Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Thomas A. Droleskey on the Lies of Protestantism
Seattle Catholic ^ | September 29, 2003 | Thomas A. Droleskey

Posted on 09/30/2003 9:32:47 AM PDT by Fifthmark

Protestantism is founded on many lies: (1) That Our Blessed Lord and Savior Jesus Christ did not create a visible, hierarchical Church. (2) That there is no authority given by Our Lord to the Pope and his bishops and priests to govern and to sanctify the faithful. (3) That each believer has an immediate and personal relationship with the Savior as soon as he makes a profession of faith on his lips and in his heart, therefore being perpetually justified before God. (4) Having been justified by faith alone, a believer has no need of an intermediary from a non-existent hierarchical priesthood to forgive him his sins. He is forgiven by God immediately when he asks forgiveness. (5) This state of justification is not earned by good works. While good works are laudable, especially to help unbelievers convert, they do not impute unto salvation. Salvation is the result of the profession of faith that justifies the sinner. (6) That grace is merely, in the words of Martin Luther, the snowflakes that cover up the "dungheap" that is man. (7) That there is only one source of Divine Revelation, Sacred Scripture. (8) That each individual is his own interpreter of Sacred Scripture. (9) That there is a strict separation of Church and State. Princes, to draw from Luther himself, may be Christians but it is not as a Christian that they ought to rule. These lies have permutated in thousands of different directions. However, they have sewn the fabric of the modern state and popular culture for nearly 500 years (I shudder to think how the Vatican is going to commemorate the 500th anniversary of Luther's posting his 95 theses on the church doors in Wittenberg fourteen years from now).

Here below are explanations of these lies and their multifaceted implications for the world in which we live:

(1-2) The contention that Our Lord did not create a visible, hierarchical church vitiates the need for a hierarchical, sacerdotal priesthood for the administration of the sacraments. It is a rejection of the entirety of the history of Christianity prior to the Sixteenth Century. It is a denial of the lesson taught us by Our Lord by means of His submission to His own creatures, Saint Joseph and the Blessed Mother, in the Holy Family of Nazareth that each of us is to live our entire lives under authority, starting with the authority of the Vicar of Christ and those bishops who are in full communion with him. The rejection of the visible, hierarchical church is founded on the prideful belief that we are able to govern ourselves without being directed by anyone else on earth. This contention would lead in due course to the rejection of any and all religious belief as necessary for individuals and for societies. Luther and Calvin paved the way for Jean-Jacques Rousseau and the French Revolution that followed so closely the latter's deification of man.

(3-6) Baptism is merely symbolic of the Christian's desire to be associated with the Savior in the amorphous body known as the Church. What is determinative of the believer's relationship with Christ is his profession of faith. As the believer remains a reprobate sinner, all he can do is to seek forgiveness by confessing his sins privately to God. This gives the Protestant of the Lutheran strain the presumptuous sense that there is almost nothing he can do to lose his salvation once he has made his profession of faith in the Lord Jesus. There is thus no belief that a person can scale the heights of personal sanctity by means of sanctifying grace. It is impossible, as Luther projected from his own unwillingness to cooperate with sanctifying grace to overcome his battles with lust, for the believer to be anything other than a dungheap. Thus a Protestant can sin freely without for once considering that he has killed the life of sanctifying grace in his soul, thereby darkening his intellect and weakening the will and inclining himself all the more to sin-and all the more a vessel of disorder and injustice in the larger life of society.

(7-8) The rejection of a visible, hierarchical Church and the rejection of Apostolic Tradition as a source of Divine Revelation protected by that Church leads in both instances to theological relativism. Without an authoritative guide to interpret Divine Revelation, including Sacred Scripture, individual believers can come to mutually contradictory conclusions about the meaning of passages, the precise thing that has given rise to literally thousands of Protestant sects. And if a believer can reduce the Bible, which he believes is the sole source of Divine Revelation, to the level of individual interpretation, then there is nothing to prevent anyone from doing the same with all written documents, including the documents of a nation's founding. If the plain words of Scripture can be deconstructed of their meaning, it is easy to do so, say, with the words of a governmental constitution. Theological relativism paved the way for moral relativism. Moral relativism paved the way for the triumph of positivism and deconstructionism as normative in the realm of theology and that of law and popular culture.

(9) The overthrow of the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ as it was exercised by His true Church in the Middle Ages by the Protestant concept of the separation of Church and State is what gave rise to royal absolutism in Europe in the immediate aftermath of Luther's handiwork. Indeed, as I have noted any number of times before, it is arguably the case that the conditions that bred resentment on the part of colonists in English America prior to 1776 might never have developed if England had remained a Catholic nation. The monarchy would have been subject in the Eighteenth Century to same constraints as it had in the Tenth or Eleventh Centuries, namely, that kings and queens would have continued to understand that the Church reserved unto herself the right to interpose herself in the event that rulers had done things-or proposed to do things-that were contrary to the binding precepts of the Divine positive law and the natural law and/or were injurious of the cause of the sanctification and salvation of the souls of their subjects. The overthrow of the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ deposited power first of all in the hands of monarchs eager to be rid of the "interference" of the Church and ultimately in the hands of whoever happened to hold the reins of governmental power in the modern "democratic" state. Despotism has been the result in both cases

(Excerpt) Read more at seattlecatholic.com ...


TOPICS: Catholic; Ecumenism; Evangelical Christian; Mainline Protestant; Other Christian; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: catholiclist; popefrancis; romancatholicism; sectarianturmoil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 3,101-3,117 next last
To: RnMomof7
What are you, a poor man's anti-Catholic entertainment? Have you anything of substance to say?
101 posted on 09/30/2003 2:14:40 PM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: malakhi
Terry, does this sound at all familiar?

Yes it does..and now it forces me to wonder if the Catholic Church should be lumped with all the other cults. We have given them the benefit of the doubt in this matter and considered them a part of the professing church..but if they are going to deny a triune God with each person being equal to the other.. Father , Son and Holy Spirit..we have no choice but to consider ourselves blessed that God chose to deliver us from that cult

This has always been a consideration of Protestants because like they Mormons and the JW's they have a salvation of works not grace..

I guess this answers our questions

102 posted on 09/30/2003 2:16:29 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: conservonator; malakhi
You can find plenty of non-Catholic Christians that hold that belief today.

And plenty of "Catholics" too!
103 posted on 09/30/2003 2:17:29 PM PDT by OLD REGGIE ((I am a cult of one! UNITARJEWMIAN))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
St. Ann and St. Joachim. At the moment of her Immaculate Conception, she was kept free from the stain of Original Sin by God, who promised the devil after the fall of Adam to "...put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed" (Genesis iii.15)
104 posted on 09/30/2003 2:19:30 PM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
This is a riot. You predict the downfall of the Catholic Church and its denigration to "cult" status, and yet it has survived every conceivable onslaught of the last 2,000 years to be the faith of more than 1 billion people worldwide. How long has your sect been limping along?
105 posted on 09/30/2003 2:22:17 PM PDT by Fifthmark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Wrigley
No the Catholic Church has never removed the curses (don't you love it :>) The curses only apply to those of us that the Holy Spirit led out of Rome..Those of you born apostate are not cursed.

I think that they think that we will stay because of the fears of the curse..when actually we leave for the sake of our eternal salvation

106 posted on 09/30/2003 2:23:11 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: rdb3
Hi, Mom. Haven't the complaints been myriad against "Catholic bashing?"

I think they get 100 indulges if they can scare us back..

107 posted on 09/30/2003 2:24:46 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark; RnMomof7
Mom, I'd say 2000 years, wouldn't you?
108 posted on 09/30/2003 2:26:24 PM PDT by Gamecock (Paul was a Calvinist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark
The premise is as flawed as the rebuttle. Catholicism gets rejected because of what it is as much as what it isn't. It's misunderstandings of it's proclaimed roots are as obvious as it's historical lies and fraudulent historians.
Catholicism as a historical entity makes more sense when put under the microscope and examined in historical context.. but not as a religion - as a political entity.

Historically speaking, Theodosius gave Catholicism it's proper name. It grew out of the Rabble that accused the Donatists as a matter to save popular face. The Donatists not only refused to compromise the faith by paying respect to the pagan gods of Rome by paying tribute, they had the nerve to point out that all the other sects were sinning in so doing. The other sects grumbled to Constantine till the Donatists found themselves pursued by the Emperor for a time. They ultimately outlived Constantine. But, Theodosius put the charge on the table later when he drew the paganized church together and named it Catholicism as
a means to hold the content of a struggling empire.

Catholicism might have been a bastardized version of Christianity; but, Constantine had lived a pagan life and died a pagan. He'd used Christianity as a political anchor to cement his place as emperor.. the heeders of pagan gods that Theodosius proclaimed "Catholic" later on would use Constantine as much as he had used them - and some would lie and use his name in forgery to create the Rule of the Roman rite. This is the loose history with a lot of holes left to fill with other facts.

When one starts adding in the fraudulent books and documents passed on by the Roman rite as authentic for decades (ie, isidore, Gracian, the fraudulent books of Clement, Ignatius, etc).. to the pile of fraudulent relics such as the "Chair of Peter" and the Seven baskets of teeth purportedly belonging to the same "saint" if the questions haven't started about authenticity or authority, one isn't thinking. This is to say nothing of the blatent misunderstandings of Judaic terms and rites that were both misinterpreted and misapplied out of ignorance by Catholicism - ie Binding and loosing. Binding and loosing is an interpretive office like our Judicial system in the states. No right exists in the judiciary to craft new law - only to interpret what exists. New law in our judiciary comes from abuse of office, so to in Catholicism. Had they understood half of what they misapplied, it might not be so blatent.

So the repulsion felt by Christians and protestants against Catholicism has nothing to do with what is stated in the article. It has everything to do with knowing your stuff, knowing history and knowing snake oil when it's seen. People have a right to believe what they will. They have a right to practice that belief. But niether believing nor practicing makes it right. And simply saying one must have faith doesn't cut it. Christ, the Apostles and Prophets of old - even Moses proclaimed that our faith must be in God - not in men or their devices.

Much of this stuff has long since been debated and rehashed in the Christian Chronicals book.. it's too big any longer to call it a thread. Have fun.
109 posted on 09/30/2003 2:28:06 PM PDT by Havoc (If you can't be frank all the time are you lying the rest of the time?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark
Fanciful eisegesis of Genesis 3:15 ya got there. Looks like the magisterium that you accord the sole athority to interpret Scripture is an inventive bunch.
110 posted on 09/30/2003 2:29:09 PM PDT by drstevej
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
If anyone says

That's how all the canons with the anathemas are introduced. To me, anyone means catholics, too.

There are lots of links if you google on trent and anathemas.

111 posted on 09/30/2003 2:32:03 PM PDT by Aliska
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480; ksen
From the article

8) That each individual is his own interpreter of Sacred Scripture.

From Ksens answer

We believe that each individual can understand the Scriptures under the Illumination of the Holy Spirit. It has to do with that whole Priesthood of the Believers thing.

If Scripture is indeed revealed by the Holy Spirit , and Catholics believe that only the "church" can correctly interpret them , it indicates that Catholic lay men lack the Holy Spirit that was given to lead all men to all truth .

112 posted on 09/30/2003 2:32:08 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
If Scripture is indeed revealed by the Holy Spirit , and Catholics believe that only the "church" can correctly interpret them , it indicates that Catholic lay men lack the Holy Spirit that was given to lead all men to all truth .

You should carry this to it's proper conclusion. Christ commanded that we must be both born again and baptised in the spirit in order to be His. If they be lacking in either, they are none of His. QED.

113 posted on 09/30/2003 2:35:15 PM PDT by Havoc (If you can't be frank all the time are you lying the rest of the time?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: drstevej
Hey, there you go using the Bible again. That's not allowed, you have to let the Magesterium tell you what it means.

(Who is that Magesterium?)

114 posted on 09/30/2003 2:36:22 PM PDT by jude24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Wrigley
September 12, 1996 (David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061-0368, fbns@wayoflife.org) - Has the Roman Catholic Church changed its basic doctrinal position in this present ecumenical era? The answer is no, it has not. The Council of Trent was a Catholic council held from 1545-1563 in an attempt to destroy the progress of the Protestant Reformation. This council denied every Reformation doctrine, including Scripture alone and grace alone. Trent hurled 125 anathemas (eternal damnation) against Bible-believing Christians. These proclamations and anathemas were fleshed out in the murderous persecutions vented upon Bible-believing Christians by Rome, and the solemn fact is that the Council of Trent has never been annulled. The Vatican II Council of the mid-1960s referred to Trent dozens of times, quoted Trent's proclamations as authority, and reaffirmed Trent on every hand. The New Catholic Catechism cites Trent no less than 99 times. There is not the slightest hint that the proclamations of the Council of Trent have been abrogated by Rome. At the opening of the Second Vatican Council, Pope John XXIII stated, "I do accept entirely all that has been decided and declared at the Council of Trent." Every cardinal, bishop and priest who participated in the Vatican II Council signed a document affirming Trent.



DECLARATIONS OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT



FOURTH SESSION: DECREE CONCERNING THE CANONICAL SCRIPTURES: "If anyone does not accept as sacred and canonical the aforesaid books in their entirety and with all their parts [the 66 books of the Bible plus 12 apocryphal books, being two of Paralipomenon, two of Esdras, Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, Sophonias, two of Macabees], as they have been accustomed to be read in the Catholic Church and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate Edition, and knowingly and deliberately rejects the aforesaid traditions, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA."



SIXTH SESSION, CANONS CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION: "If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons Concerning Justification, Canon 12).



SIXTH SESSION, CANONS CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION: "If anyone says that the justice received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works, but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not the cause of its increase, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons Concerning Justification, Canon 24).



SIXTH SESSION, CANONS CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION: "If anyone says that the Catholic doctrine of justification as set forth by the holy council in the present decree, derogates in some respect from the glory of God or the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ, and does not rather illustrate the truth of our faith and no less the glory of God and of Christ Jesus, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons Concerning Justification, Canon 33).



SEVENTH SESSION, CANONS ON BAPTISM: "If anyone says that in the Roman Church, which is the mother and mistress of all churches, there is not the true doctrine concerning the sacrament of baptism, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on Baptism, Canon 3).



SEVENTH SESSION, CANONS ON BAPTISM: "If anyone says that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on Baptism, Canon 5).



SEVENTH SESSION, CANONS ON BAPTISM: "If anyone says that children, because they have not the act of believing, are not after having received baptism to be numbered among the faithful, and that for this reason are to be rebaptized when they have reached the years of discretion; or that it is better that the baptism of such be omitted than that, while not believing by their own act, they should be baptized in the faith of the Church alone, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on Baptism, Canon 13).



SEVENTH SESSION, CANONS ON CONFIRMATON: "If anyone says that the confirmation of those baptized is an empty ceremony and not a true and proper sacrament; or that of old it was nothing more than a sort of instruction, whereby those approaching adolescence gave an account of their faith to the Church, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on Confirmation, Canon 1).



THIRTEENTH SESSION, CANONS ON THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF THE EUCHARIST: "If anyone denies that in the sacrament of the most Holy Eucharist are contained truly, really and substantially the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ, but says that He is in it only as in a sign, or figure or force, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, Canon 1).



THIRTEENTH SESSION, CANONS ON THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF THE EUCHARIST: "If anyone says that Christ received in the Eucharist is received spiritually only and not also sacramentally and really, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, Canon 8).



FOURTEENTH SESSION, CANONS CONCERNING THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF PENANCE: "If anyone says that in the Catholic Church penance is not truly and properly a sacrament instituted by Christ the Lord for reconciling the faithful of God as often as they fall into sin after baptism, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons Concerning the Most Holy Sacrament of Penance, Canon 1).



FOURTEENTH SESSION, CANONS CONCERNING THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF PENANCE: "If anyone denies that sacramental confession was instituted by divine law or is necessary to salvation; or says that the manner of confessing secretly to a priest alone, which the Catholic Church has always observed from the beginning and still observes, is at variance with the institution and command of Christ and is a human contrivance, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons Concerning the Most Holy Sacrament of Penance, Canon 7).



FOURTEENTH SESSION, CANONS CONCERNING THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF PENANCE: "If anyone says that the confession of all sins as it is observed in the Church is impossible and is a human tradition to be abolished by pious people; or that each and all of the faithful of Christ or either sex are not bound thereto once a year in accordance with the constitution of the great Lateran Council, and that for this reason the faithful of Christ are to be persuaded not to confess during Lent, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons Concerning the Most Holy Sacrament of Penance, Canon 8).



FOURTEENTH SESSION, CANONS CONCERNING THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF PENANCE: "If anyone says that God always pardons the whole penalty together with the guilt and that the satisfaction of penitents is nothing else than the faith by which they perceive that Christ has satisfied for them, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons Concerning the Most Holy Sacrament of Penance, Canon 8).



TWENTY-SECOND SESSION, CANONS ON THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS: "If anyone says that in the mass a true and real sacrifice is not offered to God; or that to be offered is nothing else than that Christ is given to us to eat, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on the Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 1).



TWENTY-SECOND SESSION, CANONS ON THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS: "If anyone says that by those words, Do this for a commemoration of me, Christ did not institute the Apostles priests; or did not ordain that they and other priests should offer His own body and blood, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on the Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 2).



TWENTY-SECOND SESSION, CANONS ON THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS: "If anyone says that the sacrifice of the mass is one only of praise and thanksgiving; or that it is a mere commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the cross but not a propitiatory one; or that it profits him only who receives, and ought not to be offered for the living and the dead, for sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on the Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 3).



TWENTY-SECOND SESSION, CANONS ON THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS: "If anyone says that it is a deception to celebrate masses in honor of the saints and in order to obtain their intercession with God, as the Church intends, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on the Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 5).



TWENTY-THIRD SESSION, CANONS ON THE SACRAMENT OF ORDER: "If anyone says that there is not in the New Testament a visible and external priesthood, or that there is no power of consecrating and offering the true body and blood of the Lord and of forgiving and retaining sins, but only the office and bare ministry of preaching the Gospel; or that those who do not preach are not priests at all, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on the Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 1).



TWENTY-THIRD SESSION, CANONS ON THE SACRAMENT OF ORDER: "If anyone says that the bishops who are chosen by the authority of the Roman pontiff are not true and legitimate bishops, but merely human deception, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons on the Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 8).



TWENTY-FIFTH SESSION, DECREE ON PURGATORY: "Since the Catholic Church, instructed by the Holy Ghost, has, following the sacred writings and the ancient tradition of the Fathers, taught in sacred councils and very recently in this ecumenical council that there is a purgatory, and that the souls there detained are aided by the suffrages of the faithful and chiefly by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar, the holy council commands the bishops that they strive diligently to the end that the sound doctrine of purgatory, transmitted by the Fathers and sacred councils, be believed and maintained by the faithful of Christ, and be everywhere taught and preached."



TWENTY-FIFTH SESSION, ON THE INVOCATION, VENERATION, AND RELICS OF SAINTS, AND ON SACRED IMAGES: "The holy council commands all bishops and others who hold the office of teaching and have charge of the cura animarum, that in accordance with the usage of the Catholic and Apostolic Church, received from the primitive times of the Christian religion, and with the unanimous teaching of the holy Fathers and the decrees of sacred councils, they above all instruct the faithful diligently in matters relating to intercession and invocation of the saints, the veneration of relics, and the legitimate use of images, teaching them that the saints who reign together with Christ offer up their prayers to God for men, that it is good and beneficial suppliantly to invoke them and to have recourse to their prayers, assistance and support in order to obtain favors from God through His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, who alone is our redeemer and savior; and that they think impiously who deny that the saints who enjoy eternal happiness in heaven are to be invoked, or who assert that they do not pray for men, or that our invocation of them to pray for each of us individually is idolatry, or that it is opposed to the word of God and inconsistent with the honor of the one mediator of God and men, Jesus Christ, or that it is foolish to pray vocally or mentally to those who reign in heaven."
115 posted on 09/30/2003 2:38:07 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Fifthmark
NonStarter. This is a popular catholic debate tactic - 'we're old and big so we must be right'. The Chinese are older and bigger, where now does that leave you. When you have to retort to this sort of silliness, it betrays you.
116 posted on 09/30/2003 2:38:10 PM PDT by Havoc (If you can't be frank all the time are you lying the rest of the time?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: OLD REGGIE
And plenty of "Catholics" too!

They are "Catholic" only in their own minds.

117 posted on 09/30/2003 2:39:33 PM PDT by conservonator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
I'm not sure I'd believe anything written by David Cloud; he's worse than Dave Hunt.
118 posted on 09/30/2003 2:39:57 PM PDT by jude24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: conservonator
You've seen it countless times, and denied just as many times, what's the point?

that no one has shown us anything

119 posted on 09/30/2003 2:40:18 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock; George W. Bush
Here is what I don't understand about the Mary thing. If she herself was pure and Holy, like her Son, who were her parents?

I guess two sinners can produce one sinless..so it makes you wonder Huh?

I like GWB's observation that if mary was sinless we did not need Jesus they just could have nailed her to a tree

120 posted on 09/30/2003 2:42:38 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 3,101-3,117 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson