Posted on 08/17/2018 8:40:24 AM PDT by wardaddy
Cardinal Raymond Burke has called for “open recognition” of the Catholic church’s homosexual culture in light of recent revelations of sexual abuse. “I believe that there needs to be an open recognition that we have a very grave problem of a homosexual culture in the Church,” Burke said in an interview Thursday, “especially among the clergy and the hierarchy, that needs to be addressed honestly and efficaciously.”
he former head of the church’s equivalent of the Supreme Court said it was already “clear after the studies following the 2002 sexual abuse crisis that most of the acts of abuse were in fact homosexual acts committed with adolescent young men.”
“There was a studied attempt to either overlook or to deny this,” he said, referring to the mainstream media cover-up of the homosexual nature of the abuse as well as such denial within the church itself.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
You said it.
Every time a Roman Catholic says that, it makes my gorge rise because that statement that no one can be sure of their salvation is calling God the Father, Son, AND Holy Spirit liars.
It smacks of the “unforgiveable sin” to me!
Gotta disagree with your interpretation, oops, sorry, your explanation of those verses. Nothing to do with sacerdotalism. That is my interpretation, oops, sorry, my explanation of those verses. But then again, what could I possibly know? I am just a poor, hapless ex catholic, who interprets, oops, sorry, explains scripture. I believe in scripture only and faith only, and I have assurance of salvation. 😁 Now, your interpretation, oops, sorry, your explanation, may be different from mine, but I am comfortable with that, even if you don’t think I can be.
I have Bible studies, where I invite only Catholics. I try to get them to interpret scripture for themselves. Oops, I mean explain scripture for themselves. It’s a beautiful thing, to see Catholics finally figure out the truth, and leave the “one true church,” the way I did.
OK, it’s time for me to enjoy my assurance of salvation. I know, I know, in your eyes, it’s the sin of presumption, but I am comfortable with that. Having assurance of salvation, is a beautiful thing. If you don’t have any assurance of salvation, I feel sorry for you bro.
x
Well now we are making some progress, from relegating it to being a a Protestant slur as if it began after the Reformation, to acknowledging, after substantiation showed otherwise, that "the term has its place."
You just want ME to get 666!!!
You sound as biased a a black dude who claims to be able to say NIGGA with impunity while not ALLOWING white guys to say NIGGER.
Totally racist; but they do not see it that way.
Please; illustrate just where in Scripture the teaching "that we are saved by faith" plus.
1 John 5:13
“I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.
The Latin probably has THIS attached to the end of the verse shown:
...as long as you follow the OTHER rules set down by Rome.
But...
Sorry, but do you actually read what refutes you or must you just parrot the party line? As expressed, if the canons of prior councils were binding then your own scholars could not have debated the status of the Deutros. Nor would the situation be that "Few are found to unequivocally acknowledge their canonicity" as the CE attests.
And since the canon was subject to disagreement, which it was right into Trent, and if that was blasphemous, then you must include Catholic scholars in your charge of blasphemies. Yet which your pope seems to have forgotten to include that in Exsurge Domine.
Moreover, the issue was that the well -substantiated fact of disagreement on the status of certain books was contrary to the premise that the canon was settled in 5th c., and "that the African councils, like any other council, were binding on the Church" and thus establishing uniformity and excluding freedom of disagreement.
That is simply not true was the main issue.
In your mind. But I am not interested in what you think.
Not now (you say) but you were interested enough to challenge what I said, which means you must interact with what challenges your response, unless you just want to engage in argument by mere assertion of Catholic teaching (as you interpret it). As if that settles the matter, based upon the the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility as per Rome (and basically in primary cults).
Which comes back to the questions re the basis for assurance of Truth, but which you also seem to have no interest in actually answering, and thus we must accept your reticence, while yet parroting refuted propaganda of RC polemics. Which marginalizes the poster as unfit for either meaningful exchange or intelligent debate.
Which is what can happen outside Catholic Answers type forums, versus an open forum as this.
I presume that was back in the 50s. The price is probably a hundred bucks by now. 👎
In your mind. But I am not interested in what you think.
Calling all ex Catholics. 😊 AA, you need to cut us ex Catholic, now saved, permanently, forever, some slack. Do you think it’s possible, that the time they taught tact and diplomacy 101, you called in sick? I figured you must have missed that class. You violated transactional analysis, which I learned at the NCO Academy, at Lackland AFB, San Antonio, by golly, TX, when I was a USAF Master Sergeant. I really was a master at my job too. Oh sorry, I guess I shouldn’t toot my own horn. 😆
On the other hand bro, maybe you are doing a great job of driving people away from the OTC, and that is a good thing.
OK, I have two Catholics here now. It am interpreting, oops, sorry, explaining some scripture to them. It’s a beautiful thing. 👍
Mark, dontcha know?
We don’t interpret Scripture.
We read it and tell people what is says.
Matter of fact, usually I just post it and let it speak for itself and I *STILL* get accused of *interpreting* it with a Prot bent.
Heh, maybe they’re just seeing for themselves that it *sounds* like Protestant doctrine because it IS Protestant doctrine. Prots take their doctrine from Scripture, not fabricated fantasy renamed *sacred tradition*.
But then again, Catholicism is good at renaming things so they can get away with sinning.
I don’t know about other Catholics, but when I was a catholic, on the Roman hamster wheel of guilt, what I tried to do, was sin to my hear’s content, up to, but not including mortal sins. I tried to limit my sins, to venial sins, but I didn’t want to commit any mortal sins. I gradually found out that my favorite sins, really were mortal sins, and that spoiled all my fun. After awhile, I just couldn’t resist sinning, and I no longer cared if they were mortal sins or venial sins. I committed so many mortal sins, if I had a dial meter, to record them, someone could have used it as a fan, cuz it spun so fast. 😁 Now, I will struggle with sin, but as a Catholic. I just sinned till I was blue in the face. I suspect most do, but the only sin, that I love to commit, which is not a sin, is the “grave sin of presumption.” I enjoy my presumption of Heaven. Can you see me quaking in my boots, worrying about it? 😊 Not hardly. I am also looking forward to talking to St Martin Luther. I heard his wife was a former catholic nun. We can also talk to the men of Ninevah and the Queen of Sheba. It will be a grand reunion, while many cultists, are cast into outer darkness. where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 👎
Luke 6:26. Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets.
Here is a Prot bent. If they speak ill of you, that’s a good thing. It means your bomb bay doors are open, as you are over the target. Wear their scorn, like a badge of honor. In watered down language, if they don’t like you much, they didn’t like Him much either. 👍😇
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.