Posted on 04/05/2019 8:52:38 AM PDT by aimhigh
Children of LGBT parents can now be blessed or baptized in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, church officials declared in a new policy on Thursday, dramatically reversing a 2015 decision that excluded those children from the rituals until they were 18. The church will also update its handbook for leaders, removing the label of “apostasy” for same-sex marriage.
(Excerpt) Read more at oregonlive.com ...
In response to your question, but not supporting your answer.
As a branch of Christianity, Roman Catholicism can be traced to the life and teachings of Jesus Christ in Roman-occupied Jewish Palestine about 30 CE. According to Roman Catholic teaching, each of the sacraments was instituted by Christ himself. Roman Catholicism also holds that Jesus established his disciple St. Peter as the first pope of the nascent church (Matthew 16:18). Centuries of tradition, theological debates, and the wiles of history have shaped Roman Catholicism into what it is today.
Forgot the reference source.
More interesting information on the formation of Roman Catholicism at the link.
And what do you find when you ask Google about the “Log Cabin Republicans?”
If you’re serious about learning more about the Catholic faith, I would be pleased to help you. You are incorrect that I have done done anything to disparage other branches of Christianity.
All I’ve done is respond to the litany of the usual antiCatholic tribe we hear so often on our FreeRepublic. I am deeply happy with my Catholic faith and have no desire to vilify yours, whatever it may be.
From your prized source:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity_in_early_Christian_theology
All of these had access to the same letters (books of the Bible), and then some. Those “some” were evaluated by Catholics and others, then codified.
From your prized source:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Christianity
Multiple Christian groups had these letters transcribed. Protestants do not use multiple books Catholics do, called the “Apocrypha,” so this further clouds your assertion that the Bible came from the Catholic church.
Do you have any thing of substance to add?
The Ever Changing God of Mormonism.
Well, after all, he’s only Human.
A distinction without meaning.
The Scriptures were in existence, were recognized as Scripture, and were circulated.
My statement is 100% true.
Except the part where it is totally false, sure!
LOL!
They claim Abe Lincoln was a closet gay, so they honor him for that.
Very similar to Catholics claiming Peter was their first pope, and they honor Peter for that.
Neither are actually true, in history.
Let’s walk this through.
The books of the Bible existed in the early church, outside of anything Catholic.
No other sect, including Christian Jews for centuries, believed Peter was the first Catholic pope.
Why would I, as a former weekly Mass and every holy-day going RC and altar boy, CCD teacher and lector, who is often educating RCs on aspects of RC teaching, want to learn about the RC faith from you? Who know what sect of it you belong, aside from basic beliefs.
You are incorrect that I have done done anything to disparage other branches of Christianity.
All I’ve done is respond to the litany of the usual antiCatholic tribe we hear so often on our FreeRepublic. Rather, it is you who is either blind or lacking in memory or understanding in understanding how you have disparage other branches of Christianity. To wit:
The Catholic Church is the original church, founded by St. Peter. You, however belong to a false church, founded by some individual on his or her own. (post #35 )
Here, you assert your church is the original church, which by itself thus disparages all others, yet which you also explicitly state. Yet insolently claim "I have done done anything to disparage other branches of Christianity."
Next,
And for the two of you, Our Lord quite clearly told those who believed in him and "ate his flesh and drank his blood" would have eternal life. Post 50
Here you implicit disparage at least most Protestants, as well as Vatican Two Catholics, for by taking John 6:53 purely literally, then you relegate that all those believers in Christ who live and die denying transubstantiation as not having eternal life. Perhaps you want to engage in some polemical special pleading to allow for the salvation of some believers in the metaphorical understanding, which is the only one that easily conflates with the whole of Scripture , but your doctrinal position is still disparaging. As any doctrinal position implicitly is. Yet you want to present yourself as the victim who has only responded "to the litany of the usual antiCatholic tribe...."
Then we have the personal attacks, "your own dimwitted prejudices," by you, who fails to see how you disparaged the faith of others. The fact is that as long as what you are defending is a elitist serf-proclaimed "one true church" which historically damned all without her such as me and presently asserts that Prot churches are not worthy of the proper name "church," then you should expect rebuke from those who search and find that distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (including how they understood the OT and gospels), which is Scripture, especially Acts thru Revelation.
And consistent with that elitism, it has been well-evidenced that Catholics are the ones mostly likely to essentially demand special treatment and whine to the RM. Thus from the same is this wise warning:
Open threads are in a town square format.
Posters may argue for or against beliefs, deities, religious authorities, etc. They may tear down other’s beliefs. They may ridicule. “Open” RF debate is often contentious.
It requires thick skin. A poster must be able to make his points while standing his ground, suffering adverse remarks about his beliefs - or letting them roll off his back.
Members of religions which are as much culture as belief sometimes take religious debate personally. If you keep getting your feelings hurt because other posters ridicule or disapprove or hate what you hold dear, then you are too thin-skinned to be involved in “open” RF debate. You should IGNORE “open” RF threads altogether and instead post to RF threads labeled “prayer” “devotional” “caucus” or “ecumenical.”
However, I am not defending all that is posted in reproof of Rome or its devotees.
Well, when no less a authority as Manning makes even what history states subject to how Rome judges,
It was the charge of the Reformers that the Catholic doctrines were not primitive, and their pretension was to revert to antiquity. But the appeal to antiquity is both a treason and a heresy. It is a treason because it rejects the Divine voice of the Church at this hour, and a heresy because it denies that voice to be Divine... I may say in strict truth that the Church has no antiquity....Primitive and modern are predicates, not of truth, but of ourselves...The only Divine evidence to us of what was primitive is the witness and voice of the Church at this hour. — Dr. Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, Archbishop of Westminster, The Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost: Or Reason and Revelation (New York: J.P. Kenedy & Sons, originally written 1865, reprinted with no date), pp. 227-228.
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.