Posted on 10/31/2010 11:59:22 AM PDT by RnMomof7
In Christ Alone lyrics
Songwriters: Getty, Julian Keith; Townend, Stuart Richard;
In Christ alone my hope is found He is my light, my strength, my song This Cornerstone, this solid ground Firm through the fiercest drought and storm
What heights of love, what depths of peace When fears are stilled, when strivings cease My Comforter, my All in All Here in the love of Christ I stand
In Christ alone, who took on flesh Fullness of God in helpless Babe This gift of love and righteousness Scorned by the ones He came to save
?Til on that cross as Jesus died The wrath of God was satisfied For every sin on Him was laid Here in the death of Christ I live, I live
There in the ground His body lay Light of the world by darkness slain Then bursting forth in glorious Day Up from the grave He rose again
And as He stands in victory Sin?s curse has lost its grip on me For I am His and He is mine Bought with the precious blood of Christ
BWHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Douay Catechism: Nothing whatsoever to do with homosexuality.
Catholic Catechism:"...homosexual practices."
Homosexuality is not in of itself a sin. Homosexual action is defined as a sin.
Of course her death is only conjecture.. there is no body, so no crime errr, I mean death may have occurred .. remember there is no record of her death in any of the scriptures..so maybe she really is in that pancake and street scum..tree trunk ...
You are switching topics. OLD REGGIE tried to say that the council passage implied that Honorius' letter should be considered infallible from the Catholic perspective. Are you supporting OLD REGGIE's contention?
How does this address the original question..why did the church make a doctrine of the assumption and the immaculate conception if their doctrine only addresses heresies.. as I pointed out even The Catholic Encyclopedia admits that the first “genuine” written references to the Assumption come from authors who lived in the sixth to the eight centuries:
So why the doctrine on this?? Obviously it was NOT to address a heresy
Re-read.
Homosexuality is not in of itself a sin. Homosexual action is defined as a sin.
What is the difference?
No bones about it! The best evidence is no evidence at all so the less evidence there is of her “assumption” the more it proves she was!
Say you understand.
No bones about it! The best evidence is no evidence at all so the less evidence there is of her “assumption” the more it proves she was!
Say you understand.
The Catholic Encyclopedia is no more official Church Teaching than WikiPedia.
Honorius, a Pope, was a HERETIC and taught heresy. So says the Infallible judgment of the First Ecumenical Council.
I think there are enough slivers of the cross to build a new tower of babble
AND there are enough foreskins of Jesus from His circumcision to build a.......well you know
And you have no "falsus in uno."
Bingo!
Hey, wait a minute..haven’t I seen Tears of Mary in little glass vials? Maybe not, could be the Sweat of Peter..Building a religious paradise in a place you never visited is a back-breaking proposition.
Homosexuality is not in of itself a sin. Homosexual action is defined as a sin.
What is the difference?
If you need help on this one I am not the person. Ask your Priest.
My friend there is NO verification that these are the bones of John the baptist.. found BTW this year.. hey maybe Mary’s are next
This may be as much about Catholic tourism as it is about TRUTH
http://www.balkantravellers.com/en/read/article/2170
I have already addressed the original question. In this case I was addressing a subsequent question.
Blasphemer. Our conversation is over.
I understand, and I understood the first time. :-)
Can you post another Cathchism of the Church that state other than the one Natural Law quoted to me in Cathachism 1992?
You realize there is a schism between much of the East and Rome. Before the split, the majority Eastern view was correct.
So you believe in the doctrine of the eastern church rather then the western church? Please remember the eastern church followed John Cassian (a student of Pelagius). The western church followed Augustine (Pelagius' arch rival).
Have you read St. Augustine's magnum opus City of God?
Yes, as a matter of fact I have. What part are you referring to? But before we go down this path, I would also refer to Augustine's statement in the Treatise of the Predestination of the Saints, that once he fully understood St. Cyprian's doctrine he recalled most of his life's work to destroy it. This shows the admirable quality of Augustine's faith to be true to doctrine without regard to his own work.
According to Congressional testimony, the US Communist Party infiltrated American Catholic seminaries with thousands of sleeper agents who were trained to pretend orthodoxy until they reached high rank.
So, it's a conspiracy? Our Lord called them tares.
You said, I believe, that doctrine was to address the "heresy" of non belief..and that the church ALWAYS believed these things historically...I pointed out that is not true. .So were those early Christians heretics?
Actually the assumption was first taught by heretics
“The belief in the corporeal assumption of Mary is founded on the apocryphal treatise De Obitu S. Dominae, bearing the name of St. John, which belongs however to the fourth or fifth century. It is also found in the book De Transitu Virginis, falsely ascribed to St. Melito of Sardis, and in a spurious letter attributed to St. Denis the Areopagite” (Catholic Encyclopaedia).
So what does the church do with that heresy?
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.