The very interesting thing is that the Roman Catholic church and especially FRoman Catholics, so disparage Paul when they feel that what he has to say supports Protestant doctrine, but when they feel it supports Catholic doctrine, Catholics will quote Paul so fast your head will spin.
All of a sudden, he’s a church father, even if he is a *loon*, a *goofball*, and a *kook*.
Either Paul is worthy of quoting or he is not. Not depending on what doctrine you choose to have him support, but either he’s reliable, or he’s not.
Cherry picking doesn’t cut it. It leaves one with no credibility. Catholics need to make up their mind about what they believe about Paul instead of moving the goalposts all the time.
AMEN, metmom. Paul is loved/reviled according to what they WANT him to say, not what he actually says. I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a person so misunderstood. And for no other reason than they do NOT want to believe what he actually said. Not an IMPLICIT meaning in any of his epistles. Yet you would think they were written in some kind of pre-Adamite claw scratching on a cave wall. A stumblingblock, to be sure.
Amen to that. Thank God that the Catholic Church doesn't promote that. Saint Paul is venerated by the Catholic Church and his writings are part of the revealed Word of God. What the Church does not accept or promote is the notion that Paul's writings are on par with or superior to the Gospel as revealed by Christ Himself. When read in support of the Gospel Paul is glorious. However, when presented as a stand alone revelation they are misleading. The sin does not lie with St. Paul, but with those who would corrupt his work.
The very interesting thing is that the Roman Catholic church and especially FRoman Catholics, so disparage Paul when they feel that what he has to say supports Protestant doctrine, but when they feel it supports Catholic doctrine, Catholics will quote Paul so fast your head will spin.
All of a sudden, he’s a church father, even if he is a *loon*, a *goofball*, and a *kook*.
Either Paul is worthy of quoting or he is not. Not depending on what doctrine you choose to have him support, but either he’s reliable, or he’s not.
Cherry picking doesn’t cut it. It leaves one with no credibility. Catholics need to make up their mind about what they believe about Paul instead of moving the goalposts all the time.
OF COURSE . . . IT EVEN INVOLVES RELIGIOUS DUTIES OF OBLIGATION . . . RITUALS . . .
RELATED Stations of the Stations of the White Hanky:
2. Black/white icon of duplicity, double standard dance
6. Icon of the rubber bible
10. Icon of hubris to the supreme degree
11. Groping for any explanation but the truth
12. Icon to the holy flip-flops in word meanings and arguments
14. Icon to the fantasized divine right, to be correct, pristinely sanctified & perfectly flawless in all respects in all cases all the time, regardless.
15. Icon to chronic & obsessive inconsistency.
Everything S,.t Paul write is inspired scripture and supports the Catholic doctrines. Whoever disparaged St. Paul doesn’t understand Catholicism. We are Pauline Christians.