God’s message of history: to call all to conversion, says Pope Benedict

God’s message of history: to call all to conversion, says Pope Benedict


Vatican City, May. 11, 2005 (CNA) - Continuing his series of Wednesday audiences prepared by the late John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI today told an estimated 17,000 pilgrims gathered in St. Peter’s Square that although seemingly in the hands of dark forces, God penetrates all of human history.

The Holy Father spoke on the "Hymn of adoration and praise", a canticle in chapter 15, verses 3 and 4, of the Book of Revelation.

"History”, he said, “is not in the hands of dark forces, of chance, or of merely human choices."

Rather, he said, "The Lord, supreme arbiter of historical events, rises above the discharge of evil energies, the vehement onslaught of Satan, the emergence of plagues and wickedness. He knowingly guides history to the dawn of the new heaven and the new earth, as mentioned in the last part of the book in the image of the new Jerusalem."

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=3860

Sure, Pope. We'll all convert so the Vatican can get out of red ink and use black instead. What happened to the nice Pope? Oh he died and made this quack Pope. What is his evidence that Satan exists and Revelation is true? If it's faith, his argument has no legs. Isn't there a vote of no confidence for Catholics?

"It's in the hands of our Invisible Sky Pixie!"

Well, shoot, I wish we would have known that back around 1941! We could've saved a lot of dead and crippled people, and just let God take care of Hitler, Tojo and Mussolini.

:eyes:

I should have had him pick out my clothes for work tomorrow.
Do you think he'll tell me what to pack for lunch?
I hate all these tough decisions...

Do you feel that we are incapable of finding religious news on our own?

How many topics have you started in the past few days?

If you have an opinion or agenda, why don't you state it??

And does it not help to get a discussion going on matters?

Catholics and baptists make a huge majority here in the US, this is a religion and theology forum. I post what I see as current news relating to those topics open for discussion.

I have no agenda behind them, and not always an opinion. I let the articles speak for themselves and weed out before I post articles which I don't think folks on this forum would find nominal.

Like others here check cnn daily for stories and post them on the news or general discussion side, I look for daily news from religion sources for which I am familiar (and am not slighting buddhists, wiccans, et al - I would be glad to search for news on those fronts as well and post interesting articles, these were just sites I had bookmarked and was familiar with and read anyway).

I am sure we are all capable of finding news on our own, and yet all the forms contain news posted by people - mainly so that we can share that news and discuss it's content.

Is there a limit on topics which can be started? I have posted many in politics forum as well which are of import, as well as many here which I think are a reflection of the current state of faith in this country (and which has political bearings on things).

My goal is generally not to have an opinion or an agenda when initially posting things - it is my hope to see what others feel, their reasons for feeling it, and perhaps learn something beyond my own opinions (note I said generally and not always).

Perhaps I would do better to post news stories on michaell jackson and runaway brides - but I prefer to stick with politics, foreign affairs, environment, and some general discussion things.

but you do have an agenda, based on what you consider to be important news to post. That's where subjective opinion is, in the process of selection.

However, you are not stating your own opinion of the particular issue, so it is a little disingenuous.

I am just wondering why you feel a need to post so many articles in such a short space of time. Also, it might help if you state your own opinion on a particular issue.

I have times when I am able to post and times when I can't. So I go around looking for things of interest, note them, then when I get time I compile the list and post them.

As far as an agenda it is simply to discuss or share things I find of interest, from politics to religion. I don't always have a full opinion nor time to elucidate it in the way I like.

As an example of that, here are my basic thoughts on an article I posted:
U.S. Bishops File Brief in Assisted Suicide Case
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x20186

Now I look at this whole thing in several ways, to wit:
1. The bishops are doing the job they were appointed to do and are follwoing their beliefs and making a stand. One we may not like, but some dems could learn a lesson from them.

2. The article shows how active some segments of the church are in trying to shape our laws and directions of society outside the church walls. It is important to keep up on these things, always good to know what people are planning to do which could affect issues we care about.

3. Another quote from the article which is interesting to discuss on a philosophical level is "The brief noted that medicine by its very definition aims to prevent illness, to heal, and to alleviate pain. "Taking a human life accomplishes none of these objectives.
To say that it does creates an inherent contradiction, like saying that the legitimate practice of law includes helping clients break the law." - This line of thinking is interesting to note and given the whole schiavo thing I think it is worth talking about.

4. How does that tie in with the article I posted in this thread? It shows a pattern, to me, when combined with other items. To wit: the church is getting involved in a large way in legal matters (which, I might note, is their right) and they are working towards conversion of all (as noted in this thread) - which should alarm not just those not of a religious bent but also those within the christian faith who are not catholic.

5. Does not mean catholics are evil or bad, they are who they are and we disagree on some common things. They are though powerful, have an agenda, and that agenda is opposed to a broader freedom (and again, does not make them bad - they differ and try to effect change just like we do).

Was gonna post more but have a conf call so have to run. I do appreciate and understand your input.

I tend to see things from many angles,