Peter NOONE??? Of Herman's Hermits? Cool! ;o)
Posted on 09/15/2013 1:37:28 PM PDT by matthewrobertolson
The pride in one desiring to attain Sainthood should automatically disqualify that person from becoming a Saint.
You would think. But I guess we would be wrong. It just never occurred to me that a person would actually set out to become a saint. Who knew??
Well, since it seems to be about the only way a Catholic can be guaranteed salvation and a place in heaven, could you really blame them?
Nah, I don’t blame them. Until the bill comes due...what a shocker it’s gonna’ be ;)
You’ll run into a good Catholic someday. (I’m convinced most of us do.) There are a few around; and maybe that person will be a beacon of Light, to show you that the Catholic faith (Christ in the Eucharist!) is perfection........
I hate the Saints!!! ....Oh, wait, are you talking about the New Orleans Saints?
The pride in one desiring to attain Sainthood should automatically disqualify that person from becoming a Saint.They don't put their desire on billboards. And of course, their humility prevents them from ever thinking they actually could become saints; it was St. Bernadette of Lourdes who said [and this is a paraphrase], "When I die, you'll be asking for my intercession and talking, talking, of how I am a great saint, and all the while I'll be burning in purgatory, with no one left to pray for me."
The pride in one desiring to attain Sainthood should automatically disqualify that person from becoming a Saint.They don't put their desire on billboards. And of course, their humility prevents them from ever thinking they actually could become saints; it was St. Bernadette of Lourdes who said [and this is a paraphrase], "When I die, you'll be asking for my intercession and talking, talking, of how I am a great saint, and all the while I'll be burning in purgatory, with no one left to pray for me."
you obviously do not understand cananozation....all who die and go to heaven are saints....the Catholic Church, when proclaiming someone to be a saint, merely says that there is sufficient evidence that person X is actually in heaven and can be called a saint. Your mother may be a saint, but unless you can prove that she is in Heaven, she cannot be venerated as such...
There is no such thing as a canon of any scriptures. That is just one of the many self promoting lies of the catholic abomination.
The various kelia spread around the Mediterranean had no need for a “new testament; they needed guidance on how to live by Yehova’s commandments in the scriptures that they already had, the same ones that Yeshua quoted from, in the Torah scrolls that they all had from the time that their congregations were born.
In short, they needed “The Way.”
Paul’s letters, written in Hebrew by necessity, were those instructions. He wrote far more letters than we have preserved today, judging by the comments of early church leaders, but we will do with what we have until Yehova sees fit to reveal more to us.
There is no chronological flaw.
The "one mediator" is Jesus. I haven't seen anyone in this thread dispute this. So if I have Jesus as mediator, why do I need any saints? Jesus is not sufficient?
Pray to the saints if you want to. But, ultimately, they have to go to Jesus to get anything done anyway. I strive for efficiency, so I'll just go straight to the Savior.
thousands...Gesu in Milwaukee is a very large and famous Catholic church....Divine Savior, holy reedemer, Christ the King, etc etc etc
>> “The picture? And yes, all the saints pray for everyone” <<
.
OIC, just one great big Seance.
Necromancers have all the fun.
Jesus is consubstantial with the Father....there is noone between them
I appreciate what you are saying. Jesus and God the Father are one.
However, John 17:5 leads me to believe that Jesus temporarily set aside his heavenly glory to do the will of the Father with respect to Jesus' earthly mission. This would help to explain the several examples in the Holy Bible where Jesus prays to the Father even though he is one with the Father.
Oh I understand it well. I also understand someone who proclaims to know what is written in the book of life is misguided
Peter NOONE??? Of Herman's Hermits? Cool! ;o)
If Catholicism is so wonderful why does it have so little impact on the lives of the vast majority of Catholics that there's a chance that jodyel will run into a "good" Catholic *SOMEDAY*??? There are a *FEW* around? Yeah, I agree with that. A FEW. In spite of Catholicism, not because of it.
Any religion that cannot have more of an impact on the personal, day to day lives of those associated with it, is not worth the time and effort investigating it.
When Catholicism produces the kind of fruits among it's parishioners which FRomoan Catholics claim it does, then maybe people will begin to take it more seriously.
They may call themselves Catholics, and they may even go to Mass, but when it comes to life choices they are virtually indistinguishable from everyone else in America. They don’t live radical Christianity out in any real sort of way. Their lives look just like the lives of their worldly neighbors. They don’t give any more than the average joe. They seem just as likely to divorce their spouses, have only 2.5 children as their non Catholic neighbors and they seem just as materialistic as everyone else. They attend church if they feel like it, but if there’s a weekend football game or the call of the beach house they’re just as likely to respond to that demand. When it comes to voting, they’ll vote as they wish according to wherever they get their opinions from–TV, the newspaper, the mass media–just like their neighbors. The one source they won’t consider when informing their vote is their priests and bishops.
— from the thread Catholic Vote?Are Catholics now so “successfully” assimilated into American political life that they are without political impact—that there really is no such thing as a “Catholic vote”? Unfortunately enough, Catholics are largely indistinguishable from non-Catholics and, despite a few pundits, no, there really is no “Catholic vote.” This obvious conclusion—clear enough from the fact that the vote for the winning candidates in the last national election was approximately the same for Catholics and non-Catholics—has serious current implications....
....Compare two lists: According to the USCCB, the five most Catholic states, in population, are: Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Connecticut. According to the American Life League, the states with the most pro-life legislation (i.e., inhibiting abortion in various ways) are: Oklahoma, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Arkansas and Texas. This is a shocker. In short, there is no Catholic political impact in support of life in those states reportedly having the most Catholics. As Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia put it, after the 2008 election, “[w]e need to stop overcounting our numbers, our influence, our institutions, and our resources, because they are not real.”
— from the thread The Mythical Catholic Vote: The Harmful Consequences of Political Assimilation
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.