| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/28/2010 11:54:24 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Per poster’s request |
Posted on 04/18/2010 9:49:35 PM PDT by Judith Anne
I seriously wonder about some FReepers, sometimes. Any other person accused of a crime would be defended by every FReeper as being innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. I've seen whole threads written by men who have been accused of child abuse by ex-wives out to deny them their visitation rights or to wrest more money out of them. These men are rightly indignant, and furious about the unjust accusations that cannot be proven but are never withdrawn.
Yet where are those FReepers when a PRIEST is accused? Where is the presumption of innocence? Suddenly, every accusation becomes a verdict, and not only the accused but his entire organization and all its adherents are held responsible.
I can only wonder what some of these so-called conservatives (who so faithfully defend the Constitution) would do, if THEY were the ones accused! It is a nightmare for any man -- all of you know how even the accusation stains the man forever, even if it is proven false!
Not only that, many here assert that the problems of 30, 40 and even 50 years ago must be tried in the media TODAY!
Remember the Duke rape case? There are more similarities than differences here. The priests are accused, nifonged, and instead of being defended, they are vilified!
What other man of you could stand under the weight of such an accusation trumpeted by the press, and come out whole? None! And such accusations made, LONG after the statute of limitations has passed, sometimes even after the accused is dead and buried for YEARS -- are YOU one of those who automatically, reflexively, spitefully, and gleefully act as judge, jury, and executioner?
Women! What if it were YOUR HUSBAND, YOUR BROTHER, YOUR FATHER, YOUR UNCLE, YOUR SON who was accused? Wouldn't you want the best defense possible? Wouldn't YOU believe in their innocence? Wouldn't YOU help protect your loved ones as much as possible? And yet, YOU JUDGE THE CHURCH FOR DOING WHAT YOU WOULD DO?
Shame! Vast shame! On all who have sinned against the innocent!
Yeah,
It is HIGHLY likely that when Papist Bigots castigate the scribe of a major portion of the New Testament that at least some Prottys will have some thoughts to share about that.
Trying to get to my administrivia and out the door to class . . . that one will have to wait. Good effort, it appears.
Rats! I’ll have to think of another word, now. All y’all have copycatted me and have started using “bigots.”
Oh, well, that’s okay. I’m quite certain I can come up with something.
Now, as to St. Paul, MY OPINION is not the *Official* Catholic position. So far, I think I’ve said that “my opinion of St. Paul is my opinion only,” but apparently all y’all can’t read, or keep up.
Once again:
I. DON’T. LIKE. ST. PAUL. THIS. IS. MY. OPINION. ONLY.
So, it would be (as usual) dishonest to blame anyone except me for MY OPINION.
If you want to have a hissy fit, please do as you wish. IT’S MY OPINION OF ST. PAUL. NO ONE ELSE’S. If you want to castigate me for MY OPINION, rest assured I don’t think that will cause me any grief.
“”Somewhat familiar with Hus.””
He was another devilish nut like Wycliffe who said that “God ought to obey the devil”-Hus said Peter was never the head of the church along with many other ridiculous heresies
The Errors of John Hus
as proclaimed by THE COUNCIL OF CONSTANCE 1414-1418
http://www.hol.com/~mikesch/hus.htm
The Errors of John Wycliffe
as proclaimed by THE COUNCIL OF CONSTANCE 1414-1418
http://www.hol.com/~mikesch/wycliffe.htm
I see it just that way too, dearest sister in Christ.
Thank you so very much for this wonderful essay/post!
To God be the glory, not man, never man!
Good for you. I am not alone. :)
That is such a weird statement coming from someone who I assume is Christian.
This.is.my.opinion.
FK, I assure you Judith Anne is not me in disguise. :)
"Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God and knoweth God ... Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us."
1 John 4:7
The errors of John Hus and John Wycliffe........
Yeah, these Bastards disagree with “Church Teaching” so lets just burn their asses at the stake!
The "difference" is that Christ appeared and what was alluded to in the Old Testament has come into time and the world in the flesh and performed the only sacrifice God will now accept for the sins of His children - His Son on the cross, now risen to prove it all true.
And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead." -- Acts 17:29-31 "Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
So the instruction is to pray to the Godhead alone. Not silver, not gold, and no one else, because God alone is our judge, according to the righteousness of Christ alone.
Further, Jesus Christ was specifically asked "how do we pray?
His response was not "you kneel to a woman or friends of mine and offer them your prayers."
And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth...""And it came to pass, that, as he was praying in a certain place, when he ceased, one of his disciples said unto him, Lord, teach us to pray, as John also taught his disciples.
I assume you know the rest.
And finally, the Roman Catholic apologist is under the burden of disproving the above by showing us anywhere in the New Testament that Christ or any of His apostles tells us to pray to anyone but the Triune God alone.
Not so.
Jesus was/is fully God and fully man. He was transfigured on the mountain and then Moses and Elijah came to Him, while He was transfigured.
There is nothing in the account that indicated that He went up for the purpose of meeting them, and even if He did, He met them transfigured, not in His earthly human (as we are) state.
Nor does that justify the practice the habit of praying to saints when Jesus Himself said we are to pray to God the Father. Nowhere are we commanded to pray to anyone but God.
And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do [it]. - John 14:12-14
Which is exactly what we are called to do.
And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will. " -- 2 Timothy 2:25-26"In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
(I should look up the Greek for "meekness." lol)
I fail, at the very least, to see what good praying to someone else for what we are to pray only to God for, is going to do.
Do Catholics really think that God is not going to answer but some redeemed being is? Are they trying to get prayer answered that they are afraid that God won’t answer so they bypass Him?
If God is not going to grant the request for reasons that He alone knows, how is some dead person who is not God going to be able to do it?
When the disciples asked Jesus to teach them to pray, He said,.....
Matthew 6: 9”This, then, is how you should pray:
“ ‘Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
10your kingdom come,
your will be done
on earth as it is in heaven.
Just where is the admonition to pray to dead people, or even living people who have died and are in heaven?
For all the emphasis that the Catholics say they put on the gospels and the dissing for theology that they do to Paul, just where does this concept of praying to saints come from? Where in the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels is that found?
Amen! What more do we need?
What? Is nothing forbidden to Catholics?
I'd have to say that judging by the lifestyle I've seen most Catholics lead, that would be the case.
I don’t disagree with anything you posted there.
The question remains. Why the sainthood? For what purpose?
They can be recognized for the exemplary lives without having titles added to their names and without prayers being said to them.
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.