Posted on 02/05/2012 2:58:27 PM PST by marshmallow
Fidel Castro will be received back into the communion of the Roman Catholic Church during Pope Benedict XVI’s visit to the island in March, the Italian press is reporting. If true, this is a remarkable story — and one that has yet to catch the attention of editors this side of the Atlantic.
On 1 Feb 2012, La Republicca — [Italy’s second largest circulation daily newspaper, La Republicca follows a center-left political line and is strongly anti-clerical; not anti-Catholic per se but a critic of the institutional church] — reported that as death approaches, the octogenarian communist has turned to God for solace.
ABC’s Global Note news blog is the only U.S. general interest publication I have found that has reported this story. It referenced the La Republicca story and said that Castro’s
daughter Alina is quoted as saying “During this last period, Fidel has come closer to religion: he has rediscovered Jesus at the end of his life. It doesn’t surprise me because dad was raised by Jesuits.” The article quotes an unidentified high prelate in the Vatican who is working on the Pope’s Cuba trip: “Fidel is at the end of his strength. Nearly at the end of his life. His exhortations in the party paper Granma, are increasingly less frequent. We know that in this last period he has come closer to religion and God.”
Some Italian websites have even speculated as to when Fidel will make his confession and credo — setting the date as 27 March 2012 at 17:30 when the two ottantacinquenni, Pope Benedict XVI and Castro, will meet at the Palacio de la Revolución when the pope makes his official visit to the head of state, Raul Castro.
During Pope John Paul II’s 1998 visit to Cuba, Castro attended mass, but did...........
(Excerpt) Read more at geoconger.wordpress.com ...
Have you rejected the fact that as totally human he was subject to His parents but as God He is not?
I see that you have resurrected the ancient heresy of Nestorianism with a dash of Monophysitism. Congratulations, somewhat of a triumph, really. I suppose that the last 1500 years really didn't happen.
Queen James I of England (also known as Queen James VI of Scotland) certainly commissioned the KJV as a government document, subject to himself and for the glory of himself.
The Bulgarian Heresy:
In the 10th century, there arose in Bulgaria a gnostic heresy credited to a priest by the name of Bogomil. The beliefs of the Bogomils, as they were called, were adoptionist, meaning that they considered Jesus to have been "adopted" by God at the time of his baptism, but did not consider him to be a part of a trinity. Neither did they consider Mary in any way the mother of God.
Simplicity and strict adherence characterized their practices, with priests elected from their own groups and congregations meeting at homes rather than churches. Infant baptism was not practiced, marriage was not considered a sacrament, and saints were considered false idols.
The heresy had a strong Manichean flavor to it. They believed that God had two sons, Michael and Satan. Satan created the material world and attempted to create Adam, but was unable to create a soul. God added the soul to Adam, but mankind was bound in service to Satan. Michael came to earth in the form of the holy spirit, which entered into Jesus. As Christ, he broke the original agreement which bound mankind to Satan. But it was Satan who orchestrated the crucifixion, and he is still working to recapture mankind by means of the mainstream churches.
The basic ideas of this Bulgarian heresy spread rapidly west, through northern Italy to Southern France. There, the believers called themselves Cathars, from the Greek word meaning pure. Others called them Albigensians, after the town of Albi, or Bougres, for Bulgarians. This last name is the source of the word bugger, due to accusations of sodomy.
Even stricter than the Bogomils, the Cathars attempted to live simple, exemplary lives, with the most serious believers refraining from sex and other physical pleasures. Many adopted strict veganism. They had only one sacrament, the consolamentum, which was something of a last rites in which sin was removed.
The Cathars believed that the God of the old testament was actually Satan, and that he was responsible for the creation of the material world. Jesus was therefore purely spirit (Docetism), since he would have been tainted if he had had a real body. By purity of living, anyone could cast off the physical body and awaken in heaven. The impure were doomed to rebirth into this physical world. One interesting side effect of this belief was that women were treated as equal to men, since we have all been men or women at some time in our past lives.
The Bogomils and the Cathars were harshly persecuted by the Orthodox church in the east and the Catholic church in the west. By the 14th century, the Bulgarians were absorbed by the Islamic Ottoman Empire, and the Cathars were virtually eliminated by Crusades and the Inquisition. They had laid the foundations, however, for the Reformation.
from http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/heresies.html
You guys think that you invented your particular departures from Christianity? These guys did it a long time ago and didn't commercialize it a la Osteen or Hinn.
The written record of the words and deeds of the Incarnate Jesus; his teachings and commands to us. What is it to you?
There is none.
I am saddened that so many who claim the mantle of Christianity have in actual fact departed so far afield.
Those who can’t support their beliefs by scripture truly have left the teachings of Christ and the apostles there is no doubt.
I would be curious how Fidel intends to make restitution for the lives he has taken. I did not think murderers could repent since they have not the means to restore what they have taken.
Those who support nonsense with scripture are ill equipped to correct others.
You mean like the bodily assumption of Mary? Oh wait, the RCC can’t even support that with scripture. Maybe the concept of a “vicar of Christ” and a false hierarchy of Priests?
Murderers can repent. There are many cases when exact restoration is impossible that don’t include murder.
I think it’s been well proven that your abilities with scripture are not to be taken seriously.
“Why do you suppose fear is involved?”
And yet you still avoid answering, why?
I’m sure Catholics would think that given they don’t use scripture without adding something to it. Catholics still think that the guy in the pointy hat has the same authority as scripture so pretty much anything goes with them.
Sorry, silly insults only make it harder to take you seriously.
Is this an example of "Theological" dialog you were asking for D-fendr? Because it sure looks a lot like grudge attacks to me. Nobody here is arguing for Osteen or Macpherson theology so why are all non-Catholics being swiped at? Anyone who dares discuss the wrong theology of the Catholic Church is "attacking" the Church for liberals, but it's okay to attack a group based on wrong theology NOBODY is spouting??? This is just a little bit too much hypocrisy to stomach.
What is the Catholic definition of a cult? Do you know?
Ah, gee, thanks for the history lesson. Can you point to even ONE post that causes you to think anyone here is a closet Bolgomilian, Albegensian or Cathar???
If you think comparing to Olsteen or Maphereson is bad, read the other side a bit.
There’s no theological dialogue possible in this particular discussion and the other’s like it on the thread-war du jour.
I participate in theological seminars with members of Protestant denominations. One this morning in fact, I was the only Catholic of seven participants and a moderator. Medieval Scholasticism and it’s effect on Christianity was the topic.
In these seminars, we disagree on quite a bit, particularly ecclesiology, and the discussion is very open and honest, people argue their beliefs skillfully and with passion. I’m familiar with theological dialogue and what it requires. Those requirements don’t exist here, now.
There was a time on FR where there were long stretches of dialogue between Catholic and Protestant. You may even remember a few. I don’t see most of those Protestants participating anymore, or very rarely. I don’t blame them given what it’s devolved to. All that’s left are,mostly, bomb throwers: those who, apparently, committed enemies of the Church without the capacity and desire for honest debate or dialogue. I’m referencing a very few, a half-dozen at most, with precious little theology, likely they would object even to the term.
So, the opportunities for good and honest dialogue are greatly diminished, that’s not why I’m on this thread now, though there was a fleet courteous conversation a couple of dozen posts back. I try to jump in when possible, whenever a courteous poster shows a willingness.
To answer your question: No, this is not an example of theological dialog, and I don’t think it was intended to be. It’s an argument, about history and credibility, a comparison of sources perhaps, but not about theology.
“”Those who support nonsense with scripture are ill equipped to correct others.””
Sort of like this organization who uses Scripture to support this silliness
Flat Earth Society
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm
Excerpts...
The Shape of the Earth
Disregarding the dome, the essential flatness of the earth’s surface is required by verses like Daniel 4:10-11. In Daniel, the king “saw a tree of great height at the centre of the earth...reaching with its top to the sky and visible to the earth’s farthest bounds.” If the earth were flat, a sufficiently tall tree would be visible to “the earth’s farthest bounds,” but this is impossible on a spherical earth. Likewise, in describing the temptation of Jesus by Satan, Matthew 4:8 says, “Once again, the devil took him to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world [cosmos] in their glory.” Obviously, this would be possible only if the earth were flat. The same is true of Revelation 1:7: “Behold, he is coming with the clouds! Every eye shall see him...”
Do you believe this too, Cynical Bear?
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.