Posted on 12/26/2022 11:06:13 AM PST by ebb tide
The Vatican is losing the world's largest Catholic country, and Marxist-sexualist liberation theology is no more successful than Marxist-political liberation theology, writes CatholicHerald.co.uk (December 12)
• At the current rate, Catholics will make up less than 50% of all Brazilians by July 2023.
• Nearly one in five Latin Americans now describe themselves as Protestant Pentecostals.
• Until the failed Vatican II, at least 90% of Latin America was Catholic.
• One reason for this fiasco is "liberation theology", which put politics above religion.
• Most Catholics left the secularised Council Church because they were looking for religion, not for politics.
• The Vatican II Church is currently repeating the mistake of Marxist-political liberation theology with Marxist-sexualist liberation theology.
Such as faith without works is dead?
And this was the letter that your brother in rebellion Mad Marty called an “epistle of straw”.
That says a lot about the man.
Nope, that is the earliest documentation and it refers back to the time of the apostles.
You do know that the first 3 centuries of the church were times of persecution, correct?
And just because it isn’t directly in the Bible doesn’t mean it’s not a teaching, right? Even the Bible says that not everything Jesus taught was written down nor could be written down. This is why we have sacred traditional and the magisterium.
Sola Scriptura is just protestant tradition.
—> Nope, that is the earliest documentation and it refers back to the time of the apostles.
Prove it was ever taught by an Apostle.
Prove it was taught before 100 ad when the Apostles were alive.
—> And just because it isn’t directly in the Bible doesn’t mean it’s not a teaching, right?
If you can’t provide a chapter and verse, it’s made up.
—> Such as faith without works is dead?
You said James 2 addressed your claim that there was no salvation outside the church.
Another fail.
That’s what I thought when I was a Catholic, so many decades ago. 😁😆🤪 I don’t now. I was never a Shiite. 👍🤣😃
Judgment has a much broader meaning, though, besides just determining with authority that someone deserves punishment and rendering it to them.
We *judge* situations and things and things about people all day long. And then we often act on these imperfect judgments of ours.
But God has the final say about everything always, and so nothing can and does happen that for some reason or reasons doesn’t fit into His ultimate plan somehow, if we could understand it now.
So the gradually and then suddenly modernizing world (what the Book of Daniel describes as knowledge shall increase and people shall run to and fro) is part of that plan. Here we are conversing through computers and the internet. There’s good and bad about the modernizing, but basically it ultimately builds the power of the Beast system and leads to the return of Christ: end of the age, the Last Judgment, and a new Heaven and a new Earth.
What do you believe about the Book of Revelation?
I wasn’t a Shiite Roman either bro...
But is someone is going to refer to a passage of Scripture, it ought to at least say what they claim...
So are you just a plain ol' Shiite?
—> So are you just a plain ol’ Shiite?
No I’m a former Roman, saved by grace, apart from works, to the sole glory of Him alone. But for which I’m eternally grateful.
And you ebb? Have you turned to Him alone, apart from your works and rituals and medals and scapulas??
Or are you still unsaved and unrepentant?
It isn't I who has apostatized from the One, True Church founded by Jesus Christ.
It is indeed true that outside the one true church (OTC) there is no salvation, since the only one true church is the mystical body of Christ which the Spirit baptizes one into (1 Co. 12:13) upon regeneration by heart-purifying faith, (Acts 10:43-47; 15:7-9) and to which Christ is married, (Ephesians 5:30-32) for it alone only and always consists only of true believers, while the organic fellowships which believers are normally part of end up being admixtures of wheat and chaff.
And it is actually more true that inside liberal Protestant churches churches there is no salvation, as well as Rome, for as often showed you, distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels).
As for RC Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, for a faithful RC, assurance that Rome is uniquely the OTC is to rest not upon the weight of Scriptural substantiation (indeed, it is even imaginatively held in RC apologetics that one must have faith in Rome to even know what Scripture consists of), but upon the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial veracity as per Rome (and basically in primary cults). Meaning that since has asserted that she alone is the OTC, so that must be true, if she does say so herself.
For Rome has presumed to infallibly declare she is and will be perpetually infallible whenever she speaks in accordance with her infallibly defined (scope and subject-based) formula, which renders her declaration that she is infallible, to be infallible, as well as all else she accordingly declares, and presumes protection from at least salvific error in non-infallible magisterial teaching.
Which means that Tradition, History and Scripture only authoritatively consists of and means what she decrees. As no less the highly esteemed Dr. Henry Edward Cardinal Manning declared,
“It was the charge of the Reformers that the Catholic doctrines were not primitive, and their pretension was to revert to antiquity. But the appeal to antiquity is both a treason and a heresy. It is a treason because it rejects the Divine voice of the Church at this hour, and a heresy because it denies that voice to be Divine” "The only Divine evidence to us of what was primitive is the witness and voice of the Church at this hour." (Dr. Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, Lord Archbishop of Westminster, “The Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost: Or Reason and Revelation, pp. 227-228)
Meanwhile,, in its strongest assertions EENS makes salvation doubtful even for her EO (with whom Rome still has substantial disagreements even after 1,000 years) cousins, while TradCaths (who selectively reject V2 and the Bergoglio papacy) and modern RCs - both of whom reject certain historical papal teaching on submission.
Know history, cease to be protestant.
Quite the opposite, except when "history" means some uninspired writings of post-apostolic men are held as made interpretive of what the NT church believed, for they were certainly not RC, or EO, whose distinctive teachings are not those of the NT.
And just because it isn’t directly in the Bible doesn’t mean it’s not a teaching, right? Even the Bible says that not everything Jesus taught was written down nor could be written down.
That latter statement is actually true, but the first statement is incomplete, as it should read " just because it isn’t directly or otherwise manifest in the Bible means it cannot be a doctrine. For instance, when the Spirit inspired the writing of over 200 prayers by believers, but zero addressed to anyone else but God, and instruction on who to address is to Him, then it cannot be taught that this is what Biblical believers did, and what the NT church taught, regardless of the egregious attempts by extrapolation to do justify it. .
And while men such as the apostles could speak as wholly inspired of God and also provide new public revelation thereby (in conflation with what had been written), neither popes and councils claim to do so, or can. Thus the written word is the assured infallible word of God.
This is why we have sacred traditional and the magisterium.
Rather, you have sacred traditional and the magisterium for the same reason Orthodox Jews must, which is because they must make Scripture subject to their handling of it in order to justify their own erroneous disbeliefs\.
Sola Scriptura is just protestant tradition.
Wrong once again, except as regards the RC strawman of SS as well as some shallow consideration of it, as it is your necessary alternative that is simply untenable in the light of Scripture and history. See 14 questions as regards sola scriptura versus sola ecclesia, from me, by the grace of God.
God manifestly made writing His most-reliable means of authoritative preservation. (Exodus 17:14; 34:1,27; Deuteronomy 10:4; 17:18; 27:3,8; 31:24; Joshua 1:8; 2 Chronicles 34:15,18-19, 30-31; Psalm 19:7-11; 119; Isaiah 30:8; Jeremiah 30:2; Matthew 4:5-7; 22:29; Luke 24:44,45; John 5:46,47; John 20:31; Acts 17:2,11; 18:28; Revelation 1:1; 20:12, 15;
And thus as abundantly evidenced , as written, Scripture became the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God. Thus the veracity of even apostolic oral preaching could be subject to testing by Scripture, (Acts 17:11) and not vice versa.
And rather than an infallible magisterium being required to for writings to be established as being from God, a body of authoritative wholly inspired writings had been manifestly established by the time of Christ, as being "Scripture, ("in all the Scriptures") "even the tripartite canon of the Law, the Prophets and The Writings, by which the Lord Jesus established His messiahship and ministry and opened the minds of the disciples to, who did the same . (Luke 24:27.44,45; Acts 17:2; 18:28, etc.)
However, no more really needs to be said since you have been reproved abundantly already, by the grace of God.:
To: To Texas_Guy
75 of 116 70 of 116 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3846989/posts?page=68#68
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3846989/posts?page=67#67
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3868037/posts?page=23#23
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3867413/posts?page=78#78
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3870363/posts?page=50#50
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3870363/posts?page=49#49
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3870363/posts?page=48#48
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3870363/posts?page=47#47
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3870363/posts?page=60#60
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3872796/posts?page=46#46
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3873326/posts?page=97#97
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3873326/posts?page=93#93
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3873326/posts?page=92#92
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3872796/posts?page=506#506
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3877970/posts?page=138#138
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4011052/posts?page=89#89
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4011052/posts?page=88#88
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4011052/posts?page=87#87
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4011052/posts?page=86#86
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4044225/posts?page=29#29
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4064985/posts?page=35#35
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4074989/posts?page=22#22
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4074989/posts?page=24#24
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4099941/posts?page=70#70
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4102860/posts?page=142#142
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4074989/posts?page=24#24
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4099941/posts?page=70#70
Same here bro. No more syncretic paganism for me. 😁😀😊🤪😆🤗 Do you like my emojis? 🤪👍
They add lots of punch! And color!
Some people have hard hearts or closed minds or both
I find it hard to believe that you are still resorting to ignorant and refuted arguments.
Actually, Luther said a lot in opinionated hyperbole, and see here on Luther's "Epistle of Straw" Comment and here on Luther on the Book of James...Revisted. And what Luther also said includes:
faith is a living and an essential thing, which makes a new creature of man, changes his spirit... Faith cannot help doing good works constantly... if faith be true, it will break forth and bear fruit... where there is no faith there also can be no good works; and conversely, that there is no faith.. where there are no good works. Therefore faith and good works should be so closely joined together that the essence of the entire Christian life consists in both. if obedience and God's commandments do not dominate you, then the work is not right, but damnable, surely the devil's own doings, although it were even so great a work as to raise the dead... if you continue in pride and lewdness, in greed and anger, and yet talk much of faith, St. Paul will come and say, 1 Cor. 4:20, look here my dear Sir, "the kingdom of God is not in word but in power." It requires life and action, and is not brought about by mere talk. Works are necessary for salvation, but they do not cause salvation... “This is why St. Luke and St. James have so much to say about works, so that one says: Yes, I will now believe, and then he goes and fabricates for himself a fictitious delusion, which hovers only on the lips as the foam on the water. No, no; faith is a living and an essential thing, which makes a new creature of man, changes his spirit and wholly and completely converts him. It goes to the foundation and there accomplishes a renewal of the entire man; so, if I have previously seen a sinner, I now see in his changed conduct, manner and life, that he believes. So high and great a thing is faith.”[Sermons of Martin Luther 2.2:341]... faith casts itself on God, and breaks forth and becomes certain through its works... faith must be exercised, worked and polished; be purified by fire... it is impossible for him who believes in Christ, as a just Savior, not to love and to do good. If, however, he does not do good nor love, it is sure that faith is not present... where the works are absent, there is also no Christ... References and more by God's grace. http://peacebyjesus.net/Reformation_faith_works.html
Moreover, scholarly disagreements over the canonicity (proper) of certain books continued down through the centuries and right into Trent, until it provided the first "infallible," indisputable canon in 1546. RC scholars also while a general consensus was confirmed earlier, the , and contrary to "Catholic Answers" propaganda, scholarly disagreements over the canonicity (proper) of certain books continued down through the centuries and right into Trent, until it provided the first "infallible," indisputable canon in 1546. Thus there was no "infallible" canon of Scripture for RCs until after the death of Luther, and contrary to "Catholic Answers" propaganda, Who, as with other scholars, had freedom to question the canonical status of certain books, and which was not a charge against him. Read here.
In Historia ecclesiae 2.23.25, Eusebius classes James among the Antilegomena or disputed works, stating "it is to be observed that it is disputed; at least, not many of the ancients have mentioned it, as is the case likewise with the epistle that bears the name of Jude, which is also one of the seven so-called catholic epistles. Nevertheless we know that these also, with the rest, have been read publicly in very many churches." (Historia ecclessiae 3.23.25)
Actually what is bad is that you have precisely zero support for applying the title "saint" only to a select few believers, much less all those Rome has. Would you like a list of all who are called "saint" in the NT epistles? But there are some who are more saintly, while some whom Rome sainted were not.
But most who come to the US, RC or Prot, vote liberal.
Roger that. 👍😆🤪🤗😀😃🎿⛷️😅👍😊🤣😄☺️🙃🥹❄️🐀👎😞🎄🎁🫥
You do like exposing the warts.
422 'But when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.'1 This is 'the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God':'2 God has visited his people. He has fulfilled the promise he made to Abraham and his descendants. He acted far beyond all expectation - he has sent his own 'beloved Son'.3
423 We believe and confess that Jesus of Nazareth, born a Jew of a daughter of Israel at Bethlehem at the time of King Herod the Great and the emperor Caesar Augustus, a carpenter by trade, who died crucified in Jerusalem under the procurator Pontius Pilate during the reign of the emperor Tiberius, is the eternal Son of God made man. He 'came from God',4 'descended from heaven',5 and 'came in the flesh'.6 For 'the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father. . . And from his fullness have we all received, grace upon grace.'7
424 Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.'8 On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church.9
"To preach. . . the unsearchable riches of Christ"10
425 The transmission of the Christian faith consists primarily in proclaiming Jesus Christ in order to lead others to faith in him. From the beginning, the first disciples burned with the desire to proclaim Christ: "We cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard."'11 It And they invite people of every era to enter into the joy of their communion with Christ:
At the heart of catechesis: Christ
426 "At the heart of catechesis we find, in essence, a Person, the Person of Jesus of Nazareth, the only Son from the Father. . .who suffered and died for us and who now, after rising, is living with us forever."13 To catechize is "to reveal in the Person of Christ the whole of God's eternal design reaching fulfillment in that Person. It is to seek to understand the meaning of Christ's actions and words and of the signs worked by him."'14 Catechesis aims at putting "people . . . in communion . . . with Jesus Christ: only he can lead us to the love of the Father in the Spirit and make us share in the life of the Holy Trinity."15
427 In catechesis "Christ, the Incarnate Word and Son of God,. . . is taught - everything else is taught with reference to him - and it is Christ alone who teaches - anyone else teaches to the extent that he is Christ's spokesman, enabling Christ to teach with his lips. . . Every catechist should be able to apply to himself the mysterious words of Jesus: 'My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me.'"16
428 Whoever is called "to teach Christ" must first seek "the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus"; he must suffer "the loss of all things. . ." in order to "gain Christ and be found in him", and "to know him and the power of his resurrection, and [to] share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, that if possible [he] may attain the resurrection from the dead".17
429 From this loving knowledge of Christ springs the desire to proclaim him, to "evangelize", and to lead others to the "yes" of faith in Jesus Christ. But at the same time the need to know this faith better makes itself felt. To this end, following the order of the Creed, Jesus' principal titles - "Christ", "Son of God", and "Lord" (article 2) - will be presented. The Creed next confesses the chief mysteries of his life - those of his Incarnation (article 3), Paschal mystery (articles 4 and 5) and glorification (articles 6 and 7).
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.