Free Republic 3rd Quarter Fundraising Target: $85,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $22,394
Woo hoo!! And the first 26% is in!! Thank you all very much!!

Posts by Mrs. Don-o

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Meriam Ibrahim arrives safely in Italy, meets Pope Francis

    07/24/2014 6:37:23 PM PDT · 21 of 23
    Mrs. Don-o to RedHeeler

    “Praise God” is a good response.

  • Obama: ‘It’s Pretty Hard To Find An Economic Measure Where We’re Not Significantly Better Off’

    07/24/2014 6:31:57 PM PDT · 43 of 84
    Mrs. Don-o to Nachum
    He's off in his own world.

    Or maybe it's the cocaine.

  • Meriam Ibrahim arrives safely in Italy, meets Pope Francis

    07/24/2014 4:16:38 PM PDT · 3 of 23
    Mrs. Don-o to Salvation

    Praise God!

  • Doctors respond to parents of Down syndrome newborns with cruelty and callousness

    07/24/2014 3:35:40 PM PDT · 53 of 74
    Mrs. Don-o to blueplum; Morgana
    Blueplum: "The mother in this article was too lazy to test, too irresponsible and too selfish to involve her own husband in testing..."

    It's funny how the unconditional love of a mother is universally cherished as one of the noblest things in human existence. And then when a mother actually manifests unconditional love, she gets trashed as a moral reprobate for welcoming and loving an innocent child who is not a member of the elite: the Planned, Perfect and Privileged.

    I declined to take several of the usual round of prenatal tests even though I was an "elderly primagravida" at 38, because, as I told my doc, I considera them a form of hostile surveillance. "Hostile" they are, because when defects are discovered, it almost invariably results in a fatal attack on the baby before birth. That's the intended result of an antihuman protocol.

    I fired by first OB/GYN, who ried to push me into an amniocentesis. You should truly give a second thought to your thesis that hostile prenatal surveillance is morally mandated. --- What a thoroughly perverted value system.

    According to your own "worst-case scenario" statistics --- mothers at age 45--- such women are still 96% certain of giving birth to children who do not have Down Syndrome.

    If I had the choice of living with either a Down Syndrome child or a Down Syndrome baby-slayer, I'd choose the child. They are much more pleasant and more gracious company than their would-be exterminators.

  • Woman Has Two Abortions Because She Didn’t Want to Share Her Husband With Her Children

    07/24/2014 2:21:41 PM PDT · 46 of 54
    Mrs. Don-o to Secret Agent Man; wagglebee
    No doubt she shouldn't raise kids. She shouldn't murder them, either.

    Why wouldn't she let somebody adopt the baby who would love him? Has she no family, no friends, no imgination of the joy that would bring, joy for generations to come?

    Now, no joy, and an eternity of horror.

  • Doctors respond to parents of Down syndrome newborns with cruelty and callousness

    07/24/2014 2:09:33 PM PDT · 23 of 74
    Mrs. Don-o to bluedogpdx; Morgana
    Hey blue, maybe you should have tried smiling first? That usually works for me.

  • When They Set Fire to Our Monasteries (irreparable damage from anti christians)

    07/24/2014 1:50:56 PM PDT · 19 of 20
    Mrs. Don-o to NYer

    Thank you. Sadly.

  • Meriam Ibrahim lands in Italy, on way to US; Update: Meets with Pope Francis

    07/24/2014 7:09:36 AM PDT · 8 of 30
    Mrs. Don-o to Morgana

    Thanks be to God.

  • ISIS 'orders female genital mutilation' for women in Mosul

    07/24/2014 7:01:19 AM PDT · 22 of 139
    Mrs. Don-o to Izzy Dunne

    Just a few minutes ago I was t5hiking, “This can’t get worse.” And then I read this.

  • ISIS Attacks Iraqi Town Where Christians from Mosul Took Refuge (churches become mosques)

    07/24/2014 6:51:23 AM PDT · 8 of 16
    Mrs. Don-o to Texas Eagle
    I am just teaching my RCIA (Catholic Adult Converts) class about the Catholic Churches of the Ancient Middle East: Melkites, Maronites, Syrians, Copts, Armenians, Chaldeans. The people, the culture, the art, architecture, relics, shrines, the sung Liturgies going back 1800 years, Scriptures, the Gospel in priceless ancient manuscript and the Gospel in the people's hearts. They are being exterminated before our eyes.

    Orwell quote tagline.

  • ISIS Torches 1800 Year Old Mosul Church After Expelling Christians-1st time no mass in 1600 years

    07/24/2014 6:33:18 AM PDT · 29 of 29
    Mrs. Don-o to ZinGirl
    Thank you for posting these thoughts.

    I am angry that this isn't front page news in every newspaper in America.

  • "How LGBT Students Are Changing Christian Colleges" (The Atlantic)

    07/24/2014 5:11:45 AM PDT · 42 of 45
    Mrs. Don-o to dsc

    I’d like to see him try because it’s important to get this crap out in the open to be examined, refuted and dismissed.

  • "How LGBT Students Are Changing Christian Colleges" (The Atlantic)

    07/23/2014 11:32:03 AM PDT · 33 of 45
    Mrs. Don-o to CynicalBear
    And notice how the argument is running in the Atlantic comment section.

    It's the old shrimp-and-linsey-woolsey argument (Don't bother me with Leviticus!" They seem to have missed everything that 2,000 years of detailed and profoundly significant, reasoned discourse about the levels and kinds of law found in the Hebrew Scriptures: mainly, cultural separation codes, health-safety best practices, the rubrics of ritual conduct, and moral law. They also ignored the fact that New Testament Law superseded Old Testament Law, since the OT law "brought nothing to perfection" (Hebrews 7:19).

    The Gay Christians and their allies seem to think they're among the first to realize that, OMG, Christians don't keep kosher. And following upon that, it appears they think they can just take an x-acto knife and a tweezers, extract a couple of verses about shrimp, adulterers and Canaanites, wad them up into a spitball and whap them into somebody's eye, and that settles the argument.

    In other words, they argue like a clipart-cartoon fundamentalists.

    I think they could probably do better, and --- I don't think I'm alone in saying this --- I'd like to see them try.

  • "How LGBT Students Are Changing Christian Colleges" (The Atlantic)

    07/23/2014 11:24:53 AM PDT · 31 of 45
    Mrs. Don-o to pallis
    "Two percent of the population couldn’t spread their contamination without the help of their leftist co-conspirators who are out to destroy Christianity and Western civilization."

    Two percent of the population couldn’t spread their contamination without the help of heterosexual co-conspirators who long ago threw out "traditional, natural marriage," perverted it with civil divorce, Playboy, the condom and the Pill, broke down all the norms of Holy Matrimony as a sacred, fertile, exclusive, lifelong union, deconstructed it piece by piece and turned it into "what I want or as long as I want it" --- in otherwise, they universalized gay marriage for straights. No wonder the gays want in.

  • "How LGBT Students Are Changing Christian Colleges" (The Atlantic)

    07/23/2014 11:16:44 AM PDT · 29 of 45
    Mrs. Don-o to 4Runner

    The “caliphate” will be slitting throats in the Vatican long before they turn their attention to Gordon-Conwell.

  • Responding to “Spiritual but Not Religious” Christians

    07/23/2014 10:35:36 AM PDT · 41 of 138
    Mrs. Don-o to Resettozero
    OK, I can see what you're saying. It seems like a reasonable inference, and thanks for taking the time and the thought.

    However "Get back to where you belong" could also, and reasonably, be applied to anyone on God's green earth, since "where we belong" is within the will of God; God wills that all men be saved, and come to a knowledge of the Truth; and Christ established His church for a reason, namely to be the "pillar and foundation of the Truth."

    So it stacks up to be practically a syllogism. If not quite apodictic, it's at least a reasonable inference that everybody ought to be a member of that Church which He founded, which is the Body of Christ.

    I wouldn't expect all the members of the FReeper Brethren Fellowship to snap to attention and say "Oh, I get it, I'm supposed to be a Catholic" --- most people are not, actually, much moved by reasonable inferences --- but this might give you an insight on how a Catholic would see it.

  • Responding to “Spiritual but Not Religious” Christians

    07/23/2014 9:09:05 AM PDT · 33 of 138
    Mrs. Don-o to Resettozero
    "By a Catholic" to be sure: the author is a Catholic Answers apologist. But "to" could be to anybody who will consider these Biblical teachings.

    I'm puzzled by people who think Jesus established a church for no reason in particular.

  • Responding to “Spiritual but Not Religious” Christians

    07/23/2014 9:04:44 AM PDT · 32 of 138
    Mrs. Don-o to Iscool; roamer_1
    "If you wuz a Catholic, you'd have to turn around and head back to the pavement...Jesus ain't out there in the wilderness..." You're so wrong. Why do you write such fact-free, nutrient-free stuff about things you don't know? It's, at the very least, bearing false witness against your neighbors.
  • "Jesus Was Not a “Bible Believer” let Alone an Evangelical" (F-word warning)

    07/23/2014 9:00:00 AM PDT · 102 of 114
    Mrs. Don-o to Star Traveler; Salvation


  • "Jesus Was Not a “Bible Believer” let Alone an Evangelical" (F-word warning)

    07/23/2014 8:56:48 AM PDT · 101 of 114
    Mrs. Don-o to Star Traveler; Salvation

    Right, and...

  • Responding to “Spiritual but Not Religious” Christians

    07/23/2014 8:46:28 AM PDT · 28 of 138
    Mrs. Don-o to Iscool; Gamecock
    Iscool, your comment is similar to one made by Gamecock, so I'll ask the same question: What was "written by a Catholic to a Catholic"? What Catholic?

    I'm not challenging you so much as I'm peplexed who or what you're talking about.

  • "Jesus Was Not a “Bible Believer” let Alone an Evangelical" (F-word warning)

    07/23/2014 8:34:07 AM PDT · 98 of 114
    Mrs. Don-o to mountainlion
    I read that linked article, and thanks for sending it, it's a very good one. It does not refute my earlier comments, though.

    There are reportedly 3,536,489 letters in the Bible. (I didn't count them, I looked it up!) If the text is 99.5% error free, that makes 17,687 errors. And there are indeed thousands of scribal errors in the various mss of scripture.

    However, I do not derive a skeptical attitude about the Bible from those calculations. The truth is that the Bible is rather astoundingly error-free, compared to any other ancient text. Even more important, most of these scribal errors make no difference whatsoever. For instance, one text says "he had sheep and goats," another says "he had goats and sheep", and the Aramaic is over there saying "he had herds and flocks."

    Lots of variants, makes no difference at all.

    People who play up scribal errors to encourage agnosticism (like Bart Ehrman) are, in my view, pedantic fools. They turn "perfect text" into a kind of an idol, and then when they find a half-penny variant, they say "There is no god!"

  • Responding to “Spiritual but Not Religious” Christians

    07/23/2014 8:18:34 AM PDT · 21 of 138
    Mrs. Don-o to circlecity; NKP_Vet
    "First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation,"...
    This merely means that...scripture is the word of God not the word of man."

    There I believe you are conflating two different things being explained by St.Paul: prophecy and the interpretation of prophecy.

    Paul affirms two truths: that

    • prophecy is the word of God, not the word of man; and
    • that the interpretation of prophecy is not a matter of one's own individual insight or comprehension.

    This Paul makes really clear in his discourse on the Body of Christ with its many parts and functions:

    1 Corinthians 12:7,10
    To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. To one is given the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the discernment of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues.

    1 Corinthians 12:28
    And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers; then deeds of power, then gifts of healing, forms of assistance, forms of leadership, various kinds of tongues.

    1 Corinthians 12:30
    Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret?

    Obviously there are different people appointed by God in the Church with different gifts. Not all can teach, not all can govern, not all can interpret.

    "First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation,"...
    Exactly. These things are manifestations of the Spirit, distributed by the Spirit to particular people He appoints in the Church for the common good. We're not just a bunch of in-DUH-viduals interpreting things on our own.

  • Responding to “Spiritual but Not Religious” Christians

    07/23/2014 7:57:41 AM PDT · 15 of 138
    Mrs. Don-o to polymuser; vladimir998
    "There were many mysteries then. There are very few mysteries today."

    That's just flat wrong, absurdly wrong. Jaw-droppingly wrong.

    Human knowledge is like fractal; or, if you can't imagine a fractal, it's like a gigantic spreading tree. A tree grows, and grows, and grows, and every new little green twig on that tree has a bud of mystery.

  • "Jesus Was Not a “Bible Believer” let Alone an Evangelical" (F-word warning)

    07/23/2014 7:24:38 AM PDT · 94 of 114
    Mrs. Don-o to mountainlion
    I actually don't believe that. There's counter-evidence, in that tons of manuscripts have scribal errors. Here's 200,000 articles about it, if you're interested.

    This, however, does not in the least undermine my respect for, and reliance on, the Bible as what it truly is, God's word. His message gets through, regardless, Deo gratias.

  • How Many Americans Are Lesbian, Gay or Bisexual? (Answer: Not that many)

    07/22/2014 6:30:38 PM PDT · 59 of 63
    Mrs. Don-o to Sequoyah101

    Because gay rights activists are largely supported by heterosexual advocates of sexual disorder: contraceptors, sterilizers, aborters.

  • "Jesus Was Not a “Bible Believer” let Alone an Evangelical" (F-word warning)

    07/22/2014 6:16:52 PM PDT · 74 of 114
    Mrs. Don-o to Gamecock
    Not sure what you're saying here. Whose Roman Catholic indoctrination?
  • "Jesus Was Not a “Bible Believer” let Alone an Evangelical" (F-word warning)

    07/22/2014 6:10:00 PM PDT · 72 of 114
    Mrs. Don-o to mountainlion
    "If a scribe made a mistake he was beaten and the scroll destroyed in a ritual"

    I doubt that. Can you give me chapter and verse on that?

  • Nun: The Sign of Genocide (Please join Aug 1 Day of Solidarity and Prayer)

    07/22/2014 6:01:10 PM PDT · 9 of 9
    Mrs. Don-o to NYer

    read later

  • Muslims Enter Catholic Church, See A Statue Of The Virgin Mary, Call It An Idol And Destroy It

    07/22/2014 9:37:21 AM PDT · 116 of 131
    Mrs. Don-o to ealgeone
    "Nope. I worship and pray only to God. I acknowledge Mary was the mother of Christ and she is blessed among women for this. I also acknowledge that Paul was the writer of the bulk of the NT. However, I do not worship or pray to Mary or Paul or any other Christian. Nor did Mary, Peter, Paul, etc. Do I respect what Paul, Peter, James and the other apostles did? Yes. Do I respect what Mary did? Yes."

    Well, we're in perfect agreement on this. Good morning to you!

    Oops, it's past noon! Guess I'll cancel breakfast and go straight into lunch.

  • Muslims Enter Catholic Church, See A Statue Of The Virgin Mary, Call It An Idol And Destroy It

    07/22/2014 9:35:15 AM PDT · 115 of 131
    Mrs. Don-o to ealgeone
    Praying "for" someone and praying "to" someone are, indeed, two distinct things.

    Praying to someone and worshiping them are also two distinct things.

    But if I ask you (or any other saint) for something, I am praying TO you. I am asking FOR your intercessionary prayer.

    So, pray for me...I pray you.

    I could pray you for a cup of coffee, if you had one to spare :o)

    The point is, there are different senses of the word "pray." When I pray you for a cup of coffee, I am not worshipping you.

    It seems aggravating when people refuse to discern different meanings of the word prayer. Don't you see that? You keep insisting that I mean it YOUR way, which is as a synonym for worship. But it is not. To insist that it is, seems obstinacy.

  • @USCCB: Latest @BarackObama's Executive Order "unprecedented and extreme and should be opposed"

    07/22/2014 8:13:52 AM PDT · 26 of 53
    Mrs. Don-o to Teófilo

    For later.

  • ISIS Torches 1,800-Year-Old Church in Mosul; Priest Says City Is 'Now Empty of Christians'

    07/22/2014 8:12:53 AM PDT · 12 of 23
    Mrs. Don-o to NYer
    i wrote about this in our parish newsletter. Got one complaint: "What does this havce to do with us? Why are you focusing on the situation of people so far away, foreigners?"

    As if one Christian could call another Christian a foreigner! Or one Catholic, another Catholic! We are closer than we would be as U.S. co-citizens, closer even than natural family. We are members of the Body of Christ!

  • I Used to Be Pro-Choice, Pro-Choice to the Core, Then I Had an Abortion

    07/22/2014 7:58:35 AM PDT · 18 of 31
    Mrs. Don-o to Nevadan

    Feminists apparently think a woman is strong enough to handle the presidency, but not strong enough to handle a pregnancy.

  • Is the “Missio ad Gentes” Still a Priority for Pope Francis’ Church?

    07/22/2014 7:54:25 AM PDT · 12 of 17
    Mrs. Don-o to marshmallow

    Millions of people hated Benedict XVI for the wrong reasons. Now millions of people “love” Francis -— also for the wrong reasons.

  • Key West Gay Couple That Can't Marry: "Love is Love. That's All That Matters."

    07/22/2014 7:39:30 AM PDT · 27 of 36
    Mrs. Don-o to Opinionated Blowhard
    "Love is love. That's all that matters."

    If that's all that matters, why do they insist on sodomizing each other?

  • Key West Gay Couple That Can't Marry: "Love is Love. That's All That Matters."

    07/22/2014 7:37:52 AM PDT · 25 of 36
    Mrs. Don-o to SoFloFreeper
    "LGBT youth... are not only at risk of being victims of hate crimes but are also at an increased risk of self-hate offenses -- such as self-mutilation..."

    That's the very definition of a tranny.

    But if I pointed that out, my guess is I'd be the one who'd be called a hater.

  • The Bible isn't the word of God. It contains the word of God

    07/22/2014 7:08:43 AM PDT · 100 of 103
    Mrs. Don-o to Heart-Rest

    HaHa. Pretty good!

  • The Bible isn't the word of God. It contains the word of God

    07/21/2014 8:12:07 PM PDT · 84 of 103
    Mrs. Don-o to chajin

    Thank you, wow! That looks fascinating. I’m going to print it off when I get a chance. (These old eyes....)

  • The Bible isn't the word of God. It contains the word of God

    07/21/2014 4:27:00 PM PDT · 56 of 103
    Mrs. Don-o to chajin
    Hmmm... interesting. Now you're talking about 14 books of Apocrypha, and I'm curious what those 14 books would be. In addition, I suppose, to the 7 books called the Deuterocanonicals, which I listed in my previous post, what are the over seven books the LCMS has published?
  • The Bible isn't the word of God. It contains the word of God

    07/21/2014 4:22:08 PM PDT · 55 of 103
    Mrs. Don-o to boatbums
    Just to take on the last two (since it's suppertime)

    13. Jerome (AD 340-420) The great scholar and translator of the Latin Vulgate rejected the Apocrypha as part of the canon.

    You seem to forget that, while under the influence of rabbinical scholars who did not believe Jesus was the Messiah (a group Jesus called "spiritually blind") Jerome's initial opinion was against the LXX; but he later included the deuterocanonicals in his translation precisely because he did not want to rely on his own opinion, or on rabbinical opinion influenced by their ongoing anti-Christian polemic, but on the actual practice of the church. He went with the texts received and preserved by the churches for liturgical use.

    That established a principle: The guiding authority is (1) not your opinion (2) not rabbinical opinion, but (3) the actual practice of the churches.

    And that leads directly into your last point:

    14. Not until 1546 AD in a polemical action at the counter-Reformation Council of Trent (1545-63), did the apocryphal books receive full canonical status by the Roman Catholic Church.

    That's an unfortunately common misunderstanding of the way texts are recognized as canonical. The Council invented nothing, added nothing and imposed nothing: it confirmed (that's an important key word, "confirmed") the identical list already approved by the Council of Florence (1442), which in turn is the same as the earliest canonical lists extant from the synods of Carthage and Rome in the fourth century.

    This business of something lacking "full canonical status" unless it's confirmed in an Ecumenical Council is a misunderstanding of what a Council does.

    Although the Canon wasn't dogmatically defined in an ecumenical council until 1546, it had been first believed by the ancient Christian community (sensus fidelium), then celebrated liturgically, then recognized by local synods, then supported by scholastic argument, and lastly --- many centuries later, and under pressure of controversy by dissenters --- formally defined as a dogma of the Faith.

    That, by the way, is the normal course of doctrine: it is first anciently believed based on what was handed down to them; then celebrated; then clarified by argument, then defined. And not the other way around!

    Ecumenical Councils are generally prodded into action by dissent, controversy, conflict. There's no particular reason to define things which nobody out there is bug-tussling about. The purpose of the Council is to confirm what has been received by the Church, and by the Church I mean Christendom: by believers East and West going back to Apostolic times.


  • The Bible isn't the word of God. It contains the word of God

    07/21/2014 2:54:10 PM PDT · 48 of 103
    Mrs. Don-o to Boogieman
    I'm sorry, but some of what you wrote seems historically dubious. May I ask you for a fuller explanation?

    Who took themselves out [of Catholicism?]? Your Pope got together with the churches that still agreed with him and voted the rest out.

    What? What Pope? Got together with what churches? And "voted" the rest out? When? Who voted and what was the vote?

    "Nope, those books[the deuterocanonicals] were never in the canon of inspired literature before the Reformation, so there was nothing to be subtracted."

    Can you find me a church before, say, 1500 AD that had a 66-book canon? A church, a synod, a council, a bishop, a scholar, anybody? Even Jerome, whose opinion was strongly influenced by the Jewish scholars who excluded the deuterocanonicals (as well as the entire New Testament!!) did not substitute his individual opinion, or the AD Jews' rabbinical opinions, for the actual practice of the churches:

    Said Jerome: "What sin have I committed if I followed the judgment of the churches? But he who brings charges against me for relating the objections that the Hebrews are wont to raise against the Story of Susanna, the Song of the Three Children, and the story of Bel and the Dragon, which are not found in the Hebrew volume, proves that he is just a foolish sycophant. For I was not relating my own personal views, but rather the remarks that they [the Jews] are wont to make against us. (Against Rufinus, 11:33 [AD 402]).

    So Jerome acknowledged the principle by which the canon would be settled —the judgment of the Church,what was actually used liturgically in the churches, rather than his own judgment or the judgment of Jews who had rejected Christ.

    Of course, it's all more complicated than either of us has yet described. St. Jerome translated Tobias and Judith from Chaldean, parts of Esther and Daniel from Greek. Baruch, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus and the Maccabees he left unchanged from an early Latin version of the Scriptures (the Old Testament which was translated from the Septuagint, and was also called the Italic version).. The Psalms he did translate from Hebrew, but this translation was not popular, and the Clementine Vulgate contains the Old Latin translation corrected by St. Jerome according to the Septuagint.

    As for his translation from the Hebrew. A strong argument for favoring the Vulgate over the Masoretic Text seems to me that it is based on pre-Masoretic Hebrew texts. The Vulgate is almost 600 years older than the Masoretic Text.

    It's a little equivocal to speak of "the" "Hebrew Canon" (as if there were just one Hebrew Canon) when the Greek LXX, which was translated from the Hebrew --- as was confirmed by the Dead Sea Scrolls --- was translated from an OLDER Hebrew text than the Masoretic.

    St Justin Martyr (AD 100 – 165) supports the Septuagint and claims that the Jews altered their Scriptures to eliminate obvious prophecies of Christ: for instance, the still-debated question of "a virgin shall bear a son" vs. "a young woman shall bear a son" in Isaiah.

  • The Bible isn't the word of God. It contains the word of God

    07/21/2014 2:27:27 PM PDT · 43 of 103
    Mrs. Don-o to chajin
    Because "apocrypha" is a much larger category, can I assume you mean the seven deuterocanonical books? (I like to avoid conflation between the otherwise distinct terms "deuterocanonical" and "apocryphal".)

    Looking at my lectionary, the answer is "yes, mostly."

    Tobit -- 6 Weekday Mass readings in Year I

    Judith -- --

    Esther (12:14-16, 21-25)one pericope in the weekday readings

    Wisdom -- 15 pericopes in both Sunday and Weekday readings

    Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus)-- a whole bunch, spread across both the Sunday and Weekday cycles

    Baruch -- 4 pericopes, Sundays and weekdays

    Daniel: The Song of Azariah is used as one of the First Readings
    I can't find it readily, but I think the Song of the Three Holy Children is sometimes used as a Responsory Psalm, probably when the Fiery Furnace episode is the First Reading

    1 Maccabees -- 4 pericopes, all on weekdays of the first cycle

    II Maccabees -- 3 pericopes, one on a Sunday, two on weekdays

    This is just from running my eyes down the list of the Roman Missal Lectionary, 1970 edition. There might be some "presider's choice of readings" or "alternate readings" for special Masses or feast days of saints, I don't know.

    I can't speak for the Orthodox, they have a different lectionary.

    It's very nice, by the way, to answer a question by an inquirer who is actually looking for an answer. :o)

  • The Bible isn't the word of God. It contains the word of God

    07/21/2014 11:19:37 AM PDT · 16 of 103
    Mrs. Don-o to Boogieman
    Those who take themselves out of "Catholic," take themselves out of the Canon.

    You might want to consider the first 1500 years. Did the Holy Spirit abandon the Christian people for 1500 years, just to pop in again in the 16th century and reveal: "You got the canon wrong"?

    And as for those who had split from "Catholic," who exactly gave them the authority to subtract books from the Canon? Some king?

    And if that's something the British throne and her licensed liturgists in the Anglican Church had the competence to do, do they still have it? Could Queen Elizabeth II and Abp Justin Welby split off a couple more books if they felt divinely called to do so?

    Or, instead of 1500 years, switch your focus to 2,000 years. The big majority of Christians still have the full canon --- 73 books. There has been a Christian church in continuous existence for 1900 years in Mosul, Iraq. They speak Aramaic, the language of Jesus. They have the same canon as the rest of us Catholics. I think it's a good bet that they're clinging to their whole Bible as they high-tail it outta there --- as we speak. If the ISIS couldn't make them give it up, I very much doubt the Anglicans would be very persuasive.

  • The Bible isn't the word of God. It contains the word of God

    07/21/2014 11:04:31 AM PDT · 13 of 103
    Mrs. Don-o to SeekAndFind
    104 In Sacred Scripture, the Church constantly finds her nourishment and her strength, for she welcomes it not as a human word, "but as what it really is, the word of God". "In the sacred books, the Father who is in heaven comes lovingly to meet his children, and talks with them."

    Catechism, para 104

  • The Bible isn't the word of God. It contains the word of God

    07/21/2014 10:50:24 AM PDT · 9 of 103
    Mrs. Don-o to SeekAndFind
    "The collection of 66 books that the Christian Church recognized as being inspired speaks as the very words of God in many places.."

    The Cristian Church recognizes a collection of 73 books. This author seems a little weak on the historic Christian canon.

  • Family considers killing 10-year-old daughter after mullah rapes her in Afghanistan mosque

    07/21/2014 10:47:04 AM PDT · 13 of 71
    Mrs. Don-o to george76
    I'm sorry. In case anybody missed this:

    The girl’s own testimony, and medical evidence, supported a rape so violent that it caused a fistula, or a break in the wall between the vagina and rectum, according to the police and the official bill of indictment. She bled so profusely after the attack that she was at one point in danger of losing her life because of a delay in getting medical care.

    After the two women’s officials began speaking out about the case, they started receiving threatening calls from mullahs – some of them Taliban, others on the government side – and from arbakai, or pro-government militiamen. One of their claims was that the girl was actually 17, and thus of marriageable age, not 10.

    Photographs of the girl that Sarwari took in the hospital clearly show a pre-pubescent child, and the doctor said the girl weighed only 40 pounds. Few Afghans have birth records, and many do not know their precise ages. But the girl’s mother said she was 10, and a forensic examination in the hospital agreed, saying she had not yet started menstruating or developing secondary sexual characteristics.

  • Muslims Enter Catholic Church, See A Statue Of The Virgin Mary, Call It An Idol And Destroy It

    07/21/2014 10:15:26 AM PDT · 93 of 131
    Mrs. Don-o to ealgeone
    Nobody said anything about Great Britain. We're talking about Biblical understandings and types.

    The OT presents a comprehensive set of prophecies and prefigurings of Jesus, all through the pages of the Hebrew Scriptures. Jesus Himself said (Luke 24:17) that these things refer to Him. If the books of Moses, the Psalms and all the Prophets refer to Him, they refer also to the people and events around Him.

    Mary is explicitly presented as Queen in Revelation 12. It is she who is clothed with the sun, standing on the moon, wearing a crown of 12 stars. (You had some other Biblical Queen in mind?) She is portrayed as giving birth to a son who will "rule the nations" (you had some other King in mind?) and she is also portrayed as being concerned for all her offspring, "those who keep the commandments, and hold fast to the testimony of Jesus": that would be us --- including you and me ---assuming we keep the commandments and have faith in Christ.

    So you not only have Jesus as your personal savior, you have Mary as your personal mother.

    And where would you assume a Queen to be? You're Biblically correct about the "right hand" part:

    Psalm 45:9
    daughters of kings are among Your ladies of honour; at Your right hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir.


    1 Kings 2:19
    So Bathsheba went to King Solomon, to speak to him on behalf of Adonijah. The king rose to meet her, and bowed down to her; then he sat on his throne, and had a throne brought for the king’s mother, and she sat on his right.

    The Biblical commandment says that we are to honor our father and our mother. Solomon demonstrated how a good King's mother is to be treated. Do you think that Jesus would fall short of the standards of His predecessors, or would show less honor to His own Mother?

    It is demeaning to Jesus to suppose that He would fulfill the commandments or courtesies less regally than Solomon did.

  • It's over ... Genocide has been accomplished

    07/21/2014 9:47:09 AM PDT · 36 of 37
    Mrs. Don-o to okie01; Biggirl
    The Sauis are the principal funders of every Salafist jihadi terorist organization in the world.

    Google this:

    Walsh, Declan (December 5, 2010). "WikiLeaks cables portray Saudi Arabia as a cash machine for terrorists". The Guardian (London).

    "US embassy cables: Hillary Clinton says Saudi Arabia 'a critical source of terrorist funding'". The Guardian (London). December 5, 2010.

  • It's over ... Genocide has been accomplished

    07/20/2014 6:40:50 PM PDT · 32 of 37
    Mrs. Don-o to Biggirl
    But I've always wondered why, when 17 of the 19 guys who blew up the World Trade center were Saudis coordinated by Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, we targeted, not Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, for Afghanistan and Iraq.

    Why Iraq?