Posted on 09/21/2008 9:45:44 PM PDT by Coleus
I say no, and how does that relate in any way to Sarah Palin's baptism?
Get those marshmallows over the fire. Yum, yum.
One current in this discussion seems to be that it's just awful for us feelthy papists to think that if someone flouts the normal practices of the Catholic Church, for example by not attending Mass on Sundays because they're at some other Christian gathering, we would then consider them members not in the very best standing.
So I was attempting an analogy. Just as someone who expressly renounces his US Citizenship should lose the franchise and other rights and privileges of citizenship, so also if Sister Palin attends the Wasilla Bible Church on Sunday, she ought not to receive communion in the Catholic Church until she's done all the sort of remedial or qualifying stuff.
Something like that.
What's a heretic roast without marshmallows?
We don’t let our mistrust of people obstruct our confidence in God’s promise to His Church. We think God is stronger than sin.
You stated
The Catholic church believes the Pope, the sinful man he is, is equivalent to Christ.You have not shown it. You have changed the subject. You have asked for documents. It appears that you are saying that I mentioned "special documents" as "supporting material for [my] position."
But my position in this discussion with you is that you have made a charge, quoted above, which is false. You make the charge. You support it.
I see no defense of your ridiculous charge yet. I see some other charges and other characterizations, but nothing to support or even excuse the initial charge. You did say something to the effect that you would "apologize" for the initial charge if we proved or disproved something else, but that makes no sense.
D00d! Is it your position that Jehovah will *not* "stick to the deal", precisely, and exactly as He said? Because if that is your position, you and me is gonna have a row...
The whole of the Prophecy is based upon the declaration of Jehovah that His Word does not ever come back to Him empty. His Will will be done exactly as He said, and that is His proof to us (as He declared) through the ages that HE IS GOD. It is right and proper that us Protestants "hold Him to His Word" because we believe He WILL do it as He said.
It isn't a matter of "not trusting Him" at all. It is a matter of trusting Him. We DO have it in writing. We KNOW what He said. We don't trust others who say it is different than that.
Don’t be so glum, Sarah. Martin Luther had the same problem.
(SO glad that someone knows how to spell "D00d"!)
No! Heck no! I would even go so far as to say Hail no (full of grace, no, wait that's something else....)
I'm saying we trust Him with or without having it in writing.
I get, believe me, not trusting those who seem to go against what's in the Bible. (I'm gonna stick with "seem", though.)
It seems to me any Christian, including us Cat'licks, has to be grateful for the grace of God that gives our brothers such faith in the Bible. The differences include our thinking that the Spirit continues to guide the Church in a way on which the faithful can rely in the unfolding of the revelation.
I was brought up in the Catholic Church and taught that the Pope, sinful man that he is, is not equivalent to Christ, but is Christ's servant and Vicar on earth.
I forgot to add, the servant is not equivalent to the Master.
You’re something else...thanks for the laugh!
Benedict and JPII were NOT Dirty Vicars. I think that honor would belong to Alexander VI (aka Rodrigo Borgia).
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.