Posted on 09/17/2014 9:07:14 AM PDT by thetallguy24
Pope Francis, with his open-mindedness and more humanist approach to Catholicism reportedly promoted that the Virgin Mary should be at the second Holy Trinity, even putting her at Godhead level.
Pope Francis recently attended the morning mass for the Feast of Our Lady of Sorrows on Sept. 15 at Casa Santa Marta. He preached on how the Virgin Mary "learned, obeyed and suffered at the foot of the cross," according to the Vatican Radio.
"Even the Mother, 'the New Eve', as Paul himself calls her, in order to participate in her Son's journey, learned, suffered and obeyed. And thus she becomes Mother," Pope Francis said.
The Pope further added that Mary is the "anointed Mother." Pope Francis said the Virgin Mary is one with the church. Without her Jesus Christ would not have been born and introduced into Christian lives. Without the Virgin Mary there would be no Mother Church.
"Without the Church, we cannot go forward," the Pope added during his sermon.
Now The End Begins claims Pope Francis' reflection on the Virgin Mary suggests people's hope is not Jesus Christ but the Mother Church.
The site claims his sermon somehow indicates a change in the position Jesus holds in the Holy Trinity. Jesus has reportedly been demoted to the third trinity. While the Virgin Mary and the Holy Mother Church, the Roman Catholic Church, takes over his place at the second trinity.
Additionally, basing on Pope Francis words he may have supposedly even put the status of the Blessed Virgin Mary at the "Godhead level."
Revelation 17:4-6 according to the site, gives meaning to the Pope's reflection. The chapter tells the story of the apostle John and his "great admiration" for the Virgin Mary. Now The End Begins claims the verses also speaks about the Holy Mother Church and how God thinks of the "holy Roman Mother Church".
However, the Bible seems to contradict Pope Francis promotion of the Virgin Mary to second trinity. The site quoted some passages wherein the "blessed hope" of the Christians is "the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ." There was reportedly never any mention of the Virgin Mary as being any kind of hope to anyone or anything.
But during the Feast of Our Lady of Sorrows, Pope Francis ended his reflection with the assurance of hope from the Virgin Mary and the Mother Church.
"Today we can go forward with a hope: the hope that our Mother Mary, steadfast at the Cross, and our Holy Mother, the hierarchical Church, give us," he said.
However, the Bible's passages shouldn't be taken literally, especially when it comes to reflections of the Virgin Mary and Jesus Christ.
The inquisition began in the late 4th century, right after the council of Lao DiCea authorized it.
The persecution of all who kept the Sabbath, which was all that followed Yeshua, plus every Jew in southern Europe.
This was the biggest holocaust the world has ever known.
In the remainder of the information you provided, it appears there were a variety of reasons, and if not formal charges, then still reasons why, including strong resentments of the judge which tried him, as you mentioned...
Johnson provided no footnote for where he sourced his own brief info, unfortunately.
Perhaps removal of the Ave Maria to substitute "Praise be to God" in school prayers was what set the pitchforks after the schoolmaster in the first place, leaving that aspect remaining to be included as reason why he was executed, though not inclusive of why, and possibly not showing up in list of more formal charges, similar to how political resentments of a judge likely would not make it into court record. That does leave one wondering though, just how much of what the man was charged with was actually as true as some would make it out to be.
That also leaves Johnson's scholarship not completely failing him on that point perhaps, though less than inclusive enough which perhaps he could be faulted for, but if the school incident was truly part of the bigger picture (it was, wasn't it) then other writers who fail to mention that could be faulted in part for that one "failure", themselves.
Johnson did not there write that the execution was by the Spanish Inquisition per se, but was a "Spanish execution for heresy".
That also may come across as misleading to a casual reader, yet is still technically correct.
Even when limited to being conducted by local level secular authority shows that they viewed it as their own prerogative, and in that sense regardless of having less than fully "legal" standing to do so, was in the end result much as continuation in spirit of previous Inquisition.
They did, and they didn't, with the Inquisitors playing papal office off against various Spanish kings.
When Church authority would make complaint, the Inquisitors would often in reply include response along lines "but we are acting under authority of the king" while of course reminding that they were ridding the world and the church of heretics "dangerous" to both Church & State.
When Spanish kings would complain, the Inquisitors would use the same basic process but tell the king they were acting under authority of the Church, according to Llorente, whom I do not believe anyone has cause to doubt on this particular point.
The trouble was they (the Inquisitors) were right.
But only partially, technically correct, yet enough to get away with it, with political considerations looming in the background promising trouble had either King or Church put their foot down and made an end of the entire ordeal. [funny how that reminds me of someone in the here and now world, that guy plays both ends against the middle near constantly, whenever pressed/in a jam/caught with hand in cookie jar. perhaps he is a blood descendent, or simply one in spirit]
If Paul Johnson was present on this forum he could say that he was still right in what he said, in every word regardless of what you had to add (he could add comment that what you said "didn't matter" if he wanted to be a jerk about it) and be just as fully justified (if not more) by the very same tokens of "technically correct" or "right" in his words, as you rely upon to do that same --- minus -- the skipping over/denying but producing no basis for the denial of the applicability of information provided which is inconvenient to the perpetual contention that you are never wrong, etc.
Place mark
Part of what makes it sound like Jesus might be dissing his mother is the fact that he refers to her as "woman." We don't talk to women like that today--not if we respect them, and certainly not our own mothers. But the connotations--of respect, disrespect, or other things--that a word has in a given language are quite subtle, and we can't impose the connotations that a word has in our own language on another. Consider: Suppose, in English, we replaced "woman" with a term that means basically the same thing but with better connotations. For example, the word "lady" or "ma'am." Suddenly what Jesus says sounds a lot more respectful. In British circles, "lady" has distinctly noble overtones (it's the female counterpart to the noble honorific "lord"). And even in demotic America, a son can say, "Yes, ma'am" to his mother and mean it entirely respectfully. -Jimmy Akin
“The inquisition began in the late 4th century, right after the council of Lao DiCea authorized it.”
No, that’s completely false as recognized by every reputable historian whether Catholic, Protestant or Jewish. Also, no council by the name Lao DiCea ever happened. Perhaps you mean Laodicea. The fact that you didn’t even spell the council’s name correctly doesn’t bode well in regard to your knowledge about what did or did not happen there.
“The persecution of all who kept the Sabbath, which was all that followed Yeshua, plus every Jew in southern Europe.”
Oh, there we go - the quasi-Seventh Day Adventist cat is out of the bag. Canons at Laodicea against Judaizing among Christians in no way imply an inquisition. There was no inquisition until the 13th century.
“This was the biggest holocaust the world has ever known.”
That’s completely false. Chinese communists killed 60 million people. The Nazis and Soviets killed tens of millions. All executions by the state after all known inquisition trials amount to no more than 15,000 spread over several nations and several centuries (really the 13th to the 18th). All reputable historians of the Spanish Inquisition, for instance, admit that no more than 3000 to 5000 people died during the Spanish Inquisition’s more 350 year existence.
If you examine the records of the SI - and historians (most notably Gustav Henningsen and Jaime Contreras) have - you see that between 1560 and 1700 there were 49,092 judgments, and only 1.9 percent of those people were executed. That’s less than 1,000 people over 140 years. That’s about 7 people a year. It should be remembered that some of those executed were murderers.
Facts are stubborn things.
Your post changes nothing I said. Everything I said was true and accurate.
I beg to differ. One of the earliest known examples of my surname is found in the Templar Inquisition of 1185.
“Yipes! Ugly! Disrespect?”
Not a surprise though is it? :)
There's none left, bb.
Good point.
If the best you can do to win converts is make the other person look worse than yourself, then you have nothing to stand on.
If Catholicism were all that Catholics make it out to be, it would stand on its own merit and there would never need to be even a mention of Luther, Calvin, whoever. Catholicism would win on its own.
And it doesn’t.
We cannot identify with the suffering of God because not only is God beyond our comprehension, but the depths of what He suffered is as well.
I CAN empathize with others' suffering because I myself have suffered, as has everyone else on this planet.
That is one reason why Catholicism is referred to as a more complete faith, because we remember his birth, his life as a child and adult (that which we know), and his death and his rising.
Baloney.
Faith is faith and I don't think that there's a believer around who is any less familiar with Jesus' life and death than any catechized Catholic.
Y'all are not as special as y'all think you are. That's spiritual pride and right there knocks out any claims of spiritual superiority.
“I beg to differ. One of the earliest known examples of my surname is found in the Templar Inquisition of 1185.”
RegCountry, you’re confusing an inquest with an inquisition. And remember the famous (or infamous) legal process against the Templars that saw some of them executed was not started until 1307. Thus, you are off by 122 years. But that’s not all...
The inquest of 1185 was ordered by the Grand Master of the Templars and was essentially an accounting of their property. It was an inventory of the Templars’ English property. You can buy the resulting report in English: http://www.amazon.com/Knights-templar-inquest-1185-translation-ebook/dp/B00K1IIYB8
Next time it might be best not to “beg to differ”.
“There’s none left, bb.”
You don’t think boatbums has any credibility? It must be because if you were speaking about me in an active thread of course you would have had the courtesy to actually include me in the recipients, right?
I’m sorry but it is recorded as an inquisition. That is the word. You’ve stated that this did not begin until the 13th c., when quite obviously there was one in the 12th.
Annoying, isn’t it, this picayune verbal hair-splitting? Hopefully your being on the receiving end will moderate such behavior.
“And it doesn’t.”
Actually it does. I’ve seen it happen again and again. It doesn’t happen when there are anti-Catholics muddying the waters with lies, distortions, misrepresentation, false evidence, throwing in the kitchen sink, etc.
Last year I met a young man whose father was Lutheran and his mother Catholic (at least in her background). I don’t believe the mother was a practicing Catholic. The young man was raised a Lutheran. Growing up he never gave a second thought to the Catholic faith. When he started investigating the Catholic faith he did it on his own. His family wasn’t thrilled with it but they were not strongly anti-Catholic. His wife was a committed Baptist. He’s Catholic now and she’s considering becoming Catholic. She attended a Catholic Bible study class and was blown away because she learned things she never knew. When people are open minded they respond to the Catholic 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.