Archive for the 'Catholic' Category
Well, I’m not catholic, but there’s a college where I really want to attend.
I’ve already applied the application form last November, but the thing is that today I discovered that
catholic students have more chances of getting a place than non catholic.
The college is called Loreto which is in Manchester.
Anyone can help?
Thank you for your support?
well. it depends on how strict the college is…im an indian hindu and i go to an originally christian school in London. however it is multi ethnic, as there are staff and students from hundreds upon hundreds of different types of countries and areas. For example, there are people from uganda, kenya, australia, bulgaria, ireland and so on – however it isnt an international school.
i dont quite know about manchester, but in london, most schools are multi ethnic. casual racism occurs, but its all funny and in good order….most of the time ^^
also, it depends how good of a student you are – if you are as good as a catholic geeza, then he might go through – however if your better behaved and hard working, then you have a good chance of getting through – so dont worry mate, keep your hopes up n i hope you get in 
powered by Yahoo Answers
February 26 2010 | Catholic | 1 Comment »
Hi… My mother in law to be wants us to go through with a catholic church wedding since she is catholic. I am not catholic but I am considering her options. What are my options in counseling and how long do they all last? I live in the state of Missouri and would like to know. Thank you.
First of all you need to be baptized, second you need to be confirmed, the Pre Cana classes in my state are one day for 8 hours and are mandatory for wanted to be married in the Catholic church, and they must be done at least 6 months before the wedding. Good luck!
powered by Yahoo Answers
February 18 2010 | Catholic | 2 Comments »
And if this is the case, are Catholic Christians concerned about this change?
Were they ever not?
The public in general has become more individualistic, which drifts them further apart vis-a-vis Catholic Church politics.
It’s just a question of perception: The current pope already had a conservative reputation as "John Paul’s Rottweiler" before he became pope; Benedict also spoke out against secularism, the growth of Islam in Europe, is seeking to reinstate an ultraconservative (and Holocaust denying) bishop, as well as put "Hitler’s Pope" on the path to sainthood.
Now, JP 2 probably was just as conservative theologically and politically as Benedict, but he wasn’t as controversial at doing so.
The Church’s politics used to be about firm anticommunism, which wasn’t so controversial because Americans feared Left Communism too.
powered by Yahoo Answers
February 16 2010 | Catholic | 13 Comments »
Africa has been the biggest area of new recruits to the catholic church, around 50% have aids which could be prevented using condoms yet the pope will still not allow it. Why would god allow this or want this?
Because they think that there’s a magical being living in the sky who might want to give people a baby, whether or not they’re starving or have AIDS, and they think that we shouldn’t interfere with that magical being’s decision to give a person a baby. (Even if that baby is going to die of starvation or AIDS in six months.)
powered by Yahoo Answers
February 14 2010 | Catholic | 23 Comments »
I am currently in RCIA classes and they gave me a Catholic bible recently which has the Apocrypha. I have heard that it is a contradicting set of books. What is the Catholic Defense for it? Since I can’t seem to wait long until next Sunday.
First of all you need to understand that the books called apocrypha by Protestants are not really apocrypha . That is a pejorative term given to the books by the Protestants. the true Apocrypha books were never a part of the Bible and were banned by Pope St. Gelasius in the fifth century. The correct name are the Deuterocanonical books. Here is the correct history of the Scriptures:
In first century Jerusalem there were at least four OT Canons in use by different Jewish Groups. There was the Canon of the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Ethiopian Jews and the Diaspora/Essene Jews. Jesus and the disciples used the Septuagint which was the Canon of the Diaspora/Essenes. We know this because it is quoted in the New Testament. This Canon continued to be the Canon of Christians until after the Reformation and, in fact until about 200 years ago when the Protestants adopted a condensed version of the Canon eliminating the Deuterocanonicals from their Bibles. Even the AKJ originally contained the complete Christian Canon. It has been said by critics of Christ’s Church that the Deuterocanonicals were never believed to be inspired and just the opposite is true. The decision by Christians as to which books are inspired and useful for teaching was decided at the African Synods in the late fourth and early fifth century. There was never a question about their inspiration.
The OT Canon chosen by the Protestants is actually a Jewish Canon not chosen by the Jews until after the establishment of Christianity as a result of the spread of Christianity to slow the growth of the new group in Jerusalem after the fall of the Temple in 70AD. Until then as I said previously there were many Canons in use. The adoption of the Canon missing the Deuterocanonicals united the Jews against the Christians was decided in the Jewish Council of Jamnia because the Deuterocanonicals referred too strongly to the Messiah fulfilled in Christ.
Some Protestants will claim that only the Jews have the authority to choose Canon but the Church deferred that decision to Christ and the disciples and it is clear through biblical research, that the Septuagint is the Bible used by the first century Church and quoted in the NT Scriptures. The fact that Protestants choose to adopt the Canon that was approved by the same Jews that accused our Lord that resulted in His crucifixion suggests the source of this confusion as from the father of lies who led the Pharisees to accuse Christ and petition for His punishment. It is another way that Satan divides the body of Christ and separates the faithful denying Christ’s prayer that we all be one in Christ through His Church. The Christian Church has always used the Septuagint as Canon and never the truncated version of modernist Protestants.
Some Protestants erroneously believe that Catholics added to the Bible with the Deuterocanonicals but this shows an ignorance of their own history and the history of Christianity as witnessed by Christ’s Church. The facts are that the Protestants removed the Deuterocanonicals and even considered strongly to remove some of the NT books currently in use by Protestants and Catholics. Fr. Martin Luther was in favor of removing the book of James because it conflicted with His heretical man made doctrines of the “Solas”, Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide. The heretic Ulrich Zwingli wanted to remove the Gospel of John because of its teaching of the commandment to Eat Christ’s Body and drink His Blood which contradicted his view of a real absence of Christ instead of a real presence in the Eucharist. Even Fr. Martin Luther could not endorse such a departure from Scriptures and deny that Christ is truly and really present in the Eucharist in Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.
In Christ
Fr. Joseph
powered by Yahoo Answers
February 07 2010 | Catholic | 11 Comments »
The Bible states that little baby Jesus died on the cross for our sins. However, it also says that this evil act was committed by the Romans, who owned Bethlehem and the surrounding area at that time.
So why, when the Romans were finally defeated, did the Catholic Church decide to move and base itself in Rome?
Is this the ultimate demonstration of Christian forgiveness or did they just make a mistake?
Also, does anyone know when the Catholics actually left Bethlehem and move to Rome?
Jesus was 33 years of age when He was sacrificed on the cross to attone for the sins of humanity.
St. Peter was appointed by Jesus to be the leader of the disciples and shortly after the Church was formed in 33 AD he moved his bishopric to Rome after establishing the Church of Antioch. This was long before the fall of Rome by many centuries. Most Romans were eventually converted to Catholic Christianity. God bless!
In Christ
Fr. Joseph
powered by Yahoo Answers
February 03 2010 | Catholic | 18 Comments »
Also apart of the question…In what ways was it a Catholic Reformation?
It was called the counter-Reformation by the Roman Catholics of the time. It was kicked off by the Council of Trent in 1546 in organized response to the reformations of Wittenberg, Zurich, and Geneva. The reformers (Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, the Anglicans, et al) galvanized and popularized religious observance among non-clergy people, and the Roman Church did a lot of the same things following the Council of Trent.
powered by Yahoo Answers
February 01 2010 | Catholic | 2 Comments »
I am Baptist, but my daughter and I are looking at possible high schools for her. I am not sure if I should send her to a Catholic High School, because the way they teach things are different from those of a Baptist.
I do not know a lot about the Catholic religion. Would there be a big difference if she went to a Catholic High School. They have mass and what is reconciliation and all the confessions? I know that in Mass, Catholics take communion.
Thank you!
As a non-Catholic attending a Catholic school, your daughter would not have to attend or participate in mass, confession, or Catholic communion. She would have to learn about Catholicism in religion class, as all Catholic schools have those, but people of many different faiths consider it well worth it to send their children there because of the higher education standards that come with it. Catholic schools are generally quite respectful of differing beliefs.
My Catholic high school had quite a large number of non-Catholics attending, and a few non-Catholic teachers as well. They all loved it.
powered by Yahoo Answers
January 29 2010 | Catholic | 13 Comments »
My girl-friend and I have decided to start attending church together. Neither of us attends church on regular bases. I was raised as a Baptist. She was raised as a Catholic. I would like to find a church that both of us would feel comfortable attending.
How about finding one that is preaching the Word of God with truth and with power.
How about attending one that you will grow spiritually, and will be challenged to live a holy life, and one filled with serving the Lord.
How about attending a church that will draw you closer to Jesus Christ and will convect you of your need for a Saviour if your not already truly saved.
Those are the things you should be looking for in a church. To many churches out there are trying to make people feel comfortable, but what we need is a church that challenges us, and pushes us to new spiritual growth.
And with that, you have limited the churches that you can go to. Obviously the Catholic Church is out (will most of them), The Cult Churches like Mormon and JW’s, and Christian Science, and Islam are out. Most of your Non-denominational Churches are out, and most of your Baptist Churches are out.
What your looking for is a solid fundamental, Independent, KJV only Church. Not many of them out there.
powered by Yahoo Answers
January 27 2010 | Catholic | 16 Comments »
The critical role of the Catholic Church in passing national health care reform legislation is coming under serious media scrutiny. But the story has taken a strange turn. It has now been revealed that George Soros, the billionaire hedge fund operator and well-known atheist, has been pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into "progressive" Catholic groups that are significant players in the national debates over health care and immigration.
On the surface, it would appear that Soros would be opposed to many positions of the Catholic Church.
A major financial backer of the ACLU, Soros supports such causes as drug legalization, the rights of "sex workers" and felons, euthanasia, radical feminism, abortion rights, and homosexual rights. He does all of this in the name of promoting an "open society."
But a review of the records of his Open Society Institute finds that a group calling itself
Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good (CACG) has received $200,000 from them over the last several years.
James Todd of Pewsitter.com, which represents traditional Catholics, calls such groups "CINOs," or Catholics In Name Only. He explains, "This group and several others have sprung up recently-I suspect purposely organized and funded-to counterbalance the growing influence of the faithful Catholics AND to try to deceive and mislead the middle of the road Catholics that have determined the last 13 Presidential elections."
An AIM investigation also finds, however, that Soros money has gone into the Catholic Legal Immigration Network (CLINIC), an organization established by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops back in 1988. It has received at least $530,000 from the Open Society Institute.
The two issues merge in the fact that the Catholic Bishops are demanding that national health care legislation cover illegal aliens.
In a story headlined, "Religious Leaders Seek Healthcare for Illegal Immigrants," the Los Angeles Times recently quoted Kathy Saile, director of domestic social development with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, as saying that illegal immigrants should be included in any healthcare reform plan. Father Richard Estrada of Our Lady Queen of Angels Catholic Church in Los Angeles was described as being part of a religious service and phone bank "to urge congressional leaders to include illegal immigrants in any healthcare reform plan." His church has in the past offered sanctuary to illegal immigrants.
CACG played a role in House passage of H.R. 3962, the bill known as Pelosicare and boasts that it had joined with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Catholic Health Association, and "dozens of other Catholic and faith-based groups in celebrating this historic vote."
The group’s blog even offered a "Health Care Reform Prayer," asking for God’s help in passing federal legislation.
John Gehring, CACG media director, told AIM that "We have been primarily focused on highlighting the moral dimensions of this issue and articulating how Catholic social teaching addresses health care as a human right central to a just society. Along with other faith-based groups like PICO National Network, Faith in Public Life, Sojourners and others we brought citizens and faith leaders to Capitol Hill several weeks ago to meet with representatives and they emphasized the urgency for reform and specifically the critical issue of affordability. For example, Fr. Joseph Shad, S.J., a hospital chaplain at Mercy Hospital in Portland, Maine, came to Capitol Hill and met with representatives. He shared stories we have collected from citizens across the country as part of our project, Voices for Health Reform."
http://www.rightsidenews.com/200911127274/editorial/atheist-soros-funds-catholic-groups.html
The Catholic Church is just a remnant of times long past. They will accept monies from anyone in order to remain in the public forum. They will also pander to the organizations that "bestow"
them with operating wealth. It would be interesting to learn what Soros’s plan is re: the church and his motivation to offer monetary support.
The church is monetarily wealthy. Read about all their vineyards in the chateaus all over the world. Additionally, the church has multiple Holdings in real estate world wide. So perhaps Soros and the current pope and his "henchemen" are working a deal.
powered by Yahoo Answers
January 18 2010 | Catholic | 6 Comments »
Next »