Posted on 05/24/2004 9:17:25 PM PDT by churchillbuff
MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) -- As president of the Christian Coalition of Alabama, John Giles is no stranger to a pew. Yet he remembers well the time he got lost in a Roman Catholic church.
"I couldn't even follow the order of service, it was so foreign to me," Giles says of that day some six years ago.
Since then he's found his way and a new home in the Roman Catholic church — a home that might seem foreign to the overwhelmingly Protestant church population of Alabama.
"I have to admit to you that the whole time that I was in that church service, I was reduced to tears, and I couldn't explain it," Giles said Monday in an interview with The Associated Press.
"In fact," he jokes, "you would have thought I had been spending the whole weekend down at the House of the Rising Sun down in New Orleans, that I had all this sin in my life that I had to get out."
In any case, Giles and his wife, Deborah, were received into the Catholic Church at St. Peter's Parish in Montgomery on Easter Sunday.
Such a decision normally wouldn't be a matter of public interest, but Giles says he anticipated the questions that have followed his conversion from the Protestant faith.
"It would be nice if my private, Christian walk could be my private, Christian walk, but it's very difficult in my job for that to be the case," he says.
Giles says he knew the questions would come because as a Protestant he, too, had mistaken notions about Catholics. And the most frequent question he gets from his friends is "why?"
With that in mind he wrote an eight-page letter explaining his reasoning. In it, he explains that he had attended a variety of Protestant churches in Montgomery, including Christian Life Church and River of Life Church.
But once he visited the Roman Catholic church, he found himself in awe of its history and ritual, particularly its use of sight, sound, smell, taste and touch in each service.
Trips to Israel and Rome spurred his curiosity. And the deeper he looked into the faith — which is the largest in the United States but lags behind Southern Baptists and other Protestant denominations in the South — the more he says he realized that many of his beliefs about Catholicism had been wrong.
"There is a perception among Protestants — you kind of have this perception that if you're Episcopal or Catholic, you're not even saved, you're not born again, which is totally a myth," he says.
He recalls one example from the New Year's holiday, which he spent in Florida with the chairman of his board. He had told the chairman of his and Deborah's plans to convert, and he says they were well-received.
"But we went to some other friends of theirs' house on one of the nights we were down there," Giles remembers. "And so we're sitting around visiting and this one lady was teaching a Sunday School class on cults. And she began to name off all the cults that she'd be teaching and named Catholic in there."
He acknowledges that the reaction by his Protestant constituents may be mixed.
"We didn't make this change to win friends and influence people and do it from a popularity standpoint, because we knew that in the state of Alabama, this is probably not a popular position to take in the Christian movement," he says. "So it remains to be seen."
But he hopes they, like he and his wife, will keep an open mind.
"We hope that we could have a small contribution to building bridges where there weren't bridges," he says. "Because Christians are Christians. There's no such thing as Christians and Catholics."
lol!
You need to learn to read Scripture and interpret it.
The statue of St. Peter in St. Peter's Square has his toes rubbed off because you folks go around kissing it like he is a god.
Granted, that is just some Catholics, but it highlights how your hierarchal structure can lead to things.
And if by learn more, you of course mean read Catholic refutation books.
so of course they will be "enlightened" to how great the RCC is when they read your propaganda!
I have a book from the late 1800's, intended for Catholic use, that has lots of well....."interesting" dotrines.
You're reading into the text again.
And your St. Ambrose contradicts the very words of Hebrews that I posted and that with which you suggest you agree, by saying that Jesus became an eternal oblation.
And you yourself contradict the words of St. Ambrose, who says that Jesus entered the heavenly places by means of His own blood.
Furthermore, you and your commentators deny the various uses of the term "once for all" and the blatant statement of verse 25 that He did not offer Himself often - in any capacity. One use of the plural "sacrifices" negates all the rest? The singular "sacrifice" is used a dozen times in those same verses - what of that?
Bottom line is, an unbloody sacrifice can never remit sin. Check out verse 22 - without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin. So what then is the point of an "unbloody" sacrifice?
Jesus' death was for the remission of sin. An incense offering was never used as such. Therefore the "unbloody" sacrifice of incense in Revelation was not for the remission of sin.
Nestorians are heretics.
I do like the Eastern Orthodox church a lot better than the RCC though.
I love Mary.
I do not believe she is another mediator. Scripture says there is ONE mediator, Jesus Christ!
I do not believe she is worthy of idolatrous violations of the Second Commandment with graven images and statues.
Tons of Reformed people on here.
check this out.....this is the "Great Reformed Ping List"...a long list of Reformed Freepers.
http://www.freerepublic.com/~drstevej/index?U=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.freerepublic.com%2Ffocus%2Ff-news%2Fbrowse
"Well, you are wrong. I have a book of Catholic doctrine from the Archdiocese of Boston at that time (was my mom's father's book) from the late 1800's which is very clear that Mary is a co-mediator with Christ."
Sorry, but I have to say I find it -hilarious- how many people base "the Archdiocese of Boston" as the New Vatican - and how those are the ones who basically despise the real Vatican and use it as a surrogate for bashing.
I think it's pretty obvious that that particular Archdiocese has been routinely and deliberately infiltrated, subversed and used as a tool to discredit Catholics for ages. It used to be hostile Protestants and Masonists who were eager to do so. These days, communists continue that work. Communists certainly -intended- to and planned to do precisely that - infiltrate and discredit the Church - it's all over their writings as a means to discredit religion, which is directly antithetical to their social utopia. They need to discredit and destroy the Church just as much as they need to destroy the U.S. Of course, with only one eye open, people like these will recognize the propaganda against the U.S. but then act as if every negative word uttered against Catholicism -must- be true. Who would lie?!
And now we're going back to what they said in the 1800's to make a claim that no Catholic I have ever met in my life makes?
To your direct points - the actual Church has never taught any official "co-mediator" doctrine of Mary. Mary is the favorite tool of the propagandists against the Church. I honestly consider it -bizarre- how much they revile her, especially considering what the Bible itself says. Mary CAN mediate with Jesus, precisely the same as ANY Saint can, and any human being can. But do you know what "mediate" in this case means? It means PRAY. Mary and the Saints don't have any more power to "mediate" than living humans do - that is, they, and we, can -pray-. Look at the actual text of the Hail Mary. The -only- thing asked of Mary is that she "pray for our sinners".
Now, if Freepers can daily come on this website and say "Please pray for our fellow Freeper who's in the hospital", asking someone else to pray, why can't Catholics ask Mary in Heaven to pray? That's all this "co-mediator BS is - taking the act of asking Mary to pray for us and twisting that into making it look like Catholics believe Mary herself has any power to -grant- the thing being prayed for, in order to discredit and defame Catholics.
But as far as non-Catholics going to Hell? You're closer to the mark on that one. Yes, the Church is held to be the only means of salvation. And yes, Vatican II does try to tone that down, though it does not overturn the dogma. Then again, virtually every Protestant faith I know themselves claims that Catholics are all going to Hell, so I'm not sure precisely why that should be soooo horrible for Catholics to believe.
And by the way, I'm not Catholic. I -used- to be Catholic, but the difference is, I'm not "bitter" about it. I just lack Faith, but I don't have some huge chip on my shoulder where I blast away at my previous Church because I fell hook, line and sinker for the vicious propaganda, which is no different at all in viciousness or source from the kind of hateful propaganda you see daily spewed against the U.S.
Qwinn
That's okay! It is interesting to me! I found that studying the Jewish Feasts just added more depth to my love of God, and more knowledge of the meaning of some of the words of Christ in the NT! It is decidedly Jewish afterall!
Yeah, I'd have invented Orthodox Judaism as well (you'd probably have invented "17th century" English deism). Why don't you answer my questions? Otherwise I'll take this as an admission that you know absolutely nothing about it.
Sorry my friend but the website you cite is NOT a "Catholic" website,
I knew it! Unless you believe in evolution you aren't really "Catholic!" I'll be sure and tell this guy that he's in danger of excommunication. Too bad he's not "gay" rather than a Biblical literalist. Then he'd get a nice, cushy job in Rome.
it appears to be a website created by an individual Catholic.
Ah, but it's actually a website put out by a Protestant posing as a Catholic, right??? 'Cause, see, if he were Catholic, he'd be an evolutionist! The same goes for this web site as well. Subversive Protestant borers from within, every one of them. At least that's how they're treated. And don't forget the Kolbe Center. They're all a bunch of Southern Baptists carrying out the orders of the Masonic lodge by destroying the Catholic Church with creationism, whereas all true Catholics interpret only eight words literally ("this is my body, this is my blood").
That's right, we are NOT mindless robots controlled by Rome.
Then why do you blindly follow Rome's support of higher criticism and evolution? Why don't you "think for yourself?"
Next time look for the imprimatur.
Oh, you mean like all those higher critical "bibles" have? But, literalists can't get one, can they? So I guess this is a victory for you, since only good evolutionists can get them (which goes against your "independent" argument above).
Seriously, if you only knew the kinds of works that get a nihil obstat and in imprimatur you wouldn't even bring the issue up. They don't appear to mean very much.
This Protestant believes you! I think there is a concerted effort to discredit and destroy all of Christianity in this country, or should I say the world. The Catholic church is certainly being attacked in the media constantly lately as if they are the only area in life where molestation happens, etc. I know what is going on here, and my heart goes out to you all.
I also know that Catholics do not condone this behavior, you are all upset about it, and wish that it would be dealt with and stopped, just as I wish it would be stopped where it also happens in Protestant Churches and anywhere else.
Even worse, these Godless accusers then turn right around and endorse the same reprehensible behavior among the unchurched! "good is evil, and evil is good."
And your St. Ambrose contradicts the very words of Hebrews that I posted and that with which you suggest you agree, by saying that Jesus became an eternal oblation.
Jesus IS an eternal oblation. Check the meaning of the word "oblation."
"And you yourself contradict the words of St. Ambrose, who says that Jesus entered the heavenly places by means of His own blood."
Wow! Where did I do this? Certainly, it was never my intent to say that Jesus DIDN'T enter the heavenly places by means of His own blood. Can you show me where I said this?
"Furthermore, you and your commentators deny the various uses of the term "once for all" and the blatant statement of verse 25 that He did not offer Himself often - in any capacity."
Sorry, but it, I believe, is you who do not fully comprehend just what is meant by "once for all" in Hebrews. The text makes plain, specifically in the verse you cited about 'suffering' that the 'once and for all' refers refers to bloody sacrifice.
"The use of the plural "sacrifices" negates all the rest?"
No. However, note the heavenly sacrifices are better than the bloody sacrifices of the priests under the Old Covenant here on earth. Note further those bloody sacrifices did remit sin.
"The singular "sacrifice" is used a dozen times in those same verses - what of that?"
Yes, and in each instance it is referring to bloody sacrifice.
"Bottom line is, an unbloody sacrifice can never remit sin. Check out verse 22 - without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin. So what then is the point of an "unbloody" sacrifice?"
Who said the Mass was for the remission of sin? Certainly, venial sins, small sins, can be washed away at Mass by saying the Confetitor, but mortal sins won't be. Indeed, anyone participating in Mass with mortal sin on their soul is drinking condemnation unto himself.
The word, "Eucharist," means, literally, Thanksgiving. Check out the Old Testament for the numerous examples of sacrifices offered to God in thanksgiving.
The Mass is an Act of Worship. The Ultimate Act of Worship in which Christ joins us to Himself through His Body and Blood in an offering to God.(see St. Paul who commands us to be "living sacrifices" to God.) It is not meant for remission of serious sin.(That's why God gave us Confession.) It is meant for Worship.
I was Catholic for six years, and had to study in order to convert, so please don't tell me I know nothing about Catholicism, however much you may disagree with me. And you claim that Catholicism has always supported Israel is so ludicrous that it isn't even funny. I will respond to no more of your posts.
Is it true as some are saying that you don't believe in the creation by God, but in evolution? I haven't heard that before about the Catholic Church, and can't find it on the web sites.
My problem is with his use of eternal, not oblation.
Wow! Where did I do this? Certainly, it was never my intent to say that Jesus DIDN'T enter the heavenly places by means of His own blood. Can you show me where I said this?
You cited Ambrose in support of unbloody sacrifice, but the quote you supplied describes no such thing but rather discusses the necessity of the blood.
Sorry, but it, I believe, is you who do not fully comprehend just what is meant by "once for all" in Hebrews. The text makes plain, specifically in the verse you cited about 'suffering' that the 'once and for all' refers refers to bloody sacrifice.
I don't disagree with you, but would add that your further interpretation requires reading more into the text in order to find this unbloody sacrifice, and with that I do disagree. I simply don't see it there and don't feel it's been effectively demonstrated.
The Mass is an Act of Worship. The Ultimate Act of Worship in which Christ joins us to Himself through His Body and Blood in an offering to God.(see St. Paul who commands us to be "living sacrifices" to God.) It is not meant for remission of serious sin.(That's why God gave us Confession.) It is meant for Worship.
But it (meaning unbloody, perpetual sacrifice of Christ, not the act of communion, which of course is biblical) finds no place in scripture, least of all in your originally posted references to Revelation - that's where this discussion started, if you'll recall. You asked why is there an altar in Revelation, if not for Christ's perpetual sacrifice, and the answer has not changed.
The altar in Revelation is used for incense. You attempted to link this offering to an unbloody sacrifice of Christ, but the truth is, Christ does not offer the incense on the altar in Revelation. An angel does. And there is simply no textual indication that the incense offering represents His sacrifice in any capacity whatsoever.
What I see is you, a non-Christian, attacking both Protestants and Catholics i.e. everyone on this thread dogmatically.
If a Christian went on a Jewish thread and attacked Jews refusal to follow Christ they wouldn't last long around here. Even if they called it "lamenting."
I apologize in advance for a long post... but I want do deal with this subject in full. The background on Jesus is meant for ZC.
If you want to follow Christ, don't you think it would be a good thing to know who He is and why He came? Who He is is both simple and complex. Simply He is the Word made flesh, God dwelling among His people. He is the second person of the Holy Trinity. The complexity of His nature is beyond our understanding.
He isn't someone foreign to the Old Testament dreamed up to fulfill the Law and the prophets in the New Testament. His coming was foretold throughout the Old Testament--first in Genesis, actually, when God chastised the serpent. Jesus also spoke directly through the prophet Isaiah...
Isaiah 48:12
"Listen to Me, O Jacob, even Israel whom I called;
I am He, I am the first, I am also the last.
13 "Surely My hand founded the earth,
And My right hand spread out the heavens;
When I call to them, they stand together.
14 "Assemble, all of you, and listen!
Who among them has declared these things?
The LORD loves him;
he will carry out His good pleasure on Babylon,
And His arm will be against the Chaldeans.
15 "I, even I, have spoken; indeed I have called him,
I have brought him, and He will make his ways successful.
16 "Come near to Me, listen to this:
From the first I have not spoken in secret,
From the time it took place, I was there.
And now the Lord GOD has sent Me, and His Spirit."
Here in the Old Testament, you have God speaking in the first person. He makes it clear who is the speaker with the identifiers of creation and infinity (alpha and omega). He ends the discourse showing that although He is God Himself, God has sent Him and His Spirit. Jesus speaking first person in the Old Testament... Old Testament Trinity.
So Jesus is God. He is the God of the New and Old Testament--the One Who came to fulfill the Law and the prophets. The next question is WHY did he come? The simple answer is that He came to die for our sins. Have you ever looked deeply into what that statement means? It means He didn't come for the purpose of preaching and teaching. He came to die.
God sent His messengers throughout history to preach His Word. He didn't come Himself to repeat it. He repeated it and explained it to show His identity for the fullness of His sacrifice. The Greatest Commandment discourse makes this clear. Here, a rabbi comes to Jesus to trap Him with a question...
Matt 22:34 But when the Pharisees heard that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered themselves together. 35 One of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, 36 "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?" 37 And He said to him, " 'YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.' 38 "This is the great and foremost commandment."
Was this new? Nope.
Deut 6:4 "Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one! 5 "You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.
So Jesus didn't come to teach. He came to die...
Isaiah 52:13
Behold, My servant will prosper,
He will be high and lifted up and greatly exalted.
14 Just as many were astonished at you, My people,
So His appearance was marred more than any man And His form more than the sons of men.
15 Thus He will sprinkle many nations,
Kings will shut their mouths on account of Him;
For what had not been told them they will see,
And what they had not heard they will understand.
Isaiah 53:1
Who has believed our message?
And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 For He grew up before Him like a tender shoot,
And like a root out of parched ground;
He has no stately form or majesty
That we should look upon Him,
Nor appearance that we should be attracted to Him.
3 He was despised and forsaken of men,
A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief;
And like one from whom men hide their face
He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.
4 Surely our griefs He Himself bore,
And our sorrows He carried;
Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten of God, and afflicted.
5 But He was pierced through for our transgressions,
He was crushed for our iniquities;
The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him,
And by His scourging we are healed.
6 All of us like sheep have gone astray,
Each of us has turned to his own way;
But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all
To fall on Him.
7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
Yet He did not open His mouth;
Like a lamb that is led to slaughter,
And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers,
So He did not open His mouth.
8 By oppression and judgment He was taken away;
And as for His generation, who considered
That He was cut off out of the land of the living
For the transgression of my people, to whom the stroke was due?
9 His grave was assigned with wicked men,
Yet He was with a rich man in His death,
Because He had done no violence,
Nor was there any deceit in His mouth.
10 But the LORD was pleased
To crush Him, putting Him to grief;
If He would render Himself as a guilt offering,
He will see His offspring,
He will prolong His days,
And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.
11 As a result of the anguish of His soul,
He will see it and be satisfied;
By His knowledge the Righteous One,
My Servant, will justify the many,
As He will bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great,
And He will divide the booty with the strong;
Because He poured out Himself to death,
And was numbered with the transgressors;
Yet He Himself bore the sin of many, And interceded for the transgressors.
Havoc, you claim that Catholics live and believe outside of Biblical teachings. On the contrary, our Protestant friends have to discard and obscure what is plainly spoken to deny the truth. I'll show you that clearly in the eucharist...
You want to believe that Jesus was speaking metaphorically, not literally in the Eucharistic discourse of John 6. If He's speaking metaphorically, you want us to believe with you that Jesus intends that we digest His words and Himself as The Word made flesh. Your theology breaks down here. It breaks down because it doesn't recognize why Jesus came. He didn't come to teach us, He came to save us. He saved us through His sacrifice on the cross. His words and His life show His identity and the authenticity of His sacrifice. Here is what the Bible has to say about the Eucharist:
The Eucharistic Discourse:
John 6:48 "I am the bread of life. 49 "Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 "This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 "I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh." 52 Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, "How can this man give us His flesh to eat?" 53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. 54 "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 "For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56 "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. 57 "As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me. 58 "This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever."
Words to the Disciples
59 These things He said in the synagogue as He taught in Capernaum. 60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, "This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?" 61 But Jesus, conscious that His disciples grumbled at this, said to them, "Does this cause you to stumble? 62 "What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before? 63 "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. 64 "But there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. 65 And He was saying, "For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."
Peter's Confession of Faith
66 As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. 67 So Jesus said to the twelve, "You do not want to go away also, do you?" 68 Simon Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. 69 "We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God."
Later, Jesus institutes His sacrifice as rite...
Matt 26:26 While they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is My body." 27 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you; 28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.
Finally, the Apostles understood and passed on what they had learned. The Apostle Paul makes it very clear in his letter to the Corinthians...
1 Cor 11:23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me." 25 In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me." 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes. 27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly.
Can the institution of the Eucharist be any clearer? Oh, but the Eucharist is just from Catholic tradition and we only go by the written Word, not tradition...
1 Cor 11:2 Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you.
2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us.
The Word was passed by tradition before these writings were compiled. The Epistles were written to shore up the faith which had been already shared. They dealt with issues of faith, not the whole faith. What wasn't covered wasn't an issue.
History also speaks to the Eucharist in the early Church. Are you aware the early Christians were spoken of as "cannibals" by the Romans? They were called thus because they ate the Body and drank the Blood of their Lord.
My Protestant friends have to go to great lengths to ensure the Catholic Church doesn't seem right to them (even discounting history and books of the Bible--like the Book of James). Catholics, on the other hand, have a faith and tradition that includes the entirety of the Bible and the original Deposit of Faith from Jesus.
Catholics and Protestants are not enemies but one perspective is very clearly more greatly supported by Scripture.
If a Christian went on a Jewish thread and attacked Jews refusal to follow Christ they wouldn't last long around here. Even if they called it "lamenting."
Listen, genius, I posted to this thread because it was about someone like me doing exactly what I once did--a Biblical Fundamentalist who became convinced of the truth of Catholicism and converted. I didn't last because of the Church's hostility (however "unofficial") towards a simple belief in the inerrancy of the Bible and the facticity of the events it describes. I feel that Mr. Giles is headed for a fall unless he sells out and becomes a higher critical evolutionist (in fact, here is a page by a Catholic apologist who insists that any Protestant who brings his Biblical inerrantism with him is "insufficiently converted," which is a strange claim considering the millions of non-coverted pagans the Chuch has incorporated with little instruction and lots of pagan syncretism). As one who went through this exact same thing I felt especially constrained to share my own experience.
Now I'm sorry if you can't understand that, but if you want to run me off this thread or any other thread you'd better run to the mods and get me formally banned. How dare you try to intimidate me into silence on a subject about which I have first hand experience.
Stop feeding this anti-Catholic troll. Some cases only improve by prayer and fasting. That is what it will take to drive the anti-Catholic demon out of Havoc.
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.