Tom Z

In Latin, would, "If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?" be a simple or contrary-to-fact subjunctive?

What I mean by that is can you think of any Democratic "rising stars" who are far-off contenders for the 2016 and 2020 races, after Obama is either term-limited or voted out of office?

On facebook, when I login, it leaves out the chat bar on the bottom and the list on the left side.

Why is this, and how do I fix it?

I, while looking through a list of mortal sins, came upon incredulity. The definition is: Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or willful refusal to assent to it.

Now, I find this definition confusing. What is meant by "The neglect of revealed truth"? Does this mean that if we ever forget a teaching of the Catholic Church, we have committed a mortal sin? Also, keeping in mind the definition of heresy, "Heresy is obstinate post-baptismal denial of a truth that must be believed with divine and catholic faith," what is the difference between heresy and incredulity?

Also, on the sin of blasphemy, "This grave sin is the uttering of hatred, reproach, defiance or speaking ill of God. Blasphemy against the Church, the saints and sacred things is also a grave sin." Does this mean that whenever we disagree with the Church we committ two (or even three)mortal sins? Also, as to the definition of reproach or speaking ill of God, it seems that the psalmists and Patriachs (Abraham, Moses, etc.) have committed this sin many times. What am I to make of that?

Please help.

Why would sinful things often feel (physically) very good? Isn't it the least bit counterproductive on God's part?

N.B.: I'm not being sarcastic, nor am I some angry atheist.

1. I remember, for some reason, at a young age (no older than 5), upon seeing one of the pro-life posters at my Church, inquiring what it was. I don't entirely remember what followed, but I remember not thinking that those in the womb were people, or humans. Does this constitute a sin, or does my age, lack of knowledge, and inability to fully remember exonerate me?

2. Upon reading about Pius IX's Syllabus of Errors. I found listed there secularism which I initially did not believe to be wrong, or taught to be wrong now by the Catholic Church. Upon reading further, I found that secularism is considered wrong, and, upon reading what it is, I immediately recognized as wrong. I also do not remember this well at all. Is this a sin?

3. If you commit as in, then forget about it, and then remember it again after having gone to Confession, must you confess it again?

4. If you confess something, and realize when in confessing it you made a mistake (mis-described the action, left something out, didn't mention the number of times you committed it) far after the fact, must you re-confess the sin?

Yes, I am a Catholic looking for a Catholic perspective, thank you.

Jesus did say that he was the Bread of Life, but he also said that he was many other things, I am the light of the world (John 8:12) I am the door (John 10:9) and I am the good shepherd (John 10:11). What separates these verses (clearly symbolic) from the bread of life verses (thought of as literal)?

N.B.: I am not an anti-Catholic. I am a Catholic. I just have a question.

Is it true that according to Christian doctrine, God isn't omnibenevolent, or that he doesn't love everyone?

I've heard that the Gospel of Matthew was originally written in Aramaic, then translated to Greek later. Is there any truth to this?

What are the OLD TESTAMENT passages that involve two messianic ages.

Two Messianic ages: AKA the second coming, where the Messiah comes back and does all his other stuff.

If Pinocchio says his nose is about to grow, does it?

Do you, and also the Vatican, hold that the following statement is true?

Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ.

And this one?

Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true

These quotes being from Blessed Pope Pius IX's Syllabus of Errors, an addendum to his encyclical Quas Primas.

If the Vatican holds to these statements, there is a clear divide between their teachings and the teachings of Blessed Pope Pius IX. How would you explain this divide, if it exists at all?

N.B.: I'm a devout, believing Catholic, not a Catholic basher.

Can you recall any massive, earth shattering, history changing events taking place around 3114 BC? Because that was the last time a Mayan calendar reset itself, so I'd wager that's a pretty good barometer for the accuracy of 2012 claims, wouldn't you agree?

Are all German WWII veterans Nazis too? Should we just start to go to 85 year old veterans in Germany and angrily accuse them of Nazism?

teachings in encyclicals? Because judging by the responses to my previous question on Popes Pius XI and XII, they can. So, hypothetically speaking, Pope Benedict could come out tomorrow and say that the Church has abandoned Humanae Vitae? (Which he won't)

Pius XI stated this in "On Christian Education" 12/31/29:

"Catholic children may not attend non-Catholic, neutral, or mixed schools... and it pertains exclusively to the Ordinary of the place to decide... under what circumstances and with what precautions against the danger of perversion, attendance at such schools may be tolerated."

Pius XII: "Everyone knows well that children can often avoid an epidemic so long as the disease is outside their own home, but cannot escape it when it lurks within the home itself. It is an evil thing to bring the sanctity of the home into danger. The Church, therefore, as her right and duty demand, has always striven with all her resources to prevent these sacred portals suffering violence, under any pretext, from evil televisions shows." Encyclical Letter of Pope Pius XII - "Miranda Prorsus (9/8/57).

Although I wish to hold fast to church teaching, this just sounds kind of...wacky.

Pius XI stated this in "On Christian Education" 12/31/29:

"Catholic children may not attend non-Catholic, neutral, or mixed schools... and it pertains exclusively to the Ordinary of the place to decide... under what circumstances and with what precautions against the danger of perversion, attendance at such schools may be tolerated."

Pius XII: "Everyone knows well that children can often avoid an epidemic so long as the disease is outside their own home, but cannot escape it when it lurks within the home itself. It is an evil thing to bring the sanctity of the home into danger. The Church, therefore, as her right and duty demand, has always striven with all her resources to prevent these sacred portals suffering violence, under any pretext, from evil televisions shows." Encyclical Letter of Pope Pius XII - "Miranda Prorsus (9/8/57).

Although I wish to hold fast to church teaching, this just sounds kind of...wacky.

How does the Catholic Church presently regard Unam Sanctam by Pope Boniface VIII.

Unam Sanctam is the one with, "Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."

How does the Catholic Church presently regard Unam Sanctam by Pope Boniface VIII.

Unam Sanctam is the one with, "Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."

How does the Catholic Church presently regard Unam Sanctam by Pope Boniface VIII.

Unam Sanctam is the one with, "Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."