Posted on 04/26/2015 10:04:43 AM PDT by ebb tide
Strictly speaking, the only "statue" required in a Catholic church is a crucifix on or near the altar. The others are optional, and are no more idols than pictures people keep of their relatives who have passed on.
I don’t agree with that either. Does that mean that the church “has no problem” with Protestants?
Some Catholics on FR certainly seem to have problems with Protestants. What do you think?
“Is that why you fashion statues and images of dead “saints,” kneel before them and light candles and incense in offerings to them?”
Let me correct your errors which are so common among anti-Catholics:
1) The saints are not dead - but alive in Christ.
2) I’ve never lit a candle or offered incense to any saint, or any image of a saint. If I light a candle it is as a reminder that Christ is the light of the world. As a layperson I have never used incense for anything. If you want to know how incense is commonly used, please see this: http://www.adoremus.org/0212Herrera.html
“Follow up question - How can what I described be anything except worship?”
1) I think you first have to deal with the fact that you presented a false premise. In other words, to “describe” what you falsely ascribe to us as “worship” would be a logical error on your part to begin with since you were wrong to begin with.
2) Since we don’t worship saints, it behooves you to not make the error of saying we do. When you say, “How can what I described be anything except worship?” I can’t help but wonder how you can make the mistakes you do when we’re in the information age. It’s not hard to learn the truth.
“No, apparently the last conclave forgot about the Holy Ghost and now we’re stuck with Francis.”
No, thankfully the Holy Spirit doesn’t take direction from you.
“Did you not hear about “Team Bergoglio”?”
How does it matter if I did or didn’t?
“And most of the Independent Fundamental churches do not follow Scofield.”
Doesn’t matter. He espoused sola scriptura and millions of sola scripturists use his Bible.
“As for Ruckman, the Bible says a person can be divorced for adultery, that is the only reason, but that a divorced person cannot be a pastor (2 Timothy).”
Well, he’s a pastor. And there are thousands of pastors like him who are divorced and yet still espouse sola scriptura. So, if claim that sola scripturists (especially pastors) don’t believe in divorce or divorce and remarriage, you’re clearly wrong. Many do. It happens all the time.
“Needless to say, there are many divorced pastors serving in churches today — in evangelical, Bible believing churches.”
https://bible.org/question/can-or-should-pastor-who-has-been-divorced-his-wife-continue-his-role-pastor-even-if-divorc
Nor does the Holy Spirit impose Himself where He's not wanted. We have a pope who has publicly praised the Kasper heresy, labeling Kasper's evil drivel "serene" theology.
------------
". . . Benedict XVI, who as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was asked on Bavarian television in 1997 if the Holy Spirit is responsible for who gets elected. This was his response: "I would not say so, in the sense that the Holy Spirit picks out the Pope. ... I would say that the Spirit does not exactly take control of the affair, but rather like a good educator, as it were, leaves us much space, much freedom, without entirely abandoning us. Thus the Spirit's role should be understood in a much more elastic sense, not that he dictates the candidate for whom one must vote. Probably the only assurance he offers is that the thing cannot be totally ruined."
Then the clincher: "There are too many contrary instances of popes the Holy Spirit obviously would not have picked!"
http://www.thesacredpage.com/2013/02/no-holy-spirit-doesnt-choose-pope.html
Yes, you can make those points and they are correct. But in each case they have added something to Sola Scriptura to justify what they are doing.
Denominations are formed because people could not handle exactly what the Bible teaches, so tried to find a way to get around what it plainly says.
So you can claim they are Sola Scriptura and they will call themselves the same, but their books and writings always add to the scripture.
And that fate is plainly spelled out, Revelation 22:18-19.
Which doesn’t contradict anything I said. Thanks for playing.
“But in each case they have added something to Sola Scriptura to justify what they are doing.”
So sola scriptura is essentially useless since it is all subjective to the individual.
The term ‘Sola Scriptura’ commits the fallacy of the undistributed middle ... which is perhaps why Catholics are fond of it since it then allows them to insewrt the authority of the priests and the councils and the Pope and Mary, and ... well, you get the gist. The term wouldn’t apply to the era of Paul when he was evangelizing and writing letters, but that doesn’t stop some from using the fallacy to their agenda aims.
“The decree in question didn’t change anything that wasn’t believed before.”
Why was it made in 1854?
Why not 1754 or 1054 or 554 etc...?
“The term ‘Sola Scriptura’ commits the fallacy of the undistributed middle ... “
No. Sola scriptura is a fallacy.
Whatever ...
Just trying to gauge how ill-informed you are. More than I thought.
See what I mean by insolent?
Back to the question.... What does it look like when a catholic worships God if not as the photos reflect then what?
Someone who claims to be Catholic and constantly slanders all Catholics who don’t agree with them is a far better example of the word “insolant” than someone who may well be running down a rabblit hole but who is at least seeking logical connections.
Oh yes, I know ...it's venerating or some such thing.
They would do well putting aside the Mass entirely and let the people Worship God in and by His Spirit... not through a line of old men masquerading as something they are not.
"Hindu priest holds a human skull as worshippers offer prayers to the Hindu god Shiva"
"Catholic Priest holds out a human skull as worshippers offers prayer to the Catholic god"
I think you meant “all ‘catholics’ who don’t agree with Catholicism”.
I explained dogma in Posts 23, 29 and 32. Three strikes and you’re out.
I did not know ifinnegan was a Catholic, nor did I slander him. Are you even a Catholic, yourself?
How about the dogma of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus? Are you ‘catholic’ enough to state your belief in that dogma on this forum?
“Just trying to gauge how ill-informed you are. More than I thought.”
ebb tide, as you have shown in the past, I am vastly better informed than you appear to be.
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.