| 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 These men are rightly indignant, and furious about the unjust accusations that cannot be proven but are never withdrawn.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!
Do I have to specify that every post I make is my personal opinion? Or is it sufficient to just let you know, here?
Before I became Catholic or even Christian, I spent a lot of time reading the Old and New Testament scriptures in various translations. Frankly, St. Paul was just plain loony in a lot of what he says, legalistic and nit-picky at times, and at other times a wild-eyed foaming visionary. The epistles made me wonder at times if he had a blood sugar problem, you know, extreme highs and lows. Now, 1 Corinthians 13 was absolutely true and beautiful, and if that were all we had of St. Paul, it had been an elegant sufficiency.
The four Gospels, on the other hand, had a huge impact on me as an agnostic. The bald narrative was compelling, and Christ’s recorded words spoke directly to my soul. I love Christ and He is my Lord and Savior, and I am a Catholic, because of the Gospels.
Yes, you have made it apparent that you treasure my posts. And Natual Law's. Be sure and tell Jesus Christ about it when you pray tonight, if you pray.
They sure are. *sigh*
Trust me- I understand your posts are your opinion. I assume it with every poster (unless attributed or quoted content is included).
Do you claim not to practice your faith? If so I apologize. But I didn’t say it was a practice of the church, just that I didn’t realize it was practiced.
Adding 1 Cor 13 back into the mix will, unfortunately once again lower the percentage of the Bible read at mass during the lectionary cycle.
Will Wallace
We’re not Phelps-ers
We’re apparently anti Catholic bigot Nifongers.
Gald I could clear that up :)
Will Wallace
I, as well as a lot of Catholics I know, make a habit of reading the daily mass scriptures (posted right here on FR by Salvation) and that RAISES the percentage of the Bible read by Catholics throughout the year.
Anyway, why would my criticism of the Pauline epistles interest you enough to comment? Just the other day, a protestant or two was saying that St. James and St. Jude didn’t belong in the Bible. St. James, I presume because of James 1:22, “Be ye doers of the word and not hearers only” (by memory, that may not be exact) and St. Jude because they thought Peter wrote it, or something like that.
Not much difference from what I have observed.
Any anti Catholic port in a storm, I believe...
I didn’t read that thread. (re: Jude and James)
Honestly, I’ve been enjoying this one too much to read any others for the past couple of days.
As to why it would interest me enough to comment; because it presented an opportunity to respond to something I have an opinion on in a hopefully witty or amusing way.
A large percentage of the rabbit trails you argue appear to be just conversational injections of humor, not assertions of facts.
For example, the other day when you said to someone that there was a priest with in 500 miles (an assertion I admittedly did not understand- perhaps I missed some of the previous context), and they replied to the effect that they’re closer than that- there’s a prison within 100 miles; it was, I believe an injection of humor.
Your repeated demands that he produce names didn’t discredit the poster in my eyes.
Hyperbole, witticisms and on the internet even half-witticism (typing in my best foghorn Leghorn voice “That’s a joke ma’am... I say that’s a joke”) keep the conversation interesting and make points with impact in ways at which mere repetition of facts fails.
Since it’s a open thread on a public forum, I need not answer why I chose to respond, but have done so anyway.
The comments about the percentage of Bible covered in the three year lectionary...well they were mildly amusing. Trust me, I’ve been smiling ever since I wrote them. If your humor mileage varies, I’m okay with that.
Will Wallace
Keep observing then.
Well I think “Reichbishop” was humorous, but apparently some do not.
It all depends on your point of view, I guess.
Some of your comments I do see as an attempt at humor. I actually enjoy reading your posts. Of COURSE you do not need to justify your interest in mine, or explain yourself. I just asked the question, that’s all, relax. (I’m smiling, okay? Not an attack. Just a slight witticism, nothing earth-shaking. Okay?)
So I guess 2 Tim 3:16 means nothing?
Actually, there is a fairly large number of protestant FReepers whom I like, and enjoy thread conversations with, and who are quite a bit of fun.
It’s entirely possible you might be one of them, in some far far distant future time when all is peace and light....
KIDDING, okay?
Actually, 1 Cor 13 was read as the second reading for the fourth Sunday after Epiphany this past January 31st.
As Judith Anne pointed out, between the two-year daily Mass Lectionary cycle and the three-year Sunday Mass Lectionary cycle, Catholics read about 72% of the NT and about 13% of the OT just as a matter of keeping up with the Mass readings. If you add the Liturgy of the Hours into the mix, the percentage goes significantly higher (though I haven't seen anybody who has done a statistical analysis like they did for the Lectionary for Mass, like I linked to earlier). You can get a pretty good idea of the volume of Scripture involved by looking at the Universalis website (although, as a caution, it is not an officially sanctioned source, due to copyright restrictions with the officially approved versions of the readings).
Hope that helps quantify her statements.
I’ve been observing since 1999 and have become more convinced with every satan-inspired post I have seen.
wow
It takes longer for some- keep at it.
will Wallace
We’ve been at it since Christ rose from the dead, not just the last several hundred years.
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.