Free Republic

Regardless of whatever else Jolie may or may not be, I think she’s well established as a liberal Hollywood tumour. Seems rather odd that a long-time Freeper would play white knight for such a creature.

Rest in peace. FR has lost a legend.

Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine,
et lux perpetua luceat eis.
Requiéscant in pace.

“You have heard that it was said to them of old: Thou shalt not kill. And whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment. ...But I say to you, that whosoever is angry with his brother, shall be in danger of the judgment. And whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council. And whosoever shall say, Thou Fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.”

“Shut up and let others do the talking, lest you be guilty of the lies you casually spew.”

That sort of language hardly seems to befit a Catholic thread. While this is certainly a controversial topic, I think we would benefit from more Christ-like interactions in our discussions.

To the contrary, faith is more succinctly defined as obedience. Believing what Christ instructs us to believe in the New Covenant. Obeying the strictures He laid down for us to follow. He ordered us to eschew sin and peform good works. The faithful heed His instruction.

John 3:36 “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever disobeys the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains upon him.”

One-time acceptance of Christ isn’t faith. You don’t go on autopilot doing nothing but good works for the rest of your life after accepting Christ.You must accept Him anew everyday with your obedience. It’s not mere expression of belief in God or Jesus-—it’s acceptance of the life God wishes you to lead. Never forget that Satan believes in the existence of God, knows firsthand the truth of Christ’s words. And yet he is faithless. Obedience are not merely the byproduct of faith. it is integral to it. If you have no obedience, you have no faith.

What is faith? Faith is upholding your end of God’s Covenant. It’s not mouthing the words “I accept Jesus as my personal Lord and Savior!” Faith is accepting it in thought, word, and deed. Remember that not everyone who says “Lord, Lord!” will enter the kingdom of God. There’s a wealth of meaning in that verse.

They don’t need to. The whole concept of a “dubia” is, literally, casting “doubt” on the orthodoxy of a teaching or policy. For Cardinals to cast doubt on some policy or pronouncement of the Pope is to imply that he has said or done something that they doubt is in accordance with the Deposit of Faith.

Actions speak louder than words. When was the last time a Pope has been challenged in this manner?

Whatever they’re trying to “convey”, it clearly isn’t in support of his heretical policies. They are making a stand against him. You’d have to be blind to take this any other way.

“If a Moabitess converts to Judaism can she be the grandmother of a King of Israel and have the Messiah as her descendant ?”

Sure. But conversion to Judaism didn’t grant her a personal claim to the Holy Land. She was a stranger who married into the royal family of the Biblical chosen people. She herself was a foreigner with no special heritage or ancestral membership to the chosen people. And that by no means demonstrates that a person who converted to Judaism after the coming of Christ shares in God’s Old Covenant promise to Abraham.

"I don't think there is a legal basis for a strictly genetic claim on land tenure. The argument has been more along the lines of ethnicity or "sense of nationhood," more broadly defined."

But if we're talking about the "people of Israel" as a coherent group, then what exactly are we talking about here if not genetics and ethnic background? It seems to me that this "sense of nationhood" you're talking about is so broadly defined that people who may be of completely non-Semitic background may now be considered Semites. If a German converts to Judaism, does he now have a claim to the Holy Land? What made the descendants of Abraham so special if not their heritage?

Are you kidding me? Are you aware that the Communist Party of China maintains an alternate Catholic church? And you seriously think that they'd have no interest in subverting the real thing? Likewise, the whole practice of receiving Communion in the hand was the product of disobedience to JP II's authority.

http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/03/truth-about-communion-in-hand-while.html#.V-MmGfArLIU

The whole concept of the "lay minister" is very much a novelty, and more to the point it turns the proper order of the mass on its head. In many churches we're left with the congregation's proletariat usurping the role traditionally reserved for the ordained.

As if it were a different religion. Oh wait...

Or how about an emergent movement within the Church that emphasizes novelties? Well, for all its profound theological faults at least V2 didn't jump ship entirely.

So you both judge that we aren’t in the Church. It’s interesting how it’s easy for you to come to that conclusion but not to the conclusion that Francis is not in the Church ....when we actually profess the Catholic Faith and he does not.

His errors are myriad, but the sedevancantists make one specific error that separates them from Rome. That is the fundamental difference. It's not that sedevacantists make more theological errors than the Pope---it's that they make one particular error that on its own severs ties with the line of Peter.

Well if one parses words, then sure it can all sound personal. The complete sentence was “if you do XYZ, then you have no credibility”. In addition, I said one “appears to be” which is not the same thing as saying one “is”.

If we want to talk about parsing words...saying that "Blather doing what he does means he has no credibility" is not really a tremendous improvement on simply saying "Blather has no crediblity." xD

Of course when others tend to make things personal it does make it even harder for the receiving poster to remain objective in his/her posts. Perhaps if others would refrain from judging fellow Catholics as non-Catholic or not remaining on the Ark given the unprecedented Crisis in the Church these days, it would help the overall productivity and tenor of the discussion.

Well, from the perspective of both me and Blathernaut, sedevacantists are NOT in the Church, as they reject the legitimacy of validly elected Popes. It would be rather disingenuous for us to pretend that we thought the circumstances were otherwise.

Pardon me for observing, Pius, but how in the world are statements like “you have no credibility” and “you appear to be a dogmatic sedeplenist” NOT personal?

That DID hit a nerve now, didn’t it. Try to learn the Catholic Faith and stop being cult groupies.

Those who live in glass houses...

How ironic that members of one of the smaller breakaway factions have taken to referring to the Church as a "cult." :)

They either have to put up, or shut up. His quote clearly labels the heretical Vatica-2 as infallible and of God. So the R & R crowd has three choices: They must either accept Montini’s decree & V-2 and become heretics themselves in that manner. OR Continue this Resist the ‘true’ [sic] V-2 magisterium and ‘true’[sic] pope and become heretics and schismatics from what they THINK is the Church and the pope. OR Come to the CATHOLIC conclusion that both were of Satan and Montini and the rest of the post-1958 lot who also participated or affirmed V-2 were formal heretics thus not Catholic thus not the pope.

Actually, the TRUE CATHOLIC conclusion would be to venerate that schmuck Pope Michael of Oklahoma City---he's the TRUE PONTIFF, as decided by a Papal conclave of six sedevacantists including himself and his parents. That's about as logical as the sedevacantists' "true Catholic conclusion," which calls for the invalidation of a legitimately elected Pope by a tiny self-appointed tribunal.

The whole idea was to destroy, not the institution of the Church, but rather the Faith of the people, and even use the institution of the Church, if possible, to destroy the Faith through the promotion of a pseudo-religion: something that resembled Catholicism but was not the real thing.

Which, of course, is exactly what happened in China. The Roman Catholic Church is illegal per order of the Communist Party, and in its place they have erected a false church called the "Patriotic Catholic Association" which mimics our faith, but in reality is a puppet of the atheist Communist Party. They weren't content simply to purge Catholicism---they wanted, as your quote said, to create a literal pseudo-religion to take its place.