Skip to comments.Michele Bachmann Should Not 'Get a Pass' on Past Membership in Anti-Catholic Church
Posted on 07/17/2011 1:06:48 PM PDT by Brices Crossroads
The news and blogosphere is filled with responses to the July 14, 2011 story by Joshua Green, the Senior Editor of the Atlantic, entitled "Michele Bachmann's Church Says the Pope Is the Antichrist." That is because it raises a serious matter which should not be taken lightly, and one which the candidate must address. First, let me share some personal context. I am what is often called a "revert" to the Catholic Church, someone who returned to the Church of my childhood after a long search for the truth. I love being a Catholic Christian. I hold an undergraduate degree and a master's degree in Catholic theology. I am a dissertation away from obtaining a PhD in Catholic Moral Theology. I am also a member of the Clergy, a Deacon. However, I write this article as a private and very concerned citizen.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholic.org ...
EXACTLY RIGHT!! Why this idea that being a member of a specific denomination is the equivalent of being a Christian keeps coming up -— just bizarre.
“This might matter to me,,, if i wasnt treated to a continous stream of Roman catholic threads that are very disrespectful of protestants. Arrogant statements that only the catholics are the true church,, endless claims that Christ himself intended a line of popes and picked the first one,,endless caterwalling that the vatican is open to one sided reuniting with other christians. (meaning fully accept the pope as your leader, and all teachings of the catholics,, and we will accept you)
So no wounded cries will be listened to today.”
If you go to a church where doctrine is espoused that the Pope is the Anti-Christ, it's fair to say you have some 'splaining to do in the context of a Presidential election.
That's not to say it's worse than Obama and Wright, it's not.
But when you ascribe the foundation of evil to a sect/religion that 20-25% of the people in the country believe in...you got some 'splaining to do.
With all due respect, one cannot blaspheme against a denomination — only against God. I do assume you’re not equating God and the Catholic Church as being one and the same? At least I HOPE that’s not what you’re trying to say!
It isn’t arrogance to believe Scripture — and Scripture says over and over that one can absolutely be assured of salvation — through the power of Christ’s blood. “For by grace are we saved and not of ourselves lest any man should boast” (just one example, but there are many many more!) Of course one must accept Scripture as authoritative.
That is not the same Gospel that the RCC preaches.
“The Bible is full of verses on salvation assurance. Look up 1 John 5:13.
What would even be the point of accepting Jesus as your personal Savior, if you didn’t believe that you were going to Heaven?
I have perfect peace that when I die, I will be immediately in the presence of the Lord. No arrogance here, just trust the scriptures.”
VERY WELL SAID - THANK YOU!!
Why not? All the anti-Catholic Catholics in the Obama administration do.
Not quite. We believe that works are a PRODUCT of being in-dwelt with the Holy Spirit, not a separate way to Heaven. It is part of the sanctification process, not the justified — which only occurs once (according to Scripture) when one comes to faith in Christ.
“My dear friend. The People of God were never left without their earthly Shepherd. Your concept of the keyes of the Kingdom has been converted, perverted, re-designed, to frequently mean the dern Concordance, or Bible keyes to find scriptures.
The keyes of the kingdom were given to Peter from the mouth of Christ Jesus, and quite easily rebuke Article Four as you refer. The OT establishes the sure keyes given to the chief steward, in the absence of the Master. That was not just a pleasant story, it was the pattern to which Jesus confers on Peter, the first father of the Church.”
Thank you RitaOK...you make my point clear. Yours is an orthodox Roman Catholic view....and I don’t intend to spend time going in circles arguing because it accomplishes nothing. However, the orthodox Protestant view is that Christ is the ONLY mediator and that the Apostle Peter never was in any way shape form or fashion the “Father or Pope” of anything. Especially not the Body of Christ...all true believers in Jesus Christ, God the Son. Other interpretations of scripture are in error.
So, we are 180 apart on this issue. However, I don’t question your personnel faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Also, I don’t denigrate the current Pope as a man. The issue is the office.
But, the issue of the post is Michelle Bachmann. Only Roman Catholics can say if she is unsavory to them. However, in reality any conservative protestant is never going to agree that the Papacy is a valid office. So, all conservative protestants must equally be unsavory.
Brices Crossroads in a previous posting stated that Sarah Palin is a former Roman Catholic that changed affiliation. Isn’t that apostacy in the eyes of true Roman Catholics?
I remember the poster as one starting several vanities on why Michele Bachmann has no shot. It’s quite sad that good conservatives have to smear one of their own just because they’re so obsessed with Palin.
I am smoking the cigar of truth!
There is no chance that Obama will lose in 2012, no viable candidates on our side...Sarah and Michelle are damaged goods to most of the voting public and the others are nobodies, the majority of voters will stay with Obama(at least they know what to expect from him) rather than take a chance on someone else and new for POTUS.
You affirmed "Conservativegreatgrandma has been repeating that lie, she told friday: It may also be pointed out that the Catholic churchs official teaching is that anyone not a Catholic will also be going to hell
"the only person dividing us, is Bachmann herself, by her own words and actions."
Yet besides other things that can be listed (advocation of torture, restrictions on Bible reading, etc.) your own faith has not been consistent either. But an autocratic entity presumes it can define what is consistent.
Pope Leo XIII, in Sapientiae Christianae: "But the supreme teacher in the Church is the Roman Pontiff. Union of minds, therefore, requires, together with a perfect accord in the one faith, complete submission and obedience of will to the Church and to the Roman Pontiff, as to God Himself. This obedience should, however, be perfect...(and) must consequently be accepted without wavering.... Pope Leo XIII, in Sapientiae Christianae (On Christians As Citizens), Encyclical promulgated on January 10, 1890, #22-24. http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13sapie.htm
Council of Constance, Condemnation of Errors, against Wycliffe [Sentence condemning various articles of John Wyclif]: 8. If a pope is foreknown as damned and is evil, and is therefore a limb of the devil, he does not have authority over the faithful given to him by anyone, except perhaps by the emperor.
[Condemned articles of J. Hus]: 20. If the pope is wicked, and especially if he is foreknown to damnation, then he is a devil like Judas the apostle, a thief and a son of perdition and is not the head of the holy church militant since he is not even a member of it. Council of Constance, Condemnation of Errors, against Wycliffe http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum16.htm
Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino 1441): "Whoever, therefore, have adverse and contrary opinions the Church disapproves and anathematizes and declares to be foreign to the Christian body which is the Church."
Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino: "The sacrosanct Roman Church...firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart "into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation...
and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino, Bull promulgated on February 4, 1441 (Florentine style), proclaimed "ex cathedra" (infallible).
Pope Pius IX (18461878), Encyclical Singulari Quidem March 17, 1856):
There is only one true, holy, Catholic Church, which is the Apostolic Roman Church. There is only one See founded on Peter by the word of the Lord, outside of which we cannot find either true faith or eternal salvation. He who does not have the Church for a mother cannot have God for a father, and whoever abandons the See of Peter on which the Church is established trusts falsely that he is in the Church. (On the Unity of the Catholic Church) http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9singul.htm
Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam: Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff. Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Bull promulgated on November 18, 1302. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/b8-unam.html
Fifth Lateran Council: Moreover, since subjection to the Roman pontiff is necessary for salvation for all Christ's faithful, as we are taught by the testimony of both sacred scripture and the holy fathers, and as is declared by the constitution of pope Boniface VIII of happy memory, also our predecessor, which begins Unam sanctam, we therefore...renew and give our approval to that constitution... Fifth Lateran CouncilSession 11, 19 December 1516, http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum18.htm
Pope Pius XII, Ad Apostolorum Principis: "We teach,...We declare that the Roman Church by the Providence of God holds the primacy of ordinary power over all others, and that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate. Toward it, the pastors and the faithful of whatever rite and dignity, both individually and collectively, are bound by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, not only in matters which pertain to faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the Church spread throughout the whole world, in such a way that once the unity of communion and the profession of the same Faith has been preserved with the Roman Pontiff, there is one flock of the Church of Christ under one supreme shepherd. This is the teaching of the Catholic truth from which no one can depart without loss of faith and salvation." Pope Pius XII, Ad Apostolorum Principis (On Communism And The Church In China), Encyclical Promulgated on June 29, 1958, #46.
Pope Pius X, Iucunda Sane: "...We cannot but remind all, great and small, as Pope St. Gregory did, of the absolute necessity of having recourse to this Church in order to have eternal salvation, to follow the right road of reason, to feed on the truth, to obtain peace and even happiness in this life." Pope Pius X, Iucunda Sane (On Pope Gregory the Great), Encyclical promulgated on March 12, 1904, #9. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_x/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_12031904_iucunda-sane_en.html
Pope Boniface I, Epistle Ad Thessalon: "Whosoever has cut himself off from the Church of Rome has become an alien to Christianity." Pope Boniface I, Epistle Ad Thessalon, LAF, vol IX:57; FOC, p 324 (quoted in Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 4: "The Book of Christians", Chapter 2: "Those Who Reject Christ's Church Are Anti-Christian").
Pope Pius IX, Quanto Conficiamur Moerore: Eternal salvation cannot be obtained by those who oppose the authority and statements of the same Church and are stubbornly separated from the unity of the Church and also from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff.. Pope Pius IX, Quanto Conficiamur Moerore, #8 http://www.ewtn.com/library/encyc/p9quanto.htm
Pope Pius IX, Amantissimus: There are other, almost countless, proofs drawn from the most trustworthy witnesses which clearly and openly testify with great faith, exactitude, respect and obedience that all who want to belong to the true and only Church of Christ must honor and obey this Apostolic See and Roman Pontiff." Pope Pius IX, Amantissimus (On The Care Of The Churches), Encyclical promulgated on April 8, 1862, # 3.
Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 9): The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Satis Cognitum (# 9): June 29, 1896: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_29061896_satis-cognitum_en.html
Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos: "No one is found in the one Church of Christ, and no one perseveres in it, unless he acknowledges and accepts obediently the supreme authority of St. Peter and his legitimate successors." Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, PTC:873, http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius11/P11MORTA.HTM
Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam:
We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff."
"If, therefore, the Greeks or others say that they are not committed to Peter and to his successors, they necessarily say that they are not of the sheep of Christ, since the Lord says that there is only one fold and one shepherd (Jn.10:16). Whoever, therefore, resists this authority, resists the command of God Himself. " Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam (Promulgated November 18, 1302) http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/b8-unam.html
Pope Pelagius II, Quod Ad Dilectionem: Those not willing to be at agreement in the Church of God cannot abide with God. For the Church of God is established among those known to preside over the Apostolic Sees, and whoever separates himself from these Sees is manifestly in schism." Pope Pelagius II, Quod Ad Dilectionem," http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_29061896_satis-cognitum_en.html
Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis: "They, therefore, walk in the path of dangerous error who believe that they can accept Christ as the Head of the Church, while not adhering loyally to His Vicar on earth. They have taken away the visible head, broken the visible bonds of unity and left the Mystical Body of the Redeemer so obscured and so maimed, that those who are seeking the haven of eternal salvation can neither see it nor find it... Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi (On the Mystical Body of Christ), Encyclical promulgated on June 29, 1943, #41-42, 69. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_29061943_mystici-corporis-christi_en.html
Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum: St. Augustine denies that anyone who dissents from the Roman faith can be a Catholic. "You are not to be looked upon as holding the true Catholic faith if you do not teach that the faith of Rome is to be held" (Sermo cxx., n. 13).
St. Ambrose, "Expl. of Luke: "The Lord severed the Jewish people from His kingdom, and heretics and schismatics are also severed from the kingdom of God and from the Church. Our Lord makes it perfectly clear that every assembly of heretics and schismatics belongs not to God, but to the unclean spirit." St. Ambrose, "Expl. of Luke", ch.7, 91-95; PL 15; SS, vol. II, p. 85, (quoted in The Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 4: "The Book of Christians", Chapter 2: "Those Who Reject Christ's Church are Anti-Christian").
St. Thomas Aquinas: It is also shown that to be subject to the Roman Pontiff is necessary for salvation. For Cyril says in his Thesaurus: Therefore, brethren, if we imitate Christ so as to hear his voice remaining in the Church of Peter and so as not be puffed up by the wind of pride, lest perhaps because of our quarrelling the wily serpent drive us from paradise as once he did Eve. And Maximus in the letter addressed to the Orientals says: The Church united and established upon the rock of Peters confession we call according to the decree of the Savior the universal Church, wherein we must remain for the salvation of our souls and wherein loyal to his faith and confession we must obey him. St. Thomas Aquinas, Against the Errors of the Greeks, Pt. 2, ch. 36 http://dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraErrGraecorum.htm#b38
St. Peter Julian Eymard: "People often say, 'It is better to be a good Protestant than a bad Catholic.' That is not true! (quoted in "The Real Presence, NY: Blessed Sacrament Fathers, 1938, p. 245).
St. Frances Xavier Cabrini: "Many Protestants have almost the same practices as we, only they do not submit to the Holy Father and attach themselves to the true Ark of Salvation. They do not want to become Catholics and unite themselves under the banner of truth wherein alone there is true salvation. Of what avail is it, children, if Protestants lead naturally pure, honest lives, yet lack the Holy Ghost? They may well say: 'We do no harm; we lead good lives'; but, if they do not enter the true fold of Christ, all their protestations are in vain." St. Frances Xavier Cabrini, "Travels", Chicago: 1944, pp. 84, 71.
Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis (Concerning Some False Opinions Threatening to Undermine the Foundations of Catholic Doctrine): "Some say they are not bound by the doctrine, explained in Our Encyclical Letter of a few years ago, and based on the sources of revelation, which teaches that the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same thing. Some reduce to a meaningless formula the necessity of belonging to the true Church in order to gain eternal salvation." Encyclical promulgated on August 12, 1950, #27. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html
"Nothing ever changes in the eternal Catholic doctrine." Pope John Paul II, LOR, #49, December 9, 1992, (quoted in The Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 6: "The Book of Sentimental Excuses", Chapter 4: "The Dogmas of Faith Admit No Alteration Whatsoever").
He is a heretic who deviates from any article of faith. The American Textbook of Popery, p 143, (quoting from the Directory for the Inquisitors).
Baltimore Catechism: "Outside the Church there is no salvation" does not mean that everyone who is not a Catholic will be condemned. It does mean that no one can be saved unless he belongs in some manner to the Catholic Church, either actually or in desire, for the means of grace are not given without some relation to the divine institution established by Christ." Baltimore Catechism, #3, Chapters 11 & 12, #138, 166-167. http://www.catholic-pages.com/dir/link.asp?ref=11597
Lumen Gentium: "This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation....Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved." Pope Paul VI, in Council of Vatican II, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Promulgated on November 21, 1964, Chapter II "On the People of God", #14.
Catechism of the Catholic Church: "Outside the Church there is no salvation"
"How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? [Cf. Cyprian, Ep. 73.21: PL 3, 1169; De unit.: PL 4, 509-536.] Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the (Catholic) Church which is his Body:
... Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it." Catechism of the Catholic Church, Part One, "The Profession of Faith", Section Two, "The Profession of the Christian Faith", Chapter Three, "I Believe in the Holy Spirit, Article 9, "I Believe in the Holy Catholic Church", Paragraph 3, "The Church Is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic", Section III, "The Church Is Catholic", #846 (1992 edition, p 244). http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a9p3.htm
The plan of salvation includes those also who acknowledge the Creator; foremost among these are the Muslims: they profess fidelity to the faith of Abraham and, with us, adore the one and merciful God who will judge mankind on the last day. Lumen Gentium, Vatican Council II pg. 367, Austin Flannery, General Editor.
LUMEN GENTIUM: The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter. (Cf. Gal. 4:6; Rom. 8:15-16 and 26) For there are many who honor Sacred Scripture, taking it as a norm of belief and a pattern of life, and who show a sincere zeal. They lovingly believe in God the Father Almighty and in Christ, the Son of God and Saviour. (Cf. Jn. 16:13) They are consecrated by baptism, in which they are united with Christ. They also recognize and accept other sacraments within their own Churches or ecclesiastical [Protestant] communities...They also share with us in prayer and other spiritual benefits. Likewise we can say that in some real way they are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too He gives His gifts and graces whereby He is operative among them with His sanctifying power. Some indeed He has strengthened to the extent of the shedding of their blood... (15)
More precisely, historically they overall believed that one is justified by faith alone - that being the instrumental means of procurement - but not by a faith that was alone. And this was and is evidenced in evangelicals manifesting more commitment and conservative moral views than RCs. http://www.peacebyjesus.com/RC-Stats_vs._Evang.html Glory to God for those who do.
In one way I don't have a dog in this fight (I'm not a chr*stian, though I'm a product of and very supportive of Protestant Fundamentalism), but I resent the typical leftist hypocrisy that says that historic "victim" groups can't themselves ever be guilty of anything--a note sounded over and over by Catholics who feel they have to play the "Know Nothing" card just because some Protestant churches actually still believe what they always did.
But you know, I have to ask: why does the "unchanged and unchanging" Catholic Church have to teach something "now" that it did not always teach? If the Church has had to change its teaching at some point in the past, how can any dogma be safe?
I believe the real reason Catholics resent Fundamentalist Protestants is that, unlike them, the Fundamentalists haven't sold out to political correctness, ecumenism, and "faith tradition." No wonder many Catholics sound like the Anti-Defamation League.
” It isnt arrogance to believe Scripture and Scripture says over and over that one can absolutely be assured of salvation through the power of Christs blood. For by grace are we saved and not of ourselves lest any man should boast (just one example, but there are many many more!) Of course one must accept Scripture as authoritative. “ <<<
Your are quite right. I believe exactly as you, and remembering that there are caveats of great number teaching us first how to obtain the Grace of which you speak
and of which is availed to us by the Blood of Christ. These teachings are sometimes quite hard, and daily. I never heard a Catholic boast of his salvation, knowing that we Catholics fall daily and do not want to die in that state at some given moment. No one enters Heaven who is not perfect. Thankfully, there is Purgatory. I though do not long for Purgatory, but Heaven. Mercy is my song.
Oops. Pro-life was a typo. I meant pro-choice. The cliches and euphemisms sometimes blur their meaning for me. As a fairly devout Catholic my historical perspective is that the Reformation shook up Christianity in a positive way. And most people of Faith have more in common with each other than not.
Some of the Catholics on FR have stated they don’t believe she is anti-Catholic, and that they fully intend to vote for her.
Not with this economy.
I’m afraid you are right, but you didn’t mention the total lack of political knowledge of most Americans.
Hi, RitaOK. I’m so glad we can have a civil discussion on this. So many times on this board posts between Catholics and Protestants get a bit heated and anything BUT civil. I think the difference lies in the sanctification process versus the justification process. Protestants hold to the Scriptural view that the latter occurs once — but we are continually “sanctified” — and that is where the fruits of the Spirit are made manifest. Those who belong to Christ though need not fear that they will not “make it” or “will die” before they can get right because they are already “right” with God. When sins are forgiven and repentance occurs it happens once for all time. Christ forgives, has forgiven and will forgive all past, future and present sins. Contrary to what some say who don’t understand this Biblical truth, this is not a “license to sin”. (Paul addresses this very issue in the NT). Those who see it as such and live accordingly (sinning as much as they wish without any conviction) are not saved. Repentance is a fundamental of salvation. Where there is no “turning” there can be no salvation. It doesn’t mean we won’t sin, but the Holy Spirit living within us will relentlessly convict us of the need to repent. It’s not repentance unto salvation at that point, for that has already occurred or we would not have the Holy Spirit. It is part of the ongoing sanctification process.
Now that’s probably a much longer and wordier response than you were looking for. Apologies.
How about following common FR courtesy and ping the FReeper you are talking about?
HiTech RedNeck on post 33: I was not FReepborn yesterday and it is very rare to come across an evangelical who categorically states a Catholic cannot be a Christian. Onus on you to catalog a rebuttal.
To which Palladin replied in post 41: Just do an FR search on the name Gamecock.
To refute Palladin's slander, I invite all to my home page, on which the following statement has been posted since 2001: I think there will be some Reformed "Christians" in hell, some Arminians and Catholics in Heaven.
Now Palladin, please show us all where I have ever said there are no Catholic Christians. < crickets>
“It is part of the sanctification process, not the justified which only occurs once (according to Scripture) when one comes to faith in Christ.”
Sorry - that last bit should read “justification” — not “justified”.
” Some of the Catholics on FR have stated they dont believe she is anti-Catholic, and that they fully intend to vote for her.” <<<
You are absolutely right, and Catholics are free to vote for her if she is the nominee against Obama. The arguments here are theological, and cathartic, a steam release exercise which may not be entirely unhealthy after all. I like Bachman, and I trust her that she is not going to make abusing Catholics much of a priority. :)
That helps not hurt Obama’s chances in 2012 IMHO...
Catholicism is but one of many man-made religions. Christianity is what we should aim for, not any religion or denomination.
The infighting between Christians is stupid.
I won’t vote for someone who says my Faith is Satanic. It aint complicated.
To fill you in, here is a sample of some of the responses thus far (and i do not favor Bachmann for President, if the Repubs allow a good man to run):
Lets let the muslim kenyan stay in office
we adore Michele Bachmann and have no problem supporting her at all.
Bachmann is too right-wing evangelical for my taste... Reminds me of someone else and his pastor, out in Chicago, just before he ran for President.
my Catholic in-laws always vote for the LIBERAL democrat
54% of Catholics put aside their religious persuasion and voted for Obama.
Bachmann better come out and explain why she belonged to this Church that holds us all in contempt until SIX DAYS BEFORE ANNOUNCING FOR PRESIDENT. Or else she will be toast. If she isnt toast already.
Im Catholic and if she ends up as our candidate, Im voting for her.
This might matter to me,,, if i wasnt treated to a continous stream of Roman catholic threads that are very disrespectful of protestants. Arrogant statements that only the catholics are the true church,
I have experienced the most vicious anti-Catholicism I have ever seen on the FR Religion Forum
I’m a Deacon in my church, I’ve studied scripture and can find many Catholic doctrines that I disagree with but frankly, I find the doctrine of the Pope as the Anti-Christ to be extreme and unsupported by scripture.
The Gov. of NY is a Catholic, Pelosi, Kennedys - Catholic, Notre Dame so called Catholic University had a Priest arrested recently and Buffalos Canisus campus had Hillery Clinton speak at an event.
These are not wobbly Catholics, these examples are instead, dedicated protestants to the Church, who make political hay for themselves by continuing to identify themselves as Catholics, causing grave scandal by their self identity to the Church they despise.
you forget. In the United States Catholics are an “oppressed minority.” That means they can only be victims of “prejudice” and never practitioners of it.
Michele Bachmann Should Not ‘Get a Pass’ on Past Membership in Anti-Catholic Church. Why not? All the anti-Catholic Catholics in the Obama administration do.
By my count, this is at least the 3rd thread you’ve posted on the same subject. You’re likely suffering from OCD or APD (or something worse).
It is funny that Catholics should be worried about some minor Protestant doctrines unfriendly to them, when Catholics do the same sort of thing. In my own ancestry, I have direct ancestors who (for a fact!) were dragged from their homes into the street by a Roman Catholic mob, and had their throats slit
And MY ancestors were tortured and killed my Protestants...Funny thing about that.
Actually, according to the The Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope by is part of the
Augsburg Confession, the Pope is a considerd a anti-christ (not The) as he claims to be the vicar of christ on earth and to act as Christ on earth..Basically what Luther had to endure and corruption of the Catholic chruch I could understand why he felt that way.
As president of the United States how do you engage a religious leader, an ally, who is also a legitimate head of state, when your faith says he’s the Antichrist?
Notice it is an attack on the legitamacy of the Office of Pope....not on the Christianity of Roman Catholics. I know this is upseting to many Roman Catholics. However, I get disturbed when a Roman Catholic tries to tell me that theirs is the ONLY true church and the rest of us are apostates to some degree from RC.
all Protestant Churches are “anti-Catholic in a BIG way. Just like the Catholic Church is anti-Protestant in a big way, and I say that as a Protestant who loves my Catholic brothers and sisters.
in reality any conservative protestant is never going to agree that the Papacy is a valid office. So, all conservative protestants must equally be unsavory.
Catholicism is but one of many man-made religions. Christianity is what we should aim for, not any religion or denomination.” <<<
Trying to evangelize is never stupid for Christians. Theological teachings and discussion thereof is not stupid.
A lot of the people “aimed” for the Ark too, but there was only one. Those who aimed but missed drowned.
Now it is true that people become exasperated, and some cranky, but really...stupid? I don’t think so. Maybe you should find another thread you don’t think is so stupid. :)
So Catholics should look the other way when it’s discovered that Ms Bachmann attended a virulently anti Catholic church.We are quite aware that anti Catholicism is the predjudice accepted and practiced by Left and Right.If Congresswoman Bachmann has any hope of becoming POTUS she will explain this disquieting fact.Like Freepers who will stay home or write in if Romney is nominated, Catholics can and will do the same thing.
Is is not blasphemous to attack thee original church of Jesus Christ? Is it now blasphemous to lie about the church of St. Peter?
With respect to Michelle Bachmann, I am not saying I want asshobama to win. I’m saying that just like RevWright and Obama, I would expect some sort of explanation.
And yes, lying about a church is blashemy:
Here is the law in Ireland:
Here is an excerpt from the Blasphemy Clause:
(1) A person who publishes or utters blasphemous matter shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding 100,000. [Amended to 25,000]
(2) For the purposes of this section, a person publishes or utters blasphemous matter if (a) he or she publishes or utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion, and (b) he or she intends, by the publication or utterance of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.
Continue reading on Examiner.com Ireland passes blasphemy law - Philadelphia atheism | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/atheism-in-philadelphia/ireland-passes-blasphemy-law#ixzz1SPw4Ynmt
Does the Atlantic really care who is the Anti-Christ?
While I think the Lutheran Synod of Bachmann is wrong, that is historic protestant teaching, and I’m pretty sure Martin Luther believed essentially the same.
John Wesley did, so that axes Methodists. Luther did so that axes Lutherans. Calvin did so that axes presbies, congregationalists, etc., etc.
It’s beginning to sound like a “religious test”....isn’t it? And those are forbidden by the constitution.
Oh...and should we get rid of Obama because of Jeremiah Wright?
Your position that your religion trumps Christianity is duly noted.
This is not about Bachmann vs. soetero. This is about Bachmann and her past - it SHOULD BE KNOWN prior to the primaries so WE can make an informed decision. If her church indeed stated that the Pope is the antichrist, then that would important for me to know.
If this is not an issue then why, all of a sudden, did she leave her church? She knows damn well that this is going to bite her in the arse.
I spent some time attending both Baptist and Church of Christ Churches before I went HOME to the Catholic Church. I can tell you that both the Baptist and Church of Christ churches overtly criticized the Catholic church on a recurring basis -—— so much so that it made me defensive of the Catholic church and I went back. I have NEVER heard our priest utter one negative word about protestant religions. But I heard plenty of evangelicals get their pants in a wad about the Catholics.
Interesting note is that the Catholic church is now experiencing respectable growth as many lost protestants are coming home to where they need to be.
All this crap in this thread from the evangelicals could end up pushing me to Romney if Palin won’t run. And yes, if Palin through this out there, then good for her, because we all know how the jackals in Bachmann’s campaign were criticizing Palin.
Neither Michele Bachmann, nor the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, claims that our Faith is “Satanic.” See my post #288.
Our enemy is not the candidate who agrees with us 90% of the time; it’s the president who disagrees with us 90% of the time.
“During eucharist, they explained that non-catholics were not welcome...To me, it is all a technicality, a mechanism of trying to assert control. It is damaging to the very worthy interests of the Roman Catholic Church, most of which I support. It short, it is foolish and non-Christian.
Do WELS Lutherans do the same thing? I just read on another one of these threads they aren’t even supposed to pray with other Christians. I don’t know if they enforce that or not.
Here’s what the UCCB says about Communion and other Christians:
We welcome our fellow Christians to this celebration of the Eucharist as our brothers and sisters. We pray that our common baptism and the action of the Holy Spirit in this Eucharist will draw us closer to one another and begin to dispel the sad divisions which separate us. We pray that these will lessen and finally disappear, in keeping with Christ’s prayer for us “that they may all be one” (Jn 17:21).
Because Catholics believe that the celebration of the Eucharist is a sign of the reality of the oneness of faith, life, and worship, members of those churches with whom we are not yet fully united are ordinarily not admitted to Holy Communion. Eucharistic sharing in exceptional circumstances by other Christians requires permission according to the directives of the diocesan bishop and the provisions of canon law (canon 844 § 4). Members of the Orthodox Churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Polish National Catholic Church are urged to respect the discipline of their own Churches. According to Roman Catholic discipline, the Code of Canon Law does not object to the reception of communion by Christians of these Churches (canon 844 § 3).
” Your position that your religion trumps Christianity is duly noted.” <<<<
huh? I’m trying to get the water from my ear on that one!
Christianity IS a religion. In fact, buzz off. This thread is for the more informed.
So the ugly truth comes out.
And why should they? There is no religious test for office, per the constitution. Do you want to institute one?
Works are a result of being saved, but add nothing to salvation.
Your view is the heretical Lordship salvation view and represents a departure from the Reformation view that salvation was simply by faith (trust) in the finished work of Christ which immediately resulted in becoming a new creature in Christ.
Works were never part of the salvation 'process', it was part of the growth process.
Don’t think I said any differently. Works are part of the sanctification process —as I’ve said repeatedly — not Justification - which happens once before God.
Further clarification: works here in the guise of “the fruit of the Spirit”.
Once you believe in Christ you are saved-period.
Growth is a different aspect of sanctification, which has nothing to do with being saved, it has to do with spiritual maturity.
OK - for whatever reason you have misunderstood or misconstrued what I have said. Hopefully this will clarify — one more time: Justification = “right standing before God”; “sanctification” has NOTHING to do with the aforementioned standing. It is a continual process throughout the life of the Believer — i.e. the living out of his/her faith; the exhibition of the fruit of the Spirit. There is NOTHING contradictory in that. NOTHING. It is Scriptural. I think either you are reading someone else’s posts and getting them confused with mine or you are misreading mine. Hopefully this clarifies the situation. I am fully aware of what “justification” means, versus “sanctification” — are you?
Justification (i.e. Salvation; being “born again”; being “saved”) occurs once. There is no contradiction in what I have said. Not sure why you are continuing to post that I am wrong only to re-post my position. Color me confused on this.
“This is not about Bachmann vs. soetero. This is about Bachmann and her past - it SHOULD BE KNOWN prior to the primaries so WE can make an informed decision. If her church indeed stated that the Pope is the antichrist, then that would important for me to know.
If this is not an issue then why, all of a sudden, did she leave her church? She knows damn well that this is going to bite her in the arse.”
Right, Adam. The point of this thread is not to see how many freepers are going to vote for Obama over Bachmann. I presume that would be next to none. Ideological conservative Catholics will almost all vote for any GOPer over Obama. But you have a large number of non ideological Catholics who are unhappy with Obama. Many are ethnic and many are concentrated in the Midwest states where the election will be decided.
These Catholics are not going to be interested in whether Catholics believe other denominations are condemned or any other theological questions. These Catholics many of whom are Polish or Eastern European are going to hear that Bachmann belonged to a church that believed that their beloved John Paul II was the Anti-Christ, and that will be it. They won’t vote for her. And that is absolutely fatal in states like PA, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin. No amount of argument will persuade them.
Bachmann knows this. It is why she got out of that Church. She is going to have to explain it. Otherwise she is going to bleed support as people begin to realize that a vote for her is wasted completely.
Once you believe in Christ you are saved-period. >>
and what happens if you break some of the 10 commandments and then die? you go straight to heaven no matter if you kill or rape someone?
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.