Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"Ale Mary" Dive Bar Uses Monstrance and Chalices for Drunken Revelries
Eponymous Flower ^ | March 25, 2012

Posted on 03/26/2012 1:38:33 PM PDT by NYer

Edit: A definition from Wikipedia is useful here: Blasphemy is irreverence towards religious or holy persons or things.[1] Some countries have laws to punish blasphemy,[2] while others have laws to give recourse to those who are offended by blasphemy. 


[Fell's Point, Baltimore, MD] There was a show called "Cheers" on television years ago.  It was bawdy and vulgar yet there were some borders it was not safe to pass in the early 80s when the show first aired.  It depicted a homey place, reminiscent of an unpretentious neighborhood bar with a hint of old world ambiance and Boston charm.  The heavy wooden furniture and the bar spoke of permanence, elegance,  and  that favorite piety of secular artists, human dignity. It was not always clear who the show's buffoons were, but you knew them when you saw them, and sometimes, it was a comedic mailman who could be the most noble in the simplicity of his fears.  Some other writer said something about irony being lost on a society which had no shame.  That's why we'd like to wield a metaphorical hammer.  Perhaps there are others who can put a better finish on the details of what we will tell.

Satirical painting: priest displeased with Nun?

All we can say is that sometimes evil is really mundane and some of us don't realize that we're not only bufoons needlessly offending  people's religious sensibilities, but far worse than that, we're offending God.  Even the name of the bar, a pun on the Blessed Mother's name seems calculated to be offensive.

Would you like some candy?

 We're not talking about this place, but it's not far from Boston, but it boasts a similar unmistakable charm you'd expect in New England with friendly folks.

One of the features of the bar, and there are many, is its unmistakable Catholic ambiance. It's called, Ale Mary's and is located in Fell's point Maryland. One can just smell the faint aroma of the ocean as you think about it. The food is inexpensive, but if you're Catholic you might find it too expensive for the peace of your conscience to see the sacramental elements of your religion appear for the sake of decoration in peculiarly deliberate ways.

Chalices Used for Holy Sacrifice Being Abused by Patrons

It's not surprising, but it's not acceptable either that chalices which are used in Catholic Mass for the consecration of wine which becomes the blood of Christ, are used by patrons to drink (and get drunk from). They're made of precious metals, sometimes jewels, but their use in such a secular setting is strange and unsettling. No less than the inexplicable painting of a priest with a stole, looking aghast or in surprise at a nun who has her back to him.

The most disturbing thing in the restaurant is the monstrance which is behind the bar used as decoration. The monstrance is large ornate disk, often resembling the sun, which is surmounted in a long stand with a heavy base. It contains a crystal compartment at the center of the disk where a consecrated communion Host can be placed inside and it allows the priest to elevate the entire object by the stand for the veneration of the Sacrament it contains. Seeing this monstrance here in this bar, covered with mardigras beads and a mustached smiley face where the Host would normally be is a little bit like finding family heirlooms in the hands of people who not only use them for purposes for which they were never intended, but use them in disrespectful ways.


Mustached Smiley Face Seems Particularly Malevolent

We found out about this recently and the individual who sent this to us wrote an e-mail complaining about the display of these religious items and even offered to purchase them. Far from being treated with the respect she deserved, her concerns were met with derision. 

Despite the bar owner claiming that no one cared about this clearly blasphemous display of religious artifacts, he asked her to remove an entry she made under the bar at a public site allowing comment on establishments.

As he berated our friend, the proprietor insisted as an argument to justify his sacrilege and disrespect for Catholic sacramentals, that there were even Bishops and priests who thought that his blasphemous inclusion of religious articles was comical and that there was nothing wrong with this display.

Apparently, there's some truth to what he says, because Catholic clergy, including senior, does frequent this place.

We'll be praying a Rosary in reparation for having seen this blasphemy.  Hopefully, the proprietor can be persuaded to part with these items before word of this affects his business either spiritually or financially.


Give them a call:

Corner of Fleet & Washington Sts.
Fell's Point
Baltimore, MD.
21231
410-276-2044


TOPICS: Current Events; Moral Issues
KEYWORDS: bar; md; sacramentals
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-231 next last
To: editor-surveyor
"Catholics are amazing."

Aw shucks......

151 posted on 03/28/2012 1:36:47 PM PDT by Hegewisch Dupa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: WPaCon

Yes - you’re playing the evil “Taking the definition of “literal” literally” Game - shame on you. Also nicely ironic of you....


152 posted on 03/28/2012 1:41:23 PM PDT by Hegewisch Dupa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Hegewisch Dupa

Thank you. Although it can be expected of me, since, as a Catholic, I am amazing. Still not amazing enough to get the inflatable bouncing clown reference, though...


153 posted on 03/28/2012 1:53:40 PM PDT by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

Then obviously you do not wear a goatee...


154 posted on 03/28/2012 2:14:15 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

LOL! That must have gone right over your head.


155 posted on 03/28/2012 3:19:23 PM PDT by Pyro7480 (Viva Cristo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

-—And you apparently don’t realize that to a logical thinking believer, the scripture you post demolishes your position.——

I see an assertion, but no argument.


156 posted on 03/28/2012 4:10:34 PM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas (Viva Christo Rey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

Comment #157 Removed by Moderator

To: Natural Law
No more so than the Ark of the Covenant.

Or a cheesy plastic imitation of one...

158 posted on 03/28/2012 4:15:30 PM PDT by Sirius Lee (Sofa King Mitt Odd Did Obamneycare)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas

The posted scripture is my argument. No suggestion by Paul to inject any mumbo-jumbo satanic priest there between the believer and the bread; just a simple respectful commemoration of the Lord’s death. No magic cookie, no sun worshiper monstrance, just the way the Lord said.
.


159 posted on 03/28/2012 4:22:40 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor; St_Thomas_Aquinas
"No suggestion by Paul to inject any mumbo-jumbo satanic priest there between the believer and the bread; just a simple respectful commemoration of the Lord’s death. No magic cookie, no sun worshiper monstrance, just the way the Lord said."

You are indeed a Felix Culpa. The more outrageous you get, the better I feel when I forgive you.

160 posted on 03/28/2012 4:55:37 PM PDT by Natural Law (If you love the Catholic Church raise your hands, if not raise your standards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

I’m not sure what your position regarding the Eucharist is, but I detect hostility to the constant Tradition of Christ’s Church. If you will not listen to the Church...

From St. Paul through to the early Church Fathers to today, Catholics have seen the Eucharist the same way.

______________________________________________________________________________

Paul Confirms This

Paul wrote to the Corinthians: “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16). So when we receive Communion, we actually participate in the body and blood of Christ, not just eat symbols of them. Paul also said, “Therefore whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. . . . For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself” (1 Cor. 11:27, 29). “To answer for the body and blood” of someone meant to be guilty of a crime as serious as homicide. How could eating mere bread and wine “unworthily” be so serious? Paul’s comment makes sense only if the bread and wine became the real body and blood of Christ. 
 
What Did the First Christians Say?

Anti-Catholics also claim the early Church took this chapter symbolically. Is that so? Let’s see what some early Christians thought, keeping in mind that we can learn much about how Scripture should be interpreted by examining the writings of early Christians. 

Ignatius of Antioch, who had been a disciple of the apostle John and who wrote a letter to the Smyrnaeans about A.D. 110, said, referring to “those who hold heterodox opinions,” that “they abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again” (6:2, 7:1). 

Forty years later, Justin Martyr, wrote, “Not as common bread or common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, . . . is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus” (First Apology 66:1–20). 

Origen, in a homily written about A.D. 244, attested to belief in the Real Presence. “I wish to admonish you with examples from your religion. You are accustomed to take part in the divine mysteries, so you know how, when you have received the Body of the Lord, you reverently exercise every care lest a particle of it fall and lest anything of the consecrated gift perish. You account yourselves guilty, and rightly do you so believe, if any of it be lost through negligence” (Homilies on Exodus 13:3). 

Cyril of Jerusalem, in a catechetical lecture presented in the mid-300s, said, “Do not, therefore, regard the bread and wine as simply that, for they are, according to the Master’s declaration, the body and blood of Christ. Even though the senses suggest to you the other, let faith make you firm. Do not judge in this matter by taste, but be fully assured by faith, not doubting that you have been deemed worthy 
of the body and blood of Christ” (Catechetical Discourses: Mystagogic 4:22:9). 

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/christ-in-the-eucharist


161 posted on 03/28/2012 4:57:37 PM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas (Viva Christo Rey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

Comment #162 Removed by Moderator

To: Pyro7480

Put it back in the context of the verse. Paul remonstrated those that had literally come to satisfy their hunger with the communion bread.

How did you miss that?


163 posted on 03/28/2012 5:06:13 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

164 posted on 03/28/2012 5:12:21 PM PDT by Pyro7480 (Viva Cristo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
"Paul remonstrated those that had literally come to satisfy their hunger with the communion bread."

Please explain Jesus' use of the word "Epiousios" (επιούσιος), in the Lord's Prayer translated as "Supersubstantial Bread" in describing the "communion bread". Note the term ousios meaning the philosophical term "substance" exactly like that used by the Church in the "Consubstantial" and the Eucharist being Transubstantial.

165 posted on 03/28/2012 5:30:10 PM PDT by Natural Law (If you love the Catholic Church raise your hands, if not raise your standards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

Jesus did not use that word. That was a later corruption of the Greek.

Jesus spoke only Hebrew anyway. He didn’t ask his Father for any hocus-pocus bread.


166 posted on 03/28/2012 5:36:04 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

The Antichrist has a sinus headache?


167 posted on 03/28/2012 5:47:15 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: theKid51

Should I drive you there.


168 posted on 03/28/2012 5:50:10 PM PDT by bmwcyle (I am ready to serve Jesus on Earth because the GOP failed again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
Jesus spoke only Hebrew anyway.

Really? How did his disciples understand him since Aramaic was probably the most common language of the area at the time, along with Greek. And unless Scripture is not to believed Jesus is quoted to have spoken Aramaic on several occasions. He no doubt spoke and read Hebrew but the notion of Him only speaking Hebrew is silly.

169 posted on 03/28/2012 5:50:22 PM PDT by conservonator (God between us and the devil!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

170 posted on 03/28/2012 6:13:52 PM PDT by Pyro7480 (Viva Cristo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
"Jesus did not use that word. That was a later corruption of the Greek."

So now you are saying that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, both written in Koine Greek, both using the word Epiousios ( επιούσιος ) in the Lord's Prayer are errant?

171 posted on 03/28/2012 6:24:31 PM PDT by Natural Law (If you love the Catholic Church raise your hands, if not raise your standards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
The bride of Christ doesn’t need nicolaitan canons; it has the Holy Spirit to guide Bible study.

You are going to blame the Holy Spirit for your beliefs? Better be careful about blaspheming against Him.

Of course, catholics have no more concept of how the Holy Spirit works in the real church than a blind man has of a color wheel.

You gotta stop staring at the strobe lights.

Keep on thrashing; you remind me of Sambo’s tigers running around the tree until they turn into butter.

When one's theology is cut whole cloth from a fantasy life, I think it good that you are branching out from the usual fantasy merchants into actual literature.

172 posted on 03/28/2012 6:42:24 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 112 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
The Ark was not worshiped; in fact, in practice only the high priest even entered to it, and then only after filling the place with enough smoke that he couldn’t even see it.

Are you saying that the high priest could be only a dwarf, midget or small child?

You are awesome, dude.

173 posted on 03/28/2012 6:45:31 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 133 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
More nonsense to smoke-up the room. Paul’s writing demolished the pagan alchemy of transsubstantiation. Live with it.

Ah. Paulianity. Declared heresy.

You still wanna be called Christian?

174 posted on 03/28/2012 6:47:13 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 143 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
Jesus spoke only Hebrew anyway.

Uh huh. Try Aramaic. Nice to see that you fail at this as well as every other posting on this thread.

175 posted on 03/28/2012 6:49:39 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 166 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr

Relax,The Holy Spirit and I are in constant contact.

I can’t imagine what kind of parties you attend, but I havent seen a strobe in decades. No wonder you have such demonic views on things; get different friends.


176 posted on 03/28/2012 7:04:53 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

I want to go on record here that the Gospels were written in Hebrew, and later translated to Greek and Aram. The Hebrew and Aram MS were largely destroyed in great numbers when Rome sacked Israel, which is the primary reason for the dominance of Greek MS.

There are many corrupted Greek MS in this world, and I can see why you’d love them.


177 posted on 03/28/2012 7:11:58 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

Nobody would pick you up?

Could it be your disposition?


178 posted on 03/28/2012 7:13:28 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
Relax,The Holy Spirit and I are in constant contact.

Gotcha. You're blaming the Holy Spirit for your beliefs.


179 posted on 03/28/2012 7:14:38 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 176 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
I want to go on record here that the Gospels were written in Hebrew, and later translated to Greek and Aram. The Hebrew and Aram MS were largely destroyed in great numbers when Rome sacked Israel, which is the primary reason for the dominance of Greek MS.

You wouldn't have any evidence for this, would you? I must say that you have a fascinating world view.

180 posted on 03/28/2012 7:17:28 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 177 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr

Sorry, Jews spoke Hebrew, although they had enriched the language with a few Aram words for which Hebrew had no equivalent.

Let me know when you acquire a masoretic scroll in Aram. Only a complete fool would believe that a 70 year stay in Babylon would change the Language of God’s people.
.


181 posted on 03/28/2012 7:18:35 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr

>> “Are you saying that the high priest could be only a dwarf, midget or small child?” <<

we went through that foolish misdirection earlier, and it wasn’t worth a laugh then, nor is it now. Not even worth a brown star.


182 posted on 03/28/2012 7:21:21 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
Sorry, Jews spoke Hebrew

Wrong. Most Jews at the time of Christ spoke Greek. The ones around the Holy Land mostly spoke Aramaic. The only Hebrew was by the priestly class.

Let me know when you acquire a masoretic scroll in Aram. Only a complete fool would believe that a 70 year stay in Babylon would change the Language of God’s people.

A more completely warped view of history than I was formerly led to believe.

183 posted on 03/28/2012 7:23:02 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 181 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
we went through that foolish misdirection earlier, and it wasn’t worth a laugh then, nor is it now. Not even worth a brown star.

And how did you handle it? By not handling it? The Ark was a small box.

Nobody except God entered it. Any particular reason you don't want to admit it?

184 posted on 03/28/2012 7:25:32 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 182 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr

Do you not realize that the ark was in its own “Holy of Holies,” a small room that had to be filled with smoke, when the shekina was present?

Is every catholic that ignorant? (yes, of course)
.


185 posted on 03/28/2012 7:29:33 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
"I want to go on record here that the Gospels were written in Hebrew, and later translated to Greek and Aram."

The oldest extant Hebrew manuscripts of the Gospels date to the 11th and 12th centuries. If you have any proof that Matthew, Mark, Luke or John wrote first in Henrew I would love to see it.

For the record, Aram is not a language. It is a region located in modern day Syria.

186 posted on 03/28/2012 8:21:25 PM PDT by Natural Law (If you love the Catholic Church raise your hands, if not raise your standards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
Only Luke even knew any language other than Hebrew.

Logic has to prevail. Hebrew is the language given by God for his people. Everything of importance in God's word is measured in Jerusalem, and can be stated accurately only in his given language. The twelve tribes of Israel are the key to all end time associations and events.

Aram are a people, and Aram is also their language.

This confetti cannon of catholic error and confusion has become very tiring to the believers here, and it is time to educate the catholics in the ways of Christs true followers.

If you are one of his, you will soon be beckoned by his angels to come out of Babylon, and join his convocation.

187 posted on 03/28/2012 9:01:52 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

I’m not sure what your position regarding the Eucharist is, but I detect hostility to the constant Tradition of Christ’s Church. If you will not listen to the Church...

From St. Paul through to the early Church Fathers to today, Catholics have seen the Eucharist the same way.

______________________________________________________________________________

Paul Confirms This

Paul wrote to the Corinthians: “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16). So when we receive Communion, we actually participate in the body and blood of Christ, not just eat symbols of them. Paul also said, “Therefore whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. . . . For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself” (1 Cor. 11:27, 29). “To answer for the body and blood” of someone meant to be guilty of a crime as serious as homicide. How could eating mere bread and wine “unworthily” be so serious? Paul’s comment makes sense only if the bread and wine became the real body and blood of Christ. 
 
What Did the First Christians Say?

Anti-Catholics also claim the early Church took this chapter symbolically. Is that so? Let’s see what some early Christians thought, keeping in mind that we can learn much about how Scripture should be interpreted by examining the writings of early Christians. 

Ignatius of Antioch, who had been a disciple of the apostle John and who wrote a letter to the Smyrnaeans about A.D. 110, said, referring to “those who hold heterodox opinions,” that “they abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again” (6:2, 7:1). 

Forty years later, Justin Martyr, wrote, “Not as common bread or common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, . . . is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus” (First Apology 66:1–20). 

Origen, in a homily written about A.D. 244, attested to belief in the Real Presence. “I wish to admonish you with examples from your religion. You are accustomed to take part in the divine mysteries, so you know how, when you have received the Body of the Lord, you reverently exercise every care lest a particle of it fall and lest anything of the consecrated gift perish. You account yourselves guilty, and rightly do you so believe, if any of it be lost through negligence” (Homilies on Exodus 13:3). 

Cyril of Jerusalem, in a catechetical lecture presented in the mid-300s, said, “Do not, therefore, regard the bread and wine as simply that, for they are, according to the Master’s declaration, the body and blood of Christ. Even though the senses suggest to you the other, let faith make you firm. Do not judge in this matter by taste, but be fully assured by faith, not doubting that you have been deemed worthy 
of the body and blood of Christ” (Catechetical Discourses: Mystagogic 4:22:9). 

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/christ-in-the-eucharist


188 posted on 03/29/2012 4:29:29 AM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas (Viva Christo Rey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
Do you not realize that the ark was in its own “Holy of Holies,” a small room that had to be filled with smoke, when the shekina was present? Is every catholic that ignorant? (yes, of course)

Do you not realize that you posted that the high priest entered the Ark, not any room? Is every antiCatholic in his cups that ignorant? Yes, of course.

189 posted on 03/29/2012 5:30:35 AM 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 185 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
Only Luke even knew any language other than Hebrew. Logic has to prevail

Reality check.

Hebrew is the language given by God for his people. Everything of importance in God's word is measured in Jerusalem, and can be stated accurately only in his given language. The twelve tribes of Israel are the key to all end time associations and events.

Random phrases do not reality make.

Aram are a people, and Aram is also their language.

Neither do vain repetitions.

This confetti cannon of catholic error and confusion has become very tiring to the believers here, and it is time to educate the catholics in the ways of Christs true followers.

By your own admission, you are not even Christian. What education would you have we Christians learn?

If you are one of his, you will soon be beckoned by his angels to come out of Babylon, and join his convocation.

Put your analyst on danger money, baby.

190 posted on 03/29/2012 5:35:15 AM 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 187 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
Now before you get all indignant and preachy define "fasting" and how it does and does not apply to infants. Most interpretations refer to abstinence from solid foods and none specifically address or prohibit mothers milk. (Besides, there is that whole household thing in Acts).

Nice try but no cigar...So you 'interpret' it to mean something other than what it says...Now you can justify yourself...

Problem with your own definition is a three or four year old would have a rough time on only mother's milk for a couple of days...

191 posted on 03/29/2012 5:47:38 AM PDT by Iscool (You mess with me, you mess with the WHOLE trailerpark...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
"...So you 'interpret' it to mean something other than what it says..."

No, I do not have enough hubris to believe that I can interpret it. I defer to those early Christians who heard the Word from those no less than one generation after the life and ministry of Jesus. The bottom line is that the Didache does not prohibit infant baptism as you attempted to interpret it for us.

Peace be to you.

192 posted on 03/29/2012 9:45:22 AM PDT by Natural Law (If you love the Catholic Church raise your hands, if not raise your standards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr

Wrong!

By my own admission, I am very Christian, unfortunately you clearly are not, and have no respect for God’s word, or his things.


193 posted on 03/29/2012 10:02:41 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr

“entered TO the Ark”

(not into, as deranged demon posessed catholics see)


194 posted on 03/29/2012 10:05:58 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas

What you insist on calling “the church” is a herd of very lost men that have absolutely no knowledge, nor relationship with Jesus Christ.

Your “church” was created in the 4th century by the pharisees that had been displaced from Israel by the Roman army in 70 AD. That is why said “church” defies God’s word, and follows man made “traditions” as the pharisees always have.

The worship of Ishtar in the guise of Mary is another characteristic of the pharisees of Judea.
.


195 posted on 03/29/2012 10:15:57 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas
absolutely no knowledge, nor relationship with Jesus Christ

Must be some pretty heavy indoctrination, started at a young age, to make someone that amazingly naive.

196 posted on 03/29/2012 10:19:39 AM PDT by Hegewisch Dupa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

-—Your “church” was created in the 4th century by the pharisees that had been displaced from Israel by the Roman army in 70 AD. That is why said “church” defies God’s word, and follows man made “traditions” as the pharisees always have.——

Can you find any historical evidence for Christians following your doctrines prior to Luther?


197 posted on 03/29/2012 10:33:02 AM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas (Viva Christo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas

Yes, in the epistles of Paul; it is an exact fit.


198 posted on 03/29/2012 10:39:42 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: Hegewisch Dupa; St_Thomas_Aquinas
"Must be some pretty heavy indoctrination, started at a young age, to make someone that amazingly naive."

Quid est veritas? That is the question that is written in the hearts of everyone.

If one looks inward for the answer they will never find it. That is particularly true of those who begin with their truth, that the Church instutited by Christ is evil, and then read Scripture and history to prove themselves correct.

We know that lies and discord are not fruits of the Holy Spirit so those trapped in this deceit need our prayers.

199 posted on 03/29/2012 10:43:08 AM PDT by Natural Law (If you love the Catholic Church raise your hands, if not raise your standards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

Bless ya, NL - there’s wisdom and clearly inspiration in your words. I know I’d be better off to scorn less and pity more - prayer is a very good answer in a case like this.


200 posted on 03/29/2012 11:12:24 AM PDT by Hegewisch Dupa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-231 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