The Neverending Story (The New Christian Chronicles)

Southern Baptists ending talks with Catholic Church ^ | 3/24/01 | AP

[malakhi]

The Neverending Story
An ongoing debate on Scripture, Tradition, History and Interpretation.

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

Thread 162
TNS Archives

[DouglasKC]

The pastor went to them again, they finally married, but it was really a tough thing on the pastor as you can imagine. I feel in alot of churchs the pastor would have turned a blind eye to it to save himself the embrassment and trouble. The hard stand is exactly that hard. But that was wrong and they needed to be called on it.

That is really neat.

So you are not a member of any certain denomination? Who established the doctrine?

[the808bass]

And another post goes into the void. Never mind. Wasn't that important n-e-ways. Pinging myself so I don't have to wend my way through the posts I've already perused.

[SoothingDave]

Again, I prefer your offer of 'spiritual leadership' (even though I respectfully decline it) over Boniface's attempted usurpation of secular authority. The modern Catholic Church is right on this, and Boniface was in error.

I am prepared to go this far at the moment. The Church in history often intertwined temporal and spiritual authority in ways which would have been better left undone. It must be understood that the Church filled a vacuum and became in places a gov't by default. It is also true that the church in places had to defend her internal affairs from meddling princes. But I will admit a stubbornness and clinging to temporal power, including the issuance of spiritual threats over temporal matters. This is a mistake and some of the Bull in question displays this attitude. The Church is not infallible in temporal affairs.

SD

[malakhi]

Obviously you have never seen the state in action. Under American law, a belief that is contrary to public policy can be held only so long as it is not translated into action. Let me give you an example on a petty matter. Hence, a public school teacher CAN lose her job if she chooses to read the Bible at her desk even if no students are present in the classroom. This is not true everywhere; the pernicious thing is that her action can, however, become illegal if the school has a well-established policy, wishes to pursue the issue, and the teachers is foolish enough to disobey. Ther right of a public school to set policy normally trumps religious liberty. In the world of "ordered liberty," religious liberty occupies a lower position than many other liberties.

I repeat again: the state cannot force anyone to violate his or her religious beliefs. Our freedom of conscience is an inalienable right, part and parcel with our free will.

Now, that being said, THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU MAY NOT FACE CONSEQUENCES FOR ADHERING TO YOUR CONVICTIONS. Consider the case of Thomas More. The state may pressure you, but they cannot coerce you. They can only persecute you and/or kill you. If you give in to the pressure, you are making a free will choice. If you, like More, stand up to the pressure, you make a free will choice. The question is, are you prepared to suffer persecution for your beliefs?

[malakhi]

A priest in America, any Catholic, would have the right to "believe" that wine could be changed into Precious Blood during a Mass, but would be prohibited from actually having a Mass.

He has a third choice. He can refuse to obey an unjust law, and make a decision to risk punishment to do what he believes is right.

[malakhi]

It is ok to disobey the law of the land if it goes against the Law or will of the Father. Take for example in Daniel when Shadrach, Meshach, and Obednigo (sp?) didn't bow down to the statue/idol of the king. This was clearly against the law, but a higher law (that of God) superceded it. We must act the same.

Thank you, JM. I agree wholeheartedly.

[SoothingDave]

The state may pressure you, but they cannot coerce you. They can only persecute you and/or kill you. If you give in to the pressure, you are making a free will choice. If you, like More, stand up to the pressure, you make a free will choice. The question is, are you prepared to suffer persecution for your beliefs?

If you want to put it that way. Yeah sure, they can only torture and kill you. But let's examine what you said in 6411

Abortion is evil. I believe it is murder and should be covered under those statutes. Let's consider a fuzzier case, though. Catholics also believe that contraception is a sin. Do you think the church should pressure the state to outlaw contraception?

Shouldn't the Church in the question of More, or Prohibition, or anything, make its voice heard to the local gov't? Nay, shouldn't it demand that the gov't follow the dictates of God?

SD

[malakhi]

Sacraments require being personally there. You can't "phone it in." How is one to partake of the Communion while watching TV? Have it sent via FedEx?

An interesting question. Would you agree that most people who attend mass should not be receiving communion, because they are not in a state of grace? And, if you are not going to participate in the sacrament, is there a qualitative difference in being in the church versus watching it from home? What about being in the church building, but in a separate crying room with closed-circuit TV?

[JHavard]

OR, I'm so glad to see you posting again, even if SD won't respond to you, most of us will though.

I just went back over the post to see what you did that set SD off the way you did, and I'm not sure but I think it was one of two things.

Possibly this blasphemous statement.

Reggy to SD...By your standards, has there ever been such a council? Of course, that lets you off the hook concerning infallibility.

Or this one that I hesitate to copy and paste because of it's content, but for the sake of truth I will.

Reggy to SD.....You are in my prayers my son. "Lord help this man remove the hatred from his heart." Help him to read for meaning, help him to learn what " all means.

Needless to say, anyone reading your comments to SD, can plainly understand what ticked him off.

I for one, hope you have learned from your mistake, and will be more careful in the future since SD is a very sensitive person.

Keep in mind though, he was so remorse over the whole thing, he apologized to saradippity and angelo for what you caused him to do.

It reminds me of the time when I had first come on the threads, and I had all the supporters of the pope mad at me over some things I said about pope Pius XII, and SD got so mad at me, he said I was an a$$ hole, and would you believe, he or none of the (pope supporters) apologized to me, but do you know what they did? ....They apologized to him, for me making him so mad that he swore at me.

To top it all off now, he is going to overcome his problem with his mouth controlling his fingers, by now refusing all communications with you so he can maintain his composure.

Doesn’t this remind you of some one who sucker punches you in the face, and then says that rather then taking a chance on hurting his knuckles on your teeth again, he is going to wear gloves and walk on the other side of the street.Lol

To someone who isn't used to hearing these expletives, I have such a graphic mental picture when I do hear them, it is upsetting, but SD, despite the fact he has all the answers for his church, seems to have no control over his mouth, and for one I am getting fed up with it, and my list of his infractions are growing daily.

Soothing Dave, can you imagine the effect this may have on some lurker who doesn’t know your tendencies, who just happens to read your post and thinks, Wow, look what Christianity has come to on the threads, wait until I tell that Christian co-worker who is always trying to get me to go to Church....<\sarcasm> intended.

[malakhi]

None of this is to say that televised Masses aren't good for those who can't get to one otherwise.

Here's another one. If you are not going to receive communion, is it better to stay home and watch the mass on EWTN, or to go to your local clown mass?

[malakhi]

I figured this would raise a few questions. Pope Bonifice was addressing a situation where "every" human was essentially a Catholic. There was no great knowledge of far flung peoples ignorant of Christ. There was no multi-generational tradition of Protesting. The world we know now is different than the world he spoke to.

O R T H O D O X.

[RobbyS]

Maybe, but not even Havoc has put his disbelief so crudely.

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Please review my quote from Boniface in my #6544. I don't think he agrees with you.

Give it up Angelo. This all makes perfect sense to them.

[dignan3]

Everyone who has touched and revised it is in error.

According to who, Protestant? You?

Let's see, to whom shall I look to for Catholic doctrine in toto? The Magesterium or a person who knows next to nothing about the authentic Catholic Faith? Pardon me if I choose the Church over you to tell me what Catholic doctrine is.

You prooftext Papal statements the way you do Scripture. A practice which leads to your destruction.

Pray for the Vicar of Christ

[PoorMuttly]

"...the words I speak are Spirit." I don't care if it's all historically correct. It has all proven itself true to me, and my instructions from God, by practical application. IMHO that is the purpose, and utility of the Book.

[RobbyS]

The state may pressure you, but they cannot coerce you. They can only persecute you and/or kill you. If you give in to the pressure, you are making a free will choice. Breaking under pressure is free consent?