NationStates

Nordengrund wrote:

Kannap wrote:Why must it feel so hard to even think about the decision to switch churches?

Like, joining a church near my college was just easy because it was too far away from home to stick with my home church on Sundays.

But I am currently thinking about whether or not I want to stay with my current hometown church during breaks when I am at home or if I want to jump to a church across town.

I have switched churches several times.

Ask God and see where He wants you to go before making a decision.

As I planned to. I have a few reasons for jumping to the other church, but pretty much the only reason that I feel like I should stay with my current hometown church is because I feel like I'd miss the people there if I left.

The Alexanderians wrote:

Czechanada wrote:
And here I thought that God needed no glorification.

What gave you that idea?

Doesn't all Creation itself, the existence He created and everything in it, give glory to God already? (Imperfectness and sin tainted aside)

The United Neptumousian Empire wrote:nonsense. great arching beautiful cathedrals should not be made a thing of the past. glorifying God is a worthy use of money.

I'd argue that helping the suffering is a more worthy use of money by Christ's standards.

Honestly, I'd also argue that doing so would bring more Glory to God than building several Hagia Sofia's.

Salus Maior wrote:

The United Neptumousian Empire wrote:nonsense. great arching beautiful cathedrals should not be made a thing of the past. glorifying God is a worthy use of money.

I'd argue that helping the suffering is a more worthy use of money by Christ's standards.

Not to mention that a building that still exists can't really be a thing of the past.

Salus Maior wrote:

The United Neptumousian Empire wrote:nonsense. great arching beautiful cathedrals should not be made a thing of the past. glorifying God is a worthy use of money.

I'd argue that helping the suffering is a more worthy use of money by Christ's standards.

Honestly, I'd also argue that doing so would bring more Glory to God than building several Hagia Sofia's.

Isn't getting poor people a good job in church construction helping them?

United Marxist Nations wrote:

Salus Maior wrote:
I'd argue that helping the suffering is a more worthy use of money by Christ's standards.

Not to mention that a building that still exists can't really be a thing of the past.

True.

Also, side note: I'm not saying that Cathedrals or nice Church buildings are sinful or anything. I'm just saying that building the biggest and fanciest buildings in the name of God is not the best way of glorifying God, or what Christians should spend loads on resources on if there are better causes that need it.

Diopolis wrote:

Salus Maior wrote:
I'd argue that helping the suffering is a more worthy use of money by Christ's standards.

Honestly, I'd also argue that doing so would bring more Glory to God than building several Hagia Sofia's.

Isn't getting poor people a good job in church construction helping them?

Perhaps.But it only helps those who have the training and ability to work that field, and it's unlikely I imagine that such workers would not be able to find similar jobs after that.

Salus Maior wrote:

The United Neptumousian Empire wrote:nonsense. great arching beautiful cathedrals should not be made a thing of the past. glorifying God is a worthy use of money.

I'd argue that helping the suffering is a more worthy use of money by Christ's standards.

Honestly, I'd also argue that doing so would bring more Glory to God than building several Hagia Sofia's.

Coulee Croche wrote:Beautiful Churches are also an investment. If Churches can bring in more people, then it can reimburse the money that was lost and hopefully yield a larger profit. That larger profit could be used for other things like charity.

Beautiful Churches= More money for charity. (Therefore, beautiful churches bring twofold the glory to God )

Coulee Croche wrote: If Churches can bring in more people, then it can reimburse the money that was lost and hopefully yield a larger profit. That larger profit could be used for other things like charity.

Or building more giant icons.

And I'm not saying Churches should not be built.

Salus Maior wrote:

Coulee Croche wrote: If Churches can bring in more people, then it can reimburse the money that was lost and hopefully yield a larger profit. That larger profit could be used for other things like charity.

Or building more giant icons.

And I'm not saying Churches should not be built.

Yes but if 94% of your money is going strictly to charity. Then if you count 6% being divided multiple times (housing of priests, monastics, paying other workers and also their food ect),. That icon would barely make the list, and would most likely be funded by parishoners.

And Im aware you are not saying that.

Edit: Not to mention that that Icon would be in of itself an investment. (Read the rest of my posts on the previous page)

Salus Maior wrote:

Diopolis wrote:Isn't getting poor people a good job in church construction helping them?

Perhaps.But it only helps those who have the training and ability to work that field, and it's unlikely I imagine that such workers would not be able to find similar jobs after that.

Actually, a lot of artisans are having difficulty making ends meet. For one thing, the demand for their skills is shrinking because cheap imitations are ubiquitous and fewer people care about quality. And they can't easily switch jobs, because their educations are geared towards artisanal rather than formal education. The end result is that fewer young people are entering those trades, so they're in danger of dying out, and at the same time, workers already in it, who are usually old enough to be set in their trades, are getting fewer commissions and having trouble keeping their families fed.

To throw to a conversation Const and I had last night, and something Const said in it which rings true here: If the Church is in a position where it is the only thing standing between people and being absolutely destitute, that is a sign of a bigger problem in society than Churches being built expensively.

Diopolis wrote:

Salus Maior wrote:
Perhaps.But it only helps those who have the training and ability to work that field, and it's unlikely I imagine that such workers would not be able to find similar jobs after that.

Actually, a lot of artisans are having difficulty making ends meet. For one thing, the demand for their skills is shrinking because cheap imitations are ubiquitous and fewer people care about quality. And they can't easily switch jobs, because their educations are geared towards artisanal rather than formal education. The end result is that fewer young people are entering those trades, so they're in danger of dying out, and at the same time, workers already in it, who are usually old enough to be set in their trades, are getting fewer commissions and having trouble keeping their families fed.

That might be a hard thing to grasp for non-catholics living an a non-catholic area.

I could drive down the road and see lots full of cheaply made statues of the Virgin Mary, Jesus, and Joseph. They are made of concrete and are poured into molds for shape. Majority arent even painted, and the details are piss-poor.

Diopolis wrote:

Salus Maior wrote:
Perhaps.But it only helps those who have the training and ability to work that field, and it's unlikely I imagine that such workers would not be able to find similar jobs after that.

Actually, a lot of artisans are having difficulty making ends meet. For one thing, the demand for their skills is shrinking because cheap imitations are ubiquitous and fewer people care about quality. And they can't easily switch jobs, because their educations are geared towards artisanal rather than formal education. The end result is that fewer young people are entering those trades, so they're in danger of dying out, and at the same time, workers already in it, who are usually old enough to be set in their trades, are getting fewer commissions and having trouble keeping their families fed.

Well, artisans are one thing, but the thing that stirred this discussion was this: http://www.kristv.com/story/31075647/21 ... d-for-i-37

Which seems to be less of a investment that pays back, like Churches, and more of a "LET'S BUILD A BIG CHRISTIAN SYMBOL CAUSE WE'RE SUPER CHRISTIAN HERE."

I would have to describe myself as a Hegelian Christian in the sense that Christianity pictorally represents the True, ie: the self unfolding of the Absolute in History.

United Marxist Nations wrote:To throw to a conversation Const and I had last night, and something Const said in it which rings true here: If the Church is in a position where it is the only thing standing between people and being absolutely destitute, that is a sign of a bigger problem in society than Churches being built expensively.

And honestly, there's a lot more we can criticise in modern Western spending habits than people donating to what is essentially a devotional act (albeit a flawed one - the names on paving stones for big donors is what really irritates me). Nor should we assume the donors are donating in lieu of charity.

Incidentally, I don't think this'll be the Western Hemisphere's biggest cross. The world's largest cross, at the Valley of the Fallen in Spain, is west of Greenwich.

Salus Maior wrote:

The Alexanderians wrote:What gave you that idea?

Doesn't all Creation itself, the existence He created and everything in it, give glory to God already? (Imperfectness and sin tainted aside)

Yes but are you saying you can't glorify him a little yourself?

United Isles of the Commonwealth wrote:I'm a roman Catholic who is currently studying for confirmation, and I was wondering what you guys thought of Gay Marriage. It's interesting to see a range of opinions from a group of people

How do you call it marriage at all?

Ash Wednesay is February 10th.

Darn, the year goes by fast :/

Talvezout wrote:Ash Wednesay is February 10th.

Darn, the year goes by fast :/

New Moon is the evening of February 9th. Where is Ash Wednesday in the Besorah?

Efraim-Judah wrote:

Talvezout wrote:Ash Wednesay is February 10th.

Darn, the year goes by fast :/

New Moon is the evening of February 9th. Where is Ash Wednesday in the Besorah?

1. What the fuck is the Besorah?

2. What does the new moon have to do with anything?

United Isles of the Commonwealth wrote:I'm a roman Catholic who is currently studying for confirmation, and I was wondering what you guys thought of Gay Marriage. It's interesting to see a range of opinions from a group of people

I'm okay with gay marriage as a civil institution which the courts have domain over.

Now, religious gay marriage? I am on the fence about that one.

Luminesa wrote:

The United Neptumousian Empire wrote:I was in the same boat, but ultimately I decided to vote based on other issues, largely because I think parties that claim to be pro-life are liars and are just trying to force pro-life people to vote for them. They won't do anything about abortion if they're elected.

Well you're voting for candidates, not parties. A good bit of the Republicans have good pro-life records, whereas most of the Democrats don't. TRUMP certainly won't do anything about abortion if he's elected, but Rubio or Cruz probably will.

But we can't wait for our presidents to do stuff concerning abortion. This is not just a political issue, but a human rights issue. We should be working in our communities right where we are, if we want to help to end abortion. What state are you from? Whichever one it is, you've still got plenty of work to do.

Cruz and Rubio won't do shit for abortion.

They know they can't, so they won't. Abortion was largely decided in the courts, and unless they can pass a Constitutional amendment or can overturn case after case of abortion they can't do anything in their power to ban it, let alone legislate it further than it already is.

Sadly, the talk about abortion has only become a political point which presidential and congressional hopefuls have just duped the population into actually paying attention to that and not to all the actual blunders their other policies have. Pro-life advocates in the U.S. have to focus on culture if they want to change the paradigm of abortion for the better, not on policy; because policies in the U.S. at the Supreme Court level are very rare to overturn, especially if they have been used as precedent.

I feel the best way to prevent abortions is to reduce the effect/rate of unwanted pregnancies. Sadly, abstinence-only education DOES NOT WORK! I have said this before, and I will say this always. This delusional belief Southern Protestants have that teenagers and young adults won't have sex until they marry is that, delusional. Catholicism puts a moral condition to sex before marriage (it is bad in the eyes of God), however, not everyone is a Catholic in the South, let alone every Catholic being a devout Catholic.

Efraim-Judah wrote:

Talvezout wrote:Ash Wednesay is February 10th.

Darn, the year goes by fast :/

New Moon is the evening of February 9th. Where is Ash Wednesday in the Besorah?

I know jack-shite in this form of stuff, so what is a Besorah? Is it a name for a Jewish calendar and/or book?

Constantinopolis wrote:The Orthodox Church continues to uphold the rule that clergy cannot hold political office (although, in Cyprus, there was a time in the 20th century when, uh, this wasn't exactly respected very well).

Our record is far spottier than that, though some historical context helps. From 1453 through to 1922, the Patriarch of Constantinople was automatically ethnarch (in Ottoman Turkish millet-bashi) of the Rum Millet within the Ottoman Empire; in other words, he was both the religious and political leader - albeit often a figurehead - of the entire semi-autonomous Ottoman Christian community within the Ottoman State; which is, in part, why so many Ecumenical Patriarchs were deposed and reinstated by the Ottomans in line with internal political factional struggles at the Sublime Porte.

Archbishop Makarios' role as first president of the Republic of Cyprus is perhaps best understood in the context of that Ottoman institution of the Orthodox ethnarch; Cyprus was a de jure component of the Ottoman state until 1914 (though de facto under British control from 1878), so within living memory for many Greek Cypriots. In that context, the presidency of Makarios III was less unprecedented.