Posted on 07/17/2017 8:08:32 AM PDT by ebb tide
“Francis is more interested in leftwing politics than in Catholic theology”, George Neumayr, contributing editor of The American Spectator, states talking to Tom Woods on July 14th on tomwoods.com. Woods describes Francis as a result of John Paul II who - as he puts it - appointed "absolutely terrible people" as bishops: "Catholics have suffered under Bergoglios for decades now”.
Neumayr agrees that a lot of the liberal bishops were appointed by John Paul II and Benedict XVI. He sees Francis as the “culmination of a century” of liberalism and modernism in the Church.
For him it is "highly unlikely" that Francis, who in his theology is “more a Protestant than a Catholic” will convert to Catholicism. Instead, the realistic scenario is that Francis will produce division and chaos, "Catholics will have to decide whether they guard the faith over papolatry.”
And: “The Cardinals have to declare that Francis is a bad pope who must be resisted.”
+1
You originally wrote: “Read the history of the Didache and you learn it was altered more than once to reflect Romanism of a much, much later age.”
It started as a Jewish document, and was changed by early Christians (1st or 2nd century, according to historians) to reflect the teaching Christ handed to the Apostles. The fact that it reflects “Romanism,” as you put it (rather rudely, I might add), is an indication that the early Church was Catholic, which is why I brought it up in the first place.
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. (Hebrews 11:1)
Therefore we are always confident, although we know that while we are at home in the body, we are away from the Lord. For we walk by faith, not by sight. (II Cor. 5:6,7)
“The fact that it reflects “Romanism,” as you put it (rather rudely, I might add), is an indication that the early Church was Catholic, which is why I brought it up in the first place.”
My comment was factual and any rudeness is simply your perception. Romanism is the amalgamation of Christianity and the pagan customs, practices and beliefs it incorporated.
In regards to the didache, we do not know how many times it was changed nor do we know what centuries the changes were made. All we know is we have a copy from the 400s ad - more than 300 years after Christ.
As such, it does not represent the early church nor is there any certainty it represents the teaching of an Apostle.
Best.
You are correct sir. I am amazed at how long I accepted false Catholic doctrines, without questioning it. I strongly disagree with the Catholic plan of salvation, which is another gospel. I am just not into false religions. 😀😆🙃😄
8For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves,
it is the gift of God;
9not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Ephesians 2:8-9 NASB
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 6:23)
I am in the Philippines. There are "lavish displays of Mary" in about half the houses around here. Roadside vendors are selling Mary grottos all the time.
Most Filipinos are Catholic on the surface, but below the surface, are animists. They worship spirits, and are generally very superstitious, but Mary grottos are numerous.
Post of the day sir. 🙃 I have a feeling, most false religions, are just money making organizations.
It’s really quite simple, isn’t it? Forest, meet trees.
It’s even weirder when they rail about assurance of salvation EXCEPT when it’s MARY promising it.
I guess when Jesus says it, it doesn’t carry the weight as when MARY says it.
Now you've just made it works based salvation.
Someone is saved as long as they toe the line.
That is NOT salvation by grace through faith.
We don't work to get saved and we don't work to stay saved.
Not all sin is willful sin. There are unintentional sins as well.
But regardless, choosing to sin is not by default choosing to give you your salvation.
Even turning out back on God does not remove us from His family. The Prodigal Son was still the son and welcomed home as a son, even though he didn't have any inheritance cause he blew it. The father never disowned him.
You beat me to it!
Jesus says it...the Catholic may believe it.
Mary says it...take it to the bank.
So it seems to me? This is your response after asserting that needing to go thru Mary is "One of the most false statements I have ever read on FR...educate yourself on Catholicism before making more false statements,? and then being shown the manner of Catholic devotion such as teaches that "we obtain everything through Mary," "Sinners receive pardon by the intercession of Mary alone," "no one approaches Christ but through Mary His Mother." (http://www.catholictradition.org/Mary/mary18a.htm)
Do you really think dismissing such as merely "seeming" to say one needs to come to Christ thru Mary is going to be taken seriously?
I will point out blatant fallacies/falsehoods when I see them & feel it’s appropriate to do so as I have done in this thread.
Which you have failed to do, unless you will censor the uncensored devotion of revered "saints."
If you don’t agree with Catholicism then stay away from Catholicism. It’s that simple, IMO.
No. By the grace of God we do not intend to sit just here and let Catholics incessantly advertise and promote their elitist church which denigrates all others without exposing her. It’s that simple, IMO.
For the answer to any other questions or observations you might have, I refer you to post #372.
That is not going to work either, for to I believe in one, holy, catholic, with a capital "C", and apostolic Church is to believe what she professes and sanctions, which quite obviously includes such attributions and adulation of Mary by popes, prelates and "saints" as were described.
.
>> “Now you’ve just made it works based salvation.” <<
Nonsense!
He explained our Obedience based salvation.
The word does not offer “salvation by grace through faith.”
It offers salvation by faith, which is the gift of Yehova’s grace.
Grace brings opportunity, but it cannot bring salvation without continuing faith.
.
.
Mary had no part in anyone’s salvation but her own, through obedience.
.
.
>> “Find me any early Christian writer who holds all or at least most of the Protestant distinctives.
Name what you consider these “distinctives” to be.
.
“It’s even weirder when they rail about assurance of salvation EXCEPT when it’s MARY promising it.”
Ironic, eh?
And even that is based on works, like saying the rosary and wearing the brown recluse - oops, brown scapula. Sorry I get instruments that bring death mixed up...
“Grace brings opportunity, but it cannot bring salvation without continuing faith.”
But then you said you belong to a non-Christian religion and follow Michael Rood, the former Way cultist... so not a reliable source of truth.
Says the guy who follows a wannabe rabbi who thinks he has credibility because he plays dress up and dresses like what he thinks an OT rabbi dresses like.
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.