Skip to comments.
Catholic Church Prepares for Cold War With Evangelists
Pacific News Service ^
| 05/31/05
| Paolo Pontoniere
Posted on 06/01/2005 6:29:39 AM PDT by murphE
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140, 141-160, 161-180 ... 321-324 next last
To: murphE
Today, to regain ground in the first world and continue to expand in the Third World, the Roman Catholic Church, more than fighting secularism, must counteract the expansion of evangelical groups. So the Catholic Church has declared war on those who are seeking to bring people to Christ and abandoning the war against those who would seek to destroy Christianity altogether.
So much for ecumenicism.
The reason why evangelical churches are growing is because they are actually doing what the lord commanded. They are preaching the gospel of Christ. They are going into all the world with the gospel. Apparently this is anathema to the current RC leadership.
To: seamole
Perhaps, OLTG, we can both pray an Our Father, and ask the Lord to grant that any competition between Christians be waged in truth, charity, love and fidelity to Jesus Christ, and that it may only serve to build up the Kingdom of God. Agreed....
And that he will give us both (all) the conviction and courage to drop any false beliefs we have come to hold...
142
posted on
06/01/2005 11:34:25 AM PDT
by
Onelifetogive
(* Sarcasm tag ALWAYS required. For some FReepers, sarcasm can NEVER be obvious enough.)
To: aspiring.hillbilly
Re: "Notice the difference?"
Sure I do but the next logical question I would have is this:
Does this mean a person who does not believe in the death penalty is outside the Kingdom of God? (and they say Catholics are tough on Dogma) Because if a person can believe in death penalty and get in Heaven and the person who does not believe in the death penalty can get in Heaven, we are right back where I started and you have taken us around our elbow to get to our thumb.
Comment #144 Removed by Moderator
To: Petronski
"Such beautifully crafted strawmen! And you destroy them with such graceful aplomb!"
I hope you noted that I was adopting the outrageous extremism of the article's author before summarily blowing it to bits.
I also hope that you noticed my own affirmation of the Body of Christ in my ensuing recognition of a broad unity that spans Catholic, Protestant and Evangelical lines. To wit: we all affirm the Nicene Creed as seminal Truth, and strive ever to advance the work of the gospel in fulfillment of the Great Commission.
145
posted on
06/01/2005 11:48:44 AM PDT
by
HKMk23
(Ladies, "No" should not mean "No"; it should mean "Don't even THINK it or I'll for real KILL you!")
To: Mark in the Old South
Whereas the Bible is the inspired word of God; whereas the same God rules in both the Old and New Testament eras; whereas the Bible clearly prescribes the death penalty for crimes in numerous passages; whereas the will the Divine is not vague on this command by any stretch....Therefore any advocation of the elimination of the death penalty is a serious breech of faith and morals and places one squarely outside the ranks of Godly believers. If this punches your ticket to Hell,,,,, we shall leave that up to God Almighty.
This old boy is taking no such chances!!
To: Dominick
Compared to eternity, this life is a but fleeting moment, so prudence demands putting the priorities of eternal life above our mortal existences. Such not being lulled into the fallacy that a human intuition can supersede the Bible...
"Eternal life is human life..." (there are vast differences in the durations....) LOL
To: All; netmilsmom
Re: aspiring.hillbilly
Don't feed the troll.
(Apologies to netmilsmom)
148
posted on
06/01/2005 12:05:53 PM PDT
by
Dominick
("Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought." - JP II)
To: aspiring.hillbilly
Re: "If this punches your ticket to Hell,,,,, we shall leave that up to God Almighty."
Well I am all for this but you imply an obligation on the Faithful. And they say Catholics are Dogma intensive. You don't leave any room for personal interpretation do you? So this puts you .....? Well I don't know, It isn't Baptist, and Catholic has already been eliminated, I doubt Eastern Orthodox?
By the way do you advocate a celibate lifestyle?
Do you believe in Transubstiation of the Bread and Wine into the real presence of Christ?
Does your Church have Bishops?
Is it the common practice in your Church to kneel during prayer?
Do you acknowledge the primacy of Saint Peter and his successors?
All supportable by Scripture but most rejected by millions all claiming to follow Scripture.
By the way, I think the death penalty is called for. I think the Pope JPII was wrong on this and the Catholic church permits this. Betcha didn't know that did ya?
To: Dominick
No apologies needed!
Welcome to the Association of Anti-Catholic troll hunters.
Good catch!!!!
150
posted on
06/01/2005 12:24:24 PM PDT
by
netmilsmom
(Buy Dominos Pizza-save a life (and please tip the driver))
To: HKMk23
I love your Gatto quote on your homepage.
I know that you are not exactly a newbie but Welcome!
You are very wise.
151
posted on
06/01/2005 12:29:10 PM PDT
by
netmilsmom
(Buy Dominos Pizza-save a life (and please tip the driver))
To: Mark in the Old South
#1 No, because the apostles were married and Timothy writes about married (only once married) bishops. Fast forward to the present day, celibacy has been at the root of the child molestation scandal, whereas protestants don't have a widespread problem like this.
#2 This is a belief that it is impossible to verify. A rigorous reading states that when Christ said, "This is my Body" it referred then to the bread in His hands, not a wafer in a priests hands 2000 years in the future.
#3 A community that needs bishops will surely acquire them, no impediments to the contrary. A nondenominational community is the closest thing to the early church before all the corruption set in and is the most pure form of spiritualism in todays world...
4# Peter was the first in a lineage, and since there were times when there were two popes one in France and one in Italy each claiming to be the one, plus the bad popes, A Alexander VI,,,that turned the Vatican into a den of sin in the middle ages,,,the issue of primacy is best placed on the shoulders of the apostle that walked with Christ and then denied him before the crucification...
To: Dominick
What about this bit of history?
"Pope Joan," who supposedly served from 855 to 858, was said to be an Englishwoman who disguised herself as a monk to be with her cleric boyfriend. She went to Rome, where she so impressed others with her learning that she was elected pope. Her secret was discovered when she gave birth during a procession, whereupon she was slain.
{Papal horror stories are entirely legit. In many cases, in fact, weaknesses of the flesh were the least of the popes' sins. In the Middle Ages many popes were elevated to office following the murder of their predecessors. During one particularly grim period from 882 to 1046, there were 37 popes, some of whom served only a few weeks.
Leo V (903), for instance, had been pope for only a month before being imprisoned and tortured by one Christophorus, who then enthroned himself. Both men were killed in 904 on the orders of Pope Sergius III (904-911). Sergius later had a son by his teenaged mistress Marozia who became Pope John XI (931-935). In 914, according to one chronicler, Marozia's mother Theodora installed her lover on the papal throne as John X (914-928). (Theodora and Marozia effectively controlled the papacy through their menfolk and may be the source of the Pope Joan legend.) John XII (955-963), who ascended to the papacy at 19, was accused, perhaps falsely, of sleeping with his father's mistress, committing incest with his niece, and castrating a deacon.
Murder gave way to bribery as a route to the papacy in later centuries; some 40 popes are believed to have bought their jobs. But the lax attitude toward celibacy remained unchanged. In large part this was because the Church was an important route to wealth and power. Sons of influential families were pushed into Church careers much as we might send a kid to MBA school, apparently with similar expectations regarding morals. Noblemen with mistresses saw no reason to adjust their life-styles just because they had taken vows.
The spectacle of cardinals and popes putting their "nephews" into cushy jobs was a standing joke in Rome for centuries. Innocent VIII (1484-1492) had a son and daughter who lived with him in the Vatican. The notorious Alexander VI (1492-1503), born Rodrigo Borgia, had at least four illegitimate children while still a cardinal, among them the cutthroat Cesare Borgia and the reputed poisoner Lucrezia Borgia (actually, she probably never poisoned anybody). Clement VII (1523-1534), himself illegitimate, had a son whom he attempted to make duke of Florence. Paul III (1534-1539) had four kids; two teen grandsons he made cardinals. Pius IV (1559-1565) had three children, and the list goes on.
This is the legacy of the "one true Church?"
To: aspiring.hillbilly
=^]
Let us start with the first one shall we. :^D
Celibicy is recommended (not required)
Matthew 19:12
If you differ with my position (and you have already gone on record as having done so...) then please offer an alternative non-Catholic and Protestant explaination for that passage.
For those without a Bible handy
Matthew 19:12
For there are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother's womb: and there are eunuchs, who were made so by men: and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it.
To: theFIRMbss
That chick seriously freaks me out...she looks so plastic and soooooo fake.
To: murphE
"I don't think evangelicals are evil or despicable."
I didn't assert that YOU did, but that such was the implication (thinly veiled) of the article's author.
[Protestants and Evangelicals] "cannot lead souls to salvation apart from the One True Church which Christ established, nor do they have the authority to do so apart from the authority which Christ established on earth, his Church."
That people are coming into bona fide relationship with the risen Christ through the preaching of the gospel by both groups is indisputable. Multiplied millions have entered the Kingdom of God by that one True and Living Way, Faith in Jesus Christ, because of Protestand and Evangelical ministers and laymen bearing witness to the saving power of the gospel.
"Evangelicals teach doctrine contrary to the Church,"
Yes, but so what? The real question is, "Are they contrary to the Bible?"
See, I can simply stand your point on it's head and argue thus:
Catholics teach doctrine contrary to Evnagelical and Protestant teaching.
This is also true but, again, so what? The real question remains, "Are they contrary to the Bible?"
The point is that just because I say different than you say does not make one of us right and the other wrong; that might be the case, but it might also be the case that we may each be partially corrrect or we may both be in error. In any event, the standard is the Bible, regardless of what any given denomination teaches.
"As long as they teach doctrine contrary to the doctrine taught by the authority on earth established by Christ, His Church, they are leading souls astray."
Excellent point, though you will doubtless vehemently protest the manner in which I agree with it: "His Church" does not equal "Catholic" exclusively. "His Church" is not limited to those united under the name "Catholic," "His Church" includes all who are united by faith under the Name "Jesus." The unity of his body is not dependent upon the cohesiveness of one group with a certain name and history, but upon belief in him.
The United States has one Army, but within that Army is great diversity: infantry, artillery, cavalry and more. All of these teach and practice differing tactics and strategies using different tools. But when sent to the theater of battle, they fight with common purpose against a common foe. We readily recognize that it is ludicrous to say that only the infantryman is REALLY in the Army. We see that, as a whole, the entire Army is ONE Army united in a common bond. Infantrymen and artillerynmen may have their arguments about who's better or more important but, out on the battlefield, they work together for victory.
If, however, all of this is too much for you; if you cannot bear that we should be in the same spiritual Army, serving the same risen LORD, then, I bid you, at least have the grace of St. Paul in speaking of some of his adversaries and rejoice that, in all, Christ is preached.
15 Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will: 16 The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds: 17 But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel. 18 What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.
Phiilippians 1:15-18
156
posted on
06/01/2005 12:48:05 PM PDT
by
HKMk23
(Ladies, "No" should not mean "No"; it should mean "Don't even THINK it or I'll for real KILL you!")
To: FourtySeven
The Noble Bereans set the example for us ... of checking the message of those which would speak for God ... against the already established scriptures.
157
posted on
06/01/2005 12:49:39 PM PDT
by
Quester
(When in doubt ... trust God!)
To: aspiring.hillbilly
Pope Joan is a hoax:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08407a.htm
Whats the point, except trolling? Shall I start telling tales of Oliver Cromwell and his genocide against the Irish?
Does this have any bearing on the topic?
158
posted on
06/01/2005 12:57:56 PM PDT
by
Dominick
("Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought." - JP II)
To: netmilsmom
Thank you, you are most gracious.
FWIW: I try to be wise without being too much the wiseguy.
That is more easily said than done on these threads where the debate coalesces into "Cathoilc" v. "non-Catholic" Christians.
I am for a more Godly ecumenism based in the reality that, in Heaven we will all be, at last, in agreement. The important aspects of that agreement being these:
-- we will all agree with God,
-- that agreement will not involve a concurrent act of our will,
-- the resulting agreement between each of us will be incidental.
Since, then, this is the eternal reality, it is ridiculous to persist with (or worse, insist upon) continued division in the here and now.
159
posted on
06/01/2005 1:01:00 PM PDT
by
HKMk23
(Ladies, "No" should not mean "No"; it should mean "Don't even THINK it or I'll for real KILL you!")
To: seamole
I hope that this article is just a poor attempt by the secular, leftist, anti-Christian MSM to exacerbate divisions amongst Christians. I think it is. However, the prayer of Our Lord, " that we "all may be one", as the Father and Son are one, "that the world may believe" (Jn 17:20-21)" that you mentioned, has been fulfilled in His Church.
160
posted on
06/01/2005 1:01:00 PM PDT
by
murphE
(These are days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed but his own. --G.K. Chesterton)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140, 141-160, 161-180 ... 321-324 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson