<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Crumble, crumble &#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/crumble-crumble/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/crumble-crumble/</link>
	<description>Notes, journal, diary, blog, arguments, beliefs, cogitations, comments, considerations, contemplations, criticisms, daydreams, deliberations, engrossments, musings, opinions, poems, points, rantings (occasional), reflections, ruminations, satire, wit, pensiveness of a thinking man.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 16:59:54 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=MU</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: sol</title>
		<link>http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/crumble-crumble/#comment-1857</link>
		<dc:creator>sol</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2008 13:33:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/?p=256#comment-1857</guid>
		<description>Or it could be seen as comical that someone assumes there's no dialogue just because they aren't a part of the conversation.

I find nothing more comical (or illogical) than the assumption that entities don't exist, just because we do not perceive them Or put more accurately, because &lt;i&gt;some&lt;/i&gt; do not perceive them.

And having never been in the room, how do you know how comfortable it is or not, and how can you tell them they would be better leaving it?

But it just goes to show how irrational atheism is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Or it could be seen as comical that someone assumes there&#8217;s no dialogue just because they aren&#8217;t a part of the conversation.</p>
<p>I find nothing more comical (or illogical) than the assumption that entities don&#8217;t exist, just because we do not perceive them Or put more accurately, because <i>some</i> do not perceive them.</p>
<p>And having never been in the room, how do you know how comfortable it is or not, and how can you tell them they would be better leaving it?</p>
<p>But it just goes to show how irrational atheism is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SilverTiger</title>
		<link>http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/crumble-crumble/#comment-1848</link>
		<dc:creator>SilverTiger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:29:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/?p=256#comment-1848</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;“impedes direct dialogue with the Lord.”&lt;/em&gt;

Um, how can you "impede dialogue" with a non-existent entity?

There isn't any dialogue to start with...

I'm afraid I can't muster any enthusiasm whatsoever for these supposed changes. They are just people shuffling around to find a more comfortable position in an uncomfortable room that they would be better leaving altogether.

Then again, I suppose it has its comical side.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>“impedes direct dialogue with the Lord.”</em></p>
<p>Um, how can you &#8220;impede dialogue&#8221; with a non-existent entity?</p>
<p>There isn&#8217;t any dialogue to start with&#8230;</p>
<p>I&#8217;m afraid I can&#8217;t muster any enthusiasm whatsoever for these supposed changes. They are just people shuffling around to find a more comfortable position in an uncomfortable room that they would be better leaving altogether.</p>
<p>Then again, I suppose it has its comical side.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sol</title>
		<link>http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/crumble-crumble/#comment-1839</link>
		<dc:creator>sol</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:29:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/?p=256#comment-1839</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;To me it represents a movement away from institutionalized authority, and a courage to determine one’s own relationship with any divine. . . . Instead of being dominated by it, more of them are saying, “I still want a bit of church, but on my terms. It has less power over me and my thinking.”&lt;/i&gt;

But that's the funny thing about God. Not being His equal, we really aren't entitled to have Him (or His Church) on our terms. Compartmentalised faith really isn't faith at all. After all, we are dealing with issues concerning what is the very essence and purpose of life. 

Any rejection of, or reticence toward, the sacrament of reconciliation is simply depriving the oneself of the benefits of the sacrament. It is not that you cannot confess your sins to God without a priest. And it is not that the priest is an intermediary, any more than individual Christians are intermediaries when they offer prayers on behalf of others.

To see the institution of the Church as some bad thing imposed upon Catholics makes no sense.  The Church is the keeper of that which has been passed down by Jesus and His Apostles. Through it's leadership it makes decisions on how to apply that in any given milieu. 

Lorena says the Catholic Church is sticking to its errors, but doesn't define what those errors are. If they stick to anything in the interest of keeping the tradition, then they are simply doing that they are supposed to be doing. That is the Church's job: keeping the tradition.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>To me it represents a movement away from institutionalized authority, and a courage to determine one’s own relationship with any divine. . . . Instead of being dominated by it, more of them are saying, “I still want a bit of church, but on my terms. It has less power over me and my thinking.”</i></p>
<p>But that&#8217;s the funny thing about God. Not being His equal, we really aren&#8217;t entitled to have Him (or His Church) on our terms. Compartmentalised faith really isn&#8217;t faith at all. After all, we are dealing with issues concerning what is the very essence and purpose of life. </p>
<p>Any rejection of, or reticence toward, the sacrament of reconciliation is simply depriving the oneself of the benefits of the sacrament. It is not that you cannot confess your sins to God without a priest. And it is not that the priest is an intermediary, any more than individual Christians are intermediaries when they offer prayers on behalf of others.</p>
<p>To see the institution of the Church as some bad thing imposed upon Catholics makes no sense.  The Church is the keeper of that which has been passed down by Jesus and His Apostles. Through it&#8217;s leadership it makes decisions on how to apply that in any given milieu. </p>
<p>Lorena says the Catholic Church is sticking to its errors, but doesn&#8217;t define what those errors are. If they stick to anything in the interest of keeping the tradition, then they are simply doing that they are supposed to be doing. That is the Church&#8217;s job: keeping the tradition.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lorena</title>
		<link>http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/crumble-crumble/#comment-1817</link>
		<dc:creator>Lorena</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2008 04:42:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/?p=256#comment-1817</guid>
		<description>It is interesting to see the Roman Catholic church, as usual, sticking to its errors in the interest of keeping the tradition. 

Any other institution would get rid of the practice. But, no, the RC church prefers to fix it. No wonder Christianity is so archaic.  

I am not sure, though, that the rejection of the confession practice means that the RC church is crumbling.  At least in Latin America, most Roman Catholics are nominal Christians. They rarely go to church and confession, well, that's for old ladies. 

So really people couldn't care less about the rules and regulations. They just want  a place to be baptized , married, and buried.

If it weren't because its devotees care so little about living out the faith, the RC church would've died a long time ago. It is possible, though, that the number of TRUE catholics is decreasing, in which case, yeah, perhaps the RC church is in trouble.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is interesting to see the Roman Catholic church, as usual, sticking to its errors in the interest of keeping the tradition. </p>
<p>Any other institution would get rid of the practice. But, no, the RC church prefers to fix it. No wonder Christianity is so archaic.  </p>
<p>I am not sure, though, that the rejection of the confession practice means that the RC church is crumbling.  At least in Latin America, most Roman Catholics are nominal Christians. They rarely go to church and confession, well, that&#8217;s for old ladies. </p>
<p>So really people couldn&#8217;t care less about the rules and regulations. They just want  a place to be baptized , married, and buried.</p>
<p>If it weren&#8217;t because its devotees care so little about living out the faith, the RC church would&#8217;ve died a long time ago. It is possible, though, that the number of TRUE catholics is decreasing, in which case, yeah, perhaps the RC church is in trouble.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: the chaplain</title>
		<link>http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/crumble-crumble/#comment-1812</link>
		<dc:creator>the chaplain</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 15:17:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/?p=256#comment-1812</guid>
		<description>Nice post. I agree that this is a very good sign. It probably will take some more generations to break free from the grasp of organized religion, but there are many signs that each generation is gaining a bit more freedom than its predecessors.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice post. I agree that this is a very good sign. It probably will take some more generations to break free from the grasp of organized religion, but there are many signs that each generation is gaining a bit more freedom than its predecessors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mercurious</title>
		<link>http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/crumble-crumble/#comment-1811</link>
		<dc:creator>Mercurious</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 15:12:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/?p=256#comment-1811</guid>
		<description>Wishful thinking, I fear. It will take millions of years for the stupidity to be evolved out of species, don't you think]?

But kudos for looking for the silver lining.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wishful thinking, I fear. It will take millions of years for the stupidity to be evolved out of species, don&#8217;t you think]?</p>
<p>But kudos for looking for the silver lining.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: onethoughtfulwoman</title>
		<link>http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/crumble-crumble/#comment-1810</link>
		<dc:creator>onethoughtfulwoman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:33:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://athinkingman.wordpress.com/?p=256#comment-1810</guid>
		<description>Good blog. Agree with what you say. Love the title.
Crumble, Crumble, all I can think of here is apple crumble.
Who had the apple? oh yes, it was Eve. A woman's fault again with harbouring sin, never first a man. Why couldn't he have had the Apple first? See what Yalom is doing for me. THINKING oh thinkingman, from your chum thoughtfulwoman. 
Seriously, I liked the last paragraph especially.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good blog. Agree with what you say. Love the title.<br />
Crumble, Crumble, all I can think of here is apple crumble.<br />
Who had the apple? oh yes, it was Eve. A woman&#8217;s fault again with harbouring sin, never first a man. Why couldn&#8217;t he have had the Apple first? See what Yalom is doing for me. THINKING oh thinkingman, from your chum thoughtfulwoman.<br />
Seriously, I liked the last paragraph especially.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
