Posted on 11/23/2011 11:11:08 AM PST by marshmallow
A notoriously 'gay-friendly' parish in San Francisco has invited an openly homosexual Episcopalian cleric to lead an Advent Vespers service.
Most Holy Redeemer parish asked Bishop Otis Charles, a retired Episcopalian prelate, to lead the November 30 service. After serving as the Bishop of Utah from 1971 to 1993, he publicly announced that he is homosexual. Divorced from the mother of his 5 children, he solemnized a same-sex union in 2004.
That no one every questioned? There isn't a single tenant of the Faith that someone hasn't questioned at some time.
If that's your criteria for the canon, well, then queers marrying one another is fine because a lot of people question the teaching that such marriages are wrong. Just because the Bible says homosexuality is wrong is meaningless, because a lot of people question that particular portion of the Scripture. Everyone has to approve of abortion, too, because a lot of people question whether the Scriptures teach that there is anything wrong with murdering your own child. So, let me see. What was the Septuagint was translated into the Latin Vulgate and from 400 AD until Trent, at least one someone questioned every book in the Vulgate and every book in the New Testament. So, throw the entire Bible out or stop playing little word games and pretending to be dealing with the question honestly.
Stump me? No, proves to me that someone is out of ammo and has to resort to games, ploys, red herrings, and changing the subject because they know full well that the Scrptures thrown out during the revolt against The One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church are every bit as valid as those that were retained. But that's OK, I needed a good laugh.
have a nice day
A careful reading of that sentence, in light of the whole thread which has evolved or devolved into a debate on the truth of Catholicism would show that the hatred felt is toward the Catholic church.
A hatred that led to the statement that was reposted by me.
I do not believe that protestants hate Mary, but I do believe there is a detachment from her that stems from the Catholic attachment to her.
I have been told many times that it is the Catholic Mary that protestants decry, but that statement leaves me to believe there is more to it.
Greek Catholics still use the Septuagint, as do the Greek and Russian Orthodox for their scripture readings.
How were those in the past supposed to do this when Bibles were too few and too expensive to obtain for the individual believer to have one in his possession to read?
And what if one can’t read? Or can’t see?
THe Church developed sacred art partly to teach the Bible stories to the illiterate faithful.
Before the printing press, it took months for a copyist to complete one Bible.
Catholics need to once and for all come to the real truth that the CC had not until the time of the reformation agreed on what was in fact scripture or as they call the canon. Even then the books they officially call the canon which included questionable books that supported CC positions were included only to oppose the reformation. Some of those books that were included contain error of historical fact and some contradict the writings of the Apostles. To claim unanimous support for what was scripture any earlier then the time of the reformation is just not true.
A worthy exercise, imho.
Private opinions don’t substitute for authoritative judgements. Perhaps you should start by regarding Revelation as apocyrphyal.
Mere intellectual assent is not saving faith.
I’ll simply refer you to the caww post 3236. It looks to any rational person as if the CC proclaims there is no salvation apart from Mary.
My translation? That was from the KJV of scripture. Are you calling the KJV a faulty translation?
Jvette...”Really? We can learn nothing about Jesus through Mary?
metmom...”Nothing we can’t learn from reading Scripture or the leading of the Holy Spirit, which makes Mary redundant at best.”
From that exchange you get...(Jvette...)”I cannot imagine a hatred for anything, so intense...” You actually think metmom hates Mary herself intensely?
m5501: I think that you cannot be serious.It’s obvious what metmom meant and the fact that you jumped so high at that ill-perceived slight says more about your feelings for Mary than it does metmom’s.
*************************************************************************
When all else fails, accuse the other person of *hate*. It’s so much more dramatic and goes (theoretically) so much further in discrediting the person and anything else they have to say.
It’s ridiculous that when someone states a fact, that it’s immediately *hate* when it offends someone else.
God doesn’t need ANYONE, you, me, or Mary to lead people to Christ.
When did the KJV become the “Protestant/Rabinnical Massoretic text”?
It’s not I who claim Apostolic succession and unanimous consent. The CC can’t have it both ways.
What? Are you saying the CC goofed by including Revelation?
I wasn’t referring to the KJV. I was referring to the fact that the corrupt Massoretic text undergirds all Protestant scripture translations.
Protestants held up the Massoretic text as an idol at the time of the Reformation.
The Dead Sea Scrolls have confirmed what early Christian polemicists wrote - namely that the Jews corrupted the Old Testament.
I wouldn’t bet against you.
No Mary. No Incarnation.
No. I’m holding you to your standard for deciding what is scripture and what isn’t.
But yet you don't know if you'll be getting into heaven until you are face to face with Jesus at the White Throne Judgment...
You are in Jesus and he in you but you are not saved...
So how is the Christian baptism different than John's baptism???
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.