| 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 These men are rightly indignant, and furious about the unjust accusations that cannot be proven but are never withdrawn.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!
“Towards the end of my time in the Episcopal Church I would not close the door if I was alone with anyone”
Jesus did advise being cautious as a serpent. Even while being innocent as a dove.
The times really are wicked.
Amen! dear brother in Christ!
That does not follow at ALL, not for a minute!
This is the most amazing hatchet job on Judith Anne (or on anybody not currently a Republican president or presidential candidate) I think I have ever seen.
People are placing the worst possible construction on what JA said, outright ignoring some of what she said and then with their manufactured charge mobbing her.
It’s disgraceful.
Paul himself says that God uses the weakness of man. It is you all who claim to see Christ’s weakness on the cross as a defeat, while we use crucifixes to proclaim God’s victory in weakness. We, and I assume JA is included here, are perfectly capable of thinking that Paul was not altogether himself but still able tto be used by God to present inspired Scripture.
Luther, on the other hand, was the one who called the Letter of James a letter of straw. He clearly didn’t like it. JA doesn’t like Paul, but she quite clearly stated that she does not dismiss his writings or think that God made a mistake.
Heh, thanks. This doesn’t bother me. I think it clearly reveals, however, that the same characteristics that lead the presbyterians and other protestants to wildly accuse me (a little nobody) are at work when any discussion of child sexual abuse is undertaken.
Nifonging the Catholic Church, in other words.
I don't know where you get your information, but I have never given any indication whatsoever that I see Christ's " weakness on the cross as a defeat". I see the crucifixion of Christ as a victory over sin, and death, and Satan.
We, and I assume JA is included here, are perfectly capable of thinking that Paul was not altogether himself but still able tto be used by God to present inspired Scripture.
Excellent! Then the next time prophetic Scripture, written by God through the apostle Paul, such as 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, which details the event of the Rapture of the Church, is posted on this forum, we can look forward to no contemptuous, derisive comments from Catholics?
That's very good news!
(Canon 3): It is fitting that the holy bishops and priests of God as well as the Levites, i.e. those who are in the service of the divine sacraments, observe perfect continence, so that they may obtain in all simplicity what they are asking from God; what the Apostles taught and what antiquity itself observed, let us also endeavour to keep… It pleases us all that bishop, priest and deacon, guardians of purity, abstain from CONJUGAL INTERCOURSE with their wives, so that those who serve at the altar may keep a perfect chastity.”(emphasis added)
As for Origen, I think it's more likely than not but I find craziness easy to believe at times.
You are welcome! Cheers.
The 'duck and cover' tactic doesn't get it...The numbers have never been the issue...The issue is your organized boy buggering mafia that not only protects its own perverts but provides 'opportunity' all over the world when one spot gets a little too hot to handle...
And then how many of these sexually abused boys, teenagers and young men become Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals and popes themselves to carry on their trade???
No, the numbers have never been the argument...And those of you who are trying to detract from the issue are just as guilty as the ringleaders...
I don't blame you...Paul brings the hammer down on the Catholic church...
Just as the Gospels are God breathed words written to the Jewish people to reveal the Messiah and His Kingdom to them before the Crucifixion, Paul's epistles are the God breathed words written to the Gentiles (and everyone else) to reveal their (our) opportunity for salvation and the formation and operation of the churches after the Crucifixion and Resurrection...
I never heard of a Christian that didn't like Paul or what Jesus showed him to tell us...
LOL....The Beatitudes demonstrate the emptiness of the Calvinist based Protestantisms. The requirement to earn Salvation through the good works embodied in the Beatitudes completely negates the concept of the TULIPS. This explains why Calvin worked so hard to trivialize them.
But if you follow the threads back you will see the Judy claims Paul was a nut job.
That is the context of this discussion.
He did...
Those aren't Jesus' words that He penned in the red ink...Those are the words of someone who 'claimed' he heard Jesus say those things...
Just as God spoke to prophets and they recorded God's words...If the words of God in the OT were in red, would you latch onto those words and ignore every thing else in the OT???
Most of my bibles don't have any red ink at all...
No, she said she thought Paul was "looney". She also said that she accepts the authenticity of his scripture in spite of it. It wasn't the first or the last time God made use of the crazy or the fools for His purposes. Heck, just reading some of the posts on FR would lead you to conclude that it could happen here every day.
So how can you hold that position and reject Apstolic Tradition?
Never said the church was perfect. I just hope that all Christians reflect Jesus..not the world. God bless
This is close enough for me...
I don’t dismiss St. Paul. I just don’t like him. Or much of what he wrote.
;-D
Now you write (and I agree)that it is reasonably supposed that he obeyed somebody else (or somebodies else) who forbade conjugal relations.
That was what I was wondering about. Ambrose wasn't in any position, as far as I know, to forbid bishops anything.
I pretty much think we have to die to get the inside skinny on Origen. In any event I would venture that in the historical sweep of Catholic thought self-castration was not considered a good idea. While I haven't read that much about Origen, I've NEVER read anybody said anything good about the story. Those who believe it say it was a tragic error. Those who disbelieve it call it a slander.
You pays your money and you makes your choice...
Paul is revered, with Peter, as the two greatest of the Apostles. With that said, the tortured twisting of Pauline verse, and the resultant horrific theologies which came from the justification of those twisted understandings, does not do Paul justice whatsoever. Paul came along when the fledgling Church was dying and sold it to the Greeks. The irony is that the Protestant Reformation 1500 years later took Paul's works and used them, not to advance the Church, but to fraction it, and then lead significant fractions away from Church teachings into personal theologies - exactly what Paul opposed.
Of course the Beatitudes demand works for salvation...But what else do they demand???
Mat 5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Well there you go...You're already in the dungheap...
Mat 5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
Mat 5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
Still got all your toes and fingers???
The thing you missed is that none of these people had grace, they had no atonement, they had no shed blood to remove their sins and none of them were Gentiles...
Jesus revealed to Paul a NEW Mystery...And apparently it's still a mystery to you...
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.