Posted on 04/05/2005 10:01:52 PM PDT by Coleus
For the last quarter of a century, this non-Catholic has had a pope. Now that John Paul II is gone, I am even more of an orphan than the Christians in the Roman church. For they will surely have another pope, but that one may not be mine, since I haven't converted.
I am sure I am reflecting the views of many Protestants. Who else but John Paul II gave voice to my faith and my values in 130 countries? Who else posited personal holiness and theological clarity against postmodern self-deception and egotism? Who else preached the gospel as tirelessly as this man?
What other clergyman played any comparable role in bringing down communism, a godless system? What other world leader—spiritual or secular—understood so profoundly how hollow and bankrupt the Soviet empire was, so much so that this tireless writer never bothered to pen an encyclical against Marxism-Leninism because he knew it was moribund?
Has there been a more powerful defender of the sanctity of life than this Pole, in whose pontificate nearly 40 million unborn babies wound up in trashcans and furnaces in the United States alone? What more fitting insight than John Paul II's definition of our culture as a culture of death—an insight that is now clearly sinking in, to wit the declining abortion rates in the United States?
In Europe some time ago, a debate occurred in Protestant churches: Should John Paul II be considered the world's spokesman for all of Christianity? This was an absurd question. Of course he spoke for all believers. Who else had such global appeal and credibility, even to non-Christians and non-believers?
Of course, there was the inveterate Billy Graham. There were many faithful Orthodox and Protestant bishops, pastors and evangelists.
(Excerpt) Read more at christianitytoday.com ...
Just admit that there are many Catholics that go beyond Catholic doctine and worship Mary and I will admit that there are many Protestants that go beyond Protestant doctrine with faith healing and other such weirdness. Both are wrong. Both happen. Neither should be practicing it.
You need to understand that we respect, but we do not, nor will we ever, worship Mary. It seems to be a stumblingblock for all concerned
She believed what God said to her regarding the birth of the Jewish Messiah
He hath holpen his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy, and he spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever (Lk.1:54-55)
She wasn't a Christian until the Church came into being in Acts 2.
Following her Faith in God came her ‘Yes’ to Him, and therefore the Incarnation of Christ.
Yes, she was blessed to carry the saviour (Lk.1:45).
Moreover, as someone who was suppose to be sinless, she still had to make an offering for her own sins (Lk.2:22 cf Ex.12:8) [I take it you mean Leviticus?]
Yes, Lev.12:8, thank you.
Good point, a lot can be learned here about the utter humility of Christ. The Law of Moses was two-fold: The purification of the mother, and the presentation and then redemption of her first-born. According to the Law a woman who bore a child was considered legally unclean. Not necessarily a reference to sin, though Catholics do believe that she was freed from all stain of sin. Because she bore Christ without intercourse and because her virginity remained intact after the birth of Christ, she was exempt from this Law – but submitted to it.
Well, you have to impose your theology on the verses to believe that.
As they stand, she was like any other woman who had a child and had to have an atonement made for her.
Likewise, for the redemption of the child, the sacrifice of a lamb, or a pair of doves for poor people, was not required for Christ. Yet, as St. Paul says “though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that by his poverty you might become rich” the offering of the poor was made on His behalf. Christ, through his family even as an infant, obeyed the Law even though He was completely exempt from it. And this done “for our sake”.
The offerings were not made for Christ, they were made for Mary.
However you are correct that Christ did obey the Law, even though, being born sinless, he was not under it.
The same however cannot be said of Mary who was born as anyone else was, with a sin nature.
excellent post! Bravo. He is my Savior, by His grace, through faith in his completed work - completely apart from any merit or lack of merit I have. I too, belong to the true Catholic Church that owns no property on earth. AMPU
You seem to be using the word "Fundamentalist" as a perjorative. Why is that? You might be surprised as to the origins of the Fundamentalist movement within Protestantism which dates to the latter part of the 19th century. I have a book entitled "The Fundamentals of the Faith" (a collection of essays) which was where the term Fundamentalist (as applied to a Protestant Christian) came about. The subject matter of these essays is nothing like the caricature that has developed around the term "Fundamentalist".
I wouldn't really call it a sect. First of all, understand that the Church of England has veered back and forth between being more protestant and more catholic over the centuries. It used to be that they would destroy all the finery when the Cromwellian types would rampage, now they put it away for safe keeping.
In the US the Episcopal Church represents a wide range of churches. When I say I'm Anglo Catholic, it means I go to a church that has most of the elements of a Roman Catholic church, with the emphasis on saints diminished, but not missing. We have crucifixes, incense, communion bells, latin anthems and service music at times (Kyrie, Sanctus, Agnus Dei. Gloria), High Requiem Mass, Confession (not often taken advantage of).
Anyway, it is very similar to the RC church, and to me, the Pope feels like a close relative, like a much beloved Uncle perhaps.
And I love the RC church. Perhaps one day I will be received into it so I can have the True Body and Blood, and the Latin Mass.
I've certainly never heard of it
I continue to ask Catholics why they think that departed saints and in this case Mary, can hear them when they pray. I see nothing in scripture to show this is true. Can you shed any light on this? AMPU
Glory be to the Lamb of God!
You should quit while you're ahead. You only demonstrate the depths of your stupidity.
Then we will have to keep on arguing.
"Isn't ancestor worship Confucianism?"
Well here in the South we call it genealogy. ;)
So which other Protestant denominations do you not consider "fundamentalist"? I thought you saw all Protestants as flawed?
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.