Lent is upon us [Archive] - Debate Policy

Noir

02-25-2009, 03:23 PM

LiberalNation

02-25-2009, 03:30 PM

fish time, the church will be having fish frys every week now.

I never give anything up, ima bad catholic.

glockmail

02-25-2009, 03:35 PM

Maybe I'll do red meat this year. One year I did hard liquor and another, booze altogether.

Nukeman

02-25-2009, 04:57 PM

I know this may sound pathetic but I have given up swearing!! I feel lent is to make us a better person and I have a bad habit of using way too much colorful language. :cool::beer:

Kathianne

02-25-2009, 05:27 PM

Ring a ding ladles and Germans.

As I'm sure you all know today is the start of lent, so I just wana ask what everyone is giving up, last year I did chocolate successfully (the only tiny bit I had was near the end when I had to buy a cookie for a mate in school, and after giving it to him I realized I had some chocolate on my thumb, reaction got me to lick it off, I was so annoyed lol)

This year I'm sayin goodbye to any and all food that is made in Fish&Chip shops, having worked in them the past few years I have become far to use to regularly eating chips, burgers and the like.

So, what other lenton vows are DPers undertaking?

I do the fish Fridays, not much of a hardship there as I eat fish at least 3 times a week anyways. Rather than 'give up' something, I'm trying to 'do something better instead. I'm going to try to be nice or at least not act annoyed with a couple colleagues at school who I sometimes lose patience with. I'm also trying to pray more than I usually do.

moderate democrat

02-25-2009, 05:38 PM

giving up alcohol and sugar this year.

plus I am going to volunteer at my local food bank, and will study the bible daily. Lent is a great season to recharge.

darin

02-25-2009, 06:13 PM

I'm giving up any http://blog.wired.com/underwire/images/2009/02/04/obama_hope.jpg I had President Obama has even a modicum of a clue as to WTF he's doing.

glockmail

02-25-2009, 06:52 PM

giving up alcohol and sugar this year.

plus I am going to volunteer at my local food bank, and will study the bible daily. Lent is a great season to recharge.
Have you given up salt?

avatar4321

02-25-2009, 07:23 PM

Nukeman

02-26-2009, 07:16 AM

Im giving up nothing.

I think its rather appropriate since Im not Catholic and anything I would do to strengthen my faith I do all year round.

Ive got nothing against Lent. And I hope it does help people change their lives for the better. Preferably longer than just the lent period. I just wish more people would do what they know they should to change their lives all year around.
Lent is not just for Catholics!!! It is for ALL Christians, Yes we should all strive to be better EVERY DAY but you have to have a start somewhere so this is a "starting point" for a lot of folks. It is also a time for reflection on your previous year and how your relationship with God has progressed so it is not just about "giving something up"..

moderate democrat

02-26-2009, 07:23 AM

Lent is not just for Catholics!!! It is for ALL Christians, Yes we should all strive to be better EVERY DAY but you have to have a start somewhere so this is a "starting point" for a lot of folks. It is also a time for reflection on your previous year and how your relationship with God has progressed so it is not just about "giving something up"..

precisely. Giving something up is merely a diet plan if it is not accompanied by prayerful reflection. Personally, when I come home from work and think about going to the wetbar and getting a cocktail, or when I think about having a sweet snack, I take that moment to sit and reflect upon my Lenten journey. Lent is a lot more than that for me, but those moments are built into the day and only serve to increase the time that I spend in meditation and prayer.

Nukeman

02-26-2009, 07:37 AM

We have been using it in our house to discuss with the kids the meaning and what it is to "sacrafice" something, these are very important messages for this time of year. It makes the transition into Palm Suday and Easter easier and more understandable for our younger children...

darin

02-26-2009, 07:37 AM

There's no biblical precedent for Lent, IMO. We aren't brought closer to God by an act of giving something up. We're brought closer to God by a deep-seeded desire to know Him.

Nukeman

02-26-2009, 07:39 AM

There's no biblical precedent for Lent, IMO. We aren't brought closer to God by an act of giving something up. We're brought closer to God by a deep-seeded desire to know Him.
Very true, but anything that brings one closer to God is a GOOD thing dont'cha think????:cool:

PostmodernProphet

02-26-2009, 07:59 AM

I'm giving up my liberalist tendancies....

Nukeman

02-26-2009, 08:15 AM

I'm giving up my liberalist tendancies....
OHHHHH really!!!!!!!!!!!:lol::lol:

avatar4321

02-26-2009, 08:25 AM

I'm giving up my liberalist tendancies....

So you're doing nothing?

darin

02-26-2009, 09:34 AM

Very true, but anything that brings one closer to God is a GOOD thing dont'cha think????:cool:

How does one measure 'closer to God'? Closer to God in what capacity? Rituals aren't going to cut any mustard. They are valuable in a traditional sense.

My point is 'doing something' won't bring one closer to God. 'Being' a certain way, however, will. :)

LiberalNation

02-26-2009, 11:02 AM

I have never felt the presence of a god or close to one. Seems almost impossible from where I am standing.

DannyR

02-26-2009, 11:16 AM

There's no biblical precedent for Lent, IMO. We aren't brought closer to God by an act of giving something up. We're brought closer to God by a deep-seeded desire to know Him.There is actually ample precedent in my opinion. Most of the disciples gave up all their belongings to follow Jesus. Jesus likewise warned of riches blocking one's path to knowing God. Putting aside one's material possessions for a time allows you to determine if they may be interfering with your communion with God.

Nukeman

02-26-2009, 11:24 AM

How does one measure 'closer to God'? Closer to God in what capacity? Rituals aren't going to cut any mustard. They are valuable in a traditional sense.

My point is 'doing something' won't bring one closer to God. 'Being' a certain way, however, will. :)
I think you know very well what I mean by "closer to God". If something you can do or participate in makes you think more on God and think about your actions and how they affect not only you but others and your relationship with God can only be a good thing.

I agree that "rituals" really do not bring one to a better understanding of God but like I said if it gets you to THINK more on how you're interpreting your relationship with God I can only see that as a positive.

Suffice it to say You have your view and I have mine..... I do respect your convictions and beliefs!!! :)

PostmodernProphet

02-26-2009, 11:27 AM

So you're doing nothing?

hey, don't forget that the first week I was here Red gave me neg rep for being a liberal.....besides, I think doing something is better than giving up something....for the next six weeks I am teaching a financial responsibility class at my church for folks that have approached the deacons for assistance....helping them figure out a budget to live on....

darin

02-26-2009, 11:55 AM

There is actually ample precedent in my opinion. Most of the disciples gave up all their belongings to follow Jesus. Jesus likewise warned of riches blocking one's path to knowing God. Putting aside one's material possessions for a time allows you to determine if they may be interfering with your communion with God.

Putting aside one's material possessions does nothing to turn one towards God.

Think of it like this. I place a chair in front of me. And say, God is behind me. Right now the Chair is my material possession. I love it. I'm looking at it. After a time I decide I'm going to turn from the chair. I decide to turn to my left. Wow! I'm no longer focused upon my chair! God now, is on my Left and (X) is in front of me. Sure it's nice to have turned from my chair, but the key is not turning FROM anything...it's turning TO God that's the answer. Not giving up belongings. Not withholding food from one's self. Not deciding to do or don't do (x). See where I'm going?

I think you know very well what I mean by "closer to God". If something you can do or participate in makes you think more on God and think about your actions and how they affect not only you but others and your relationship with God can only be a good thing.

I agree that "rituals" really do not bring one to a better understanding of God but like I said if it gets you to THINK more on how you're interpreting your relationship with God I can only see that as a positive.

Suffice it to say You have your view and I have mine..... I do respect your convictions and beliefs!!! :)

I suppose I'd support ANY activity - and encourage it - if the result was a deeper relationship with Christ. However, and it seems not to apply to you, I'm encouraging folk to focus on the results - not the process. That is to say, If folk follow a ritual or tradition for the sake of the ritual or tradition it's not beneficial. If, however, folk follow those things as a means to re-focus on their lives upon Christ, well...sure...go for it!

:D

:beers: to ya, mate.

DannyR

02-26-2009, 12:02 PM

Sure it's nice to have turned from my chair, but the key is not turning FROM anything...it's turning TO God that's the answer. Not giving up belongings. Not withholding food from one's self. Not deciding to do or don't do (x). See where I'm going?Yes I do. But turning to God can be difficult if some shiny bauble is distracting your attention. Yes ideally one can do so without setting aside material possessions, but for many thats a learned skill, and sacrificing something is what it takes to focus their attention in the first place in the right direction.

avatar4321

02-26-2009, 01:07 PM

I have never felt the presence of a god or close to one. Seems almost impossible from where I am standing.

Then stand somewhere else.

God reveals Himself to those who seek Him. In my personal experience, I felt the power of God and learned from the Spirit only after I was willing to listen. Not just to hear what He said, but to actually follow what He said.

Mr. P

02-26-2009, 01:20 PM

Giving-up is just NOT in my nature.. I'll change nothing.

glockmail

02-26-2009, 01:49 PM

I have never felt the presence of a god or close to one. Seems almost impossible from where I am standing. It is impossible from where you are standing, since homosexuality is an abomination.

Noir

02-26-2009, 02:01 PM

It is impossible from where you are standing, since homosexuality is an abomination.

Lulz, a sinner can not feel the presence of their God, I dare say there are allot of gay christains ect who would beg to differ.

glockmail

02-26-2009, 02:34 PM

Lulz, a sinner can not feel the presence of their God, I dare say there are allot of gay christains ect who would beg to differ.I doubt any of them feel it as an approving force. If so then they need to have their heads examined.

Noir

02-26-2009, 02:41 PM

I doubt any of them feel it as an approving force. If so then they need to have their heads examined.

Whatever you say, But I am not going to guess what it feels like for them ect as that would just be plain stupid, if they say they feel the positive presence of their god then who are you to assume their feelings and thoughts?

glockmail

02-26-2009, 02:48 PM

Whatever you say, But I am not going to guess what it feels like for them ect as that would just be plain stupid, if they say they feel the positive presence of their god then who are you to assume their feelings and thoughts? I think they should realize the truth, don't you?

avatar4321

02-26-2009, 02:49 PM

Lulz, a sinner can not feel the presence of their God, I dare say there are allot of gay christains ect who would beg to differ.

I have to agree somewhat. I mean if the sinner couldnt feel the power of God, then they would never repent.

Noir

02-26-2009, 02:59 PM

I think they should realize the truth, don't you?

And who knows the truth? I sure as hell don't, I know what I believe but that doesn't make it the truth, you also know what you believe, but to think it's the truth that everyone should stop being so stupid and realise is a lil arrogant no?

@ Avi
Indeed, you often see folks who have been 'born again' on interviews saying that after some event in their life they felt the presence of God and that converted them, and biblical parables such as the man who left his flock of 99 sheep to find the 1 that was missing, would support the idea that said God would activly reachout to sinners, as infact did Jesus, if you believe all that stuff.

PostmodernProphet

02-26-2009, 03:18 PM

I think we should all give up abortions for Lent....

Abbey Marie

02-26-2009, 03:35 PM

I think we should all give up abortions for Lent....

Soooooooo rep worthy.

http://users.telenet.be/honeybee1/punten.gif

(but I can't)

DannyR

02-26-2009, 03:56 PM

I think we should all give up abortions for Lent....I promise not to have one.

Mr. P

02-26-2009, 04:17 PM

I think we should all give up abortions for Lent....

Just for Lent? I've given up abortion for life. Easy being male. Given up dictating what others can do with their own body too..something you may want to consider.

Noir

02-26-2009, 04:18 PM

I think we should all give up abortions for Lent....

I'd concur, but only if rapists gave up rape, perverted uncles gave up incest and under 16's give up sex for lent.

Noir

02-26-2009, 06:14 PM

do you realize how many abortions would be blocked if you limited them to situations of rape, incest and under 16 years old?.....

No I don't to be honest, but I don't thnk the number matters, whether it's 3 or 3 million a woman/girl under those circumstances should he able to abort.

Edit- it seems I was able to pass through some sort of time warp and answer your questions before you asked it!!!...or there was a glich in the database...I prefer to believe the time warp idea.

PostmodernProphet

02-26-2009, 06:15 PM

I'd concur, but only if rapists gave up rape, perverted uncles gave up incest and under 16's give up sex for lent.

do you realize how many abortions would be blocked if you limited them to situations of rape, incest and under 16 years old?.....

PostmodernProphet

02-26-2009, 06:16 PM

Just for Lent? I've given up abortion for life. Easy being male. Given up dictating what others can do with their own body too..something you may want to consider.

I will consider it, if you will agree to restricting abortions that involve more bodies than the mother's........

glockmail

02-26-2009, 06:54 PM

And who knows the truth? I sure as hell don't, I know what I believe but that doesn't make it the truth, you also know what you believe, but to think it's the truth that everyone should stop being so stupid and realise is a lil arrogant no?
... Its not arrogant to acknowledge what is written in the Bible.

Noir

02-26-2009, 07:05 PM

Its not arrogant to acknowledge what is written in the Bible.

I didn't say it was, but it is arrogant to say that it is the truth and that those who do not believe so should wake up and realize it.

glockmail

02-26-2009, 07:11 PM

I didn't say it was, but it is arrogant to say that it is the truth and that those who do not believe so should wake up and realize it. The truth is written in the Bible, especially on this issue. There is simply no room for any other interpretation.

Mr. P

02-26-2009, 07:17 PM

I will consider it, if you will agree to restricting abortions that involve more bodies than the mother's........

A ball of cells is not a body, just like a fertilized egg is NOT a person.

Nothing new for me to consider.

5stringJeff

02-26-2009, 07:21 PM

DannyR

02-26-2009, 08:41 PM

The truth is written in the Bible, especially on this issue. There is simply no room for any other interpretation.

Um, sure there is.

When infant mortality is 50%, plagues and wars decimate the population and life expectancy averages in the 30's... there is a logical and valid reason to ban homosexuality. You want babies... lots of them. Back then octo-mom would have been hailed as a hero.

Those reasons fail when we have a population as large as we do today.

No different than many of the other laws of the bible. They were appropriate in the past, but not so much today. Dietary laws were largely made because people died when they ate bad foods. But today we know how to cook pork properly, and what shellfish to eat and how to do so, etc.

Mixing threads from different weaves was banned because it wasted resources and they didn't know how to do it then. Today we do so all the time!

You gotta take the Bible in the context of when it was written. The bans on homosexuality are no different.

I won't argue like some do that the writers didn't mean to ban homosexuality as we have it today. I have no doubt they were as homophobic as people today. But that still doesn't change the fact that the book is 2000 years old, and morality and rationale of that day and age is not the morality we hold today. Last I checked we don't stone people to death, and those that do we mock as being ass backward.

darin

02-26-2009, 09:01 PM

The bible freed us from dietary laws/restrictions. ;)

PostmodernProphet

02-26-2009, 09:02 PM

Um, sure there is.

When infant mortality is 50%, plagues and wars decimate the population and life expectancy averages in the 30's... there is a logical and valid reason to ban homosexuality. You want babies... lots of them. Back then octo-mom would have been hailed as a hero.

I'm not sure that's a valid assumption for the Israelites....after all, they started with a guy and his 12 sons in Egypt and 400 years later the Pharaoh was so worried about them overpopulating the area that he ordered all their sons to be killed at birth.....that's why Moses was floating down a river in a basket as I recall.....another generation later and a couple hundred thousand of them were traipsing across the Sinai.....and that was the point in time that the rules about homosexuality were put in place....and by the way, the statements in scripture about homosexual relations differ from the dietary laws.....in the original Hebrew, dietary laws restricted certain things as being unclean while the word used for homosexual relations is the same word used for only a limited number of actions.....incest, bestiality, human sacrifice and idolatry......

PostmodernProphet

02-26-2009, 09:09 PM

Last I checked we don't stone people to death, and those that do we mock as being ass backward.

the fact that we do not stone people to death is no reason to say that we should consider something to be good when God said it was bad.....recall that the last statement of Christ in the oft-quoted story regarding stoning was "go and sin no more", not "adultery is okay now".......

darin

02-26-2009, 09:11 PM

Um, sure there is.

When infant mortality is 50%, plagues and wars decimate the population and life expectancy averages in the 30's... there is a logical and valid reason to ban homosexuality. You want babies... lots of them. Back then octo-mom would have been hailed as a hero.

Those reasons fail when we have a population as large as we do today.

No different than many of the other laws of the bible. They were appropriate in the past, but not so much today. Dietary laws were largely made because people died when they ate bad foods. But today we know how to cook pork properly, and what shellfish to eat and how to do so, etc.

Mixing threads from different weaves was banned because it wasted resources and they didn't know how to do it then. Today we do so all the time!

You gotta take the Bible in the context of when it was written. The bans on homosexuality are no different.

I won't argue like some do that the writers didn't mean to ban homosexuality as we have it today. I have no doubt they were as homophobic as people today. But that still doesn't change the fact that the book is 2000 years old, and morality and rationale of that day and age is not the morality we hold today. Last I checked we don't stone people to death, and those that do we mock as being ass backward.

Ya know what is outdated? Darwin and his theories.

Mr. P

02-26-2009, 09:19 PM

The bible freed us from dietary laws/restrictions. ;)

And Federal/ State/ Local governments re-wrote them.

Mugged Liberal

02-26-2009, 09:35 PM

Wow! Has this thread wandered a long way from “What are you giving up for Lent”, and I notice no one has confessed to any serious faults or defects they will try to curb during this Lenten season. So let me correct that omission. I vow to try to rein in a rampant ego even if that ego manifests itself only in internal conversations with myself. Secondly, I will try to avoid gluttony even if it is practiced in secret. You know, the person who waits until everyone has gone to bed and then devours half a bag of cheetos and a goodbar.

As a last comment, I don’t think it matters whether or not the Early Church Fathers observed Lent for the first four hundred years. What’s important is how we view the effect on our own lives of either giving up something or doing some sort of good work.

DannyR

02-26-2009, 10:35 PM

The bible freed us from dietary laws/restrictions. ;)Yes, well aware of that. Bit of a compromise there don't you think? They wanted to convert the gentiles, but who's going to join a new religion that has weird rules about what you eat or requires you to get your privates cut open? ;) Just another example of how the morals and rules of the day get changed when faced with political necessity.

I'm not sure that's a valid assumption for the Israelites....after all, they started with a guy and his 12 sons in Egypt and 400 years later the Pharaoh was so worried about them overpopulating the area that he ordered all their sons to be killed at birthI think you're taking the "overpopulation" idea to an extreme. Estimates of population in Egypt at the time are around a million or so. So if by your estimate Hebrews only numbered a hundred thousand, that's still a very small population in comparison. It does however make sense that the rulers of Egypt would worry about their growing numbers. Slave revolts were a real possibility.

As for the Hebrews, this only proves my point in my mind. They would want to mandate breeding if only to try and increase their numbers to match the larger nations like Egypt they left behind. How else could they compete and hope to conquer the nations that lie ahead?

the fact that we do not stone people to death is no reason to say that we should consider something to be good when God said it was bad*shrug* It was bad then. That doesn't mean its still bad.

Ya know what is outdated? Darwin and his theories. Thanks for participating. This is related to the topic how?

avatar4321

02-26-2009, 10:37 PM

My guess is we fixed all the serious faults ages ago. We are conservatives for the most part

PostmodernProphet

02-26-2009, 11:39 PM

They wanted to convert the gentiles

???...they did?.....where did you come up with that?....

So if by your estimate Hebrews only numbered a hundred thousand, that's still a very small population in comparison.

you have obviously never taken a forty year long stroll through the desert with a hundred thousand of your closest friends....

How else could they compete and hope to conquer the nations that lie ahead?

you have obviously forgotten the story of Gideon, he was facing an army of 135,000 Midianites with an army of 35,000, then God told him to send all but 300 of his soldiers home because they weren't needed..... Judges 7

PostmodernProphet

02-26-2009, 11:41 PM

*shrug* It was bad then. That doesn't mean its still bad.

I figure if God changed his mind he would have mentioned it.....

Abbey Marie

02-26-2009, 11:46 PM

the fact that we do not stone people to death is no reason to say that we should consider something to be good when God said it was bad.....recall that the last statement of Christ in the oft-quoted story regarding stoning was "go and sin no more", not "adultery is okay now".......

Prophey, you can remind people of that till' your blue (I know, I've tried), but they still choose to ignore that part. It's just so damn inconvenient, you know?

DannyR

02-26-2009, 11:55 PM

???...they did?.....where did you come up with that?....

Acts 21:25 for starters, where they specifically exempt gentiles from the food laws.

you have obviously forgotten the story of Gideon, he was facing an army of 135,000 Midianites with an army of 35,000, then God told him to send all but 300 of his soldiers home because they weren't needed..... Judges 7Not exactly the strategy the people of the day wanted to use. And Judges comes after the laws of Leviticus. Also if you read that story carefully, you'll see that the 300 only scared the army and scattered them. The rest of the men came back into play chasing them down and seizing the territory afterwards.

I figure if God changed his mind he would have mentioned it.
He told me. I told you. Isn't that the traditional way these sort of things are passed along?

manu1959

02-27-2009, 12:25 AM

i would like to see our leaders give up their worldly posessions to set and example.....

just once i would like to see someone at that level lead by example.....

what did i give up for lent.....4/5ths of my income so i would not have to lay off so many people in this horrible economy.....

crin63

02-27-2009, 12:59 AM

Might I suggest a lent brush if you have lent upon you. :laugh2:

PostmodernProphet

02-27-2009, 07:40 AM

Acts 21:25 for starters, where they specifically exempt gentiles from the food laws.

uh, Danny?....that was the Christians, not the Jews.....

Also if you read that story carefully, you'll see that the 300 only scared the army and scattered them.

you missed the point of both the story and my post....it wasn't the 300 men who scared them.....they weren't expecting to defeat their enemies with manpower.....the entire history of the nation of Israel, from the Red Sea on taught them it was God that would defeat their enemies, not them......

He told me. I told you. Isn't that the traditional way these sort of things are passed along?

I sort of thought the scriptures were the traditional way.....when your claims are canonized I will take a look at them.....meanwhile, got any suggestions where in scriptures God said homosexual relations are okay now?.....

Nukeman

02-27-2009, 07:42 AM

Wow! Has this thread wandered a long way from “What are you giving up for Lent”, and I notice no one has confessed to any serious faults or defects they will try to curb during this Lenten season. So let me correct that omission. I vow to try to rein in a rampant ego even if that ego manifests itself only in internal conversations with myself. Secondly, I will try to avoid gluttony even if it is practiced in secret. You know, the person who waits until everyone has gone to bed and then devours half a bag of cheetos and a goodbar.

You obviously MISSED post number 4...........:poke:

Mugged Liberal

02-27-2009, 08:36 AM

Damn

DannyR

02-27-2009, 09:55 AM

uh, Danny?....that was the Christians, not the Jews.....yeah, so? Thats what I was talking about. Hard to get converts if you ask them to east strange foods and chop bits of their privates off.

the entire history of the nation of Israel, from the Red Sea on taught them it was God that would defeat their enemies, not them......And god taught them they would prosper and multiple too. That means having babies. The idea of birth control was also prohibited (no spilling one's seed). You can't deny there was a strong imperative to breed and multiply.

I sort of thought the scriptures were the traditional way.....when your claims are canonized I will take a look at them.....meanwhile, got any suggestions where in scriptures God said homosexual relations are okay now?.....As I said, those are 2000 year old books. When the Newest Testament comes out, I'll make certain you're sent a copy.

PostmodernProphet

02-27-2009, 11:51 AM

yeah, so? Thats what I was talking about.

/shrugs....well, I guess I got a bit confused, because your statement was about Jews....from that I assumed you were talking about Jews.....my mistake.....

PostmodernProphet

02-27-2009, 11:53 AM

As I said, those are 2000 year old books. When the Newest Testament comes out, I'll make certain you're sent a copy.

/shrugs....okay, until then, your point is wrong.....

glockmail

02-27-2009, 12:50 PM

:poke: So, aren't you non-Catholic heathens just so jealous that we got this "Lent thang" going on?

Mr. P

02-27-2009, 01:16 PM

:poke: So, aren't you non-Catholic heathens just so jealous that we got this "Lent thang" going on?

Question...

Does being Baptized Catholic and doing the Catechism thing make me Catholic? I don't think so, but honestly I donno.

glockmail

02-27-2009, 01:35 PM

Question...

Does being Baptized Catholic and doing the Catechism thing make me Catholic? I don't think so, but honestly I donno. Once Catholic, we've got you by the balls.

Mr. P

02-27-2009, 01:41 PM

Once Catholic, we've got you by the balls.

Now that I know...But seriously, does the Vatican consider me Catholic?

glockmail

02-27-2009, 01:58 PM

Now that I know...But seriously, does the Vatican consider me Catholic? The Vatican only recognizes itself as the one true church, so it considers all Christians to be Catholic, and followers of other denominations to have lost their way in one form or another.

Since you have a baptismal certificate, yes. If you haven't kept up with it then you are considered a "candidate":
Candidates are individuals who have been baptized in any Christian church (including Roman Catholics) but have not been confirmed in the Catholic Church http://www.rciaprogram.org/

Most churches have RCIA (Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults) programs to get adults back on the straight and narrow.

Mr. P

02-27-2009, 02:20 PM

The Vatican only recognizes itself as the one true church, so it considers all Christians to be Catholic, and followers of other denominations to have lost their way in one form or another.

Since you have a baptismal certificate, yes. If you haven't kept up with it then you are considered a "candidate": http://www.rciaprogram.org/

Most churches have RCIA (Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults) programs to get adults back on the straight and narrow.

Thanks! I've wondered about this for yrs. Never really cared to check on it though.

moderate democrat

02-27-2009, 03:19 PM

Thanks! I've wondered about this for yrs. Never really cared to check on it though.

most every protestant denomination will accept you for membership without any further sacramental action.... your baptism counts for them as well.

glockmail

02-27-2009, 04:17 PM

most every protestant denomination will accept you for membership without any further sacramental action.... your baptism counts for them as well. Sure just hand the preacher a fifty and you're good to go, back in the Lord's good graces until next month.

LiberalNation

02-27-2009, 04:27 PM

I did RCIA last year and got confirmed and first communion. Was baptised in the church at birth. Haven't been back to mass since. Every sunday for a year was enough.

glockmail

02-27-2009, 04:34 PM

I did RCIA last year and got confirmed and first communion. Was baptised in the church at birth. Haven't been back to mass since. Every sunday for a year was enough. Never too late to repent for that and all the rest of the crap that you've done. That is, until that car crosses the double yellow and sends that little motor scooter and its contents into oblivion.

Mr. P

02-27-2009, 04:55 PM

most every protestant denomination will accept you for membership without any further sacramental action.... your baptism counts for them as well.

I'm NOT looking for acceptance..just an answer on the Catholic policy/belief.

Mr. P

02-27-2009, 04:59 PM

I did RCIA last year and got confirmed and first communion. Was baptised in the church at birth. Haven't been back to mass since. Every sunday for a year was enough.

BS..you said Mom was making you go at Christmas. Were ya lying?

LiberalNation

02-27-2009, 05:51 PM

except for christmas, went then.

avatar4321

02-27-2009, 05:58 PM

:poke: So, aren't you non-Catholic heathens just so jealous that we got this "Lent thang" going on?

Not really. Doesnt effect my life at all.

avatar4321

02-27-2009, 05:59 PM

I did RCIA last year and got confirmed and first communion. Was baptised in the church at birth. Haven't been back to mass since. Every sunday for a year was enough.

Never too late to search for God.

LiberalNation

02-27-2009, 06:07 PM

the priest said I needed to marry a could catholic boy and it would solve all my faith problems. :rolls

Kathianne

02-27-2009, 06:07 PM

I've given up things for Lent before, but I'm not doing it this year. I may fast for a day or two, though. That's a good spiritual discipline to learn - going a day (or three) with no food, and taking that time to pray, study the Bible, reflect on your spiritual state, etc...

For me, Lent is less about giving something up and more about renewing my devotion to God, which is what I think captures the "intent" of the season.

I don't disagree. From my point of view, we begin our journey to God beginning at baptism, the journey ends when we are rejoined in heaven. Lent to me is an annual reflection of that. It begins at Ash Wednesday, focusing on the dry period Jesus encountered in the desert. Throughout the Lenten season, I try to focus on how to become the person God wishes me to be, which means trying to improve myself and more fully try to follow Him, (ie., not being so impatient with some people). It ends Easter Sunday with the earth giving up the Savior.

PostmodernProphet

02-27-2009, 06:31 PM

the priest said I needed to marry a could catholic boy and it would solve all my faith problems. :rolls

thinks he would keep you in line, eh?......(deftly avoids commenting on the Freudian slip...."could catholic boy")......

LiberalNation

02-27-2009, 06:38 PM

lol good.

Mr. P

02-27-2009, 07:59 PM

except for christmas, went then.

That's moot, you said haven't been back, you have and LOVED it.

moderate democrat

02-27-2009, 08:25 PM

I'm NOT looking for acceptance..just an answer on the Catholic policy/belief.

no need to get snippy...I was just giving you some options.

Mr. P

02-27-2009, 08:29 PM

no need to get snippy...I was just giving you some options.

Thanks, but I wasn't asking for options. See how that works?

moderate democrat

02-27-2009, 08:36 PM

Thanks, but I wasn't asking for options. See how that works?

I do. please forgive my inappropriate intrusion into your discussion about lent.

Mr. P

02-27-2009, 08:40 PM

I do. please forgive my inappropriate intrusion into your discussion about lent.

No problem..although what I asked Glock was not about Lent..no matter..no big deal, forget it.

bullypulpit

02-28-2009, 05:38 AM

What have we been lent, for how long, and what's the interest rate?

5stringJeff

02-28-2009, 06:53 PM

I don't disagree. From my point of view, we begin our journey to God beginning at baptism, the journey ends when we are rejoined in heaven. Lent to me is an annual reflection of that. It begins at Ash Wednesday, focusing on the dry period Jesus encountered in the desert. Throughout the Lenten season, I try to focus on how to become the person God wishes me to be, which means trying to improve myself and more fully try to follow Him, (ie., not being so impatient with some people). It ends Easter Sunday with the earth giving up the Savior.

:beer: (Unless you're giving up beer for Lent, that is :D )

crin63

03-02-2009, 11:07 AM

I had heard of lent but never knew what it was until now. I guess I have been on a 13 year lent now.

By the grace of God I gave up alcohol, smoking and cursing when I became a Christian, not to bring me closer to God, I just figured those things shouldn't be found in the lives of Christians anyway.

After using foul language as punctuation for more years than I can count my tongue has slipped a few times, very few times.

Abbey Marie

03-02-2009, 12:30 PM