Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies.
Locked on 04/28/2010 11:54:24 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:

Per poster’s request



Skip to comments.

Nifonging the Catholic Church
me ^ | April 18, 2010 | vanity

Posted on 04/18/2010 9:49:35 PM PDT by Judith Anne

I seriously wonder about some FReepers, sometimes. Any other person accused of a crime would be defended by every FReeper as being innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. I've seen whole threads written by men who have been accused of child abuse by ex-wives out to deny them their visitation rights or to wrest more money out of them. These men are rightly indignant, and furious about the unjust accusations that cannot be proven but are never withdrawn.

Yet where are those FReepers when a PRIEST is accused? Where is the presumption of innocence? Suddenly, every accusation becomes a verdict, and not only the accused but his entire organization and all its adherents are held responsible.

I can only wonder what some of these so-called conservatives (who so faithfully defend the Constitution) would do, if THEY were the ones accused! It is a nightmare for any man -- all of you know how even the accusation stains the man forever, even if it is proven false!

Not only that, many here assert that the problems of 30, 40 and even 50 years ago must be tried in the media TODAY!

Remember the Duke rape case? There are more similarities than differences here. The priests are accused, nifonged, and instead of being defended, they are vilified!

What other man of you could stand under the weight of such an accusation trumpeted by the press, and come out whole? None! And such accusations made, LONG after the statute of limitations has passed, sometimes even after the accused is dead and buried for YEARS -- are YOU one of those who automatically, reflexively, spitefully, and gleefully act as judge, jury, and executioner?

Women! What if it were YOUR HUSBAND, YOUR BROTHER, YOUR FATHER, YOUR UNCLE, YOUR SON who was accused? Wouldn't you want the best defense possible? Wouldn't YOU believe in their innocence? Wouldn't YOU help protect your loved ones as much as possible? And yet, YOU JUDGE THE CHURCH FOR DOING WHAT YOU WOULD DO?

Shame! Vast shame! On all who have sinned against the innocent!


TOPICS: Catholic; Ministry/Outreach; Moral Issues; Religion & Culture
KEYWORDS: denialnotrivernegypt; excuses; falseaccusations; koolaidcatholics; moralrot; moredeflection; nifong
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 351-400401-450451-500 ... 2,751-2,775 next last
To: Natural Law
Now if only we can sort out how the NC’s, that would be non-Catholics, engineered the whole scandal from the dank corners of their mothers’ basements...........
401 posted on 04/21/2010 12:37:14 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 397 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
Now it's YOUR denial, YOUR exploitation, YOUR soul, YOUR purposes.
402 posted on 04/21/2010 12:50:58 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 399 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
"Now if only we can sort out how the NC’s, that would be non-Catholics, engineered the whole scandal from the dank corners of their mothers’ basements........... "

Again, more obfuscation and denial of complicency in the sin by non-Catholic clergy. Have you no shame?

403 posted on 04/21/2010 12:52:20 PM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 401 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law; count-your-change; Dr. Eckleburg
I didn't ask Judith Anne I asked you and your silence and obfuscation is deafening.

Your post #390 asked me nothing. Your post #388 asked me the question, and I quote:

Wouldn't you agree that those who exploit the victims for political or sectarian purposes are nearly as guilty as those who exploit them for sexual gratification?
Point "i" in my post 399 summarized your charge.
Silence in regards to abuses by clergy shows a lack of care and concern for the victims. Speaking out in regards to abuses by clergy is exploiting the victims in order to harm others.
My post #389 shows your 26 attempts to post about abuses within my church. By your logic, I should be deafened by your thread posting history, which shows you've never posted a single thread about the abuse problems that occured within your own church. Indeed, one might deduct from said history a "lack of care and concern for the victims". One might deduct a greater concern for politics than for church matters of any kind.

So what was the purpose in attempting 26 posts about another's church abuse issues, if not to (in your words) "exploit the victims for political or sectarian purposes"?

404 posted on 04/21/2010 12:56:31 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
Now it's YOUR denial, YOUR exploitation, YOUR soul, YOUR purposes.


405 posted on 04/21/2010 1:02:31 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 402 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
"So what was the purpose in attempting 26 posts about another's church abuse issues, if not to (in your words) "exploit the victims for political or sectarian purposes"?"

My purpose was to illustrate that the abuse scandal is not an exclusively Catholic issue but a human failing that affects all faiths and organizations that are made up of imperfect people. Where we differ is that I have worked "in my own back yard" to address the problem and expressed compassion for all victims, not just those of the Catholic clergy. You on the other hand lurk almost exclusively on Catholic subject threads and take every opportunity to re-exploit the victims in service to your anti-Catholic agenda. Denying that molestation scandals have occurred in Calvinist organizations is just plain lying.

406 posted on 04/21/2010 1:12:09 PM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 404 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

That ‘best defence is good offence’ doesn’t work either.


407 posted on 04/21/2010 1:15:08 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: All

Haven’t posting here for long, but I don’t intend on posting again. Comments and attacks here on this site...can’t call ourselves christians. We can agree to disagree...not even worth explaining.
The world is in chaos, total chaos and if we can’t even be repectful and cordial to each other, than we are no better off then the rest of the world. We call ourselves Christians..no wonder people have left the faith. It’s pretty disgusting actually...


408 posted on 04/21/2010 1:16:16 PM PDT by bellfleur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
"That ‘best defence is good offence’ doesn’t work either."

Its not about offense or defense, it is about your denial and subsequent culpability. Your denomination will not end the problem until well meaning people like you speak up and publicly denounce it instead of joyfully pointing to the mote in your brother Christian's eye.

409 posted on 04/21/2010 1:31:39 PM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 407 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law; count-your-change; Dr. Eckleburg
My purpose was to illustrate that the abuse scandal is not an exclusively Catholic issue but a human failing that affects all faiths and organizations that are made up of imperfect people.

Which is, of course, why you've made so many posts and threads about the abuses that have occured within your own church. Gotcha.

Where we differ is that I have worked "in my own back yard" to address the problem and expressed compassion for all victims, not just those of the Catholic clergy. You on the other hand....

And how would you know what I've done in my own backyard? Have you been spying on me? Usually when someone spies on me, I get phone calls from heavy breathers, asking me what kind of underwear I have on.

You on the other hand lurk almost exclusively on Catholic subject threads and take every opportunity to re-exploit the victims in service to your anti-Catholic agenda.

"Almost exclusively"??? I've made a total of 3,187 threads and 12,683 in-thread posts over nine years. So you've read all of them, and can accurately summarize my entire nine-year posting history with that one statement? "Almost exclusively" and "every opportunity" would mean a sizeable majority of those will be about abuse scandals.

I think I've just been Nifonged!

You know, it's funny that just four short months ago - almost to the day - you were saying

I am a Catholic and a conservative American. I have never felt any anti-Catholic bias from Free Republic or any of the moderators. There are a handful of posters that are chronic anti-Catholics but they are few and simply letting them spool out their thoughts is repudiation enough. Like the saying goes, I may not agree with what they say, but I will defend to the death their right to say it.
503 posted on 12/22/2009 10:33:45 PM PST by Natural Law ("Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" Gal 4:16)
And then just yesterday you were saying
Don't get your expectations up too much. I have learned how to navigate with and around the inherent anti-Catholic bias of FR.
354 posted on 04/20/2010 11:47:47 AM PDT by Natural Law
Your professed ability to detect "anti-Catholic bias" and "anti-Christian agendas" is suspect, to say the least.

Denying that molestation scandals have occurred in Calvinist organizations is just plain lying.

Who's denied it? When? I've made a total of 3,187 threads and 12,683 in-thread posts up until now. Show me the one(s) in which I denied it.

410 posted on 04/21/2010 1:44:11 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 406 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
Reichbishop

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
411 posted on 04/21/2010 1:44:31 PM PDT by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

I don’t call child rapists and molesters my Christian brothers.


412 posted on 04/21/2010 1:45:24 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 409 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
"I don’t call child rapists and molesters my Christian brothers."

Are you insinuating that all Catholics are child rapists and molesters and not your brothers in Christ?

413 posted on 04/21/2010 1:58:27 PM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 412 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
I don’t call child rapists and molesters my Christian brothers.

Ditto - regardless of what Catholic/Orthodox church or Protestant/Evangelical denomination that they try and hide within.

...But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler--not even to eat with such a one.
Paul to the Corinthians, 1 Corinthians 5:11 [NASB]

414 posted on 04/21/2010 1:59:39 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 412 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

My comment was in clear and simple English and insinuating of nothing.

Now I must go work on my well meaning yet shameless agenda.


415 posted on 04/21/2010 2:13:06 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 413 | View Replies]

To: All

P.S. If some of the comments here are posted by those who believe “justfication by faith” then that is reason enough for me to believe what I believe. Wish it was that easy...


416 posted on 04/21/2010 2:23:01 PM PDT by bellfleur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies]

To: Religion Moderator
Reichbishop was a cabinet level political office and head of the German Protestant Church. The Reichbishop was Ludwig Müller (who I am pretty sure is not a freeper) who gained the office largely because of his extreme anti-Jewish and anti-Catholic rhetoric and works. In using the term Reichbishop was referring generally to those who, like Müller, engage in anti-Jewish and/or anti-Catholic rhetoric in the name of greater Christianity. I did not name any names or specific freepers and will not do so in the future.
417 posted on 04/21/2010 2:26:19 PM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 411 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

Saves a packet of grief when the Bible is followed, doesn’t it? Jesus even outlined the steps to be taken at Matthew chapter 18....Cheers.


418 posted on 04/21/2010 2:47:57 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law; Alex Murphy
I don't know what was accomplished by copying the Reichbishop on this.

You're obviously not referring to Alex Murphy since you're asking him the question. I doubt you use that term for Judith Anne. So that leaves me as the person you are labeling as "Reichbishop."

The last post you made calling me a "Reichbishop" was removed by the Religion Moderator.

Roman Catholic apologists break the rules consistently. Stop breaking the rules.

419 posted on 04/21/2010 3:32:10 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

lol. Thanks, Alex. Their own words reveal the absence of compassion, discernment and a heart of flesh.


420 posted on 04/21/2010 3:36:04 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 399 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
Saves a packet of grief when the Bible is followed, doesn’t it? Jesus even outlined the steps to be taken at Matthew chapter 18
Catholic and Protestant Bibles: What is the Difference?

Ours get read?

10 posted on 03/07/2007 10:01:26 AM PST by Alex Murphy
Get Cracking, Catholics![article at the National Catholic Register]
A formative, family-friendly factoid from a recent study or survey in the news.
November 19-25, 2006 Issue
Posted 11/16/06 at 8:00 AM

According to a study released in September by Baylor University’s Institute for Studies of Religion, evangelical Protestants are a whopping eight times more likely than Catholics to read the Bible on a weekly basis. Of course, the survey only looked at private Bible reading; it did not take into account the Scripture passages Catholics take in at every Mass. Still, we tip our hats to our separated brothers and sisters in Christ for their zeal for the Word of God.

Related threads:
Synod: Christianity not a 'Religion of the Book' [article from National Catholic Reporter]
Yesterday saw...a forceful plea from a key papal advisor [Bishop Salvatore Fisichella, the rector of the Lateran University and President of the Pontifical Academy for Life] to reject the idea of Christianity as a “Religion of the Book.”

Synod to Focus on Proper Use of Scripture [article from Catholic World News]
The Church should combat widespread "Biblical illiteracy" among the Catholic faithful, Archbishop Eterovic said

A Literate Church: The state of Catholic Bible study today [article from America: The National Catholic Weekly]
...while fewer believers know much about the Bible, one-third of Americans continue to believe that it is literally true, something organizers of the Synod on the Word of God called a dangerous form of fundamentalism that is “winning more and more adherents…even among Catholics.” Such literalism, the synod’s preparatory document said, “demands an unshakable adherence to rigid doctrinal points of view and imposes, as the only source of teaching for Christian life and salvation, a reading of the Bible which rejects all questioning and any kind of critical research”....
....The flip side of this embarrassment is the presumption among many Catholics that they “get” the Bible at Mass, along with everything else they need for their spiritual lives. The postconciliar revolution in liturgy greatly expanded the readings, with a three-year cycle in the vernacular that for the first time included Old Testament passages. Given that exposure, many think they do not need anything else. As Mr. McMahon put it, “The majority still say you go to Mass, you get your ticket punched, and that’s it for the week.”

"By doing nothing to practice his faith except attending Sunday weekly Mass (and the few Holy Days), in two years' time (after which the reading cycle ends), a Mass-attending Catholic will hear 3.7% of the Old Testament (932 verses), and in three years' time (after which the reading cycle ends) a Mass-attending Catholic will hear 40.8% of the New Testament (3247 verses). That all adds up to a total of 4179 out of 33001 verses mentioned in the chart, i.e. only 12.7% of the entire Bible (excluding Psalms) is heard by a weekly-Mass-attending Catholic."
-- Alex Murphy, November 1, 2009
on the thread Lectionary Statistics - How much of the Bible is included in the Lectionary for Mass? (Popquiz!)

421 posted on 04/21/2010 3:46:25 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 418 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

Even in the relatively rare and brutally frank back and forth experienced on the FR Religion Forum (and few other places), I’ve experienced surprising ignorance of basic Biblical themes from putative Catholics. You’d think those brave enough to wade in, to something approaching a donneybrook at times, would have the confidence that a firm grounding in one’s faith provides.

But, I’ve been told that Christ as the second Adam is one of those weird Protestant beliefs, I’ve been told that Replacement Theology is a uniquely Protestant and particularly Presbyterian variety of anti-Semitism, I’ve been told that I will be judged by the Pope on Judgment Day ... I can’t quite decide if it’s scary, sad or funny.

It’s all three by turns, I suppose.


422 posted on 04/21/2010 4:00:44 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 421 | View Replies]

To: Twink
If teachers sexually molest children, they go to jail.

If priests sexually molest children...well, parent probably won't know about for a decade or so until their child reaches 28, anyway, according to Ratzinger's rules, and by then the priest will probably have been shuffled around to several more parishes where he's destroyed even more children and families.

Watch the award-winning documentary on DVD, "DELIVER US FROM EVIL," and pay close attention to the guilt all the many parents felt at handing their children over to pederasts. No one has to stay blind. They just have to stay vigilant.


423 posted on 04/21/2010 4:09:09 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 371 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; Religion Moderator; Alex Murphy
"You're obviously not referring to Alex Murphy since you're asking him the question. I doubt you use that term for Judith Anne. So that leaves me as the person you are labeling as "Reichbishop."

Are you attempting to read my mind in violation of the Forum rules?

424 posted on 04/21/2010 4:21:54 PM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 419 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
You were addressing Alex' post. Your comment doesn't make sense if it were addressed to Alex. It was in the third person.

It also doesn't make sense if it were addressed to Judith Anne, unless you've had a falling out in the past few hours. Which is none of my concern.

That leaves me whom you have called by that name before (and the term still doesn't make any sense.)

The last time you called me that name your post was removed by the Religion Moderator. So either follow the rules or continue to break them and live with the consequences.

425 posted on 04/21/2010 4:29:50 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 424 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; Religion Moderator
"So either follow the rules or continue to break them and live with the consequences."

In addition to attempting to read my mind are you now making this about me AND assuming the duties of the Religion Moderator? Or do the rules only apply to Catholics?

426 posted on 04/21/2010 4:38:37 PM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 425 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

The kings of ancient Israel were commanded to make their own copy of God’s word so as to be able to read it for themselves. So it would seem that to the degree we appreciate the importance of His Word, we take time to become well versed in it.


427 posted on 04/21/2010 5:31:03 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 421 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
No, I'm telling you the last time you call me "Reichbishop" your post was pulled by the Religion Moderator. (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you may have missed that fact.)

Therefore I'm reminding you again that your use of the term directed at individual FReepers is against the rules.

428 posted on 04/21/2010 5:45:05 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 426 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy; count-your-change
According to a study released in September by Baylor University’s Institute for Studies of Religion, evangelical Protestants are a whopping eight times more likely than Catholics to read the Bible on a weekly basis...

"By doing nothing to practice his faith except attending Sunday weekly Mass (and the few Holy Days), in two years' time (after which the reading cycle ends), a Mass-attending Catholic will hear 3.7% of the Old Testament (932 verses), and in three years' time (after which the reading cycle ends) a Mass-attending Catholic will hear 40.8% of the New Testament (3247 verses). That all adds up to a total of 4179 out of 33001 verses mentioned in the chart, i.e. only 12.7% of the entire Bible (excluding Psalms) is heard by a weekly-Mass-attending Catholic."

Astounding.

Roman Catholics take pride in "living the Beatitudes." Yet Christ referenced the Scriptures in practically everything He said. You'd think they'd make more of an effort to know what Christ is talking about.

429 posted on 04/21/2010 5:51:05 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 421 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
So what was the purpose in attempting 26 posts about another's church abuse issues, if not to (in your words) "exploit the victims for political or sectarian purposes"?

I find it difficult to believe you cannot discern the purpose. BTW, have you ever posted a thread about protestant clergy child sexual abuse? Please provide a link, if you have. The purpose of the removed posts indicting the presbyterian ministers' child sexual abuse was to let you and all lurkers know that contrary to protestant propaganda, adolescent/child sexual abuse is not a Catholic problem, it is a problem of all institutions. In fact, one of the worst abusers in the presbyterian church, who moved around from school to school, was a teacher at a school for deaf children. Public schools also have a very high rate of sex abusers of children, probably the highest. The propaganda, and the anti-Catholic bigots' agenda here, is to pretend that the Catholic Church has the only, the worst, and the highest rate of child abuse.

430 posted on 04/21/2010 5:52:53 PM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 404 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
Roman Catholics take pride in "living the Beatitudes."

As opposed to presbyterians. Is the PCUSA the largest group of presbyterians? It would be shocking if ANY of them read the Bible once a week.

431 posted on 04/21/2010 5:56:58 PM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 429 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
Therefore I'm reminding you again that your use of the term directed at individual FReepers is against the rules

Actually, thin-skinned people are the disrupters on the open threads. Being hypersensitive to imagined or perceived slights is against the rules as well.

432 posted on 04/21/2010 5:58:47 PM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 428 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne
"But he that glorieth, let him glory in the LORD.

For not he that commendeth himself is approved, but whom the Lord commendeth." -- 2 Corinthians 10:17-18


433 posted on 04/21/2010 6:00:46 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 431 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne
The last time that word was flung at a FReeper, the post was pulled by the Religion Moderator.

Challenge the rules; it's your choice.

434 posted on 04/21/2010 6:02:25 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 432 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

I also find it difficult to believe that any presbyterians read the gospels. They sure do concentrate on those freaky Pauline epistles. St. Paul got a few things right, but he was likely just as loony as his protegee, Calvin.


435 posted on 04/21/2010 6:03:57 PM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 433 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; Religion Moderator; Natural Law
The last time that word was flung at a FReeper, the post was pulled by the Religion Moderator.

Challenge the rules, it's your choice.

Well, you have complained about this "Reichbishop" word numerous times, and Natural Law has explained the meaning and use of it, and the Religion Moderator has left it on post 400. If the Religion Moderator wants to delete it, I's sure s/he will. If it bothers you a lot, consider getting a thicker skin or hitting the abuse button, but please return to the subject of the thread, we've wasted enough time on this word, which does have a meaning that is not derogatory.

436 posted on 04/21/2010 6:10:10 PM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 434 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; Religion Moderator; Natural Law

PS, the word was not “flung” at you, and frankly, you are the one who decided it was aimed at you.


437 posted on 04/21/2010 6:11:48 PM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 436 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne

“freaky Pauline epistles. St. Paul got a few things right, but he was likely just as loony . . .”

I understand giving Protestants grief over removing the Apocrypha (even if I don’t agree with the Catholic position); but I wasn’t aware that picking and choosing which books of the Bible were ‘non-freaky’ and which were ‘freaky’ was practiced.

Removing those freaky Pauline epistles written by that loon should increase that percentage of the Bible that is read at mass during the lectionary cycle significantly.

Now, Calvin...I’ve never been presdestined to like his stuff much. But that’s for other threads.

Will Wallace


438 posted on 04/21/2010 6:20:02 PM PDT by will of the people
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 435 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne; Dr. Eckleburg
I also find it difficult to believe that any presbyterians read the gospels. They sure do concentrate on those freaky Pauline epistles. St. Paul got a few things right, but he was likely just as loony as his protegee, Calvin.

Oh my, but that statement's a keeper. Ping for later reference.

439 posted on 04/21/2010 6:31:08 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 435 | View Replies]

Oh wow. All the Fred Phelps types on one thread.


440 posted on 04/21/2010 6:34:42 PM PDT by big'ol_freeper ("Anyone pushing Romney must love socialism...Piss on Romney and his enablers!!" ~ Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 439 | View Replies]

To: will of the people

Do I have to specify that every post I make is my personal opinion? Or is it sufficient to just let you know, here?

Before I became Catholic or even Christian, I spent a lot of time reading the Old and New Testament scriptures in various translations. Frankly, St. Paul was just plain loony in a lot of what he says, legalistic and nit-picky at times, and at other times a wild-eyed foaming visionary. The epistles made me wonder at times if he had a blood sugar problem, you know, extreme highs and lows. Now, 1 Corinthians 13 was absolutely true and beautiful, and if that were all we had of St. Paul, it had been an elegant sufficiency.

The four Gospels, on the other hand, had a huge impact on me as an agnostic. The bald narrative was compelling, and Christ’s recorded words spoke directly to my soul. I love Christ and He is my Lord and Savior, and I am a Catholic, because of the Gospels.


441 posted on 04/21/2010 6:36:12 PM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 438 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy; Natural Law
Oh my, but that statement's a keeper. Ping for later reference

Yes, you have made it apparent that you treasure my posts. And Natual Law's. Be sure and tell Jesus Christ about it when you pray tonight, if you pray.

442 posted on 04/21/2010 6:38:03 PM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 439 | View Replies]

To: big'ol_freeper

They sure are. *sigh*


443 posted on 04/21/2010 6:38:45 PM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 440 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne

Trust me- I understand your posts are your opinion. I assume it with every poster (unless attributed or quoted content is included).

Do you claim not to practice your faith? If so I apologize. But I didn’t say it was a practice of the church, just that I didn’t realize it was practiced.

Adding 1 Cor 13 back into the mix will, unfortunately once again lower the percentage of the Bible read at mass during the lectionary cycle.

Will Wallace


444 posted on 04/21/2010 6:48:19 PM PDT by will of the people
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 441 | View Replies]

To: big'ol_freeper

We’re not Phelps-ers

We’re apparently anti Catholic bigot Nifongers.

Gald I could clear that up :)

Will Wallace


445 posted on 04/21/2010 6:50:55 PM PDT by will of the people
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 440 | View Replies]

To: will of the people

I, as well as a lot of Catholics I know, make a habit of reading the daily mass scriptures (posted right here on FR by Salvation) and that RAISES the percentage of the Bible read by Catholics throughout the year.

Anyway, why would my criticism of the Pauline epistles interest you enough to comment? Just the other day, a protestant or two was saying that St. James and St. Jude didn’t belong in the Bible. St. James, I presume because of James 1:22, “Be ye doers of the word and not hearers only” (by memory, that may not be exact) and St. Jude because they thought Peter wrote it, or something like that.


446 posted on 04/21/2010 6:57:56 PM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 444 | View Replies]

To: will of the people

Not much difference from what I have observed.


447 posted on 04/21/2010 7:10:54 PM PDT by big'ol_freeper ("Anyone pushing Romney must love socialism...Piss on Romney and his enablers!!" ~ Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 445 | View Replies]

To: big'ol_freeper

Any anti Catholic port in a storm, I believe...


448 posted on 04/21/2010 7:15:33 PM PDT by MarkBsnr ( I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 447 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne

I didn’t read that thread. (re: Jude and James)

Honestly, I’ve been enjoying this one too much to read any others for the past couple of days.

As to why it would interest me enough to comment; because it presented an opportunity to respond to something I have an opinion on in a hopefully witty or amusing way.

A large percentage of the rabbit trails you argue appear to be just conversational injections of humor, not assertions of facts.

For example, the other day when you said to someone that there was a priest with in 500 miles (an assertion I admittedly did not understand- perhaps I missed some of the previous context), and they replied to the effect that they’re closer than that- there’s a prison within 100 miles; it was, I believe an injection of humor.

Your repeated demands that he produce names didn’t discredit the poster in my eyes.

Hyperbole, witticisms and on the internet even half-witticism (typing in my best foghorn Leghorn voice “That’s a joke ma’am... I say that’s a joke”) keep the conversation interesting and make points with impact in ways at which mere repetition of facts fails.

Since it’s a open thread on a public forum, I need not answer why I chose to respond, but have done so anyway.

The comments about the percentage of Bible covered in the three year lectionary...well they were mildly amusing. Trust me, I’ve been smiling ever since I wrote them. If your humor mileage varies, I’m okay with that.

Will Wallace


449 posted on 04/21/2010 7:20:01 PM PDT by will of the people
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 446 | View Replies]

To: big'ol_freeper

Keep observing then.


450 posted on 04/21/2010 7:20:37 PM PDT by will of the people
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 447 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 351-400401-450451-500 ... 2,751-2,775 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