Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: OLD REGGIE

You seem to say: Feeney was not excommunicated for heresy, but for disobedience, THEREFORE his teaching was not heretical.

This does not follow. There are plenty of heretics running around who have never been excommunicated for ANYTHING.

Feeneyism is a heresy, and a particularly harmful one. It stems from, and fosters, neurotic anger and fear. It scandalizes people and drives them away from the Catholic Church, because it is contrary to common sense and the gospel.


545 posted on 07/15/2007 1:31:02 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 541 | View Replies ]


To: Arthur McGowan
You seem to say: Feeney was not excommunicated for heresy, but for disobedience, THEREFORE his teaching was not heretical.

This does not follow. There are plenty of heretics running around who have never been excommunicated for ANYTHING.

Feeneyism is a heresy, and a particularly harmful one. It stems from, and fosters, neurotic anger and fear. It scandalizes people and drives them away from the Catholic Church, because it is contrary to common sense and the gospel.

It's not what I "seem" to say. It is a fact. Feeney was excommunicated because he wouldn't "hush" up.

Feeney committed no heresy.

547 posted on 07/15/2007 3:49:23 PM PDT by OLD REGGIE (I am most likely a Biblical Unitarian? Let me be perfectly clear. I know nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 545 | View Replies ]

To: Arthur McGowan
Ok. I guess I am just very confused here. In post 227, it said: For the lurkers and those interested in the full reading of this particular section of the catechism here 'tis
The Church and non-Christians ...
841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."330

To which I have replied, several times to the effect that. "And the teaching is that the Muslim worship the God of Abraham. They do not. That is very obvious to those who know the Shepherds voice. The action of kissing the koran is just an exclamation point to that teaching. How very sad, to say the least, that all those who are to be called RC are to believe in thatm that they HAVE to believe such a lie - the evil, lying, murdering god of Islam is the God of the bible. It doesn't make any difference to me WHO or WHAT teaches that, but it is wrong, dead wrong.But when the Pope merely repeats something that the Church has always taught, Catholics have to agree with him. Not because HE said it, but because the Church has always taught it."

I said that because you had said: But when the Pope merely repeats something that the Church has always taught, Catholics have to agree with him. Not because HE said it, but because the Church has always taught it. So, here we have you now saying: No Catholic has to believe that. No Catholic has to believe that the Pope was correct to kiss the Koran--regardless of what the Pope intended to signify by doing so. Catholics are not required to agree with the Pope about EVERYTHING he says or does. They are required to believe what he says when he repeats what the Church has always believed and taught.

The fact that the RCC catechism teaches that the Muslim god is the same God of the bible is obvious. Then you say that what the "church" teaches is what an RC MUST believe, no matter what the pope does. Here, the pope just affirmed that he believed the koran teaches a god that is the God of the bible (it is not - not at all!). And since you say you must believe what the "church" teaches (and the pope affirmed - about which there was no outcry of blaspheme, as should have been), so now you are saying that all RC's MUST believe that the evil, lying, murdering, adulterous and pedophiles commanding god of Islam is the Almighty God. That sir, is very very wrong.

May I again quote Proverbs 17:15: He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous are both alike an abomination to the LORD.

and also Isaiah 5:20:Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

Like it or not, both the catechism of RCC and the one pope who confirmed it by kissing the Koran, (again, without a cry of outrage) has indeed called evil good. How then can someone have any respect for them as a so-called world leader of Christianity and has any credibility whatsover to say what is a proper "church" and what is not?

548 posted on 07/15/2007 3:53:45 PM PDT by lupie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 545 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson