Unable to load image
Reported by:
  • WayOut : I JACKED OFF! PLEASE SOMEONE LET AEVANN KNOW I JACKED OFF, I DON'T WANT TO BE BANNED!!
  • whyareyou : I reported @WayOut for jacking off desu
  • DangerousBlackGuy : Im defecating as we speak

Consistent with Pharaoh @Aevann's instructions, all rDrama users must report what they got done last week. Failure to respond will be taken as a resignation.

Please reply to this post with approx. 5 bullets of what you accomplished last week and cc your hole !jannies.

Please do not send any DMs, links, or attachments.

Deadline is this Tuesday at 11:59pmEST.

103
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Catechism of the Catholic Church:

meh church used to say a ton of stuff it doesn't anymore. being against psychoatives is bit hypocritical when one of jesus miracles is producing wine from water, which is one of the least useful and most harmful of the psychoactives

besides even the catechism mentions:

Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense

seem u can try to consume ayauascha for fun ... but ur gunna get ur shit spiritually pushed in.

taking it for spiritual therapy is the only intentional way to do so, and my god are we way past due for some collectively spiritual healing.

they're just plants my brother. u grow them, u boil them, u drink them, and then u meet ur maker in ways u never could have previously imagined....

usually at least. a few people are more spiritually blocked that others.

but at the same time, draw it back a little, hippie

a) not a hippie, i fit the young urban professional demographic, b) humanity in an existentially dire position far beyond ur current understanding of it.

Church promotes is repentance (which in the traditional definition of the word doesn't just mean "feel bad for wrongdoing" but means instead a transformation of mental and spiritual attitude towards sin).

but of course. the world has lot of repenting to undertake...

Then we can talk about everything else. Heal the wounds, heal the wounds. ... And you have to start from the ground up."

no shit, pope

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

meh church used to say a ton of stuff it doesn't anymore.

Moral teachings within the Church have not and cannot change, empirical arguments against prohibition's pros and cons would be licit but using ayahuasca isn't something that will be deemed "not a sin" in the future.

being against psychoatives is bit hypocritical when one of jesus miracles is producing wine from water, which is one of the least useful and most harmful of the psychoactives

The reason drug use is sinful is that being high/drunk deprives us of the capacity for moral reasoning. Microdosing and CBD topical creams, where legal, would be the more appropriate parallel to drinking in moderation. And it's not hypocritical, Jews/Christians have always been against drinking to excess.

a) not a hippie, i fit the young urban professional demographic, b) humanity in an existentially dire position far beyond ur current understanding of it.

If you think taking psychedelics is part of the solution to addressing this, I stand by what I called you, but tone is hard to convey online and I was just trying to rib you. :marseyhippiecrygenocide:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Moral teachings within the Church have not and cannot change

lol wut? church did a one 180 on homosexuality even tho the bible expressly forbids forms of it in several places.

the bible doesn't even address "illicit substances", such a concept did not exist back then to be addressed. their stance is not well grounded in scripture., so i'm not sure what ground u think it's even standing on.

The reason drug use is sinful is that being high/drunk deprives us of the capacity for moral reasoning

trying to overgeneralized all psychoactives as the same is actually as r-slurred as trying to generalize all medicine as the same

Microdosing

is useful, but does not have the same depth of effect as macrodosing.

i wouldn't think someone like the pope to really need microdosing tbh, it's the macrodose that offers novel perspectives, for someone of that order

If you think taking psychedelics is part of the solution to addressing this,

i'm find myself drowning in a society that has found only abject failure in trying to systematically address and eradicate "sin" via the sober mind, more powerful techniques simply are required or we will remain too mired in such sin to find the clarity for sustainability, let alone divinity

finding divinity is not optional, unless you also consider our survival merely "an option"

#god

!commenters

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

lol wut? church did a one 180 on homosexuality even tho the bible expressly forbids forms of it in several places.

No, it didn't.

Basing itself on sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered. They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

However, the Church also acknowledges that "[homosexuality's] psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. . . . The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's cross the difficulties that they may encounter from their condition.

Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection. (CCC 2357– 2359)

https://www.usccb.org/news/2023/doctrinal-dicastery-explains-how-when-gay-couples-can-be-blessed You can read about it here if you think I'm misinterpreting what occurred: all that "changed" is that priests were advised to be willing to bless two men/women presenting themselves in private requesting it without withholding the blessing on the assumption that they live in sin.

the bible doesn't even address "illicit substances", such a concept did not exist back then to be addressed. their stance is not even well grounded in scripture., so i'm not sure what ground u think it's even standing on.

The Bible has many passages on sobriety and it's very clearly an application of the same principle. Besides, Catholics are not "Bible alone" and never have been. The Church was founded by Christ and is guided by the Holy Spirit. The moral teachings stand as they are: https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=sober&version=RSVCE keyword search for "sober".

i'm find myself drowning in a society that has found only abject failure in trying to systematically address and eradicate "sin" via the sober mind, more powerful techniques simply are required or we will remain too mired in such sin to find the clarity for sustainability

Do you think native cultures with ritualized drug use were free of this? Can you provide examples of hippie communes not falling into debauchery? Why are we pinging !commenters ? Hi @QuadNarca :marseywave2:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Hi, @Nightcrawler. My opinion is that

even if they are a believer, people don't have to submit to the Church's opinion on everything, but they are free to make their own interpretations according to their own moral conscience. Any institution that claims its own conclusions are superior to everything else is bound to become riddled with moral corruption, that is really hard to correct.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Does it make sense to reject the central truth claims of having been founded by the living God and possessing Divine guidance and still participate? :marseyshrug: Picking and choosing is only logical if you're agnostic/atheist already because there's really no point to be Catholic in the first place if Jesus was not God.

is bound to become riddled with moral corruption, that is really hard to correct

Corruption of the teachings or corruption of the hierarchy? That many priests and bishops have led personally immoral lives is unfortunate and undeniable. Mystery of the faith, for any religion for that matter, why God (or whatever supernatural precursor to the natural universe existed) created the world and humans exactly the way He did.

They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's cross the difficulties that they may encounter from their condition.

If I've ever failed to uphold this I sincerely apologize. This time I pinged you because I think you had already commented in this thread right? :marseyblush:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

You didn't fail to uphold it. You're good and kind. :marseyembrace:

Also I meant corruption of hierarchy, priests abusing their power to do evil for example.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Does it make sense to reject the central truth claims of having been founded by the living God and possessing Divine guidance and still participate?

one of the other things i picked up in mass was a clear feelings for a 2nd coming of christ.

clearly the church still has much to learn from it's mistakes, or such a 2nd coming would have little meaning.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

@goderator200 always pings commenters it's xer gimmick, hecko :marseywave3:


https://i.rdrama.net/images/1739271948y52utXmckBNkwg.webp https://i.rdrama.net/images/1740487396BapOr-T9W_9t1g.webp

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

wow, i have a known gimmik!

:m#arseydance:

!commenters

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This is an obnoxious gimmick. At least @BimothyX2 saying hecko :marseywave3: doesn't ping me every frickin day

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Reported by:

frick you b-word

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

block me then cute twink u wont

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

ur welcome

:#marseymisatolewd2:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Hecko. :marseyblush: How are you today?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'm good! I hope you're having a wonderful day!

https://media.tenor.com/BvNjn5RP80MAAAAx/good-morning-happy.webp


https://i.rdrama.net/images/1739271948y52utXmckBNkwg.webp https://i.rdrama.net/images/1740487396BapOr-T9W_9t1g.webp

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I don't read any of your or @goderator200 's longpostbot summoning comments but I'll upmarsey you just so you keep on fighting !upmarseysluts

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I haven't been longpostbotted bc the length comes from quoting Church teaching. :marseysad:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I upmarsey your summon but the post above is too many words I got lost looking for the upmarsey so :marseysidevote: for them

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

another thing the church should be pushing is transparency, like full systemic transparency. starting with the church, but then subsequently into the rest of global society. seriously, what does the church have to hide if it really claims to be the premiere agent of god? but honestly the church even with it's flaw, i don't think in really justifying the need, they are the vessel for change, not the reason. it's every other fricking system on earth that needs the divine spotlight of truth and honesty.

if u want talk about a "judgement day" that day will come when we all, every consciousness moral agent on earth, has access to the full and truthful state of society... so we each can judge it for ourselves, to act accordingly. never before in history did we have the ability to create such an informational system, so never before in history was such a "judgement day" possible.

if god is truly indeed in all of us, which church does so profess, then that part deserves access to the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,

so help us god

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

There's been steady headway on the transparency/accountability part in the last few decades. What secrets do you think the Church is keeping that need to be revealed?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

sorry, maybe my edit came in to late,

but it's not really the church that i think is particularly corrupt. we we'll prolly find some sure, but i suspect it may be on the lesser corrupt side of the spectrum...

it's most everything else my dude, that is in desperate need of god's honest gaze. our entire global economic system. our entire nation state political system.

it is such a simple fix, yet it will be profound beyond all expectations.

of course i can have the spark of such an idea, but i cannot be the whole engine that actually drives said change. the world is too big, am i but one man, hence the need for a larger vessel.

sin cannot be corrected if it's not even revealed

#god

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I consider the water to wine miracle an indication that God won't hide from you just because you like to party

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

all that "changed" is that priests were advised to be willing to bless two men/women presenting themselves in private requesting it without withholding the blessing on the assumption that they live in sin.

their assumption when wedding two men is that they don't ever have s*x?

bc it sounds like what you're saying is "gay marriage is fine but gay s*x is a sin"

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

As with the Holy Father's above-mentioned response to the Dubia of two Cardinals, this Declaration remains firm on the traditional doctrine of the Church about marriage, not allowing any type of liturgical rite or blessing similar to a liturgical rite that can create confusion. The value of this document, however, is that it offers a specific and innovative contribution to the pastoral meaning of blessings, permitting a broadening and enrichment of the classical understanding of blessings, which is closely linked to a liturgical perspective. Such theological reflection, based on the pastoral vision of Pope Francis, implies a real development from what has been said about blessings in the Magisterium and the official texts of the Church. This explains why this text has taken on the typology of a "Declaration."

It is precisely in this context that one can understand the possibility of blessing couples in irregular situations and same-s*x couples without officially validating their status or changing in any way the Church's perennial teaching on marriage.

...

5. This is also the understanding of marriage that is offered by the Gospel. For this reason, when it comes to blessings, the Church has the right and the duty to avoid any rite that might contradict this conviction or lead to confusion. Such is also the meaning of the Responsum of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which states that the Church does not have the power to impart blessings on unions of persons of the same s*x.

6. It should be emphasized that in the Rite of the Sacrament of Marriage, this concerns not just any blessing but a gesture reserved to the ordained minister. In this case, the blessing given by the ordained minister is tied directly to the specific union of a man and a woman, who establish an exclusive and indissoluble covenant by their consent. This fact allows us to highlight the risk of confusing a blessing given to any other union with the Rite that is proper to the Sacrament of Marriage.

https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2023/12/18/0901/01963.html#en

The Vatican has never, and categorically cannot, permit performing a "gay marriage". You can read the document if you want but it's not a blessing of the relationship but of the individuals.

Anyway, this confusion is why many bishops have told Rome they will not start offering them to presumably gay couples. :marseydoomer: The context of all this is that in Germany/Luxembourg/parts of western europe large swathes of the Church are openly heretical and this was part of the ongoing dialogue between those parties. Rome has opted not to seek formal excommunication in hopes that the problem dies off with time rather than initiating a third major schism.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Rome has opted not to seek formal excommunication in hopes that the problem dies off with time

You mean people who are more liberal, thus would advocate for such things leaving or not even joining the church, so only the conservatives stay that will oppose this? I mean it's also where the Church shrinks a lot, and a lot of people leave Catholicism.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Protestant congregations that have changed teachings to conform to secular morality have cratered even harder than Catholics/Evangelicals. I think you should probably keep in mind that this is more about genuine faith than politics, which is why the liberal churches have fared worse than we have - once you say "God got that one wrong, oops" you're really just "playing church" rather than worshipping. I want a Church of people with genuine faith, not political actors seeking to conform the Church to their preferred vision of society.

I get frustrated with more right wing Catholics who want to pick and choose which teachings to follow, too, btw. You can ask @C333 or @nuclearshill :marseywave2:

But if you're curious, Pope Benedict XVI gave several speeches when he was a priest/cardinal on this very subject. An excerpt from one of those speeches Fr. Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI) gave all the way back in 1969 about politics, the Church, and the decline of Christianity:

"The future of the Church can and will issue from those whose roots are deep and who live from the pure fullness of their faith. It will not issue from those who accommodate themselves merely to the passing moment or from those who merely criticize others and assume that they themselves are infallible measuring rods; nor will it issue from those who take the easier road, who sidestep the passion of faith, declaring false and obsolete, tyrannous and legalistic, all that makes demands upon men, that hurts them and compels them to sacrifice themselves. To put this more positively: The future of the Church, once again as always, will be reshaped by saints, by men, that is, whose minds probe deeper than the slogans of the day, who see more than others see, because their lives embrace a wider reality. Unselfishness, which makes men free, is attained only through the patience of small daily acts of self-denial. By this daily passion, which alone reveals to a man in how many ways he is enslaved by his own ego, by this daily passion and by it alone, a man's eyes are slowly opened. He sees only to the extent that he has lived and suffered. If today we are scarcely able any longer to become aware of God, that is because we find it so easy to evade ourselves, to flee from the depths of our being by means of the narcotic of some pleasure or other. Thus our own interior depths remain closed to us. If it is true that a man can see only with his heart, then how blind we are!

"How does all this affect the problem we are examining? It means that the big talk of those who prophesy a Church without God and without faith is all empty chatter. We have no need of a Church that celebrates the cult of action in political prayers. It is utterly superfluous. Therefore, it will destroy itself. What will remain is the Church of Jesus Christ, the Church that believes in the God who has become man and promises us life beyond death. The kind of priest who is no more than a social worker can be replaced by the psychotherapist and other specialists; but the priest who is no specialist, who does not stand on the [sidelines], watching the game, giving official advice, but in the name of God places himself at the disposal of man, who is beside them in their sorrows, in their joys, in their hope and in their fear, such a priest will certainly be needed in the future.

"Let us go a step farther. From the crisis of today the Church of tomorrow will emerge -- a Church that has lost much. She will become small and will have to start afresh more or less from the beginning. She will no longer be able to inhabit many of the edifices she built in prosperity. As the number of her adherents diminishes, so it will lose many of her social privileges. In contrast to an earlier age, it will be seen much more as a voluntary society, entered only by free decision. As a small society, it will make much bigger demands on the initiative of her individual members. Undoubtedly it will discover new forms of ministry and will ordain to the priesthood approved Christians who pursue some profession. In many smaller congregations or in self-contained social groups, pastoral care will normally be provided in this fashion. Along-side this, the full-time ministry of the priesthood will be indispensable as formerly. But in all of the changes at which one might guess, the Church will find her essence afresh and with full conviction in that which was always at her center: faith in the triune God, in Jesus Christ, the Son of God made man, in the presence of the Spirit until the end of the world. In faith and prayer she will again recognize the sacraments as the worship of God and not as a subject for liturgical scholarship.

"The Church will be a more spiritual Church, not presuming upon a political mandate, flirting as little with the Left as with the Right. It will be hard going for the Church, for the process of crystallization and clarification will cost her much valuable energy. It will make her poor and cause her to become the Church of the meek. The process will be all the more arduous, for sectarian narrow-mindedness as well as pompous self-will will have to be shed. One may predict that all of this will take time. The process will be long and wearisome as was the road from the false progressivism on the eve of the French Revolution -- when a bishop might be thought smart if he made fun of dogmas and even insinuated that the existence of God was by no means certain -- to the renewal of the nineteenth century. But when the trial of this sifting is past, a great power will flow from a more spiritualized and simplified Church. Men in a totally planned world will find themselves unspeakably lonely. If they have completely lost sight of God, they will feel the whole horror of their poverty. Then they will discover the little flock of believers as something wholly new. They will discover it as a hope that is meant for them, an answer for which they have always been searching in secret.

"And so it seems certain to me that the Church is facing very hard times. The real crisis has scarcely begun. We will have to count on terrific upheavals. But I am equally certain about what will remain at the end: not the Church of the political cult, which is dead already, but the Church of faith. It may well no longer be the dominant social power to the extent that she was until recently; but it will enjoy a fresh blossoming and be seen as man's home, where he will find life and hope beyond death.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

As a small society, it will make much bigger demands on the initiative of her individual members.

What did he mean by this.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

That's a lot of text that won't matter when you go to heck for defending the Whore of Babylon.

!lutherans

:#marseyluther:


Gavel to gavel coverage, powered by cable.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Can you provide examples of hippie communes not falling into debauchery?

hippies failed because they tried to drop out of society, not realizing u can't just drop out of cancer. it must be confronted and addressed.

Do you think native cultures with ritualized drug use were free of this?

look bro, the ungodly sober mindset of the monotheistic religions has put us on a dogmatically r-slurred path of self-destruction, not the natives or the hippies.

and i don't think psychoactives are the only prerequisite to sustainability, far from it. but they are one of the keystone facets, and without them it will crumble.

our job is quite a bit more difficult than myopic black vs white... there's a whole array of colors we need for that bridge, and missing any one of them can and will mean total annihilation for this species.

monotheistic religions holds one. psychoactives hold another. scientific understanding holds a third. technological prowess holds a fourth. philosophy holds a 5th. etc, this list is non-exhaustive. i don't know how many keys we need.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I think if God cared about strags then maybe Jesus would have mentioned once. :marseyshrug:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Jesus took the moral teachings surrounding sexuality and made them stricter. Paul did explicitly mention homosexuality a few times.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Oh yeah, nobody anymore wants to talk about what he really said. That you can't get divorced and then remarried. :marseyglancing:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Catholics still hold to this one, wdym? :marseythinkorino:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Maybe legit actual Catholics like you but nobody else does. It's really funny to me that Jesus explicitly gave out very few rules and 90% of "Christians" can't even follow those. Especially because he said "I'm gonna dumb this down for you because apparently 10 commandments was too much for you fricking r-slurs to remember."

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

You can't get remarried in a Catholic Church without an annulment declaring the first "marriage" to have never been valid in the first place. It gets abused and people will lie to get what they want, but it's not like they haven't made efforts to maintain the teaching. :marseyshrug: It was the whole reason England broke off, as I know you know.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

lol wut? church did a one 180 on homosexuality even tho the bible expressly forbids forms of it in several places.

also remember those few decades where any form of worshipping idols was a moral failure and forbidden and then they went back on that bc it was so unpopular and then they FRICKING DID IT AGAIN

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Iconoclasm

the idea that the christian faith has never modified its moral teachings is absurd, I'm not the most knowledgeable about christian history but I'm sure there are dozens of other examples like this, and that's even staying squarely within "moral" teachings (ie excluding stuff like how they insisted humans were created by god and not evolution)

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The Papacy remained firmly in support of the use of religious images throughout the period, and the whole episode widened the growing divergence between the Byzantine and Carolingian traditions in what was still a unified European Church, as well as facilitating the reduction or removal of Byzantine political control over parts of the Italian Peninsula.

But, to address your actual point...

the idea that the christian faith has never modified its moral teachings is absurd, I'm not the most knowledgeable about christian history but I'm sure there are dozens of other examples like this, and that's even staying squarely within "moral" teachings (ie excluding stuff like how they insisted humans were created by god and not evolution)

Give me some to respond to and I will! :marseyautism: There's never been a 180 on something deemed morally licit. Closest I'm aware of is the death penalty, and admittedly Pope Francis has used language approaching a 180 where JP2 and Benedict XVI were more careful in their phrasing.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

drinking in moderation

Also keep in mind that they didn't have 12.5% Franzia Pinot Grigio in those days. Wine was much weaker, probably too little to get drunk unless you were really really trying.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.



Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.