Posted on 04/30/2016 6:36:14 PM PDT by ButThreeLeftsDo
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/heidi-cruz-face-of-god
I believe each and every soul/spirit intellect that takes this flesh journey has the God given right to believe whatever he/she chooses.
However, there is NO God given right to add to or take away from HIS WORD... Per Moses no less and John. Why? Christ said Mark 13:23 But take ye heed: behold I have foretold you all things. There is absolutely no need for libraries fill with philosophy to speak for what Christ already said in what is commonly called the Old Testament.
Christ had a lot to say about those that sit in Moses’ (the law giver) seat. Matthew 23, and what Christ warned would be fits like a fine fitted glove.
I am worn thin with all this breast beating of ‘anti-Catholic’ whine. The present pope went to Mexico recently, messing in our election, itching about ‘borders’ a wall of all things and then he twittered off to his walled palace.
Paul said in ICorinthians 10 referring back to Moses, in verse 11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples (examples) and they are written for our admonition (warning), upon whom the ends of the world (age) are come.
Moses not only the ‘law-giver’ was the first prophet and Moses foretold what would be IF Deuteronomy 28:15-68.
God told us what He was going to do in Amos 8:11 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD GOD, that *I* will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD:
That famine has begun.
Good summary, BlackElk. I'm always pleased to see that your health permits you to generate reams of interesting and vehemently vivid verbiage!
where does ‘evils of capitalism’ and Occupy Wall Street land on the ‘sanctity of life’ issue?
???? Apples and oranges. Different categories, I think.
Why was Daniel Berrigan at Occupy Wall Street is my point.. certainly wasn’t for the sanctity of life.
From an article on Occupy Wall Street, where he most certainly made an appearance- Daniel Berrigan, America’s Street Priest, Stands With Occupy
quote-Berrigan believes, as did Martin Luther King, that “the evils of capitalism are as real as the evils of militarism and the evils of racism.” And he has dedicated his life to fighting these evils. It is a life worth emulating.
In that same city, 2012, where he lived, more black babies were aborted than born. Truly horrific stat right under that priest’s ‘pro life’ nose.
quite a living legacy for ‘sanctity’.
You asked me why was Daniel Berrigan at OWS. I don’t know.
quote-You asked me why was Daniel Berrigan at OWS. I don’t know.
90 year old christian communists dig all the ‘ism’s’. except capitalism.
Within the Reformed version of Christianity, there tends to be no central teaching authority such as we have with popes in Catholicism. The Reformed rely on Scripture alone but cannot very well avoid subjectively interpreting its contents. When we Catholics have a pope like Bergoglio on auto-gaffe, that exposes a weakness. We believe that in certain narrowly defined circumstances, the pope, when speaking ex cathedra (from the chair of Peter) on a matter of faith or morals and specifically invoking such infallibility IS infallible.
This belief is much misunderstood even within the Church much less outside it. First, the pope, whoever he may be, MUST remember always that he is the Vicar of Christ on Earth. Not Christ's successor, but merely Peter's.
As I understand it, since the quality of infallibility was defined in the mid-19th century First Vatican Council. If a pope expresses a preference for vegetarian pizza over bacon and mushroom, that is not infallible. If a pope expresses himself contrary to the accumulated Teaching Magisterium of the Church, likewise.
One such exercise was by Pope Pius IX when, in 1854, he infallibly defined as dogma the long-held Catholic belief (characterized by antiquity, universality and consensus) that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was herself conceived without the stain or consequences of the Original Sin of Adam and Eve on her soul.
This necessarily suggests that she did not suffer the pangs of childbirth when Jesus was born because those pangs were punishment for Original Sin and that, likewise, for the same reason, she did not suffer death. This, I believe, is Scriptural as a logical consequence of the statement of the Archangel Gabriel to her during the annunciation, calling her "full of grace," not a quality of even the most virtuous exemplars of men and women born with Original Sin. Concededly, we have no Gospel or other Scriptural account directly and specifically describing the details of Jesus's birth as to whether Mary suffered in childbirth.
Jesus Christ was God and Man, but He also was not subject to Original Sin. Adam and Eve were created by God and sinned. Of all those human beings, born of woman, only Jesus and Mary were born without Original Sin.
I don't expect you or anyone else to change your beliefs (just as I will not change mine) or beat your breast any more than I beat mine (I don't).
The raising of old and often discredited canards against the Catholic Church has a history not unlike the disreputable history of the Blood Libel against Jews. Did Catholics treat Jews, Protestants and others shamefully and sinfully? You betcha but the decidedly non-Catholic Calvinist rulers at Geneva burned what they viewed as heretics at the stake, Calvinist Cromwell treated my Irish ancestors unjustly and shamefully, Henry VIII had his friend St. Thomas More beheaded for not approving his plan to divorce his rightful wife, Lizzie I had Catholic priests disemboweled alive and their entrails burnt in their conscious presence. None of which is fairly attributed to Reformed Christianity generally. Individual sinners. Individual sins.
Meanwhile, it was the Lithuanian Catholic King of Poland Jan Sobieski who, very late in the Muslim Siege of Vienna and nearly at the last minute, deployed his feared cavalry, the Hussars. and defeated a vast Muslim army, thus repelling a very serious attempt to establish an Islamic power base in Christian Europe at Vienna. It was Pope St. Pius V who had all of Catholic Europe praying the rosary incessantly for months for the success of the Christian fleet of Don Juan of Austria over a superior Muslim fleet at Lepanto. Most of that Muslim fleet can still be found at the bottom of the Mediterranean. That was, in both cases, DOING something for Christianity and not just talking about it. As a result your children and mine could grow up reading the Bible rather than the Koran. That does not mean that my Church is perfect only that it was ready, willing and able. I am not apologizing for Catholic armies attacking Muslims trying to reclaim the Holy Land as suggested by Obozo.
If we are to hold individual sinners responsible on Earth, we must be scrupulously fair. I have been a Knight of Columbus for 52 years now. Forty years before that, the Knights of Columbus were apparently actually accused by some nuttier Masons of cannibalizing Protestant babies. The response from some Knights was equally uncharitable and false. Then we all grew up.
In Connecticut, there is today a joint program involving the Knights of Columbus, the Masonic Order and the Jewish brotherhood of B'nai Brith, called "Brotherhood in Action" in which the three groups co-operate with charitable efforts such as support for the Shriners' Hospital treating at no charge children who are victims of cancer, or new winter coats for poor children or similar charities. There is nothing distinctively Catholic, Protestant or Jewish about most general charities. As James observed, your works are the fruit of your faith. That does not mean that works merit salvation but rather that we know the spiritual quality of those among us by their practice of charity towards others, according to their respective means. Charity means love. It includes paying due regard to not falsely accusing others.
The present pope is disgraceful, not the first such and likely not the last. His manifest secular errors on his fantasy of "global climate change" (thinly disguised anti-capitalism), his overt anti-capitalism which is inconsistent with Rerum Novarum, the great encyclical of Pope Leo XIII, his shameless cheerleading for the invasion of Western nations by Islamic "immigrants" including those who would erase the Vatican itself if given a chance, his refusal of the basic authority to judge which is the essential function of those holding his office.
Another such exercise of papal infallibility was in about 1954 when Pope Pius XII defined as dogma the long-held belief that Mary did not die (being free of Original Sin) but was assumed alive, body and soul, into heaven at a time of God's choosing.
The doctrine of the Assumption is, to the best of my knowledge, not at all Scriptural but I would welcome correction on that score, particularly by Catholics more knowledgeable than I. I take for granted that non-Catholic criticism is unlikely to be consistent with Catholicism. Also, I suspect that non-Catholic Christians will not be likely to claim the Assumption as Biblical. The flock of Jesus Christ is not precisely one flock. We have good faith differences among us.
I am well aware of the apparent injunction of Scripture not to add to or subtract from Scripture. Each and every sermon I have ever heard or you have ever heard would seem to violate that since no one stands up in the pulpit and merely reads Scripture word for word without additional commentary. I think that the injunction means not to deviate from the text of Scripture substantively.
Looking at Revelations, there is an account of the Earth being struck by a star called Wormwood, that would poison a third of all the land, a third of all the waters, a third of all the crops, etc. If you or I were to say that John was writing about an attack by spacecraft from the planet Neptune, that would be impermissibly adding to Scripture in that such a claim would seriously deviate from the text.
If, however, you or I contemplate that Revelations was written in the technologically primitive time of the late first century AD or early second century AD by John who had no personal experience with our modern technology and that he was writing for us moderns as well as for everyone born at the time of the writing and subsequently, it would seem permissible to speculate that John was describing, from a first century perspective, a attack by hydrogen bomb.
When God sends that promised famine upon the land, it won't be because Bergoglio is making a fool of himself on matters far beyond his competence, nor because some Catholic priests turned out to be pedophiles protected by coverups by their bishops, nor because of the shennanigans of the Rev. Mr. Jimmy Swaggert or the Rev. Mr. James Baker. They are all, up to and including Bergoglio, small fry.
My best guess is that when God sends that famine and a whole lot more, it will more likely result from the 60+ million and counting abortions in this country alone and 100s of millions worldwide.
Not that I know much about it -— and I’ve no idea what Fr. Berrigan’s ideas may have been on the subject-— but I think there may be relevant distinctions to be made between different types of capitalism.
I think there’s a kind of international capitalism which suppresses national sovereignty, presses toward globalism, wipes out private enterprise and crushes local cultures and values. Look at the corporate donor list oh the major LGBT totalitarians. I think GLSEN has a donor list at their website.
That’s the kind I’m against. Speaking for myself, with some heat.
Good pic.
And as a sinner, who can rejoice in Fr.Berrigan’s fidelities and mourn his transgressions as well as my own, I say:
Eternal rest grant unto him, O Lord,
And let perpetual light shine upon him.
May his soul, and the souls of all the faithful departed,
Through the mercy of God
Rest in peace.
Amen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.