Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pope Francis Asks Protestants to Forgive Catholics for Persecution
The Catholic Herald (UK) ^ | 1/26/16 | CNS

Posted on 01/27/2016 6:19:11 AM PST by marshmallow

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-123 next last
To: Zionist Conspirator
like to think I lack the chutzpah to call G-d a liar. Does that answer your question?

No. If one were raised Fundamentalist Protestant, converted to Catholic, and then renounced Jesus as Messiah to dabble as a Gentile proselyte in Judaism would it be reasonable to infer such a one may not be a sure and certain interpreter of the holy scriptures, and was still in need of true answers to the soul's burning questions ?

The Old Testament

121 The Old Testament is an indispensable part of Sacred Scripture. Its books are divinely inspired and retain a permanent value,92 for the Old Covenant has never been revoked.

122 Indeed, "the economy of the Old Testament was deliberately so oriented that it should prepare for and declare in prophecy the coming of Christ, redeemer of all men."93 "Even though they contain matters imperfect and provisional,"94 the books of the Old Testament bear witness to the whole divine pedagogy of God's saving love: these writings "are a storehouse of sublime teaching on God and of sound wisdom on human life, as well as a wonderful treasury of prayers; in them, too, the mystery of our salvation is present in a hidden way."95

123 Christians venerate the Old Testament as true Word of God. The Church has always vigorously opposed the idea of rejecting the Old Testament under the pretext that the New has rendered it void (Marcionism).

41 posted on 01/27/2016 11:06:55 AM PST by af_vet_1981 (The bus came by and I got on, That's when it all began.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: impimp

"I was extrapolating one time ...

...but then I realized that I was going way past where I should have been."

42 posted on 01/27/2016 11:12:50 AM PST by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

Yep.

It doesn’t sy they baptized the dead people in their graves, either.

Infant baptism is completely unbiblical - unfortunately, lots of the midstream “protestants” have an infant baptism hangup as well.

Luths, Presbys, Angs, etc.... they never quite got around to finishing a Biblical Reformation.

They still have one foot in Rome and one foot.... wherever.


43 posted on 01/27/2016 11:15:35 AM PST by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: impimp
Is your religion opposed to the death penalty?

There is nothing wrong with the death penalty. There is something entirely wrong with burning to death those that disagree with you.

I would not be surprised that a Muslim would kill because of a disagreement, but I had hope Catholics had moved past this. Very sad.

44 posted on 01/27/2016 11:20:21 AM PST by Tao Yin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
Infant baptism is completely unbiblical - unfortunately, lots of the midstream “protestants” have an infant.

I understand it is not part of your faith community's modern tradition. Your tradition notwithstanding, where in the scriptures is baptism of little ones explicitly forbidden ?

45 posted on 01/27/2016 11:25:55 AM PST by af_vet_1981 (The bus came by and I got on, That's when it all began.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Tao Yin

Killing those who disagree with you is wrong? In a just war people are killed and it is not a sin. Perhaps your religion reserves the death penalty for murderers. That is not the current view in the United States (treason for example). The Catholic Church, as far as I know, does not say that the death penalty is intrinsically evil if it is used for non-murderers.


46 posted on 01/27/2016 11:48:02 AM PST by impimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Campion
Your whole screed is missing an important fact,....The RC church started when Roman Caesars took it over. That's why they call it Roman catholic. It was when Rome took the church in about 400 AD that the church became Roman. I don't want to be mean, but Catholics aren't Christians according to the Bible. The church fell to government control where Rome mixed Babylon idol worship and other forbidden rites in with the true religion. Read the Scriptures about the Whore of Babylon and her fate in Revelation. Christians were fed to the lions, crucified, burned, and slaughtered by the sword for literally thousands of years by the RC church.

Your argument is not with me but with God and history.

47 posted on 01/27/2016 11:59:52 AM PST by chuckles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

bump


48 posted on 01/27/2016 12:03:31 PM PST by Albion Wilde (Who can actually defeat the Democrats in 2016? -- the most important thing about all candidates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: impimp
Killing those who disagree with you is wrong? In a just war people are killed and it is not a sin.

Killing those who disagree with you is wrong! What kind of world do you live in?

Treason is a fine reason for the death penalty. The ruler does not bear the sword in vain. But treason is much more than a disagreement.

People die in war. That is what happens.

But I will stand with Luther and condemn Pope Leo X and any Catholic that agrees with him. "That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit." Why would we need to debate this?

You can have your rationalizations that you are doing it for the greater good. You can bemoan the fact that Martin Luther wasn't burned at the stake. You can try to confuse the death penalty by the state with the burning of heretics, but you are wrong and Pope Leo X was wrong.

49 posted on 01/27/2016 12:28:47 PM PST by Tao Yin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

The only thing Francis should be apologizing for is claiming to be Catholic.


50 posted on 01/27/2016 12:53:59 PM PST by piusv (The Spirit of Christ hasn't refrained from using separated churches as means of salvation:VII heresy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981

“I understand it is not part of your faith community’s modern tradition.”

That is quite a liberal catch phrase. I would never use it.

I get my teaching from the Bible.

Believe me, for 23 years, I got enough from Rome to fill my craw for a long, long, time.


51 posted on 01/27/2016 12:56:22 PM PST by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

>>No baby or child is baptized in Acts 18:8.

How can you say that with authority?


52 posted on 01/27/2016 1:47:36 PM PST by Bryanw92 (Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92

“How can you say that with authority?”

I don’t need any authority to point out there is no child or baby mentioned in the passage.

If there is an invisible baby there, it doesn’t even mention anyone hearing the cries.

I think it best never to build a doctrine based on an invisible baby.


53 posted on 01/27/2016 1:50:38 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion (As a representative of Earth, I officially welcome Global Warming to our planet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
... I get my teaching from the Bible.

If that were true you could produce the scriptures that explicitly forbid baptism for little ones instead of relying on modern traditions.

54 posted on 01/27/2016 1:51:19 PM PST by af_vet_1981 (The bus came by and I got on, That's when it all began.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

>>I don’t need any authority to point out there is no child or baby mentioned in the passage.

There are no women explicitly mentioned either.

What does “entire household” mean to you. If a house burns down at you get the entire household out, would you leave the babies behind to burn?


55 posted on 01/27/2016 1:54:40 PM PST by Bryanw92 (Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981

“Your tradition notwithstanding, where in the scriptures is baptism of little ones explicitly forbidden ?”

Ah, back to an argument from silence. Can’t find a basis for a teaching? Make it up and pretend it’s sanctioned.

The Scriptures teach believers to be baptized. They never teach non-believers (including infants) be baptized. By claiming infant baptism, you are adding to the teaching of believers baptism.

Under the theory of “the Scriptures don’t explicitly forbid it” you may consider adding some other key doctrines, like...

Baptizing dogs, cats and hamsters. Scripture doesn’t forbid it.

I would caution you about baptizing cats thought. From experience, I can tell you they are not Christians and they do not appreciate immersion.


56 posted on 01/27/2016 1:58:04 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion (As a representative of Earth, I officially welcome Global Warming to our planet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92
"There are no women explicitly mentioned either." No need. Believers are to be baptized, regardless of gender. "What does “entire household” mean to you. If a house burns down at you get the entire household out, would you leave the babies behind to burn?" So you are arguing pets should be baptized also now... I do see you have to create a circumstance to try to prove a baby was even present. Yet the teaching of infant baptism requires an invisible baby to be assumed present. Based on what? Many households had babies? Did this one? Ah, unfortunately, back to silence. All we know is that *in this instance*, as recorded history, this "household" was baptized, indicating they believed. Babies don't believe. Even invisible babies. Nor can we hear their cries.
57 posted on 01/27/2016 2:02:13 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion (As a representative of Earth, I officially welcome Global Warming to our planet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
Your tradition notwithstanding, where in the scriptures is baptism of little ones explicitly forbidden ?

Okay, Catholic Tradition holds that Peter was the first Pope, right? So on the day of Pentecost, when the men in Jerusalem saw the outpouring of the Holy Ghost on the disciples, they were convicted of their sin and asked what they had to do to be saved.

What did Peter tell them? "Repent and be baptized every one of you for the remission of your sins." So if baptism is supposed to follow repentance, how can an infant be baptized?

58 posted on 01/27/2016 2:05:15 PM PST by CA Conservative (Texan by birth, Californian by circumstance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative
What did Peter tell them? "Repent and be baptized every one of you for the remission of your sins." So if baptism is supposed to follow repentance, how can an infant be baptized?

By that logic only Jewish men could have "remission of sins" and "receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them. But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. And he laid his hands on them, and departed thence.

Matthew, Catholic chapter nineteen, Protestant verses thirteen to fifteen,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James

59 posted on 01/27/2016 3:28:38 PM PST by af_vet_1981 (The bus came by and I got on, That's when it all began.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981

I have no disagreement with the verse you quoted, but it has nothing to do with infant baptism.


60 posted on 01/27/2016 3:36:26 PM PST by CA Conservative (Texan by birth, Californian by circumstance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-123 next last

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.

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