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 ...
How could the "Church" know better today, rather than closer to the actual genesis of the epistles when Paul was considered as the true author and was acknowledged by church theologians within the first century? And, are you finally admitting that the "infallible" Magesterium that comprised the infallible articles of the Council of Trent were not all that infallible? Quite an admission on your part.
If you had actually cracked a book .... (Like)
Henry VIII frightens me. The man was ruthless and began a new religion
All true and good, but none says that the written word is above God, nor that everything there is to know about God and His mighty deeds is written of there.
Want to refuse to believe that the Bible is the word of God and contains the truth of God’s Holy word?
I do not refuse to believe nor have I ever denied that the Bible contains the word of God and is all true and without error.
But, I do not believe that everything God has done is contained there.
Gospel of John25 But Jesus did many other things; if all were written down, the world itself would not hold the books recording them.
Jesus is God.
Your nose growing a lot lately???
Unless the Master calls me one of His, I am not. (one of his sheep)
But yet you call yourself a Christian...You then are no more a Christian than the average Mormon...They are shooting for the same goal you are...
Thus I provided the source and a means for you to search through FOIA. Use it or cease and desist this harassment which is bordering on an actionable tort.
You stated "You did not prove your assertion and only "guessed". Please provide empirical evidence to substantiate said claim. To make such an assertion without evidence is not only inadmissible but is construed as defamation of character.Be advised you are publicly Noticed to refrain from such statements against me in this matter as you are merely attributing Intent without the requisite proof. I have a legal right to defend myself from libelous assertions and it appears you may have committed such a Tort.
It would be well for you to provide substantive proof for future assertions of a similar nature you make against my character. The Burden of proof lies with you. Law school would have provided you with this knowledge.
I wish we got some credit for the heroic “religious” mostly Dominicans and Jesuits, but Franciscans as well who were vociferous in denouncing the exploitation of Los Indios in the New World and who argued victoriously (but without practical effect — which depended on the King and nobility) before the King of Spain for the rights of non-Christian peoples. Antonio de Montesinos threatened to deny the sacraments to the adventurers in the New World who enslaved and abused the indigenous peoples.
The forced conversions in Spain were the result of the secular King, presiding over an uncertain state, expelling all who weren’t Christian. The Spanish Inquisition had no authority over or concern for non-Catholics.
The concern was false conversos, largely. Even after the Reformation the local ruler got to control the religious affiliation of his subjects. So I think there’s good reason to acknowledge a real and important distinction between the State’s role in creating an oppressive atmosphere, especially when one recalls the anxiety later expressed by the Pope.
Of course we Catholics will say things like “not that bad” when we consider these days that any torture is abominable. The very phrase “gentle torture” wrung bitter laughter from the Lay Dominicans when we learned that our order restricted the ordeals to such limits.
In the context and expectations of one time, the gentle restraints, even the moral accomplishments and advances of an earlier time may seem barbaric.
Thank you Jvette
God the Father is not limited to a book.
Everything God has done is not contained there.
Thank you again ...
Then would the verse in the Douay-Rheims Version help?
Ephesians 3:2 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
If yet you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me towards you:
Some OTHER translations use the word: stewardship in the place of dispensation, but the word in Greek is "oikonomia", and means:
1) the management of a household or of household affairs
a) specifically, the management, oversight, administration, of other's property
b) the office of a manager or overseer, stewardship
c) administration, dispensation
The Greek word is used to mean both stewardship and dispensation and the context determines the meaning. Two examples of the word are shown in these verses, but in context, you could not interchange the words else the meaning is lost.
Luk 16:4 I am resolved what to do, that, when I am put out of the stewardship, they may receive me into their houses.
Eph. 1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; [even] in him:
And how do you know that??? Because it was written in the book...
Mad Dawg — this is profound. I love Antonio de Montesinos right now
You wrote:
“Yes, I bothered to read the link. It appears you did not, though. Are you unfamiliar with the “Traditionlists” that were attempting to bring back the Catholic religion while Henry was on his last legs?”
There was no inquisition in England. Thus, no matter who you can find who was tortured or executed in the history of English isle, it was never connected with the inquisition. What part of that do you not understand?
“Are you unaware that after his death and that of his young son, Edward, that they did indeed get their wish with the Catholic Queen Mary Tudor?”
They never got an inquisition. What part of that do you not understand?
“Anne Askew (née Anne Ayscough, married name Anne Kyme) (1520[1] – 16 July 1546) was an English poet and Protestant who was condemned as a heretic. She is the only woman on record to have been tortured in the Tower of London before being burnt at the stake.”
Executed by a Protestant king. She was tortured by Richard Rich and Thomas Wriothesley. Rich was the man who perjured himself to convict St. Thomas More. Catholic traditionalist? Absolutely NOT. Wriothesley actually was said to have operated the rack when Askew was tortured. He had become rich when he received the wealth of dissolved monasteries. And you’re now trying to claim it was Catholic Traditionalists who were at fault? You might want to read Peter Marshall’s “Is the Pope Catholic? Henry VIII and the Semantics of Schism”, in Catholics and the ‘protestant nation’: religious politics and identity in early modern England.
The simple fact is that Henry VIII was less Protestant than Askew. Both were not Catholic, however and neither was ever tried by an inquisition nor was either ever tortured in one. Richard Rich by the way simply went wherever he could make money. He served Henry VIII, Edward VI, Mary I, and Elizabeth I and participated in persecuting people for religious reasons under all of those monarchs. He was a Talleyrand. What he wasn’t was a loyal Catholic.
Protestant anti-Catholic fails again. Same old, same old.
I agree with you and with Jvette.
I sometimes think we can all let ourselves become too enamored with knowledge and being “educated” in Sciptures and not nearly enough in the spirit of them.
If we truly believe that it is true that Christ comes to live in us and make His abode in us, then there is no way to express the depth of such a relationship.
In his wonderful book “Jesus of Nazareth”, Pope Benedict writes: “God’s love for each individual is totally personal and includes this mystery of a uniqueness that cannot be divulged to other human beings.”
This why everything that God does is not contained in the Scriptures or can be perceived by all or should be interpreted by all.
Really? Then why does SCRIPTURE teach that there is one mediator between God and man, the man Jesus Christ (paraphrase of 1 Tim. 2:5) and the Roman Catholic Catechism teaches that Mary is a "co-mediatrix"??
Sounds like they run afoul to me....
Hoss
It is not a continuation of Paul's commission to Jew and Gentile, forming the Church the Body of Christ, who, at this point in God's timeline, has been raptured.
Thank you, boatbums, for posting the Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition of Scripture Ephesians 3:2. So..it is not a question of translation. It is a question of refusing to accept the Scripture. How very typical. Don’t like what it says, refuse that it’s there..{{{sigh}}}
Dear Running on Empty (Jackson Browne?)
We Have let ourselves become too enamored with knowledge.
Bring on the Holy Spirit!! He is a Person of the Trinity.
I forgot to say that I like Benedict also - I hate the Novus Ordo though ....
I forgot to say that I like Benedict also - I hate the Novus Ordo though ....
Not really, because the Douay-Rheims has been replaced by newer and better translations. Not because the Word of God has changed, but because the English languages evolves.
In the Catholic Church "dispensation" does not mean what you purport it to mean. In the canon law of the Catholic Church, a dispensation is the suspension by competent authority of general rules of law in particular case.
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.