Posted on 04/10/2005 2:31:05 PM PDT by Liz
ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE -- President Bush yesterday expressed awe at the funeral of Pope John Paul II, calling the ceremony a high point of his presidency that helped strengthen his faith in God.
"I would define Pope John Paul II as a clear thinker who was like a rock," he said ......"And tides of moral relativism kind of washed around him, but he stood strong as a rock."
"I knew the ceremony today would be majestic, but I didn't realize how moved I would be by the service itself, by the beautiful music," he marveled.
Mr. Bush was asked to react to Mr. Clinton's remark Wednesday that the pope "may have a mixed legacy." The president sounded eager to distance himself from the comment, which angered some conservatives.
"Pope John Paul II will have a clear legacy of peace, compassion and a strong legacy of setting a clear moral tone," he said. "A clear and excellent legacy."
Mr. Bush said his relationship with the pope "will strengthen my faith and my belief." A self-described born-again Christian, the president spoke expansively about his religious devotion.
"A walk in faith constantly confronts doubt, as faith becomes more mature and you constantly confront, you know, questions," he said. "My faith is strong. The Bible talks about, you've got to constantly stay in touch with the Word of God in order to help you on the walk."
"There is no doubt in my mind there is a living God and no doubt in my mind that the Lord Christ was sent by the Almighty -- no doubt in my mind about that," he said. "When I'm talking about doubts, I'm talking about the doubts that an individual struggles with in his or her life."
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
President Bush approaches Italian President Carlo Azeglio Ciampi, back to camera, as former U.S. president Bill Clinton, top right, and U.N. general secretary Kofi Annan look on, during Pope's John Paul II funeral in St. Peter's Square yesterday. (AP)
How grateful we can be to have leaders who walk in Truth. Wise comments by President Bush.
Seems we, as a Nation, have turned the corner-----a president talking so openly and devoutly about his religious beliefs and inspirations is unprecedented.
More please, President Bush.
Mr. Bush was asked to react to Mr. Clinton's remark Wednesday that the pope "may have a mixed legacy." The president sounded eager to distance himself from the comment, which angered some conservatives.Bull shiite! Name one, and I'll show you a RINO or a LIB, but not a "conservative".
"Pope John Paul II will have a clear legacy of peace, compassion and a strong legacy of setting a clear moral tone," he said. "A clear and excellent legacy."
Amen!!
Amen!!.....and Amen.
:^D
Too bad he didn't stand strong against the tides of Catholic relativism. JP-II did more damage to the True Faith (with his actions and also by negligence) than any Pope in centuries. After the Church is restored in the future, cleansed from modernism and heresy, history will not look kindly on JP-II.
" I would define Pope John Paul II as a clear thinker who was like a rock," he said ......"And tides of moral relativism kind of washed around him, but he stood strong as a rock."
and, "How grateful we can be to have leaders who walk in Truth. Wise comments by President Bush"
PUHLEEZE. That's like hearing a 17-year old dogmatically spout their stupid opinions. You know they don't understand the issues. Bush calling the Pope a clear thinker, true and wise???
What's clear or wise about someone, who, when they have all the power of the Pope, doesn't actually go back and fix things according to Scripture, eliminating the errors that have been added to doctrine due to traditions? No, that would mean the Pope would lose his job.
Having all the power of the Pope, and yet he failed totally. We have forgiveness because of what Christ has done, and yet HE offers us forgiveness IF we do what HIS guys say.
We have reconciliation with the Father through Jesus Christ, and yet the world of Catholics is more comfortable with Carol as their "father" than the only real Father.
We have assured hope of resurrection from the dead because of Jesus Christ, yet the Pope's funeral leaves the billions of Catholics not trusting in Jesus' finished work, but in their traditions.
We have the only religion in all of history which has nothing we can do to earn God's favor, and in which HE does the total giving to us through grace in His Son's substitution for us. But did we hear that ONCE in the days of service for the Pope?
Did we hear once that they misinterpret the passage "upon this Rock I will build my church", thinking it was Peter, when it is easily shown just from the context Jesus meant revelation: It was upon the revelation that Jesus is the Christ, the Lamb of God given for the world, that the Church is built. It is built upon Jesus, not upon Peter.
Well, all the media got paid-for trips to Rome, so why should they do good scholarship and show all the ways the Pope has failed? Why should we not watch?
He failed to acknowledge the errors from the Council of Trent where anyone who believed contrary, especially the protestants, were anathematized.
He easily could repent of sins he'd never done: killing Jews, having slaves, abortions. But he refused to give up his pride of office, his doctrinal errors that have kept the Church divided to this day. Maybe he can get them born into life, and having good lives while here, but they'll still have an eternity away from God if they believe the different Gospel his teachings presented.
He refused to admit that God's salvation is through Christ alone, received through faith alone because of God's grace alone. Galatians 1 says he taught a different Gospel.
That little, weak, shaking, humped man with no voice this week went SCREAMING in glee to the grave, demonically knowing he had kept billions from the free gift of God in Christ Jesus.
He could throw in all he wanted to make his statements sound spiritual and "Christian". Satan knows Jesus is Lord, too. But the Pope's statements ended up just being another religion trying to gain favor, unsucessfully, with God, because he denied these basic fundamentals of Christianity.
He was not a loving man, but a hater, a user of these poor people. Many turn to the Church seeking God, and he kept that seeking intertwined with idolatry of dead patrons, idolatry of Mary, and the diminishing of the authority of Holy Scripture with additional books placed on par with Scripture, and additional traditions placed on par with Scripture.
I'm not being purposely hurtful or vitriolic. I'm speaking Truth. Like when you had a scab as a kid...sometimes it got infected and needed to be pulled off and started over. It hurts, but it's necessary.
The Pope was given 26 years to have shown the lies, the inconsistencies, the errors, and disbanded the false religion, joining real believers in Christ in the other two branches, but why? When so many people are willing to follow you anyway? When the entire world is willing to grant you respect for your deceitfulness?
It is too late for him. But not for you. You still are being called to repent. Trust that Jesus' death was for you, and that He alone has earned you favor with the Father. He offers you a free gift of love and mercy and grace because of His atonement in your behalf. Justice was met. Your sins were paid for. Only if you trust in Him and turn to Him will you receive that gift. If you try to add to it, or earn it yourself, you are rejecting God's magnamity.
Let's see. John Paul II was instrumental in stopping Communism, consecrated Russia to Our Lady's Immaculate Heart, let Bishops give permission for the indult Mass, replaced most of the liberal Bishops and Cardinals with much more conservative replacements, and restored respect for the Papacy that has been bleeding ever since the split in 1054.
I would have like more like an ever harder crackdown on the Jesuits and a universal indult but these will have to wait. Rome wasn't built in a day.
Remind me exactly how the early Christians were supposed to follow Solo Scriptura and interpret the Bible for themselves when there was no Bible to speak of. Christians weren't even sure which books were Scripture and which weren't until the Pope decided things.
Luke Ch 1 (KJV)
28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:
42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.
46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,
47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
It seems like many Protestans are not joining with the Catholics in calling Mary "blessed." Catholics do not worship Mary, we ask her to intercede for us to the Father.
And when Jesus says "upon this Rock I will build my church" He is obviously referring to Peter as the Rock. He had just given Simon the name Peter which means rock!!
"A clear and excellent legacy." Amen!!.....and Amen.
What was his stand on the pedifilial arm of the church and what were the final recomendations by the august body of the church hiearchy of this scandal or has it been swept under the papal rug?
What good is it if Communism is stopped, but the people don't believe in and understand Christianity??
What good is it if bishops are called conservative, but still proclaim as "anathema" anyone who believes Jesus alone is the sole atonement for their sins, to be received through God's grace alone and not works, through faith, is anathema and wrong??
If you call that respect for the papacy, and think that's great, you're the prime example of what this Pope has done to YOU. You don't know the Scriptures, nor the power of God, because he has perpetuated false teaching and a different Gospel than the Apostle Paul's.
He's dead. You're not. You still have God's mercy to turn to Him. Christianity was built in a day: Jesus rose from the dead proving His Deity and His teachings. His teachings are completely different than what Catholocism promotes. Do you care?
"Remind me exactly how the early Christians were supposed to follow Solo Scriptura and interpret the Bible for themselves when there was no Bible to speak of."
Your sarcasm betrays the fact you haven't taken ONE good course on the basics of where do we get our Christian knowledge.
1. Jesus raised Himself from the dead, proving He was God. What does HE say about Scripture? Wouldn't HE be right, even above any council? He says He gives His stamp of approval to what His disciples would teach of Him, with the Holy Spirit bringing into their remembrance what He taught them.
2. Their writings were recognized as canonical, not 'decided to be' canonical. The first century churches collected their writings, rejected ones which were known to not be authentic, and the ones we have in the NT today are the letters they had then, copied and passed from church to church. Someone lied to you claiming the Pope is the one who decided it.
3. Sola Scriptura means that we have ONE final authority for where we go for truth. We should go where Jesus wants us to go, shouldn't we? He is God, He knows. He says the Old Testament is the Word of God, including the Law, the Prophets, the Writings. He says Adam and Eve is true, Jonah and the whale is true, Moses wrote all the Pentateuch...all the higher critical claims are dached by Him.
He authorizes His disciples, and in their writings, we find them saying SCRIPTURE is inspired by God and profitable for reproof.(2 Tim. 3:1) They say their writings are not initiated by themselves, but that they are moved by the Holy Spirit to HIS goal (1 Pet.1:19-21). They even call each others' writing Scripture on par with OT Scripture.(Peter calling Paul's writings difficult, "as are the other Scriptures." Paul quoting Luke as Scripture on the workman deserving his wages.)
They place Scripture ALONE as the final judge for our knowledge of salvation and God. Tradition and teachings and emotions are to be subservient to, and judged by God's word. His word is inspired. We are sinful men.
Pastors are sinful men, and must interpret the Word correctly. The word is inspired, NOT them. The copies are not inspired, only in their reflection of the original autograph. Textual criticism is a necessary discipline to learn which manuscripts and portions are the most faithful to the original.
This is CRUCIAL, because everybody makes truth claims. Where do we go to authoritatively find out which claim is correct? Why not ask Scripture itself, and Jesus Himself where to go, rather than deciding first for ourselves to allow tradition, reason, the Magesterium and Scripture? HE says contrary.
Who is the leader of YOUR religion? The Jesus of Scripture, or someone telling you something contrary to what you can examine clearly for yourself?
Accusing Protestants of not following Scripture by calling Mary blessed, where do you get your facts? Mary WAS blessed by God to be allowed to be the Mother of the Son of Man, the Second Person of the Trinity, the Word become flesh and dwelt among us, and Protestants know this from Scripture..
We do NOT find in Scripture your claim that she can "intercede for us to the Father." In fact, we find the contrary: --that only Jesus is our intercessor, our mediator with the Father-- so we know that the teaching allowing Mary to be our intercessor is therefore necessarily false and cannot be followed.
We have no Scriptural support for contact with the dead. In fact, we have Scriptural support condemning any such attempts.(Dt.18)
A rule of Biblical hermeneutics is that we interpret the difficult passages in light of the clearer ones. We cannot adduce that because Mary in life asked Jesus to do a favor for her, that therefore she 1)can hear our prayers 2) that she will be more likely to be answered than you or I. In fact, Jesus says the contrary, that who is His mother or brother or sisters? Only those who believe on Him and trust in Him.
Hope this helps.
> restored respect for the Papacy
Respect from whom?? JP-II did more to denigrate and dilute the papacy than any pope in centuries. And how much respect can you have for someone, who's supposed to stand for something and defend it, and instead spends 26 years saying all religions are equal?
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.