Видео

Thank you for your service and for sharing your beautiful story with me

@@sisterkathryn6451 Dear Sister, Please pray for me that I ALWAYS decern God's will and do it. Thank you for saying yes to God. I know it makes HIM happy. My little job is one that I should have paid to do. I loved it so much.

My bad. Sorry.

I call myself Sister with permission from my Bishop. And I wear a veil with permission from Bishop too. This is partly because it is too complicated to explain to the local people about the distinction between the various forms of consecrated life. I don’t wear a rosary because that is part of a religious habit of a mediaeval order such as the Dominican, Franciscans, and Benedictines. I don’t wear a scapula because it is also part of a mediaeval habit, but also because it’s signifies contemplative life, which I don’t observe. My life is active. I engage with and serve people of my community out in the world, rather than spending, a great amount of time in contemplative prayer like the Carmelites, Dominicans, or cistercians. Of course, I do spend time in prayer, but there is a greater emphasis on the active apostate. This is not what the blessed scapula signifies.

​@sisterkathryn6451 Thank you so much and God bless you!

Good to know. Thank you for the info.

I was surprised when I found that out haha

Noted thank you 🙂❤️👍🙏

That’s a good point. One of the concerns is however, here in Australia some nuns were wearing the full wimple and were passing out from heat exhaustion. The church says in the second Vatican Council that religious need to have religious habits which are conducive to health.

I’m familiar with this order. The Church requires that they must bear witness to their consecration. So as long as they are recognisable as religious, it’s within the bounds of the laws of the Church.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

My intention was not to be disrespectful towards them, but only to point out that they are deliberately choosing to go against church law, and against their own vocations. Members of religious orders have been told clearly and explicitly by Paula and others that they must wear the habit.

@@sisterkathryn6451 I don’t think this is a correct interpretation at all. I know scores of apostolic sisters in the UK who dress simply and are by their simplicity very identifiable as Religious. They are not going against any law. The Pope hasn’t mandated what Religious should wear. Let’s not forget that some habits have their origins in the dress of the poor. Habits aren’t always practical for certain types of work.

The new code of Canon law states: "Can. 669 §1. Religious are to wear the habit of the institute, made according to the norm of proper law, as a sign of their consecration and as a witness of poverty." Pope Paul VI said in Evangelica Testificatio: "the dress of religious men and women should be, as the Council wishes, a sign of their consecration(34) and that it should be in some way different from the forms that are clearly secular." And Pope John XXIII said in Perfectae Caritatis: "The religious habit, an outward mark of consecration to God, should be simple and modest, poor and at the same becoming." Pope John Paul II said in Vita Consecrata: "Since the habit is a sign of consecration, poverty and membership in a particular Religious family, I join the Fathers of the Synod in strongly recommending to men and women religious that they wear their proper habit, suitably adapted to the conditions of time and place." I hope these references are helpful to you :)

Thank you for your beautiful comment :) may God bless you!

We can respectfully agree to disagree 🙂❤️🙏

​@@sisterkathryn6451I honor your choice but I do not respect false magnanimity.

Please pray for me so that my magnanimity may not be false. I'll pray for you too :)

Okay. First of all, God didn’t hide from us. The Jewish laws only applied to the Jews, not to all of humanity. Nowhere in the Scriptures does God say that if you don’t obey him, you go to hell. I know, because I’ve read the Bible multiple times. Or, if it does say that, it is immediately followed by God‘s mercy when you are sorry for your sins. I find it hard to believe that Charlemagne killed that many Saxons, but if he did, that can’t be blamed on Christianity. One of the laws of Christianity is thou shall not kill. As for the brutality and genocide in Latin America, it was with the introduction of Christianity that put an end to the prevalent child sacrifice which was being committed due to their pagan beliefs.

@@sisterkathryn6451 Thanks for your answer. 1 Its a fact that we humans exist since 300 k years. We have religious artefacts since 60k years ago of hunting gods, venus gods, lionman gods, fertility gods even pantheons of gods. But we do not have any artifacts or testimonies older than 3,5k years of age of YHWH, or Adam and Eve or of anything that could lead to this version of a god. So if that god dint hide from us, he was simply not yet invented. That happened then by the Hebrews around 5000 years ago. Its even getting worst: our ancestor homo heidelbergensis lived since 700k years ago, he invented religion (he gave grave goods to his dead for the afterlife). So god created us humans in his image as homo heidelbergensis and we humans evolved to homo sapiens and now we look more advanced than god? By the way: also homo heidelbergensis doesnt lead to a Adam and Eve or a YHWH creator god , as also he evolved gradually from homo erectus and he from Australopithecus. 2 "Nowhere in the Scriptures does God say that if you don’t obey him, you go to hell." With that sentence you baffel me. Your fellow Christians tell me different: "not to follow Jesus is a sin", "if you disobey the bibles laws you do not follow Jesus and you will not be saved" etc. How can you regret your sins when you dont even know the laws? 3 You can believe me when I say that Charlemagne killed that many Saxons. Its well documented and you can study it. Furthermore: if he wouldnt have been that brutal, Europe would never have been Christian. The Saxons were very religious and would never have betrayed their gods. 4 The same counts for the unique brutal Christian Spiritual conquest of Latin America. Without that Latin America wouldnt be Christian till today. 5 The Aztects didnt practice child sacrifice, they scarificed adult humans, believeing they go directly to heaven. Child sacrification we had in the Canaanite Culture, and they didnt do it because they were "evil", but because they thought ist right to do so for their gods. It was surely not easy for the mothers to give their babies, they gave the highest they had to offer. What the Hebrews then did was killing ALL babies , all men amd woman and even the cattle. 6 The Hebrews rather invented a god that fit them: he leads then out of Egypt, he promise them a land that was already owned by another people, and he allows the Hebrews to eli min ate those people that they can life there. All in all the spread of the OT and the NT was mainly brutal and still there are only 35% Chrsitians of the wrld population on Earth. So either 1 the Christian god wanted it brutal but not really successful or 2 he just is not a great person to present himself in an adecuate way that people see that he is the right way or 3 he is simply invented by the Hebrews and that myth expanded from there very violent. Thank you for your time :)

All religions and all religious practices are the result of different people and groups of peoples reaching out for, and trying to connect with the same one true God. Any religious artefacts that you have mentioned are all indications that we humans and God have been having some kind of relationship, for all those thousands of years. When the scriptures say that we were made in God's image likeness, it means that we have the capacity to love selflessly like God does. It has nothing to do with what God looks like. God doesn’t look like anything. He is a spirit. I must reaffirm that the scriptures do not say that you go to hell for disobey God. Every single one of us in the whole world throughout, human history is guilty of sin of one kind or another. Jesus told us not to judge others, and I’m sure that we are all guilty judging others. By your logic, hell would be completely full, and there would be no one in heaven at all. What a horrible and dismal idea! These so-called fellow Christians, you speak of, Are they protestant? You do realise that protestants and Catholics have different views on salvation? Protestant believe that you are saved by faith alone, whereas Catholics are much more faithful to the scriptures, which say that you are not saved by faith alone. Christian Europe preceded Charlemagne. Europe has been Christian since Constantine legalised Christianity. Even before that Christianity was extremely strong, even though it was not yet legal. I would also like to reiterate that Charlemagne‘s brutality cannot be blamed on Christianity since one of the 10 Commandments is thou shalt not kill. And as far as Charlemagne was Killing people, he was not acting as a Christian. I feel deeply concerned about the way you speak about human sacrifice practice by the Aztecs. You almost sound like you endorse it. On the other hand, you seem to be referring to how the people of Israel killed the ammonites. They did this

Because the ammonites practiced child sacrifice. This practice was so deeply embedded in their whole belief system and lifestyle that the only way to eradicate it was to get rid of the whole community. It was an extreme and one-off situation. The percentage of Christians in the world does not have any bearing whatsoever on the truth or falsehood of Christianity itself. There could be no Christians in the world, and Christianity would still be real. On the other hand, if it’s not real, it wouldn’t be made real, even if everybody believed in it. so that point is moot.

@@sisterkathryn6451 All religions and all religious practices are the result of different people and groups to explain where we go after death, whats is the sense of life and how does the world work. In this search NOTHING leads to a "one true god". As I said before , in the first 295k years of homo sapiens we dont have any testimony of a god YHWH or Adam and Eve, but of many other very different concepts of gods. The Chrsitian god loves selflessly? How? By getting angry and eliminate any tribe that doesnt do what he wants? By organizing a global flood for people not following him? Yes his hon calmed him down a bit, even though he also brings the sword. The evangelical christians claim, that you not only go to hell when you disobey gods rules (which means that you dont follow Jesus) but also when you simply dont believe in that version of a god or have faith in him(Jesus-father-Holy Spirit). This is the morst crazy part. I see the morals , wisdoms and rules in the bible as exclusively man-made, human wisdom of generations. With many of them I have no problem to follow them, others, who are errors based on lack of knowldge of the time, I see as very dangerous. Christians adjust reality to those errors, like in the topic of homosexuality or evolution. For that reasons Buddhism is closer to me, as Buddha is honest and says his wisdom is man-made and he is a human. As I told you before: I am a Deist and for that my logic says we ALL will be fine (or as you say "saved") after death as we go there, where we have been before we came in this world. But evolution and abiogenese are a reality. Same as the fact, that before us homo sapiens there was already homo heidelbergensis 400k years earlier with different religious views than the ones we developed. And we humans will die out one day and be replaced by a more advanced species, they will see all our theistic concepts as pure mythology. The many inner-christian differences of interpreting the Bible is one reason why I left the Christianity and went in distance to all abrahamic religions with their exclusivity demand. Evangelicals even claim they dont follow a religion but a relationship with Jesus. What they mean is a relation under the rules of the Bible, meaning its a religion. All reasons why I stopped being a Christian and became a Deist. Of course there was Chrsitianity in Europe before Charlemagne, e.g. in Rome, and there was also Christian violence before Charlemane, for example under Charles Martel. But the establishment of Christianity as the European religion was made by Charlemagne in his christian karolingian empire. And that happened with brutal military superiority. Without that Christianity would never have become the European religion. If isabela la Catholica wouldnt have reconquested Saopin , spain would be muslimic today. If Pronce Eugenius of Savoyen wouyldnt have fougfht the Turcs successfully befor Vienna maybe big part of Europe would be Mulismic today. Nothing became better or worst after Christianity came up. Just another theistic religion. >>>