Posted on 08/31/2013 3:38:44 PM PDT by Greetings_Puny_Humans
Full interview (roughly one hour) with former Roman Catholic priests Richard Bennett (website: http://www.BEREANBEACON.ORG) & Bartholomew Brewer, Ph.D, author of "Pilgrimage from Rome - A Testimony" (website: http://www.MTC.COM) and former nun Rocio Zwirner give glory to God for their exodus from the Roman Catholic Church & into the glorious grace of the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ. (Description from youtube)
Great Augustine Quote.
The reformers were only trying to bring back the Ancient and Biblical Truth without the novelties.
Another thread on the Religion Forum where the milk of human kindness and Christian restraint of the tongue flows like a mighty river!
I have to visit once in a while to remind myself why I don’t visit more often.
Makes me want to run back into the *loving* arms of the church again.
I don’t think so.
It do keep the Rel. Mods on their toes.
Well! Isn’t that special! And in a Religion thread too! I suppose we can discern which spirit inspired that comment.
A: Don't tell anyone, but actually they can be married. That's a big secret you see. Any Catholic priest can give up the priesthood to have a wife and family, and since all of them are fairly well educated with college degrees, they'll have no problem picking up a good secular job or starting a family business. Nuns and monks are the same way. They can, at any time, choose to leave their orders to pursue a secular life in holy matrimony. Most of them are highly educated too. Nobody is a prisoner of their religious vocation.
But now the accusations of statutory rape and indecent motives abound against those who leave the Catholic Church. I think it is ironical as well as comical how FRoman Catholics on this forum are so quick to castigate and condemn any Catholic priest who chooses to leave his profession or, when he leaves, decides to be married. They are so quick to paint ALL non-Catholic Christians as liars, heretics and deceivers. Look how soon this thread was attacked for the AUDACITY of talking about priests and nuns who leave Catholicism.
We get bombarded daily with numerous pro-Roman Catholic threads that often include the condemnation of everyone-but-Roman Catholic-Christians and which make Free Republic appear, for all practical purposes, as a website run by the Vatican and its minions. It's a wonder why we even have to have fund raising every quarter when the Catholic Church SHOULD be the sole funding source due to the domination of the Religion Forum. Let someone DARE post a pro-Protestant thread and the attacks begin immediately, loudly and nastily. The one bright spot in it all is that the brave Christians here refuse to be cowed and continue to speak the truth of the gospel of the grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ. That truth WILL break through to any heart that diligently seeks to know it.
Duplicity is the stock in trade of Catholicism. When the RCC embarked on the amalgamation of Christianity and Paganism in an attempt to raise and maintain membership and control it demanded duplicity.
Exactly. Just like they did with Luther not to long ago. I'm sure you remember THAT thread and the beating he took over getting married.
I saw that comment and was wondering how long it would stay up.
strange place, the RCC...
It goes to show that the moral issues are not what bothers them, but rather fidelity to Rome.
Yep! There is an almost schizophrenic attitude towards Luther - sometimes he’s a drunken horndog and the next he’s a Mary-worshipper who thanks the Papists for giving us the Bible! Just as CB described it - duplicity that goes back a LONG way.
Fidelity to Rome is first and foremost for those who adhere to her teaching.
Source?
Catholics are their own worst enemies.
Post deleted by RM in
3......
2......
1......
You are on your way to indicting yourself.
It was the charge of the Reformers that the Catholic doctrines were not primitive, and their pretension was to revert to antiquity. But the appeal to antiquity is both a treason and a heresy. It is a treason because it rejects the Divine voice of the Church at this hour, and a heresy because it denies that voice to be Divine..
The problem is that this quote is clearly taken out of context because the very sentence before the quote is: “And from this a fourth truth immediately follows, that the doctrines of the Church in all ages are primitive. It was the charge of the Reformers that the Catholic doctrines were not primitive...”
This EXACT theme, “that the doctrines of the Church in all ages are primitive” is already highlighted on roman numeral page XXI of the same book (edition = London: Longmans, 1865). You are entirely unfamiliar with the book and its contents aren’t you?
"Clearly taken out of context"? What in the world are you protesting in Roman reactionary reflex? You seem to think that if a Prot .quotes only part of a text (for brevity sake, as i did) then you must be dishonest if it is used against Rome. Yet here Manning is contending that the doctrines of the Church in all ages are primitive, which claim the Reformers examined and found wanting, and the recourse of Manning was to essentially claim that antiquity is what Rome says it is, which is what i invoked it for.
Nor does it surprise me that daniel1212 apparently never bothered to compare it to the original and has now posted it here.....What website did you lift the quote from without checking to see if it was even genuine or properly quoted?
I certainly did compared it to ensure it was teaching in context what i claimed, and you are wrong for asserting otherwise. For i have quoted this text numerous times on FR and often included the link, which is not some anti-Catholic (though anything that contains anything that impugns Rome is labeled such) we site, but the actual book as found on http://www.archive.org/stream/a592004400mannuoft/a592004400mannuoft_djvu.txt
...End paste of the actual quote rather than the deceptively edited Protestant anti-Catholic version. Thus, we can see once again how Protestant commonly misrepresent things by falsely editing quotes.
Thus, we can see??? Falsely editing quotes???" What we see is what loyalty to Rome can do. Vladimir, there is NOTHING in the quote you provided which teaches anything different than what i invoked it for!!! Manning claims the Church is its own interpreter of its history, thus in a real sense it has no antiquity as it "rests upon its own supernatural and perpetual consciousness. Its past is present with it..." Therefore the Reformers cannot be right.
But it is you who has erred in false charging me with dishonesty and false editing or being stupid, which is not the first time RCs has resorted to slander here and been exposed. It seems that some simply cannot allow anything that even seems to impugn Rome and so must resort to slander.
End paste of the original quote untouched by the deceitful hands of Protestant anti-Catholics.
posted here: http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2011/08/canon-as-infallible-sacred-tradition.html It is obvious that you took the quote - deceptively quoted - from Beggars All, or a website that used the same deceptively edited quote, and that you accidentally cut the ““...in” from the beginning of the quote.
That is simply absurd, as "in all cases" does not change the meaning of the text in support of what i invoked it for, that the RC assurance of doctrine rests upon Rome's claim to veracity, and if anything, "in all cases" supports this. And i also only provided the link to the actual source thus you could read it!
Once again you are simply protesting against something that impugns Rome, while the fuller context does nothing to refute that. Newman is dealing with to the formal Definitions of the Church and to the exercise of logical and methodical reasoning by which to arrive at some conclusions ("What has been said of History in relation to the formal Definitions of the Church, applies also to the exercise of Ratiocination"), for he confesses that "no doctrine of the Church can be rigorously proved [or disproved] by historical evidence" and proceeds to state that
"in all cases the immediate motive in the mind of a Catholic for his reception of them is, not that they are proved to him by Reason or by History, but because Revelation has declared them by means of that high ecclesiastical Magisterium which is their legitimate exponent."
If you protest this then you must argue that "the immediate motive in the mind of a Catholic for his reception of them" only applies to some doctrines, meaning they are to objectively search for evidence of some doctrines to determine their veracity, which would make them as an evangelical.
But while it is affirmed by Catholics that this means of ascertaining truth is valid in (fallibly) deciding to submit to the infallible authority of Rome, once he does so he is exhorted to simply implicitly trust Rome, as these approved writings state (and these excerpts are consistent with the context), consistent with Newman,
But mark well: having once found the true Church, private judgment of this kind ceases; having discovered the authority established by God, you must submit to it at once. There is no need of further search for the doctrines contained in the Christian Gospel, for the Church brings them all with her and will teach you them all. You have sought for the Teacher sent by God, and you have secured him; what need of further speculation? Your private judgment has led you into the Palace of Truth, and it leaves you there, for its task is done; the mind is at rest, the soul is satisfied, the whole being reposes in the enjoyment of Truth itself, Who can neither deceive nor be deceived. "Be convinced," says Cardinal Newman in his great sermon, "Faith and Doubt"-----"be convinced in your reason that the Catholic Church is a teacher sent to you from God, and it is enough."
Protestants seem to imagine that strength of mind consists in criticizing and disputing Christian doctrine. Catholics, on the other hand, think that true nobility of soul and greatness of mind are evidenced chiefly in believing mysteries above our capacity simply because the Church enunciates them to us; in thinking as she thinks, accepting what she accepts, and rejecting what she rejects.
He is as sure of a truth when declared by the Catholic Church [infallibly at least] as he would be if he saw Jesus Christ standing before him and heard Him declaring it with His Own Divine lips. —“Henry G. Graham, "What Faith Really Means", (Nihil Obstat:C. SCHUT, S. T.D., Censor Deputatus, Imprimatur: EDM. CANONICUS SURMONT, D.D.,Vicarius Generalis. WESTMONASTERII, Die 30 Septembris, 1914 ); http://www.catholictradition.org/Tradition/faith2-10.htm]
Thus once again, there is nothing in the larger quote (and RC complain my posts are too long) that is contrary to what i invoked the quote in support of, while your reaction is slander.
Sometimes I’m not sure what is worse - that Protestant anti-Catholics are stupid or that they are deceptive. It has to be the deceptive part because that tends toward sinfulness. Stupidity is perhaps blameless.
I am sure what is worse, that of RCs who are so blindly devoted to defending Rome against anything that disturbs their cherished view of the object of their devotion that they must charge anyone who exposes it as being deceptive or stupid, but in so doing they indict themselves and provide an arguments against Rome.
This is not the first time this has happened, as RCs see what they want in both Scripture and elsewhere, and an apology is in order, but i have yet to see one.
Are you determined to get people to see that you are to be disregarded in spiritual matters?
*sigh*
Treatment of others like that by Catholics yanks me back to the years I spent in Catholicism and with Catholics.
Clearly nothing has changed over the years.
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.