Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Radio Replies First Volume - "Outside the Church no salvation"
Celledoor.com ^ | 1938 | Fathers Rumble & Carty

Posted on 07/11/2009 6:11:46 AM PDT by GonzoII

"Outside the Church no salvation,"



536. Do you maintain that one is obliged to join your infallible, one, holy, catholic, apostolic, and indefectible Church, if he wishes to be saved?

If a man realizes that the Catholic Church is the true Church, he must join it if he wishes to save his soul. That is the normal law. But if he does not realize this obligation, is true to his conscience, even though it be erroneous, and dies repenting of any violations of his conscience, he will get to Heaven. In such a case, it would not have been his fault that he was a non-Catholic and God makes every allowance for good faith.

537. So I deserve Hell because I am a non-Catholic?

If you say, "I know quite well that the Catholic Church is the true Church, which God obliges me to join, but what of that!" then you deserve Hell. That would be a serious sin. But apparently you do not realize this obligation. Your position is based upon insufficient or false information, and this leads you to a wrong if sincere conclusion.

538. If one has to be a Catholic to get to Heaven I shall be glad to stay outside.

That is an absurd statement, for there is no eternal happiness outside Heaven. But I understand what you mean. You believe the Catholic Church to be wrong, and you will not do what you believe to be evil that good may come. But God does not want you to do that. Nor do I. As long as you believe the Catholic Church to be wrong, you are obliged not to join it. Yet if ever God gives you the grace to perceive its truth, you will be obliged to join it, no matter what the cost in renouncing your previous attachments.

539. If a Catholic leaves his Church, and outside that Church lives a good and devout life, could he be saved?

You give an impossible case. To live a devout life is to live a life devoted to God. Now no Catholic can have a really sufficient reason to doubt the truth of his Church. If doubts do come, he owes it to God to make sure of his position before he acts, and inquiry will show such doubts to be unfounded. If he leaves without such inquiry, he is to blame for throwing away the best of God's gifts. If he inquires sincerely, he stays.

540. But what if he be fully convinced that the Catholic Church is wrong, even though his conscience be erroneous, would you blame him for leaving rather than violate his conscience by remaining?

I would blame him for allowing his conscience to become so convinced by insufficient reasons, and for not studying the grounds which absolutely guarantee the Catholic Church as the only completely Christian Church. His first difficulties should have led him to seek advice from competent guides.

541. So if a Catholic becomes a Protestant, he has no hope?

While there is life there is always hope. Such a man may return to the Catholic Church, or at least die sincerely repenting of ever having left it.

542. Are Protestants free to leave the Protestant Church, yet Catholics not free to leave the Catholic Church?

One may always renounce error for truth; but no one is free to forsake truth for error.

543. Christ died for all. He did not say that we must all be Catholics.

Since Christ died for all, it follows that He wants all to belong to the one Church He established and endowed with His authority.

544. Many clever men have examined the Roman claims and have rejected them. They do not think it necessary to join the Catholic Church.

Equally clever men are convinced of its necessity. After all, there are clever men who reject Christianity itself, but that does not make the truth of Christianity uncertain. We cannot argue from the degrees of intelligence in those who accept or reject the Catholic claim. Such differences of human thought prove nothing except that men differ. The real question is not affected. We must study carefully the value of the foundations upon which the claim rests.

545. You said that a Protestant in good faith could be saved. Does not that admit that his religion is sufficiently true?

No. Such Protestants are saved not because of, but in spite of their erroneous religion. They have simply been true to a conscience which was erroneous through no fault of their own.

546. What are the conditions for the salvation of such a good Protestant?

He must have Baptism at least of desire; he must be ignorant of the fact that the Catholic Church is the only true Church; he must not be responsible for that ignorance by deliberately neglecting to inquire when doubts have perhaps come to him about his position; and he must die with perfect contrition for his sins, and with sincere love of God. But such good dispositions are an implicit will to be a Catholic. For the will to do God's will is the will to fulfill all that He commands. Such a man would join the Catholic Church did he realize that that was part of God's will. In this sense the Catholic Church is the only road to Heaven, all who are saved belonging to her either actually or implicitly.

547. Since Protestants can be saved, and it is ever so much easier to be a Protestant, where is the advantage in being a Catholic?

Firstly, remember the conditions of salvation for a Protestant. If he has never suspected his obligation to join the Catholic Church, it is possible for him to be saved. But it is necessary to become a Catholic or be lost if one has the claims of the Catholic Church sufficiently put before him. I myself could not attain salvation did I leave the Catholic Church, unless, of course, I repented sincerely of so sinful a step before I died.

Secondly, it is easier to live up to Protestant requirements than to live up to Catholic requirements. Non-Catholic Churches do not exact so high a standard of their followers as does the Catholic Church of hers. But that is not the question. It is much easier to be a really good Christian in the full sense of the word as a Catholic than as a Protestant, and surely that is what we wish. What advantages contribute to this? They are really too many to enumerate in a brief reply. The Catholic is a member of the one true Church established by Christ. He has the glorious certainty of the true Faith, and complete knowledge of the whole of Christian truth is much better than partial information, if not erroneous information. By submission to the authority of Christ in His Church he has the advantage of doing God's will just as God desires. If he fails at times by sin, he has the certainty of forgiveness by sacramental absolution in the Confessional. He has the privilege of attending Holy Mass Sunday after Sunday, and the immense help of Holy Communion by which he may receive Our Lord Himself as the very food of his soul. He has the privilege of sharing in the sufferings of Christ, by observing the precepts of fasting and mortification. He receives innumerable graces from Sacramentals and from the special blessings of the Church. He may gain very useful indulgences, cancelling much of the expiation of his sins which would otherwise have to be endured in Purgatory. And he is more loved by God in virtue of his being a Catholic even as God loves the Catholic Church more than any other institution on the face of the earth. In short, even as there is an advantage in being a Christian rather than a pagan, so there is an immense advantage in being a true Christian and belonging to the one true Church rather than to some false form of Christianity. Thus a good Catholic has many advantages over and above those possessed by a good and sincere Protestant. But, as I have remarked, if a Protestant begins to suspect his own Church to be defective, inquires into the matter, and becomes convinced that the Catholic Church is the true Church, he has no option but to join that Church if he desires to avoid the risk of eternal loss.

Encoding copyright 2009 by Frederick Manligas Nacino. Some rights reserved.
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0
http://www.celledoor.com/cpdv-ebe/


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic
KEYWORDS: catholic; radiorepliesvolone
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-169 next last

Historical Context of "Radio Replies"


By markomalley

If one recalls the time frame from which Radio Replies emerged, it can explain some of the frankness and lack of tact in the nature of the responses provided.

It was during this timeframe that a considerable amount of anti-Catholic rhetoric came to the forefront, particularly in this country. Much of this developed during the Presidential campaign of Al Smith in 1928, but had its roots in the publication of Alexander Hislop's The Two Babylons, originally published in book form in 1919 and also published in pamphlet form in 1853.

While in Britain (and consequently Australia), the other fellow would surely have experienced the effects of the Popery Act, the Act of Settlement, the Disenfranchising Act, the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, and many others since the reformation (that basically boiled down to saying, "We won't kill you if you just be good, quiet little Catholics"). Even the so-called Catholic Relief Acts (1778, 1791, 1829, 1851, 1871) still had huge barriers placed in the way.

And of course, they'd both remember the American Protective Association, "Guy Fawkes Days" (which included burning the Pontiff in effigy), the positions of the Whigs and Ultra-Torries, and so on.

A strong degree of "in your face" from people in the position of authoritativeness was required back in the 1930s, as there was a large contingent of the populations of both the US and the British Empire who were not at all shy about being "in your face" toward Catholics in the first place (in other words, a particularly contentious day on Free Republic would be considered a mild day in some circles back then). Sure, in polite, educated circles, contention was avoided (thus the little ditty about it not being polite to discuss religion in public, along with sex and politics), but it would be naive to assume that we all got along, or anything resembling that, back in the day.

Having said all of the above, reading the articles from the modern mindset and without the historical context that I tried to briefly summarize above, they make challenging reading, due to their bluntness.

The reader should also keep in mind that the official teaching of the Church takes a completely different tone, best summed up in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers .... All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."324

269 UR 3 § 1.
270 Cf. CIC, can. 751.
271 Origen, Hom. in Ezech. 9,1:PG 13,732.
272 UR 3 § 1.
273 LG 8 § 2.
274 UR 3 § 2; cf. LG 15.
275 Cf. UR 3.
276 Cf. LG 8.
322 LG 15.
323 UR 3.
324 Paul VI, Discourse, December 14, 1975; cf. UR 13-18.

1 posted on 07/11/2009 6:11:47 AM PDT by GonzoII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

Rev. Dr. Leslie Rumble, M.S.C.

"I was brought up as a Protestant, probably with more inherited prejudices than most non-Catholics of these days.  My parents were Anglican and taught me the Angelican faith. My 'broad-minded' protestant teachers taught me to dislike the Catholic Church intensely. I later tried Protestantism in various other forms, and it is some thirty years since, in God's providence, I became a Catholic. As for the 'open, free, sincere worship' of a Protestant Church, I tasted it, but for me it proved in the end to be not only open, but empty; it was altogether too free from God's prescriptions."

Eventually, Leslie became a priest of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart.

In 1928, Fr. Rumble began a one-hour 'Question Box' program on 2SM Sydney, N.S.W. radio on Sunday evenings that was heard all over Australia and New Zealand. For five years he answered questions on every subject imaginable that had been written to him from all over that part of the globe. His first show began with a classic introduction:

"Good evening, listeners all. For some time I have been promising to give a session dealing with questions of religion and morality, in which the listeners themselves should decide what is of interest to them. Such a session will commence next Sunday evening, and I invite you to send in any questions you wish on these subjects . . . So now I invite you, non-Catholics above all, to send in any questions you wish on religion, or morality, or the Catholic Church, and I shall explain exactly the Catholic position, and give the reasons for it. In fact I almost demand those questions. Many hard things have been said, and are still being said, about the Catholic Church, though no criminal, has been so abused, that she has a right to be heard. I do not ask that you give your name and address. A nom de plume will do. Call yourself Voltaire, Confucius, X.Y.Z., what you like, so long as you give indication enough to recognize your answer."

"By the summer of 1937, the first edition of Radio Replies was already in print in Australia, financed by Rt. Rev. Monsignor James Meany, P.P. - the director of Station 2SM of whom I am greatly indebted."

"I have often been mistaken, as most men at times. And it is precisely to make sure that I will not be mistaken in the supremely important matter of religion that I cling to a Church which cannot be mistaken, but must be right where I might be wrong. God knew that so many sincere men would make mistakes that He deliberately established an infallible Church to preserve them from error where it was most important that they should not go wrong."

Rev. Charles Mortimer Carty

I broadcast my radio program, the Catholic Radio Hour,  from St. Paul, Minnesota.

I was also carrying on as a Catholic Campaigner for Christ, the Apostolate to the man in the street through the medium of my trailer and loud-speaking system. In the distribution of pamphlets and books on the Catholic Faith, Radio Replies proved the most talked of book carried in my trailer display of Catholic literature. As many of us street preachers have learned, it is not so much what you say over the microphone in answer to questions from open air listeners, but what you get into their hands to read. The questions Fr. Rumble had to answer on the other side of the planet are same the questions I had to answer before friendly and hostile audiences throughout my summer campaign."

I realized that this priest in Australia was doing exactly the same work I was doing here in St. Paul. Because of the success of his book, plus the delay in getting copies from Sydney and the prohibitive cost of the book on this side of the universe, I got in contact with him to publish a cheap American edition.  

It doesn't take long for the imagination to start thinking about how much we could actually do. We began the Radio Replies Press Society Publishing Company, finished the American edition of what was to be the first volume of Radio Replies, recieved the necessary imprimatur, and Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen agreed to write a preface. About a year after the publication of the first edition in Australia, we had the American edition out and in people's hands.

The book turned into a phenomena. Letters began pouring into my office from every corner of the United States; Protestant Publishing Houses are requesting copies for distribution to Protestant Seminaries; a few Catholic Seminaries have adopted it as an official textbook - and I had still never met Dr. Rumble in person.

To keep a long story short, we finally got a chance to meet, published volumes two and three of Radio Replies, printed a set of ten booklets on subjects people most often asked about, and a few other pamphlets on subjects of interest to us.

Fr. Carty died on May 22, 1964 in Connecticut.

"Firstly, since God is the Author of all truth, nothing that is definitely true can every really contradict anything else that is definitely true. Secondly, the Catholic Church is definitely true. It therefore follows that no objection or difficulty, whether drawn from history, Scripture, science, or philosophy, can provide a valid argument against the truth of the Catholic religion."



Biographies compiled from the introductions to Radio Replies, volumes 1, 2 and 3.

Source: www.catholicauthors.com

2 posted on 07/11/2009 6:12:06 AM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fidelis; Atomic Vomit; MI; Sir_Humphrey
 Radio Replies

Radio Replies Ping

FReep-mail me to get on or off

“The Radio Replies Ping-List”

ON / OFF


3 posted on 07/11/2009 6:12:47 AM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

The Radio Replies Series: Volume One

Chapter One: God

Radio Replies Volume One: God’s Existence Known by Reason
Radio Replies Volume One: Nature of God
Radio Replies Volume One: Providence of God and Problem of Evil

Chapter Two: Man

Radio Replies Volume One: Nature of Man & Existence and Nature of the Soul
Radio Replies Volume One: Immortality of the Soul
Radio Replies Volume One: Destiny of the Soul & Freewill of Man

Chapter Three: Religion

Radio Replies Volume One: Nature of Religion & Necessity of Religion

Chapter Four: The Religion of the Bible

Radio Replies Volume One: Natural Religion & Revealed Religion
Radio Replies Volume One: Mysteries of Religion
Radio Replies Volume One: Miracles
Radio Replies Volume One: Value of the Gospels
Radio Replies Volume One: Inspiration of the Gospels

Radio Replies Volume One: Old Testament Difficulties [Part 1]
Radio Replies Volume One: Old Testament Difficulties [Part 2]
Radio Replies Volume One: Old Testament Difficulties [Part 3]
Radio Replies Volume One: New Testament Difficulties

Chapter Five: The Christian Faith

Radio Replies Volume One: The Religion of the Jews
Radio Replies Volume One: Truth of Christianity
Radio Replies Volume One: Nature and Necessity of Faith

Chapter Six: A Definite Christian Faith

Radio Replies Volume One: Conflicting Churches
Radio Replies Volume One: Are All One Church?
Radio Replies Volume One: Is One Religion As Good As Another?
Radio Replies Volume One: The Fallacy of Indifference

Chapter Seven: The Failure of Protestantism

Radio Replies Volume One: Protestantism Erroneous
Radio Replies Volume One: Luther
Radio Replies Volume One: Anglicanism
Radio Replies Volume One: Greek Orthodox Church
Radio Replies Volume One: Wesley

Radio Replies Volume One: Baptists
Radio Replies Volume One: Adventists
Radio Replies Volume One: Salvation Army
Radio Replies Volume One: Witnesses of Jehovah
Radio Replies Volume One: Christian Science

Radio Replies Volume One: Theosophy
Radio Replies Volume One: Spiritualism
Radio Replies Volume One: Catholic Intolerance

Chapter Eight: The Truth of Catholicism

Radio Replies Volume One: Nature of the Church
Radio Replies Volume One: The true Church
Radio Replies Volume One: Hierarchy of the Church
Radio Replies Volume One: The Pope
Radio Replies Volume One: Temporal Power

Radio Replies Volume One: Infallibility
Radio Replies Volume One: Unity
Radio Replies Volume One: Holiness
Radio Replies Volume One: Catholicity
Radio Replies Volume One: Apostolicity

Radio Replies Volume One: Indefectibility
Radio Replies Volume One: "Outside the Church no salvation"

4 posted on 07/11/2009 6:13:46 AM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

While I sincerely appreciate EACH and EVERY person’s faith and completely agree that ONLY GOD knows what HE wants, I would like to make a humble request to you.

On FR we should refrain from posting about our churches and why they are the One True Path.

I truly and genuinely respect that you believe it but maybe other FReepers dont.

Thus, we should, in my opinion, stay away from such discussions as they will lead to heartburn INSIDE FR.

Not advocating self censorship by any means. Just advocating the “agree to disagree” principle


5 posted on 07/11/2009 6:16:31 AM PDT by SoftwareEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SoftwareEngineer

Thanks for your very appropriate remark. I have recently seen an increase in this type of posting or comments.

A couple of times I have been drawn into a “discussion” that I felt inappropriate for an open forum and moved the comments off to freep mail.

Best regards,

TF


6 posted on 07/11/2009 6:24:00 AM PDT by Texas Fossil (The last time I looked, this is still Texas where I live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII; informavoracious; larose; RJR_fan; Prospero; Conservative Vermont Vet; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.

Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment

Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

7 posted on 07/11/2009 6:24:33 AM PDT by narses (http://www.theobamadisaster.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoftwareEngineer

I disagree. In the RELIGION forum on FR, the open and frank debate of religion is the purpose. Trying to separate the supernatural out of the political is part of the modernist malaise that has led us to the corrupt, even decadent place we find our culture at today. This is a particularly good piece in my opinion for that purpose.


8 posted on 07/11/2009 6:27:12 AM PDT by narses (http://www.theobamadisaster.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SoftwareEngineer
"On FR we should refrain from posting about our churches and why they are the One True Path.

I simply post the info about the Catholic Church for those who may be interested and for Catholics who like to stay informed about their faith.

I believe if no one wants to know about the Catholic Faith they can just scroll to the next thread. I don't think it should be any problem.

Regards, Gonzo

9 posted on 07/11/2009 6:31:02 AM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SoftwareEngineer

I get tired of all the silly entertainment threads - so I don’t open them.

I’m not sure why FR decided to offer religious threads, but FR has both open and closed threads on religion. And while some of these threads are primarily name-calling, some have genuine thought and discussion.


10 posted on 07/11/2009 6:31:56 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

While I”m glad to see that I shouldn’t become a Catholic, I’m a bit surprised by this: “Secondly, it is easier to live up to Protestant requirements than to live up to Catholic requirements. Non-Catholic Churches do not exact so high a standard of their followers as does the Catholic Church of hers.”

I’ve met plenty of Catholics who felt free to get smashed, commit adultery, etc, provided they went to Mass a couple of times a year. And Pelosi & Kerry & Kennedy don’t seem too restrained by their faith...

Comparing beliefs is one thing. Claiming Catholics live more spiritual lives is silly.


11 posted on 07/11/2009 6:39:32 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
"Claiming Catholics live more spiritual lives is silly."

The claim had to do with "standards".

12 posted on 07/11/2009 6:50:15 AM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

The point of that sentence was clearly, ‘Look at how good the Catholic Church is - we have higher standards!’

Kind of pointless to have standards that are not applied. And kind of wrong to look down your nose at other denominations, claiming their standards are lower, if your adherents don’t meet the ones you set for yourselves.


13 posted on 07/11/2009 7:03:40 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

“Outside the Church no salvation,”

Wow, this statement is wrong on so many levels. There is no salvation without a knowledge and acceptance of Jesus Christ. The church, be it Catholic or Protestant are created by man to honor God but are fallible by their very nature. I didn’t read much more because it started off on such a dumb premise that the rest of the article should be considered religious fecal matter.


14 posted on 07/11/2009 7:12:51 AM PDT by Dmitry Vukicevich (Well at least I am smarter than 63,250,000 Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

You were disagreeing with:

“Secondly, it is easier to live up to Protestant requirements than to live up to Catholic requirements. Non-Catholic Churches do not exact so high a standard of their followers as does the Catholic Church of hers.”

And then, incredibly, you wrote:

“I’ve met plenty of Catholics who felt free to get smashed, commit adultery, etc, provided they went to Mass a couple of times a year. And Pelosi & Kerry & Kennedy don’t seem too restrained by their faith...”

And you think those things - drunkeness, adultery, etc. - are Catholic standards? You’ve got to be kidding. The original point, “it is easier to live up to Protestant requirements than to live up to Catholic requirements” is absolutely true and in fact undeniable. We do not allow divorce and remrriage. Most Protestants do without many qualms. We don’t allow birth control. How many Protestant sects can claim that?

Comparing beliefs is one thing. Claiming Catholics live more spiritual lives is silly.


15 posted on 07/11/2009 7:13:38 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Jesus said He is the way,so what’s with all these Hail Mary’s?


16 posted on 07/11/2009 7:26:08 AM PDT by kickonly88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

The posted article claims Catholics have a higher standard - “Non-Catholic Churches do not exact so high a standard of their followers as does the Catholic Church of hers.”

So I pointed out that many Catholics feel very free to ignore that standard, whatever it is, and a standard that followers are not held to is not a standard you can boast about.

If I started a school, and boasted that OUR students had to be rocket scientists, you’d be well within your rights to point out that 45% failed to meet grade standards set by the state.

You don’t allow divorce - but you allow annulments. You rather oddly don’t allow birth control, but very few Catholics pay any attention to that restriction. Shoot - Catholics are more likely to accept abortion than Evangelicals.

I did not write nor post the article. I’m only commenting that it is unfair to boast of having such high standards if your adherents don’t pay attention to them.

“We don’t allow birth control. How many Protestant sects can claim that?”

Hopefully, NO Protestant ‘sects’ claim that. Protestants use the Scripture for a guide, and I don’t remember any verses about condoms in the Bible.

So - how many Catholics OBEY your no birth control standard?


17 posted on 07/11/2009 7:31:09 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

If a Catholic takes his faith seriously and is informed about it, it is a very strict and spiritual life.


18 posted on 07/11/2009 7:41:06 AM PDT by Melian ("Now, Y'all without sin can cast the first stone." ~H.I. McDunnough)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Dmitry Vukicevich

Actually, the Catholic Church was started by Christ.


19 posted on 07/11/2009 7:41:58 AM PDT by Melian ("Now, Y'all without sin can cast the first stone." ~H.I. McDunnough)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: kickonly88

Catholics believe Christ is the way- the only way. We say the Hail Mary to honor Christ’s mother, repeat the words an angel said to her as recorded in the Gospels, and ask her to strengthen us and help us (especially at the hour of our death). We believe she is special to Christ and that He pays special attention to her requests (as He did at the wedding feast at Cana). We say the Hail Mary to ask her to join her prayers with ours as we bring them before her Son.


20 posted on 07/11/2009 7:46:55 AM PDT by Melian ("Now, Y'all without sin can cast the first stone." ~H.I. McDunnough)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Melian

Really? I have read the scriptures and no where does it say that Christ started the Catholic Church so you need to get over that misinformation. Also Christ preached about a personal relationship with God not being forgiven through your priest. Also where is Mary named in the Bible as someone with special significance? Christ never even calls Mary his “mother” he calls her woman, plus she had other children so she is no longer a virgin.


21 posted on 07/11/2009 7:54:20 AM PDT by Dmitry Vukicevich (Well at least I am smarter than 63,250,000 Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

. We do not allow divorce and remrriage.

Unless you have enough money to get an annulment.


22 posted on 07/11/2009 7:57:08 AM PDT by Dmitry Vukicevich (Well at least I am smarter than 63,250,000 Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Melian

He pays special attention to her requests (as He did at the wedding feast at Cana)

He says “woman why do you bother me with such requests as my time has not yet come”. To say that Christ is honoring Mary is to pervert the scriptures. Christ never paid “special” attention to Mary anymore so than he paid attention to other sinners, and yes Mary was a sinner and can say no special prayers for you.


23 posted on 07/11/2009 8:02:22 AM PDT by Dmitry Vukicevich (Well at least I am smarter than 63,250,000 Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

You wrote:

“The posted article claims Catholics have a higher standard - “Non-Catholic Churches do not exact so high a standard of their followers as does the Catholic Church of hers.””

Actually THE CATHOLIC CHURCH has a higher standard. That’s what the quote says. And that’s the truth.

“So I pointed out that many Catholics feel very free to ignore that standard, whatever it is, and a standard that followers are not held to is not a standard you can boast about.”

And do you think those Catholics are living up to the standards of the Catholic Church?

“If I started a school, and boasted that OUR students had to be rocket scientists, you’d be well within your rights to point out that 45% failed to meet grade standards set by the state.”

That’s a lousy analogy. The Church is a hospital for sinners. It’s standard is perfection - as set by God Himself - bt all the patients, no matter what the standards, are still ill with sin.

“You don’t allow divorce - but you allow annulments.”

So what? A divorce is not an annulment. And an annulment is not a divorce. Pointing out we have annulments while Protestants allow divorce and remarriage (generally) does not show a high standard for Protestants and does not show a low standard for Catholics.

“You rather oddly don’t allow birth control, but very few Catholics pay any attention to that restriction.”

Again, the Church has high standards. The very fact that so many people fail to meet it shows how high that standard is. All you’re doing is showing that the Catholic standard is higher than the Protestant one.

“Shoot - Catholics are more likely to accept abortion than Evangelicals.”

No. I know some polls say that, but I don’t buy it for a second according to what a Catholic actually is. Also, again, the standards say othewise. The fact that people fail to meet it shows how high it is. Evangelical Protestantism in a sense can’t even claim to have a standard because they all disagree as to what it is. Almost all so-called evangelicals believe abortion is just fine in some circumstances. I remember being shocked when the supposedly pro-life Jerry Falwell (or was it Pat Robertson?) when he said abortion was okay in some cases. Those are leaders. Where are our religious leaders who actually advocate abortion? No where. Higher standards.

“I did not write nor post the article. I’m only commenting that it is unfair to boast of having such high standards if your adherents don’t pay attention to them.”

But millions of them to pay attention to them. I’m one of them. You have millions of Protestants who religiously (pun intended) adhere to your lower standards too. And even those lower standards are at least close to orthodoxy in some ways.

“Hopefully, NO Protestant ‘sects’ claim that. Protestants use the Scripture for a guide, and I don’t remember any verses about condoms in the Bible.”

And abortion isn’t in the Bible either. Not a single verse. You might want to contact Protestants Against Birth Control and read the book by the Protestant Charles Provan called the Bible and Birth Control. Some things were so OBVIOUS to the ancient Jews that it apparently didn’t need to be stated in scripture.

“So - how many Catholics OBEY your no birth control standard?”

Not enough. How many non-Catholics obey the lower Protestant standards and murder the unborn and not allow the next generation of Christians to be born? Too many.


24 posted on 07/11/2009 8:06:56 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Dmitry Vukicevich

You wrote:

“Unless you have enough money to get an annulment.”

Anyone who deserves the annulment gets the annulment without cost if they can’t afford the court costs. I know the chancellor of my diocese extremely well. I’ve known him for 14 years. The annulment court (tribunal) fee is less than $300 and I know someone who got the annulment and paid nothing. Apparently you don’t know about the whole process or the costs or the fact that those who can’t pay don’t. I’m glad I could enlighten you. ;)

“...most tribunals charge anywhere from $200 to $1,000 for adjudicating a standard nullity case. A few charge somewhat over $1,000, and several CHARGE NOTHING AT ALL.”

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9909fea2.asp


25 posted on 07/11/2009 8:14:08 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

Man made rules rather than divine commandments, it is legalistic and smacks of pharisee.


26 posted on 07/11/2009 8:20:24 AM PDT by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

“Actually THE CATHOLIC CHURCH has a higher standard.”

God’s standard might be more appropriate to worry about. In Matthew 5, Jesus points out that God’s standard is too high for even the Pharisees to live by - and too high for any man to live by - and we thus need a Savior.

“I know some polls say that, but I don’t buy it for a second according to what a Catholic actually is.”

So any Catholic who doesn’t live by this standard ceases to be a Catholic? Is Pelosi a Catholic? If not, has she been excommunicated?

“Almost all so-called evangelicals believe abortion is just fine in some circumstances.”

I’ve never met one. As a matter of politics and knowing the weakness of man, many would allow a rape/incest exception, but all that I’ve ever met agree that abortion isn’t admirable in those cases. The Law of Moses, knowing the weakness of man, allowed divorce, and it is described as perfect. But I haven’t met an evangelical who calls abortion “just fine”.


27 posted on 07/11/2009 8:31:17 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

You wrote:

“God’s standard might be more appropriate to worry about.”

In terms of abortion, birth control and divorce and remarriage they are one in the same.

“In Matthew 5, Jesus points out that God’s standard is too high for even the Pharisees to live by - and too high for any man to live by - and we thus need a Savior.”

And yet Jesus said divorce was wrong, but that Moses had lowered that standard. So who wanted higher standards? Moses or Jesus?

“So any Catholic who doesn’t live by this standard ceases to be a Catholic?”

He certainly isn’t a Catholic in good standing in the moral realm. And any Catholic who denies Catholic doctrine is clearly placing himself outside of the Church. Why do you think so many orthodox Catholics were upset about Notre Dame inviting Obama?

“Is Pelosi a Catholic?”

No. She only calls herself one.

“If not, has she been excommunicated?”

She excommunicated herself years ago.

“I’ve never met one.”

Then you don’t know many evangelicals. A year before Roe v. Wade the Southern Baptist Convention decided to support legislation allowing abortion in limited cases (a euphmism for rape and incest cases). Did you know that? That’s the largest evangelical body in America and they’ve been proudly pro-abort (ahem, in limited cases since the early 1970s.

“As a matter of politics and knowing the weakness of man, many would allow a rape/incest exception, but all that I’ve ever met agree that abortion isn’t admirable in those cases.”

Isn’t admirable? Murder of an innocent child isn’t admirable? Wow, talk about a lower standard.

“The Law of Moses, knowing the weakness of man, allowed divorce, and it is described as perfect. But I haven’t met an evangelical who calls abortion “just fine”.”

No, just “isn’t admirable”. Sounds “just fine” to me.


28 posted on 07/11/2009 8:44:46 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
She excommunicated herself years ago.

C'mon, you guys are too funny...Pelosie ex communicated herself??? Go ahead and ask her if she ex communicated herself...

The thing that totally excapes you religious types is that the Chruch of God is spiritual...You can no more add a soul to His church than you can remove one...

29 posted on 07/11/2009 9:13:31 AM PDT by Iscool (I don't understand all that I know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

So annulment is sort of a do over? Sounds like a divorce to me.


30 posted on 07/11/2009 9:33:12 AM PDT by Dmitry Vukicevich (Well at least I am smarter than 63,250,000 Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

From a site:

The Southern Baptist Convention
initially called for legislation in 1971 that would allow for the possibility of abortions under such conditions as rape, incest, clear evidence of severe to fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother. In 1976, the convention changed its position to oppose abortions used as a means of birth control. In 1980, the convention strengthened its position by supporting legislation and/or a constitutional amendment prohibiting abortion except to save the life of the mother. In recent years the Southern Baptist Convention has taken an active leadership role in supporting pro-life legislation, including backing the PBA Ban Act and opposing FOCA and other pro-abortion measures. The convention has also developed a broad range of pro-life educational material for all levels, including a comprehensive pro-life Sunday school curricula and materials for Sanctity of Life Sunday in January.
“Called for legislation” being the operative word here. Unlike any other denomination, the SBC has NO jurisdiction over the local SBC church. NONE. Their resolutions are non-binding in terms of legislating what the local church does or does not do.

The posters urging you to place Biblical Standards above a particular denomination are indeed correct. As a Southern Baptist, I have no more nor less chance of salvation than you as a Catholic. It is NOT my denomination which will save or damn me - but my relationship to Christ. Standing in a garage doesn’t make one a car. God will not ask you to what denomination you belonged when you stand before Him.


31 posted on 07/11/2009 9:53:00 AM PDT by JLLH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Melian

Besides Christ was Jewish why would he start the “Catholic” as oppossed to the catholic church?

The word “catholic” means “universal”. It claims the universality of Christ’s church makes it open to all: all classes, both genders, all nationalities. It implies that the Body of Christ is not limited to a time, place, race or culture. “Then Jesus approached and said to them, ‘All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you’”. (Matthew 28:18-20) No where do I read baptize them into the only Church that God recognizes the Catholic Church.


32 posted on 07/11/2009 9:57:15 AM PDT by Dmitry Vukicevich (Well at least I am smarter than 63,250,000 Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

“Outside the Church no salvation,”

This title is a complete joke. It should read “Outside of Christ there is no Salvation” or is the “Catholic Church” claiming to be a higher authority than Christ?


33 posted on 07/11/2009 10:02:10 AM PDT by Dmitry Vukicevich (Well at least I am smarter than 63,250,000 Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

This whole program is a bunch of Bovine Squeeze. I don’t care if you are Catholic or Rastafarian without a relationship and acceptance of Jesus Christ you are going to Hell. These heretics that call themselves priests will no doubt be cooking with you.


34 posted on 07/11/2009 10:06:56 AM PDT by Dmitry Vukicevich (Well at least I am smarter than 63,250,000 Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil
A couple of times I have been drawn into a “discussion” that I felt inappropriate for an open forum and moved the comments off to freep mail.

I do not understand what you mean. Why would any discussion about Christianity be inappropriate on an open forum?

35 posted on 07/11/2009 10:09:38 AM PDT by TradicalRC (Conservatism is primarily a Christian movement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TradicalRC

Inflamitory.

Unfortunately denominational division is a sure invitation for disputes that are not constructive.

There will be no denominations is heaven, but we have them here.

Perspective of Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, and others bring disputes that should not take place. In your face hostile remarks only divide us.

I have experienced this recently during some history discussion forums. What happened in the distant past is never agreed on by opposing sides.

The U.S. was founded Religious outcasts from Europe. That persecution is possibly one of the reasons we have succeeded so well as a nation. We knew instinctively what not to do, because of the abuses in Europe.

I am not apologetic about being a Christian, but do not like sectarian disputes.


36 posted on 07/11/2009 10:35:12 AM PDT by Texas Fossil (The last time I looked, this is still Texas where I live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Dmitry Vukicevich

The Catholic Church is the only one that traces its line of leadership and doctrine directly from Christ to today. The earliest Christians considered themselves catholic as you defined it and practiced the Mass as Christ commanded. God not only recognizes the Catholic Church, He started it.


37 posted on 07/11/2009 10:48:41 AM PDT by Melian ("Now, Y'all without sin can cast the first stone." ~H.I. McDunnough)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Dmitry Vukicevich

Yes, Christ said that and then did exactly what she asked Him to do: help her friends. Mary was Christ’s mother and, therefore, more special to Him than the average person. Mary was not a sinner: her DNA was used to create Christ’s, and God cannot join Himself to any imperfection. This means that Mary was sinless so that she could carry Christ and their blood could mingle.

The scriptures tell us that an archangel called her “blessed among all women” and “full of grace.” He said she had found favor with God and was selected for this honor. Christ performed His first miracle at her request. She walked to Calvary with Christ. She was revered by the apostles and with them for the Pentecost. Christ made sure His favorite apostle took care of her following His death. There is a lot of evidence in Scripture that Mary was extremely special to God and Christ.


38 posted on 07/11/2009 10:57:35 AM PDT by Melian ("Now, Y'all without sin can cast the first stone." ~H.I. McDunnough)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Dmitry Vukicevich

Dmitry, Christ started a church and promised that He would send the Holy Spirit to guide it forever and that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it. He breathed on the apostles and gave them special gifts and authority. They set up a church that practiced the Mass and had a hierarchy and sacraments. The Catholic Church is the only church that traces its line of leadership, Mass, traditions, sacraments, and beliefs directly back to that church started by Christ and the apostles. The Church called itself Catholic long before Martin Luther broke away from it. Like it or not, the Catholic Church is the only one that shares the complete history of Christ’s Church.

My previous post outlines the places in scripture where Mary is named as significant. If you know the customs of the people of Galilee, you know that calling someone “Woman” was not unusual or derogatory. It was a form of address commonly used. Mary never had other children; in Christ’s day, cousins were also called brothers. Christ had cousins. Christ’s birth was a virgin, miraculous birth.

If you do some historical research using the earliest versions of the Gospels, you will find most of your objections are overcome.


39 posted on 07/11/2009 11:08:23 AM PDT by Melian ("Now, Y'all without sin can cast the first stone." ~H.I. McDunnough)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
If a man realizes that the Catholic Church is the true Church, he must join it if he wishes to save his soul.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is what cults do.

Cults brainwash people into believing that their cult, their cult ceremonies, their anointed cult sacraments, and cult priesthood, is the one and only path to salvation. If they leave the cult they will be damned. It doesn't matter if the cult leadership is corrupt and/or completely ineffectual, if one leaves the cult, they are damned.

Wow! Am I ever glad that I found Christ, and broke free of the cult-like hold of the Catholic Church! It is through Him and His atonement that I am saved...not...a cult-like church.

There is much about the Catholic Church that is true, and I respect Catholics who truly practice their religion....but...PLEASE, in this one area of it claiming to be the “true” church..please. TRUCE PLEASE!

40 posted on 07/11/2009 12:03:57 PM PDT by wintertime (People are not stupid! Good ideas win!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

I am not apologetic about being a Christian, but do not like sectarian disputes.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I don’t either. Claiming to be the one and only true way to salvation is a good way to stir up disputes.


41 posted on 07/11/2009 12:06:32 PM PDT by wintertime (People are not stupid! Good ideas win!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Melian

Mary was Christ’s mother and, therefore, more special to Him than the average person. Mary was not a sinner:

This is so wrong as to be laughable. So now there are two perfect people? Then why wasn’t Mary crucified too? You are speaking the doctrine of Demons when you take the focus off of Christ. Mary did sin and Jesus did not hold her in any special accord. Where is this view even Biblical? Mary sinned and died, she cannot intercede for you, she is dead and she is not a saint. Her DNA had nothing to do with Christ for he was all God unless of course you believe that God pulled a Zeus and came down and slept with Mary, which would mean she is no longer a virgin, or he is half man/half god like in Greek Mythology, none of which is Biblical. Jesus never said you should honor Mary, other then saying honor thy mother and father which was presented for all believers. Which version is it?


42 posted on 07/11/2009 12:12:54 PM PDT by Dmitry Vukicevich (Well at least I am smarter than 63,250,000 Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: wintertime

Precisely my point. All cults say they are the one true religion. I am still waiting on the Catholics to supply me biblical background as to their beliefs that Mary never sinned and that she can intervene between you and God, isn’t that what Christ did? Is there now a holy quarterly?


43 posted on 07/11/2009 12:15:57 PM PDT by Dmitry Vukicevich (Well at least I am smarter than 63,250,000 Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

You wrote:

“C’mon, you guys are too funny...Pelosie ex communicated herself??? Go ahead and ask her if she ex communicated herself...”

It has nothing to do with what she thinks about her position. It has everything to do with her actions.

“The thing that totally excapes you religious types is that the Chruch of God is spiritual...”

You’re incredibly wrong. Only a spiritual person could believe in whatI expressed. Only a spiritual person could believe that a person could separate himself from the faith without any formal decision of the Church officials. This, of course, escapes a person like you.

“You can no more add a soul to His church than you can remove one...”

Souls can be added to the visible Church through baptism and excluded from the sacraments through excommunication.


44 posted on 07/11/2009 12:27:48 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Melian

Like it or not, the Catholic Church is the only one that shares the complete history of Christ’s Church.

Wrong again, if it was only the “Catholic Cult” that Christ recognized why the need to send out Paul in a different ministry? Or John? or any of the other disciples? Shouldn’t they all have been following Peter around? You know the guy that denied Christ but, supposedly, founded the Catholic Church? You can claim anything you want and I am sure there are “documents” that the “Catholic Church” holds that states this but I am going to call it what it is “lies”.

As for the claims of the Roman Catholic Church that its history can be traced back to Jesus Christ, Peter, or the other apostles, such claims lack both historical and Scriptural support. The true Church of Jesus Christ was not founded upon Peter, but upon Peter’s confession of Christ’s deity as recorded in Matthew 16:16: “.. Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. “ Peter was not the first pope nor is there any Scriptural justification whatever for such an office. Peter’s own inspired testimony as to his position and ministry is given in I Peter 5:1-4. He further identifies himself in 2 Peter 1:1 as “a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ....’ History confirms the fact that there were no popes in the early church nor even in the Roman Catholic Church during the first centuries of its existence.

Roman Catholicism makes salvation a long, complicated process with no assurance of eternal life and forgiveness of all sin; to faith in Jesus Christ is added Baptism, the Mass, Confession, prayers to Mary and the Saints, good works, and purgatory. By contrast the Bible teaches salvation by faith in Jesus Christ alone, not by sacraments, prayers or works. Eph. 2:8, 9; Titus 2:13. Bible salvation is God’s free gift to any sinner who believes with the heart that Christ died for his sins and rose again for his justification. I Coy. 15:1-4; Rom. 10:9-13. Bible salvation gives immediate assurance of eternal life. I John 5:10-13. Carefully read and believe John 1: 12; 3:1618; 3:36; 5:24; 14:1-6; 20:30, 31. No church ever saved anyone, but Christ can and will save everyone who will come and trust Him as their Saviour. Acts 4:12; John 6:37; 10:27-30. Trust Christ today and be saved for all eternity!


45 posted on 07/11/2009 12:28:18 PM PDT by Dmitry Vukicevich (Well at least I am smarter than 63,250,000 Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: JLLH
“Standing in a garage does not make one a car.”

Great post. Sometimes I think our Catholic brethren get God confused with “the Church”.
It is not our “particular Church” that will save us. It is our relationship with our Lord. I agree with that statement totally and completely.
It is a form of Idolatry to worship a Church and it's Hierarchy. Scripture tells us there is only one Mediator between God and man. And that is the man Jesus Christ.
I can't find Mary mentioned in there as a “Mediatrix”.
Oh, it's in the Catechism. Since since that overrides the Bible, I guess it's ok then.

46 posted on 07/11/2009 12:28:24 PM PDT by BnBlFlag (Deo Vindice/Semper Fidelis "Ya gotta saddle up your boys; Ya gotta draw a hard line")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: BnBlFlag

Thanks! I get deeply concerned when I talk to my Catholic friends and they say, “Oh, I’m Catholic. I haven’t really read the Bible.” I can’t imagine facing eternity with only a pastor’s/preast’s word on what God requires. That to me is astonishing! Just like the mess with those who voted for our current Pres. - not doing your own research has dire consequences!!


47 posted on 07/11/2009 12:33:51 PM PDT by JLLH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: JLLH; BnBlFlag
I get deeply concerned when I talk to my Catholic friends and they say, “Oh, I’m Catholic. I haven’t really read the Bible.”
So does Mother Church, therefore she has her priests read aloud the entire Bible every year. In public.
48 posted on 07/11/2009 1:51:20 PM PDT by narses (http://www.theobamadisaster.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Melian

So if Mary was sinless, she didn’t need a savior.

Could you really be claiming that Mary never sinned?

You really need to read your Bible.

Romans 3:23 - “for ALL HAVE SINNED and fall short of the glory of God”

Romans 3:10 “NONE IS RIGHTEOUS, no, not one”


49 posted on 07/11/2009 2:47:13 PM PDT by paulist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

“So - how many Catholics OBEY your no birth control standard?”

Lots of us do and always have. There is a small minority of very lound CINOs that give all of us a very bad name. Another thing annulment isn’t given to everyone who wants one. It’s not like you can just throw your hands up and get one easily.


50 posted on 07/11/2009 2:57:28 PM PDT by chris_bdba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-169 next 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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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