Poland`s aid to Ukraine if Russia invades

No, I'm saying the Russian state keeps the same form at the top despite the changing political labels attached to it

tsar - first secretary - president (or whatever Putin is now) = despots

serfs - the masses - whatever they call the majority of the Russian public now = sheep to be milked and fleeced at the convenience of the despot

human life (of the masses or serfs) doesn't matter much to anyone - see the utter impasivity with which Russians react to outrages that would topple other governments

I've seen russians in print defend the holomor by saying that lots of Russians were starved to death by the government too and they're not complaining...

Who aspires to such an existence?

i didnt have a chance to respond to you mafkeis i think you responded thwt just because another country acts wrong doesnt give this or some country the rught to. i agree i was just pointing out the hypocrisy of poles supporting the usa or thinking it does no wrong.

more ignorance.... I remember in the 1980s telling a Polish person that if Poland were in Central America.... he would have a completely different impression of the country.... (he resisted this idea pretty strongly.... and I kind of get it.... finding out your main hoped-for ally against an enemy isn't always great either must be disheartening....)

its just choosing one side or another but neither is more just imo. I was trying to explain to them how the laws work in claifornia with three strikes and in warsaw bars they didnt believe it.

What do you want? During the hundreds of years everything that had a grain of a human dignity and courage had been extermiated with sadistic humiliation. And been wiped out on genetical level. Either during "peaceful" life or in wars. And you want to stand them up against criminals overnight? I think Poles have advantage, because they have stronger feeling of ethnic solidarity. Therefore violation of a human rights against one Pole is viewed by other Poles as violation against entire extended family. Eastern Slavs on this matter are probably not as much united and don't view themselves as a part of a larger family even within he same ethnic group.

interesting idea here guys:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecumenism

Why?

Who cares?

Christianity is becoming more and more irrelevant.

How about people who belong to different nationalities working together?
Much more sensible.
No.need to bring religion into it.

You don't like cats? You just don't know how to properly cook them... ;)

Keep to the topic of the thread please

To have united church they need to overcome at least two types of discrepencies:
1) Political.
2) Theological.

@Vlad1234
Maturity too, it was far more politically difficult when pope crowned kings and blessed single leading rulers. Nowadays with republics and crowning of monarchs it's not such a hot topic anymore. Wether an pope is backing France, Austria or Spain isn't relevant anymore since as it was pointed out western leaders have become secular and due to the voting system any contact with the Vatican is for the purpose of furthering their own electoral agenda.

For ecumenism to work, there needs to be open dialogue and/or communication at least. It's a challenge now since states have been closing themselves more and more.

Ecumenism is not really about a united church. It's just about different religions focusing on what they have in common rather than their differences and also sharing certain activities where the theology and politics are irrelevant. I'll give you a practical example. My sister is a Catholic and she's a harpist but the vicar of the local Anglican church where she lives invited her to play at some services and she does. The same Anglican church has a free cafe, book stall and prayer space where all are welcome regardless of religion. That's ecumenism in its simple, everyday form.

Also the ministers/priests of the different faiths sometimes conduct ecumenical services together. In Ireland where I'm from we often have ecumenical services to mark occasions that are important to the whole community regardless of their religion. They're quite common.

@Atch
Well the goal is to join one united church of course, but willingly. Not forcefully, but yeah in everyday life it's about spending time together. Not apart

It is just great.

Do you mean to have just one Christian church, not different denominations?? That's not ecumenism and it could never achieved nor is there any compelling reason why it should be. One God, many different paths to Him and ways of worshipping. Ecumenism has fairly blurry boundaries and often encompasses the Jewish and Muslim traditions too so there is no question of some kind of United Church.

"The Ecu-mandments" by Bishop Anthony Farquhar, the longest serving Bishop in Ireland :))

(1) You shall not confuse ecumenism with
community, political or social relations

(2) You shall have a healthy pride in and
respect for your own tradition

(3) You shall have pride in and respect for
other traditions as for your own

(4) You shall not be smug or self-righteous
within your own tradition

(5) You shall not be smug or self-righteous in
your relations with other traditions

(6) You shall not claim to represent anyone
other than yourself when you have moved
outside the official teaching of your own
Church

(7) You shall pray for unity in prayer within
your own tradition

(8) You shall be thankful for what has already
been achieved ecumenically

(9) You shall smile ecumenically and some
day the people of God will smile with you

They are using it along with economic, sexual and religious divisions to push through a Godless totalitarian new world order that will make current clownworld look like the good old days. They are not merely exploiting sexual, religious etc divisions, they truly believe in an ecumenism that will try to swamp and combine all religions under a liberal umbrella, they support transcending sex via transgenderism, etc. Of course that is only the ideology side and the other half is simply profit motive.

Unfortunately I have too little free time to contribute to the thread so let me just remind you all of a few eternal truths.

1. Faith and morals have God as their cause and proper object. Since their proper object does not change, neither do the truths of Faith and Morals.

2. Catholic Church cannot teach error. Whatever Catholic Church teaches in matters of Faith and morals, it teaches forever. This cannot change.

3. There is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church (IV. Lateran Council), so no, neither jews, nor muslims, nor protestards are saved. Everyone who is saved is a member of the Catholic Church. It is a duty of every Catholic to spread the Catholic Faith and to bring everyone into the Catholic Church (Matthew 28:18-20).

4. Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is perfect (Council of Trent, Session XXII, Canon VI), it cannot be abrogated (Council of Trent, Session XXII, Canon VI) and it cannot replaced by a new rite (Quo Primum), neither for the linguistic reasons (Council of Trent, Session XXI, Canon IX) nor for other reasons.

5. Everyone must convert to Catholic Faith. All "ecumenism" that claims otherwise is false (Mortalium animos).

6. Sodomy is a sin that cries to heavens for vengeance. So is murder, including abortion (murder of a child in a womb).

7. Christ is truly present in the Holy Eucharist: His body, blood, soul and divinity are in each particle of the Eucharist.

8. Whoever takes Christ into his hands, lets Christ fall on the floor and tramples on Christ with his feet commits the sin of sacrilege.

9. Whoever receives Holy Eucharist in the state of a mortal sin commits a mortal sin of sacrilege.

10. Whoever divorces and "remarries" is an adulterer. Adultery is a mortal sin.

11. There is no such thing as an "ecological sin".

12. Receiving a medicine that was developed using the stolen remains of a murdered human baby is a grave sin.

Who are 'they'?

And I don't think you read my posts in their entirety - I said 'there is no question of some kind of united Christian Church'. and the doctrine of transubstantiation is indeed one of the main reasons why you can't ever have the Catholic church united with any other Christian church.


This is not correct.


Matthew told us to spread the word of God. That's not the same thing as the Catholic church.

A lot of what you've said Korvinus is actually quite sacrilegious.

papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum12-2.htm

Now Korwinus, on my shelf I have a lovely, old leather bound prayer book. It was published in 1936 for the young ladies of the Ursuline convent schools in Ireland and ' for forming youth to the practice of solid piety'. The text was written by one of the Archbishop's henchmen for want of a better word, and then approved by him. In the back of the book is a set of the kind of questions that might be asked by those seeking to better understand the faith and indeed there is a great deal of speechifying about why the Catholic church is the 'one true church' BUT when it comes to this question:

Is the Catholic church besides being the only true church, the only one in which salvation can be obtained?

Catholics, while they believe their own religion to be the only true one, are convinced that great numbers are comprised within its pale who do not adhere to it by any visible bond of communion. All innocent children of every religious persuasion, all adult Christians who have preserved their baptismal innocence, though they make no outward profession of the Catholic faith, are yet claimed as her children by the Catholic church. Neither have we any difficulty in believing that there are several throughout the world professing the religion by law established there, whose uniform integrity, love of God and sincere disposition to embrace the truth, if they but knew it, not only open for them the road to salvation but afford them more solid grounds to expect that blessing than those Catholics who live in constant disobedience to the dictates of their religion and deny by their behaviour the faith which they profess.

and

Are Catholics taught to believe or to assert that all those of other religions will be damned?

No, most assuredly they are not. If ignorance, embittered by resentment, has given utterance to similar expressions, these are not the language of Catholics. God alone knows who shall be His by faith and good works,

Or Vietnam. Yes, initially Rusian invaders can conquer and occupy most of Ukraine but eventually they will be forced to withdraw, just like the US from Vietnam or USSR from Afghanistan

• 
  1.jpg
  

Total nonsense. In Vietnam, the US troops had zero sense of patriotism and their only motivation was to get out of that hell alive. To make matters worse, they were directed and restricted by the DC lawyers. The same with Afghanistan where they met fanatics, not a regular army that could be defeated. The rules of engagement were so ridiculous they bordered on criminal - crime being committed against the US troops by the US government.

Ukraine will be a replay of Crimea or close to it. Think the US invading Canada. No sane Canadian would risk his life to repel that invasion.

Would you?

The US isn`t Russia and vice versa. What is even worse, Canada isn`t Ukraine and vice versa. :):)

If Ukraine would be a member of EU or had a real chances to become it, then it would be different. But now, what they actually have to die for? An oligarch's arses?

:):) I see you are still trying to peddle the Kremlin propaganda here. :) Funny.

A famous Polish poet with propensity for socialism, Broniewski, wrote a cult poem about fighting for Poland. Look at its second stanza.

Bayonet on !!!

When they come to set fire to the house,
the one in which you live - Poland,
when they throw a bolt of lightning before them ,
when they collapse with an iron army
and stand at the door, and
beat the door with their rifle butts at night -
you, lifting your temple from sleep,
stand at the door.
Bayonet on!
We need blood!

There are bills of wrongs in our homeland, and
a foreign hand will not cancel them either,
but no one will refuse blood: we will
drain it from our breasts and from songs.
Well, prison bread tasted bitter
in this country more than once
For that hand raised over Poland -
a bullet to the head!

What do you think?

Wow! You are a true genius...


Hey, Vlad, could you donate a couple of your brain cells to pawian?

No, I only tried to politely suggest that you gave us a silly example with that Canada. And full of woulds which always means tall stories in your posts coz you are not a visionary who sees future events. :):)


So that he has nothing left? Are you crazy?

Dignity? Freedom from despotism?

Why would anyone support invading a country trying (however imperfectly) to become more democratic, less corrupt, and more free and with greater value given to human life?

Yes. Poles often fought for honour - better to die on your feet than live on your knees.

Russians would rather make everyone kneel than learn to stand on their own....

Yes, it is a known slave mentality syndrome since the Middle Ages when early Russia was controlled by Mongols for a hundred or more years.

It's a matter of principle. Every country has a right to govern themselves.


Same as the Irish.

"Those fearless men but few
Who bore the fight that freedom's light
Might shine through the foggy dew"

Polska Górą and Éire go Brách:))