Posted on 07/02/2012 6:30:14 AM PDT by Cronos
I want to thank Archbishop William E. Lori for reminding me once again why I'm an ex-Catholic ("Fight for freedom," June 27). With the so-called "Fortnight for Freedom," the church leadership is deliberately and cynically using a mixture of patriotism and religion in a blatant and manipulative attempt to influence the outcome of the upcoming elections.
I can't seem to recall any recent news about Catholic churches being bombed in the United States or attempts to bar American Catholics from attending mass. I do know that the Catholic Church has been using its "religious freedom" for decades to aid and abet child abusers, to recently attack nuns in the United States who are at the forefront of what used to be one of the church's primary missions to aid and comfort the poor and needy, and that the American church has over the past few decades formed an alliance with some of the most strident and politically active right-wing religious groups in the U.S. Archbishop Lori even received an award in May from a coalition of some of those groups.
I am proud to be an American, and I am a strong supporter of the Bill of Rights. I support freedom of religion, and I support freedom from religion. And, at this moment in time, I am also very proud and happy to be an ex-Catholic.
Sandy Covahey, Baltimore
(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...
Your characterization of annulment is shear lunacy. Every sane person recognizes that there are some marriages that failed to have the essential qualification to be a legitimate marriage. Do you consider marriages to someone who is already married to another valid? Do you consider marriages to someone someone who did not give their consent or someone who was not physically or intellectually capable of giving their consent valid? Do you consider marriages to 12 13, or 14 year olds valid?Marriages between close relatives such as brother and sister, parents and children, and first cousins valid even it the relationship was unknown at the time? Do you consider a marriage valid if one of the spouses was secretly a Muslim, an atheist? How about a practicing homosexual? What about a marriage to someone who lied never intended to have a family or about raising their children Christian?
Annulment is not an infallible or inerrant process and in my judgment it errs far too often, but that does not mean that it is completely unnecessary, invalid or corrupt. And, for the record, children of an annulment marriage are not considered non-existant or bastards.
Peace be with you
I have asked stpio by PM to perhaps enlighten me as to the perspective proffered. The results may prove rather interesting.
Is it possible to be even consider Christian if one rejects the Trinity? The various Latter Day Saints also come to mind.
annulment = Catholic church sanctioned divorce.
That’s it exactly. But for catholics to go off on their own to get a divorce - there is nothing in it for the catholic church - so they will grant annulments for a ‘FEE’ - make a business out of it as they keep them in bondage by saying ‘all is well’ now by us. ‘Those that don’t pay, can’t play’ their ‘religious’ game.
Your opinion = irrelevancy.
Peace be with you
Let's look at the passage in Philippians 2:5-11
In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death — even death on a cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
There IS only ONE God. Do you believe this? This ONE, true God is the ONLY God and savior as Isaiah 44:6 says: "“This is what the Lord says— Israel’s King and Redeemer, the Lord Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.
The LORD God (Jehovah/Yahweh) is the first and the last, He is the Alpha and Omega just like Revelation 1:8 says: "“This is what the Lord says— Israel’s King and Redeemer, the Lord Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.
And because Jehovah is the beginning and end, the Alpha and Omega as He declares, and besides Him there is no other God OR Savior, then how can you explain in Revelation 22:12-17
"Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. “Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.” The Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let the one who hears say, “Come!” Let the one who is thirsty come; and let the one who wishes take the free gift of the water of life.
Jesus says HE is the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last. We know that Jesus is Almighty God INCARNATE - in the flesh. God became a man to redeem man back to himself. We do NOT believe in three Gods, but ONLY one God and because Scripture says that the Father is God, and Jesus is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, we therefore accept that God is revealed to us as THREE YET ONE. Just because it is a concept that is hard to grasp, does not mean it is not true. God told us it is so. People can refuse to believe that Jesus is God, but they cannot claim Scripture doesn't teach it.
As to an "inferior" status for Jesus, this is speaking of a hierarchy of authority or role, just as the husband is head of the wife, the Father is the head of Jesus and Jesus is the head of the church. But the husband and wife are STILL equal in the eyes of God. Galatians 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."
There are many other Scriptures passages that speak to this truth. The Christian faith accepts the truth of the Triune nature of our God because God says it is the truth. I sincerely hope you will continue to discuss this very important tenet of our faith.
It's not my characterization that makes it lunacy it is annulment itself!!
Annulment is NOT of God but catholicism, an organization of man made teachings to keep the deceived in bondage. Talk about sheer lunacy coming out of the Vatican - evil knows no bounds.
Well, where do we go from here. You don’t accept my premise? You’re the one touting your hapax legomenon. It’s not my fault it doesn’t prove your case. Lexical analysis is what it is. It’s not my premise you’re running into here. It’s just ordinary knowledge about words. Kind of a common framework that has to be there to have any continuity of analysis, of which, as you must know, Aquinas would approve as the exercise of right reason.
As for John 6:55, surely you understand that real and corporeal are two different words. Words have meaning. God is real, right? Is God corporeal? Well, to a Mormon perhaps. But my Bible says God is a spirit. Does that make him any less real?
Look, I respect your effort, but I don’t see where this can go if you think we can just throw aside the rules of language whenever it suits you. From a debate point of view, you put me in an impossible position. I have to accept your entire system of belief before I can inspect it? Really? Like ObamaCare? We have to pass it before we can find out what’s in it?
Not how I play. God saved me from a wretched life. You have no idea. There were miracles. I have seen the name of Jesus put flight to the darkest evils. He reached me through his word, and I will not sell out low for 9th Century magic, not when I already have the real real thing.
Peace,
SR
Good post.
It's not an opinion, it is fact. And what metmom said is truth, so get over it.
Hasn't their marriage been dissolved and they are free to marry another? Same outcome as anyone who seeks a divorce.
Good post to you, too.
Scripture makes only one provision for divorce and that is adultery.
And even then, in most Evangelical churches, restoration and forgiveness is strongly encouraged. Nor do I know of any pastor who would marry a couple who claiims to be Christian and is either living together or got a divorce after a profession of faith.
An interesting thing I discovered. I have a relative who lives in Montreal and he told me that it’s an extremely strongly Catholic city and the cohabitation rate of couples is about the highest in the world. Since the church so strongly condemns divorce, couples don’t dare risk divorce and so cross the church, so instead they figure they’re in better shape by just living together.
The fruit of Catholicism.
And knowing the neighborhood so well, I ned to add this disclaimer that this relative was raised Catholic and at present has no church affliation and most certainly makes no claim to any Protestant affiliation.
Exactly. The CC/Catholicism is a worldly organization with man made teachings so their congregants will live like the world and do as the worldly man does and see nothing wrong with it.
Whereas metmon's opinions are irrelevant yours are simply sophomoric. I get the distinct impression you post only to offend and provoke and that fact, reason and logic are not permitted to get in the way. I do hope you come to grips with what ever haunts and drives you and that you can somehow find a way to walk in charity and the fellowship of Christ.
FYI - an annulment does not dissolve a marriage. A finding of nullity establishes that the marriage never happened. Within Catholicism a marriage is a permanent creation, an institution that survives as long as both participants live. While the Church does not prohibit civil divorces for the divorced the sacramental marriage endures. Those civilly divorce are free to live apart but are not free to remarry or enter into another conjugal relationship as doing so is adultry.
He is clearly revealed to be God, explicitly and implicitly, , being ontologically one with the Father, (Jn. 5:18) and God manifest in the flesh, (1Tim. 3:16) and the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, (Heb. 1:3), who is called God, (Jn. 1:1; 20:28; Heb. 1:8) with the Holy Spirit also attributing to Him many texts which in the O.T. were ascribed to God, as well as uniquely Divine attributes, titles and glory, as shown here.
And the same conclusion is reached as regards the Holy Spirit, which is well set forth here. Both conclusions are required to reconcile Scripture with itself in its progressive revelation.
And rather than the Son being a created subcontractor in creating all things, (Jn. 1:2; Col. 1:16) "all things" would include Himself, and in no place is creative activity ascribed to any created thing. Rather, "Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself." (Isaiah 44:24)
As for Jesus being inferior, subordinationism in its heretical form is that the Son is inferior in nature to the Father, as not being God.
However, there is an order in the Godhead, and in this order the Father is the head, (1Cor. 11:3) who made His Son" both Lord (functionally) and Christ, (Acts 2:36 and thus judge of living and the dead, working by the Holy Spirit. And who "must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet." "And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all. " (1 Corinthians 15:25,28)
In which the Son shall be as He was before His incarnation, not reigning as the Lord but as the Divine Son of God nonetheless.
Rome accepts a relational subordinationism of Son to the Father, and we concur in the CCC (1050 ) statement, that "true and subsistent life consists in this: the Father, through the Son and in the Holy Spirit, pouring out his heavenly gifts on all things without exception."
I get the distinct impression you oppose Truth and can be thin skinned and easily offended by the double-edged sword as it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. Heb 4:12
Except that I have NEVER aligned myself with "non Trinitarians on certain Trinitarian debates". If the topic is the Trinity and someone is expressing doubts or disbelief in the doctrine, I HAVE engaged with them on the subject - though I am not saying I have participated on every such thread. I have responsibilities that preclude me from doing so. However, when I have participated, I dispute the false doctrine that says Jesus is not God in the flesh or that Almighty God is not revealed to us as a Triune God.
I am happy to hear of your regard for me and I can reciprocate, though, like family, we may all "get" to each other from time to time. I rejoice that there is not residual animosity even though we wrestle over some doctrine.
As to Cronos' insistence that NO non-Catholics EVER dispute non-trinitarians when Catholics are involved in the discussion, and that we are "all out to get you 'caflics'" (or however he spelled it), I still disagree. That implies that non-Catholics care more about attacking Catholics than they do defending Christian tenets. It is demonstrably untrue despite a few threads dug up from years past. That was what my response was about.
The usual response is that you can only know what is inspired by the Church (of Rome), but the church began upon Scriptural substantiation, using texts that were recognized as Scripture without an infallible magisterium of men. For like true men of God, the word of God is established as being so due to it Divine qualities and attestation, (Ps. 19:7-11; 119) and is evidenced to be the supreme standard for obedience and for testing Truth claims, as the assured Word of God.
More on this/; http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2901874/posts?page=210#210
Thank you. I respect, agree and appreciate the comments you have made here.
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.