On Devout Catholics

[baliguat]

Halos wala man gani Pasudla si St. Francis sa Vatican kay yagit lagi intawn, Nya gisunog pas Obispo ang Church nga ila giayu. tsk tsk

[Hellblazer 2.1]

lu-oya noh? let us pray...

[handsoff241]

mao ra jud nay nyu nahibaw-an? peata you keep on shoving what on your part you know and tell that it is the only face of our church, i can;t blame you, after all wala pud mo ka-experience sa among na experience, YES it's a fact our forefathers committted great errs which was accounted in the history due to its gravity. but the other way round also happened.. remember our church as a vast number of members and almost all kinds of men lived and perished with our church's vicinity, but look at us now we are strong as ever, proof that God was always with us even during those dark times nga daghan kaau ug sala nga committed it's a proof that as human we have sinned and was forgiven kay nag basol, you will not understand due to your "over whelmingly blinded" empathies on the side of the oppressed, yes naa moy point, but your point is too fixed to serve both sides.

and we are not reading vatican edited books/soources.. gibuguan mo namo? vatican has so much to do other than regulating the end info that is coming to the least members of our church and vatican does not own the internet.

Peace <= rcruman
<= reg

lol

[The_Child]

try to study history without being a religionist. your cherished beliefs has got nothing to do with the historical facts. ang inyong study about history man gud puros censored na. murag you're only studying vatican-approved texts. unya, murag mtrcb baya nang vatican. they want to censor everything. if that's your prerogative na modawat lang mog hand-outs from the church, aw maypa magbasa na lang mog Gospel Comics. save the History Books done by accredited scholars for the Seekers.

there are no historical facts, only interpretations. anybody who does history decently knows that.
"study history without being a religionist" -- > right. granted, but assume that the person who pens down history was not unbiased, consciously or not, which is in the first place impossible.

when an amateur reads history, at some point he tries to filter out whats "quality" and what is not, then assumes a trendy ideology to find a historical perspective, and reads it, and goes around bashing people, saying that it is "censored this, and it is censored that" what he does not know is that, the trendy ideology he assumes, perhaps because it sounds 'cool' is nothing more but a product of cultural forces that has made its way to the writer of history and his readers.

yes indeed, save the scholarly works, but to assume that the church's history is implied not scholarly, then somebody really is too biased already.
The church afterall is responsible for preserving ancient knowledge and treatises especially during the dark age.



God save common sense!

[schmuck]

May I ask who caused the Dark Age(Early Middle Ages) and the consequent gap in humanity's progress?

[regnauld]

there are no historical facts, only interpretations. anybody who does history decently knows that.
"study history without being a religionist" -- > right. granted, but assume that the person who pens down history was not unbiased, consciously or not, which is in the first place impossible.

when an amateur reads history, at some point he tries to filter out whats "quality" and what is not, then assumes a trendy ideology to find a historical perspective, and reads it, and goes around bashing people, saying that it is "censored this, and it is censored that" what he does not know is that, the trendy ideology he assumes, perhaps because it sounds 'cool' is nothing more but a product of cultural forces that has made its way to the writer of history and his readers.

yes indeed, save the scholarly works, but to assume that the church's history is implied not scholarly, then somebody really is too biased already.
The church afterall is responsible for preserving ancient knowledge and treatises especially during the dark age.



God save common sense!

Were Crusades and the Inquisition an interpretation of history too where thousands of people were tortured, killed and burned at the stakes?

[The_Child]

May I ask who caused the Dark Age(Early Middle Ages) and the consequent gap in humanity's progress?

to say "who" is the same way as to ask, who started the "great war" (world war I)
and to say consequent gap in progress is the same way as to say that the holocaust was a gap of progress.

the dark ages, as some historians would point out is the description of the known world when order collapsed after Rome collapsed. When the center was breached, everything became chaotic in europe, cept for the east, the fertile crescent and Eastern Rome ( Constantinople )

IN the dark ages, what served as the last bastion of foundation that held WEstern Europe to a single identity? The last superinstitution that substituted the caesars' ? the institution that was a catalyst for the the renewal of European power a little later on ? It was the Holy Mother CHurch, and it was not just all about hail mary's...

[The_Child]

Were Crusades and the Inquisition an interpretation of history too where thousands of people were tortured, killed and burned at the stakes?

sir, im not a historian, but since, i assume, you have access to university colleagues in the history department, you might want to ask professional historians, why they constantly try to juggle between the term "historicism" and "science" - with this you will get what i mean.

why is history not a science? because it is never objective.
what is historicism ? - a hermeneutics of history which is the tool of a historian.

[regnauld]

sir, im not a historian, but since, i assume, you have access to university colleagues in the history department, you might want to ask professional historians, why they constantly try to juggle between the term "historicism" and "science" - with this you will get what i mean.

why is history not a science? because it is never objective.
what is historicism ? - a hermeneutics of history which is the tool of a historian.

You mean to say you don't believe that the Crusades and the Inquisition really happened at all?

[The_Child]

You mean to say you don't believe that the Crusades and the Inquisition really happened at all?

did i say i didnt?