AND THEN YOU SAY..." Could it be the anit’s just might be descendance to OT/NT enemies to those other prophets that were also stone and maligned.
IS THAT YOUR EXAMPLE OF "LOVE ONE ANOTHER??"
Posted on 12/09/2010 8:20:52 AM PST by restornu
There does seem to be a high correlation between orthodoxy and vocations. The high school from which I graduated years ago was, at the time, not exactly a pillar of Catholic orthodoxy (but then, I graduated in 1978, not exactly an era of high orthodoxy here in the United States). Our school produced very few vocations (although my class, interestingly, did produce a very late vocation in one of my classmates, who was eventually ordained in his 40s).
Over the years since then, a lot of folks who love my old school worked hard to make it more of the Catholic institution that it should have been all along. The level of Catholicity there now is sufficient that I have entrusted the school with my own two beloved sons. It is a Catholic high school that works to faithfully transmit Catholic faith.
And the vocations have come. A school of a thousand young men, a young man from the class of ‘01 was ordained to the priesthood this past June, and there are currently 9 or 10 young men who are recent graduates or recent faculty studying for the priesthood.
Orthodoxy works.
sitetest
Those are the characteristics and behaviors of your church’s early leaders on display. I am not lying, regardless of your scurrilous accusation.
That you so easily dismiss them as “innuendo” is not uncharacteristic. If I made them up out of whole cloth, you might have an argument. Since I didn’t, your argument is without merit.
I would never knowingly follow in the footsteps of such people, I did so unknowingly.
The “walk” that is too hard for some to make is the one that takes one away from such deception. I took the walk away from mormonism into Christianity and I’m not looking back, just over my shoulder.
As for the “backbiters” comment you made, I would offer up your “reap what you sow” comment as the impetus for this post.
I suspect the original intention of your posting this thread is to somehow attempt to posit that Christians are hypocrites.
I don’t know of any TRUE Christian who would ever arrive at the conclusion they are anywhere near sinless.
We are talking about something in the realm of Church discipline. Yes, the Latin Rite could change the discipline. I don't think it will, nor would I want it to.
Show me the voice recording or actual words written by Jesus himself where he says priest need to be celibate. It was a man man creation written by infallible men who have interpreted their own meaning of it through the centuries.
We don't have anything that Jesus wrote - If we used this criterion on everything, Christianity would be without content. A complete void. The only time we ever hear of Jesus writing is where He wrote on the ground at the attempted stoning of the woman caught in adultery.
The Church's only testimony to the teachings and Works of Jesus are what we have received from the preaching of the Apostles - both through writing and through oral tradition. And part of that testimony is the teaching of Jesus that it is laudable to be celibate for the sake of the Kingdom. St. Paul even tells us that it is preferable to be single and be able to work zealously for the things of the Lord - but that not everyone is called to that life.
That said, priests don't NEED to be celibate - there are married priests in the Eastern Rites, as well as a small handful in the Latin Rite who have received special dispensations under extraordinary circumstances. But the longstanding tradition has been for celibate clergy - and there continue to be very good practical and spiritual reasons to do that.
One significant one remains that availability - and a married man simply does not have the same availability and flexibility as a celibate one. A bishop is limited in what he can justly ask of a married priest, because the bishop must consider the priest's wife and children. And the priest himself cannot take on as much because he must maintain his responsibilities to his wife and children.
I don't see how the small handful of Latin Rite priests who have been granted the dispensation actually make it work. I really cannot understand it, and they have my respect.
My church is a "training" church.[&c]
When you say that they're 'terrible'... what do you mean? Are they really inadequate in their preaching or in some other aspect of their ministry... or are they just green? If they are genuinely inadequate, it may be worth expressing a concern to the Diocese...
My friend always wanted to be a priest not a deacon but he fell in love with his HS sweetheart 30 years ago.
God will never call us to something that is impossible - God will not call a man to priesthood if it is impossible for a bishop to affirm that call on behalf of the Church. Given that it sounds like he is happily married, I would say that he was called to marriage, and not to priesthood.
But it sounds like there may be something genuine working on his heart... has he ever asked a priest to be his spiritual director to help tease out what exactly it is that is moving in his heart?
Ya only hear what ya want to hear and see what ya want to see if any of you ponder my opening post it seem to go over your heads.
[Reminder of what Jesus Said
He who is without cast the first stone!
Jesus also said
that we as his children should Should Love One Another!]
Many anti’s for years have been throwing the first stone at the LDS an in order to justify many have to go back to the 1800’s.
Could it be the anit’s just might be descendance to OT/NT enemies to those other prophets that were also stone and maligned.
Now that folks are fighting back against his claim, mormons get upset. We're supposed to be held to some higher standard set by the mormons that they themselves refuse to adhere to? To "fight" with one hand tied behind our back?
Good luck with that.
I notice that you haven't addressed the content of my previous post (as usual), just trying to keep it personal it "seems". Should I post some of that "love another" the mormons on FR have demonstrated?
Could it be that some mormons just can't handle the truth regarding the sordid foundations upon which mormonism was founded?
Btw, maybe you can answer this question which none of your mormon buddies seem willing to try.
How many loaves of bread could be paid for with the $4B+ that is being spent to build the mall in SLC?
The bread that families are obligated to provide for mormon sacrament meeting instead of the church providing for the flock.
AND THEN YOU SAY..." Could it be the anit’s just might be descendance to OT/NT enemies to those other prophets that were also stone and maligned.
IS THAT YOUR EXAMPLE OF "LOVE ONE ANOTHER??"
I guess the Greek New Testament and the Hebrew Old Testament can’t be the word of God, because they are not translations.
To restornu, original poster of this thread:
SATAN is called the accuser of the brethren in Revelation 12:10...
“And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, “Now the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ have come, for the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night before our God.”
Not a good model to follow - it doesn’t end well for him.
I notice how tricksy your post is - mixing Bible references with cultic literature!
“Guess walking the walk is too hard!”
Making it personal resty?
“Many anti’s for years have been throwing the first stone at the LDS an in order to justify many have to go back to the 1800’s.”
Ah, hmmmmmmmm...
Resty, you do realize the Founder of your mormonic cult, one Joseppe Smith, built mormonism on the foundation that all other churches were false?????????
I think that was the first stone.
Disparaging remarks directed at anti’s and ex-mos.
It is a clear demonstration that those who do so come intellectually unarmed into the arena of debate.
A sign of a feeble mind desperately trying to express itself.
Nothing new.
Then there are those who behave as if they’re “above” the fray looking down on others, casting judgment that we are not Christlike.
They don’t respond to the content of the reply, only malign the poster.
Weak. Just like the foundation of mormonism.
A foundation poured by a weak, morally corrupt, sick deviant who died a coward’s death.
The “walk” that is hard is the one that takes the humility to recognize that one made a mistake, was deceived. And instead of accepting or attempting to justify it, turn one’s back on the cult and run to Christ.
And doing it quite well!
ARE you honest in your dealings...
Just goes to show some revel in being backbittersMORMONism needs no backbiter; for they can get their GOD to threaten their reluctant targets!
| The Official Scriptures of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints © 2006 Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved. Rights and use information. Privacy policy. |
While some, ahem, MORMONs merely go back to 2000.
Could it be that a lot of MORMONs made a COVENANT to have their TONGUES ripped out?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_atonement
100
“It is a clear demonstration that those who do so come intellectually unarmed into the arena of debate.
“A sign of a feeble mind desperately trying to express itself.
what you said! :-)
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.
