Favourite Christian Books...

kelly1

Folks,

not sure if we've done this before but I think it would be a good idea to see a short list of people's favourite books. i.e. ones that really struck you and made you stop and ponder God's greatness. Not much point in mentioning the bible because it goes without saying.

These are mine:-

1. Diary - St. Faustina
2. The Dialogue - Catherine of Siena
3. Devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus - J. Croiset.
4. The Spiritual Combat and Treatise on Peace of Soul - Dom Lorenzo Scupoli
5. The Fulfilment of all Desire - Ralph Martin
6. Revelations - Anne Catherine Emmerich
7. The Way of Divine Love - Sr. Josefa Menendez.
8. Theology for Beginners - F.J. Sheed
9. The Glories of Divine Grace - Matthias J. Scheeben.

God bless,
Noel.

BrianCalgary

Mere Christianity - CS Lewis
Screwtape Letters - CS Lewis

Piercing the Darkness - Frank Peretti
Evidence that Demands a Verdict - Josh McDowell

kelly1

BrianCalgary wrote: »

Mere Christianity - CS Lewis
Screwtape Letters - CS Lewis

Piercing the Darkness - Frank Peretti
Evidence that Demands a Verdict - Josh McDowell

I have Mere Christianity but haven't read it yet. What did you think of the Screwtape Letters? Is it something to do with how demons try to manipulate people?

wolfsbane

These spring to mind as having greatly stirred my thinking:

A New Heaven and a New Earth by Archibald Hughes

Pilgrim's Progress by John Bunyan

Tim Robbins

BrianCalgary wrote: »

Mere Christianity - CS Lewis
Screwtape Letters - CS Lewis

Piercing the Darkness - Frank Peretti
Evidence that Demands a Verdict - Josh McDowell

I can see a Catholic / Protestant split on this one.

Fanny Cradock

kelly1 wrote: »

I have Mere Christianity but haven't read it yet. What did you think of the Screwtape Letters? Is it something to do with how demons try to manipulate people?

It's a work of fiction.

PDN

kelly1 wrote: »

I have Mere Christianity but haven't read it yet. What did you think of the Screwtape Letters? Is it something to do with how demons try to manipulate people?

The Screwtape Letters is a fictional series of letters between a junior demon and his supervisor. It uses humor to make some very effective points about prayer, Christianity etc.

BTW Noel, great idea for a thread! My top ten (in no particular order) follows. These are certainly not the best Christian books I've ever read, but they are my favourites in that they introduced me to an idea or helped shape my thinking.

The Inspiration and Authority of the Scriptures by B.B.Warfield

God's Smuggler by Brother Andrew

The Purpose Driven Church by Rick Warren

Mere Christianity by C.S.Lewis

The Cross and the Switchblade by David Wilkerson

Post-Christendom by Stuart Murray

The Next Christendom by Philip Jenkins

A Plain Account of Christian Perfection by John Wesley

Foxes Book of Martyrs

Blue Like Jazz by Donald Miller (my latest read)

--amadeus--

My favourite books that touch on christianity are:

"The God Delusion" - Richard Dawkins. 1.5 million copies sold and translated into 31 languages this really is the big hitter amongst texts relating to christianity. Wiki here gives a good overview

"God is not great" - Christopher Hitchens. Hard to read in parts because he has quite an abrasive style but that kind of punchiness can be great for really cutting to the heart of christian matters. Again wiki here

Not specifically christian but a great philosophical book that can be used in reference to discussions on christianity is "Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance" (wiki here ). A perception changing read that never ages.

Those are the first three books referencing christianity / spirituality I could think of - if I come across others I'll add them.

kelly1

--amadeus-- wrote: »

My favourite books that touch on christianity are:

"The God Delusion" - Richard Dawkins. 1.5 million copies sold and translated into 31 languages this really is the big hitter amongst texts relating to christianity. Wiki here gives a good overview

"God is not great" - Christopher Hitchens. Hard to read in parts because he has quite an abrasive style but that kind of punchiness can be great for really cutting to the heart of christian matters. Again wiki here

Not specifically christian but a great philosophical book that can be used in reference to discussions on christianity is "Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance" (wiki here ). A perception changing read that never ages.

Those are the first three books referencing christianity / spirituality I could think of - if I come across others I'll add them.

Not really what I had in mind...

--amadeus--

kelly1 wrote: »

Not really what I had in mind...

Why not? I'm a leftie liberal vegetarian pacifist greenie and I regularly read the Daily Telegraph and the UK Times. I've even been known to have a nose through the Daily Mail. Reading material that simply re-inforces your own views, opinions and prejudices only serves to narrow the mind. Reading content that is challenging and contrary serves to open it. I read the threads in here partially for the debate but also to help understand the christian mind, which is a total mystery to me. I would have thought that to better undestand your own faith you should have an understanding of the contrary arguments.

MrPudding

--amadeus-- wrote: »

I would have thought that to better undestand your own faith you should have an understanding of the contrary arguments.

Why would you do that if you believed they were simply wrong?

MrP

PDN

--amadeus-- wrote: »

Why not? I'm a leftie liberal vegetarian pacifist greenie and I regularly read the Daily Telegraph and the UK Times. I've even been known to have a nose through the Daily Mail. Reading material that simply re-inforces your own views, opinions and prejudices only serves to narrow the mind. Reading content that is challenging and contrary serves to open it. I read the threads in here partially for the debate but also to help understand the christian mind, which is a total mystery to me. I would have thought that to better undestand your own faith you should have an understanding of the contrary arguments.

I didn't think I'd get to post again this weekend - but my hotel lends out laptops for free in their Executive Lounge. Happy days.

Well, to be fair, your own list of books hardly demonstrates a willingness to listen to other viewpoints. They are books written squarely for the atheist, or even anti-theist, market and appeal to those who already have their mind made up. Both Dawkins and Hitchens preach to the atheist choir and are highly unlikely to seriously challenge an informed or well-read theist.

Might I suggest you try Blue like Jazz by Donald Miller? Miller writes simply and, at times, beautifully. He gives an honest account of how he developed spiritually while rejecting the stereotypes of Christianity that he encountered in the US. It is a fascinating study of how a postmodernistic liberal works out his Christian faith. The overly religious hate his books, but I think they can provide food for thought for both Christians and atheists. He can also be quite funny, as when he describes his attempt to set up a confessional booth in a very irreligious US College during their equivalent of rag week. Miller describes how he dressed as a monk and smoked his pipe while naked people painted blue ran around the campus. When anyone came into his confessional booth he confessed the sins of Christianity to them! Wonderful stuff. Miller recently prayed the closing prayer over Barak Obama at the Democratic Convention in Denver.

PDN

MrPudding wrote: »

Why would you do that if you believed they were simply wrong?

But how can you think arguments are wrong if you've never taken the time to read and assess them?

I found reading The God Delusion to be a very comforting experience. After hearing Dawkins being built up so much by atheists I found myself thinking, "If this is the best they can do then we haven't too much to worry about."

I think those who unthinkingly adhere to Christianity without allowing themselves to be challenged pose a much greater threat to the Faith than the likes of Dawkins or Hitchens.

studiorat

PDN wrote: »

I think those who unthinkingly adhere to Christianity without allowing themselves to be challenged pose a much greater threat to the Faith than the likes of Dawkins or Hitchens.

+1
I'm sorry you see atheists as a threat of some sort though, without giving a smart answer, why would you see an atheist as a threat to a persons faith? Would a Muslim pose the same threat?

evil-monkey

hi all.

lost my faith a few years back. i'm a man of science myself (not the reason i lost my faith) and was wondering if anyone could recommend a book that makes a genuine argument for and against the existence of God from a rational, maybe slightly scientific where possible, point of view?? Perhaps from a neutral stance rather than something trying to argue one side or the other...

any thoughts?? thanks in advance

robindch

--amadeus-- wrote: »

Reading material that simply re-inforces your own views, opinions and prejudices only serves to narrow the mind. Reading content that is challenging and contrary serves to open it.

The late lamenented Alistair Cooke, if anybody here is familiar with the man, made the point -- oh, it must have been fifteen, perhaps twenty, years or so ago -- that, during the twenties and thirties and the rise of radio news and its electric ability to be there first to the ear with the facts -- that the old and slow, printed media -- the newspapers, the dailies and the magazines of every kind -- ceased to be the journals of record that many were and, over the course of ten or maybe twenty years, slowly assumed the prejudice of every reader, and the hidden, or sometimes open, biases, of every owner.*

<*> With apologies to AC's shade.

.

robindch

PDN wrote: »

I found reading The God Delusion to be a very comforting experience. After hearing Dawkins being built up so much by atheists I found myself thinking, "If this is the best they can do then we haven't too much to worry about."

Perhaps I missed it here if it ever even happened, but I've seen few -- if any -- posters here on boards "build up" Dawkins as a serious threat to to religious belief. Quite the opposite in fact: I believe that most here think that he has done little or nothing for the cause of irreligion.

However, I'm certainly heartened that you feel there's nothing to worry about.

The easiest army to conquer is the one which is asleep on watch

studiorat

robindch wrote: »

I believe that most here think that he has done little or nothing for the cause of irreligion.

However, I'm certainly heartened that you feel there's nothing to worry about.

The easiest army to conquer is the one which is asleep on watch

Armies? Are you planning a crusade or something? IMO a statement like that is just the very reason certain people are anti-religious. Not to mention it's possible to be irreligious and theistic, just as it is possible to be a member of a religion and be an atheist.

I have nothing but respect for someone who chooses to have faith in a religion or a personal deity and their points of view. I would of course expect the same from others. Being an Atheist does not mean anti-religious or anti-theistic. Of course the perception of a little bit of persecution is useful to rally the troops.

I started reading the thread 'cause I was looking for a good book, but I'm frankly shocked by the distain and dismissiveness of some posters towards a different point of view to theirs. I suppose it's a question of whether you think self-righteousness is a good thing or not.

robindch

studiorat wrote: »

Armies? Are you planning a crusade or something?

Yep. GPO at ten this evening, a short message from Dawkins, then it's out to Drumcondra with torches and pitchforks.

studiorat

robindch wrote: »

Yep. GPO at ten this evening, a short message from Dawkins, then it's out to Drumcondra with torches and pitchforks.

LoL!!!

Too early for me, guess you want to get out before the match!

Puck

evil-monkey wrote: »

hi all.

lost my faith a few years back. i'm a man of science myself (not the reason i lost my faith) and was wondering if anyone could recommend a book that makes a genuine argument for and against the existence of God from a rational, maybe slightly scientific where possible, point of view?? Perhaps from a neutral stance rather than something trying to argue one side or the other...

any thoughts?? thanks in advance

I'd recommend The Reason For God by Tim Keller. Brilliant book. It doesn't meet all of your criteria but I don't think you'll ever find a completely unbiased book on this matter because this issue is so big (the meaning of life and all that) that everyone has some kind of opinion. That said Keller takes a very reasoned approach, in other words he doesn't try to make you feel stupid for disagreeing with him. It's not preachy and at the end of the book, if you still disagree with it then you'll at least have a better understanding of what all us Jesus nuts are on about.

PDN

evil-monkey wrote: »

hi all.

lost my faith a few years back. i'm a man of science myself (not the reason i lost my faith) and was wondering if anyone could recommend a book that makes a genuine argument for and against the existence of God from a rational, maybe slightly scientific where possible, point of view?? Perhaps from a neutral stance rather than something trying to argue one side or the other...

any thoughts?? thanks in advance

I find anything by Alister McGrath to be pretty good and, from my admittedly biased perspective, pretty balanced. McGrath is a committed evangelical Christian with a background in science. He earned his PhD in molecular biophysics at Oxford, but is now a Professor in Theology at the same University. As an atheist convert to Christianity he features in public debates with the likes of Dawkins and Hitchens and, from what I have heard, gives a well-reasoned case for Christianity.

However, like Puck, I doubt if you'll find much out there that is neutral.

wolfsbane

PDN wrote: »

Miller recently prayed the closing prayer over Barak Obama at the Democratic Convention in Denver.

Looks like he needs it!
‘Bioethicists’ and Obama agree: infanticide should be legal
http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5828/

wolfsbane

robindch wrote: »

The late lamenented Alistair Cooke, if anybody here is familiar with the man, made the point -- oh, it must have been fifteen, perhaps twenty, years or so ago -- that, during the twenties and thirties and the rise of radio news and its electric ability to be there first to the ear with the facts -- that the old and slow, printed media -- the newspapers, the dailies and the magazines of every kind -- ceased to be the journals of record that many were and, over the course of ten or maybe twenty years, slowly assumed the prejudice of every reader, and the hidden, or sometimes open, biases, of every owner.*

<*> With apologies to AC's shade.

.

AC was the intellectual highlight of my week for many years. Thanks for the memories, and in such AC style too!

Puck

wolfsbane wrote: »

Looks like he needs

Don't we all?

Fanny Cradock

wolfsbane wrote: »

Looks like he needs it!

I'm not counting any chickens just yet. There is still plenty of time for the McCain love child and heroin fiend scandals.

--amadeus--

wolfsbane wrote: »

Looks like he needs it!
‘Bioethicists’ and Obama agree: infanticide should be legal
http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5828/

A pointed and evil partisan smear article. It also totally misrepresents Singers work on Applied Ethics and anyone with even a passing familiarity with his writing could see through it a mile away.

[EDIT] For an impartial view of BO position on abortion you should read http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Barack_Obama_Abortion.htm. Badly written and poorly conceptualise articles like the one posted just discredit those making them

hivizman

PDN wrote: »

I find anything by Alister McGrath to be pretty good.

Yes, I particularly rate his books Science & Religion: An Introduction (Blackwell: 1999) and Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes and the Meaning of Life (Blackwell: 2005). On a more personal note, the book he wrote with his wife Joanna Self-Esteem: The Cross and Christian Confidence (IVP: 2001) was of great help to me during a rather bleak time some years ago.

There's a big literature on Science and Religion, and I'd mention three writers who have contributed books that I've found interesting and well-argued (though I don't necessarily agree with everything they write):

John Polkinghorne Science and Theology: An Introduction (SPCK, 1998).

Arthur Peacocke Paths from Science Towards God (Oneworld, 2001).

Keith Ward The Big Questions in Science and Religion (Templeton Foundation Press, 2008).

I saw a review a couple of weeks ago of another book by Keith Ward, who is Regius Professor of Divinity Emeritus at Oxford University, entitled Why There Almost Certainly Is A God: Doubting Dawkins (Lion Hudson, 2008), which looks worth a read.

As this thread is really about favourite Christian books, the two books I've been keeping by my bed over the past year or so, and regularly dip into, are:

Timothy Radcliffe OP What is the Point of Being a Christian? (Burns & Oates, 2005)

N T (Tom) Wright Simply Christian (SPCK: 2006)

So both a Roman Catholic and a Protestant perspective.

Puck

Blue Like Jazz - Don Miller
The Reason for God - Tim Keller
The Pursuit of God - A.W. Tozer ("Tozer" is a great cat name by the way, if I have a cat I'll call it Tozer)
Mere Christianity - C.S. Lewis
Screwtape Letters - C.S. Lewis
The Wounded Healer - Henri Nouwen

PDN

Puck wrote: »

("Tozer" is a great cat name by the way, if I have a cat I'll call it Tozer)

I love it.

MattKid

I'm just finishing 'Just Walk Across the room' by Bill Hybels, which I've found to be a reaaly good book.

Eagerly awaiting a copy of 'The Church That Never Sleeps' by Matthew Barnett, after hearing him talk a few times this summer.

kelly1

evil-monkey wrote: »

hi all.

lost my faith a few years back. i'm a man of science myself (not the reason i lost my faith) and was wondering if anyone could recommend a book that makes a genuine argument for and against the existence of God from a rational, maybe slightly scientific where possible, point of view?? Perhaps from a neutral stance rather than something trying to argue one side or the other...

any thoughts?? thanks in advance

Have you read Mere Christianity?

You might also find Francis Collins' (geneticist) book interesting?

EDIT: Just found this and this

Splendour

'Blue Like Jazz' & 'Searching For God Knows What' -both by Don Miller. (read both twice. I felt like I was having a cup of coffee and a chat with Miller whilst reading his books...)

'Run Baby Run' - Nicky Cruz

'The Cross and the Swithblade' - David Wilkerson

'The Normal Christian Life' - Watchman Nee

'I Dared to Call Him Father' - can't remember author!

'The Land of Many Names' - Steve Maltz

And last but not least 'The Purpose Driven Life' - Ricky Warren; PDN's acquaintance from another thread...

Currently reading 'This Present Darkness' by Frank Peretti - my second attempt at this. First tried reading it about 5 years ago and couldn't get into it and am struggling again. Though I understand the concept behind it, I don't think it's a particularly well written book.

PDN

Splendour wrote: »

And last but not least 'The Purpose Driven Life' - Ricky Warren; PDN's acquaintance from another thread...

Ah now, I never claimed Rick Warren as a friend or even an acquaintance. We move in very different circles and are unlikely ever to meet.

I am to Warren what an Eircom League footballer is to David Beckham.

Splendour

PDN wrote: »

Ah now, I never claimed Rick Warren as a friend or even an acquaintance. We move in very different circles and are unlikely ever to meet.

I am to Warren what an Eircom League footballer is to David Beckham.

Now now PDN, you know better than that. You most certainly move in the same circles as Mr. Warren and are more than likely to meet. (Maybe not in this life but in the next... )

Anyways just for the record, most of us would prefer Eircom League footies to Dave Beckham...

robindch

PDN wrote: »

We move in very different circles and are unlikely ever to meet.

Well, perhaps god would arrange it if you try a prayer tour of the petrol pumps around Saddleback Church?

Soul Winner

PDN wrote: »

The Screwtape Letters is a fictional series of letters between a junior demon and his supervisor. It uses humor to make some very effective points about prayer, Christianity etc.

Screwtape is actually the senior demon and the book is a series of letters written by him to his affectionate nephew 'Wormwood', with advice on how to take down his patient (a human being that he [Wormwood] has been assigned to by his father below). An assignement that he seems to mess up again and again culminating in him (the patient) becoming a Christian, to which Screwtape is enraged and responds with heavy artilary for Wormwood to use. Their father below will not be happy about this turn of events One of my favourite books. Read it a few times. Also got the audio book from the library, read by John Clease. A must read for all Christians because although it is fiction it is a true reflection of what Chrisitians face on a daily basis battling spiritualy evil forces in a darkened world.

Other books I loved

Christian:

Mere Christianity - C.S. Lewis
Pilgrim's Progress - Bunyan
The Witness in the Stars - Bullinger
Trial of the Evangelists - Greenleaf

Too many to mention really, G Campbell Morgan, A R Torey, A W Tozer, E Raymond Capt, and many others...

Non Christian:

The Stand - Stephen King
Perdido Street Station - China Miéville
American Tabloid - James Elroy
Cold Six Thousand - James Elroy
Ten Men Dead - David Beresford
The Road - Cormac McCarthy

Again there are too many to mention, these just pop into my head...

Splendour wrote: »

Anyways just for the record, most of us would prefer Eircom League footies to Dave Beckham...

I second that.

Splendour

kelly1 wrote: »

I have Mere Christianity but haven't read it yet. What did you think of the Screwtape Letters? Is it something to do with how demons try to manipulate people?

Hi Noel, there's a Catholic newspaper (can't think of the name of it) which has an article entitled 'Dumbag' which is based around the theme of the Screwtape letters. If you know the article I'm referring to it will give you some indication of what the book is about...

kelly1

Splendour wrote: »

Hi Noel, there's a Catholic newspaper (can't think of the name of it) which has an article entitled 'Dumbag' which is based around the theme of the Screwtape letters. If you know the article I'm referring to it will give you some indication of what the book is about...

Yes, it's "Alive!" and it's a great little paper too. Thanks.

robindch

kelly1 wrote: »

Yes, it's "Alive!" and it's a great little paper too.

Wasn't that the publication that a few Irish bishops banned from their churches?

kelly1

robindch wrote: »

Wasn't that the publication that a few Irish bishops banned from their churches?

Could have been. It was something to do with arguing for a No Lisbon vote.

robindch

kelly1 wrote: »

Could have been. It was something to do with arguing for a No Lisbon vote.

I have a vague memory that both Archbishop Martin and the Bishop of Meath (or somewhere like that) had ordered the publication removed from their churches, saying something like that the promoters were dishonestly pretending to be "catholic" organizations.

Out of interest, does the Archbishop's denouncing of the publication affect your own opinion of it? I recall from last week sometime that you mentioned that bishops should be obeyed at all times.

Splendour

kelly1 wrote: »

Yes, it's "Alive!" and it's a great little paper too. Thanks.

It is a good read. My Dad gives it to me, think he's trying to get me back to the Catholic church

Fanny Cradock

Letters from a Sceptic by G.A. Boyd is a good read. It has a happy ending!

kelly1

Splendour wrote: »

It is a good read. My Dad gives it to me, think he's trying to get me back to the Catholic church

Someday, with the help of God!

Splendour

kelly1 wrote: »

Someday, with the help of God!

wolfsbane

--amadeus-- wrote: »

A pointed and evil partisan smear article. It also totally misrepresents Singers work on Applied Ethics and anyone with even a passing familiarity with his writing could see through it a mile away.

[EDIT] For an impartial view of BO position on abortion you should read http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Barack_Obama_Abortion.htm. Badly written and poorly conceptualise articles like the one posted just discredit those making them

Thanks for the alternative article on Obama. I've read it and can't see how he comes out any cleaner, eg., on partial-birth abortion (where the baby's head presents at the outer vagina and a lethal injection is given. This legally covers the abortionist, as only if the baby fully exits the mother does it become infanticide):
In 1997, Obama voted against SB 230, which would have turned doctors into felons by banning so-called partial-birth abortion, & against a 2000 bill banning state funding. Although these bills included an exception to save the life of the mother, they didn't include anything about abortions necessary to protect the health of the mother. The legislation defined a fetus as a person, & could have criminalized virtually all abortion.

Also, I didn't see any rebuttal of the accusation Obama refused to protect live aborted babies, as reported in the original article:
‘Obama articulately worried that legislation protecting live aborted babies might infringe on women's rights or abortionists' rights. Obama's clinical discourse, his lack of mercy, shocked me. I was naive back then. Obama voted against the measure, twice. It ultimately failed. In 2003, as chairman of the next Senate committee to which BAIPA was sent, Obama stopped it from even getting a hearing, shelving it to die much like babies were still being shelved to die in Illinois hospitals and abortion clinics.’20
http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5828/

As to Singer, perhaps you could link us to his actual writings so we can see how we have misunderstood him? The Wiki article seems to confirm what the other article alleged. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Singer
Consistent with his general ethical theory, Singer holds that the right to life is intrinsically tied to a being's capacity to hold preferences, which in turn is intrinsically tied to a being's capacity to feel pain and pleasure. In his view, the central argument against abortion is equivalent to the following logical syllogism:

First premise: It is wrong to take innocent human life.
Second premise: From conception onwards, the embryo or fetus is innocent, human and alive.
Conclusion: It is wrong to take the life of the embryo or fetus.[22]

In his book Rethinking Life and Death Singer asserts that, if we take the premises at face value, the argument is deductively valid. Singer comments that those who do not generally think abortion is wrong attack the second premise, suggesting that the fetus becomes a 'human' or 'alive' at some point after conception; however, Singer remarks that human development is a gradual process, that it is nearly impossible to mark a particular moment in time as the moment at which human life begins.


Singer lecturing on medical ethics.Singer's argument for abortion differs from many other proponents of abortion; rather than attacking the second premise of the anti-abortion argument, Singer attacks the first premise, denying that it is wrong to take innocent human life:
[The argument that a fetus is not alive] is a resort to a convenient fiction that turns an evidently living being into one that legally is not alive. Instead of accepting such fictions, we should recognise that the fact that a being is human, and alive, does not in itself tell us whether it is wrong to take that being's life. (Rethinking Life and Death 105)

Singer states that arguments for or against abortion should be based on utilitarian calculation which weighs the preferences of a mother against the preferences of the fetus. A preference is anything sought to be obtained or avoided; all forms of benefit or harm caused to a being correspond directly with the satisfaction or frustration of one or more of its preferences. Since a capacity to experience suffering or satisfaction is a prerequisite to having any preferences at all, and a fetus (up to around 18 weeks) has no capacity to suffer or feel satisfaction, it is not possible for fetuses to hold any preferences at all. In a utilitarian calculation, there is nothing to weigh against a mother's preferences to have an abortion, therefore abortion is morally permissible.
Similar to his argument for abortion, Singer argues that infants similarly lack essential characteristics of personhood - "rationality, autonomy, and self-consciousness" [23]- and therefore "imply killing an infant is never equivalent to killing a person."[24].

kelly1

Has anyone read the writings of the Catholic saints e.g John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila, Terese of Lisieux etc?

robindch

kelly1 wrote: »

Someday, with the help of God!

Perhaps you missed my earlier question, but why do you read and support something that's been banned by your archbishop?

2Scoops

PDN wrote: »

I am to Warren what an Eircom League footballer is to David Beckham.

In terms of income?

PDN

2Scoops wrote: »

In terms of income?

Definitely. My royalties wouldn't cover the cost of my dog's food.