Posted on 10/25/2007 9:24:05 AM PDT by NYer
The Other Christ: Padre Pio and 19th Century Italy, by the historian Sergio Luzzatto, draws on a document found in the Vatican's archive.
|
|
|
|
|
The document reveals the testimony of a pharmacist who said that the young Padre Pio bought four grams of carbolic acid in 1919.
"I was an admirer of Padre Pio and I met him for the first time on 31 July 1919," wrote Maria De Vito.
She claimed to have spent a month with the priest in the southern town of San Giovanni Rotondo, seeing him often.
"Padre Pio called me to him in complete secrecy and telling me not to tell his fellow brothers, he gave me personally an empty bottle, and asked if I would act as a chauffeur to transport it back from Foggia to San Giovanni Rotondo with four grams of pure carbolic acid.
"He explained that the acid was for disinfecting syringes for injections. He also asked for other things, such as Valda pastilles."
The testimony was originally presented to the Vatican by the Archbishop of Manfredonia, Pasquale Gagliardi, as proof that Padre Pio caused his own stigmata with acid.
It was examined by the Holy See during the beatification process of Padre Pio and apparently dismissed.
Padre Pio, whose real name was Francesco Forgione, died in 1968. He was made a saint in 2002. A recent survey in Italy showed that more people prayed to him than to Jesus or the Virgin Mary. He exhibited stigmata throughout his life, starting in 1911.
The new allegations were greeted with an instant dismissal from his supporters. The Catholic Anti-Defamation League said Mr Luzzatto was a liar and was "spreading anti-Catholic libels".
Pietro Siffi, the president of the League, said: "We would like to remind Mr Luzzatto that according to Catholic doctrine, canonisation carries with it papal infallibility.
"We would like to suggest to Mr Luzzatto that he dedicates his energies to studying religion properly."
LOLOL. Is David dancing before you?
The fact is that the OT points to Christ NOT MARY. People knelt before the ark; the ark was a place of mercy.
AMEN. How does anyone go wrong in believing all signs point to Christ?
And he is before all things, and by him all things consist." -- Colossians 1:16-17"For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
I did answer your question you just did not like the answer
I'm confused.shalom b'shem Yah'shuaYou pray for people to come to know the savior of the world: Yah'shua
and they try to Zot you.
Clearly they of the world and not in the spirit.
Clearly they do not understand the chesed of Yah'shua.
Well, it's nice that you're sure.
As far as I'm concerned, dodging questions, repeating the same thing over and over again, claiming that one's interlocutors are ignorant, dragging up old slanders -- these are probably not the best way to persuade.
There's foolishness and then there's Christ risen. And that's about it.
2 Timothy 3:15-17 and Jude 1:3.
The sacred writings . . . are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. . . . Contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.
As the post with the words of the early Fathers pointed out..if it can not be confirmed in scripture it is a tradition of men and NOT GOD.
Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
I was not commanded to persuade anyone. I was commanded to preach the Good News of the Lamb of G-d. Only the Ru'ach HaKodesh can convict ! Please cite.
shalom b'shem Yah'shua
AMEN!
"And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God." -- Luke 4:4
The Scriptures themselves bear witness of Him.
Wrong. Original sin is not a "thing" that can be "passed" at all, but the lack of a thing. You don't transmit a lack, you fail to transmit the thing you're lacking.
We see in Hebrews that Levi, a distant descendant of Abraham, is said to have paid tithes to Melchizedek when Abraham was the one offering the tithes, not Levi. What this means is that there is biblical support for the idea that the sin nature was passed down through the father.
If that's the best support you can offer for it, you've truly proven how completely worthless sola scriptura is as a rule of faith.
The verse doesn't mention sin at all. It doesn't mention a "sin nature". It doesn't mention Abraham passing anything to Levi, but Levi passing something to Melchizedek through Abraham.
Actually, I have to correct myself. It doesn't prove how worthless sola scriptura is, it proves how completely the professed adherents of sola scriptura fail to actually practice it.
Compared to this, getting from Matthew 16 to Peter being the first Pope is child's play.
AMEN!
"So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase." -- 1 Corinthians 3:7
Thank you, I'll stand corrected on that.
The fact remains that, at least during part of his post-1517 career, he not only approved of the veneration of Mary, he practiced it himself. His 1521 exposition on the Magnificat both begins and ends with an invocation of Mary.
Jesus told us that would be so my friend.
Jhn 15:18 If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before [it hated] you.
Luk 6:22 Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you [from their company], and shall reproach [you], and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake.
Jesus told us that would be so my friend.
Jhn 15:18 If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before [it hated] you.
Luk 6:22 Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you [from their company], and shall reproach [you], and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake.
If that's an argument, it goes right by me. It could just be that they believe that she WAS, not that she somehow "MUST" be. Maybe you could rephrase your question in a way designed to be both clear and not gratuitously offensive.
I keep looking for arguments and finding nothing but speculations built on tenuous conjectures. The Protestant Episcopal Church had a "Churching of Women" which morphed in 1979 into a Thanksgiving after child birth. One of the things involved there is that Mary was "churched" (mutatis mutandis), and if it's good enough for the Mother of the Lord, hey, who are we to argue?
I dealt with the fallacious conclusion from abstention before Mass.
You have yet to show an absolute need, so no more need be said there. It's a groundless assertion.
Paul is talking about men in ministry I believe.
Well, of course, being, as so many here are so eager to tell me, an ignorant Catholic who does not read his Bible and wouldn't understand it if I did, I wouldn't know about 1 Cor 7:25-40, and especially those parts dealing with παρθενων (v 25), η γυνη η αγαμος και η παρθενος (v 34) but that sure sounds like women to me.
If God intended her to remain a virgin he would not have given her a husband.
You know, it's not any more persuasive in bold than it is in normal typeface.
Are you Orthodox?
If this proves Augustine adhered to sola scriptura, you have a big problem on your hands.
Augustine also wrote that one who failed to adore the Holy Eucharist was thereby sinning.
He also wrote an extremely fulsome prayer to Mary.
"For our faith rests on the revelation made to the Prophets and Apostles who wrote the canonical books.- - Thomas Aquinas Summa Theologiae, Question 1, Art. 8
Ditto for St. Thomas
So you have a problem. You have to conclude one of the following X things:
I'm always surprised when I see how far Catholics have come from their own faith.
The sin of Adam corrupted all men's nature. It is very much a "thing" -- it is a rebuttal of the truth, an obstinate will, a hateful longing for self and not God.
(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous." -- Romans 5:12-19"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
Latin Rite Catholic.
Mary gave birth to Jesus under THE LAW . That was a Jewish levitical law.
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.