Is it not True?

[Don John of Austria]

He said that the Unknown god was the pagans acknowledgement of GOD I would remind you that the altar was small and little used sort of a cya altar so as not to tic off any God they might have missed, there was no formal worship of the unknown god he was " UNKNOWN" He was infact NOT a Pagan god according to saint PAul but GOD so he is not one of the gods of the pagans he was the God of The Jews ergo not a devil. So in answer Paul was worshiping God at the Alter to the unknown God.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote]The Bible explicitly says that the gods of the Gentiles (pagan gods) are devils. No one believes this anymore; and sadly, the "phaithful" here are no different. [/quote]

Hey thats not fair I believe it, Good friday believes it, I'd wager Winchester believes it ( his quib about eating cows not withstanding) as well as some others-- Some of us certianly do believe it so saying that NOONE believes it is really not fair.

[CatholicCrusader]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' date='Dec 1 2004, 12:31 PM'] It helps to actually read the Bible from time to time so that you can at least sort of look like you know what you're talking about. [/quote]
Typical kind of uncharitable remarks ignored by mods simply because you have a little flag next to your name, but if any "phishy" person makes any comment whatsoever that a person MIGHT think to be "uncharitable" toward the current hierarchy, especially the Pope, then he is labeled an uncharitable monster, censored, suspended, etc.

Typical...

[cmotherofpirl]

Maybe you have so angered people with your attitude and disrespect people are getting a little fed up.

Maybe a lot fed up.

Maybe you have a lot of good information, but people can't see what you say becuase they are so upset how you say it.

Charity is the form, mover, mother, and root of all virtues.
-St. Thomas Aquinas-

so is Tact.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Dec 1 2004, 01:33 PM'] Typical kind of uncharitable remarks ignored by mods simply because you have a little flag next to your name, but if any "phishy" person makes any comment whatsoever that a person MIGHT think to be "uncharitable" toward the current hierarchy, especially the Pope, then he is labeled an uncharitable monster, censored, suspended, etc.

Typical... [/quote]
You yourself admitted to not reading the bible except what you hear/read in daily mass. While I find it vurtuous to attend daily mass, you are not really prepared to discuss the subject at hand (Acts 17) unless you read it. If you had, you would have realized that it pertained to after St. Paul's conversion. That is simple to see and I can't see how that would be the kind of private interpritation you worry so much about. You, in your statement, either said or strongly implied that you didn't really know what you were talking about.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

I'm going to write a short tract on the passages at hand later, when I get back from class tonight. I hope that someone with my mythology knowledge will be able to explain this. Oh, and if anyone tries to use the daily Mass thing as proof to outweigh me, I will explain that going to daily Mass doesn't necessarily mean anything, and if no one accepts that, then I will say how often I go to Mass. Back later, my friends.

[cmotherofpirl]

especially if the Mass readings are in Latin.

[amarkich]

Don John of Austria, sorry, I did not mean to include everyone in that. I am happy that there are some who do agree. God bless.

[Mateo el Feo]

First: CatholicCrusader, Cmom is right. You come across as quite uncharitable (sometimes condescending) toward others. Not nice.

Second: why not quote [url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/1corinthians/1corinthians10.htm#v20"]1 Corinthians 10:20[/url]?

Third:
[quote name='Don John of Austria']I would remind you that the altar was small and little used sort of a cya altar so as not to tic off any God they might have missed[/quote]
I just about fell out of my chair laughing when I read this sentence. Too funny!

[Guest Aluigi]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Dec 1 2004, 01:28 PM'] He said that the Unknown god was the pagans acknowledgement of GOD  I would remind you that the altar was small and little used sort of a cya  altar so as not to tic off any God they might have missed, there was no formal worship of the unknown god he was " UNKNOWN" He was infact NOT a Pagan god according to saint PAul but GOD so he is not one of the gods of the pagans he was the God of The Jews ergo not a devil.  So in answer Paul was worshiping God at the Alter to the unknown God. [/quote]
This is all I was saying. Polar Bear asked about the unknown god, I said it was not a pagan god and thus not a devil.

I said that Paul worshipped Jesus at the altar of the unknown God, and that it was not a pagan god.

Edited December 1, 2004 by Aluigi

[CatholicCrusader]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Dec 1 2004, 04:28 PM'] especially if the Mass readings are in Latin. [/quote]
Yes, in order to be in line with Church Tradition [i]and Vatican II[/i], the readings--and the entire Mass--ought to be in Latin.

[qfnol31]

No, you misunderstand Vatican II and Trent.

[CatholicCrusader]

[quote name='Mateo el Feo' date='Dec 1 2004, 05:06 PM'] First: CatholicCrusader, Cmom is right. You come across as quite uncharitable (sometimes condescending) toward others. Not nice.
[/quote]
I suppose calling a spade a spade and condemning error outright may seem "condascending", but it is not. Neither is it uncharitable to condemn all heresy and error in the strictest terms. I do not condemn the sinner but the sin--the sinner cannot be condemned in the same way, for it is impossible to know whether he will reform. One could say of the heretic: you will be damned if you do not convert, always qualifying the statement, but he need not make such a qualification when condmening the error, e.g.: Protestantism is a damnable heresy. No qualification is needed, as the heresy itself is always damnable.

I hope that clears up my intention and purpose for my threads. God bless.

[Don John of Austria]

Vatican II did say that the Mass was to remain in Latin but that has nothing to do with this topic.

[CatholicCrusader]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Dec 1 2004, 05:29 PM'] No, you misunderstand Vatican II and Trent. [/quote]
I misunderstand Trent by saying Latin must be preserved? In fact, at Trent one could not use any other language than Latin for the Holy Sacrifice in the Latin Rite (hence the name...). As far as Vatican II, it uses like terms, John XXIII and Paul VI both saying: The Latin language must be preserved, and the us of Latin is an APOSTOLIC TRADITION.

Vatican II didn't call for a new Mass. It didn't call for an exclusively vernacular Mass. It [i]permitted[/i]--and never even encouraged--the use of the vernacular SOMETIMES. Never did it say: the entire Mass ought to be in the vernacular; Latin ought to be condemned. No, quite the contrary. Nevertheless, that is the idea in the NO today.