Posted on 01/03/2011 10:40:41 AM PST by RnMomof7
Hugs to you, “presently no screen name.” Rest well tonight - I’m turning in - and probably shouldn’t have posted - but it was from the heart. Sleep with peaceful dreams.
Keep posting that cop-out. It makes the RCC look as hypocritical as it always has been.
I don't have time to repost the endless evidence so here's a nice, short recap of Hitler's Roman Catholicism...
According to Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Adolf Hitler was born into the Catholic faith. He dictated Mein Kampf to a Catholic priest. Someone listed him as Catholic on his death certificate. Hitler regarded himself as a Catholic until he died. "I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so," he told Gerhard Engel, one of his generals, in 1941. the Pope was to publicly describe Hitler's opposition to Russia as a "high-minded gallantry in defense of the foundation of Christian culture. "Several German bishops openly supported Hitler's invasion of Russia, calling it a "European crusade." One bishop exhorted all Catholics to fight for "a victory that will allow Europe to breathe freely again and will promise all nations a new future. " On April 20, 1939, Archbishop Orsenigo celebrated Hitler's birthday. The celebrations, initiated by Pacelli (Pope Pius XII) became a tradition. Each April 20, Cardinal Bertram of Berlin was to send "warmest congratulations to the Fuëhrer in the name of the bishops and the dioceses in Germany" and added with "fervent prayers which the Catholics of Germany are sending to heaven on their altars." "During Hitler's fiftieth birthday celebration, special votive masses were held in every German church "to implore God's blessing upon Fuhrer and people," and the Bishop of Mainz called upon Catholics in his diocese to pray specifically for "the Fuhrer and Chancellor, the inspirer, enlarger and protector of the Reich." The Pope did not fail to send his congratulations. on Catholics in his diocese to pray specifically for "the Fuhrer and Chancellor, the inspirer, enlarger and protector of the Reich." Adolf Hitler is a Catholic.
God is her savior in the superlative way. He has saved us all, in some sense, and he has saved Mary supremely..
All according to your human understanding and not biblical.
On the other hand, he himself needs no salvation.
What a weird thing to say. Unbelievable.
Of course it is not hypocritical to take a segment out of a work that notes that Hitler did have a Catholic veneer but holds that Luther led to Hitler as its central thesis and leave the whole Lutheran thing out of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_and_Fall_of_the_Third_Reich#cite_ref-1
I was looking to see if the work was credible. I am doubtful, but it certainly does not seem as if the Catholics come out in the lowest part of the ditch.
Perhaps it is something of both. Though I never considered, nor would have put it as, that you would be "prostrating [yourself]self before a wafer..."
As far as I'm concerned, when doing so, it is part of you worshiping the Risen Christ. Which is good enough for me, any day of the week.
They also never say that my grandmother's green bean casserole recipe is to be used.
Thankfully, we don't teach Christianity according to what the Bible doesn't say, but what it does say.
And that's why God's word is our only rule of faith and practice. Unlike the faulty, variable RCC doctrines of men which only serve to lead men away from Christ.
So, when I read a post that says Catholics worship Mary
When Roman Catholics believe Mary to be men's "co-redeemer" and "a mediator between God and men" and "sinless" and "queen of the universe," then it is clear that Roman Catholics "worship Mary," regardless of their feeble excuses to the contrary.
Words count. And each of us will be justified or condemned according to the words we speak (Matthew 12:37.)
If they are corrected and knowingly commit the same sin again, well they must answer to the Lord Himself.
I thank God for His free and merciful gift of eyes to see the deadening idolatry inherent in the superstitions of Rome which blatantly steal the glory of God only to foist it off onto a simple Jewish girl (not to mention all those ersatz "alter Christus.")
Jesus takes persecuting the Church personally, since it is His Body
Amen. The problem for Rome, however, is that since it denies the Scriptures and distorts the Gospel, the papacy places itself outside orthodox, historic Christianity.
Read your Bible and learn the truth, God willing.
But 1921 is a lot more recent than 1521.
Read Hebrews.
The sacrifice of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world has been completed. God has accepted the offering for the sins of His flock.
There is no further sacrifice.
Rome somehow does not believe the first time was good enough. Apparently the sacrifice didn't stick. It must be repeated ad nauseum in contradiction to God's word.
And there are no priests in the New Testament. There is the priesthood of all believers and the one "high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec," Jesus Christ.
There are teaching elders and pastors to preach the Gospel of Christ.
But there is no re-sacrifice. There are no "alter Christus."
Read your Bible and learn the truth. It will set you free, God willing.
Reality.
What is the world coming to when you cannot trust the Vatican?
Reality.
You might try reading post 346 before making such a quick reply.
Finally a post of yours that I can say that I completely agree with, though I do not quite follow how it pertains to the post to which it responds—though maybe that is because I don’t know the book that you were indirectly quoting earlier well enough.
It must be admitted that Church officials did not spend every waking moment offending Hitler. As other freepers have pointed out on this thread, given that he was head of state, understandably certain diplomatic and civil protocols were observed by all states and individuals who sought to respect the head of state. Some churchman may have even gone beyond the minimum required in this department, though less so than other people.
As I have pointed out repeatedly in this thread,by the spring of 1937 the Church was tweaking Hitler`s nose in ways that no other organized group did. Of course, this thread is long, so I would not expect you to have read all of the posts, so here is a link. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2650932/posts?page=316#316
Replying to each of your blurbs in order:
Yes the sacrifice has been completed in a sense, it still needs to be applied.
It is not a further sacrifice, it is making the original sacrifice present again through divinely instituted signs.
It is not a different time, it is not repeated, it is made present again.
The first clause of your second sentence contradicts your first sentence, but the main problem is overlooking the ¨do this in memory of me`thing.
There are greek words that are translated in a variety of ways, and certainly there are people with the responsibility of preaching, but this does not preclude the fact that the synoptics and first Corinthians make a big deal about representing the last supper explicitly, and John does the same in a more subtle manner.
No re-sacrifice—right, just a representation of the same sacrifice. Each individual sacramentally designated by Christ to represent Him IS an alter Christus. He who hears you hears me and all that. ARE is incorrect as Christus is singular.
And everything in the last statement is true, though with more elaboration, we probably could find something to disagree on.
it is clear that Roman Catholics “worship Mary,” regardless of their feeble excuses to the contrary.
Words count. And each of us will be justified or condemned according to the words we speak (Matthew 12:37.)
Ummm I bet that if you found a Pope or a saint denying that he worshipped Christ, we would find that quote in all of your posts pronto, and not explanations that really his other actions indicate that he does worship Christ even though he denies it. If Catholics treat Mary the same way as they treat Christ, how come they don`t occasionally also deny worshipping Christ. Have you ever seen a Catholic attacking another Catholic in a discussion when one claims not to worship Mary.
So, according to the Vaticanists, is Dr. Luther burning in the fires of Hell, or is he awaiting someone to pray him out of purgatory, . . . or what?
Please note that you, as other catholics, frequently give higher honor to you traditions than you do the scriptures. Scriptures are just that...been when it comes to your traditions..they are "Holy"..."Sacred" etc.etc. and the same for your rituals...and various works of art. These and many "other" remnants of the middle age dark period, which were long ago denounced, but remain the priority of your worship...and this over and above who Christ is...which often appears as lip service only by comparison.
Yes this is an observation both here on these threads, in the churches I have attended...and debates I have viewed and been a part of. But it is an obvious observation to those who are non-catholic.
Bet you haven’t attended a Mass, or better yet a sacred liturgy (Eastern rite term for Mass) with all the stops pulled out or you would be accusing catholics of worshipping the gospels, which are treated with a symbolic reverence that would put this concern to rest.
I have attended Mass and was not impressed. Though I do understand there are those who are.
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.