| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/28/2010 11:54:24 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Per poster’s request |
Posted on 04/18/2010 9:49:35 PM PDT by Judith Anne
I seriously wonder about some FReepers, sometimes. Any other person accused of a crime would be defended by every FReeper as being innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. I've seen whole threads written by men who have been accused of child abuse by ex-wives out to deny them their visitation rights or to wrest more money out of them. These men are rightly indignant, and furious about the unjust accusations that cannot be proven but are never withdrawn.
Yet where are those FReepers when a PRIEST is accused? Where is the presumption of innocence? Suddenly, every accusation becomes a verdict, and not only the accused but his entire organization and all its adherents are held responsible.
I can only wonder what some of these so-called conservatives (who so faithfully defend the Constitution) would do, if THEY were the ones accused! It is a nightmare for any man -- all of you know how even the accusation stains the man forever, even if it is proven false!
Not only that, many here assert that the problems of 30, 40 and even 50 years ago must be tried in the media TODAY!
Remember the Duke rape case? There are more similarities than differences here. The priests are accused, nifonged, and instead of being defended, they are vilified!
What other man of you could stand under the weight of such an accusation trumpeted by the press, and come out whole? None! And such accusations made, LONG after the statute of limitations has passed, sometimes even after the accused is dead and buried for YEARS -- are YOU one of those who automatically, reflexively, spitefully, and gleefully act as judge, jury, and executioner?
Women! What if it were YOUR HUSBAND, YOUR BROTHER, YOUR FATHER, YOUR UNCLE, YOUR SON who was accused? Wouldn't you want the best defense possible? Wouldn't YOU believe in their innocence? Wouldn't YOU help protect your loved ones as much as possible? And yet, YOU JUDGE THE CHURCH FOR DOING WHAT YOU WOULD DO?
Shame! Vast shame! On all who have sinned against the innocent!
We Prods have always suspected that FRoman Catholics have a low view of scripture.
Statements like that tend to validate that as fact.
“Shocking that ANY FREEPER would join JIMMY CARTER in construing THEIR wisdom as greater than Paul’s.”
Preparing the finest meal also produces a certain amount of garbage. But that’s the nature of these forums, I suppose.
Refreshing, after all that hysterical screeching from the guess-whos above.
Not at all. We do not, however, worship it. In particular, I personally do not worship Paul, nor do I hang on his every word in the NT. I tend to think he was insane. However, God can do anything, use anybody.
I would like to see the Prods quote a BIT more of the Gospels, however, particularly the words in red. All y'all seem unfamiliar with them....
I'm so sure you are correct, but I don't recall that. Mind giving chapter and verse?
INDEED.
And, at some point, a low view of SCRIPTURE translates rather horrifically into a low treatment of JESUS . . . which we also see in terms of the interloping Mary caricature personage foisted on the faithful.
Here’s a penalty levelled with no pretense of due process. “A credible allegation” justifies verdict and sentence?
It’s not just a Catholic phenomenon that clergy get weird stuff said about them. I forget what it was but when I was in a mission church somebody started up some rumor. There was some factionalism in the congregation about changing the form of worship, as the bishop (to whom all missions answer) required. Nancy and I took a little heat, but nearly everyone in the parish knew the rumor-monger was a slightly addled troublemaker.
How hard would it be to cobble up a “credible allegation” about something that happened to a man now dead? How hard would be it to establish one’s innocence for something that might or might not have happened some years ago?
In our current parish, the friars doors all have windows in them so that the friar can be seen from the corridor. Towards the end of my time in the Episcopal Church I would not close the door if I was alone with anyone. It’s scary out there!
That’s comforting.
I’m blessed to be thrown in with Paul on such scores. LOL.
Of course, God likely has a different view on Paul and probably even on me.
In some families that would be a pair of contradictory statements ....
:-)
Yes, some of his stuff really was a problem for me. And at one point I totally rejected Christianity because I thought all Christians thought Paul was the perfect apostle.
Worshipping the Pauline epistles is just daffy.
Understood. At the two hospitals where I was a nurse, anyone at the nurse’s station could open a speaker/listener channel to any patient’s room on the unit. In addition to allowing easier quicker communication with the patient, nurses were protected from the risk of accusations by unbalanced patients. This was especially important for male nurses, but the women appreciated it too.
I guess my question for you is what specifically in Pauline writings do you see as conflicting with Church teachings? That is the part that confusing to me.
I agree with you about your statement about how some seem to elevate the Pauline epistles above the Gospels, or for that matter any of the rest of the Scriptures. I think that is the effect of Darby and Schofield and their dispensationalism. But that is a world different than claiming error in what Paul wrote. Maybe I’m just misreading you.
EXCELLENT POINTS.
LUBBRO
I don't think that is known. I've read equally plausible conclusions on either side of the question.
and Ambrose forbade married bishops conjugal relations.
Ambrose of Milan? How could he forbid or permit bishops anything?
To me, Paul’s writing is so confused that I cannot really tell where he may or may not conflict with Church teaching. The first quote from your post above is a perfect example.
More to the point, Paul's epistles go hand-in-glove with the Gospel of John and John's epistles, e.g. the indwelling Spirit (John 15, John 17, Romans 8, I Cor 2.)
And Peter says this of Paul's epistles:
For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers. But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called [me] by his grace, To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.
Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother. – Galatians 1:11-19
Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether [they be] thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all [things] he might have the preeminence. For it pleased [the Father] that in him should all fulness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, [I say], whether [they be] things in earth, or things in heaven.– Colossians 1:15-20
AMEN! AMEN! AMEN! AMEN! AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!
THX for all your excellent points so well made.
PRAISE GOD.
BLESSED BE THE NAME OF THE LORD.
BLESSED BE THE WORD OF THE LORD.
BLESSED BE THE WAYS OF THE LORD.
Thank you so much for your encouragement, dear brother in Christ!
Um, I kind of really like Paul, like a LOT!
The guilty are claiming their convictions are unfair because not all the guilty have been convicted. Should they then be set at liberty til a sufficient number are called to account?
“IOW, it's like giving a guilty verdict to an accused priest when an equally guilty public school teacher gets a pass.”
If the teacher is never brought to trial how is it unfair for the priest to pay for engaging in what he knew to be a crime and a sin, by his own admission at times?
Perhaps he should refuse to pay a traffic ticket too until all murderous teachers are in irons.
“As far as comparing the rate of abuse in the Church with the general population, I think this is perfectly valid for two reasons. One, while priests are called to a different vocation than most, simply having a different vocation does not imply, nor is it intended to imply, that they are somehow more “holy” than the laity. They are human beings like the rest of us and thus are equally as fallable.”
Such a comparison absolutely is not valid and the Catholic church views priests on much different level than the laity or the general populus.
“19. Thus the priest accompanies the Christian throughout the pilgrimage of this life to the gates of Heaven. He accompanies the body to its resting place in the grave with rites and prayers of immortal hope. And even beyond the threshold of eternity he follows the soul to aid it with Christian suffrages, if need there be of further purification and alleviation. Thus, from the cradle to the grave the priest is ever beside the faithful, a guide, a solace, a minister of salvation and dispenser of grace and blessing.
20. But among all these powers of the priest over the Mystical Body of Christ for the benefit of the faithful, there is one of which the simple mention made above will not content Us. This is that power which, as St. John Chrysostom says: “God gave neither to Angels nor Archangels”—the power to remit sins.” (Pope Pious XI from The Catholic Encyclopedia)
It simply will not do to, on the one hand claim special holy callings, functions and powers deserving of the utmost deference and respect and yet when it comes to accountibility for the shepherding of Christ's flock and the predations upon it, say, “They are human beings like the rest of us and thus are equally as fallable.”
Jesus own words link extraordinary authority and privilege
with extraordinary accountability.
“And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given of him shall be much required and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.” (Luke 12:47-8)
The Catholic church has made the claim of being holy, the apostolic church, the see of Peter by Christ's commission, etc. so now it cannot claim that the secular, the worldly and the heretical be held to the same standard, nor can it's shepherds seek refuge in mere ordinariness that these other groups possesses. If they do, how can they be “no part of the world” as Jesus prayed at John chapter 17?
Intellectual honesty? It's either one or the other.
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.