Posted on 07/18/2010 6:04:05 AM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
No wonder they're confused.
We are just instruments of God's Mercy and Love. He will speak to their hearts in due time. You never know when a word or phrase here and there will “click” and the life of a soul be changed forever. It's never hopeless as long as we simply speak the Truth in charity. God will do the rest.
Thanks. If I ever need the Posting Police, I’ll ping you.
I agree and yet the inordinate amount of time I have spent on this thread has detracted from my duties at home. Plus, I do have a job:)
Also, a woman from my parish, a fellow Catholic Daughter has passed away. As regent of my court, I have to pull together the ladies to say the rosary, and then provide the food and serve it at the reception following the funeral. Lots to do in the next few days.
If this thread should die, or be left to only the “flashback” quacks here, do not worry, the same BS will appear elsewhere at another time to be ably and prayerfully refuted by the Catholics here.
“JESUS PERSISTENTLY
REFERRED TO
IT IS WRITTEN
AS *HIS* CREATOR GOD’s
POINT OF AUTHORITY.”
__________________________________________________________________________
Are you saying that Jesus was “created” by God, or was this just a clumsy use of words on your part?
Is it not enough for RCs to contemplate the truth of Jesus Christ?
Would Christ's sacrifice have been any less miraculous and sufficient if no one had known anything about his mother?
I believe you know better about what the Mass is, so it’s not productive to waste our time on.
thanks for your reply.
lol.
I shy away from questions of "Jesus' messianic self-consciousness," but if He's human his brain takes time to come 'on-line." Not all intellective functions mature at once. In some they don't mature at all. But if one looks at temporality as a kind of projection of eternity one can imagine the perfect revelation of God would not be the same in every respect at every instant.
But yes, it blows my mind.
What you say is very true.
My question is, how many Protestant Christians are accepting homosexual/women priests because at some conference there was a vote and the men present and voting, have voted to allow/consecrate them?
Has Scripture regarding homosexuality changed?
No
I think that's the kind of charge that needs either to be explained and justified or retracted.
I do agree!
It’s amazing. He’s able to go back in time to the 5th century and read the minds of the Council fathers at Ephesus.
What a gift!
/sarc
Yes. If Christ had appeared from the clouds we do not have an Incarnation. That he became man, the same way we do, is very important to Christianity. The miracle of His birth IS the Incarnation. No Mary taught, no Incarnation taught. That's why it's in the Scriptures.
The Vatican has had a long time to ponder the issues that Proddys raise about
“MOTHER OF GOD.”
At this point, there can be no doubt that the Vatican is hanging onto it for it’s own reasons.
We could go down the list of those plausible reasons.
I’m not eager to today as it’s just not attractive to me to bother. But it’s doable.
Certainly UTMOST CLARITY AND UTMOST BIBLICAL ACCURACY
is not in the top 10 most plausible reasons . . . or even the top 100 . . .
As Alamo-Girl wisely puts . . . requires footnotes . . . yet the Vatican refuses to provide footnotes.
Another indication that the Vatican is quite willful about using
MOTHER OF GOD
for at best, questionable reasons.
Socio-linguistics would say quite firmly that
MOTHER OF GOD
is grossly misleading to the majority of the earth’s population.
The Vatican cannot be ignorant of that.
The Vatican deliberately prefers to mangle that sociolinguistic reality for the majority of the world’s population
FOR A REASON.
BEHAVIOR DOES NOT OCCUR WITHOUT A REASON.
I say the reason is lacking in integrity, lacking in truth, manipulative, ghastly, . . . and worse.
For me, the issue goes to the importance of a name and most especially, a Name of God.
And it is why the Jewish mystics refer to God the Creator as Ayn Sof which literally means "no thing." The point is that any time we sincerely use a word to describe God, we reduce Him in our own minds to the limits of our language. Or to put it another way, no mortal words can define God and when we use them that way then we are mentally creating a reduced false image of a 'god' who is not God, an idol.
Another example, though not in the language of words but of art is the beautiful albeit woefully misleading Michaelangelo painting "The Creation of Adam" showing Adam and God touching fingers. It presents God as an old gray-haired man on a cloud. That is not God but a reduction of Him.
Which brings me back to the titles given to creatures in an attempt to reveal Who God IS by description of the creature.
The title "Mother of the Incarnate Word" does not require a footnote in the mind of the hearer because God the Creator's Name is Word and the phrase "mother of the incarnate" further defines Mary, a creature.
And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. – Exodus 3:14
Remember the former things of old: for I [am] God, and [there is] none else; [I am] God, and [there is] none like me, - Isaiah 46:9
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. – John 8:58
So just like admiring the beautiful Michaelangelo painting with a younger requires us to then explain that God is not an old gray-haired man on a cloud, using the title "Mother of God" with a younger requires us to explain that there was no thing and no one and no time before God. Otherwise the younger may walk away with a reduced image of God, a false 'god' of his own imagining.
God's Name is I AM.
Sound and fury, signifying nothing.
lolol.
Anathema = eternal damnation to hell.
Obviously it behooves the RCC to shroud its insanity in current ecumenical platitudes. None of that changes the truth, however.
From the following essay by a former nun here (cue "shooting of the messenger" music)...
According to the 1913 edition of the “Catholic Encyclopedia,” when the Catholic Church anathematizes someone, the Pope ritually puts curses on them. There is a solemn written ritual for doing this. The “Catholic Encyclopedia” article describes the ritual in detail, including extensive quotations from it. (You can read this article online.) [Note 4] In pronouncing the anathema, the Pope wears special vestments. He is assisted by twelve priests holding lighted candles. Calling on the name of God, the Pope pronounces a solemn ecclesiastical curse. He ends by pronouncing sentence and declaring that the anathematized person is condemned to hell with Satan. The priests reply, “Fiat!” (Let it be done!) and throw down their candles. As we will see, the Catholic Church considers heresy (disagreement with Catholic doctrine) to be a crime. The Council of Trent, and other Church councils, declare that any person who disagrees with even one of their doctrinal statements is thereby anathematized. When the Pope pronounces an anathema, he is said to be passing sentence on a criminal. The “Catholic Encyclopedia” says that the anathema ritual is deliberately calculated to terrify the “criminal” and cause him to repent (in other words, to unconditionally submit to the Catholic Church). For those whose crime is heresy, repentance means renouncing everything that they have said or done which conflicts with Catholic doctrine. In other words, they have to renounce their own conscience and discernment, and the conclusions which they reached in their best efforts to understand Biblical principles. And they have to submit their minds and wills unconditionally to every official doctrinal declaration of the Catholic Church. As we will see, Canon Law says that this unquestioning submission of the mind and will is required. OFFICIAL MODERN ENDORSEMENT OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT The declarations and anathemas of the Council of Trent have never been revoked. On the contrary, the decrees of the Council of Trent are confirmed by both the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) and the official “Catechism of the Catholic Church” (1992)...ANATHEMAS
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.