Why don't you call him a coward? Passive aggressive behavior IS cowardism.
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You must log in or sign up to comment
19 comments:
10
1 month ago
10 points
(+0
/
-0
/
+10Score on mirror
)
1 child
Permalink
Reply
Mirrored from scored.co
5
1 month ago
5 points
(+0
/
-0
/
+5Score on mirror
)
I’ll be letting my husband do all the talking. But I told him you have to let it be known that he’s acting like a woman, he’s in no way pastoral, and he just seems to be rooting for our demise. He’s gossiping about us to other people. I’m just about ready to complain to our rector or even the Bishop. He’s behaving like a child, accusing us of grave sin, and then never talking to us after church. It’s very frustrating.
Permalink
Reply
Mirrored from scored.co
It's wild that common beliefs from as recent as 75 years ago (and going back nearly 2000 years) are now seen as irredeemably wicked. Such a drastic reversal demands an equally compelling reason. What changed? Nothing in scripture, that's for sure. The Church has changed to conform to modern secular values.
I would advise against lying though; rather hold your peace and refuse to answer instead (if I understand your comment correctly). The Hebrews were not people to emulate.
I would advise against lying though; rather hold your peace and refuse to answer instead (if I understand your comment correctly). The Hebrews were not people to emulate.
One of the Cretans, a prophet of their own, said, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.” This testimony is true. Titus 1:12-13
I'm sure by your pastor's standards Paul would be a racist bigot.
If you're not familiar, I highly recommend the Stone Choir podcast. They did an entire episode on Galatians 3:28, which is the verse most of these liberal pastors use to justify their persecution of Christians. https://stone-choir.com/galatians-328/
They also have a series on race you might find interesting, with an episode covering race and scripture: https://stone-choir.com/on-human-race-scripture-and-soteriology/
But sounds like you need a new church unfortunately. I doubt any argument you raise will be honestly considered by your pastor. I am sorry your family has to deal with this.
I'm sure by your pastor's standards Paul would be a racist bigot.
If you're not familiar, I highly recommend the Stone Choir podcast. They did an entire episode on Galatians 3:28, which is the verse most of these liberal pastors use to justify their persecution of Christians. https://stone-choir.com/galatians-328/
They also have a series on race you might find interesting, with an episode covering race and scripture: https://stone-choir.com/on-human-race-scripture-and-soteriology/
But sounds like you need a new church unfortunately. I doubt any argument you raise will be honestly considered by your pastor. I am sorry your family has to deal with this.
Husband just got an email. It sounds like we might be excommunicated. There’s a ton of false accusations in a document we just received. I’m dumbfounded that noticing racial differences and questioning the post-war consensus could have any bearing on my salvation. I’m fuming right now and not sure what to do.
> It sounds like we might be excommunicated.
Sorry, what religion is this?
Sorry, what religion is this?
Use the septugent (Bible that Jesus used)
Genesis 11:6
6 And the Lord said, Behold, one race, and one lip of all, and they have begun to do this, and now nothing shall fail from them of all that they may have undertaken to do.
But honestly almost every translation does this part right but doesnt call it race
Genesis 11:6
6 And the Lord said, Behold, one race, and one lip of all, and they have begun to do this, and now nothing shall fail from them of all that they may have undertaken to do.
But honestly almost every translation does this part right but doesnt call it race
He would respond that Pentecost reverses Babel, which is false. Pentecost restored the proper order of creation. This means going out to all the world and preaching in the name of Christ. Race and culture remain intact and each nation worships the one true God in their own unique way.
He should understand that the consequence of Babel wasn’t the scattering, as God commanded them to scatter and they refused to do so. The punishment was the mixing of languages that forced them to scatter.
But I doubt he’d see it that way.
He should understand that the consequence of Babel wasn’t the scattering, as God commanded them to scatter and they refused to do so. The punishment was the mixing of languages that forced them to scatter.
But I doubt he’d see it that way.
OP, Anglicanism is a fake religion founded by Henry the Landwhale because the Catholic church wouldn't grant him a divorce. The Anglican "priests" are bonkers. Get out of that mess.
Here's some things actual Christians said about race.
https://fitzinfo.net/2025/01/21/race-realism-within-a-catholic-context-pt-ii/
Here's some things actual Christians said about race.
https://fitzinfo.net/2025/01/21/race-realism-within-a-catholic-context-pt-ii/
Some based lad called "AveChristusRex88" spammed the entire comment section here with quotes supporting ethnonationalism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKB6B-StM-I
[St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on Aristotle's Politics, Bk. III, Lectio II](https://isidore.co/aquinas/Politics.htm):
> For it pertains to the statesman to know how large a city should be and whether it should include men of one nation or of several. [...]
> Then he investigates another notion of unity, namely, whether, when men remain in the same place, the city must be said to be the same because its inhabitants belong to the same race; for even though they are not the same numerically, one generation is succeeded by another. Just as we say that springs or rivers are the same because of the steady flow of waters, even though one part runs off and another part runs in, so we say that a city is the same, even though some men die and others are born, so long as the same race of men endures.
> Then, by solving this difficulty, he reveals the true nature of the unity of the city. He says that, because of the aforesaid succession of **men belonging to the same race, a multitude of men can be called the same in a sense**; a city, however, cannot be called the same if the political order [or regime] is changed. For, since the association of citizens, which we call a regime, pertains to the nature of the city, it is evident that, if the regime is changed, the city does not remain the same.
So he make a difference between "city" and "people": The city would stay the same, but the people would not.
St. Cyprian of Carthage, Bishop and Martyr, Treatise 10, On Jealousy and Envy, par. 15:
> If it is a source of joy and glory to men to have children like to themselves - and it is more agreeable to have begotten an offspring then when the remaining progeny responds to the parent with like lineaments [characteristics] - how much greater is the gladness in God the Father, when any one is so spiritually born that in his acts and praises **the divine eminence of race** is announced!
St. Augustine on Gal 3:28:
> Although now we have the firsttruits of the Spirit that is life mercy to the justice of faith, as the body is still dead because of sin (Cf Rm 8,23.10), the difference based on nationality, social status or sex, has already been eliminated from the unity founded on faith, but still it remains in mortal existence. Moreover, its ordering **must be maintained** in the course of this life.
> The apostles send it, who give extremely healthy norms about how they should coexist, according to their different race, Jews and Greeks; according to their different social status, masters and slaves, and according to their different sex, husbands and wives, or according to any other differentiated situation that may occur.
Rev. Fr. Bonaventure Hinwood O.F.M. - Race, Reflections of Theologian, pgs. 74-76
> THE FIRST PROPOSITION - "Human races, by their innate and immutable character, differ so greatly from each other, that the lowest of them is further removed from the highest race of men than from the highest species of animals."
Noting that the above proposition was CONDEMNED in Mitt Brennender Sorge (1937), and an instruction published by the Sacred Congregation of Seminaries and Universities (1938), the distinguished theologian goes on to write:
> The existence of distinct races is nowhere denied...Neither would the assertion that these races differ among themselves fall under the condemnation, because if they exist it follows that there must be diversity in order that they be distinguishable at all. In addition the acknowledgement of this difference is common enough in Church documents. Nor do the words "by their innate. character" cause difficulty, because races are essentially groups constituted by heredity, whose qualities in so far as they are racial must be congenital. This fact is likewise acknowledged by the catholic hierarchy.
> It is worth recalling, before this discussion is concluded, the remark made earlier to the effect that this proposition does not rule out the possibility of a limited and accidental gradation of races. Because such a relative superiority and inferiority would not as such destroy the unity of mankind. Nor does it seem to be incompatible with the Church's teaching concerning the general equality of all men.
Mit brennender Sorge, English translation:
> Whoever **removes the race**, or the people, or the state, or the form of government, the bearers of state power or other fundamental values of human community design - who claim an essential and honorable place within the earthly order - from this earthly scale of values, makes them the highest norm of all, including religious values, and idolizes them with idolatry, **reverses and falsifies the God-created and God-commanded order of things.**
> Such a person is far from true faith in God and a conception of life corresponding to such faith.
Summi Pontificatus, Pius XII:
> 45. The Church hails with joy and follows with her maternal blessing every method of guidance and care which aims at a wise and orderly evolution of particular forces and tendencies having their origin in the individual character of each race, provided that they are not opposed to the duties incumbent on men from their unity of origin and common destiny.
Rev. Msgr. Glenn S.T.D, Ph.D., Glenn's Class Manuals in Philosophy, Sociology, 1941, pg. 372:
> That there are lines between classes of people is a certainty that may as well be acknowledged at once, and the color-line is one of them. While it is entirely possible to ignore these lines, the social effect of such action is seldom happy.
>
> Just as a member of the true Church is earnestly dissuaded from marriage, by dispensation, with a non-member, so should a member of one race be dissuaded from marriage with a person of another color.
>
> In marriages of either type, there is a definite injustice done to children, there are almost inevitable misunderstandings between the parties themselves, and there is sure to be some friction between the families so gracelessly united.
[St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on Aristotle's Politics, Bk. III, Lectio II](https://isidore.co/aquinas/Politics.htm):
> For it pertains to the statesman to know how large a city should be and whether it should include men of one nation or of several. [...]
> Then he investigates another notion of unity, namely, whether, when men remain in the same place, the city must be said to be the same because its inhabitants belong to the same race; for even though they are not the same numerically, one generation is succeeded by another. Just as we say that springs or rivers are the same because of the steady flow of waters, even though one part runs off and another part runs in, so we say that a city is the same, even though some men die and others are born, so long as the same race of men endures.
> Then, by solving this difficulty, he reveals the true nature of the unity of the city. He says that, because of the aforesaid succession of **men belonging to the same race, a multitude of men can be called the same in a sense**; a city, however, cannot be called the same if the political order [or regime] is changed. For, since the association of citizens, which we call a regime, pertains to the nature of the city, it is evident that, if the regime is changed, the city does not remain the same.
So he make a difference between "city" and "people": The city would stay the same, but the people would not.
St. Cyprian of Carthage, Bishop and Martyr, Treatise 10, On Jealousy and Envy, par. 15:
> If it is a source of joy and glory to men to have children like to themselves - and it is more agreeable to have begotten an offspring then when the remaining progeny responds to the parent with like lineaments [characteristics] - how much greater is the gladness in God the Father, when any one is so spiritually born that in his acts and praises **the divine eminence of race** is announced!
St. Augustine on Gal 3:28:
> Although now we have the firsttruits of the Spirit that is life mercy to the justice of faith, as the body is still dead because of sin (Cf Rm 8,23.10), the difference based on nationality, social status or sex, has already been eliminated from the unity founded on faith, but still it remains in mortal existence. Moreover, its ordering **must be maintained** in the course of this life.
> The apostles send it, who give extremely healthy norms about how they should coexist, according to their different race, Jews and Greeks; according to their different social status, masters and slaves, and according to their different sex, husbands and wives, or according to any other differentiated situation that may occur.
Rev. Fr. Bonaventure Hinwood O.F.M. - Race, Reflections of Theologian, pgs. 74-76
> THE FIRST PROPOSITION - "Human races, by their innate and immutable character, differ so greatly from each other, that the lowest of them is further removed from the highest race of men than from the highest species of animals."
Noting that the above proposition was CONDEMNED in Mitt Brennender Sorge (1937), and an instruction published by the Sacred Congregation of Seminaries and Universities (1938), the distinguished theologian goes on to write:
> The existence of distinct races is nowhere denied...Neither would the assertion that these races differ among themselves fall under the condemnation, because if they exist it follows that there must be diversity in order that they be distinguishable at all. In addition the acknowledgement of this difference is common enough in Church documents. Nor do the words "by their innate. character" cause difficulty, because races are essentially groups constituted by heredity, whose qualities in so far as they are racial must be congenital. This fact is likewise acknowledged by the catholic hierarchy.
> It is worth recalling, before this discussion is concluded, the remark made earlier to the effect that this proposition does not rule out the possibility of a limited and accidental gradation of races. Because such a relative superiority and inferiority would not as such destroy the unity of mankind. Nor does it seem to be incompatible with the Church's teaching concerning the general equality of all men.
Mit brennender Sorge, English translation:
> Whoever **removes the race**, or the people, or the state, or the form of government, the bearers of state power or other fundamental values of human community design - who claim an essential and honorable place within the earthly order - from this earthly scale of values, makes them the highest norm of all, including religious values, and idolizes them with idolatry, **reverses and falsifies the God-created and God-commanded order of things.**
> Such a person is far from true faith in God and a conception of life corresponding to such faith.
Summi Pontificatus, Pius XII:
> 45. The Church hails with joy and follows with her maternal blessing every method of guidance and care which aims at a wise and orderly evolution of particular forces and tendencies having their origin in the individual character of each race, provided that they are not opposed to the duties incumbent on men from their unity of origin and common destiny.
Rev. Msgr. Glenn S.T.D, Ph.D., Glenn's Class Manuals in Philosophy, Sociology, 1941, pg. 372:
> That there are lines between classes of people is a certainty that may as well be acknowledged at once, and the color-line is one of them. While it is entirely possible to ignore these lines, the social effect of such action is seldom happy.
>
> Just as a member of the true Church is earnestly dissuaded from marriage, by dispensation, with a non-member, so should a member of one race be dissuaded from marriage with a person of another color.
>
> In marriages of either type, there is a definite injustice done to children, there are almost inevitable misunderstandings between the parties themselves, and there is sure to be some friction between the families so gracelessly united.
Toast message