Theologian: Shared Communion With Protestants Would be Blasphemy and Sacrilege

National Catholic Register ^ | January 2, 2017 | Edward Pentin

[Elsie]

...but the fact is the group has a lot of good information when it is correct...

I have the ability to DETECT correctness on an atomic level.

[Elsie]

[Elsie]

A calling, that I fully intend to yield to. 😀😀😄

You must RESIST; man!!

[Elsie]

Yesterday, in central Indiana, the temperature swung from 62° at 9AM to 32° at 10PM.

BRRRrrr...

[metmom]

As Saint Paul has spiritual children, so does Mr. Luther. Metmom is one of them as she follows his teaching.

Again, you are misrepresenting my position and beliefs. I told you once and you are persisting in repeating the same error.

I follow Jesus, NOT any man.

The fact that some of my beliefs are the same as those held by Luther by no means indicates I am following him. It's a matter of anyone who follows Jesus will find themselves agreeing with anyone else who follows Jesus. It's just going to happen that way but correlation is not causation.

Get it straight this time.

[RegulatorCountry]

We had the opposite recently, near record cold (single digits overnight) over the weekend after a heavy snowfall by our standards, over 8”. Yesterday, it was 70. I suppose the weather pendulum is about to swing wildly back the other way now, lol. Winter in the upper south. Too far north not to have some winter, but too far south for it to stick around for long. Back and forth. Some of the nicest weather we have all year occurs in the dead of winter, low humidity, highs in the 70’s or even 80’s, but good luck predicting just when that might be.

[metmom]

Touche`

[metmom]

FOTFLOL!!!!

That’s going to leave a mark.

[metmom]

DOntcha just love it?

As we say here in CNY, if you don’t like the weather, just wait a minute.

[Elsie]

Saint Paul is my father because I obey him and expect women to cover their head as he taught.

Some of the time...

---

A Jewish Pharisee (Phil 3:5-6; Gal 1:14; 2 Cor 11:22) who believed in the strict observance of God's Law both for himself and for all believing Jews.

 

http://www.loyolapress.com/our-catholic-faith/scripture-and-tradition/jesus-and-the-new-testament/saint-paul-and-the-epistles/a-brief-look-at-st-pauls-life-and-teachings

[Repent and Believe]

The comment was more in the spirit of rejecting the tiresome baseless assertions and assumptions pouring off of the “Elsie’s” keyboard than anything else.

Just examine the author’s numerous flippant comments rebukes and groundless objections versus the solid truths (REAL pearls) reported by “Repent and Beleive”.

[af_vet_1981]

That is somwhat of a red herring against the Jews and their English translation of the Bible by pointing to some other verse's translation. I was not discussing Job, but rather the Hebrew in a particular verse in Genesis which both I and the Jewish link correctly translated as "the woman" Do you have a valid argument against the Hebrew text at the source or the translation of the phrase about which I inquired ?

[Repent and Believe]

You claim scripture is the supreme authority.
Paul had spiritual children.
He was a father.
You misinterpret Jesus’ admonition about using the term “father”.
You reject the church’s teaching on truckloads of doctrine.
You cannot explain how Paul can claim fatherhood in the Bible, like the church teaches, and instead reject both Paul, and the church.
That is more like Mr. Luther than like Jesus, who was subject to his parents, an authority established by God.
If the scriptures is your authority, why do you reject Paul’s interpretation of how women should behave in the church and how the use of the term “father” can be done without disobeying what Jesus meant?

[MHGinTN]

Is it biblical ignorance which leads someone to state the following: "If the scriptures is your authority, why do you reject Paul’s interpretation of how women should behave in the church and how the use of the term “father” can be done without disobeying what Jesus meant?"

IF you ever dig more deeply into the Letters from Paul, taking special note of the community and history of the individuals born again out of that society, you might have the mental ability to discern just why Paul addressed such issues to theose peoples. Might ...

[Mark17]

I am going to that other thread, and see if I can conjure up a good Limerick. I think maybe we have no more pearls left. 😃😀😆

[metmom]

You misinterpret Jesus’ admonition about using the term “father”.

Matthew 23: 8-10 But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers.And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven.Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ.

No, I don't because Jesus commanded His disciples to neither address any spiritual leader as *Father*. Catholics are disobeying a clear, unequivocal command of Jesus by addressing priests as *Father*.

You reject the church’s teaching on truckloads of doctrine.

Yes, because truckloads of CATHOLIC CHURCH doctrine are wrong in that they do NOT line up with Scripture.

I don't reject Scripture. I reject the Catholics twisting of Scripture to support the doctrines they have invented.

You cannot explain how Paul can claim fatherhood in the Bible, like the church teaches, and instead reject both Paul, and the church.

Sure because claiming fatherhood in the sense that Paul did is NOT addressing him by the title *Father Paul*.

That is more like Mr. Luther than like Jesus, who was subject to his parents, an authority established by God.

Your opinion has been duly noted and you are entitled to it.

But it means and proves nothing.

Where did I reject Scriptural teaching on how women are to behave in church?

Or did you assume that you knew what I meant?

As to being a father and a religious leader going by the title of *Father _____* if you fail to see the difference it's due to the level of indoctrination you have received.

[af_vet_1981]

I doubt Latin will be spoken in Heaven, and neither will Arabic.

Note the Latin and multitude of tongues.

And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was Jesus Of Nazareth The King Of The Jews. This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.


---


After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.

John, Catholic chapter nineteen, Protestant verses nineteen to twenty,
Revelation, Catholic chapter seven, Protestant verses nine to ten,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James

[Repent and Believe]

“... I reject Scriptural teaching on how women are to behave in church?...”

Do you follow Saint Paul as he also is of Christ, such as these words of his in his letter?

From 1 CORINTHIANS - Chapter 11:1-10

1 Be ye followers of me, as I also am of Christ.

2 Now I praise you, brethren, that in all things you are mindful of me: and keep my ordinances as I delivered them to you.

3 But I would have you know *that the head of every man is Christ: and the head of the woman is the man: and the head of Christ, is God.

4 Every man praying or prophesying with his head covered, disgraceth his head.

5 But every woman praying or prophesying with her head not covered, disgraceth her head: for it is all one as if she were shaven.

6 For if a woman be not covered, let her be shorn. But if it be a shame to a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her cover her head.

7 The man, indeed, ought not to cover his head: because he is the *image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of the man.

8 For the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man.

9 *For the man was not created for the woman, but the woman for the man.

10 Therefore ought the woman to have a power over her head, because of the Angels.

[BlueDragon]

That is somwhat of a red herring against the Jews and their English translation of the Bible by pointing to some other verse's translation.

Say what?

There's is nothing intended "against the Jews", nor anything aimed at Jews in particular, or even should we say -- Jewish scholars more widely, when what you are calling "red herring" was merely comparison of online sources of translations of Hebrew scripture -into- English. AFAICT.

I was not discussing Job, but rather the Hebrew in a particular verse in Genesis which both I and the Jewish link correctly translated as "the woman" Do you have a valid argument against the Hebrew text at the source or the translation of the phrase about which I inquired ?

Uh, helloooo?

The man, dan (dan the man, lol) has ALREADY AGREED with you concerning the definitive article "question". Why all this aimless swimming around in circles, as if we hadn't already arrived? Still scouting, are you? Open the eyes (while still swimming along, of course)

I had agreed with you on the small, precise point, also. Do you remember?

If there be red herring of any type, swimming around these waters right about here and now, those do appear to be (to my own well seasoned, 'old salt' sort, fisherman's eye) from among your own aquarium pets...spawned in fear, I take it...fear of past horrors that can, and have historically, lurked in the deep...

The little innocent fishes are (safely enough) swimming now --in the relatively placid bay which is the religion forum of FreeRepublic. There are small waves here, and there are little birdies (and bigger ones too) pecking at the waters, trying to get themselves a meal, perhaps...but most fishes are safe enough here from big gulping whales that could scoop up little fishes by the ton, for real, for "keepers", to imprison them forever in the dungeons that are their bellies.

...If I'da' seen 'em breezin', I woulda' set.

Meaning, less in commercial fisherman's colloquialism, and instead more understandably;

If I had seen the small disturbances schooling fish can and do make, right near under, and also more particularly, right at the surface of the water (the 'breezing') I would have put a net into the water (set) to surround them. Wrap 'em. Close it up. Then dry it up (bring the net back aboard the boat).

(psst! I did set, then at the last, right here in front of God and everybody, will in ending part of the process --we're getting there-- be rollin' the little fishes back over the corks, and back into the water, on the other side of the web. just wanted to get a better look at 'em, I did ---in order to verify size and species/mix of species. lol)

[Elsie]

Just examine the author’s numerous flippant comments rebukes and groundless objections versus the solid truths (REAL pearls) reported by “Repent and Beleive”.