Posted on 12/05/2010 6:14:57 PM PST by RnMomof7
Blame-shifting par excellence.....
No, the blame lays directly in the hands of the Catholic church.
lol. yes, then bury him wherever, put her in Arlington, erect a giant altar, ur, monument, and praise her for winning the war by getting married and giving birth. And that’s the worship we have going on in Mary
“Neither—and this is remarkable—in the proceedings is there manifest any serious doubt of the canonicity of the disputed writings. In the mind of the Tridentine Fathers they had been virtually canonized, by the same decree of Florence, and the same Fathers felt especially bound by the action of the preceding ecumenical synod. The Council of Trent did not enter into an examination of the fluctuations in the history of the Canon. Neither did it trouble itself about questions of authorship or character of contents. True to the practical genius of the Latin Church, it based its decision on immemorial tradition as manifested in the decrees of previous councils and popes, and liturgical reading, relying on traditional teaching and usage to determine a question of tradition.”
The lists are the same; whether the first was infallibly defined or not; I will agree that there was discussion up to the infallible declaration of Trent, but also believe that that declaration was in response to the reformers.
Ever ask anyone to pray for you? Paul did!
According to the Code of Canon Law, "Insofar as possible, one to be baptized is to be given a sponsor who is to assist an adult in Christian initiation, or, together with the parents, to present an infant at the baptism, and who will help the baptized to lead a Christian life in harmony with baptism, and to fulfill faithfully the obligations connected with it" (No. 872).
Denial is a defense mechanism postulated by Sigmund Freud, in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence. Admitting ones parents were remiss and ones own complacency in an issue of this importance is difficult and painful.
The only questions are:
1) With the demonstrated deficiencies in your Catechises can we reasonably expect you to know this?
Now that you know about this what are you going to do about it?
Will you remember this admission of your poor Catechesis the next time you attempt to bloviate authoritatively on the Catechism because you were "born and raised" Catholic?
” where Jesus turned water into wine on her behalf”
I think whoever said this should reread the account as it was neither on Mary’s behalf or request, she didn’t ask him to do anything but informed him of the the situation and told others to do what he said.
” Most imporantly, Catholics are very aware of her last words in the Gospel: “Do whatever He tell you”.”
But is not obedience to Christ’s commands emphasized through out the the Scriptures so Mary’s comment would simply be the comment of a faithful disciple among many? So how “most importantly”?
In the meantime, since he said he didn't come to destroy the law, its probably best we encourage others to do the best they can with it instead of reminding them about how incapable and flawed they are. Just sayin'. :-)
First it's cake then pie then soup - ah, dinner time at the inter-faith dialog. No doubt there's casseroles too, many made with cream of mushroom soup and recipes translated from the original Greek (or was it Aramaic)? Have a nice day, sir or madam.
She said “they have no more wine”. Jesus said “Woman, what does that have to do with thee and me? My hour has not yet come.”
Mary tells them to “do whatever He tells you”.
She tells Him about the situation, gets what some would consider a rebuff, and yet she still says “do whatever He tells you”... Sounds to me like she was pretty sure Jesus was going to do something! You can interpret that any way you like; I interpret it differently!
I don’t try to interpret it, I just pointed out what was there and not, nor will I try to guess what Mary might have had in mind and expected of Jesus.
The account seems to emphasize the miracle of wine rather than the interaction of Mary and Jesus.
God’s grace and faith in Christ, which is believing that He is Who He says He is, and that He has done what He said He has done, fulfills the Law, thank you, have a good day as well.
I love your list. Made me laugh! I’m going to go worship Mary now and burn my Bible. Heil Ratzinger!
This is going to end up permanently posted to someone's home page as proof of heretical Catholic dogma.
Ratzinger, Sr. continued to serve in the police even after the Night of the Long Knives and the passing of the Nuremburg Laws so he wasn’t all that uncomfortable with his Nazi superiors. He retired on time and suffered no reprisals from the Nazis, moving his family to rural Bavaria where they continued to live in harmony with the Nazi establishment. How many Germans who were “unsympathetic” to the Nazi cause retired to Bavaria, I wonder?
Probably zero.
Traunstein, the town Ratzinger retired to, is a stone’s throw from Berchtesgaden where Hitler’s Eagle’s Nest provided him with lots of R and R.
RCs just make things up. At this point the internet is littered with frantic rewrites. But even this revisionist history cannot obscure the facts.
Truth is Truth. To seek Jesus is to seek Truth.
There were plenty of priests who rescued persecuted Jews; there were also some who collaborated with the NAZIs, as well. The same can be said for Protestants (note, I didn't say "Proddys"). There were even Jews who collaborated with the NAZIs (George Soros, anyone?).
Oddly enough, nobody seems to talk about Islamic collaboration and the two Islamic Divisions in Germany's Army.
While Catholic and Protestant involvement seemed primarily involved with individuals, Islamic involvement was definitely systematic.
I once asked my dead grand dad to front me $350. He declined.
Is it written on your heart?
When Ratzinger was put forth as candidate for the Papacy, a lot of lefties shrieked that it was "a liberal's turn" to become Pope.
Most of the negative things I've heard about Ratzinger came from the far left. These are the same people who accused George W of dereliction of duty and claimed John Kerry was "smarter." They also called John Kerry a war hero.
I have to take the claims against Ratzinger with a grain of salt.
Sorry, but that is 100% wrong. Ratzinger was always the "conservative" end of the spectrum. Liberals were angry when he was suggested for pope and right before the vote it was said he stood NO CHANCE of getting enough votes.
All this is documented on FR. If I have time, I'll send a few links...again.
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.