Skip to comments.
Anglicans 'expel' Canada (and also the openly apostate U.S. Episcopal Church!)
National Post - Canada ^
| Thursday, June 23, 2005
| Bob Harvey et al
Posted on 06/23/2005 1:15:56 PM PDT by GMMAC
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-105 last
To: MeanWestTexan
Are you with the Original Pr. of the ACC?
101
posted on
06/24/2005 3:01:23 PM PDT
by
Alkhin
("Oh! Oh!" cried my idiot crew. "It's a ghoul - we are lost!" ~ Jack Aubrey)
To: Alkhin
Re: "What I find particularly offensive about the RCC position on Mary is the ever-aggressive position that praying to her is necessary for salvation. This is completely wrong, and goes against all that we learn from Christ himself. I think the Protestants have a valid argument against the RCC in this respect."
Yes they would if it was true the RCC taught praying to Mary was necessary for salvation. But that is not true the RCC does not teach that and any Catholic who does so is in heresy. It is advisable or recommended but never "necessary". If you want to be Catholic and never wish to pray to Mary you do not have to do so. The Rosary is not "necessary" but it is recommended. The prayers to Mary are beautiful and advised but not "necessary" for salvation but if you want to understand the Catholic devotion in these matters put yourself in Saint John's position at the base of the cross when Christ gave him to Saint Mary as her son and gave Saint Mary to him as his Mother. John was the one Apostle that stayed with Christ to the end and Mary was his reward. I want to be like Saint John and not like the ones that ran away. How about you?
To: Alkhin
What I find particularly offensive about the RCC position on Mary is the ever-aggressive position that praying to her is necessary for salvation. Whoever told you that was flatly heretical. Lord knows I've heard it from time to time, but it is not and has never been doctrine. Certainly there are folks in the church who have mistakenly held that belief, but you can't control them any more than the Methodists can control the sweet little old teetotaler lady who is convinced that Jesus didn't turn water into wine. (She says it was "the fruit of the vine" and non-alcoholic, and nothing will convince her otherwise.)
103
posted on
06/24/2005 8:57:07 PM PDT
by
AnAmericanMother
(. . . Ministrix of ye Chace (recess appointment), TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary . . .)
To: Alkhin
I am not sure; we are now under a Bishop from Uganda --- a real, seriously persecuted (as in put in concentration camp by Muslims) Christian.
They were one of our church's missions --- now they came and helped us out --- bread on the water coming back.
To: Mark in the Old South; AnAmericanMother
Your posts prove my original point -- Anglicans and Roman Catholics have serious, and likely intractable, theological disputes --- one of which is the status of Mary --- that would prevent the two churches merging.
I have easy answers to all you say; I am sure you have tailor-made replys, BUT:
And as Paul, said, when discussing the inevitable theological disputes and denominational divisions that will arise among Christians --- believe these things with your whole heart --- but don't get into fights with other Christians about them --- 'cause they are trivia and distract from the one important thing we DO agree on --- Jesus was the Christ; he died for our sins.
Period, paragraph, end of sentence.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-105 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson