Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Meet "Kosher Frank" (Pope says Church cannot engage in proselytism)
The Norvus Ordo Watch ^ | 9/29/2013 | Norvus Ordo Watch Blog

Posted on 10/07/2013 5:36:12 PM PDT by Greetings_Puny_Humans

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-212 next last
To: boatbums; Cronos

“I wonder how the Jewish friend of the Pope will feel when he dies and discovers that he failed to believe in Jesus Christ and cannot be saved? Will he wonder why his friend thought his conversion was unimportant?”


More than likely they’ll be burning right next to each other, or at least within screaming distance, assuming the Rabbi doesn’t repent. So, I imagine he’ll be able to settle his curiosity by asking the Pope directly!


151 posted on 10/08/2013 6:07:21 PM PDT by Greetings_Puny_Humans (If anyone tells you it's a cookbook, don't believe them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

I quoted the Pope, verbatim, with nothing added.

Your links don’t.


152 posted on 10/08/2013 6:13:08 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide
"...those who defend the Pope for every statement he makes like atheists can go to Heaven, as long as they follow their idea of "Good"

He didn't say that. In that much misquoted letter which he sent to the atheist editor of La Reppublica, Pope Francis actually began that part of the conversation by saying "Premise that – and it’s the fundamental thing – the mercy of God has no limits if one turns to him with a sincere and contrite heart."

It's possible that part wasn't quoted in whatever garbled version of it you might have read. Tendentious accounts tend to cut it out; tendentious readers tend to pass over over it unseeingly, as if that weren't his premise; as if it weren't underlined as fundamental; as if he hadn't said it at all.

153 posted on 10/08/2013 6:13:56 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (What unites us all, of any age, gender, or religion, is that we all believe we are above average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: Chesterbelloc; ebb tide

Chesterbelloc, you have us done great service in quoting this gem from the blessed Ignatius. I am going to “retweet” it frequently in this forum til I wear it out!


154 posted on 10/08/2013 6:16:23 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (What unites us all, of any age, gender, or religion, is that we all believe we are above average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Do you ever try to convert anyone to Catholicism? If you do, you’re disobeying the Pope. Are you strong-arming and “proselytizing” your children by dragging them to Mass on Sundays?

Do you remember your Confirmation? When you became a soldier of Christ?


155 posted on 10/08/2013 6:18:59 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide

You quoted a report by someone who talked to Pope Francis. I quoted reports by people who talked to Pope Francis.


156 posted on 10/08/2013 6:20:36 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide; vladimir998; Chesterbelloc; livius
First sentence: Jesus is the Redeemer of the World. This is dogma.

Second sentence: he doesn't mean you NEVER convince him to be a Catholic. Just reaching out and helping your brother, neighbor-love, may well be enough --- it may be literally all you can do --- at some time, in some place, or with some particular person. (Then, as the Pope's insight suggests, you pray for the Holy Spirit to do the rest.)

When Jesus commanded us, "Go and do likewise," he was talking about a Samaritan who responded compassionately and helped a Jew. This defines what neighbor-love is. This is Scripture. It's not anti-Evangelical. It is the Evangelion.

157 posted on 10/08/2013 6:24:23 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (What unites us all, of any age, gender, or religion, is that we all believe we are above average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

I accept the Pope’s premise, I reject his conclusion.

Care to post, in full context, whatever version you are referencing? Then we’ll be on the same page.


158 posted on 10/08/2013 6:25:47 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Nope. I quoted Pope Francis, verbatim. And no one his leper curial court has denied it.


159 posted on 10/08/2013 6:40:41 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide

Is there a recording of Pope Francis’ conversation?


160 posted on 10/08/2013 6:51:44 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
<Second sentence: he doesn't mean you NEVER convince him to be a Catholic.

What's with the delay? The poor old atheist editor is 89 years old; and the Pope's Jewish guest in Casa de Marta, even though a "young" 63 has this to say about his host: "I eat with him at breakfast, lunch and dinner every day. He cares for me, and controls everything regarding my food to makes sure it is all kosher, and according to my religious tradition. These are festive days, and I have to say certain prayers at meals and, I expand the last prayer and translate it. He accompanies me together with the others at table -his secretaries and a bishop, and they all say ‘Amen’ at the end”, the Rabbi said.

The pope is not being charitable (in the true sense of the word) to either the atheist or the Rabbi.

I repeat. He has absolutely no desire to convert anyone to Catholicism!

161 posted on 10/08/2013 6:55:19 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Is there a posting of the interview on the Vatican website?

Psst! The Oath Against Modernism is not on the Vatican website!


162 posted on 10/08/2013 6:59:50 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide

“Is there a posting of the interview on the Vatican website?”

Does there have to be?

“Psst! The Oath Against Modernism is not on the Vatican website!”

Does it have to be when it is no longer required? This is at the Vatican website:

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_x/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis_en.html


163 posted on 10/08/2013 7:11:49 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998; Mrs. Don-o; livius; Chesterbelloc
What do mean by The Oath Against Modernism is no longer required? Look at who we currently have as Bishop of Rome (he prefers that title to Pope or Vicar of Christ), who happens to refuse to sit on the throne.

"'To open oneself to modernity is a duty.' Pope Francis

Seriously, somebody needs to put a muzzle on this Jesuit Gone Wild until they can medicate his bipolar personality. One minute he's telling us that "When we do not profess Jesus Christ, the saying of Léon Bloy comes to mind: 'Anyone who does not pray to the Lord prays to the devil,'" the pope added, quoting the famous French novelist.

"When we do not profess Jesus Christ, we profess the worldliness of the devil, a demonic worldliness," he said.

and the next thing he's doing is stating, " I give a thought, too, to the dear Muslim immigrants that are beginning the fast of Ramadan, with best wishes for abundant spiritual fruits."

164 posted on 10/08/2013 7:45:50 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide

“What do mean by The Oath Against Modernism is no longer required?”

I mean that it is no longer required by the Church for ordination or incardination.

“Seriously, somebody needs to put a muzzle on this Jesuit Gone Wild until they can medicate his bipolar personality.”

I think weak minded or stupid individuals are having issues dealing with him. He also has a tendency to say things but not in the most complete fashion so that he is easily taken out of context. I have not suffered in the least - except for the fact that I have to repeatedly explain his comments to those who are too stupid or lazy to do any research and see his other or fuller comments.


165 posted on 10/08/2013 7:51:09 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

And I think only weak minded or stupid individuals do not see the duplicity of the current Bishop of Rome who openly embraces Modernism. I have not take one thing out of context; I challenge you to prove otherwise.


166 posted on 10/08/2013 7:59:31 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide

“And I think only weak minded or stupid individuals do not see the duplicity of the current Bishop of Rome who openly embraces Modernism.”

Your opinions simply don’t matter. He’s the pope and there’s nothing you or anyone else can do about it. I always wonder why people get so worked up over a man who will be dead in a few short years and who won’t change a single Catholic dogma in the meantime.

“I have not take one thing out of context; I challenge you to prove otherwise.”

No, I challenge you to prove your understanding is correct when I posted evidence to the contrary.


167 posted on 10/08/2013 8:07:06 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
Consider the following examples. In 1961 the World Council of Churches pronounced “proselytism” to be “a corruption of Christian witness” that uses “cajolery, bribery, undue pressure, or intimidation, subtly or openly, to bring about seeming conversion.” In a footnote to the documents of Vatican II the Roman Catholic Church defined proselytism as “a corruption of the Christian witness by appeal to hidden forms of coercion or by a style of propaganda unworthy of the Gospel. It is not the use but the abuse of the right to religious freedom.

So, the Greeks (all of them Orthodox) banned the practice of it in their constitution in 1911. Protestants have used the word the same way since 1961 at least. Looks like Pope Francis was the last one to use it. And yet you accuse him of changing the definition when Protestants have been using it that way for 5 or more decades? Have you no shame at all?

This is becoming quite hilarious! Kindly READ the original post of this thread. Once you do, you will note that the Pope is who is depicted as shunning the word "proselyte" or "proselytize". I couldn't care less what the World Council of Churches or the Greek government, for that matter - though it is noted how they failed to define what they even meant by the word they claim to ban people from doing - deems "appropriate", the point of discussion is that there IS no real difference in "evangelizing" or "proselytizing" - except in the minds of those too concerned over appearances than doing the will of God. Getta grip!

168 posted on 10/08/2013 8:09:59 PM PDT by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

I’ll trade my recipe for the Curried Butternut Squash Soup I fixed for dinner tonight for your recipe for nice German Potato Soup. :o)


169 posted on 10/08/2013 8:25:56 PM PDT by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: boatbums

“Once you do, you will note that the Pope is who is depicted as shunning the word “proselyte” or “proselytize”.”

I already knew this. When did you finally figure it out? Oh, that’s right, you probably already knew it. I did. What’s your point.

“... the point of discussion is that there IS no real difference in “evangelizing” or “proselytizing””

And I showed that that is not the case. You don’t have to like it. It’s just true.

” - except in the minds of those too concerned over appearances than doing the will of God. Getta grip!”

Already had one. Again, I posted clear examples of people saying the words were not the same thing in a certain context. I was right all along. So was the pope. Get used to it.


170 posted on 10/08/2013 8:26:13 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Chesterbelloc

It’s good advice.


171 posted on 10/08/2013 8:28:20 PM PDT by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o; Tax-chick; Chesterbelloc

I am very much indebted to my son, a priest, who a number of times has offered this quote to me for my reflection. It has helped me to make efforts to think much before speaking much and to be a respecter of persons. (1Peter 2:17 ,1Peter 5:15).

I also have seen my son apply this rule himself and I believe that it has helped him to be a respected and loved pastor.


172 posted on 10/08/2013 10:08:34 PM PDT by Running On Empty (The three sorriest words: "It's too late")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: boatbums; Syncro; metmom
boatbums : But, since you asked me, YES, Jews will be in hell for eternity, separated from God because of unbelief

This is in contrary to what you, boatbums have said before -- that you believed that Jews would be saved as per the Old Covenant. But I guess you changed your doctrine. ok

173 posted on 10/08/2013 10:42:46 PM PDT by Cronos (Obama’s dislike of Assad is not based on Assad’s brutality but that he isn't a jihadi Moslem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Ditto for you metmom — didn’t you have a large fight last year about Jews being saved? Well, that’s your choice to change your doctrine.


174 posted on 10/08/2013 10:43:33 PM PDT by Cronos (Obama’s dislike of Assad is not based on Assad’s brutality but that he isn't a jihadi Moslem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Cronos
boatbums : But, since you asked me, YES, Jews will be in hell for eternity, separated from God because of unbelief This is in contrary to what you, boatbums have said before -- that you believed that Jews would be saved as per the Old Covenant. But I guess you changed your doctrine. ok

Nope...nothing changed including your inability to quote other's comments properly and in context. Here IS what I said. Those Jews prior to the coming of Christ, the Messiah, had faith that God would send Him and that he would bear the sins of the people. They looked FORWARD to the coming of the savior as we Christians look BACKWARD to Jesus Christ. It is STILL by grace through faith. The feast days and sacrifices were done as demonstrations of that faith and the blood sacrifices were as a "covering" for sins until THE Lamb of God came to take away the sins of the world. Once Jesus came and died, there remains no more sacrifice for sin. His one time payment sanctified FOREVER those who receive Him as Savior. Any more questions?

175 posted on 10/08/2013 11:27:49 PM PDT by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: Cronos
boatbums : But, since you asked me, YES, Jews will be in hell for eternity, separated from God because of unbelief This is in contrary to what you, boatbums have said before -- that you believed that Jews would be saved as per the Old Covenant. But I guess you changed your doctrine. ok

One more thought on this, since you neglected to use my actual comment, which was:

But, since you asked me, YES, not only Jews, but Muslims, Hindus, atheists, humanists and every other ism or ist that rejects Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord will be in hell for eternity, separated from God because of unbelief. At one time, I believe, this was even the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, was it not? Just for clarification, are you not in sync with your own church now?

So, will you answer my question since I answered yours?

176 posted on 10/08/2013 11:30:49 PM PDT by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: Cronos; boatbums
Ditto for you metmom — didn’t you have a large fight last year about Jews being saved?

Did I have a fight with someone last year? With who? Which side of the argument did I take?

Well, that’s your choice to change your doctrine.

Did I? Did bb?

Why don't you provide the links to prove yourself right instead of throwing out spurious claims as if they were fact?

177 posted on 10/08/2013 11:32:10 PM PDT by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of faith....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Cronos; metmom

Still trying to stir up discord in the wee hours, I see? Slow day?


178 posted on 10/08/2013 11:32:49 PM PDT by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Standard operating procedure for this one. As you can see my comment was misquoted AND taken out of context. Probably hoping it stayed out there all night to stir up a little discord. Glad you were still up, mm. :o)


179 posted on 10/08/2013 11:35:03 PM PDT by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: boatbums

Got up. I couldn’t sleep so decided to get a little snack.

Shall I get a bit of popecorn popped while we wait (not holding our breath) for the requested evidence?

I wonder what position I took in the *large fight*.


180 posted on 10/08/2013 11:43:52 PM PDT by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of faith....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Does it matter? Whichever side would be the "wrong" one, and being there is enough "deposit of double-talk" to quote mine from --- it can be proven you are wrong.

Feel the love (you heretic). Oh, and come home, too. We've missed you while we've bashed you, calling you a liar up one side and down the other...

181 posted on 10/08/2013 11:55:12 PM PDT by BlueDragon ( some days, it isn't worth chewing through the restraints)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Running On Empty; Mrs. Don-o; Chesterbelloc

I’ve found it’s helpful to say, “I don’t understand what you mean.”


182 posted on 10/09/2013 2:36:24 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("The heart of the matter is God's love. It always has been. It always will be."~Abp. Chaput)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: boatbums
It's a deal! I'll use my futzu pumpkin in the squash soup!

Note a few ingredients you might not expect: white wine and radishes. The white wine may be traded in for more broth (but I wouldn't!); for the radishes (which I have abundantly in my garden) you may substitute turnips (in my case, where radishes abound, turnips superabound).

German Potato Soup - 3 - 4 servings

1 cup diced onion (1 small)
1 clove garlic
2 T. olive oil
3 1/2 cups diced potatoes
(I scrub and score rather than peel)
1 cup white wine
1 carton (26 oz) chicken broth
1 1/2 cup thinly sliced radishes
3/4 cup evaporated milk
Chicken bouillon granules, to taste
Freshly ground pepper, to taste
Croutons and sliced sausage for garnish
(Shredded cheddar if you wish)

Sauté the onion in oil in a soup pot until translucent. Add potatoes, cook for a few minutes just to coat with oil and warm, add the garlic and sauté for 30 seconds. Add white wine and cook, stirring until the wine is almost gone. Add the broth and simmer until the potatoes are soft. While the potatoes are cooking, peel the radishes (I just scrub and score them) ) and cut into thin slices. Add to the potatoes and cook for about 5 minutes.

At this point, everything should be soft. Puree half, and leave half chunky. Add evap. milk, and pepper to taste. Add sliced sausage and heat through, serve hot with homemade buttered croutons.

183 posted on 10/09/2013 4:47:05 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (What unites us all, of any age, gender, or religion, is that we all believe we are above average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide; metmom; boatbums; Greetings_Puny_Humans; HarleyD; CynicalBear
So and unless a teaching is infallible then it can be ignored (parts of encyclicals, bulls, etc.)

Quick answer: No; unless they contradict perennial Church teaching. And much of VC II does.

Before you told us to "Pay no attention to any Popes after Pope Pius XII. Pay no attention to the Second Vatican council," but later you stated "I have rejected neither" \V2 or Pope Francis.] Now it is much of V2 that is to be rejected.

In any case, what is to be rejected is subject to different interpretations, using fallible human reasoning, which RCs tell us cannot give assurance, thus RCs promote the magisterium as the solution to different interpretations and for assurance.

Most seem to hold that that the differences of V2 that you reject are "clarifications" and are now the standard, while you must also judge what is binding teaching in encyclicals and bulls, etc., and even the CCC, and which magisterial level multitudes of teachings fall under, and thus what level of submission is required.

184 posted on 10/09/2013 5:13:36 AM PDT by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

:-)

“Beloved: sanctify Christ in your hearts. Always be ready to give an explanation for the reason of your hope, but do it with gentleness and reverence.”

“He who loves his brother abides in the light.”


185 posted on 10/09/2013 5:58:54 AM PDT by Running On Empty (The three sorriest words: "It's too late")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon
Feel the love (you heretic). Oh, and come home, too. We've missed you while we've bashed you, calling you a liar up one side and down the other...

I've never understood the abused wife syndrome, where she keeps going back to the man who beats her.

I've experienced enough of the loving arms of the Catholic church since I was a kid. It was no different then when I was a Catholic than it is now.

I'll pass, thankyouverymuch.

186 posted on 10/09/2013 6:08:45 AM PDT by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of faith....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick; Mrs. Don-o; Chesterbelloc

The following has been a great help to me:

“Respect everyone
Be sensitive to others—they are your brothers and sisters
Try to find something good, even in the worst circumstances
Do not cast a slur on anyone
Repair any harm resulting from an uttered word
Do not provoke strife between people
Speak to everyone in the language of love
Do not vex others
Reassure others
Forgive everything
Do not hold grudges
Always be the first to extend your hand as a sign of reconciliation
Act always to your neighbors advantage
Never give a thought to what others owe you, but what you owe them
Do good things to others, as you should like them done to you
Be actively compassionate in times of suffering
Be quick to offer consolation, counsel, assistance and kindness
Share your goods
Pray for everyone.”

Written by Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski, a Polish priest who was imprisoned and suffered at the hands of the Polish Communists


187 posted on 10/09/2013 6:10:06 AM PDT by Running On Empty (The three sorriest words: "It's too late")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Running On Empty

I’m told your brother is the hardest to love, because he’s in your room, leaving his laundry all over the place, taking your fan, and reeking of an unfashionable body-wash fragrance.

(My teenagers have been having a sub-primate territorial dispute worthy of black bears in the mating season.)


188 posted on 10/09/2013 6:11:06 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("The heart of the matter is God's love. It always has been. It always will be."~Abp. Chaput)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Running On Empty

When the victims of persecution speak, that gets extra attention from me!


189 posted on 10/09/2013 6:12:08 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("The heart of the matter is God's love. It always has been. It always will be."~Abp. Chaput)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212

Who’s on first?

Sheesh, there is NO pinning down what Catholicism teaches.

First they’re infallible, except when they’re not.

Then it’s only what’s taught ex cathedra, except when it’s not.

Then the Church wrote the Bible and uses it to give itself authority, but Tradition supersedes it.

They’ve raised hair splitting to the finest art on earth.

The Pharisees were amateurs compared to the Catholic church.


190 posted on 10/09/2013 6:13:26 AM PDT by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of faith....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

:-)

Memories


191 posted on 10/09/2013 6:30:18 AM PDT by Running On Empty (The three sorriest words: "It's too late")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Phinneous; Greetings_Puny_Humans
I found your discussions rather interesting especially this comment:

I suspect you mean Moses since I seriously doubt anyone heard anything from God the Father for a great long while.

The Jews in Jesus' time also had the same issue, in questioning the authority and authenticity (if you will) of the Messiah's message. Some of them believed. Many did not citing the very reason you're citing.

The Messiah asked a very strange but interesting discussion to the Jews of His day who actually believed in Him:

This surely isn't one of the most "How to win friends and influence enemies" speeches. Many of the Jewish believers of our Messiah time completely missed the point of the message. They, as well as the Gentiles, are enslaved in sin. One only needs to look inside oneself to discover this to be so. And unless God opens the eyes and ears, that person will remain embedded and will die in their sin. And nothing one can do, following the Torah, praying the rosary, living a good life, etc. will ever be enough to break the chains that holds us into this grip of sin. We are like Cain, wanting to murder our brother, until God gives us a new heart and spirit.

If you want authenticity you need only look into your own human heart. Only the Son can set one free.

192 posted on 10/09/2013 6:44:10 AM PDT by HarleyD (...one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212; ebb tide; metmom; boatbums; Greetings_Puny_Humans; CynicalBear
Before you told us to "Pay no attention to any Popes after Pope Pius XII. Pay no attention to the Second Vatican council," but later you stated "I have rejected neither" \V2 or Pope Francis.] Now it is much of V2 that is to be rejected.

This is the dilemma of Catholics who are actually more interested in the truth. If they truly examine Catholic teaching, and not try to gloss over the inconsistencies, it is clear that there have been significant changes to doctrine and positions. Ebb Tide is right. The Catholic Church is heading to universalism.

193 posted on 10/09/2013 6:52:22 AM PDT by HarleyD (...one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD; daniel1212; ebb tide; metmom; boatbums; Greetings_Puny_Humans; smvoice
>>The Catholic Church is heading to universalism.<<

Yep, a one world religion. It’s easy to watch that happen in the RCC. The whole thing about not needing to know Christ for salvation is telling. Why they even include the Muslims.

# 841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”[330]

Look at this statement from Mother Teresa.

"If in coming face to face with God we accept Him in our lives, then we are converting. We become a better Hindu, a better Muslim, a better Catholic, a better whatever we are. ... What God is in your mind you must accept" (from Mother Teresa: Her People and Her Work , by Desmond Doig, p. 156, as quoted by Dave Hunt, Global Peace and the Rise of Antichrist , p. 149).

It’s not difficult at all to see how ready they are to incorporate all beliefs.

194 posted on 10/09/2013 6:58:58 AM PDT by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Clearly you have never read the book of Hebrews.

Hebrews 10 crushes your arguement.

verse 1: For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

verse 9: Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

read more here: http://biblehub.com/hebrews/10.htm
195 posted on 10/09/2013 7:14:34 AM PDT by P220
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Just quick study points here, metmom --- I'll come back and fill in the syllabus later later. :o) --- You've without a doubt brought out my Homeschooling "Mater et Magistra" persona.

Who’s on first?

Jesus Christ Our Lord.
Sheesh, there is NO pinning down what Catholicism teaches.

..And NOW with Pinnability: the online searchable edition of the CATHOLIC CATECHISM!!
First they’re infallible, except when they’re not.

Not quite kosher to disdain Catholicism for its allegedly unlimited claim of infallibility, and then disdain it because it's, in fact, sharply limited.
Then it’s only what’s taught ex cathedra, except when it’s not.

A statement which impresses only those who don't know jack chick about the Catechism.
Then the Church wrote the Bible and uses it to give itself authority, but Tradition supersedes it.

A statement which impresses only those who don't know that Scripture is Tradition, the Written Tradition, and can't be "superceded" by it.
They’ve raised hair splitting to the finest art on earth.

Hey!! You talkin' about my split ends???!
The Pharisees were amateurs compared to the Catholic church.

History bit: The Pharisees were the forerunner of Rabbinical Judaism. The Apostles and their co-workers for the Gospel --- the episcopoi, presbyteroi, and diakonoi --- were the forerunners of Catholicism.
I'll be back soon! Study Hard!
196 posted on 10/09/2013 7:21:36 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Mater et Magistra.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: P220; Cicero; boatbums; caww; CynicalBear; smvoice; editor-surveyor
On the contrary, Romans crushes yours.....

Romans 11:1-6 I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he appeals to God against Israel? “Lord, they have killed your prophets, they have demolished your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life.” But what is God's reply to him? “I have kept for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.

Romans 11:25-32 Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written,

“The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”; “and this will be my covenant with them when I take away their sins.”

As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.

God is not done with Israel. He does NOT break His promises.

197 posted on 10/09/2013 7:29:17 AM PDT by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of faith....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Well, it really kinda depends on which Catholic you’re talking to at the moment what you’re told about what the Catholic church believes and teaches.


198 posted on 10/09/2013 7:32:26 AM PDT by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of faith....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: metmom
That's because they all haven't been taught by a gifted (and I'm not saying 'infallible', but purt'near) competent catechist, such as -- ahem --- your humble servant. But that's why it's always good to go to a checkable, quotable, clickable, reliable summary, namely,

THE CATECHISM!

199 posted on 10/09/2013 8:08:38 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Mater et Magistra.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: metmom

I think you are all misreading, or deliberately misinterpreting, what I said.

It’s not as if God made a Covenant with the Jews, and then along came Jesus a couple of thousand years later and everything changed. Jesus was there from the beginning, at the Creation and before, as the Second Person of the Trinity. He and the Holy Spirit were part of the deal God made with the Jews, although the Jews didn’t realize it.

Of course, Jesus invited and invites all Jews to become Christians. In the early days of the Church, it was thought that the Jews would fade away. But they haven’t, not for two thousand years. Christianity was the fulfillment of Jewish prophecy, but it did not SUPERSEDE or REPLACE Judaism, evidently, since the Jews are still with us.

That is a mystery. But God does not force anyone to convert; He invites them.

Pope Francis was being friendly with the Rabbi of Rome. For God’s own reasons, there are still faithful Jews who observe the Old Covenant. And God declared repeatedly that that Covenant was “eternal,” or “forever” (depending on the translation).

Pope Francis would welcome the Rabbi to the Church, and the Rabbi knows that. But he isn’t going to rudely proselytize him at a friendly meeting, still less tell him that he is damned unless he converts—which isn’t true.

According to Catholic teaching, no one can be saved without the grace of Jesus. But that grace can be channeled to virtuous pagans or to faithful Jews.

If I were a Jew and thought as I do, then I would certainly convert—as I once converted from Episcopal to Catholic. But I do not argue that all Jews are damned unless they go to some Evangelical church or tent and loudly declare that they have found Christ.


200 posted on 10/09/2013 9:02:49 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-212 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