Posted on 10/15/2001 6:54:40 AM PDT by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
Cheap version of "you aren't being open minded". You're right. And I'm not going to be. If what you are trying to sell isn't there, I'm not buying - nor am I going to take your word for it. You have to prove it. You guys can't prove your claims or your interpretations within context. And you run away every time you're blatently called on the stuff. You aren't helping your credibility by ducking constantly. Not that you could anyway, your credibility is that of your church - and they really don't have any.
I don't think that this constitutes an "ex cathedra" statement. I do, however, think it's pretty darn close.
I also think that you are more likely to see female fundamentalist preachers before female priests (heck you're more likely to see the "all Taliban" issue of Playboy before female priests.)
Every day when I pray, I try to remember to ask God to guide each one of us participating on this thread to be able to express his/her true feelings and give us all cause to think of what we really do believe in.
When I try to ask my self exactly what it is that I would hope to get across to each of you, I find I get caught up in ongoing debates, and tend to forget my overall goal, and as II, (Steven) so aptly termed it, chasing rabbit trails that lead no where.
I am now going to attempt to put into 300 words or less, what I as an NC would feel was a perfect way, according to my beliefs, to conclude these threads, if it should ever happen in our life time.
MY PERFECT CONCLUSION
That all posters would come to agree that Christ established his church through his apostles, and they recorded under inspiration of God’s Spirit exactly how that church was established and ran for some 60 plus years after the physical death of Christ.
The true church Christ founded was in each man, and when two or more came together as an assembly, they became a church, with Christ at the head on in the midst.
With Christ as the head, and each being guided by the Holy Spirit, they had the authority to determine from the written words of the Bible, what should be their creed, and their doctrine, and how their particular assembly should be run.
The unifying belief is that God sent his only begotten Son to earth as a man to overcome sin, and die for us that our sin’s could be covered by his blood, and we would be forgiven once and for all times, and when each individual comes to this understanding, we are indwelled with God’s Holy Spirit, and from that point on, we start becoming as much like God as we are capable of by allowing God to direct us in our everyday life, and this is called bearing fruits.
Others who fall under this basic belief, are free to develop their doctrine as long as all those in the assembly’s agree, and if another church teaches what your spirit guides you to believe, and you choose to follow their belief, then you are still part of the same church Christ founded, and you have the right to pursue individual needs and wants and personalities, but you are no better or no worse than then any of the others, END
To me, this is the definition of a perfect church, and what Christ and his apostles founded, and if everyone on this thread agreed with this, I would feel it had accomplished it’s goal.
Take your time, but please ask your self, what is my goal here, and Angelo, I would like to hear from you on this also. (Please feel free to not mention Christ) Lol Thanks in advance, JH
{;-)
chuck <truth@YeshuaHaMashiach>
Chapter and Verse? We KNOW He could READ!
Of course, what I meant was that he did not write the gospels or the epistles, and there are no surviving records of his teaching from his own hand. His teachings were recorded by his disciples, just as Plato conveyed the teachings of Socrates.
We do know that Jesus was capable of writing:
This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. (John 8:6)
Where is the ambiguity?
SD
The Torah scrolls in the synagogue would have been written in Hebrew.
Of course, and I could have given answers to be a new ager, too. But it wouldn't be any use in helping us ot understand anything if we lie.
SD
I liked yours, but I can do it in 6 words:
Christ returns. Explains all. Everyone agrees.
Is that cheating?
1. Eastern Orthodox (100%)
2. Roman Catholic (100%)
3. Conservative Protestant (95%)
4. Seventh Day Adventist (79%)
5. Orthodox Quaker (78%)
6. Latter-day Saint (Mormon) (71%)
7. Liberal Protestant (64%)
8. Hinduism (62%)
9. Jehovah's Witness (59%)
10. Orthodox Judaism (56%)
11. Sikhism (49%)
12. Islam (47%)
13. Liberal Quaker (35%)
14. Bahá'í (32%)
15. Jainism (32%)
16. Unitarian Universalism (29%)
17. Reform Judaism (27%)
18. Mahayana Buddhism (25%)
19. Theravada Buddhism (24%)
20. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (20%)
21. Neo-Paganism (17%)
22. Scientology (16%)
23. Atheism and Agnosticism (15%)
24. Taoism (14%)
25. New Thought (13%)
26. New Age (10%)
27. Secular Humanism (10%)
I bet if I answered that I didn't need to confess sins to a cleric I could get 100% Conservative Protestant.
What about the first question? Who found these choices ambiguous?
1.Only one God--a corporeal spirit (has a body), supreme, personal God Almighty, the Creator.
2. Only one God--an incorporeal (no body) spirit, supreme, personal God Almighty, the Creator.
Jesus has a body, but the Godhead doesn't. This was a toss up, as far as I was concerned.
And this one I didn't like either.
Roles for women and men should be prescribed.
What does that mean exactly? That I think men and women are different and serve different functions, I agree. That i think women shouldn't have jobs or drive cars, I don't.
SD
P-Leaase, you aren't that ignorant. How many times have we been over the contents of the Decretals, the other lists of forgeries and frauds like the 8 forged books of ignatious, I realize we haven't talked about the 40-50 forged gospels yet that your Church infallibly both wrote and took for original. OOOPS. Danged facts suck don't they. Run though, SD. Run away and don't deal with those piddly little issues like that the church doesn't know the difference between a fake ignatious and a forgery. Between a fake Clement and a forgery. Between a fake fill in the blank and a forgery.
Oh yeah ... I forgot about that. However ... better a pro chioce conservative than a pro choice liberal.
I wish some folks with spines would run for public office.
S - You're right, I hadn't responded. Actually, I just went back and re-read the post. Its obviously something written with great passion, so I'm going to re-post it here in full:
The problem with the pedophile priests is a source of great pain and sadness to all Catholics who seek to know,love and serve God. The entire "affair",shrouded in secrecy stands truth on its head and seems to be the work of a supernatural evil or Satan,ably abetted by his emmissaries on earth.
There is a network of persons,clerical and laity that are bound by a tie that supercedes race,religion,ethnicity and sex. I have encountered it in the secular world and have watched as fairness,justice and truth have vanished as the protective shield which envelops those bonded thusly is placed around an "incident" or series of "incidents". My own belief which I have expressed before on these threads is that it is a part of a deliberate attempt to destroy the Catholic Church so that an elite group of "men who would be gods" can enslave the rest of us "men who should be peasants". In order to destroy the Church it is necessary to shake the faith of believers and to eliminate the Pope and Magisterium. To accomplish this infiltrators have been admitted to the priesthood,who are now acting out all over the place and shaking the faith of many.Concomitantly there is a steady attack on the Pope and Magisterium.
Rome has spoken over and over again about the grave disorder of homosexuality and yet many of the hierarchy here continue to pay no attention to Rome. I had a fat old babe catechist,thinking she was cute tell a class she was teaching on the New Catechism,that it would soon be rewritten,that she wanted to be a Bishop and we didn't have to worry about the old Pope,he was ill and would die soon.I finally stood up and told her that I was sick of her pontificating and after class was over I was going to report her to someone very powerful and furthermore I was not going to walk out of the classes but I would attend everyone of them. She would have far preferred that I leave which is what most people do if they are sickened by what they hear but I knew that it was far less pleasant for her if I came to every class,sat in the fromt row and stared at her. That is what I did for her whole series;she was then removed as a teacher. Unfortunately I think they cloned her because most,but not all are teaching error.
As you can imagine I have spent much time trying to determine what has happened,how it can be combatted and what I need to do. I pray a lot and have some thoughts about the silence of the Bishops and Cardinals that I will pass on and hope that you have suggestions because so very many people are being hurt. I am expecially sorry for the many good and holy priests who are subject to so much humiliation.
The silence of the hierarchy is attributable to one of four major reasons which I will rank in the order that I think reflects the frequency.1)They are being blackmailed for their own sexual indiscretions,for which they may have repented and never again fallen or may have never repented and continue on in their reprobate ways.In this category are those blackmailed to protect another member of the hierarchy who maybe a personal friend or classmate.2]They are beholden to some wealthy powerful parishioners who have the means to reduce the style of living to which they have become accustomed if they intimate that sex outside of marriage or same sex relationships are sinful.3)Several are so good and holy they cannot believe that their brother bishops or their priests could be capable of such evil and just do not hear,or they have found a good priest,who had alienated someone accused wrongly and don't want to cause that kind of pain.4)They are not particularly bright and think publicity will cause scandal or that they are to follow Christ's words to Peter to forgive 7 times 70 and they have a few hundred forgivenesses yet to go.
Whatever, they are all wrong and must assure that innocents are not convicted but that pedophiles and homosexuals be removed from the priesthood and sent to civil court for their just punishment. I think all Catholics would understand if our money paid damages to the victims and their families as long as they put an end to this silly,pathetic,sinful permissiveness. I have more to say but I am past making sense and your eyes are glazing over.Sorry for going on so long but I think so much more is at stake for all of us.
I am in agreement, as far as I understand the subtleties of the issues involved, with the conservative Catholics who are trying to reclaim Western Catholicism from the progressives. The problem obviously seems to go back to the beachhead established by modernists in the RCC 50 years ago, from which they've been continually expanding their influence.
My reason for posting the Andrew Sullivan article was not to attack RC's, but rather to allow the RC's here to better drag the skeleton in to the light. Obviously, the homosexual and leftist community feels quite at home in the RCC. While they recognize that there are doctrines that condemn them, they seem to believe that it is possible for them to win this fight for the soul of the RCC if they stick it out long enough. Otherwise, they'd bolt and go join up where they know they're welcome - like with the Episcopalians or the Unitarians.
Why? Is there some core vulnerability that they are targeting? Are they merely hoping in strength of numbers? Are they relying on party politics identification? These are mostly rhetorical questions, but they do disturb me. I suppose I should be happy that I don't understand the ideology and agenda of perversion. But I just can't fathom the mindset of the practitioners of a particular behavior condemned by a group pushing for as many people as possible to be openly in support of this behavior.
What if, God forbid, the next Pope is not a conservative? I know next to nothing of Cardinals and the method for election of a Pope, but isn't it possible that this could happen? Could there be widespread Schism? Or is this likely to settle down within the next few months as the "scandal" departs from the headlines?
Next month "Under the Burka," only here on Playboy TV.
SD
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.