Posted on 09/02/2011 9:07:47 AM PDT by marshmallow
Minneapolis, Minnesota (CNN) –Prior to 2006, few people even knew that then-Minnesota state legislator Keith Ellison was a Muslim. Because of his English name, he said, no one thought to ask.
But five years ago, when he ran for a seat in the United States House of Representatives - a race he would go on to win - word of his religious affiliation began to spread.
“When I started running for Congress it actually took me by surprise that so many people were fascinated with me being the first Muslim in Congress,” said Ellison, a Democrat now serving his third term in the House.
“But someone said to me, ‘Look Keith, think of a person of Japanese origin running for Congress six years after Pearl Harbor–this might be a news story.’”
Though Ellison's status as the first Muslim elected to Congress is widely known, fewer are aware that he was born into a Catholic family in Detroit and was brought up attending Catholic schools.
But he said he was never comfortable with that faith.
“I just felt it was ritual and dogma,” Ellison said. “Of course, that’s not the reality of Catholicism, but it’s the reality I lived. So I just kind of lost interest and stopped going to Mass unless I was required to.”
It wasn’t until he was a student at Wayne State University in Detroit when Ellison began, “looking for other things.”
(Excerpt) Read more at religion.blogs.cnn.com ...
Makes sense to me...If Mary can be a co-redeemer, we can certainly be co-popes...I'm afraid I'm going to have to wander into the women's section to find those pretty shoes tho...
I saw that too...And Peter had his arm around John Lennon...
Heb 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
Where do you come up with these perversions of scripture???
There is nothing in that verse about your Eucharist...They ate some bread...
This is why I am Catholic. It is not based on lies, it is not brainwashing or coercion or anything other that the Eucharist.
We have been proving that statement to be false for years here on FR with gazillions of scriptures from the word of God...
Thank God it wasn't by the Catholic Church.
I find it incredulous that so many who have bought into the whole "Rapture" theory reject the assumption of Mary who was already judged sinless. Is this out of an overblown sense of fairness or jealousy?
"I will reject that outright. There are depictions of 'Mary' going back far before her birth... All the way back to Babylon."
So every ancient goddess is a depiction of Mary? What a laugh. Theories like yours are no different than those lunatics who claim that Jesus too is traceable back to Babylon as the Zoroastrian deity Mithra. If you are going to try to connect the dots, at least follow the numbers.
AMEN to everything you said. Every cult must have a goddess of the universe to worship. The Mary of RCC is nothing more than pagan goddess worship dressed up in RC gowns. She is not the Mary of God’s word. If Mary is the queen of heaven, there must be SOME KIND of cat-fight going on because Ishtar has had that “honor” since Babylon AKA The Semitic goddess Astarte. She was condemned by God then (Jeremiah 7:18, 44:17-19,25). How can the RCC hope to escape the judgement of God now?
Unbelievable.
You wrote:
“Kamen can no more speak for the Jewish people than vladimir998 can speak for the Catholic Church.”
The lunacy that is anti-Catholicism rears its ugly, stupid head. First you said that you saw no point to paying attention to evidence unless Jewish historians were involved in the conversation. Now you dismiss a fully qualified, highly trained, historian - WHO IS JEWISH - for no other reason, apparently, than you don’t want to agree with him. Do you not see the inherant intellectual dishonesty in dismissing a Jewish historian just because you’ve apparently decided he isn’t Jewish enough according to your standards (whatever they are)?
“When it comes to Jewish/Catholic relations concerning the crusades, inquisition or holocaust one is well advised to keep abreast of the International Catholic-Jewish Liaison Committee.”
Why? Since neither side speaks anymore for either religion than they other what would be the point even according to your standards? Do the Jews on that committee come up to snuff for you? Are they kosher enough? Gee, I sure hope they don’t wear wool and linen blends!
“Since you deny there is a Jewish perspective on the inquisition, I strongly recommend you read about the limpieza de sangre (purity of blood) inquisition doctrines which found people with Jewish or Muslim ancestors to be inferior - and history concerning the terms Marranos, Conversos, and New Christians>
I already have read about limpieza de sangre (purity of blood) - in more detail than you ever will most likely. And remember, none of that had anything to do with Catholic doctrine or practice so it’s essentially irrelevant. By the way, since you probably don’t know, the Statuets of Purity of Blood were codified in 1449 - more than two decades BEFORE the inquisition came into existence. The inquisition from its start and until 1572 - so for about 100 years, and 120 years after the statuets became codified - the inquisition continued to employ conversos.
Also, here’s what I actually wrote: “1) There is no “Jewish perspective” on the inquisition. Kamen shows you are simply wrong on that score. He is Jewish.” Care to comment rather than dismiss?
““Now Jewishness is… a permanent inborn characteristic that even baptism does not remove,” (Nicholls, William, 1993, Christian Antisemitism, A History of Hate, p. xxi). “Those who wished to hold public office had to present a certificate … showing that there were no Jews in their lineage, that they were free of… mala sangre, bad blood (ibid. pp. xx-xxi).”
And? What did that have to do with the inquisition? In itself, nothing.
“Note the date. Kamen has not settled the issue for the Jews.”
Who said he would - specially when many Jews are simply not interested in the facts?
“I also suggest you read closely a few posts by Mad Dawg, Natural Law and yes, even Rummel. Inquisition atrocities were politically motivated – they had to do with obtaining and securing power.”
By whom and for whom? I think you need to actually post facts and not conjectures. I have no doubt politics became involved, but it is clear the politics originally involved in the foundation of the inquisition in Spain was to secure Spain from strife, rebellion and conquest by Muslims and suspected Jewish fifth columnists.
“Religion was the excuse for the inquisition, divine right colonization, forced conversions, witch hunts, ritualistic sacrifice, crusades, Islamic terrorism, etc.”
No. To make the mistake of saying religion was an excuse for all those things is to not understand religion at all.
“Witches, btw, were the prime focus of the Protestant version of the Catholic Inquisition (which also prosecuted witches.)”
Agreed. And so what? Where there were inquisitions there were usually fewer witch trials. In Spain, after a briefly flurry, there were essentially none while they raged in other parts of Europe.
“And religion has been the pretext for killing Christians. Even in the crucifixion, Caiaphas thought he was securing the safety or power of the Jewish people by turning Jesus over to die – and his statement was correct but not in the way he meant it:”
So, Jewish historians, the only ones you want to read, could they be acting on a religious pretext? Did you even think about that?
“Christians and Jews have been persecuted and driven all over the world. Jews in particular have been brutalized defamed and slaughtered and yet, after 2000 years - which entailed the crusades, the inquisition and the holocaust - have returned to their own homeland.”
Gee, that’s a nice little emotional rant, but none of what you just said has anything to do with what we were talking about. I realize Protestant anti-Catholics eschew facts at all costs, but a Jewish homeland now in no way indicates that the inquisition was right or wrong back then anymore than insinuating that Jews calling for Christ’s death means Israel has no right to exist.
“God’s Name is I AM.”
And when it comes to dealing with the facts, yours is apparently I’M NOT.
placemark
Of course it was.
I find it incredulous that so many who have bought into the whole "Rapture" theory reject the assumption of Mary who was already judged sinless.
The rapture is a Biblical concept. It will take place at the sounding of the seventh trumpet just as the Bible declares. As to Mary 'already judged sinless', that's just another Roman myth.
So every ancient goddess is a depiction of Mary? What a laugh.
That isn't what I said.
Interesting take. The longer lived folks here may tell you differently. I have no problem with defending Catholicism Scripturally and have done so with the best of them. I'm at a point right now where I'm finding much more entertainment looking at Protestant foolishness in mistaking innovation for traditional or orthodox Christianity. The Church Fathers were theological giants as opposed to so many of the theological invertebrates squirming around the landscape today. I am actually spending time reading them and reflecting on their wisdom, as opposed to the wisdom of the god that I see in the mirror.
They were holy men and much closer to imitating Christ than I could ever hope to be. Paul said to imitate him as he imitated Christ. Some men come a lot closer than others in their imitation of Christ.
Here's the problem with that statement. They admitted that they didn't have any.
That you do not accept their conclusions, only proves you must have an agenda in holding to your false claim that the Bible has errors.
They don't have conclusions - they have possibilities and speculations. Did you not read my quoting their conclusions? If they cannot explain it and you can find nobody who can, why do you call my posts (not beliefs) false?
You often say that the Church "harmonized" the Scriptures, implying that somebody "monkeyed" with the actual writings.
I never said 'monkey'.
If that was true, then how do YOU explain the different titles above the head of Jesus?
Ladies first.
Why didn't they "correct" the errors? I have no problem with trusting the infallible word of God, nor do I see a need for an infallible teaching authority to convince me of such.
You consist of an individual interpreting Scripture. How do you call four different accounts, all in contradiction of the other infallible? Do you hold four different views of any event in your real life and consider yourself to have infallible interpretation of it?
It says more about you than us. That's really twisted.
I'm not the one reveling in the uncleanness of menstruation. I'm not the one with a horrid fascination of it. I do not shun my wife or consider my wife unclean each month. I do not shut her away or refuse to come into any physical contact at all with her.
Is that common where you guys hang out?
Do you have the right to either refuse it, or throw it away at a later date?
Against Heresies
Book 5, Chapter 29, Paragraph 1
And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, “There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.” Matt. xxiv. 21. For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.
Pseudo-Ephraem's Pre Tribulation Rapture Statement (c. 374-627) A Sermon by Pseudo-Ephraem (section 2)
"All the saints and elect of God are gathered together before the tribulation, which is to come, and are taken to the Lord, in order that they may not see at any time the confusion which overwhelms the world because of our sins."
A two part question. Our interaction is proving to be advantageous.
First, we have the ability to correlate all known versions of NT Scripture that was not available, and we have the wisdom of how the early Councils made their decisions w.r.t. naming the authors.
Second, the infallibility extends to the Faith and the teaching of it. Authorship was not considered by Biblical era Jews to be a great and worthy thing. I don't believe that most of the OT authors are reliably named either. Since the authors of other than some of Paul's Epistles are tentative at best (who was Jude?), that is consistent with the times. The Church did its best, centuries later to put an identifying mark on each book as to authorship. What we didn't get is the version of the book, of which many of them had dozens as copyists either inadvertently or with direction, changed the text.
Your nose growing a lot lately???
Actually, it's not, but what does that have to do with you telling us that Paul is the go-to guy and that Christ was only for the Jews?
Unless the Master calls me one of His, I am not. (one of his sheep)
But yet you call yourself a Christian
You get a gold star.
You then are no more a Christian than the average Mormon
That's odd that you'd say that - they arose from the same theological errors and about the same time and from the same sources as your bunch did. 1800 years after we Christians were practicing Christianity. We didn't have to create anything new. We like what Christ gave to the Apostles and they handed to us.
They are shooting for the same goal you are...
They're shooting to be a god in the next life, unlike the folks here who fawn over the god in their own mirror. No, the faux Christians and the other faux Christians are the same as we Catholic Christians who have kept the faith for two millennium. Sorry, that is a fail.
Just can’t do it without the invectives can you.
I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; - NIcene Creed
No fair. You quoted Jesus and three separate quotes from Paul, and two from Peter.
What ever shall they do?
So when the Bible says baptism for the remission of sins by Jesus, Paul and Peter, it really doesn't say it, in the same way that some people say that Jesus really didn't have anything to do with true, alcoholic wine.
Is it simply pride that keeps self-decribed Christians away from the true Faith?
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.