Posted on 12/17/2003 10:42:40 AM PST by Pyro7480
Edited on 04/23/2004 12:06:15 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
'It Is as It Was'
Mel Gibson's "The Passion" gets a thumbs-up from the pope.
Wednesday, December 17, 2003 1:06 p.m.
Here's some happy news this Christmas season, an unexpected gift for those who have seen and admired Mel Gibson's controversial movie, "The Passion," and wish to support it. The film has a new admirer, and he is a person of some influence. He is in fact the head of the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
Your opinion, sir, not mine. But my point remains that speaking ability does not prove Godliness, any more than does musicianship, or acting, or writing ability, or ...
Can-o-worms. I think your eschatology is, well, mistaken. I suppose that's not news. But the view you express here, about apostate churches in end-times, is rather more moderate than what Dave Hunt, for example, has to say about the Catholic Church right now today. That's what prompts my occasionally very intemperate remarks.
And again, the entire purpose of this thread has been lost. Those five little words of the Popes "It is as it was" have been lost again. I've said it before in thread and I'll say it again, though I disagree with the roman catholic religious system I do like and appreciate what the man said and I feel those words should reverberate until everyone has heard them. Again, just because I disagree with his principles and religion doesn't mean I can't ask folks to honor him for what he said, can I??
Try reading John Ankerberg, David Hunt, Hal Lindsey among others.
You're right, it doesn't! Wow, we actually agree on something. But it wasn't his speaking skills that I was alluding to. It's what he SAID in his lectures or sermons that tell what a godly man he was.
Self-appointed watchdogs.
But you know what made them even more likable?? It was the fact that even though we disagreed on matters of religion we agreed that we wouldn't interfere with our friendship and working relationship. Heck, I even helped to document a catholic worship service one of him so he could send a report back to his diocese. Does that sound like someone who hates catholics as I've been accused of?
We come here to further the cause of conservatism, at least we should be. If we can, as I've done in the past, "agree to disagree" and not get so arrogant and hateful in our language, then this would be a much nicer thread that it has been.
There are people who will attest to lots of things. There are people who will attest to their belief that Joseph Smith is a prophet of God, but that doesn't make him one.
Objective evidence, my friend. The objective evidence that verifies Rivera's story doesn't exist, and plenty of evidence exists that shows him to be a phony. To ignore that evidence with a "catholics made it up" line is to leap into the arms of a non-falsifiable exercise in illogic.
Again, just because I disagree with his principles and religion doesn't mean I can't ask folks to honor him for what he said, can I??
You can, and I think it's fine that you do, but I'd prefer that you didn't combine it with a no-holds-barred attack on everything else he's said.
Having said that, I find it odd, but oddly encouraging, that otherwise vociferously anti-Catholic believers of various stripes are endorsing, sight unseen, a movie starring a Catholic man and a Jewish woman, directed by a traditionalist schismatic Catholic man (whose position re Protestantism is infinitely less irenic than the Pope's, BTW) ... a movie whose script is heavily based, not only on the Bible, but on the mystical insights of an 18th Century Catholic nun. Maybe y'all don't know what you're getting yourselves into ... that roman catholic institution [sic] and her worldwide conspiracy's out to get'cha. BOO! [just kidding :-)].
Reminiscing about your long friendship with Judas Iscariot isn't going to impress Peter, John, or Mary. Sorry.
With all due respect (to you), if that is a true story that fellow should be defrocked and excommunicated. In addition to privately (and not so privately) believing and teaching heresy, he was defrauding the Catholic soldiers to whom he should have been ministering the Gospel. I have naught but contempt for him. You, at least, are an honest Protestant. He was a dishonest liar; a protestant masquerading as a Catholic Priest. If that's the sort of "catholic" you get along so famously with I regret to inform that it doesn't prove much.
You said before it was a LACK OF EVIDENCE that supported the claim that he wasn't a priest, so which is it??
Having said that, I find it odd, but oddly encouraging, that otherwise vociferously anti-Catholic believers of various stripes are endorsing, sight unseen, a movie starring a Catholic man and a Jewish woman, directed by a traditionalist schismatic Catholic man (whose position re Protestantism is infinitely less irenic than the Pope's, BTW)
Hard to say, but after viewing the show, if I find it has a definite catholic flavor to it, I will let folks know. But on the other hand if I find that it is right on the money, I will let folks know that too.
And your argument can be piggy-backed on by saying this: The one person who brought us a Bible that has lasted for over 300 years is the same person who tortured and killed hundreds. Guess we can find a rose in a bryer patch if we just look hard enough huh?
I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you!
I'd have to reread the Christianity Today article to refresh my memory. As I recall, there was no evidence that he was a bishop, a Jesuit, a seminary graduate, or that he was stationed at specific places he claimed to be stationed at. There was evidence that he was other places, doing other things, during times he claimed to be this dark, nasty, Jesuit secret agent carrying out Rome's awful orders.
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.