FR Religion Forum has Crossed the Tiber

Self

[ksen]

Well it looks to me like the FR Religion forum has crossed the Tiber and is now an official organ of the Vatican.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

What is a Catholic? Anyone who claims to be one? Does the shemale Luthern Pastor I once lived near count? She said she was a "Catholic."

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Well, I've always been much more interested in actual voting results and registration statistics than in claims made by exit-pollsters.

Of course, the use of facts tends to puncture hot air and end arguments.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

**I believe that the Church teaches that they (the baptized) are baptized into the Church, but are protesting some parts of the faith. The Church calls them "our separated brethren."**

I believe you are correct concerning the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church post Vatican II. Trent, Vatican I, and a whole host of former "traditional" doctrines are quite different in their approach.

A Catholic link that would support your statement SDG would be appreciated. FReegards.

Hmmm ... "I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins."

Anyone properly baptised has received the one and only baptism of Christ which incorporates you into the Church. Whether you then reincorporate yourself outside it by knowingly professing heresy is another matter. Nevertheless, Baptism is forever, and as St. Augustine noted, its character marks the heretics like the brand does a derserting soldier.

The "Tridentine-era" Roman Catholic Church recognized this quite explicitly by lifting the banns of excommunication on Protestants who converted to the Catholic Church. The Church only excommunicates those who were once full and unblemished members. She has nothing to do with those who are without and were never in.

Little children, when Baptised by Protestants, become Catholics. They only become Protestants if and when they take up the formal profession of errors contrary to the infused vitue of faith. Thus, St. Alphonsus de Liguori could write:

We must believe that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true Church. Hence they who are out of our Church, or separated, cannot be saved, except infants who die after baptism. (Instructions on the Commandments and Sacraments, pt. 1, sec. 1, n. 10)

Note the use of the term "seperated".

[AAABEST]

You're not belittling me at all, I've been as sinful as anyone in here.

I think we're all a bit guilty of "infighting". I don't like to try to figure out what God is thinking, but I would feel pretty safe in saying that the Lord is NOT pleased when we fight amongst ourselves. No good comes of it.

I can be EXTREMELY hard to get along with, but one thing I try to avoid is denominational disharmony. Although I find some practices of various churches hard to reconcile, I keep it to myself and find comfort in the fact that these people are worshipping Jesus. I don't share the view of some within my church that there is no salvation outside of Catholicism, and have caught hell for it. People don't go to hell because they "not doing it right".

Paul spoke of this.

1 Corinthians 12
¹   Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
²   Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.
³   Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
⁴   Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
⁵   And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
⁶   And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
⁷   But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.
⁸   For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
⁹   To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
¹⁰   To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
¹¹   But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.
¹²   For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
¹³   For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
¹⁴   For the body is not one member, but many.
¹⁵   If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
¹⁶   And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
¹⁷   If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?
¹⁸   But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.
¹⁹   And if they were all one member, where were the body?
²⁰   But now are they many members, yet but one body.
²¹   And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.
²²   Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:
²³   And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.
²⁴   For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked.
²⁵   That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.
²⁶   And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.
²⁷   Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
²⁸   And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
²⁹   Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
³⁰   Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
³¹   But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

[GirlShortstop]

I'm always a little surprised when Freeper Roman Catholics tell others that their church has always been consistent in its teachings.  It's almost as if they're denying the existence of other Threads posted here where traditionalists and progressives argue over RC doctrine, or simply rail against the current Pope. In their desire to show a unified front, they ignore their own bickering, and hope that no one is actually reading the other threads!

Perhaps, SDG you could identify what you're pointing to in this statement; I do not understand what you are saying, and why you are telling me (in addition to OLD REGGIE).  Thank you.

[GirlShortstop]

Anyone properly baptised has received the one and only baptism of Christ which incorporates you into the Church. Whether you then reincorporate yourself outside it by knowingly professing heresy is another matter.

Thank you for your thoughtful and full response HtC!
Pax et bonum.

[RaceBannon]

Nah, just most of us Bible believers are tired, while the RCC is sending in more people who are fresh!

[OLD REGGIE]

You know well who that Pope is. In his human weakness he was looked down upon because he failed to thoroughly condemn a heretic like you. Funny that you should mention that. But you wish to publicly slander him and bear false witness against him with your half-lies. Well, I am not interested in playing your evil game.

Your lies and mindless hatred have already been exposed in another thread, but you come here to stalk and carry over your old hatreds. That is something not allowed on this forum, so you had better cut it out.

I don't wish to slander him. I have no idea who he was.

You tell me. Who was Pope between 304-308?

[OLD REGGIE]

I've seen some stuff posted by Old Reggie and BigMack on other threads that I would attack vehemently were others more capable not handling them. ;)

Just curious. What?

[Gamecock]

***In fact, I was wondering if you were Catholic***

SDG, have you been holding out on us?

[SoliDeoGloria]

Well, I took a look at your past posts, searching for what I recollect, and found them (listed below). but I must say that I thoroughly enjoyed reading your many responses. You and I do agree quite heavily concerning history and the role of the Catholic Church. You are quite eloquent concerning your position, and you always have references to back your claims. As I said, I really enjoyed reading your threads, albeit in reverse order.

That having been said, there are a couple areas of deep disagreement between us:

1. Not accepting the Trinity link

2. Your tendencies towards Relativism and Universalism link

As you said above, you are definitely not a Protestant.

[SoliDeoGloria]

I do not understand what you are saying, and why you are telling me (in addition to OLD REGGIE)

In this thread, you asked me to provide "A Catholic link" supporting my statement that the teachings of the RC Church concerning Ecumenism have changed since Vatican II. The unspoken sentiment is that the statement is false, and can not be supported via references. The particular thought in dispute is that the teachings have changed over time.

The point I was making in the previous post is that Freeper Catholics themselves argue over the changes from Vatican II. So why would you (a Catholic) ask me (a Protestant) to provide a link? In fact, I even provided a link to a recent thread where Catholics were arguing the very point I was making! I'll provide it again:

Vatican II & Ecumenism: What did the Council Really Say?

Most frequently, Catholics let their apologetic stance against Protestants blind them to their own disputes: Catholics desire to tell Protestants that the Church has remained a constant bastion of orthodox truth, ever consistent with patristics, as unanimous and harmonious as it believes the fathers were. ...but... You guys argue amongst yourselves concerning the historicity of certain theologies; each party accusing the other of anachronism.

I posted the above sentiment in fewer words to you and Old Reggie since the three of us were the ones discussing the changes in teachings of the RCC.

[SoliDeoGloria]

***In fact, I was wondering if you were Catholic*** - Salve Regina

SDG, have you been holding out on us? - Gamecock

...chuckle... Nope. The Lord saved me prior to any of my recollections, and I therefore have been a student of the Reformation ever since. I have done some considerable study of the Roman Catholic Church, and I might very well have converted to Catholicism were it not for "Soli Deo Gloria". But once God changed my affections for His Glory, there was no possibility of leaving the Reformed Position.

[GirlShortstop]

I posted the above sentiment in fewer words to you and Old Reggie since the three of us were the ones discussing the changes in teachings of the RCC.

SoliDeoGloria, you are generous in giving your time to explain what you meant.  Thank you.
I would do better to compose a more thoughtful response giving you my opinion on your assertions and observations tomorrow (hopefully I will have time).  That is, of course, unless you are uninterested.    "Your move".    :-)

FReegards and God Bless!

[Romulus]

I'm waiting for the official Vatican endorsement for FR.

"It is what it is." ;-)

[OLD REGGIE]

As you said above, you are definitely not a Protestant.

Well, you know who I am.

I was raised RC, left (essentially "kicked out" when I insisted on Biblical explanations of the brothers and sisters of Jesus) when I was in my late teens, attended a local Bible oriented Congregational Church, raised my children in the Congregational Church, and slowly but surely became a "Biblical Unitarian".

What can I say? ;-)

[OLD REGGIE]

Sorry. I thought you were just back on your usual slander attack game against a particular Pope. But it is another childish slander game you are playing now.

I'm puzzled. How is it possible to slander a particular Pope when I merely asked a simple question?

Who was Pope between 304-308?

I'll shake your viscious heretic dust from my feet now.

Would you, with Aquinas, have me put to death?