Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Archbshp Sheen's Prophetic warning of 50 years ago: Mary and the Moslems; The Significance of Fatima
The Mindzenty Report, published by the Cardinal Mindzenty Foundation ^ | 11/1/01 | Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen

Posted on 11/02/2001 5:42:58 AM PST by Brian Kopp DPM

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-186 last
To: proud2bRC; Jerry_M; RnMomof7
But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
If possible, they would even seduce the elect. The Father, who has called us, will together with Christ and the Holy Spirit preserve us. No one will snatch us from His hands. We shall perservere against all.
151 posted on 11/03/2001 10:24:49 AM PST by CCWoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody
If possible, they would even seduce the elect. The Father, who has called us, will together with Christ and the Holy Spirit preserve us. No one will snatch us from His hands. We shall perservere against all.

UMMMMMMMMMM LOL Lurking are ya? *grin* God bless ya Woody !

152 posted on 11/03/2001 10:29:13 AM PST by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: patent
Please put me on your ping list - TIA
153 posted on 11/03/2001 10:42:09 AM PST by smorgle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: mitch5501; Marysecretary
.The church itself is not the truth,it is that which should HOLD UP THE TRUTH for all to see.

Well, the Church propagates doctrinal truths; wrote, preserved and canonized Scripture; and interprets Scripture infallibly, so your interpretation could be valid.

But how would this conform with the passage where Jesus tells us to take our disputes "to the church"? And if someone refuses to listen to the church, we should treat him as a "publican"? Why would He not send Christians to "the Church" to settle disputes if, in some sense, it were not the Truth? After all, he could have told us to take our disagreements to Scripture.

In fact, at least insasmuch as the Church is the mystical Body of Christ, It is the Truth.

154 posted on 11/03/2001 11:25:49 AM PST by Aquinasfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: proud2bRC
Bishop Sheen had a weekly primetime (network) TV show in the 50s. Everyone listened/watched. He was quite an orator.

After JFK was shot, Sheen wrote a book called "The Power of Love" in response. The idea for the book came from George Levy, a smart magazine publisher and good Jew, who contacted Sheen with the title, and Sheen took it from there. Very successful publication. My, how times have changed.

155 posted on 11/03/2001 11:36:32 AM PST by PoisedWoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud2bRC
So we are among the very few that understand this as at least partly a religious war. My guess is that BinLadin is also unhappy with the Pope's reception by and cooperation with the Moslems. They like the guy, and the SecState works with them intensely at the UN.

Ol' Binny doesn't cotton to that. There are some signs that 'mainstream' Muslim clerics disapprove of Binny's war...perhaps this will be the beginning of a split.

Interesing.

156 posted on 11/03/2001 12:01:48 PM PST by ninenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Prodigal Daughter
There is also Therevada and Mayana Buddhism,just like Christianity much is now polluted by the almighty dollar,yes temples in Thailand are currently selling indulgences plus indulging in all the great Crucifiction commercial sale marketing tricks.

The original scriptures,however, some 2600 years on are only now starting to be proved in the world of physics,quantum physics,chaos theory etc,as for sodomy the history of the Talibans inception(to resolve a dispute over little boys)and their treatment of women would seem to indicate homo-erotica Nambla style is quite prevalent,also the Christian church gets to blush on this issue ;as for playing with ones privates and karma sutra stuff Buddhists can't hold a candle to certain Taoist sects.

Whilst the Dalai Llama might be a nice chap he is also,by necessity a political animal he can't very well come out with scathing attacks on China as there are a lot of Tibetan Buddhists still in Tibet,the correct Buddhist thought on the matter is to feel sorry for China for the balance of consequences Bad Karma or juju its accumulating for itself to manifest at some future date.

157 posted on 11/03/2001 12:05:43 PM PST by Governor StrangeReno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody
But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

Yes, and the false prophets flourished exponentially a couple hundred years ago, denying the gospel of Christ and substituting a new false gospel that suited better their lusts and vices. ("Sin heartily yet believe even more heartily" versus the words of Christ, "Go and sin no more. Repent and believe the Good News.")

158 posted on 11/03/2001 1:37:44 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
But how would this conform with the passage where Jesus tells us to take our disputes "to the church"? And if someone refuses to listen to the church, we should treat him as a "publican"? Why would He not send Christians to "the Church" to settle disputes if, in some sense, it were not the Truth? After all, he could have told us to take our disagreements to Scripture.

Do you mean to imply the Church is the "one and only" way to settle disputes?

Matthew 18:

15 "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.
16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses.
17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
18 Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
19 Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven.
20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them."

Yes, the Church is important but it is not the one and only authority.

BTW Jesus, speaking to all the disciples, gave each of them the power to "bind" and "loose".

If the dispute was sent to the Church who would hear the argument?

1 Timothy 3:

1 The saying is sure: If any one aspires to the office of bishop, he desires a noble task.
2 Now a bishop must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, dignified, hospitable, an apt teacher,
3 no drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, and no lover of money.
4 He must manage his own household well, keeping his children submissive and respectful in every way;
==================================

There would be nobody in Church qualified to hear our dispute.
159 posted on 11/03/2001 2:35:59 PM PST by OLD REGGIE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: OLD REGGIE
The passage means that a bishop cannot have more than one wife. It doesn't mean that a bishop must be married.

Whether or not priests marry has always been a matter of Church discipline, not dogma. And there are married priests in the Latin rite today, mostly converts from Anglicanism. In the eastern Catholic church priests are allowed to marry or, if they enter the priesthood single, they must remain single. Latin rite bishops are single, in imitation of the Apostles. I think the same holds true for bishops in the eastern rites.

---------------------

If Jesus tells us to take our disagreements to the church, he must be talking about a visible, discernable church. Otherwise He'd be speaking nonsense. A gathering of two or more people in Jesus' name does not constitute the church. Even the passage doesn't imply that.

160 posted on 11/03/2001 2:53:39 PM PST by Aquinasfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: proud2bRC
I have been told so many times on this forum that we Catholics worship Mary, belong to the church that represents the Whore of Babylon, listen to a Pope who is the anti-Christ, etc etc etc. Most Catholics here hold their tongue, in charity to our poor separated brethren who simply are ignorant.

In all fairness, most who say those things are ex-Catholic themselves, so you can't really call them ignorant. They simply look upon their upbringing differently than you do.

161 posted on 11/03/2001 3:07:47 PM PST by southern rock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
I was born and raised RC and still sleep with one

LOL! ME too! Of course, according to some here, the fact that we no longer place crowns of flowers on statues heads, or bless throats(I could never figure that one out), or incessantly light candles, simply means that we have lost our minds and never really "got it" to begin with. LOL!

162 posted on 11/03/2001 3:14:54 PM PST by southern rock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
. Latin rite bishops are single, in imitation of the Apostles.

Is that a fact?

1 Corinthians 9:

1 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not you my workmanship in the Lord?
2 If to others I am not an apostle, at least I am to you; for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.
3 This is my defense to those who would examine me.
4 Do we not have the right to our food and drink?
5 Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a wife, as the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?

No, Latin Rite Bishops don't imitate the Apostles, Peter, or Jesus's brothers. There must be some other reason.
163 posted on 11/03/2001 5:15:45 PM PST by OLD REGGIE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

Comment #164 Removed by Moderator

To: OLD REGGIE
No, Latin Rite Bishops don't imitate the Apostles, Peter, or Jesus's brothers

Ah, but they DO imitate Jesus.

165 posted on 11/03/2001 5:56:41 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: southern rock
most who say those things are ex-Catholic themselves, so you can't really call them ignorant

Frankly, I find former Catholics to be the most ignorant of the real teachings of Catholicism, and, as you noted, the most offensive. If they knew the faith, they would not have left it. Of course, a large percentage, a majority in my experience, are "emotional," not "intellectual" converts.

Emotional converts are the divorced & remarried, the "Father So-and-so was mean to my dad," "Sister Such-and-such hit my knuckles with a ruler," and those easily swayed by the emotionalism and feel-good-ism of the simplistic false gospels out there since 1517.

Few are truly "intellectual" converts. Few leave the Church after having honestly studied the faith, the teachings of the early Christians, and the historical interpretation of scripture. The honest intellectual conversions by and large go through a one way door, into sacramental Christianity. When you talk to the rest long enough, you find the hurt or the insult or the other emotional aspect that precipitated the conversion. You also find that by offering a resolution to that emotional trauma, you can readily bring them home to Rome.

166 posted on 11/03/2001 8:52:21 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: proud2bRC
No, Latin Rite Bishops don't imitate the Apostles, Peter, or Jesus's brothers

Ah, but they DO imitate Jesus.
------------------------------------------------------------

In the interest of accuracy, that is not the statement I responded to.

I am certain Jesus would be thrilled with the quality of the "imitation" by some of the Bishops.
167 posted on 11/04/2001 5:18:40 AM PST by OLD REGGIE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: proud2bRC
Please explain to me how else I am to respond to this BS, which is the standard response bible only Christians use when they see us Catholics discussing our faith.

...What I stated in that post is noting compared to what has been said to me personally and what has been said about my Faith on this forum.

I think the key may be that a doctrinal disagreement should not be with confused with an attack on you personally. But if you feel you are being insulted, then take it like this:

1 Peter 3:9 Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult, but with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing.

or

1 Peter 4:14
If you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you.

I've had some pretty good knock-down-drag-out doctrinal disputations with my FRiends patent, SoothingDave and Romulus, et al and they have yet to call me a terrorist. I don't say that because you called me any names, but after 9/11 the comparison of non-Roman Catholic Christians to terrorists is too raw to the memory of any "fundys" and "Bible only" Christians who no doubt perished in the planes and towers alongside some good Roman Catholics.

Cordially,

168 posted on 11/04/2001 6:01:48 AM PST by Diamond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Diamond
Diamond,

OK, my apologies. Rebuke rightfully made, and humbly accepted. I was wrong, and yes I was being uncharitable and setting a poor example for my Christian brothers and sisters here. I already apologized privately to one of my Catholic peers here for giving scandal by my anger on this thread (no better way to gut your witness and patient efforts at apologetics than to get angry and return insult with insult, as you point out), and he defended you:

My comment: "By the way, unfortunately I really lost my temper on this thread when the Jack Chick brigade showed up. I really blew it. Sorry."

His reply: Kind of got a kick out of it, actually. Diamond is pretty mellow, he isn’t a "Catholics are the antichrist type," but he wasn’t your initial target anyway.

Again, my aplogies,

proud2bRC

169 posted on 11/04/2001 9:28:44 AM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: proud2bRC
At the present time, the hatred of the Moslem countries against the West is becoming a hatred against Christianity itself.

Some would say we are waging an undeclared war against Islam, since 9/11

170 posted on 11/04/2001 10:39:08 AM PST by NotJustAnotherPrettyFace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud2bRC
Confession is good for the soul.

"Diamond is pretty mellow, he isn’t a "Catholics are the antichrist type"

If I were to call Roman Catholics the antichrist then I would have to believe that I've been sleeping with a whore of Babylon for 22 years - "Wouldn't be prudent" (hehehe)

Cordially,

171 posted on 11/05/2001 6:26:06 AM PST by Diamond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: proud2bRC
Fallen away Catholics are hard to deal with. My sister in law is a cradle Catholic, left the Church became a Lutheran, came back, left again became a Jehoviah Witness, came back again, left again and is now in a non denominational church which has lost two pastors in two months. Still she puts down my faith every chance she gets. Her church will most likely not even be there this time next month. She wants a church to fit her lifestyle, not a life style to fit her church.
172 posted on 11/05/2001 6:50:04 AM PST by kassie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: kassie
Brother-in-law's brother (is he anything to me?) took a similar path...

Stopped going to mass when he was in the Navy, got out at his wife's request and moved back to Ohio.

She wouldn't convert, and he'd kind of fallen by the wayside, so they found a little 'church in the wildwood' kind of place.

He went at it with all the fury of the convert; not only abandoning all trappings of Catholicism, but going to church three or four times a week, and eventually deciding to be a minister.

He 'studied' for three months. I can only compare this to mainline protestant sects, which, I am told, require a four year degree, and to Catholicism which requires four years of counseling and psychology studies plus four more years of theology. Needless to say, I had my doubts.

Anyway, he becomes a minister. I was unable to make the 'swearing in', but my brother-in-law gave me a general run-down. Some requisite Catholic bashing, followed by inductions, followed by some faith healing. Did you know that unemployment can be healed? Yep. So said the priestess: "Within the week, this woman will have a job."

Never did here whether that worked or not.

Unfortunately, this new minister was every bit as good a Protestant as he had been a Catholic. Last I heard, he was trying to become a fireman.

173 posted on 11/05/2001 8:17:34 AM PST by Mr. Thorne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
But which church? Roman Catholics have always believed that theirs is the one true church. I don't. That's why I stand on scripture and not on what any one church espouses to be the truth.
174 posted on 11/05/2001 8:24:00 AM PST by Marysecretary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Bellarmine
"Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger has taken public exception to a statement by Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, who caused an uproar in Italy by saying that Western culture is superior to Islam. 'One cannot speak of the superiority of one culture over another, because history has shown that a society can change from one age to another,' the cardinal remarked, speaking to the Italian daily La Repubblica.

Ratzginer always has to get a dig in to confirm our low opinion of him doesn't he? I wonder when he will renounce his obnoxious VCII-era writings about the "senselessness" of Adoring the Eucharistic Host because "God is everywhere".

175 posted on 11/05/2001 8:54:43 AM PST by Andrew Byler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary
The church that Jesus founded, of course ;-)

Here are three Scriptural passages that have to be reconciled:

1) Jesus established a Church that he said "the gates of hell would not prevail against." (Matthew 16:17-19)

2) Jesus told us to take our disagreements to "the church." Logically, this must be the Church that He established. And it must be a visible, discernable, united Church. Christ wouldn't recommend that we settle disputes in an unidentifiable church. And He wouldn't recommend that we go to one of many churches with conflicting doctrines to settle doctrinal disputes, among other disputes. (Matthew 18:15-18)

3) The Church is the "pillar and foundation of truth." This reinforces the idea that Christ would not instruct us to settle disputes in churches that cannot agree on the truth; churches with competing doctrines.(1 Timothy 3:14-16)

Now only two churches have been around since Pentacost: the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches.

176 posted on 11/05/2001 11:12:37 AM PST by Aquinasfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
That doesn't make the Catholic and Orthodoxes the only true churches as far as teachings go. That's where we part company theologically.
177 posted on 11/05/2001 11:44:52 AM PST by Marysecretary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: Governor StrangeReno
"The Tao of Physics" but no belief in God.
178 posted on 11/05/2001 6:31:10 PM PST by Prodigal Daughter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

btt


179 posted on 10/02/2004 9:43:59 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (What did Kerry know and when did he know it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

BTTT


180 posted on 10/02/2004 9:50:52 PM PDT by Fiddlstix (This Tagline for sale. (Presented by TagLines R US))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

BTTT


181 posted on 04/05/2005 8:57:40 PM PDT by _Jim (<--- Ann C. and Rush L. speak on gutless Liberals (RealAudio files))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; annalex; ...


182 posted on 07/23/2006 5:41:40 PM PDT by Coleus (RU-486 Kills babies and their mothers, Bush can stop this as Clinton allowed through executive order)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tutstar

ping


183 posted on 07/23/2006 6:09:46 PM PDT by Nightshift (Faith is something everyone has. The question is faith in what?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Mary and the Muslims (an eye opener)

184 posted on 07/23/2006 6:11:41 PM PDT by Coleus (RU-486 Kills babies and their mothers, Bush can stop this as Clinton allowed through executive order)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Kermit the Frog Does theWatusi
Bishop Sheen: "At the present time, the hatred of the Moslem countries against the West is becoming a hatred against Christianity itself. Although the statesmen have not yet taken it into account, there is still grave danger that the temporal power of Islam may return and, with it, the menace that it may shake off a West which has ceased to be Christian, and affirm itself as a great anti-Christian world power. Moslem writers say, When the locust swarms darken countries, they bear on their wings these Arabic words: We are Gods host, each of us has ninety-nine eggs, and if we had a hundred, we should lay waste the world, with all that is in it."
185 posted on 07/24/2006 12:36:07 AM PDT by HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
If Moslemism is a heresy, as Hilaire Belloc believes it to be, it is the only heresy that has never declined... The missionary effort of the Church toward this group has been at least on the surface, a failure, for the Moslems are so far almost unconvertible.

These facts (along with the violent nature of Mohammedanism) have me convinced that it was Satan that visited Mohammed, not Gabriel.

_____________________________________________________________________

I hope Bishop Sheen was right.

_____________________________________________________________________

The first person to doubt the genuineness of the Quranic “revelations” was Mohammed himself. This was at the very beginning of his career, when during his Ramadhaan retreat outside Mecca in AD 610, he had an audio-visual experience in which he both heard and saw the archangel Gabriel, calling upon him to “Recite!” (Qarâ’, whence Qur’ân). Upon receiving his first “revelation”, Mohammed thought he was going mad, or in the parlance of those days, that he was getting possessed by an evil spirit.

He didn’t want to spend the rest of his life as Mecca’s village idiot, and so, preferring death to disgrace, he decided to throw himself from a high rock: “Now none of God’s creatures was more hateful to me than an ecstatic poet or a man possessed: I could not even look at them. I thought, Woe is me poet or possessed – Never shall Quraish [i.e. his fellow tribesmen of the Quraish tribe] say this of me! I will go to the top of the mountain and throw myself down that I may kill myself and gain rest.” (Ibn Ishaq’s Sîrat Rasûl Allah, tra. Alfred Guillaume: The Life of Mohammed, OUP Karachi, p.106/153)

The history of Islam could have ended there and then, with Mohammed escaping the spell of the alleged evil spirit by jumping to his death. But the ghost himself came to the rescue, as Mohammed testified: “So I went forth to do so and then, when I was midway on the mountain, I heard a voice from heaven saying, ‘O Mohammed! Thou art the apostle of God and I am Gabriel.’” (ibid.) ...

Yet, at one point he did give in to the tempting idea of a quick way to bring the Meccans into his fold, viz. by accepting the reality and auspicious role of the three popular goddesses al-Lât, al-Uzzâ and Manât. A revelation duly arrived from heaven, saying: “Have you thought of al-Lât and al-Uzzâ and Manât, the third, the other? These are the exalted cranes whose intercession is approved.” (Ishaq/Guillaume:165/239) The Meccans were enthusiastic, prostrating along with the Muslims at the mention of the goddesses in Allah’s company, and word even spread that they had converted to Islam.

But then another revelation came down, telling Mohammed that he had been deceived by Satan, who had smuggled these goddess-revering words into the channel of the prophet’s wahi or revelatory trance, falsely making it look like a divine message like all the others Quranic verses. So Allah annulled the Satanic verses and sent down the verse: “We have not sent a prophet or apostle before you but when he longed [viz. for acceptance], Satan cast suggestions into his longing. But God will annul what Satan has suggested. The God will establish his verses, God being knowing and wise.” (Q.22:51/52; Ishaq/Guillaume:166/239) Since then, the Quran gives a corrected reading, this one properly revealed by Gabriel himself: “Have ye seen Lât, and Uzzâ, and another, the third, Manât? (….) These are nothing but names which ye have devised, ye and your fathers, for which Allah has sent down no authority.” (Q.53:19-23)

Mohammed got away with it, the indignation among a few of his followers at this lapse from orthodoxy remaining brief and inconsequential. But an objective observer cannot escape facing the question: if the prophet could be thus deceived by Satan, how could he know on all the other occasions that he hadn’t been deceived? The only answer the Islamic apologist can come up with, is the one given in the above narrative: God or Gabriel told Mohammed which revelation to believe and which one to reject as false. That way, the only guarantee of revelation is another revelation.

Mohammed's reaction to the Quranic trance


186 posted on 07/24/2006 5:44:47 AM PDT by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-186 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson