Posts by daniel1212

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Putin’s Russia is a poor, drunk soccer hooligan

    06/24/2016 4:13:10 AM PDT · 91 of 106
    daniel1212 to NRx
    And our military spending compared to the rest of the world looks pretty overwhelming.

    When considering just total spending for 2014, the U.S. spent more on its military than the next 10 countries combined (2015 was similar). However, when compared to the gross domestic product, or GDP, the U.S. was only #4 in military spending for 2014.[1][4] Below we look at official government spending on military, private contracts, the military industrial complex and Eisenhower, Citizens United, all the jobs created by the military and other benefits, and a host of other related topics that put America’s military spending in perspective. http://factmyth.com/factoids/us-spends-more-on-military-than-any-country/

    At 4% of GDP U.S. spending on defense is tied for 8th world wide. And in a historical context it is far below average. Throughout the 1960s the U.S. spent almost 9% of GDP on defense and even during President Ronald Reagan’s defense build up, military spending topped out at 6%. Considering that the U.S. is actively fighting two wars, if anything this amount is too low. Heritage fellow Mackenzie Eaglen details how President Barack Obama’s most recent budget proposals fail to protect the core defense budget here. http://dailysignal.com/2010/04/05/how-does-u-s-defense-spending-compare-with-other-countries/

  • Putin’s Russia is a poor, drunk soccer hooligan

    06/24/2016 3:28:58 AM PDT · 89 of 106
    daniel1212 to CodeToad

    Consider the source. The Globe is one that published propaganda which would have us believe that the military itself (as well as everything from child discipline to traditional morality) is hardly necessary.

  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/23/2016 6:00:01 PM PDT · 506 of 525
    daniel1212 to Elsie
    Some folks sure don't like to admit the last part; do they?!? But these are written...

    As if oral tradition was God's chosen means of preservation:

    Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever: (Isaiah 30:8)

    And the Lord said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua: for I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. (Exodus 17:14)

    And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites: (Deuteronomy 17:18)

    Thus speaketh the Lord God of Israel, saying, Write thee all the words that I have spoken unto thee in a book. (Jeremiah 30:2)

    Take thee a roll of a book, and write therein all the words that I have spoken unto thee against Israel, and against Judah, and against all the nations, from the day I spake unto thee, from the days of Josiah, even unto this day. (Jeremiah 36:2)

    Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, (Psalms 40:7)

    But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. (Matthew 4:4)

    And 62 other times, "It is written" in the NT.

    Meanwhile you could make quite a compilation of all the inventions justified by invoking And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen. (John 21:25)

  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/22/2016 7:14:15 PM PDT · 492 of 525
    daniel1212 to Elsie
    Edit: But i think the the manner of service was not that of truly intimate contact.
  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/22/2016 7:12:33 PM PDT · 491 of 525
    daniel1212 to Elsie
    There is no record of a marriage without the conjugal part.

    1 Kings 1:1-4 English Standard Version (ESV) 1 Now King David was old and advanced in years. And although they covered him with clothes, he could not get warm. 2 Therefore his servants said to him, “Let a young woman be sought for my lord the king, and let her wait on the king and be in his service. Let her lie in your arms, that my lord the king may be warm.” 3 So they sought for a beautiful young woman throughout all the territory of Israel, and found Abishag the Shunammite, and brought her to the king. 4 The young woman was very beautiful, and she was of service to the king and attended to him, but the king knew her not.

    Which leads to the question as to whether she was a wife, versus a nurse. If we think that being very beautiful means that the manner of service included some sort of intimate contact (in lieu of an electric blanket) then marriage would negate any change of impropriety, and thus provide the an example of an unconsummated marriage. But i think the the manner of service of was that of truly intimate contact.

  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/22/2016 6:59:42 PM PDT · 490 of 525
    daniel1212 to metmom
    It’s not about the incarnation of Jesus. It’s about identifying which of the many Mary’s in Scripture was being referred to.

    There is more than one, due to the Mary of Catholicism.

  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/22/2016 6:59:38 PM PDT · 489 of 525
    daniel1212 to Elsie
    So could you possibly tell us just WHY Rome failed to include so many NECESSARY things in the BIBLE when she compiled it?

    And why it took her over 1700 years to make belief in an event an article of faith. If such was so important then it seems she was negligent in proclaiming it thusly, but in reality it was/is so lacking in early historical testimony that her own scholars opposed it being made an article of faith. But Rome can claim to "remember" what history "forgot."

  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/22/2016 6:59:28 PM PDT · 488 of 525
    daniel1212 to Mrs. Don-o; MHGinTN; metmom; imardmd1
    Our discussions often go off at cross-purposes, because you evidently think I should consider a Catholic doctrine "disproved" if it is not commanded or dispositively proven from the Bible. This is applying a too-narrow criterion.

    That simply will not do, for sanctioning doctrine merely if it is not disproven in the Bible opens up the door for all sorts of cultic teaching or such as the Talmud can provide. Instead the premise is that unless the veracity of something rests upon Scriptural substantiation then it is not to be made binding belief. Which the truths we both affirm do.

    We Catholics believe in Sacred Tradition and in the authority of the Church --- both on Biblical grounds, as the Bible itself teaches both the authority of Sacred Tradition (oral teachings) plus the authority of the Church as such.

    A SS preacher can enjoin obedience to oral teaching of Scriptural Truths, and can also hold to some traditions that are not in Scripture, if consistent with it, but not as binding, but cannot presume to be speaking as wholly inspired of God, nor to be provided new revelation as apostles and NT writers could. And neither does Rome claim to be speaking thusly. Even if she spoke infallibly, that would not make it fully equal with the wholly inspired word of God, which has God as its author, unlike merely "infallible" teaching. But Catholic traditions at issue both lack Scriptural warrant and are contrary to it.

  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/22/2016 6:59:13 PM PDT · 487 of 525
    daniel1212 to Mrs. Don-o; MHGinTN; metmom; imardmd1
    Rome" (actually, the regional synods of Hippo and Carthage) compiled the Canon, based on what the churches had already accepted in practice as inspired by God and suitable for the Liturgy. Jerome (JeROME!) did the same: but

    But rejected apocryphal books,as did Mary others until Trent provided the first indisputable canon for RCs - after the death of Luther.

    Because they didn't transcribe into text everything they were teaching by word and example. Nor did they even write down everything Our Lord taught by word and example. St. John answers the question nicely: John 21:25 "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written [not form] every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."

    Which simply does not mean that there is another body of wholly inspired Truth to be proclaimed by Rome under her the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility as per Rome (for which she invokes Tradition). And which is contrary to premise that writing was God means of continued preservation, and which contains, in its formal and material sense combined, what is needed.

    St. John speaks to this issue nicely

    And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. (John 20:30-31)

  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/22/2016 6:59:02 PM PDT · 486 of 525
    daniel1212 to Mrs. Don-o; MHGinTN; metmom; imardmd1
    You ignore the third possibility again: that she was a consecrated woman. In which case it would have required the consent of her father, if the vow was made before betrothed to Joseph, or the consent of her husband if done after. And being continent in marriage would have likely been harder for Joseph than Mary. But it is simply not consistent with the character of the Spirit not to include this claimed exception to the norm, which He abundantly does even for much lesser characters (from age to strength to sinlessness,etc.), and thus states that Joseph knew her not till she bought forth her first born (in distinction from #2..). But Joseph receives hardly any credit, relative to the blasphemous hyper exaltation of the Mary of Catholicism far above that which is written.

    There are so-called clinics ---I knew of one years ago in Oakland, and there are many more today --- whose major "health service" consists of impregnating women who have never had sex with a man. Lesbian motherhood centers. And who knows how many are not lesbians, but married women, simply being impregnated outside of their marriages? it's certainly a reality today. How does this escape your moral evaluation?

    Because as explained, it is spurious analogy, for what man physically does is not the same thing as God supernaturally doing so, which is why He could use man to provide the material for a women's body, and could be both a creator-father to Mary as we her husband as Cath theology makes Him. To charge God with adultery under the premise that He was engaging in a form of a physical conjugal act is close to Mormonic theology.

  • Trump shrugs off campaign money woes

    06/22/2016 4:34:36 AM PDT · 63 of 63
    daniel1212 to forgotten man
    Don’t forget that Trump’s mother was Scottish. Those people throw nickles around like manhole covers.

    Now that is a good one! Being half Scottish it fits, though i think Jewish mothers have them beat as far as ethnic generalities go.

  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/21/2016 2:36:09 PM PDT · 341 of 525
    daniel1212 to Mrs. Don-o

    See above. Supernaturally making a virgin pregnant is an activity reserved to God, who Joseph and Mary owed all to, and is simply not that of adultery.

  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/21/2016 2:30:16 PM PDT · 340 of 525
    daniel1212 to Mrs. Don-o; metmom
    I never said He had physical "intercourse" with her. He is not a biological male!! (Yow! The things you object to --- that I didn't say ---are really mounting up here.)... Being impregnated is a "conjugal" thing --- related to the marriage covenant --- whether or not it involves intercourse.

    I did not say He had physical "intercourse" with her. I, nor engaged in any human activity, which is one reason why the adultery change is bogus. A supernatural spiritual act of God is not that an insemination by man, as being impregnated by God is a creative act, not a physically "conjugal" thing and as the author of life God can both give such as well as remove it.

    In seeking to defend a Catholic belief that is nowhere in Scripture (and would require the approval of her head), you are equating physical actions by humans and laws that that deal with them with a supernatural spiritual act by God who is not bound by them. And in the supernatural realm God can both be a creator/father and spiritual one and a husband at the same time, while to be consistent with your reasoning, then one could say that God engaged in incest since as a creator/father he engaged in a conjugal act with his daughter!

    Let me give you an example.

    It is simply a spurious analogy, since aside from the fact that there is more to two persons becoming one than simply receiving seed, what man physically does is not the same thing as if God does so, who could both supernaturally impregnate a women as well as take it away without being either an adulterer or murderer.

  • Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up? A Meditation on the Gospel for the 12th Sunday of the Year

    06/21/2016 7:21:27 AM PDT · 12 of 13
    daniel1212 to jafojeffsurf
    Enjoy Your Journey, I Will Pray for your Soul and those you infect.

    You mean pray to Mary and or a host of other created beings in Heaven that the Holy Spirit never shows anyone making supplication to amid the approx. 200 prayers He provides, except by pagans? The "infection" is viral and the cure is the Christ of Scripture and His wholly inspired words therein, not the errors of Catholicism.

    Instead, Caths basically say,

    As for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the name of the Lord, we will not hearken unto thee. But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes... (Jeremiah 44:16-17)

  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/20/2016 8:50:38 PM PDT · 309 of 525
    daniel1212 to metmom
    Mary would not be "full of grace" nor "blessed" nor a good woman at all, if she were a liar; nor would the Incarnation of Our Lord be predicated upon a lie or upon God adulterously taking a married woman, "understood in the normal sense" as being married to someone else. God is all-honorable and all-just. He doesn't "do" adultery. Therefore though Mary was in one sense of the word, "legally" married to Joseph, we can safely presuppose that both Mary and Joseph knew she was not married married to him "understood in the normal sense"

    The Catholic's problem is that if placing Jesus in Mary's womb were enough for a charge against God of adultery, they you have a god who committed adultery. Why? Because Mary was already betrothed to Joseph when the angel came. She was already legally and technically married to him. God KNEW that. He knew that Mary was technically and legally a man's wife. God had two choices. Impregnate a single woman or impregnate a married woman. IN EITHER CASE, then, God, by Catholic reasoning, could be charged with sexual sin. And this nonsense about a *special* marriage arrangement is total assumption and speculation without a shred of support for it anywhere. On the contrary, the more Catholic push it and rationalize, they worse their position becomes because it can be refuted on so many levels. Your arguments just. don't. work.

    No they do not.

  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/20/2016 8:49:58 PM PDT · 308 of 525
    daniel1212 to ealgeone
    If the catholic claim of Mary's perpetual virginity is true she entered the marriage under false pretenses as outlined by the pope which would render their marriage null if we're understanding this claim.

    Not to worry: that is only a valid basis for annulment if the pope did not grant a dispensation, who is as God, and thus since Mary had God's sanction then it was as good as the pope's. But David and Abishag the Shunammite is another case, married or not.

  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/20/2016 8:43:05 PM PDT · 307 of 525
    daniel1212 to Mrs. Don-o; ealgeone; metmom
    Mary would not be "full of grace" nor "blessed" nor a good woman at all, if she were a liar; nor would the Incarnation of Our Lord be predicated upon a lie or upon God adulterously taking a married woman, "understood in the normal sense" as being married to someone else. God is all-honorable and all-just. He doesn't "do" adultery. Therefore though Mary was in one sense of the word, "legally" married to Joseph, we can safely presuppose that both Mary and Joseph knew she was not married married to him "understood in the normal sense" --- and therefore she was not lying to Joseph nor guilty of marital fraud towards him. A mutual vow of chastity (I presume that here you actually mean abstinence) would not be false if Joseph had known and agreed. If he did NOT know, then, yes, it would be marital fraud on the part of Mary; and God would be committing adultery.

    Your premise and reasoning are clearly in error. That Mary and Joseph knew she was not married married to him "understood in the normal sense" is simply not Scriptural, as the "normal sense" Scripturally is that being betrothed mean that sexual relations with someone else was the capital crime of adultery, and thus Joseph sought to put Mary away privately. How can you contradict Scripture to support Rome?

    The penalty for consensual relations with a betrothed women:

    23 If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; 24 Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

    Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily. (Matthew 1:18-19)

    However, God never even said He was married to Mary, nor had any sexual relations with her, but her impregnation was purely was spiritual means, thus the whole adultery charge, which is based upon laws of physical relations, is invalid, and in a word, bogus. . God can also talk to a women in private, behind her husband's back or consent if He wanted to, without any impropriety.

    Moreover can marry a command the killing of innocents, and marry a wife again who was put away, contrary to the law, (Jeremiah 3:1) as He can violate certain laws given to man, since being omniscient and almighty, then He alone can make such work out for the greater good, which is consistent with the intent of the Law, which man cannot presume to be able to do an unjust

    They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become another man's, shall he return unto her again? shall not that land be greatly polluted? but thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet return again to me, saith the Lord. (Jeremiah 3:1)

    Moreover, according to OT law, a vow that a women took was subject to the binding or loosing of her husband, or if not married, to her father. (Num. 30)

    This is why the Muslims do not believe in the Gospel account of the Incarnation. They say it casts God as an adulterer.

    Nonsense for the above reasons, but they make God after their own image. As do Mormons.

  • Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up? A Meditation on the Gospel for the 12th Sunday of the Year

    06/20/2016 5:44:25 AM PDT · 10 of 13
    daniel1212 to jafojeffsurf
    daniel1212 I believe you have had this conversation several hundred times here before and if you wish to follow the father of Chaos and believe there is No Authority left here by Our Lord, the Father of Order, continue to your own spiritual demise. For if there is No Authority left here to Guide you/us then Mine is equal to yours, however I will humble myself to that which I know the Lord has Left, the Holy Catholic Church, which by the way right now has the Hounds of Hell at its gates… God Bless

    Your vain unscriptural assertion is a poor substitute for a valid argument. If mere unity is the basis for for determining validity then certain cults win the prize, while whatever unity Rome can claim is very limited and largely on paper. For the basis for determining what what one truly believes is upon what one does and effects, (Ja. 2:18; Mt. 7:20) and and in real life "the Holy Catholic Church" exists in divisions, being a mixture of variegated beliefs, with your brethren even including prohomosexual, proabortion public figures as members in life and in death, and those that elect them are the near majority. These are your brethren and you must own them, while for that reason alone we come out from among them in obedience to Scripture, while in addition Rome is critically unscriptural and has become as the gates of Hell for most of her multitudes.

    The fact is that real division is seen under both the Roman model as well as under SS, while the limited unity of the NT church was not based upon the Roman model, but was a result of establishment of authority by Scriptural substantiation in word and in power, and was under such manifest apostles of God such as we do not see today, and Rome's so-called apostolic successors even fail of the qualifications and credentials of manifest Biblical apostles. (Acts 1:21,22; 1Cor. 9:1; Gal. 1:11,12; 2Cor. 6:1-0; 12:12) Meanwhile, those who hold most strongly to the authority of Scripture are yet the most unified in basic (conservative) beliefs, evidencing the basic unity of Christ in them and they in Christ, (cf. Jn. 17:21) thus both devout RCs and the world treats them as their single most manifest threat.

    In addition, the charge of chaos (a most manifest formal example of which was Rome for a period during the 14th and 15th centuries) depends upon a definition of "Protestant" that is so broad as to be basically meaningless, while SS affirms "it belongeth to synods and councils, ministerially to determine controversies of faith." (Westminster Confession) But not as possessing the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility, which is unseen and unnecessary in Scripture.

    If you would like to debate these then do so.

    And under the Roman model, in which the one duty of the flock is to follow the pastors as docile sheep, means that when leadership goes South then so do those who follow them, unless they essentially become like evangelicals, and ascertain the validity of teaching by examining the basis for it. In contrast, liberals manifest they can feel quite comfortable in Catholicism versus evangelical churches. Certainly our scope of disagreements and lack of centralized organizational leadership is a problem, but it is not one Catholicism can solve, for her declension required division, and you can hardly expect Bible Christians to join your unholy amalgam and with its unScriptural inventions.

  • Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up? A Meditation on the Gospel for the 12th Sunday of the Year

    06/19/2016 2:59:48 PM PDT · 7 of 13
    daniel1212 to jafojeffsurf; redleghunter; Springfield Reformer; kinsman redeemer; BlueDragon; metmom; boatbums; ..
    “And thus orthodoxy is ensured in and through Simon Peter and his successors. To those who object to this and who prefer democracy or consensus leadership, look to the confusion and silence that they produce in a situation like this and see that they are found wanting.

    Actually, the life of the church in the NT simply does not testify to it looking to Peter as the first of a line of infallible popes reigning supreme in Rome (nor does early history). Peter instead was the street-level, non-exalted, non-assertive leader among brethren, the first to preach to the Gentiles and use the keys to the kingdom (the gospel), and mentioned in particular as one who was married, and who wrote as one with a general pastoral role, yet was the only apostle to be publicly rebuked, and named 2nd one of the 3 who appeared to be pillars by Paul, after James who provided the definitive judgment in the controversy the ecumenical meeting in Acts 15 settled.

    And submission to Peter is nowhere reminded or commended, despite the many commendations and commendations, nor are any preparations for a successor manifest. And whose ministry was eclipsed by Paul after that, and who did not come behind any apostle in power, and did many unique and other things expected of a pope.

  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/19/2016 2:42:04 PM PDT · 131 of 525
    daniel1212 to ReaganGeneration2
    If a pope wanted to strengthen Catholic Marriage, he’d publish a clear and unambiguous scripture- and tradition-based doctrine, and start a program that included re-formation and periodic renewal of vows. Then the renewals would be considered a sacrament, and take away the “defective consent” argument and all other grounds for annulment.

    In Catholicism, unambiguous scripture- and tradition-based doctrine can be two different things. For the presumption of Rome is that church law is the supreme law, as it cannot contradict Scripture, if she does say so herself, and as shown above, the one duty of the flock is to simply follow the pastors, who in their time provide the interpretation of church teaching, as V2 did and this pope is.

    But for one of the grounds for annulment, how can a scripture - based doctrine invalidate a marriage if one of the parties has received sacred orders? Required clerical celibacy is consistent with RC tradition, but not Scripture, in which the normal state of apostles and pastors was that they were married, and those that were not could marry. (1Tim. 3:1-7; 1Co. 9:5).

    Of course, at the same time Rome sanctions marriage though one is said to have made a perpetual vow of chastity, and a marriage that excluded at the time of the wedding the right to children, before there was an "Apostolic See" was there to allow it, which it now requires for such.

    Meanwhile Pope's Comments on Modern Marriage Raise Storm of Criticism

    Vatican Transcript Alters Pope’s Bombshell Remark on Validity of Catholic Marriages

  • We Now Have a Totally Muslim Governent

    06/19/2016 2:26:04 PM PDT · 77 of 79
    daniel1212 to RitaOK
    The information in it is priceless, for the truth and accuracy it contains.

    Accuracy is a priority, for presenting unsubstantiated claims alongside facts impugns the integrity of the poster and his charges. A person looking for substantiation for these various accusations can find:

    John Brennan, current head of the CIA converted to Islam while stationed in Saudi Arabia. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printindividualProfile.asp?indid=2577

    Origins: On 8 March 2013, John Brennan was sworn in as CIA Director. He was nominated by President Barack Obama on 7 January 2013, and in February of that year a rumor began to circulate about Brennan's purported conversion to Islam while he was stationed in Saudi Arabia in the 1990s.

    Objections were raised to Brennan's nomination by lawmakers such as Rand Paul, who filibustered Brennan's confirmation over his prior sanctioning of the use of drones. But a fringe objection echoed outside the Beltway, where Brennan's fitness to serve was questioned due to his supposedly becoming a Muslim while stationed in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The claim's fire was fueled after Brennan was sworn in to his office not on a Bible but on a copy of the Constitution.

    The rumor about Brennan's conversion to Islam coalesced after a 9 February 2013 radio broadcast during which former FBI agent John Guandolo levied the accusation...

    Iterations of the "Brennan is a Muslim" claim have a single thing in common: ex-FBI agent John Guandolo. Guandolo resigned from his position with the Bureau in December 2008 after he was caught engaging in a sexual relationship with a key confidential source in the midst of a corruption investigation of a Louisiana politician. Since then, he has created a burgeoning second career training law enforcement groups to identify potential covert Islamic threats to the United States...

    The only thing approaching proof the former FBI agent had cited in support of his claim is the fact that Brennan once said during a speech that he had "marveled at the majesty of the Hajj." Since the Hajj is an annual pilgrimage undertaken by Muslims to Mecca, a holy city that non-Muslims not are allowed to enter, Guandolo arrived at the extremely far-fetched conclusion that Brennan himself must be a Muslim in order to have marveled at it...

    While it is true that John Brennan was sworn into office using a copy of the U.S. Constitution rather than a Bible, that fact alone is not definitive proof of any particular religious sentiment. Had he sought to conceal his Islamic faith, it's just as likely he would have opted to use a Bible (particularly if he had no intent to uphold the very Constitution on which he swore his oath). - http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/brennan.asp

    Guandolo’s first accusation – that Brennan has brought known terrorist operatives into the United States government purposefully – is both deeply serious and somewhat difficult to verify. Throughout the radio interview, Guandolo flings this accusation about, but never once names a single name...

    This brings us to Guandolo’s second accusation against Brennan – that he has proven with his own words that he is ignorant of Al Qaeda’s strategy and also considers Al Qaeda the sole enemy in the War on Terror..A video cited in the interview with Trento is especially instructive here..

    “For more than three decades, I have also had the tremendous fortune to travel the world, and as part of that experience, to learn about the goodness and beauty of Islam,” Brennan says. “In Saudi Arabia, I saw how our Saudi partners fulfilled their duties as custodians of the two holy Mosques of Mecca and Medina. I marveled at the majesty of the Hajj, and the devotion of those who fulfill their duty as Muslims by making that pilgrimage. And in all my travels, the city I have come to love most is Al Quds — Jerusalem — where three great faiths come together.” Is this a problematic quote? Possibly, if you view Islam itself as an enemy of the United States, or worry about the positive references to Saudi Arabia (whose royal family subscribes to a particularly hard line brand of Islamism), but it is not an admission of treason. It also loses some power when matched against Brennan’s actual record, which does not read like the record of a poorly concealed closet Islamist.

    Why? Because when Brennan first came up as a nominee for CIA Director, back in 2008, his main critics came from the Left. In fact, so pervasive was the left-wing criticism of Brennan that President Obama was forced to withdraw his name from consideration. Again, why? Because Brennan had supported the “enhanced interrogation techniques” pioneered by President George W. Bush and was seen as unacceptably hawkish on civil liberties. He even served under President Bush as interim director of the National Counterterrorism Center. Finally, his nomination is even now being attacked by the ACLU over his support for fierce interrogations and the Obama administration’s drone strike program. After his confirmation hearings, even the Weekly Standard expressed grudging admiration for Brennan’s knowledge of the issues. News sources that lend a sympathetic ear to Islamism, on the other hand, such as Al Jazeera, have criticized and lambasted Brennan.

    Which brings us, finally, to the accusation that Brennan is a Muslim. This one is impossible to prove or disprove, except to take Guandolo’s word on it, since his sources are anonymous. Equally impossible to prove or disprove is the allegation that Brennan’s conversion was the product of foreign counterintelligence, without speaking to Guandolo’s sources. Given that those sources will not talk to anyone else, Guandolo’s position is fairly precarious. - http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/11/rumor-check-ex-fbi-agent-claims-obamas-cia-nominee-is-really-a-secret-muslim-recruited-by-saudis/

    This comment that followed though is true;

    Ellman - Feb. 12, 2013 at 6:11pm I suspect that if Mr. Brennan were an Evangelical Christian that his beliefs would be probed intently by the Senate. No one would object to a hostile interrogation. If fact, the mainstream media would be frantically urging that he not be considered for the post because of his religious affiliation. Interesting, is it not, that Islam and Muslims are almost a taboo subject, particularly in Washington DC, as was the case with Communists in the 1950′s. So what is it that makes DC hostile to Christianity but friendly and politically correct to Communists and Islamists?

    Obama's top adviser, Valerie Jarrett, is a Muslim who was born in Iran where her parents still live.

    As for Iranian-born (to American parents) Chicago lawyer with a degree in psychology Valerie Jarrett, it would be hard for her parents to live in Iran since Dr. Bowman died of cancer on September 28, 2011, at the University of Chicago Medical Center, at the age of 88 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_E._Bowman. Meanwhile his wife currently is the Irving B. Harris Professor of Child Development at Erikson Institute in Chicago, Illinois. - http://www.erikson.edu/about/directory/barbara-bowman/. Valerie was born in Shiraz; but she returned to the U.S. with her parents in 1962 (when she was five years old), and her parents spent the rest of their working lives residing in the Chicago area (as did Valerie until she joined the Obama administration in 2008). - http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslimgovernment.asp

    As for being Muslim (not simply pro-Muslim/anti-Israel), evidence for this is a statement attributed to her,

    I am an Iranian by birth and of my Islamic Faith. I am also an American citizen and I seek to help change America to be a more Islamic country. My faith guides me and I feel it is going well in the transition of using freedom of religion in America against itself…

    However, this oft-repeated quote has been unable to be substantiated. But what is credibly testified to is that,

    She does have tremendous access to the President. She is noted for being fiercely loyal to him as seen in a Wall Street Journal article ( http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB121055336572783989 ). This can be seen in her willingness to say things aren’t particularly true in order to defend President Obama, such as when she said “Nothing in #Obamacare forces people out of their health plans.” Of course, this was not at all true, as Politifact points out, since a number of Americans lost their health care coverage because it didn’t meet the minimum standards that the Affordable Care Act set. - http://www.rumorcheck.org/wordpress/?p=136

    And,

    Like Barack Obama, Jarrett’s initial experience was not as an American, but an American/Muslim hybrid. According to an American Spectator report in August of 2008, the Obama campaign had initiated an aggressive program to hide Jarrett’s Iranian background. This program received significant help from certain media figures who were only too happy to comply with the Obama camp’s request that Jarrett’s Middle East ties were not made a public matter – even as Iranian.com declared Jarrett its “Iranian of the Day” that same month of August. Also during that same time period, Barack Obama admitted to the New York Times that, “I trust her (Jarrett) to speak for me, particularly when we’re dealing with delicate issues” and that he ran every important decision by her first.

    J http://blackquillandink.com/?page_id=8393

    Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) files obtained by Judicial Watch reveal that the dad, maternal grandpa and father-in-law of President Obama’s trusted senior advisor, Valerie Jarrett, were hardcore Communists under investigation by the U.S. government.

    Jarrett’s dad, pathologist and geneticist Dr. James Bowman, had extensive ties to Communist associations and individuals, his lengthy FBI file shows. In 1950 Bowman was in communication with a paid Soviet agent named Alfred Stern, who fled to Prague after getting charged with espionage. Bowman was also a member of a Communist-sympathizing group called the Association of Internes and Medical Students. After his discharge from the Army Medical Corps in 1955, Bowman moved to Iran to work, the FBI records show.

    According to Bowman’s government file the Association of Internes and Medical Students is an organization that “has long been a faithful follower of the Communist Party line” and engages in un-American activities. Bowman was born in Washington D.C. and had deep ties to Chicago, where he often collaborated with fellow Communists. JW also obtained documents on Bowman from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) showing that the FBI was brought into investigate him for his membership in a group that “follows the communist party line.” The Jarrett family Communist ties also include a business partnership between Jarrett’s maternal grandpa, Robert Rochon Taylor, and Stern, the Soviet agent associated with her dad.

    Jarrett’s father-in-law, Vernon Jarrett, was also another big-time Chicago Communist, according to separate FBI files obtained by JW as part of a probe into the Jarrett family’s Communist ties. For a period of time Vernon Jarrett appeared on the FBI’s Security Index and was considered a potential Communist saboteur who was to be arrested in the event of a conflict with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). His FBI file reveals that he was assigned to write propaganda for a Communist Party front group in Chicago that would “disseminate the Communist Party line among…the middle class.”

    It’s been well documented that Valerie Jarrett, a Chicago lawyer and longtime Obama confidant, is a liberal extremist who wields tremendous power in the White House. Faithful to her roots, she still has connections to many Communist and extremist groups, including the Muslim Brotherhood. Jarrett and her family also had strong ties to Frank Marshal Davis, a big Obama mentor and Communist Party member with an extensive FBI file.

    JW has exposed Valerie Jarrett’s many transgressions over the years, including her role in covering up a scandalous gun-running operation carried out by the Department of Justice (DOJ). Last fall JW obtained public records that show Jarrett was a key player in the effort to cover up that Attorney General Eric Holder lied to Congress about the Fast and Furious, a disastrous experiment in which the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF) allowed guns from the U.S. to be smuggled into Mexico so they could eventually be traced to drug cartels. Instead, federal law enforcement officers lost track of hundreds of weapons which have been used in an unknown number of crimes, including the murder of a U.S. Border Patrol agent in Arizona.

    In 2008 JW got documents linking Valerie Jarrett, who also served as co-chairman of Obama’s presidential transition team, to a series of real estate scandals, including several housing projects operated by convicted felon and Obama fundraiser/friend Antoin “Tony” Rezko. According to the documents obtained from the Illinois Secretary of State, Valerie Jarrett served as a board member for several organizations that provided funding and support for Chicago slum projects operated by Rezko. - http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2015/06/communism-in-jarretts-family/

    Hillary Clinton's top adviser, Huma Abedin is a Muslim, whose mother and brother are still involved in the now outlawed Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt!

    Assistant Secretary for Policy Development for Homeland Security, Arif Aikhan, is a Muslim.

    True. In 2006, Alikhan was named deputy mayor for homeland security and public safety for the city of Los Angeles, at which time he stated:

    A Muslim born to Pakistani and Indian parents, Alikhan said his personal background will inform his role as City Hall's leading counter-terrorism official. "I hope my experience as a Muslim will help [me] address one of the most important issues of our" time, he said. "I think the Muslim community is just as concerned about terrorism as any other." - http://articles.latimes.com/2006/sep/23/local/me-homeland23

    The issue however, is how that translates into support for terrorism in the light of his work:

    Alikhan's efforts to hire 1,000 new LAPD officers resulted in the highest deployment level in LAPD history before Alikhan left for Washington. Additionally, Mr. Alikhan significantly advanced the Mayor’s emergency preparedness and counter-terrorism initiatives, substantially increased cooperation with federal, state and local law enforcement agencies, led the effort to create the L.A. Fire Department's Professional Standards Division, and helped secure over $400 million in homeland security and public safety grants for the Los Angeles region. - Alikhan's efforts to hire 1,000 new LAPD officers resulted in the highest deployment level in LAPD history before Alikhan left for Washington. Additionally, Mr. Alikhan significantly advanced the Mayor’s emergency preparedness and counter-terrorism initiatives, substantially increased cooperation with federal, state and local law enforcement agencies, led the effort to create the L.A. Fire Department's Professional Standards Division, and helped secure over $400 million in homeland security and public safety grants for the Los Angeles region.

    Assistant Secretary for Policy Development for Homeland Security, Arif Aikhan, is a Muslim. http://www.factcheck.org/2010/11/muslims-appointed-to-homeland-security/

    This is true, and additionally Since 2015, Abedin has served as vice chairwoman for Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign for president... Hillary Clinton has been described as a mentor, and a mother figure to Huma. In 2010, at Abedin's wedding to Weiner, Clinton said: "I have one daughter. But if I had a second daughter, it would (be) Huma." During a trip that Clinton and Abedin made to Saudi Arabia, Abedin’s mother, Saleha Mahmood Abedin, said to Clinton: "Hillary, you have spent more time with my daughter than I have in the past 15 years. I’m jealous of you!"[59][60][61] In June 2011, Abedin's husband was the center of a sexting scandal which led to Weiner's resignation from Congress on June 23, 2011.[55][56] In a press conference relating to an additional sexting scandal in 2013, during her husband's unsuccessful campaign in the New York City's mayoral primary election, Abedin said that while her marriage to Weiner had been challenging, "I love him, I have forgiven him, I believe in him."[57][58] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huma_Abedin

    Homeland Security Adviser, Mohammed Elibiary, is a muslim. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2560

    He is Muslim, but once again the info is not current, as Elibiary was unceremoniously removed from his fellowship position with the Department of Homeland Security, which he tried to spin as a "resignation," but letters sent to members of Congress by DHS officials indicated he would not be reappointed. Undoubtedly, one of the chief reasons for DHS cutting ties with Elibiary was a long string of extremist statements he had been making on Twitter, including talking about the inevitability of the return of an ISIS-style caliphate -- tweets that were subsequently used by ISIS supporters for recruiting purposes.

    But Elibiary has apparently not learned his lesson, engaging in a hate-filled anti-Christian rant on Twitter yesterday, even going so far to attack Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal as a "bottom feeder". More on this radical: https://pjmedia.com/blog/homeland-security-adviser-mohamed-elibiary-goes-on-hate-filled-anti-christian-rant-attacks-jindal-as-bottom-feeder/

    Mohamed Elibiary is [was] an advisor to the Department of Homeland Security. Out of this list he probably is the most controversial. According to a November 9, 2011 CBN News article, Elibiary spoke at a Texas conference in 2004 and honored Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini as a “great Islamic visionary.” Elibiary is a member of the Department of Homeland Security’s Advisory Council. He was granted access to a nationwide database that contained terror watch lists and sensitive FBI reports, which he was accused of leaking portions of the documents to the media in order to spread charges of “Islamophobia” within Governor Rick Perry’s Texas government. - https://www.truthorfiction.com/muslim-brotherhood-in-white-house-050813/

    Obama adviser and founder of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, Salam al-Marayati, is a Muslim. https://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/10/obama-picks-islamic-supremacist-defender-of-hamas-and-hizballah-to-represent-us-at-human-rights-conf

    True:

    A founder of the Muslim Public Affairs Council and its current executive director, Salam al-Marayati's family moved to the United States from Iraq when he was a young boy.[1] He gained national attention in 1999, when then-House Democratic Leader Richard Gephardt nominated him to serve on the National Commission on Terrorism. Gephardt later withdrew the nomination after a public backlash highlighted al-Marayati's defense of terrorist acts and the groups who carry them out.[2]

    Al-Marayati's record on defending terrorist groups and extremists is substantial. During a 2002 speech at the State Department, Salam al-Marayati, said, "Rashid Ghannouchi is an example of those who promote this need for dialogue between civilizations, not confrontation."[3] Ghannoushi was the head of Tunisia's banned Muslim Brotherhood-aligned Al-Nahda Party and was convicted by a Tunisian court of responsibility for a bomb blast that blew the foot off a British tourist.[4] In a 1999 PBS interview, he called Hizballah attacks "legitimate resistance,"[5] but later added "when a Muslim commits an act of terrorism, we stand very loudly and clearly against that Muslim that committed that act of violence."[6] - http://www.investigativeproject.org/profile/114/salam-al-marayati

    Obama's Sharia Czar, Imam Mohamed Magid, of the Islamic Society of North America is a Muslim. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2562

    True, though preaching peace:

    Imam Magid helped in the establishment of religious services for Muslim communities in various parts of America. He has much experience in community service, where he was a representative of the east organization of the Islamic Society of North America. He served as vice president of the Association before his election in September 2010 as President of the Society. He established several service projects such as the Peaceful Families Project, the Annual Twinning of Mosques and Synagogues, the Interfaith Conference of Washington, DC, and the Buxton Interfaith Initiative. He established a religious partnership with Rabbi Robert Nosanchuk to build bridges between religious communities within the States.

    In March 2002, the FBI raided the ADAMS organization on suspicion that they provided material support to terrorists. After questioning him he left the headquarters of the FBI joining crowds of Muslims there and said: "This is a war against Islam and Muslims." He was able through societal pressure to remove parts of the curricula in United States schools which subjected Islam and Muslims to being described by terrorism and extremism. Later he also served on the National Security Council, and was a member in the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Arab Consultative Council

    In 2011 Obama appointed him as an adviser in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to combat violent extremism and terrorism and provide advice to individuals belonging to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other federal agencies. - http://www.investigativeproject.org/3868/a-man-and-6-of-the-brotherhood-in-the-white-house

    Advisory Council on Faith-Based Neighborhood Partnerships, Eboo Patel, is a Muslim. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/164009#.V2WADdecGhd

    Yes, though a "ecumenical" type:

    Patel details his life and career extensively in his 2007 autobiography, Acts of Faith. In the book, Patel notes that he became interested in religious diversity in college, where he noticed that conversations on multiculturalism and multiple identities did not involve religious identity. After graduating from college, he taught at an alternative education program for high school dropouts in Chicago and, inspired partly by Dorothy Day’s Catholic Worker movement, founded a cooperative living community for activists and artists in Chicago’s Uptown neighborhood.[5]:61–69 As an activist, Patel felt that diversity, service, and faith were important parts of civic life but found no community organization that touched on all three, specifically one that worked with young people.[5]:74 In response, he developed the idea for the Interfaith Youth Core,[7] formulated through his relationship with Brother Wayne Teasdale and blessed by the Dalai Lama, that would bring young people of different faiths together around service and dialogue.[5]:74 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eboo_Patel

    In Patel's 2007 book, Saving Each Other, Saving Ourselves, the author recounts discussions that he had with Imam Rauf regarding the future of Islam in the United States. “Islam is a religion that has always been revitalized by its migration,” writes Patel. “America is a nation that has been constantly rejuvenated by immigrants. There is now a critical mass of Muslims in America.” The website of the American Society for Muslim Advancement, an organization co-founded by Rauf, once listed Patel as one of the top “Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow.” - http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2565

    Nancy Pelosi announced she will appoint Rep Andre Carson, D-Ind, a Muslim, as the first Muslim lawmaker on the House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, of all things! It would make Carson the first Muslim to serve on the committee that receives intelligence on the threat of Islamic militants in the Middle East! He has suggested that U.S. schools should be modeled after Islamic madrassas, where education is based on the Quran!!! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andr%C3%A9_Carson

    Another liberal Muslim.

    Carson is a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, New Democrat Coalition and the youngest member of the Congressional Black Caucus. Among others, he is also a member of the Congressional Automotive Caucus, Cancer Action Caucus, Children's Caucus, Climate Change Caucus, Human Rights Caucus, International Conservation Caucus, Labor and Working Families Caucus, Study Group on Public Health, Democratic Budget Group, LGBT Equality Caucus, Military Family Caucus and Renewable/Efficient Energy Caucus.

    As regards the above statement:

    Carson made a speech to an Islamic group that resulted in criticism from right-wing groups when he stated that American public schools should be modelled on Islamic madrassas. He granted an interview to reporter Mary Beth Schneider of The Indianapolis Star in which he maintained his speech remarks had been taken out of context.[25] On the same date, he issued a press release clarifying his position that no "...particular faith should be the foundation of our public schools..."[26] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andr%C3%A9_Carson

    And last but not least, our closet Muslim himself, Barack Hussein Obama. http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/40-mind-blowing-quotes-barack-hussein-obama-islam-christianity/

    He is actually an amalgam of faith systems, Islam, Black Liberation, Communism, etc. which have one major theme in common, that of the victim-entitlement mentality, that the devil authored and used from the beginning, first selfishly presuming (in the first "Occupy Movement") that he was worthy of God's position, power and possessions, that God should "share the wealth." And being cast down for his prideful rebellion, seducing Eve with the lie that she was a victim of God's selfishness, in not treating her justly by forbidding one thing He had, under penalty of death, versus benefits being rewarded, and disobedience punished, and with mercy not being a right.

    Which does not mean that we are not to "honor the king," and render general obedience to the government, and pray "for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all Godliness and honesty." (1 Timothy 2:2)

    However, the Lord did call Herod a "fox," (Lk 13:32) apparently meaning a cunning person, unclean and or perhaps as he lived in public incest with his sister-in-law. (Mark 6:17) And without railings, prophetic type reproof can have its place, in the fear of God, and not out an animus toward authority in general.

    Which victim-entitlement message served one purpose, as in Communism, which was not to actually free the oppressed but to bring all into dependence upon and subjection to the devil, who thus requires obeisance to him, which he has (an is) slowly "progressively" sought to do thru his proxy servants.

    And which may explain the rather stanch military stance the Obama administration has shown toward the self-sufficient industrious Chinese in contrary to his slow seemingly hand-wringing response to Islamic aggression.

  • Utah Lt. Gov. Cox says Orlando attack prompted apology to gays

    06/19/2016 8:52:05 AM PDT · 46 of 49
    daniel1212 to HiTech RedNeck
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/06/muslim-mohammad-moghaddam-opens-fire-amarillo-walmart-shot-dead-police/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=im http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual_Agenda#Strategies_and_psychological_tactics
  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/18/2016 7:24:37 PM PDT · 66 of 525
    daniel1212 to metmom
    So it looks like lots of Catholics, then, are living in sin and receiving communion in a state of mortal sin.

    That would be true, though they are presumed innocent till Rome says otherwise.

    God himself is obliged to abide by the judgment of his priests, and either not to pardon or to pardon..The sentence of the priest precedes, and God subscribes to it. .” – Dignity and Duties of the Priest, St. Alphonsus Ligouri, Vol. 12, p. 2 (whose writings were declared free from anything meriting censure by Pope Gregory XVL (1839) in the bull of his canonization)

  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/18/2016 6:20:54 PM PDT · 56 of 525
    daniel1212 to stanne
    Catholicism. No it says nothing about Catholicism. Most people who call tgemselves Catholic in the western world right now practice nothing like Catholicism in their daily lives

    Of course it speaks of Catholicism, for "the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors." (VEHEMENTER NOS)

    For it is quite foreign to everyone bearing the name of a Christian to trust his own mental powers with such pride as to agree only with those things which he can examine from their inner nature, and to imagine that the Church, sent by God to teach and guide all nations, is not conversant with present affairs and circumstances; or even that they must obey only in those matters which she has decreed by solemn definition as though her other decisions might be presumed to be false or putting forward insufficient motive for truth and honesty.

    Quite to the contrary, a characteristic of all true followers of Christ, lettered or unlettered, is to suffer themselves to be guided and led in all things that touch upon faith or morals by the Holy Church of God through its Supreme Pastor the Roman Pontiff, who is himself guided by Jesus Christ Our Lord. - CASTI CONNUBII, ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XI; http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121930_casti-connubii.html

    To the shepherds alone was given all power to teach, to judge, to direct; on the faithful was imposed the duty of following their teaching, of submitting with docility to their judgment, and of allowing themselves to be governed, corrected, and guided by them in the way of salvation. Thus, it is an absolute necessity for the simple faithful to submit in mind and heart to their own pastors, and for the latter to submit with them to the Head and Supreme Pastor...

    Similarly, it is to give proof of a submission which is far from sincere to set up some kind of opposition between one Pontiff and another. Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them; and in some ways they resemble those who, on receiving a condemnation, would wish to appeal to a future council, or to a Pope who is better informed. On this point what must be remembered is that in the government of the Church, except for the essential duties imposed on all Pontiffs by their apostolic office, each of them can adopt the attitude which he judges best according to times and circumstances. Of this he alone is the judge. It is true that for this he has not only special lights, but still more the knowledge of the needs and conditions of the whole of Christendom, for which, it is fitting, his apostolic care must provide. - Epistola Tua (1885), Apostolic Letter of Pope Leo XIII; http://www.ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage_print.asp?number=403215&language=en

  • Pope Francis says most marriages today are ‘invalid’. This is a disaster for the Catholic Church

    06/18/2016 2:09:43 PM PDT · 54 of 525
    daniel1212 to ReaganGeneration2; redleghunter; Springfield Reformer; kinsman redeemer; BlueDragon; metmom; ...
    To his point: if every Catholic married person divorced and applied for annulment, nearly all would have grounds and would be granted. And remember annulments are granted based on conditions that exist at the time of the marriage. So, it appears he is correct, technically.

    He is consistent, if not Scripturally correct. For as a SV site says,

    68% of annulments today [dated] are granted because of "defective consent," which involves at least one of the parties not having sufficient knowledge or maturity to know what was involved in marriage. The ingenuity of judges in confidently asserting that such knowledge or maturity was lacking is amazing. Vasoli says that it is done by substituting "junk psychology" for sound psychology and psychiatry. (www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/28_Annulments.pdf)

    Some of the conditions that can allow for annulment, from the Catholic Diocese of Arlington

    And which means that multitudes of RCs are in invalid marriages, though such are considered valid until proven otherwise.

    Among the signs that might indicate reasons to investigate for an annulment are:

    marriage that excluded at the time of the wedding the right to children, or to a permanent marriage, or to an exclusive commitment.

    In addition, there are youthful marriages;

    marriages of very short duration;

    marriages marked by serious emotional, physical, or substance abuse;

    deviant sexual practices;

    profound and consistent irresponsibility and lack of commitment;

    conditional consent to a marriage;

    fraud or deceit to elicit spousal consent;

    serious mental illness; or a previous bond of marriage.

    - www.arlingtondiocese.org/tribunal/faq.php#Grounds

    Rome also considers entering marriage with the intention of never having children to be a "grave wrong and more than likely grounds for an annulment."[McLachlan, P. "Sacrament of Holy Matrimony." http://www.catholicdoors.com/faq/qu164.htm] , while praying to a women who apparently went thru with a marriage intending to do just that,

    ► MATRIMONIAL CONSENT and annulment

    Can. 1095 The following are incapable of contracting marriage:

    1/ those who lack the sufficient use of reason;

    2/ those who suffer from a grave defect of discretion of judgment concerning the essential matrimonial rights and duties mutually to be handed over and accepted;

    3/ those who are not able to assume the essential obligations of marriage for causes of a psychic nature [all are judgment calls which can see varying verdicts].

    List of diriment impediments to marriage

    Age.[6] If the man is under 16 years of age, or the woman is under 14 years of age, then their marriage is invalid. This is an ecclesiastical impediment, and so does not apply to a marriage between two non-Catholics. However, note that in a marriage between a Catholic and a non-Catholic, the age limitation applies to the non-Catholic party as well.[7]

    Physical capacity for consummation lacking [15]. Per Canon 1084 §3 "Without prejudice to the provisions of Canon 1098, sterility neither forbids nor invalidates a marriage." Both parties, however, must be physically capable of completed vaginal intercourse, wherein the man ejaculates "true semen" into the woman's vagina. (See [1] for details.)

    To invalidate a marriage, the impotence must be perpetual (i.e., incurable) and antecedent to the marriage. The impotence can either be absolute or relative. This impediment is generally considered to derive from divine natural law, and so cannot be dispensed.[16] The reason behind this impediment is explained in the Summa Theologica:[17]

    “In marriage there is a contract whereby one is bound to pay the other the marital debt: wherefore just as in other contracts, the bond is unfitting if a person bind himself to what he cannot give or do, so the marriage contract is unfitting, if it be made by one who cannot pay the marital debt.”

    Previous marriage [18]. Previous marriages, whether conducted in the Catholic Church, in another church, or by the State. All previous attempts at marriage by both parties wishing to marry must be declared null prior to a wedding in the Catholic Church, without regard to the religion of the party previously married. Divine, absolute, temporary.

    Disparity of cult [19]. A marriage between a Catholic and a non-baptized person is invalid, unless this impediment is dispensed by the local ordinary. Ecclesiastical, relative.

    Sacred orders [20]. One of the parties has received sacred orders. Ecclesiastical, absolute, permanent (unless dispensed by the Apostolic See).

    Perpetual vow of chastity [21]. One of the parties has made a public perpetual vow of chastity. Ecclesiastical, absolute, permanent (unless dispensed by the Apostolic See).

    Abduction [22]. One of the parties, usually the woman, has been abducted with the view of contracting marriage.

    Ecclesiastical,[citation needed] temporary.

    Crimen [23]. One or both of the parties has brought about the death of a spouse with the view of entering marriage with each other. Ecclesiastical, relative, permanent (unless dispensed by the Apostolic See).

    Consanguinity [24]. The parties are closely related by blood.

    Ecclesiastical or divine, depending on the degree of relationship. Relative, permanent.

    Affinity [25]. The parties are related by marriage in a prohibited degree. Ecclesiastical, relative, permanent.

    Public propriety [26]. The parties are "related" by notorious concubinage. Ecclesiastical, relative, permanent.

    Adoption [27]. The parties are related by adoption. Ecclesiastical, relative, permanent.

    Spiritual relationship [28]. One of the parties is the godparent of the other. This no longer applies in the Latin Rite, but still applies in the Eastern Catholic Churches.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_impediment#List_of_diriment_impediments_to_marriage

    . Wide interpretive provisions allow for saying the marriage never existed, and can see varying verdicts.

    And then there is Pauline Privilege, according to http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=7272,

    Pauline Privilege is the dissolution of a purely natural (not sacramental) marriage which had been contracted between two non-Christians, one of whom has since become a Christian. But if a Catholic marries an unbaptized;/non-Christian person is not a sacrament. The church says (based on a passage in Paul) that such a marriage can be dissolved for a grave reason, like if the unbaptized party makes it impossible for the Catholic to practice his faith.

    The Pauline Privilege does not apply when a Christian has married a non-Christian. In those cases, a natural marriage exists and can be dissolved for a just cause, but by what is called the Petrine Privilege rather than by the Pauline Privilege. The Petrine Privilege is so-named because it is reserved to the Holy See, so only Rome can grant the Petrine Privilege.

    Though i am hesitant to utterly disallow any extreme circumstances as possibly allowing grounds for annulment, yet in the Bible, marriage as a commitment and social contract was generally understood, and once a wife was taken — even foreign wives, or unlikely consensual, or even instead of being the one contracted for, etc. — and the marriage was consummated, then such were considered to be married, and in no place are consummated marriages “annulled,” meaning they did not exist. Even concubines were wives. (Gn. 25:1; cf. 1Ch. 1:32; Gn. 30:4; cf. Gn. 35:22; 2Sam. 16:21, 22, cf. 2Sam. 20:3)

  • What Christians Can Do in the Wake of Orlando (in response to what the Left says we must do).

    06/15/2016 4:49:29 AM PDT · 24 of 24
    daniel1212 to NRx
    The difference in our sins are irrelevant in the eyes of God. There is no homosexual who is a worse sinner than me.

    That is true in the sense that even one sin renders us to be culpable sinners and in need of salvation with all the rest, but that there are degrees of iniquity as well as guilt and punishment is clearly manifest. As shown in the OP. Sodom was not destroyed simply because they were lazy.

  • Jesus is Out. LGBT is In. Welcome to America.

    06/14/2016 10:10:18 AM PDT · 24 of 29
    daniel1212 to mountn man; redleghunter; Springfield Reformer; kinsman redeemer; BlueDragon; metmom; boatbums; ...
    Plato (427-348 B.C.E.)

    In the Republic Plato abolishes the family for the guardians, to avoid nepotism and amassing of private wealth (Republic, bk. 5, 464). Wives and children are to be held in common by all, and no parent is to know his own child nor any child his parents–"provided it can be done" (Republic, bk. 5, 457). In the Laws Plato allows family raising for all citizens, with restrictions on child rearing and inheritance (Laws, bk. 5, sec.729). Each family is to have only one heir, to avoid subdivision of the agrarian lots into small parcels. In cases where there is more than one child, the head of the family should marry off the females and the males he must present for adoption to those citizens who have no children of their own–"priority given to personal preferences as far as possible." If too many children are being born, measures should be taken to check the increase in population; and in the opposite case, a high birth-rate can be encouraged and stimulated (Laws, bk. 5, 740). Plato devotes much attention to the education of the child as a future citizen. As such, he believes that the child belongs to the state and its education is the responsibility of the state (Republic, bk. 2, 376.) Education must be compulsory for all. State funds should pay for gymnasiums and for instructors, officials, and superintendents in charge of education, both cultural and physical (Laws, bk. 7, 764, 804, 813).

    Plato is not concerned with training children for a trade but rather with giving them an education in virtue, which is to produce "a keen desire to become a perfect citizen who knows how to rule and be ruled" in turn (Laws, bk. 1, 643). Reason is man's true nature, but it has to be nurtured from childhood by irrational means. Education is thus the correct channeling of pains and pleasures (Laws, bk. 2, 653), aiming at establishing "a nature in which goodness of character has been well and truly established" so as to breed a familiarity with reason (Republic, bk. 3, 398, 401).

    Prenatal and infant care. Plato recommends that the care of the soul and body of the child begin even before birth, with walks prescribed for the pregnant woman. The first five years of life see more growth than the next twenty, necessitating frequent and appropriately graduated exercise.

    Storytelling and literature. Storytelling is the main tool for the formation of character in Plato's view, and begins at an earlier age than physical training. Stories should provide models for children to imitate, and as ideas taken in at an early age become indelibly fixed, the creation of fables and legends for children, true or fictional, is to be strictly supervised.

    Play. Plato believes that a child's character will be formed while he or she plays. One should resort to DISCIPLINE, but not such as to humiliate the child. There should be neither a single-minded pursuit of pleasure nor an absolute avoidance of pain–not for children and not for expectant mothers (Laws, bk. 7, 792). Luxury makes a child bad-tempered and irritable; unduly savage repression drives children into subserviency and puts them at odds with the world. Children and adults should not imitate base characters when playing or acting, for fear of forming a habit that will become second nature (Republic, bk. 3, 395).

    Physical education. "Physical training may take two or three years, during which nothing else can be done; for weariness and sleep are unfavorable to study. At the same time, these exercises will provide not the least important test of character" (Republic, bk. 7, 537).

    Children who are sturdy enough should go to war as spectators, if one can contrive that they shall do so in safety, so that they can learn, by watching, what they will have to do themselves when they grow up (Republic, bk. 5, 466; bk. 7, 537). Girls should be trained in the same way and learn horseback riding, athletics, and fighting in armor, if only to ensure that if it ever proves necessary the women will be able to defend the children and the rest of the population left behind (Laws, bk. 7, 804-805,813).

    Plato stands at the fountainhead of Western philosophy. He established its themes and posed its problems. Plato's views on education have greatly influenced educational thought to this day and have become the basis of many educational policies. Such diverse thinkers as Montaigne, JEAN-JACQUES ROUSSEAU, JOHN DEWEY, John Stuart Mill, Nietzsche, and many others owe much to Plato's direct influence. http://www.faqs.org/childhood/Pa-Re/Plato-427-348-B-C-E.html

  • 5 Unintended Consequences of Windows 10 Upgradegate

    06/14/2016 9:53:44 AM PDT · 52 of 66
    daniel1212 to RitaOK
    Try: Run Windows Update and click “View update history” to see all the updates you have installed. Look for, or search for, KB3035583, select it, and then click to uninstall or change it. Windows will ask “Are you sure?” Just click “Yes”. It won’t bother you again … unless you re-install KB3035583. http://www.windows10update.com/the-windows-10-free-upgrade-faq/
  • Pope Francis: ‘Rigid… this or nothing’ Catholics are ‘heretical’ and ‘not Catholic’

    06/14/2016 6:39:52 AM PDT · 110 of 114
    daniel1212 to metmom; cloudmountain
    Protestant service: Readings from the Bible and a sermon. That's it.

    And that's a problem just why? After all Catholics brag on how much Bible reading they have in their mass, now you're criticizing the fact that the Protestant services include Bible reading?

    Actually he is misrepresenting Protestant services, unless he calls dead liberal churches or cults Protestant/ In contrast, Protestant evangelical churches are worship services (my former priest when I was a lector and CDD teacher used to tell us, "sing like Protestants"), with many singing for approx 45 minutes - which is about as long as the typical RC mass with its scripted perfunctory praises, prayers and a sermonette, and with the focus being on a piece of bread and sip of wine, contrary to the NT church. And after the evangelical worship there is likely testimonies and then typically about 45 minutes of preaching, and then some fellowship. Plus midweek Bible study, and hopefully outreach. For evangelicals are overall far more committed and conservative than Catholics, yet they are far less committed then they should be, and in contrast to cults.

  • Pope Francis: ‘Rigid… this or nothing’ Catholics are ‘heretical’ and ‘not Catholic’

    06/14/2016 4:09:30 AM PDT · 109 of 114
    daniel1212 to boatbums
    Catholicism cannot produce even a single article of faith or verifiable words from the Apostles outside of what was written in Scripture.

    But but Rome has presumed to infallibly declare she is and will be perpetually infallible whenever she speaks in accordance with her infallibly defined (scope and subject-based) formula, which renders her declaration that she is infallible, to be infallible, as well as all else she accordingly declares. How dare you doubt that!

  • What Christians Can Do in the Wake of Orlando (in response to what the Left says we must do).

    06/14/2016 3:03:29 AM PDT · 22 of 24
    daniel1212 to boycott
    If Christians are responsible for this muslim act of terror, are they also responsible for the terror in Paris and Belgium? This guy is a complete fool. It’s islam and he is giving them a pass.

    Well, remember, Christians were balmed for 911, for Islamic attacks, and if a homosexual killed 50 people at a conservative church or rally then they would be blamed for inciting it.

  • What Christians Can Do in the Wake of Orlando (in response to what the Left says we must do).

    06/13/2016 6:54:12 PM PDT · 15 of 24
    daniel1212 to sheana
    Christians don’t have to do anything. They didn’t cause it and they didn’t do it.

    Christians follow the Lord Christ, who did do something when He saw immorality, as did Paul.

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/13/2016 6:50:59 PM PDT · 614 of 681
    daniel1212 to Mrs. Don-o
    I don't go beyond what it says in Munificentissimus Deus. There was evidence requiring an explanation. The explanation was proclaimed in the encyclical.

    You definitely need to go beyond what it says in Munificentissimus Deus, as the evidence simply does not exist where and when it surely should (earliest centuries), and the explanation for its latter progressive adoption is that it was a fable that became held as a fact. Which the linked post goes into.

    Including this from Ratzinger,

    Before Mary's bodily Assumption into heaven was defined, all theological faculties in the world were consulted for their opinion. Our teachers' answer was emphatically negative... Altaner, the patrologist from Wurzburg¦had proven in a scientifically persuasive manner that the doctrine of Mary's bodily Assumption into heaven was unknown before the 5C; this doctrine, therefore, he argued, could not belong to the "apostolic tradition. And this was his conclusion, which my teachers at Munich shared. - J. Ratzinger, Milestones (Ignatius, n.d.), 58-59.

    Ratzinger must thus resort to arguing that the Lord brought to Rome's memory what history "forgot," which is quite inventive.

    In reality, assurance that the Assumption is real rests upon the premise of Rome professed veracity, which rests upon herself.

  • What Christians Can Do in the Wake of Orlando (in response to what the Left says we must do).

    06/13/2016 6:21:29 PM PDT · 13 of 24
    daniel1212 to ealgeone
    Glory to God. Some minor correction at link.
  • What Christians Can Do in the Wake of Orlando (in response to what the Left says we must do).

    06/13/2016 6:20:31 PM PDT · 12 of 24
    daniel1212 to Objective Scrutator
    Execute Muslims, or be executed by them. Those are your choices. We shall see if the sodomites will learn this fact over the next few months. My hunch is that they won’t, but if they come to their senses I won’t reject potential allies for combating the Islamic virus.

    That is unlikely to happen since they have the same father. Islam is inspired by the devil as a doctrinal alternative to God's Word, and homosexuality is the devil's alternative to what God hath only joined together. The liberals see Islam as another victim of Biblical Christianity, which is its real enemy, and which explains the paradox of liberal support for a religion that is morally opposed to the liberal ethos. Pilate and Herod were made friends in opposition to Christ, and likewise in this case.

    The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure. Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel. (Psalms 2:2-9)

  • What Christians Can Do in the Wake of Orlando (in response to what the Left says we must do).

    06/13/2016 5:33:59 PM PDT · 2 of 24
    daniel1212 to redleghunter; Springfield Reformer; kinsman redeemer; BlueDragon; metmom; boatbums; ...

    ping

  • What Christians Can Do in the Wake of Orlando (in response to what the Left says we must do).

    06/13/2016 5:31:37 PM PDT · 1 of 24
    daniel1212
    More reproof of prohomosexual polemics can be seen here , by the grace of God.
  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/13/2016 5:37:58 AM PDT · 513 of 681
    daniel1212 to Mrs. Don-o; Elsie
    Just as the Apostles did not use the words "Incarnation" or "Trinity" nor make a verbal distinction between Christ's Person and His nature --- but knew, certainly after the Resurrection, that He is both "Lord" and "God" --- as Thomas said.

    You simply cannot make something like the Assumption of Mary nor praying to her analogous to the Trinity! The former is so lacking on warrant from Scripture or early history that Rome's own scholars opposed it being taught as part of apostolic tradition. Meanwhile Scripture nowhere testifies to believers praying to anyone else in Heaven but the Lord, despite prayer being so basic a practice that the Spirit provides approx. 200 prayers in Scripture! And there were plenty of angels for OT believers to pray to, as well as a multitude of ascended believers in Heaven for the NT church to make supplication to. Spare us the refuted attempts at egregious extrapolation: it simply is not there and its absence is inexplicable for a most basic practice, while making supplication to invisible created beings in the Heavens is recorded - by pagans.

    In contrast the Trinity is a demanded doctrine in the light of the abundant testimony to Christ being God in nature with the Father, and with the Spirit.

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/13/2016 5:21:42 AM PDT · 512 of 681
    daniel1212 to metmom
    So Cajetan knew that in order to put Luther down as a heretic, he must first be declared one according to some sort of doctrinal standard. Cajetan quickly drafted a declaration of dogma on the subject of indulgences. Pope Leo X found this to be a good idea. Thus came the decretal Cum postquam. The dogma of indulgences was defined as Cajetan outlined them. The Pope also threatened any of his representatives that may have held a divergent view on the subject.

    Thanks for that post of another aspect most are ignorant of, seen here in Swan's blog but is from Roland Bainton’s Here I Stand: A Life Of Martin Luther [New York: Mentor Books, 1950].

  • Is the Pope Catholic? - The Greatest Schism in Catholic Church History!

    06/13/2016 5:08:25 AM PDT · 510 of 681
    daniel1212 to Ultra Sonic 007; Elsie; redleghunter; Springfield Reformer; kinsman redeemer; BlueDragon; metmom; ..
    over 30,000 different denominations,

    See here before you parrot that again.

    But honestly, I think one need only look at the fruit of Protestantism: over 30,000 different denominations, practically all of which claim inspiration by the Holy Spirit in their interpretation of Scripture.

    They do? You mean they do not only believe in the inspiration of the Scripture by the Holy Spirit, but that of their own teaching? Sounds too much like what many RCs believe. Meanwhile your argument is simply specious, since it presumes that something that results in disunity invalidates it (thus the Lord Himself), and that the strongest unity is not seen within Protestantism - those who hold the most basic distinctive that historically resulted in believers being called "Protestants," that of Scripture as the accurate and supremely authorative wholly inspired word of God.

    And it ignores that Catholicism also exists in schism and sects, and abounds in disagreements, with its professed unity being quite restricted and largely on paper, while in reality, Catholics are far less unified than evangelicals in the most basic beliefs.

    Division as well as unity is seen under both the Catholic and Protestant model for determination of Truth, with the sharpest contentions as well as the strongest unity being seen in those who are the most committed to what they see as doctrine, but only one model is Scriptural. Thus the question,

    What is the basis for your assurance of truth? For it seems that the RC argument is that an assuredly (if conditionally) infallible magisterium is essential for determination and assurance of Truth (including writings and men being of God) and to fulfill promises of Divine presence, providence of Truth, and preservation of faith, and authority. (Jn. 14:16,26; 15:26; 16:13; Mt. 16:18; Lk. 10:16)\

    And that being the historical instruments and stewards of Divine revelation (oral and written) means that Rome is that assuredly infallible magisterium. Thus any who knowingly dissent from the latter must be in rebellion to God.

    Does this fairly represent what you hold to or in what way does it differ?

    So this is the challenge: how can you tell which denomination has the fullness of truth?

    Answer the above to pursue the answer.

  • Pope Francis: ‘Rigid… this or nothing’ Catholics are ‘heretical’ and ‘not Catholic’

    06/13/2016 4:44:05 AM PDT · 108 of 114
    daniel1212 to cloudmountain
    Thus once again your definition of Protestant is one that is contrary to even the most basic distinctives that historically resulted in believers being called "Protestants." And thus, holding to Scripture as the accurate and supremely authorative wholly inspired word of God, evangelicalism historically has contended against "Protestants" such as deny basic beliefs Catholics also profess, as well as against her traditions of men, and of liberalism. And thus true Prots do so today.

    I asked her once what the theological differences were between Protestant denominations. She didn't know. None of the Protestants here seem to know either. Our respective Bibles DO have very small differences but the Word of God is the same for both Catholics and Protestants.

    What kind of argument is that? The ignorance of your isolated friend is hardly a basis for arguing there are no real differences btwn Prot churches. And contrary to your "seem" opinion here, the regulars here can tell you of theological differences were between Protestant denominations, and which is actually regularly used by RCs in attacking Protestantism! Do you think Anglicans and Southern Baptist do not have substantial differences in beliefs and moral positions? But the strongest unity is btwn those who most strongly hold to Scripture as the accurate and supremely authorative wholly inspired word of God (which is not the Anglicans).

    I attend Mass Sunday through Friday and it is the center of my life. What could be more important than spending my mornings like this?

    Contrary to what we see in the life of the church in Scripture, with no class of believers distinctively named "priests," offering bread and wine as a sacrifice for sins as their primary active function, with this sacrament being the source and summit of the Christian life, around which all revolved.

    We do say the rosary before Mass too. How better to live than to pray and worship our good Lord?

    Which is also utterly absent in the Scriptures, despite prayer being a basic practice and with the Spirit providing approx. 200 prayers by believers, none of which are addressed to anyone else in Heaven but the Lord.

    "Prots"??? Lol. I never, ever saw THAT before. "Prots" -- sounds like a sports team.

    Which petty protest testifies to your absence here in years of Cath vs Prot debates. And it saves my arthritic fingers from typing and making more typos.

    Well, some of your fervent RC brethren disagree: http://www.traditionalcatholicmass.com/home-m240.html

    Also the "traditional" Catholic Mass is merely a LATIN Mass, nothing else.

    Which, and all your superfluous text that follows, does not change the fact that some of your fervent RC brethren disagree with you that no Popes before Francis publicly spewed "un-Catholic nonsense," if not to the regular degree you see Francis doing.

    Yet as was substantiated in post 60, "the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors." (VEHEMENTER NOS)

  • Another Hillary"Google Skew".Try To Google"Hillary Clinton Lesbian".See What Happens.

    06/11/2016 7:22:00 PM PDT · 18 of 44
    daniel1212 to Cruz_West_Paul2016

    Yes, Hillary Clinton les produces “leslie” in 3 offers, but nothing for lesl.

  • Why Does Jesus Call the Father Greater If We Teach That the Members of the Trinity Are Equal?

    06/11/2016 12:05:22 PM PDT · 846 of 1,053
    daniel1212 to daniel1212

    Edit: Last quote is from the USCCB - United States Conference of Catholic Bishops - regarding the option of the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds in the ordinary form of the Mass, which usage has become a daily occurrence in many countries.

  • Why Does Jesus Call the Father Greater If We Teach That the Members of the Trinity Are Equal?

    06/11/2016 11:59:21 AM PDT · 845 of 1,053
    daniel1212 to metmom; boatbums
    Can you all just get together some time and decide just what it is your church teaches and what you believe?

    The problem is those "Protestant" RCs who create division by ascertaining the validity of church teaching by examination of historical teaching (even if Scripture is not the supreme standard, as with true Prots), and thus do not let Rome "interpret" what such really teaches at any given time.

    Among other examples of why this is needed for cultic unity:

    Council of Constance 1414-18; SESSION 13 - 15 June 1415: In the name of the holy and undivided Trinity, Father and Son and holy Spirit, Amen. Certain people, in some parts of the world, have rashly dared to assert that the christian people ought to receive the holy sacrament of the eucharist under the forms of both bread and wine. They communicate the laity everywhere not only under the form of bread but also under that of wine, and they stubbornly assert that they should communicate even after a meal, or else without the need of a fast...

    although this sacrament was received by the faithful under both kinds in the early church, nevertheless later it was received under both kinds only by those confecting it, and by the laity only under the form of bread....To say that the observance of this custom or law is sacrilegious or illicit must be regarded as erroneous. Those who stubbornly assert the opposite of the aforesaid are to be confined as heretics and severely punished by the local bishops or their officials or the inquisitors of heresy in the kingdoms or provinces in which anything is attempted or presumed against this decree, according to the canonical and legitimate sanctions that have been wisely established in favour of the catholic faith against heretics and their supporters.

    ...when the one bread is broken, the unity of the faithful is expressed and through Communion they "receive from the one bread the Lord's Body and from the one chalice the Lord's Blood in the same way that the Apostles received them from the hands of Christ himself. (USCCP: "Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion")

  • Pope Francis: ‘Rigid… this or nothing’ Catholics are ‘heretical’ and ‘not Catholic’

    06/11/2016 7:28:39 AM PDT · 96 of 114
    daniel1212 to Elsie
    Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. Share? 99%? 50%?? 1%???

    Like the latest Target shareholders meeting?

  • Pope Francis: ‘Rigid… this or nothing’ Catholics are ‘heretical’ and ‘not Catholic’

    06/10/2016 6:19:25 PM PDT · 91 of 114
    daniel1212 to boatbums
    Well....hmmmm...either one is an "unholy dissenter" who dares resist the authority of the Pope - no matter who he is - or one is a "false" Catholic who asserts a Pope is invalid even when elected according to long established rules. A catch-22???

    Which examples the fact that while evangelicals are attacked for interpreting their supreme authority differently, so do RCs, with some see RC teaching as censuring dissent from the pope such as we see here (which censure is indeed taught), while some saying that this is why such a heretical pope cannot be a valid pope, while others say it is not for them to question such, but to simply follow leadership.

    Even then you have the fact that there are different classes of magisterial teaching, which, besides being open to varying degrees of interpretation, require different degrees of assent relative to their certainty.

    Faced with such one poster (from a Catholic Answers thread) sighed, Boy. No disrespect intended...and I mean that honestly...but my head spins trying to comprehend the various classifications of Catholic teaching and the respective degrees of certainty attached thereto. I suspect that the average Catholic doesn't trouble himself with such questions, but as to those who do (and us poor Protestants who are trying to get a grip on Catholic teaching) it sounds like an almost impossible task.

    The solution for which is cultic, just obey and don't question:

    Praxis [practice] is quite simple for faithful Catholics: give your religious assent of intellect and will to Catholic doctrine, whether it is infallible or not. That's what our Dogmatic Constitution on the Church demands, that's what the Code of Canon Laws demand, and that is what the Catechism itself demands. Heb 13:17 teaches us to "obey your leaders and submit to them." This submission is not contingent upon inerrancy or infallibility. - http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=1565864#post1565864

    Thus cultic implicit faith is called for, otherwise you have the reality of disparate understandings of RC teaching that we see now, which is contrary to what Rome expresses as reality but which is really only wishful thinking:

    CCC 889 In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. By a "supernatural sense of faith" the People of God, under the guidance of the Church's living Magisterium, "unfailingly adheres to this faith."

  • Pope Francis: ‘Rigid… this or nothing’ Catholics are ‘heretical’ and ‘not Catholic’

    06/10/2016 6:01:53 PM PDT · 90 of 114
    daniel1212 to Campion
    I have no idea what that comment means.

    Why not, in context? Singular instances [regarding the reproof by Paul and by Catherine], by souls of substance [regarding the weight the reprovers carried], not what we see here [that of peons with opinions in disagreeing with a pope in a variety of statement], and your argument is not with me [seeing as I support reproof of popes in general, while some popes have censored such].

  • Pope Francis: ‘Rigid… this or nothing’ Catholics are ‘heretical’ and ‘not Catholic’

    06/10/2016 10:16:57 AM PDT · 79 of 114
    daniel1212 to ealgeone
    So all the Catholics fussing about Francis are being bad catholics. Wonder if that rises to the level of “mortal sin”??

    No, as along with papal teaching of what the one duty of RCs is to follow their pastors, even beyond formal doctrinal teaching, there is also teaching that allows for internal dissent - but not public - of non-infallible teaching that calls for "religious assent" (ordinary assent: religious submission of will and intellect). And that in any case one must follow his conscience, even if he may be wrong.

    However, since RCs can disagree on just what magisterial level many teachings fall under as well as their meaning to varying degrees, this still leaves much room for disagreement among RCs, besides the great liberty they have to interpret Scripture in order to support Rome.

  • Pope Francis: ‘Rigid… this or nothing’ Catholics are ‘heretical’ and ‘not Catholic’

    06/10/2016 10:08:08 AM PDT · 78 of 114
    daniel1212 to Campion
    St. Catherine of Siena rebuked a Pope -- respectfully, but it was still a rebuke. St. Paul rebuked a Pope "to his face" and was upfront about it in Galatians. Were they bad Catholics? No, of course not.

    Singular instances, by souls of substance, not what we see here, and your argument is not with me.

  • Pope Francis: ‘Rigid… this or nothing’ Catholics are ‘heretical’ and ‘not Catholic’

    06/10/2016 4:20:21 AM PDT · 63 of 114
    daniel1212 to Arthur McGowan; cloudmountain
    First of all, present-day Protestants are not personally involved in the animosity that was rife 500 years ago.

    Thus once again your definition of Protestant is one that is contrary to even the most basic distinctives that historically resulted in believers being called "Protestants." And thus, holding to Scripture as the accurate and supremely authorative wholly inspired word of God, evangelicalism historically has contended against "Protestants" such as deny basic beliefs Catholics also profess, as well as against her traditions of men, and of liberalism. And thus true Prots do so today.

    Even the Popes who were rapists, sodomites, murderers, etc., never publicly spewed un-Catholic nonsense, which this Pope does daily in homilies, speeches, and documents.

    Well, some of your fervent RC brethren disagree: http://www.traditionalcatholicmass.com/home-m240.html