Posted on 09/02/2011 9:07:47 AM PDT by marshmallow
Minneapolis, Minnesota (CNN) –Prior to 2006, few people even knew that then-Minnesota state legislator Keith Ellison was a Muslim. Because of his English name, he said, no one thought to ask.
But five years ago, when he ran for a seat in the United States House of Representatives - a race he would go on to win - word of his religious affiliation began to spread.
“When I started running for Congress it actually took me by surprise that so many people were fascinated with me being the first Muslim in Congress,” said Ellison, a Democrat now serving his third term in the House.
“But someone said to me, ‘Look Keith, think of a person of Japanese origin running for Congress six years after Pearl Harbor–this might be a news story.’”
Though Ellison's status as the first Muslim elected to Congress is widely known, fewer are aware that he was born into a Catholic family in Detroit and was brought up attending Catholic schools.
But he said he was never comfortable with that faith.
“I just felt it was ritual and dogma,” Ellison said. “Of course, that’s not the reality of Catholicism, but it’s the reality I lived. So I just kind of lost interest and stopped going to Mass unless I was required to.”
It wasn’t until he was a student at Wayne State University in Detroit when Ellison began, “looking for other things.”
(Excerpt) Read more at religion.blogs.cnn.com ...
If you love Him keep His commandments:shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiachSee Exod. 20:6; Deut. 5:10; 7:9; 11:1, 13; 30:16; Jos. 22:5; Neh. 1:5; Ps. 119:47f, 127; Dan. 9:4; Jn. 14:15, 21; 15:10; 1 Jn. 5:2f; 2 Jn. 1:6
What is happening here is that the anti-Catholic control freaks are insisting that Catholics abandon our lexicon and adopt their secular interpretations and word usage in the communication of our faith. It drives them nuts that we do not allow them to define our dogma, doctrines and language nor alter our standards to accept their heresies into full communication with the Church. They are like wet dogs scratching at the back door howling to be let in and given free reign to mark the place with the muddy prints and manners of the Reformation.
Oh what a crybaby! 
Speaking of mind reading:
"Everyone here now knows that when you refer to the term "Proddy", that does not include Lutherans, Anglicans, Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists or even Pentecostals, but it only encompasses your little group that has its belief in aliens."
No, for the millionth time. It means with, but subordinate to, Jesus. By your contrarian standards the word coequal would be redundantly redundant.
Boy Pope Leo XIII had quite an imagination.
coequal |kōˈēkwəl|
adjective
equal with one another; having the same rank or importance : coequal partners.
noun
a person or thing equal with another.
DERIVATIVES
coequality |ˌkō-iˈkwälitē| noun
ORIGIN late Middle English : from Latin coaequalis ‘of the same age,’ from co- ‘jointly’ + aequalis (see equal ).Somehow it does not seem to be redundantly redundant.
Here is a good example.
Christ's presence in the Eucharist. A person can say He is truly, really, wholly, and continuously present. But you can't say He is physically present. That would be incorrect to a RC. Because to say that Christ is "physically" present would be to imply that He is "locally" present, which He is not.- "A Manual of Dogmatic Theology {New York: Desclee Company, 1959}, vol. II, p. 262.
That is why the Churxch says He is "substantially" present. That is why though Christ is present, He doesn't appear to be present. He is there in a unique way. So unique, says the Church, that there is no parallel in nature. This, of course, makes it difficult (or impossible) for anyone to understand the Eucharist. Or more importantly, TO CRITICIZE IT. _ The Gospel According to Rome. James G. McCarthy.
And that doesn't even scratch the surface. There is the "unbloody sacrifice" of the Mass, where the wine is wholly and completely turned into THE BLOOD OF CHRIST. The unbloody sacrifice? That's the most ridiculous double-speak that has ever been foisted on a pawn. And yet millions, no sorry, BILLIONS swallow it.
There is so much more, as I'm certain you may know. Abandon your lexicon? Bwhahahaha! We should be so lucky that you would have a lexicon with words that actually mean what they say. Of course you can't be wrong when you're on both sides of the issues and words, now can you?
Mary is referred to frequently as Ishtar by some of the cretins who prowl these threads pretending to be Christian. No real Christian would blaspheme God by comparing the Blessed Virgin, whom He chose to carry our Savior, with an ancient fertility goddess who was above all else associated with sexuality and sacred prostitution.
I suppose they believe they are being clever and are doing so to be specifically hurtful to Catholics, but the damage to their own souls is profoundly saddening.
...by you because you fail to understand the meaning of substance (as in transubstantiation). Don't blame your shortcomings on the Church.
Thank you. It reinforces that "co" is different in meaning from "equal" or either would suffice for the same meaning.
1. God's name. (Rom. 2:24, Isa. 52:5)
2. God, Himself. (Isa. 65:7; Ezek. 20:27; Rev. 16:9-11,21; Mt. 12:31,32)
3. The doctrine of God. (I Tim. 6:1).
4. The word of God. (Titus 2:5).
Unless Mary has been made part of the Godhead, comparing her to anything is not blaspheming God.
How can anyone who reads scripture for themselves possibly believe this stuff? No one goes to the Father but through Mary to get to Jesus to get to the Father? Has anyone, ever seen anything like this in scripture? I surely have not. It’s made up from human emotion for what reason I’m not sure.
Once again I will state the admonition from Revelation: “come out of her”.
I’ve seen something similar. It’s called “doctrines of devils.”
If I were catholic I would pick and choose what is a conviction and what is an idea based on what the Holy Spirit tells me. This is what I have done with a lot of Lutheran baggage in my life.
co-Joint redeemer ?
prefix
1 (forming nouns) joint; mutual; common : coeducation.
2 (forming adjectives) jointly; mutually : coequal.
3 (forming verbs) together with another or others : coproduce | co-own.
4 Mathematics of the complement of an angle : cosine.
• the complement of : colatitude | coset.
Mutual redeemer ?
common redeemer ?
BuuuZZZZ you fail !
How about, if it can’t be proven by scripture throw it out and leave that church?
This is an option if that is what the Holy Spirit wants.
Yes it is saddening,my friend. We must continue to pray for them.
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.