Posted on 12/15/2018 4:10:34 AM PST by sparklite2
Maison Hullibarger’s father tells the Detroit Free Press that he asked the priest to stop talking during the Dec. 8 funeral Mass. But Jeff Hullibarger says the Rev. Don LaCuesta continued giving a critical sermon at Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church in Temperance.
Hullibarger says some mourners left the church crying.
The archdiocese released a statement Thursday saying it’s sorry that an “unbearable situation was made even more difficult.” The archdiocese says LaCuesta will not preach at funerals “for the foreseeable future.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Is there any significance to the Morse code sososososo?
The Roman Catholic defense of this mess is deeply disturbing. But then again....this is the denomination that moves their homosexual priests around and seemingly refuses to deal with this issue.
Formal "Dogmatization" of any article of the faith generally doesn't happen unless dissent and controversy are threatening the unity of the Church.
If the identical same catalogue of books (canon) documented to be extant in 382 AD, 405 AD, all the way through 1546 AD (Trent) and continuing to 2018 AD (now) --- that is, 1600+ years of continuity --- is considered unsettled, it's you who have a problem.
But tell me, because I'd really like to know: who authorized the 16th century revised (or, as you might say, "reformed") canon used by your denomination? What person or group of persons by name? What year or even decade, by date? I'd like to look up these gentlemen and check out by what authority, or what qualifications, they claimed the right to determine the Scriptural canon.
What would be condign punishment to you? The priest has been suspended from funeral duties and ordered into training. That sounds about right.
Roman Catholic defense of what mess? You’re not clear.
I again suggest you do some serious research on this topic. F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, would be a good start.
But tell me, because I'd really like to know: who authorized the 16th century revised (or, as you might say, "reformed") canon used by your denomination? What person or group of persons by name? What year or even decade, by date? I'd like to look up these gentlemen and check out by what authority, or what qualifications, they claimed the right to determine the Scriptural canon.
The ekklesia.
In 2 Peter 3:16 we have Paul's writings accorded as Scripture ~66AD.
Jesus defined the OT canon in Matthew 23:35; Luke 11:51; Luke 24:44....it did not include the apocrypha.
By 200 AD all NT books we have today were accepted by the ekklesia.
Your continued defense of the priest at the funeral of the article posted. That mess.
He's gotten a slap on the wrist.
He'll be back doing funerals again in the near future.
???
There is no canonical list here. This is a list of righteous blood being shed. It does not define a list of books. The very use of the word "apocrypha" here is anachronistic.
"By 200 AD all NT books we have today were accepted by the ekklesia. "
Very interesting. What is the name of that 200 AD or pre-200 AD document you are referring to? The one that has this list?
The only reference to "Roman Catholic" authorities cited in the article we are referring to, is as follows:
"The archdiocese released a statement Thursday saying it’s sorry that an “unbearable situation was made even more difficult.” The archdiocese says LaCuesta will not preach at funerals “for the foreseeable future.”
I never even mentioned Rev. Don LaCuesrta, let alone his words.
My comments were of a more general theological nature: that suicide is an objective sin; that God is merciful to repentant sinners; and that full responsibility for sin cannot be imputed to a person who was not in his right mind.
By saying "Your continued defense of the priest at the funeral of the article posted," you are asserting that I defended either Rev. LaCuesta or his words, which I never saw, or mentioned, or quoted, and which were not quoted in "the article posted."
Your false misrepresentation is noted.
Nonsense.
The Fifth Marian Dogma.
This would pretty much finish elevating Mary officially to a fourth member of the Trinity.
It's gonna happen because Roman Catholics want it to happen....not that it's Scripturaly sound in any measure and contradicts Scripture....but that's not stopped Roman Catholicism before.
You assert, wrongly, dogmas aren't made unless there is dissent and controversy. Rome's sources say different.
The Marian dogmas of her Immaculate Conception and her Assumption, for example, were solemnly proclaimed only after a lengthy petition drive from the Catholic faithful to the Holy Father. Before the papal definition of the Immaculate Conception by Blessed Pius IX in 1854, millions of petitions from the Catholic world were sent to the Vatican, with particular perseverance coming from Spain and its Catholic government. In the case of the Assumption, infallibly declared by Pius XII in 1950, over 8 million petitions spanning 95 years were documented by the Holy Office in support of this Marian dogma.https://catholicexchange.com/the-fifth-marian-dogma-the-churchs-unused-weapon
I weep for them too.
We have the family's account as I've provided but I guess that's not enough for you. That the "priest" has been removed from funeral duties is telling.
I never even mentioned Rev. Don LaCuesrta, let alone his words.
Kinda similar to the old plea of soldiers caught doing wrong things...I was just following orders.
Yet you still refuse to condemn this. Amazing.
From Wikipedia:
"Co-Redemptrix is a title used by some Roman Catholics for the Blessed Virgin Mary, as well as a Catholic theological concept referring to Mary's role in the redemption of all peoples. It has always been controversial and has never formed part of the dogma of the Church. "This is not a dogma.
Pre-criticizing a non-dogma. Wow. The Full Cathy Newman!! 
We'e through! Bye!
Formal "Dogmatization" of any article of the faith generally doesn't happen unless dissent and controversy are threatening the unity of the Church.
Nonsense.
The Fifth Marian Dogma.
This would pretty much finish elevating Mary officially to a fourth member of the Trinity.
It's gonna happen because Roman Catholics want it to happen....not that it's Scripturaly sound in any measure and contradicts Scripture....but that's not stopped Roman Catholicism before.
You assert, wrongly, dogmas aren't made unless there is dissent and controversy. Rome's sources say different.
The Marian dogmas of her Immaculate Conception and her Assumption, for example, were solemnly proclaimed only after a lengthy petition drive from the Catholic faithful to the Holy Father. Before the papal definition of the Immaculate Conception by Blessed Pius IX in 1854, millions of petitions from the Catholic world were sent to the Vatican, with particular perseverance coming from Spain and its Catholic government. In the case of the Assumption, infallibly declared by Pius XII in 1950, over 8 million petitions spanning 95 years were documented by the Holy Office in support of this Marian dogma.https://catholicexchange.com/the-fifth-marian-dogma-the-churchs-unused-weapon
And the Fifth Marian Dogma, when it's proclaimed goes beyond the co-redemtrix blasphemy.
But I'll note another comment from the same wiki article you posted...and it's pretty telling.
In August 1996, a Mariological Congress was held in Częstochowa, Poland, where a commission was established in response to a request of the Holy See. The congress sought the opinion of scholars present there regarding the possibility of proposing a fifth Marian dogma on Mary as Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, and Advocate.
The commission unanimously declared that it was not opportune, voting 23-0 against the proposed dogma.
Say what....not opportune????
If it's true, it's true [in Roman Catholicism but not Christianity].
You assert it's not a dogma....but it has been proclaimed by Rome previously.
"Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. ... Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix" (Lumen gentium, 62).
The Roman Catholic has to again fall back on verbal gymnastics to avoid the clear meaning of words from their denomination.
Rome is so far off base on this it's very, very sad.
Keep defending the “company”....atta good Roman Catholic girl.
That's what I call, Cutting Out the Middle Man.
Well, Jesus, his mother, (the Virgin Mary) and Jesus's earthly father (Joseph) WERE Jewish ...
Call no man father
Matthew 23:9
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.