The Water Cooler
See other The Water Cooler Articles
Title: Christian Peace
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Feb 13, 2018
Author: Vicomte13
Post Date: 2018-02-13 19:05:02 by Vicomte13
Keywords: None
Views: 15943
Comments: 101
It's been a rough couple of days around here. Several of us, myself included, have not behaved in a manner at all befitting of a follower of Jesus. I propose that we cut that off and come back together in peace. We worship the same God and follow the same Lord. And he admonished us to love each other. Having gone in the other direction and riled ourselves up with hatred, what do we have to show for it? Nothing good. So lets cut our losses and get back in line with our leader, who is in heaven. For my part, I am sorry for all of the harsh words. I was hurt and angry, and lashing out, trying to inflict hurt and spread around the hate. We all know this is bad. I'm sorry I did it, and I will work much harder to keep my hot blood in check in the future. If I hurt any of you, I'm sorry. VxH, let's make peace. Too Conservative, I'm sorry I swore at you. A K A Stone - it's your site, and I spread crap all over the place out of wrath. I am sorry, and I will try to not do that ever again. Our interpretations of Christianity are different, but do we disagree that we are not supposed to carry on like this? Surely we all do. So let's all repent of it, change a different direction, turn the other cheek, forgive and forget, and move on in a more positive direction. That's what I will try to do.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Vicomte13 (#0)
There are certain topics that are never going to lead to any peaceful discussion. Ecumenical dialogue is overrated. It is exceedingly rare that it accomplishes anything.
Ecumenical dialogue is overrated. It is exceedingly rare that it accomplishes anything. That may be so, but it doesn't excuse Christian people treating each other like crap.
You know what? Sometimes people just need to avoid certain topics known to cause problems. This is true of couples, of parents and children, of friends. And it is just as true of Christians, particularly those who have known longstanding doctrinal disagreements. Expecting anything else is just naive. Wisdom is often knowing not to keep putting your foot down on landmines when you know they are there.
But how did this start? With a discussion of religion? Not really - with a discussion of "faggots".
As usual, these threads just wander. As you know well. Quite often, you can't get a single post on topic. buckeroo isn't too wrong to call it a chat channel. Sometimes I wonder if posters have even read a single sentence of the article. But maybe I'm grumpy.
Pope Francis sends hate letter to Assad https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/12/pope-francis-appeals-to-bashar-al-assad-syria That Argentine asshole Francis needs to STFU on matters that are NOT faith or doctrine! He's spreading hate and discord worldwide with his crackpot communist personal agenda. Francis needs to move into the Vatican tool shed, and let Pope Benny 16 run the church. He's just encouraging the Hillary/Trump neocons (prots) to kill whitey, the pinchy gringo infidel. Stop the hate, dump Francis the war mongering neocon k0oK!
I'm not sure why but you made me laugh.
I really wish the clergy would stop wearing those dresses. If they wore sandals and monastic robes with cowls it wouldn’t bother me so much, but those.dress-like cassocks look smarmy and weird and impractical, like they’re trying to be pretty. And black and red, like the caricatures of the Devil. Why not white, or brown, or grey, even green. And the Swiss Guard! Why those gaudy pantaloons and hats. It’s cartoonish, and foppish. I don’t like any of it.
Imagine how long it takes them to unbutton those 40-50 buttons if they want to take a dump. Why put buttons only 2" apart? Who does that? But maybe the buttons are fake and the whole front seam is just a big Velcro strip. I don't like the gaudy crucifixes either. Apparently, as you work your way up the hierarchy, you get awarded bigger and classier crucifixes. But they just aren't attractive. They send a bad message, at least to non-Catholics. I think those little red beanies are an appropriation of the Jewish yarmulkes. They have other hat styles they could wear. And all those phony overpriced shawls and other old-lady gear just seem so stale. And the colors are unattractive, like a scarlet-headed blackbird. Only not as nice. The bird has more dignity. Princes of the church. Piffle. And the Swiss Guard just could not look gayer. It's a tourist display I guess, like the guards at Buckingham Palace.
Love ya Bro and thanks for this thread. If I have ever offended you in any way I apologize and seek forgiveness. God Bless.
And almost on cue.
God Bless. Thank you. Everybody here needs to try harder at this, and we would all enjoy the place more.
And the Swiss Guard! Why those gaudy pantaloons and hats. It’s cartoonish, and foppish. I don’t like any of it. " Agree !!! Si vis pacem, para bellum Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. Never Pick A Fight With An Old Man He Will Just Shoot You He Can't Afford To Get Hurt "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." (Will Rogers)
Vicomte13 posted No you need to try harder at this. You were getting your ass kicked up and down the aisle because you were ignoring scripture. Adding to scripture. Making stuff up saying Mary wasn't a sinner. Yes that is some Catholic bullshit. I recall another time you were getting your ass kicked. You pulled this same stunt. Same type of thread. Let's all get along. Thing is I don't want to go along with bullshit to get along. That doesn't mean ai I don't like you or hate you. It means some of your beliefs are out there and not based on scripture. Then someone calls you on it because it isn't in the Bible because it is some made up bullshit. Then you get all mad about it and start saying we aren't christians. I was very careful to say that I don't think Catholics who are doctrinelky in errror that they could still be saved if they actually believed that Jesussus was the saviour. So we don't all need to do better. That is some liberal group think bullshit.
Here is the link to the thread I mentioned. https://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=52835&Disp=183#C183
Ok. Well, I tried. I was not "getting my ass kicked" or anything like it. There was a thread about gays, and VxH showed up and decided to bring my father's death from AIDS, as if to make a point. This was very nasty business, but it did not "kick my ass", it made me properly angry. What I wrote here is objectively true. Christian people should not be talking to each other the way that they do here. If people are to discuss Scripture, God, things spiritual, they should do so in a manner that respects the subject matter. You don't. Too Conservative does not. I try to. I am not going to debate Scripture with you on this thread. That was not the point. The point was to remind everybody that we are supposed to live within boundaries and keep a guard on our mouths. You don't want to do so, indeed, you see weakness in doing what Christ said to do. So let that be upon your head. It has never here been a matter of getting my ass kicked intellectually. Truth is, none of you ever actually engage with the ideas I present. What you do is start to rant and get nastier and meaner, hurling accusations. You, and Too Conservative, and VxH, take the conversation in a direction that forces me to choose to be uncivil and coarse - which sometimes I do, but I'm not good at it and am unwilling to keep at - or to back away and cease the discussion. Your message just told me that you don't care about the limits that Christians are supposed to place on their mouths, that you're not going to, that you don't read well, that you're not honest, and that you're going to go right on being a nasty jerk, that that's what this site is for - take it or leave it. I choose to leave it. Good bye. Close my account.
Sorry to hear that you're leaving and hope that you'll reconsider and come back after a while. There's a few nasty prots here who are filled with hate against Catholics. Fred Mertz is banned again, a Catholic who cracked his head on the ice in the church parking lot attending Holy Mass. I don't know if there are any practicing Catholics left here now? If a man acts in a religious way, an ethical way, then he’s really a religious man—and it doesn’t have a lot to do with how often he gets inside a church. And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of “conservatism.” I am a conservative Republican, but I believe in democracy and the separation of church and state. The conservative movement is founded on the simple tenet that people have the right to live life as they please as long as they don’t hurt anyone else in the process.
You can't be told you are wrong. You're delusional. Close your own account by not signing in.
You are the one who said you wanted to murder right wingers and that would solve the world's problems. I treated you fairly so quit spewing bullshit.
You ignored this part.
You should get an Oscar for this dramatic little performance. It was you who claimed angelic ancestry on that thread, starting in #39. It was you who claimed that the Father had carnal organs and had sex with Mary in your #84: And of course the Father begat Jesus via Mary. Then, after much protestation, I reviewed some of your other heresies regarding whether God is the author of evil and whether Jesus was an XX male (hermaphrodite or close to it) in my #184, claims that you made in just since September. You can't spout a lot of known ancient heresies (sprinkling in a few you made up for yourself) and not expect Christians with orthodox views to quietly assent to it or agree with you. This is even more true when your own church of Rome does not hold any of these positions and would, if the point were forced, condemn your views on these matters. So you can stomp off, all hurt and self-righteous. But the truth is that you picked a fight with orthodox Christian belief as it has been known since ancient times and you got your ass kicked. And you think that's unfair. I didn't and don't particularly want you to leave LF. But if you do, it's on you, bub. You wanted dialogue. You got it. And these were all topics you knew in advance were pure trouble and likely to start fights. Yet you persisted. Then you want to play the wounded woman and flee. Well, fine. But what I have described in this post is a very fair summary of what you did. It's on you, not on us, if you choose to leave after making an ass of yourself.
Indeed this is true and it's something I strive for. Though you and I disagree on some academic points, as well as, of course theology in general, you've shown before and again here your heart is good, and in my book (though perhaps not everyone's), that is the important thing. Whether you do depart for good now or perhaps may return at some point, I wish you the absolute best.
We Catholics call that Immaculate Conception, it's NOT boning Mary! It's no wonder that you're prohibited from having statutes of Mary the Blessed Virgin.
One "benefit", or perhaps virtue of what I believe is that academics do not have any bearing on our spirituality. As I understand things, it doesn't matter if you believe in evolution or creationism, or a literal interpretation of the Bible or not, or even if you believe the Bible at all, as it's all just academic head knowledge and God simply doesn't care about that. Head knowledge -- the contents of our physical brains -- dies with the human body, afterall, and our human bodies are not important. We are Sons of God because we are souls. What is important is what we do with what we believe, and whether we are fostering and growing our spiritual virtues and quashing our vices, which nearly always has to do with how we interact with others. That is our journey and purpose on earth, and knowing that gives me, at least, good reason to simply brush aside all theological discussion as, though interesting, still moot, in the event there is beneficial reason to do so. And the simple benefit is that I can wish all of you the absolute best no matter how much you disagree with me, with no compulsion to hurl insults or respond in kind should I receive them. I see all of us as having our individual paths to walk on, though never alone, and all of us must, or should, do whatever we are called to do, and all of us will be well in the end.
The word 'begat' has specific meaning in scripture. It refers to men having carnal relations with a woman to produce an heir (or male offspring). Scripture never says that the Father begat Jesus. Yet the vast majority of major Jewish personages in the Bible are listed by lineage as having been 'begat'. But not Jesus. So are you also on-board with the whole God-has-a-penis-and-screwed-Mary doctrine that Vic seemed to be offering up? Yes or no? Why don't you go try to peddle that to the local church of Rome where you live and see what the result is. About the same reception as you'll get when you try to say the same thing here. I know the Catholics where I live would never say such things. But they are quite conservative Catholics.
Why don't you go try to peddle that to the local church of Rome where you live I said "it's NOT boning Mary", so no I'm not on-board with your fantasy that God has a penis. Go peddle that shuck 'n jive at your local cults crop circle. Vic never said the crap you're making up.
He did say it. I quoted it. You can verify that he wrote it. Or are you going to try to argue, like a Xlinton, that "it depends on the meaning of the word 'begat'"? You can't have your cake and eat it too. You don't get to make up heretical nonsense entirely outside the teachings of orthodox Christianity for 2,000 years and still claim to represent mainstream beliefs.
We Catholics call that Immaculate Conception, it's NOT boning Mary! It's no wonder that you're prohibited from having statutes of Mary the Blessed Virgin. Are you sure you passed your catechism? I thought this doctrine was drilled into every Catholic child. Wiki: The Immaculate Conception is commonly confused with the Virgin Birth of Jesus. Jesus' birth is covered by the Doctrine of Incarnation, while the Immaculate Conception deals with the conception of Mary, not that of her son. Although the belief that Mary was sinless, or conceived without original sin, has been widely held since Late Antiquity, the doctrine was not dogmatically defined until 1854, by Pope Pius IX in his papal bull Ineffabilis Deus.[2] The Catholic Church celebrates the Feast of the Immaculate Conception on December 8; in many Catholic countries, it is a holy day of obligation or patronal feast, and in some a national public holiday. Without exception, the church of Rome insists that the Immaculate Conception was that of Mary, not of Jesus. If you believe otherwise, try to find any authoritative Catholic source that says so. You could start with, for instance, Catholic.com, a very staid Roman source: Maybe you should write them some emails to correct their theological errors. I'm sure they'd like to hear from you. So I'm kinda wondering just how devoutly Catholic you can possibly be if some Prot retard like me knows fundamental Roman doctrine from the catechism better than you seem to.
You have adopted to being an aggressive asshole. What are you doing?
So I'm kinda wondering just how devoutly Catholic you can possibly be No I'm not sure, that was a long time ago. Anyway you can't flunk out of being baptized a Catholic. I haven't been excommunicated yet that I know of, so I'm still in. I never made any claims to be devoutly Catholic, just a regular old school lapsed Catholic. The most popular type by far. If you expect me to be all new wave Catholic, and read all of Francis' drivel you can just forget that notion, no way! Fred Mertz is probably all up to date on the latest Francis propaganda in his church bulletin.
Sure you can... Henry VIII & Martin Luther are probably the most famous, but a more complete list of historical figures who flunked-out can be found here.
As I documented, the doctrine of Immaculate Conception was infallibly dictated by the pope in 1854. And it is part of catechism. I wouldn't state it as any kind of expert but I don't think you can be considered a real Roman Catholic without espousing it. It's not just a matter of conscience where you can choose to believe it or not. The pope says that you must believe it without exception.
Alright then, believe whatever you like, but I also confirmed that I was a Catholic Christian, and was slapped by a Bishop. The confirmation name that I chose is John. I'm not going to try to defend Catholicism against your straw-man "God's penis". Show me a quote by Vic talking about God's johnson. Vic is a weirdo, but you've got him beat!
Exactly what do you think 'begat' means? And Vic did say that God begat Jesus in the same context with the fallen angels begetting the Nephalim (whose descendants are the Basque, people like him). Begat is begat. Deal with it.
As for the doctrine of Immaculate Conception itself, perhaps you'll accept the official Catechism. Chesapeake, Va. (Catholic Online) - On this Feast of the Immaculate Conception, Catholic Online presents these texts of explanation and instruction on this beautiful doctrine from the Catechism of the Catholic Church so that our readers may come understand its mystery more fully: Born of the Virgin Mary 487 What the Catholic faith believes about Mary is based on what it believes about Christ, and what it teaches about Mary illumines in turn its faith in Christ. Mary's predestination 488 "God sent forth his Son", but to prepare a body for him,125 he wanted the free co-operation of a creature. For this, from all eternity God chose for the mother of his Son a daughter of Israel, a young Jewish woman of Nazareth in Galilee, "a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary":126 The Father of mercies willed that the Incarnation should be preceded by assent on the part of the predestined mother, so that just as a woman had a share in the coming of death, so also should a woman contribute to the coming of life.127 489 Throughout the Old Covenant the mission of many holy women prepared for that of Mary. At the very beginning there was Eve; despite her disobedience, she receives the promise of a posterity that will be victorious over the evil one, as well as the promise that she will be the mother of all the living.128 By virtue of this promise, Sarah conceives a son in spite of her old age.129 Against all human expectation God chooses those who were considered powerless and weak to show forth his faithfulness to his promises: Hannah, the mother of Samuel; Deborah; Ruth; Judith and Esther; and many other women. 130 Mary "stands out among the poor and humble of the Lord, who confidently hope for and receive salvation from him. After a long period of waiting the times are fulfilled in her, the exalted Daughter of Sion, and the new plan of salvation is established."131 The Immaculate Conception 490 To become the mother of the Savior, Mary "was enriched by God with gifts appropriate to such a role."132 The angel Gabriel at the moment of the annunciation salutes her as "full of grace".133 In fact, in order for Mary to be able to give the free assent of her faith to the announcement of her vocation, it was necessary that she be wholly borne by God's grace. 491 Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, "full of grace" through God,134 was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854: The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.135 492 The "splendor of an entirely unique holiness" by which Mary is "enriched from the first instant of her conception" comes wholly from Christ: she is "redeemed, in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son".136 The Father blessed Mary more than any other created person "in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places" and chose her "in Christ before the foundation of the world, to be holy and blameless before him in love".137 493 The Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God "the All-Holy" (Panagia), and celebrate her as "free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature".138 By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long. "Let it be done to me according to your word. . ." 494 At the announcement that she would give birth to "the Son of the Most High" without knowing man, by the power of the Holy Spirit, Mary responded with the obedience of faith, certain that "with God nothing will be impossible": "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be [done] to me according to your word."139 Thus, giving her consent to God's word, Mary becomes the mother of Jesus. Espousing the divine will for salvation wholeheartedly, without a single sin to restrain her, she gave herself entirely to the person and to the work of her Son; she did so in order to serve the mystery of redemption with him and dependent on him, by God's grace:140 As St. Irenaeus says, "Being obedient she became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race."141 Hence not a few of the early Fathers gladly assert. . .: "The knot of Eve's disobedience was untied by Mary's obedience: what the virgin Eve bound through her disbelief, Mary loosened by her faith."142 Comparing her with Eve, they call Mary "the Mother of the living" and frequently claim: "Death through Eve, life through Mary."143 ***** Endnotes 125 Gal 4:4; Heb 10:5. The only really surprising thing in there to me was that it is an extremely rare instance of any acknowledgment of predestination by the Roman Catholic establishment. Otherwise, they loathe the concept. And Luther and Calvin embraced it. Especially Calvin. At any rate, I can't find any statement that a Catholic is refused communion if they dissent from the doctrine of Immaculate Conception even if the pope did proumulgate the doctrine infallibly in 1846. There are other doctrines for which there is no dissent allowed at all, such as those enumerated at the Council of Trent in 1546 where they list one heresy after the next (mostly Protestant doctrines) and pronounce anathema on anyone, Catholic or Protestant, who does not adhere to the official doctrines of the Catholic church. This 1546 Council is where the catechism itself came from, it was a direct result of the Council. Good anecdote. I didn't know about it. I assume it disappeared after Vatican II. I read this account from 2012: Slapped By A Bishop
There ya go. I was wrong about the possibility of sin before the virgin birth, there was none, ever. As an earlier post of yours said, lots of people confuse the Immaculate Conception (Mary's birth) with the Virgin birth of Jesus. Yes, I'm guilty of getting them mixed up. I do wonder what they mean by PERSONAL sin? Are there group sins, or what? Sounds sort of like a loophole, lawyer speak. Immaculate Conception says that there was no original sin.
Are you peddling the crap that Mary never sinned? Why did she call Jesus her saviour?
Like many doctrines, it has a sugary coating. We like to think that Mary was an utterly pure being from the moment of her conception. It's poetic and bears a resemblance to similar doctrines found in other ancient religions such as in Egypt. The problem becomes that if your mother is a virgin, created sinless from the moment of conception, she really cannot need a savior. And she is then not a human being. And therefore Jesus himself was not a real human being. You start to get into various questions about whether they have one body and two spirits or whether they are divine beings who only appear to be human beings. The key point is: if Mary was a magical and godlike being herself, then Jesus was too. Yet scripture and conventional doctrine insist that Jesus was both fully man and fully divine. Whenever you lessen the humanity of Jesus by emphasizing his godlike attributes, you make Him less and less a human being and He become God in disguise, an actor on a stage in a repertoire piece whose outcome is entirely predetermined. And yet, scripture paints no such picture of Him. It may be that I cannot describe adequately why the humanity of Jesus was His primary quality, more so than His divinity. I recall a great brief sermon by Charles Spurgeon who preached on this quite passionately back in the day: Methinks, however, there is a sweeter thought than this in the name, Son of man. It seems to me that Christ loved manhood so much, that He always desired to honor it; and since it is a high honor, and indeed the greatest dignity of manhood, that Jesus Christ was the Son of man, He is wont to display this name, that He may, as it were, put rich stars upon the breast of manhood, and put a crown upon its head. Son of man — whenever He said that word He seemed to put a halo round the head of Adam’s children. Yet there is perhaps a more lovely thought still. Jesus Christ called Himself the Son of man, because He loved to be a man. It was a great stoop for Him to come from heaven and to be incarnate. It was a mighty stoop of condescension when He left the harps of angels and the songs of cherubims to mingle with the vulgar herd of His own creatures. But condescension though it was, He loved it. You will remember that when He became incarnate He did not become so in the dark. When He bringeth forth the only begotten into the world, He saith, “Let all the angels of God worship Him.” It was told in heaven; it was not done as a dark secret which Jesus Christ would do in the night that none might know it; but all the angels of God were brought to witness the advent of a Savior a span long, sleeping upon a Virgin’s breast, and lying in a manger. And ever afterwards, and even now, he never blushed to confess that He was man; never looked back upon His incarnation with the slightest regret; but always regarded it with a joyous recollection, thinking Himself thrice happy that He had ever become the Son of man. All hail, thou blessed Jesus! we know how much Thou lovest our race; we can well understand the greatness of Thy mercy towards Thy chosen ones, inasmuch as Thou art evermore using the sweet name which acknowledges that they are bone of Thy bone and flesh of Thy flesh, and Thou art one of them, a brother and a near kinsman. I will tell you the people whom Christ will save — they are those who are lost to themselves. Just imagine a ship at sea passing through a storm: the ship leaks, and the captain tells the passengers he fears they are lost. If they are far away from the shore, and have sprung a leak, they pump with all their might as long as they have any strength remaining; they seek to keep down the devouring element, they still think that they are not quite lost while they have power to use the pumps. At last they see the ship cannot be saved; they give it up for lost, and leap into the boats. The boats are floating for many a day, full of men who have but little food to eat. “They are lost,” we say, “lost out at sea.” But they do not think so; they still cherish a hope that perhaps some stray ship may pass that way and pick them up. There is a ship on the horizon; they strain their eyes to look at her; they lift each other up; they wave a flag; they rend their garments to make something which shall attract attention; but she passes away; black night comes, and they are forgotten. At length the very last mouthful of food has been consumed; strength fails them, and they lay down their oars in the boat, and lay themselves down to die. You can imagine then how well they understand the awful meaning of the term — “lost.” As long as they had any strength left they felt they were not lost; as long as they could see a sail they felt there was yet hope; while there was yet a moldy biscuit left, or a drop of water, they did not give up all for lost. Now the biscuit is gone, and the water is gone; now strength has departed, and the oar lies still: they lie down to die by each other’s side, mere skeletons; things that should have been dead days ago, if they had died when all enjoyment of life had ceased. Now they know, I say, what it is to be lost, and across the shoreless waters they seem to hear their death-knell pealing forth that awful word, Lost! lost! lost! Now, in a spiritual sense, these are the people Christ came to save. Sinner, thou too art condemned. . . . Perhaps you can see why Spurgeon was so praised in his day. He had considerable passion for his topic. This sermon was convincing enough to me that I never forget what he was trying to say about Christ as the Son of Man. And it is an interesting feature of scripture that you'll read something like this and then suddenly notice all the many times you've seen the title "Son of man" in scripture. And it doesn't register much until Spurgeon points it out. It didn't hurt that he was a very sweet preacher and writer, very sincere.
Well the Blessed Virgin Mary did get some special privileges like being free from original sin, and full of grace. Jesus IS the savior, yes or no? Mary was flesh and blood human so she's included.
If it were true that she never sinned, she would have no need of a savior. And certainly wouldn't have to give birth to a savior for the rest of mankind.
I have found the RCIA Catholics know Catholicism better than cradle Catholics. Just my observation. They have to go through the conversion training which is quite rigorous and they do so as volunteers and not compelled like some are growing up. Don't get me wrong I have quite a few relatives who are aces on the catechism and church history. But the adult converts are very motivated and know their stuff.
It depends. Teddy Kennedy got a full Catholic funeral.
That is why I like debating and talking to Catholics. Because your beliefs are supposed to be based on the Bible. But to get your doctrine and have to be intellectually dishonest. I say that because you have to ggo outside of scripture to make Mary sinless. Then you also have to ignore other scriptures such as we all have sinned. Why is that? Do you believe the Bible is God's word or not? Furthermore your comment above is vague and made up because those phrases and ideas aren't found in the Bible. Correct me with scripture if I am incorrect. What does that mean she was flesh and blood human so sh is included? It sounds like jibberish.
Again you can say stuff like that but since it isn't based on scripture as far as I can tell. Why should we believe it to be true. It is just speculation. When something is taught in the aBible it seems to me it is repeated and cross referenced many times in multiple places. Yet there is no mention of what you just said. Like I said you have to be intellectually dishonest.
I'm not going to try to defend Catholicism against your straw-man "God's penis". Show me a quote by Vic talking about God's johnson. There are minimum requirements. Not attending church at least weekly and on feast/holy days of obligation is considered by the Catholic Church as mortal sin. Unless one is too sick. https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/why-is-it-a-mortal-sin-to- miss-mass
Immaculate conception isn't found in the Bible. False teaching. If Mary never sinned why did she die? The wages of sin is death. Why would she die if she never sinned? What is interesting is TC, redleghunter and myself will use scripture to make our points. You,. Vic and Catholics have to add to scripture or leave stuff out. Think about that and let it sink in.
I read this account from 2012: Slapped By A Bishop I grew up Catholic in New York. I was confirmed in the 80s and no slap.
So what, I'm Catholic not a Saint. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Excellent sermon. I read Spurgeon almost daily. On the above quote it seems the Truly God, Truly Man or Son of God, Son of Man debate has historical cycles. With the Gnostics the Apostles encountered and ECFs they emphasized the real body and blood of Christ to refute their phantom body error. So we have from the earliest apologists arguments for the humanity of Jesus. Then a host of heresies on Christology following in the early centuries. Some focusing more on the humanity, some the Deity of Christ to some denying He was Deity at all. It seems we are more in a Modalist cycle now with Pentecostals. Frankly there are a host of old heresies cropping up. Thanks for the Spurgeon.
I'm not casting stones. Just pointing out getting wet as baby and getting slapped at 12 is not in the definition of the Catholic church being a faithful member. I linked you to Catholic answers maybe take up the conversation with them on why not attending mass weekly is a mortal sin. I think the article they post explains it well. You could always just walk to your local Catholic church and ask them.
Do you think that not going to church at least once a week is a big sin?
It's true in other churches too. The converts are often the most knowledgable and serious. I was kind of shocked when I found out just how many people think that sitting in a pew half-awake for an hour each week was all that was needed to punch their tickets for the Pearly Gates. They not only had no interest in theology or what the denomination stood for, they actively resisted any attempt of any kind to examine the distinctive beliefs of their church or any other. They worked at being uninformed and ignorant. They weren't terribly virtuous or sinful in any way, just totally uninterested. And I'm not exaggerating. Believe me, I could tell a few stories that would shock you.
No, they aren't. Rome is all about obeying the infallible doctrines promulgated by the pope and the rare church councils like Council of Trent or Vatican II. To Catholics, the bible is a mere creation of the Catholic church. There are no bible-believing Catholics. There are only pope-obeying Catholics. Period. If the pope infallibly promulgated a doctrine that the bible was harmful and that all Catholics must get rid of their bibles, they would have no choice. They would obey or they would no longer be considered Catholic and have no access to Catholic sacraments. And those sacraments have a powerful hold on them.
Not my judgment to make. I was just pointing out Catholic doctrine on the matter and linked you to why they say so. The source and summit of the Roman Catholic faith is communion. No communion and God's Grace is cut off according to the catechism. That is why they consider it a mortal sin. Now if you asked me 8 years ago if missing church is a sin, I would probably say no. But now? Why would I want to miss church on Sunday and small group Bible Study? It took a really bad sickness recently due to chemo treatments for me to miss fellowship with fellow Christians. I can't wait for the next church event and look forward to Sundays. I am a member of an Evangelical church which is very active and very young in age range. It's a pleasure to see so many young couples with 4-5 kids all running around. At 50 I'm an old guy there.
Yeah, on paper. But when did they last enforce it on anyone? When did they refuse communion for that, refuse a burial because of it, refuse deathbed rites from a priest? They don't. Not that I know of. So it's required but mostly toothless.
There is something refreshing and cheerful about the man and he is still very appealing, even so long after he lived. He had a knack for preaching and oratory and wasn't afraid to be passionate in the pulpit. He was, in private life, quite lively and there are many humorous anecdotes about him. He was as witty as Churchill or Oscar Wilde when he was in the mood for it.
When I started attending another church in July, the pastor mentioned the above to me. He does not like the term church membership and prefers partnership. Which means being a partner is you do more than pew fill. Very vibrant ministries within and without the church. Such only works if you have motivated members wanting to serve the Lord and others. I was amazed at how active this church truly is and sound doctrine for oldies like me. :-) The senior pastor is a grad of a Presbyterian university and the assistant pastor is from a Reformed Baptist university. The elders are a mixed bag of both. We even have an elder who was an Army Presbyterian Chaplain. Then of course we have the Greenbay Packers family which shows up late to service wearing their football jerseys. :-) No church is perfect.
Again you can say stuff like that but since it isn't based on scripture as far as I can tell. "Full of grace" is definitely in the Bible. The angels words are the beginning of the "Hail Mary" prayer that we Christians say. 27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. 28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
Well...I kinda hate to break it to you but... The Catholic Church teaches as dogma that the Virgin Mary "having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory".[5] This doctrine was dogmatically defined by Pope Pius XII on 1 November 1950, in the apostolic constitution Munificentissimus Deus by exercising papal infallibility.[6] While the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox Church believe in the Dormition of the Theotokos, which is the same as the Assumption,[7] whether Mary had a physical death has not been dogmatically defined. In Munificentissimus Deus (item 39) Pope Pius XII pointed to the Book of Genesis (3:15) as scriptural support for the dogma in terms of Mary's victory over sin and death as also reflected in 1 Corinthians 15:54: "then shall come to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory".[8][9][10] In the churches that observe it, the Assumption is a major feast day, commonly celebrated on 15 August. In many countries, the feast is also marked as a Holy Day of Obligation in the Roman Catholic Church and as a festival (under various names) in the Anglican Communion. So Mary never did die but Catholics didn't find out about it until the pope informed them in 1950 that she just kinda floated off into the air. And, having informed them that she didn't die after all, they were further required to believe that she didn't die or they were no longer considered Catholic. Apparently, the Eastern Orthodox believe in the Dormition which is the same thing except Mary fell asleep (died), was bodily resurrected (like Jesus), then ascended into heaven by God's power. Jesus, by comparison, ascended into heaven under His own power. I do hope you won't resort to some sort of low sarcasm. That would be so disappointing.
I wish I knew of a church around here that was anything like that.
Let's not go too far. The majority of Catholics who are motivated to read the Bible (Cardinal Newman highly encouraged Bible studies for the laity but with a priest leading and Vat2 encouraged as well). However, as a former RC the Bible is to be studied with holy tradition as the guide. My personal experience growing up in a strict Irish Catholic family may have been rare. My mother grew up in Ireland and loved church in her small town. She would hear weekly the liturgy readings from Scriptures and wanted more. She asked one is the Sisters at Catholic school for a Bible. She was quite scolded that only the priest kept the Bible. When she came back to the US after the seas were clear of Uboats, she a few years later married my dad and as a wedding gift received her first Bible. She would read to us from that Catholic Bible every night along with our prayers. I quickly loved the stories the wonderful artwork in the Bible and drank in those evenings and even more reading during Advent, Lent and Holy Week. Of course I aced all my religious studies and catechism classes. My Aunt on my dad's side was a Bible thumping Catholic too. She and my uncle were Charismatic Catholics. She gave me my very first Bible at age 10 and such is the history of this Bible thumper. :-)
They don't. Not that I know of. So it's required but mostly toothless. The confessional is their answer. I don't know if it was the parish priest's rule but I remember going to confession before every holy day of obligation was not optional. I remember as a 10 year old trying to come up with stuff to confess. I was always arguing with my siblings so that was an easy one. Again it depends on the motivation and devotion. With my mother we never missed a Sunday even on vacation and only missed if we were running a high fever. I don't think I witnessed my mother miss church at all in my time under my parents roof. And my dad was an usher and Knights of Columbus and was always doing something with the Church to include run BINGO nights. We were more strict than the Reagan family on Blue Bloods. :-) Even when in Florida retired they were even more active. When both of them were homebound in their 80s they found ways to get to church and if not due to their waning months of life a priest or Eucharistic minister came by the house or assisted living facility. I remember visiting my dad before he passed. He gave me a mission to find his priest and get him to come to his nursing home. I had to track down the dude and bring him there. I was successful. When he got there my father asked him a few questions about the book of Romans. Mind you his mind was not all there, but here I was answering his questions and the priest was listening. FYI my parents got involved with an Evangelical Bible study when they moved to their retirement community. They both accepted Christ as Lord and Savior a few years before they passed. They stayed with the Catholic church as that is all they knew.
Until a century ago, lay Catholics were very strongly discouraged from reading the bible at all, even the bible translations slanted toward Catholic doctrine. Even a few decades back, I recall a Catholic telling me they weren't allowed to read a non-Catholic bible without permission from the local priest and they would have to answer to why they would even want to read such a thing. There may be bible-believing Catholics now but that was not the tradition of the Catholic churches, either in Europe or America. I did know one of those Catholic charismatic women once. Never missed Mass on Saturday night so she could get up early and spend Sunday at the local Assembly of God. Your aunt was probably about the same. At one time, AoG seemed to be about 20%-30% Catholics from what I could tell. And these local Catholics were quite conservative.
I think we discussed this before but did you read his Downgrade letters? Very instructive for today. He was cheerful but a lion against the error of the liberal theology coming out of Germany and infecting the Arminian churches in England. I posted an intro and link here:
Woh. I never realized you were from such a devout Roman Catholic family. Urban Catholic life, especially on the east coast, was obviously quite different from the kind of Catholicism you would find in rural America in places that I knew. Only in the largest towns could anyone go to Mass every day. In places like NYC, many older people would expect daily Mass as a matter of course. The sacraments gain a powerful hold in that way.
And the Eastern Orthodox don't hold either the Immaculate conception or the Assumption as ancient church teachings. Nor do they believe in the torments of purgatory. I have some interesting links on that if interested.
We had extensive discussion of it back when I was at FR. A sad chapter in his life. He had lived through a period of great evangelism and great popularity but as he became old, he found himself being forced to defend what he considered to be settled dogma within his own denomination, the English Baptists. Kind of a sad end to the career of the greatest English preacher. Another career like that was the Presbyterian John Gresham Machen. He withdrew and formed the Orthodox Presbyterian church. Still, a sad ending. These are examples of why I say that the most important thing that determines what a church will stand for in 50 or 100 years is their knowledge of and adherence to doctrine. Sometimes, people just get tired of correct doctrine, their itchy ears lead them away toward other things.
Now that I didn't know. Or at least I don't recall it. I was being, of course, a little tongue-in-cheek with my summary of the Assumption. Rome did not actually promulgate doctrine that Mary never died. Maybe she died, maybe she didn't. But she did get beamed up to heaven, either alive or dead. Or maybe she died, got resurrected on earth and then got beamed up if you're Orthodox (I swear, you cannot say the word Theotokos around those people, they go nuts). Anyway, Stone probably is in shock now over the Mariology of the Roman church. Sometimes called the Mariolatry of Rome by those who take a dim view of how they deify Mary, contrary to scripture.
Urban Catholic life, especially on the east coast, was obviously quite different from the kind of Catholicism you would find in rural America in places that I knew. Only in the largest towns could anyone go to Mass every day. In places like NYC, many older people would expect daily Mass as a matter of course. The sacraments gain a powerful hold in that way. I meant my mother never missed Sundays and Holy days. However she did take us to mass on Wednesdays during summer vacation from school. It was mom me my siblings (dad at work) and two pews of elderly ladies. Where I grew up in NY there were very few Protestant churches. There was a SDA church near the local parish. We would joke it was a vampire church because we never saw people coming and going and no cars in the parking lot. Then next to my friends house there was an Episcopal church. Again a ghost town. Two blocks from my friends house was a small Evangelical chapel which was in a residential area. Really weird but in the middle of a block of middle class homes off the main road was this chapel. It was packed every Sunday and Tuesday. Cars parked on three streets. One summer day my friend was invited to Vacation Bible School to that chapel. He invited me to tag along. We were 12 and that was where I heard the Gospel for the first time. The rest is history praise be to God.
Most true.
Interesting. I've heard very similar stories before. Of course, the Catholics love to have converts but it seems to be that enthusiastic converts to Catholicism is pretty rare, even if they do lavish a lot of attention on them. OTOH, Catholic converts to Prot churches are welcomed but no special effort to convert them to Protestantism is made. Yet it seems there are far more Catholics converting to Protestantism than vice versa. It's not even close in my experience. I always noticed that the ex-Catholics were all avid Bible students, just loved scripture, like they were starved for it.
It was what the Orthodox call the Pseudo Synod of Florence (CA. 1439). One of those let's get back together because these Muslims are quite annoying. You will have to go past a bit of the usual supercilious and pedantic EO introductions. But it gets really interesting half way down. Basically the Orthodox could not find any ancient teachings on purgatory and any Orthodox churches which did have some leanings look to purgatory as a toll house. Kind of like the Bema seat. At one point an RC bishop made the point that purgatory was where we go to be punished for venal sins to receive forgiveness. The EO bishop responded that one can only be punished or forgiven but not both. :-) He's right.
The Orthodox can have a very dry wit when they're making a serious point. And no one actually laughs. I always thought the EOs won every debate with the RCs. Didn't do them any good because the RCs never seemed interested in the truth. When I hear people suggesting we need more ecumenical dialog, I always think of how little good it did for the Orthodox. Rome does not dialog in good faith, only for their own advantage.
I'm not in shock. I knew they would explain it away like they do with everything.
Enjoyed your re-telling of your early impressions and belief... My north Jersey town was also largely RCC.
My father -- born in the early 1930s -- lived and grew up in Harlem, NYC. His family were Italian immigrants, poor, and living in a cold-water flat on the 4th or 5th floor. Heat was partially provided by whatever driftwood and scrap wood could be scrounged from the banks of the East River along with his dad. They'd also scrounge up wild mushrooms and greens. It was a tough existence, substinance was meager. BUT...there was little or ZERO crime. To your point of "Urban Catholic life," the local parish routinely provided many of the parishioners' needs, from clothes, to food, to any and all kinds of help. The church was THE epicenter of its local society. Many remained stout RCCs for life, working those rosaries to the bone (like Gramma.) She may have attended mass often -- including obviously Sundays -- but I NEVER hear a single word from her regarding the Bible when I was a child. (Just a random memory): From age 7-15 of routinely attending Mass on Sunday (as well as attending Catechism for 4 years), I never heard any Scripture during a sermon other than a brief verse from one of the NT Gospels. Never was any Old Testament scripture ever uttered.
Even here with a majority Prot community, I never knew anyone growing up who hadn't been born in the local Catholic hospital (unless they were one of the last ones in the era to be born at home). Those nuns were fierce but did a great job, really served the community. No one ever backtalked them at all (any kid who did would have gotten a beating). You didn't mess with the nuns in their hospital. You didn't make any jokes either. It was unthinkable. They had real authority and little patience for debate even with adults. They were a blessing to all of us. No doubt of it.
I have heard that before, more than once. I do think they do a lot better over the last 30 years. Vatican II did lead to some positive changes. Prior to that and starting around 1910, while Catholics had been officially (very mildly) encouraged to read the Bible and know it, it still wasn't all that accepted as a practice among the older pre-Vatican Catholics. They were all Mass-and-sacraments types and it couldn't be spiritually correct if it wasn't uttered in Latin with reference to the theology of Thomas of Aquinas. You know what I mean. Vatican II tried to do more to compete with the teaching of the Bible in the Prot churches, especially in wealthy Western countries that were the breadbasket of Vatican fundraising. They knew they needed to compete. The Vatican is a church but every church is still a business in some sense, as distasteful as it sounds to say it. So around the Eighties, it seems they got much more active in preaching some scripture and encouraging bible study, always within the lines naturally.
We've grown up in two different environs...and yet wound up HERE. I agree -- the nuns of yore were tough ol' broads, doing very important work. NEVER would anyone think of sassing them. You didn't mess. Even the tough guy thugs feared their wrath. Their patience and sense of humor bone seemed to be broken. Whether in your Midwest or in my urban/suburban parts...I'd always thought THAT to be a shame. They were mostly helpful but...mostly also joy-less. They obviously took their suffering seriously to the point of even emotional deprivation. I always felt sorry for the one sweet young pretty nun whose bitterness had not yet come to fruition.
Yup. IN LATIN. Especially in NYC. They knew they needed to compete. The Vatican is a church but every church is still a business in some sense, as distasteful as it sounds to say it. So around the Eighties, it seems they got much more active in preaching some scripture and encouraging bible study, always within the lines naturally. "Competition" in that sense of forcing the RCC to become...I guess, "more Protestant" in style if not also in content somewhat wound up a good thing. That said, the Mass always seemed to be more about all the little traditional rites and performance art, and little to do with teaching the word. By my end days of attending Mass they'd even brought in folk guitarists to perform the music instead of the tradition pipe organ, which definitely signaled a different direction.
Speaking of a different direction, didn't the change come along around the time that the priest stopped facing the altar to consecrate and started facing the congregation? There are still Catholics (Mel Gibson would be one), who get very hot on that topic. I think us Prots just don't get the whole dispute, anyway I don't. Gibson funded that Latin rite church just so his dad could attend a real old-fashioned pre-Vatican II Catholic mass in Latin and with the priest facing the altar.
I may have been too young or bored to notice. The olde-timers would have noticed something like that...or someone paying attention. My son attended a mass several years ago with his friends, who attended RCC. His impression was first and foremost that he was impressed by...THE SHOW. The whole rites thing is impressive if you're watching it from a performance standpoint. There are still Catholics (Mel Gibson would be one), who get very hot on that topic. I think us Prots just don't get the whole dispute, anyway I don't. Gibson funded that Latin rite church just so his dad could attend a real old-fashioned pre-Vatican II Catholic mass in Latin and with the priest facing the altar. I don't get it either; can't fathom a God who dings Salvation (and knocks off points) because of something like that. OR, forgetting to dab the finger in the Holy Water tray, a women lacking headwear, or any number of Venial Sin oversights. Well, Mel is traditional about SOME things, isn't he? So he did establish his own church? Just for his dad? Heard he's planned a follow up to 'The Passion...', which will explore the aftermath of Christ' last days before ascending afterward. Should break more theater attendance records as Hollywood continues to hate on Gibson.
Gibson's father was something else. Gibson is an outspoken critic, both of the post-Vatican II Roman Catholic Church and of those Traditionalist Catholics, like the Society of Saint Pius X, who reject Sedevacantism. Gibson is also a proponent of various conspiracy theories. In a 2003 interview he questioned how the Nazis could have disposed of six million bodies during the Holocaust and claimed that the September 11, 2001 attacks were perpetrated by remote control.[1] He has also been quoted as saying the Second Vatican Council was "a Masonic plot backed by the Jews".[2] . . . In 2006 Gibson's foundation, The World Faith Foundation of California, which is funded by Mel Gibson, purchased an existing church structure in the Pittsburgh suburb of Unity, Pennsylvania, and established there a Tridentine sedevacantist congregation called St. Michael the Archangel Roman Catholic Chapel.[38] The Reverend Leonard Bealko, purportedly a former Roman Catholic priest who had left the church voluntarily in 1986, was appointed pastor. By mid-2007 Gibson and his fellow congregants had dismissed Bealko and dissolved the congregation amid charges that Bealko had misrepresented his credentials and mishandled finances.[39] So that Sedevecantist church didn't last but, at the time, it was kind of a Thing when it became clear to libmedia that Gibson and papa were both very very conservative Catholics. Papa made other inflammatory comments too, doing his son no favors.
There are plenty of conspiracies to speak out about as we know....(naah, you wouldn't know about that) Questioning the Holocaust was the one subject the Gibsons invoked was what made them/him persona non grata to begin with in a Hollywood that's known to be very Jewish, very liberal, very Atheist, and very anti-Christian. I may not agree with the Gibsons on the Holocaust, but it was after all just an opinion. Hollywood has many opinions that at least 50% of America finds offensive. I give Mel points for trying to reach out to God while helping others develop their faith.
I wuz wrong. That Sedevecantist chapel is still in business and doing business in Latin. ST. MICHAEL THE ARCHANGEL CATHOLIC CHURCH It looks like a charming little church. Nicely maintained and equipped, as these places go. I'd guess they still benefit from some Gibson money. Update: nope, that one is in Florida. Gibson's was in Pennsylvania.
Ok, I'll bite... The claim of a 911 "remote control" facet of the attack is interesting, given there is no video footage of the Pentagram "plane." Gibson may have something there. Given what we know today about who runs what, and to what extent those PTB are willing to retain/wield power, it can be said that NO explanation of 911 can truly be discounted or dismissed. Even MORE SO in light of the ongoing coup against DT that's been exposed.
Trying again, I think his dad's chapel may have closed. But Mel did build his own Latin-rite church in the hills around Malibu. This seems to be the correct picture of it. Sounds about right. Priest facing the altar, everything Latin.
Thanks. The subject just seemed to be a good place to share.
The sermon or the liturgy as well? I know by my conscious post Vat 2 upbringing, we had one OT/NT epistle reading, a reading from Psalms and then a Gospel reading.
I'm going to see it in the actual theatre this time because Hollywood hates on Gibson. :)
The sedevacantists are right, Francis is a usurper. FAKE pope!
One can only imagine what Hutton Gibson would have said about Pope Frank ascending while B16 was still alive. A Catholic cheeky enough to write a book called Is The Pope Catholic? would have had some fun opinions on that topic, no doubt. There are more of them around than is generally realized, I think. Not that I object.
Stone, you were really outta line here. Vic deserves a sincere apology. In his vanity he extended his hand and heart in Christian peace. From what I could see you slapped it away and worst. WWJD? Seriously.
Vic, yours was a great vanity, a hand extended in peace and in true Christian brotherhood. Just wanted to let you know you're a good man and appreciated here....
Actually he deserves no such apology. He implied that I did something wrong on another thread in the I should change my behavior. Why should I apologize when he is the one adding to and subtracting from the Bible. Jesus said he came to bring a sword not peace. He said his word would divide. So although I like Vic. I will never apologize for pointing out Catholic errors and deception and lies. I won't and I don't question his salvation. It is my duty to point out disagreement not sugar coat it. When he suddenly says he wants peace the earlier when other people said that he told them the basically bug off. Having said that Vic is always welcome the post here.
This was the second time that Vic got mad and issued an opus and then followed up with a mea culpa mixed with a can't-we-all-just-get-along because those bad Prots were being mean to him. Vic likes to post extremely heretical stuff, well beyond the doctrines of the Roman Catholic church, then get all offended when anyone else defends Christian orthodox belief against his religious novelties and vanity posts. No one wanted Vic to leave, no one told him to leave, and no one is slamming the door and locking it to prevent his return. That is entirely his own choice. I'm fine if he wants to return, as long as he doesn't post some longwinded apology thread or a mea culpa or something equally tiresome. Vic is the one who raised the bar against his own return to LF by writing this stuff. The rest of us just don't care that much. After posting at FR for years, then LP for more years, and at LF for years, are we still supposed to be impressed by an opus and a following mea culpa? I don't see how we can pretend to be quite that innocent because this is far from our first rodeo, you or me or Stone or Vic or anyone else here at LF. We've all posted at these forums for at least 15 years. For some of us, over 20.
bad Prots were being mean to him It's only a little heretical, besides we can always go to confession! That's the Catholic advantage. Envy leads the Prots to being mean because they've painted themselves into a corner, and can see no way out without admitting that Vic is right about a lot of things. Vic sent me a couple of LFmails about prot snake handlers, angels boffing women, the Nephilim and whatnot. He takes his religion very seriously. But he's going to have to come back and enlighten y'all himself, I'm not even going to try to explain or defend his viewpoint. Come back Vic, the snake handlers miss your epistles! They're starting to come around to Christianity and see things your way, but they still need a lot of work.
Admittedly. You always have your Get Out Of Purgatory card to play. No one drove him out, no one said he should leave. That is all on him. Well, I'm not so surprised that he was running his own little campaign against us Prot types. Thanks for confirming it.
Yes, Hillary the lesbian Methodist was right. It's a Vast Right Wing Catholic Conspiracy! Fred, Vic, and myself.
A-ha! LOL
#2. To: Tooconservative (#1)
There are certain topics that are never going to lead to any peaceful discussion.
#3. To: Vicomte13 (#2)
#4. To: Tooconservative (#3)
#5. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
#6. To: Vicomte13, Community Organizer Pope, Obama Trump neocon, *Arab Spring Jihad* (#0)
#7. To: hondo68 (#6)
#8. To: hondo68 (#6)
#9. To: Vicomte13 (#8)
(Edited)
I really wish the clergy would stop wearing those dresses.
#10. To: Vicomte13 (#0)
#11. To: Tooconservative (#7)
I'm not sure why but you made me laugh.
#12. To: redleghunter (#10)
Love ya Bro and thanks for this thread. If I have ever offended you in any way I apologize and seek forgiveness.
#13. To: Vicomte13 (#8)
" I really wish the clergy would stop wearing those dresses. If they wore sandals and monastic robes with cowls it wouldn’t bother me so much, but those.dress-like cassocks look smarmy and weird and impractical, like they’re trying to be pretty. And black and red, like the caricatures of the Devil. Why not white, or brown, or grey, even green.
#14. To: Vicomte13 (#12)
(Edited)
Thank you. Everybody here needs to try harder at this, and we would all enjoy the place more.
#15. To: All (#14)
#16. To: Vicomte13 (#0)
I propose that we cut that off and come back together in peace.
#17. To: A K A Stone (#14)
#18. To: Vicomte13, Mr. Conservative, Barry Goldwater, Fred Mertz, The last practicing Catholic, got the ax, buckeroo, Deckard (#17)
I choose to leave it. Good bye. Close my account.
Barry Goldwater “Mr. Conservative”
#19. To: Vicomte13 (#17)
#20. To: Vicomte13 (#17)
has never here been a matter of getting my ass kicked intellectually. Truth is, none of you ever actually engage with the ideas I present. What you do is start to rant and get nastier and meaner, hurling accusations.
#21. To: Vicomte13 (#17)
That doesn't mean ai I don't like you or hate you. It means some of your beliefs are out there and not based on scripture. Then someone calls you on it because it isn't in the Bible because it is some made up bullshit. Then you get all mad about it and start saying we aren't christians
#22. To: Vicomte13, A K A Stone, redleghunter (#17)
You, and Too Conservative, and VxH, take the conversation in a direction that forces me to choose to be uncivil and coarse - which sometimes I do, but I'm not good at it and am unwilling to keep at - or to back away and cease the discussion.
Angels had children with human women, creating the Nephilim (and their descendants, the Basques) so apparently they have the equipment...at least some of them. Other than the fact that they mated with human females and produced the Nephilim.
#23. To: Vicomte13 (#17)
What I wrote here is objectively true. Christian people should not be talking to each other the way that they do here. If people are to discuss Scripture, God, things spiritual, they should do so in a manner that respects the subject matter.
#24. To: Tooconservative (#22)
(Edited)
And of course the Father begat Jesus via Mary.
#25. To: Tooconservative, Vicomte13, A K A Stone, redleghunter, Liberator (#22)
#26. To: hondo68 (#24)
We Catholics call that Immaculate Conception, it's NOT boning Mary!
#27. To: Tooconservative (#26)
So are you also on-board with the whole God-has-a-penis-and-screwed-Mary doctrine
#28. To: hondo68 (#27)
Go peddle that shuck 'n jive at your local cults crop circle. Vic never said the crap you're making up.
#29. To: hondo68, A K A Stone, redleghunter (#24)
(Edited)
Vic: And of course the Father begat Jesus via Mary.
The Immaculate Conception, according to the teaching of the Catholic Church, is the conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary free from original sin by virtue of the merits of her son Jesus Christ. The Catholic Church teaches that God acted upon Mary in the first moment of her conception keeping her "immaculate".[1] I. THE DOCTRINE
In the Constitution "Ineffabilis Deus" of December 8, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary "in the first instant of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin" (Denzinger, "Enchiridion", 10th ed., n. 1641). The subject of this immunity from original sin is the person of Mary at the moment of the creation of her soul and its infusion into her body. The term conception does not mean the active or generative conception by her parents. Her body was formed in the womb of the mother, and the father had the usual share in its formation. The question does not concern the immaculateness of the generative activity of her parents. Neither does it concern the passive conception absolutely and simply (conceptio seminis, carnis, inchoata), which, according to the order of nature, precedes the infusion of the rational soul. The person is truly conceived when the soul is created and infused into the body. Mary was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin at the first moment of her animation, and sanctifying grace was given to her before sin could have taken effect in her soul. The formal active essence of original sin was not removed from her soul, as it is removed from others by baptism; it was excluded, it never was in her soul. Simultaneously with the exclusion of sin, the state of original sanctity, innocence, and justice, as opposed to original sin, was conferred upon her, by which gift every stain and fault, all depraved emotions, passions, and debilities, essentially pertaining to original sin, were excluded. But she was not made exempt from the temporal penalties of Adam—from sorrow, bodily infirmities, and death. The immunity from original sin was given to Mary by a singular exemption from a universal law through the same merits of Christ, by which other men are cleansed from sin by baptism. Mary needed the redeeming Savior to obtain this exemption, and to be delivered from the universal necessity and debt (debitum) of being subject to original sin. The person of Mary, in consequence of her origin from Adam, should have been subject to sin, but, being the new Eve who was to be the mother of the new Adam, she was, by the eternal counsel of God and by the merits of Christ, withdrawn from the general law of original sin. Her redemption was the very masterpiece of Christ's redeeming wisdom. He is a greater redeemer who pays the debt that it may not be incurred, than he who pays after it has fallen on the debtor (Ullathorne, "Immac. Conception", p. 89). Such is the meaning of the term "Immaculate Conception".
#30. To: A K A Stone, Vicomte13 (#19)
You can't be told you are wrong. You're delusional. Close your own account by not signing in.
#31. To: Tooconservative, Fred Mertz, Knights Templar (#29)
Are you sure you passed your catechism?
#32. To: hondo68 (#31)
Anyway you can't flunk out of being baptized a Catholic.
#33. To: hondo68 (#31)
I never made any claims to be devoutly Catholic, just a regular old school lapsed Catholic. The most popular type by far. If you expect me to be all new wave Catholic, and read all of Francis' drivel you can just forget that notion, no way!
#34. To: Tooconservative, Gods penis idolatry, invented here (#33)
(Edited)
I don't think you can be considered a real Roman Catholic
#35. To: hondo68 (#34)
I'm not going to try to defend Catholicism against your straw-man "God's penis". Show me a quote by Vic talking about God's johnson.
#36. To: hondo68 (#34)
(Edited)
126 Lk 1:26-27.
127 LG 56; cf. LG 61.
128 Cf. Gen 3:15, 20.
129 Cf. Gen 18:10-14; 21:1-2.
130 Cf. I Cor 1:17; I Sam 1.
131 LG 55.
132 LG 56.
133 Lk 1:28.
134 Lk 1:28.
135 Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus (1854): DS 2803.
136 LG 53, 56.
137 Cf. Eph 1:3-4.
138 LG 56.
139 Lk 1:28-38; cf. Rom 1:5.
140 Cf. LG 56.
141 St. Irenaeus, Adv. haeres. 3, 22, 4: PG 7/1, 959A.
142 St. Irenaeus, Adv. haeres. 3, 22, 4: PG 7/1, 959A. 143 LC 56; St. Epiphanius, Panarion 2, 78, 18: PG 42, 728CD-729AB; St. Jerome, Ep. 22, 21: PL 22, 408.
144 Lk 1:43; Jn 2:1; 19:25; cf. Mt 13:55; et al. I also confirmed that I was a Catholic Christian, and was slapped by a Bishop.
#37. To: Tooconservative, A K A Stone (#36)
By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long.
#38. To: hondo68 (#37)
there was none, ever.
#39. To: hondo68, redleghunter (#37)
There ya go. I was wrong about the possibility of sin before the virgin birth, there was none, ever.
“CHRIST THE SON OF MAN.”
HOW fond our Master was of the sweet title, the “Son of man!” If He had chosen, He might always have spoken of Himself as the Son of God, the Everlasting Father, the Wonderful, the Counselor, the Prince of Peace. He hath a thousand gorgeous titles, resplendent as the throne of heaven; but He careth not to use them; to express His humility and let us see the lowliness of Him whose yoke is easy and whose burden is light, He calls not himself the Son of God, but He speaks of Himself evermore as the Son of man who came down from heaven. Let us learn a lesson of humility from our Savior; let us never court great titles nor proud degrees. What are they, after all, but beggarly distinctions whereby one worm is known from another? He that hath the most of them is a worm still, and is in nature no greater than his fellows. If Jesus called Himself the Son of man, when He had far greater names, let us learn to humble ourselves unto men of low estate, knowing that he that humbleth himself shall in due time be exalted.
#40. To: A K A Stone (#38)
Why did she call Jesus her saviour?
#41. To: hondo68 (#40)
Jesus IS the savior, yes or no? Mary was flesh and blood human so she's included.
#42. To: Tooconservative (#29)
So I'm kinda wondering just how devoutly Catholic you can possibly be if some Prot retard like me knows fundamental Roman doctrine from the catechism better than you seem to.
#43. To: Tooconservative (#33)
I wouldn't state it as any kind of expert but I don't think you can be considered a real Roman Catholic without espousing it. It's not just a matter of conscience where you can choose to believe it or not. The pope says that you must believe it without exception.
#44. To: hondo68 (#40)
Mary was flesh and blood human so she's included
#45. To: hondo68 (#40)
Well the Blessed Virgin Mary did get some special privileges like being free from original sin, and full of grace.
#46. To: hondo68, TooConservative (#34)
Alright then, believe whatever you like, but I also confirmed that I was a Catholic Christian, and was slapped by a Bishop. The confirmation name that I chose is John.
#47. To: hondo68 (#37)
(Edited)
Immaculate Conception says that there was no original sin.
#48. To: Tooconservative (#36)
Good anecdote. I didn't know about it. I assume it disappeared after Vatican II.
#49. To: redleghunter (#46)
Not attending church at least weekly and on feast/holy days of obligation is considered by the Catholic Church as mortal sin.
#50. To: Tooconservative (#39)
It may be that I cannot describe adequately why the humanity of Jesus was His primary quality, more so than His divinity. I recall a great brief sermon by Charles Spurgeon who preached on this quite passionately back in the day:
#51. To: hondo68 (#49)
So what, I'm Catholic not a Saint. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
#52. To: redleghunter (#51)
ask them.
#53. To: redleghunter (#42)
I have found the RCIA Catholics know Catholicism better than cradle Catholics. Just my observation. They have to go through the conversion training which is quite rigorous and they do so as volunteers and not compelled like some are growing up.
#54. To: A K A Stone (#44)
That is why I like debating and talking to Catholics. Because your beliefs are supposed to be based on the Bible.
#55. To: hondo68 (#52)
Do you think that not going to church at least once a week is a big sin?
#56. To: redleghunter (#46)
There are minimum requirements. Not attending church at least weekly and on feast/holy days of obligation is considered by the Catholic Church as mortal sin. Unless one is too sick.
#57. To: redleghunter (#50)
Thanks for the Spurgeon.
#58. To: Tooconservative (#53)
I was kind of shocked when I found out just how many people think that sitting in a pew half-awake for an hour each week was all that was needed to punch their tickets for the Pearly Gates. They not only had no interest in theology or what the denomination stood for, they actively resisted any attempt of any kind to examine the distinctive beliefs of their church or any other.
#59. To: A K A Stone (#45)
(Edited)
Well the Blessed Virgin Mary did get some special privileges like being free from original sin, and full of grace.
Luke 1:27-29 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
#60. To: A K A Stone (#47)
(Edited)
If Mary never sinned why did she die?
The Assumption
The Assumption of Mary into Heaven, often shortened to the Assumption and also known as the Feast of Saint Mary the Virgin, Mother of Our Lord Jesus Christ and the Falling Asleep of the Blessed Virgin Mary (the Dormition),[3][4] according to the beliefs of the Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy, and parts of Anglicanism, was the bodily taking up of the Virgin Mary into Heaven at the end of her earthly life.
#61. To: redleghunter (#58)
I was amazed at how active this church truly is and sound doctrine for oldies like me. :-) The senior pastor is a grad of a Presbyterian university and the assistant pastor is from a Reformed Baptist university. The elders are a mixed bag of both. We even have an elder who was an Army Presbyterian Chaplain.
#62. To: Tooconservative, A K A Stone (#54)
There are no bible-believing Catholics. There are only pope-obeying Catholics. Period.
#63. To: Tooconservative (#56)
Yeah, on paper. But when did they last enforce it on anyone? When did they refuse communion for that, refuse a burial because of it, refuse deathbed rites from a priest?
#64. To: redleghunter (#62)
My personal experience growing up in a strict Irish Catholic family may have been rare. My mother grew up in Ireland and loved church in her small town. She would hear weekly the liturgy readings from Scriptures and wanted more. She asked one is the Sisters at Catholic school for a Bible. She was quite scolded that only the priest kept the Bible.
My Aunt on my dad's side was a Bible thumping Catholic too. She and my uncle were Charismatic Catholics. She gave me my very first Bible at age 10 and such is the history of this Bible thumper. :-)
#65. To: Tooconservative (#57)
There is something refreshing and cheerful about the man and he is still very appealing, even so long after he lived. He had a knack for preaching and oratory and wasn't afraid to be passionate in the pulpit. He was, in private life, quite lively and there are many humorous anecdotes about him. He was as witty as Churchill or Oscar Wilde when he was in the mood for it.
#66. To: redleghunter (#63)
Again it depends on the motivation and devotion. With my mother we never missed a Sunday even on vacation and only missed if we were running a high fever. I don't think I witnessed my mother miss church at all in my time under my parents roof. And my dad was an usher and Knights of Columbus and was always doing something with the Church to include run BINGO nights.
#67. To: Tooconservative (#60)
So Mary never did die but Catholics didn't find out about it until the pope informed them in 1950 that she just kinda floated off into the air. And, having informed them that she didn't die after all, they were further required to believe that she didn't die or they were no longer considered Catholic.
#68. To: redleghunter (#65)
I think we discussed this before but did you read his Downgrade letters?
#69. To: redleghunter, A K A Stone (#67)
Nor do they believe in the torments of purgatory.
#70. To: Tooconservative (#66)
Woh. I never realized you were from such a devout Roman Catholic family.
#71. To: Tooconservative (#68)
These are examples of why I say that the most important thing that determines what a church will stand for in 50 or 100 years is their knowledge of and adherence to doctrine. Sometimes, people just get tired of correct doctrine, their itchy ears lead them away toward other things.
#72. To: redleghunter (#70)
One summer day my friend was invited to Vacation Bible School to that chapel. He invited me to tag along. We were 12 and that was where I heard the Gospel for the first time. The rest is history praise be to God.
#73. To: Tooconservative (#69)
#74. To: redleghunter (#73)
The EO bishop responded that one can only be punished or forgiven but not both. :-)
#75. To: Tooconservative (#69)
#76. To: redleghunter (#70)
#77. To: Tooconservative, redleghunter (#66)
Urban Catholic life, especially on the east coast, was obviously quite different from the kind of Catholicism you would find in rural America in places that I knew. Only in the largest towns could anyone go to Mass every day. In places like NYC, many older people would expect daily Mass as a matter of course.
#78. To: Liberator, redleghunter (#77)
To your point of "Urban Catholic life," the local parish routinely provided many of the parishioners' needs, from clothes, to food, to any and all kinds of help. The church was THE epicenter of its local society.
#79. To: Liberator (#77)
From age 7-15 of routinely attending Mass on Sunday (as well as attending Catechism for 4 years), I never heard any Scripture during a sermon other than a brief verse from one of the NT Gospels. Never was any Old Testament scripture ever uttered.
#80. To: Tooconservative (#78)
(Edited)
#81. To: Tooconservative (#79)
They were all Mass-and-sacraments types and it couldn't be spiritually correct if it wasn't uttered in Latin with reference to the theology of Thomas of Aquinas. You know what I mean.
#82. To: Liberator (#81)
By my end days of attending Mass they'd even brought in folk guitarists to perform the music instead of the tradition pipe organ, which definitely signaled a different direction.
#83. To: Tooconservative (#82)
Speaking of a different direction, didn't the change come along around the time that the priest stopped facing the altar to consecrate and started facing the congregation?
#84. To: Liberator (#83)
(Edited)
11 kids? Yeah, pretty Catholic. Conquering the world, one supine event at a time. Hutton Peter Gibson (born August 26, 1918) is an American writer on Sedevacantism, a World War II veteran, the 1968 Jeopardy! grand champion and the father of 11 children, one of whom is the actor and director Mel Gibson.
#85. To: Tooconservative (#84)
#86. To: Liberator (#83)
(Edited)
#87. To: Tooconservative, Deckard (#84)
#88. To: Liberator (#85)
(Edited)
So in 2003 the actor decided to help change things back to the way they were, building a chapel in Malibu, Calif. – The Church of the Holy Family. Tucked away in the tree-covered mountains of Agoura Hills, 30 miles northwest of downtown Los Angeles, the rustic church, unaffiliated with the Roman Catholic archdiocese, has a foot-tall crucifix on the altar and the priest keeps his back to the parishioners as he performs mass every morning entirely in Latin. In church, women must wear head coverings.
Among traditionalists, there is a more extreme group affiliated with the ultra-conservative stream of Catholicism known as Sedevacantism, meaning, “the seat [of the papacy] is empty.” They believe there has been no legitimate pope since 1958. Gibson hasn’t said he shares that belief, though his father, Hutton Gibson, is a well known anti-Vatican II activist and author of the book Is the Pope Catholic?
#89. To: Liberator (#76)
Enjoyed your re-telling of your early impressions and belief... My north Jersey town was also largely RCC.
#90. To: Liberator (#77)
From age 7-15 of routinely attending Mass on Sunday (as well as attending Catechism for 4 years), I never heard any Scripture during a sermon other than a brief verse from one of the NT Gospels. Never was any Old Testament scripture ever uttered.
#91. To: Liberator (#83)
Should break more theater attendance records as Hollywood continues to hate on Gibson.
#92. To: Liberator, Vatican II Beatniks, TooConservative, redleghunter (#81)
By my end days of attending Mass they'd even brought in folk guitarists to perform the music instead of the tradition pipe organ, which definitely signaled a different direction.
CMRI: A Traditional Catholic Religious Congregation
#93. To: hondo68 (#92)
(Edited)
The sedevacantists are right, Francis is a usurper. FAKE pope!
CMRI: A Traditional Catholic Religious Congregation
#94. To: A K A Stone, Vicomte13 (#14)
#95. To: Vicomte13 (#0)
(Edited)
#96. To: Liberator (#94)
#97. To: Liberator (#95)
(Edited)
Vic, yours was a great vanity, a hand extended in peace and in true Christian brotherhood.
#98. To: Tooconservative, Liberator, Vicomte13 (#97)
Vic likes to post extremely heretical stuff, well beyond the doctrines of the Roman Catholic church
#99. To: hondo68 (#98)
(Edited)
It's only a little heretical, besides we can always go to confession! That's the Catholic advantage.
Come back Vic, the snake handlers miss your epistles! They're starting to come around to Christianity and see things your way, but they still need a lot of work.
Vic sent me a couple of LFmails about prot snake handlers, angels boffing women, the Nephilim and whatnot.
#100. To: Tooconservative, Vicomte13, Fred Mertz (#99)
campaign against us Prot types
#101. To: hondo68 (#100)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]