Posted on 08/27/2010 11:45:13 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH . . .
MORE OF THAT LEGENDARY MARIAN CHARITY . . .
TRANSMITTED BY SHIPPING CONTAINERS FULL OF WHITE HANKYS NO DOUBT.
Perhaps yours went to the wrong address.
THANKS THANKS. MUCH APPRECIATE YOUR RESEARCH.
This comment? Or is there another?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2578704/posts?page=1710#1710
“Good stuff. When you empty your heart of hatred and learn the Law of Love you will embrace this book.”
Obviously, this book has not been renounced by all Catholics.
Or even any, yet.
Your comment is gibberish.
You need to slow down and think before you type.
Well, it certainly appears to have official Roman Catholic approval.
Aside from unofficial Roman Catholic approval.
No one is yet denouncing the heresies and outright unscriptural statements about Mary contained in this publication.
Tell us what the article is talking about, Cronos.
Good stuff. When you empty your heart of hatred and learn the Law of Love you will embrace this book.
Obviously, this book has not been renounced by all Catholics.
Or even any, yet.
INDEED!
FOR SURE.
WHAT A WISE AND PERCEPTIVE PERSON THE LORD HAS MADE YOU!
PRAISE GOD!
CONGRATS.
I've never even heard of it until it showed up here. Some (a lot?) of the statements seem bizarre and I have no interest in defending it. In order to properly express my personal opinion on the content of a lot of devotional material I'd have to use language that would get this post deleted. My devotional practices tend more in the direction of the old Divine Office than to anything particularly Marian, I just don't have a Marian spirituality.
The Daughters of St. Paul publish a lot of stuff, most of the mainline Catholic publishing houses have churned out a lot of garbage over the last 40-50 years. Amazon doesn't even stock the Ferraro book and when I searched "rosary meditations" and sorted by bestselling it showed up at #50, it doesn't even seem to be available from Pauline Books.
I spent about an hour writing a post that I subsequently deleted because after all that time and effort I'd only made it through the first few items. I junked it because what we do believe is so likely to send people into orbit that I wonder what the point is. So many people are already convinced that we never actually mean what we say and are inclined to jump on the worst possible interpretation that I'm not sure it's worth the effort.
I will say I wouldn't waste my money on that book.
Yep...just catching up here but I noted that as well. Stunning hardly says enough....
No, Rome's attempt at moral equivalency is a lie proven by history.
Protestants argue with their enemies and try to persuade them by the weight of the Scriptures.
Rome murders those who disagree with Rome.
Hundreds of thousands slaughtered during the Inquisitions, the St. Batholomew's Day Massacre, the Albigensian Crusade, the Crusades against the Eastern Orthodox church, the reformers who dared to preach from the Bible...the list is endless.
And to that we can add the 800,000 Protestant Tutsis who were hacked to death by the Roman Catholic Hutus in Rwanda in 1994.
What a racket. Rome pretends to be Barry Fitzgerald when in fact it is much closer to Barry Soetoro.
Or maybe not. Maybe they know and they don't care since Rome damns to hell all those who rest assured they have been saved by Jesus Christ.
"The Holy Inquisition in its full vigor is something modernity sorely lacks" -- 328 posted on 08/01/2008 4:59:56 PM PDT by annalex
Clearly, even today they find it difficult to restrain from violence.
You and Christopher Hitchens are not much different...
Then why do Roman Catholics look to Mary as their "co-redeemer" and to priests as "another Christ?"
"Calvin did not, on this account, modify his own opinion, but he could not make it prevail. On October 26th he wrote again to Farel: 'Tomorrow Servetus will be led out to execution. We have done our best to change the kind of death, but in vain. I shall tell thee when we meet why we had no success.' (Opera, XIV, pp. 590, 613-657). "Thus, what Calvin is most of all reproached with the burning of Servetus Calvin was quite opposed to. He is not responsible for it. He did what he could to save Servetus from mounting the pyre. But, what reprimands, more or less eloquent, has this pyre with its flames and smoke given rise to, made room for! The fact is that without the pyre the death of Servetus would have passed almost unnoticed." Doumérgue goes on to tell us that the death of Servetus was "the error of the time, an error for which Calvin was not particularly responsible. The sentence of condemnation to death was pronounced only after consultation with the Swiss Churches, several of which were far from being on good terms with Calvin (but all of which gave their consent) .... Besides, the judgment was pronounced by a Council in which the inveterate enemies of Calvin, the free thinkers, were in the majority."20 That Calvin himself rejected the responsibility is clear from his later writings. "From the time that Servetus was convicted of his heresy," said he, "I have not uttered a word about his punishment, as all honest men will bear witness."21 And in one of his later replies to an attack which had been made upon him, he says: "For what particular act of mine you accuse me of cruelty I am anxious to know. I myself know not that act, unless it be with reference to the death of your great master, Servetus. But that I myself earnestly entreated that he might not be put to death his judges themselves are witnesses, in the number of whom at that time two were his staunch favorites and defenders."22"...On August 20, 1553, Calvin wrote to Farel: 'I hope that Servetus will be condemned to death, but I desire that he should be spared the cruelty of the punishment' he means that of fire. Farel replied to him on September 8th: 'I do not greatly approve that tenderness of heart,' and he goes on to warn him to be careful that 'in wishing that the cruelty of the punishment of Servetus be mitigated, thou art acting as a friend towards a man who is thy greatest enemy. But I pray thee to conduct thyself in such a manner that, in future, no one will have the boldness to publish such doctrines, and to give trouble with impunity for so long a time as this man has done.'
Rome condemned Servetus to death for denying the Trinity.
So the death tally stands at one for Calvin and millions plus one for Rome.
NATURAL LAW: Sure you do or you wouldn't keep blurting out the same falsehoods ad naseum in the hopes of corrupting me.
Not only are you once again breaking the FR RF rules by "mind-reading," but you flatter yourself that I care about what you think, say or do.
It is every Christian's responsibility to preach the Gospel in truth, and that is what dozens of Protestants are doing on this forum every day. Whether or not Roman Catholics will be given new eyes to see and new ears to hear, or instead whether God will continue to give them strong delusion that they should believe lies, is all in the capable hands of God from whom all blessings flow.
Pray for His Holy Spirit to lead you away from the idolatry of Rome to the light of His perfect word.
LOL.
Behold, for peace I had great bitterness: but thou hast in love to my soul delivered it from the pit of corruption: for thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back. " -- Isaiah 38:16-17"O LORD, by these things men live, and in all these things is the life of my spirit: so wilt thou recover me, and make me to live.
If RCs would just read the Bible, they'd learn the comfort that God gives those who know their sins were forgiven at Calvary, for He has cast all my sins behind His back.
Calvin only agreed with Rome which had earlier sentenced Servetus to death for denying the Trinity.
So the death tally stands at one for Calvin and millions plus one for Rome.
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.