Posted on 06/01/2007 2:28:41 PM PDT by Gamecock
In my shorttime on Free Republic, I have seen a number of posts by RCs about Protestants joining the RCC; and you are complaining about the posting of an article about someone leaving the RCC?
It’s not a matter of interpretation of scripture in any form, really.
The IC, Assumption, and co-redemptrix simply do NOT APPEAR in scripture. Anyplace.
It doesn’t take a genius to interpret what doesn’t appear.
I think that's been the major thrust of rcc posts for the last month.
Thank you for sharing your own personal interpretation of scripture.
Mayberry is/was a PHONEY Catholic! He was supposed to KNOW the tenets of Catholicsm and he didn’t.....and then they let him be a teacher of it....eeeegads.
That's not quite his complaint, is it? (Be honest.)
I don’t think the guy who wrote the letter of resignation and the original poster are the same person. It’s hard to tell because the original poster didn’t tell us anything in post #1.
UH......you better read some history.....don’t think Henry VIII is a Saint now.....he COULD be in heaven, but not as a saint.
You can think and believe all day long that our history isn't so, but it's a fact....please deal with it. You are a Christian if you believe Jesus is your Savior, but the Catholic Church is the TRUE Church.
In the end the "defender of the faith" didn't really change that much:
Meanwhile, Henry, though taking advantage of the spirit of religious innovation now rife among the people whenever it suited his purpose, remained still attached to the sacramental system in which he had been brought up. In 1539 the Statute of the Six Articles enforced, under the severest penalties, such doctrines as transubstantiation, Communion under one kind, auricular confession, and the celibacy of the clergy. Under this act offenders were sent to the stake for their Protestantism just as ruthlessly as the aged Margaret, Countess of Salisbury, was attainted by Parliament and eventually beheaded, simply because Henry was irritated by the denunciations of her son Cardinal Pole. Neither was the king less cruel towards those who were nearest to him. Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard, his second and fifth wives, perished on the scaffold, but their whilom lord only paraded his indifference regarding the fate to which he had condemned them. On 30 July, 1540, of six victims who were dragged to Smithfield, three were Reformers burnt for heretical doctrine, and the other three Catholics, hanged and quartered for denying the king's supremacy. Of all the numerous miserable beings whom Henry sent to execution, Cromwell, perhaps, is the only one who fully deserved his fate. Looking at the last fifteen years of Henry's life, it is hard to find one single feature which does not evoke repulsion, and the attempts made by some writers to whitewash his misdeeds only give proof of the extraordinary prejudice with which they approach the subject. Henry's cruelties continued to the last, and so likewise did his inconsistencies. One of the last measures of confiscation of his reign was an act of suppression of chantries, but Henry by his last will and testament established what were practically chantries to have Masses said for his own soul.
“It doesn’t take a genius to interpret what doesn’t appear.”
I never claimed to be a genius. Are you implying Catholics are stupid?
Please show me the words Sola Scriptura in Scriptures. I must be abysmally stupid, more so than I thought since obviously learned men have found those words despite my earnest search, and I have not.
Mea culpa.
Any catholic body can trace itself back to Jesus?
Do you believe that about orthodoxy?
Personally, I believe that christianity needs to be traced by a spiritual lineage rather than by a human one.
Where is the citation for that paragraph?
Or is it your own work you posted?
“Personally, I believe that christianity needs to be traced by a spiritual lineage rather than by a human one.”
So you refuse to believe that the Christ annointed the Apostles?
What were they, doorstops or chopped liver?
Let me share with you as well my own personal interpretation of the shining appearance of George W. Bush in the Holy Scriptures, complete with Halo, harp, and honeycomb.
It ain’t there.
Neither is the assumption, immaculate conception, and co-redemption of Mary.
The personal interpretations of what ain’t there are pretty easy.
Lassie ain’t there, nor the Lone Ranger, nor Spiderman, nor....
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07222a.htm
It’s the Catholic Encyclopedia citation for Henry VIII.
I’m sure that’ll make it easy to argue with, though, for my Protestant brethren (and sistren.)
You’re right and, furthermore, Catholic theologians disagree on this issue. It is ridiculous that Mayberry would claim that this is a doctrine but his whole article is just an exercise in excuse-making, not in finding the truth.
Hitler was born and raised in a catholic family , he was an altar boy , Jesuit educated .
Most of the SS had the same history.
Mein Kampf.- "Therefore, I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews, I am doing the Lord's work."
Hitler said it again at a Nazi Christmas celebration in 1926: "Christ was the greatest early fighter in the battle against the world enemy, the Jews . . . The work that Christ started but could not finish, I--Adolf Hitler--will conclude."
John Toland wrote of Hitler's religion: "Still a member in good standing of the Church of Rome despite detestation of its hierarchy, he carried within him its teaching that the Jew was the killer of god. The extermination, therefore, could be done without a twinge of conscience since he was merely acting as the avenging hand of god - so long as it was done impersonally, without cruelty. "
Former Jesuit theologian Peter de Rosa describes the groundwork Catholic theology laid for Hitler and the Nazis: "[Catholicism’s] disastrous theology had prepared the way for Hitler and his ‘final solution.’ [The Church published] over a hundred anti-Semitic documents. Not one conciliar decree, not one papal encyclical, bull, or pastoral directive suggest that Jesus’ command, ‘love your neighbor as yourself,' applied to Jews."
Thanks.
I’m a real bug about the proper attribution of sources.
I am implying that it’s easy to interpret what DOES NOT APPEAR in scripture.
Neither the assumption, immaculate conception, or coredemption of Mary appear anyplace in scripture.
Nor do I think that Catholics are any dumber than Protestants. I think that the foolishness of God is wiser than any human.
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.