| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/28/2010 11:54:24 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Per poster’s request |
Posted on 04/18/2010 9:49:35 PM PDT by Judith Anne
I seriously wonder about some FReepers, sometimes. Any other person accused of a crime would be defended by every FReeper as being innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. I've seen whole threads written by men who have been accused of child abuse by ex-wives out to deny them their visitation rights or to wrest more money out of them. These men are rightly indignant, and furious about the unjust accusations that cannot be proven but are never withdrawn.
Yet where are those FReepers when a PRIEST is accused? Where is the presumption of innocence? Suddenly, every accusation becomes a verdict, and not only the accused but his entire organization and all its adherents are held responsible.
I can only wonder what some of these so-called conservatives (who so faithfully defend the Constitution) would do, if THEY were the ones accused! It is a nightmare for any man -- all of you know how even the accusation stains the man forever, even if it is proven false!
Not only that, many here assert that the problems of 30, 40 and even 50 years ago must be tried in the media TODAY!
Remember the Duke rape case? There are more similarities than differences here. The priests are accused, nifonged, and instead of being defended, they are vilified!
What other man of you could stand under the weight of such an accusation trumpeted by the press, and come out whole? None! And such accusations made, LONG after the statute of limitations has passed, sometimes even after the accused is dead and buried for YEARS -- are YOU one of those who automatically, reflexively, spitefully, and gleefully act as judge, jury, and executioner?
Women! What if it were YOUR HUSBAND, YOUR BROTHER, YOUR FATHER, YOUR UNCLE, YOUR SON who was accused? Wouldn't you want the best defense possible? Wouldn't YOU believe in their innocence? Wouldn't YOU help protect your loved ones as much as possible? And yet, YOU JUDGE THE CHURCH FOR DOING WHAT YOU WOULD DO?
Shame! Vast shame! On all who have sinned against the innocent!
Correct, except that baptism had nothing to do with it.
Birth, Death, and Ressurection are the story.
My mother got much of her exercise by jumping to conclusions, too.
No, the theme of this thread is the Nifonging of the Church over the abuse accusations, which is the prejudicial rush to judgment with a presumption of guilt.
The discourse from the anti-Catholics has been nearly 2600 posts justifying the Nifonging because of transgressions, both real and perceived, in the conduct and dogma of the Church dating back 2000 years. Ya'll have made Jesus SOOOOOOOO happy [SARC]
I gather you’re not any percentage Chinese. LOL.
I agree. Again.
Look Bro. Ya gotta quite posting things I can agree so much with.
You’ll tarnish my Protty credentials.
I have a reputation to keep up! Sheesh!
Wonderful post. Thank you for returning the dialog to the adults.
That's only part of the Catholic cardio workout, you know.
Seriously, though, the ancient sermons are amazing.
Welllllllllll! Harumph!
I think it’s extremely unreasonable for any Papist
to think that Prottys must be fluent
in the language of obfuscation, slippery diplo-theo-speak, rubbery daffynitions, boiled okratized rationalizations 12 layers thick, double-speak, double-standards out of both sides of the theological bureaucrats power mongering fingers and mouths, . . .
I mean . . . don’t Papists go to universities and tutleges for long years to learn how to split such hairs, mangle such meanings and generally trash straight-forward honest communication?
15 And account the longsuffering of our Lord, salvation; as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you:
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction. 17 You therefore, brethren, knowing these things before, take heed, lest being led aside by the error of the unwise, you fall from your own steadfastness.
-- 2 Peter 3:15-17
My guess is that likely the reason he didn't rehash what happened in the Gospels was that it was because what was recorded in the Gospels for us, was pretty common knowledge to them, back in the days when Paul wrote his letters.
Oh? How exactly were the Gospels "common knowledge" to these people? In all probability Saint Paul had been martyred before any of the Gospels were even written.
The epistles of Saint Paul can best be described as a theological framework for Christianity. With the exception of First Corinthians chapter 11, they do not contain the words of our Lord.
That question alone speaks volumes about what you think of Catholics and the Catholic Church. Where you get it all wrong is that the Catechism and Dogma of the Catholic Church are all about the freedom to individually and privately choose or reject Christ as a major component of personal salvation.
Unlike so many of the Protestant and Revisionist denominations who have assumed the power to dictate and condemn the Catholic Church's role is only to educate, facilitate, and support that personal choice.
Yes, Judith Anne has been Nifonged for the crime of pointing out the Nifonging the Church.
We have a mind-bogglingly amazing Lord.
LOL.
Just think of the possibilities if the DA in Durham had had another name...
“...obsessiveness dressed in HTML”
This is one to remember.
Thanks, Lorica
Go back and read the post I was responding to and then retract or rebloviate as necessary.
“Let your heart be an altar.”
I’ll keep this one as my key to this new day.
Thanks, Lorica.
“O search me, God, and know my heart.
Test me and know my thoughts.
See that I follow not the wrong path
and lead me to the path of life eternal”
Ps. 139
In the book of Acts, chapter 9, Paul was given a specific message of what he was to preach so there was not a forgetting of the Gospel or any question of invalidating them.
Paul’s commission came directly from Christ as did that of his other apostles so there is no conflict between the message of the Gospels and what Paul preached, it was “all scripture, inspired by God”.
I’m just wondering-—is this post an example of what you call “finger-frothing?”
There are not three gods. There is only ONE YHvH I think you will find they all contain
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
the words of the ONE true YHvH
who is our salvation;
if we but call on His NAME.
the same yesterday, today and forever.
Not hardly. I asked if this line of thinking was the party line.
Hyperbole is clearly in play here, which clearly illustrates something about the FROman Catholic MO.
You have just done exactly what you said was not being done: transferring your opinion that Judith Anne's statement was "hyperbole"(even though stated carefully to stay within forum guidelines)....to "the FRoman Catholic MO."
Rather unfortunate for your argument.
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.