Posted on 10/05/2005 11:05:11 PM PDT by Salvation
Don't confuse the SSPX schismatics with orthodox Catholics.
So you use a Times hatchet job that reports on bishops warning against a literal reading of certain parts of the Bible in order to attack Catholics?
You and the Times both have your agenda, and it's apparently anti-Catholic.
" NO ONE EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITIO!!!"
YOu are right about the current research on the SI. What ever else their faults may have been the Spanish were excellent record keepers.
You read and understand Latin?
True enough. It also seems that many people assume that if a Catholic says the Bible is true but not all those truths are literal we are saying the Bible is in error. Worse than error, a lie, which we now admit we do not respect or follow in any fashion. Of course such an understanding of Catholic doctrine is nonsense. I am always tempted to ask, "How can the Church who's Councils' guided by the Holy Spirit, gave us the canon of the Bible be against that very Bible?". and if " Sola Scriptura" is suffecient why are there so many Protestant sects?". It does not matter, whatever the true cause in the eyes of the Anti Catholic it is always the fault of the Church and her teachings.
The Church is the guardian and the true home of Scripture.
I do not - however, I posted it in English and Latin and I do have a command of the English language. Are you implying that the English is not a word for word translation of the Latin and might be misleading?
Do I dare.... :O)
There was a post on this thread where a writer spoke of two pillars one being te bible and how over the last 60 years that it has come under pitched assault -- (from leftist self-styled intelectuals -- my words) and that has eroded the pillar of the word of God in the eyes of the generations that have grown up during that era.
In the 1970's I remember well the assualt on the bible there were two different moses' the J writer and another writer and two Isaiah's the first wrote some and the latter added info centuries later that made the man appear to phrophesy. I heard it then and again three days ago that we could not be made in God's image of likeness, because He is some kind of gas. I have hear it said back then that when the bible says: Gods arm or God's hand that is only figurative -- because gas has no hand or arm. The word they used for all taht was anthropormorphism: that is that God was only pretending to be like us so that we might relate with him. (Seems to be calling Him a Liar, these people have no faith, and don't beleive in miracles.)
My point is a bit rambling but I see these other people as products of that sustained attack on the bible. They have been poisoned, and injured, and afraid to look at the Bible because they have lost faith in it and no longer know what to beleive whereas they know that they are on "solid ground" in the Catechism.
And if Scripture doesn't agree with RC doctrine you can always fall back on: "The Pope is of so great authority and power, that he is able to modify, declare, or interpret even divine laws." Able to over-rule "Divine Law"!!!! Anyone who is able to over-rule divine law must have more authority than the original author!!!!
Some Catholics yes but certainly not all, just as not all Protestant Pentecostals believe that God rewards with wealth.
If the Church offically becomes involved in a claim of the miraculous you can bet they climb all over that claim and take their time before issueing any sort of statement. Belief in the apparitions that have been deemed worthy, i.e. Lourdes and Fatima are never held up as a requirement for any Catholic.
Well said.
Don't know, don't read Latin. But if history serves as a guide, I would be a bit suspect of the translation, particularly if only small segments of a larger work are being used as "evidence" against the papacy. I also suspect that there is some sort of "666" correlation with the various papal titles that the web site that serves as a source of your quotes is more than happy to make. I also suspect the web site you got those quotes form has a problem with Sunday/Sabbath days of worship, in fact my bet is that he or she is an Adventist of some stripe.
I also don't see a problem with the concept of the pope as "vicar".
Are there any occasions when you DON'T make it a point to spread your hate and bigotry toward Catholics?
Sadly they have not been taught their catechism either. So many of the laity have been given the excuse, and goodness knows we humans need no excuse, to be lazy. So many opportunities to teach the Catholic faith have been squandered by the clergy but I find hope in the new crop of priests coming into the Church, even in this country. Many are on fire for the Lord and to re-evangelize the Catholic population and those of you who are anti-Catholic I am very excited at the prospect.
I admire the faith of the simple people in seeing the face of Jesus and the Blessed mother in images in our life.
This sound muchss like the Liberal elitist left.
Care to give any sort of citation, link, or anything like that?
Or did you just do a cut-and-paste job from some anti-Catholic screed?
The Pope has no authority to modify or abrogate Divine Law. Ever. Sorry, but that's the way it is.
I love that my church keeps the tradition but is also charasmatic.
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.