Free Republic 4th Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $18,014
20%  
Woo hoo!! And the first 20% is in!! Thank you all very much!! God bless.

Posts by boatbums

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Topless Feminists Throw Firebombs, Tampons and Feces at a Catholic Church to Protest Abortion

    10/17/2017 9:58:44 PM PDT · 42 of 47
    boatbums to Morgana

    These are the REAL nasty women!

  • Topless Feminists Throw Firebombs, Tampons and Feces at a Catholic Church to Protest Abortion

    10/17/2017 9:56:15 PM PDT · 41 of 47
    boatbums to Morgana

    Demonically possessed and influenced women do these kinds of things!

  • Luther would be horrified by the world he forged

    10/16/2017 9:47:07 PM PDT · 197 of 214
    boatbums to unlearner
  • Luther would be horrified by the world he forged

    10/16/2017 9:12:54 PM PDT · 196 of 214
    boatbums to ealgeone
    How easy some ignore their OWN recorded and acknowledged history!

      The most important occurrence of Leo's pontificate and that of gravest consequence to the Church was the Reformation, which began in 1517. We cannot enter into a minute account of this movement, the remote cause of which lay in the religious, political, and social conditions of Germany. It is certain, however, that the seeds of discontent amid which Luther threw his firebrand had been germinating for centuries. The immediate cause was bound up with the odious greed for money displayed by the Roman Curia, and shows how far short all efforts at reform had hitherto fallen. Albert of Brandenburg, already Archbishop of Magdeburg, received in addition the Archbishopric of Mainz and the Bishopric of Hallerstadt, but in return was obliged to collect 10,000 ducats, which he was taxed over and above the usual confirmation fees. To indemnify hiim, and to make it possible to discharge these obligations Rome permitted him to have preached in his territory the plenary indulgence promised all those who contributed to the new St. Peter's; he was allowed to keep one half the returns, a transaction which brought dishonour on all concerned in it. Added to this, abuses occurred during the preaching of the Indulgence. The money contributions, a mere accessory, were frequently the chief object, and the "Indulgences for the Dead" became a vehicle of inadmissible teachings. That Leo X, in the most serious of all the crises which threatened the Church, should fail to prove the proper guide for her, is clear enough from what has been related above. He recognized neither the gravity of the situation nor the underlying causes of the revolt. Vigorous measures of reform might have proved an efficacious antidote, but the pope was deeply entangled in political affairs and allowed the imperial election to overshadow the revolt of Luther; moreover, he gave himself up unrestrainedly to his pleasures and failed to grasp fully the duties of his high office. (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09162a.htm)
  • Luther would be horrified by the world he forged

    10/16/2017 8:23:46 PM PDT · 195 of 214
    boatbums to piusv; ealgeone; metmom
    Many Church officials did approve of it by their actions (or inaction). What vlad has been trying to say is that it was never official Catholic teaching nor practice. These were abuses. Abuses that went all the way up. It is similar to the liturgical abuses we see in various Novus Ordo churches. Did Vatican II officially teach that these abuses were allowed? No. Even I get that. But the abuses are there nonetheless and the hierarchy does nothing to stop them. They are to blame, but the abuses were never part of official Catholic teaching.

    I also dislike the merry-go-round that so often happens on such threads as these. I DON'T play that game because I know people's very souls and spirituality are involved. But let me say this one more time about the "abuses" of indulgences that spurred Martin Luther's 95 Theses...the abuse really wasn't that people could purchase a "get-out-of-purgatory" letter from Indulgence peddlers who had the tacit approval of the hierarchy. Since, even today, indulgences can STILL be "dispensed" for a donation, the abuse Luther railed against was that, for the prior three hundred years, indulgences were taught as a means to the remission of sins and people missed out on the purpose for confession, contrition and penance and were taught to fear the punishment for their sin more than the sin itself. The indulgence robbed the Sacrament of Penance of its ethical content. The preaching of indulgences concealed the true nature of repentance. Because of this, he felt, people became fearless and careless. Ironically, that same accusation is thrown at those of us who believe in salvation through faith alone and eternal security today.

    The discussions we engage in with these threads helps us learn about such things and I see great value in them. Though they should not devolve into insult fests or occasion for one-upmanship - and we ought to guard against that:

      Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others. (Philippians 2:3,4)

    I appreciate your input here.

  • Luther would be horrified by the world he forged

    10/15/2017 8:46:17 PM PDT · 179 of 214
    boatbums to ealgeone; metmom; RegulatorCountry
    What also gets entirely swept under the rug is the REAL reason why Luther challenged the issue in the first place. He was against the idea that true repentance could be/should be avoided by those who wanted the easy way out of facing the temporal punishment of God for their sins by buying an indulgence. It wasn't until years later that he began to dispute the whole idea of Purgatory and the purpose for ANY indulgences.

    To Luther, there was a spiritual benefit in true sorrow for sin and the necessity of contrition to be restored to fellowship with God. In one of Luther's early sermons regarding indulgences, he preached:

      Then in addition, the very profusion of indulgences astonishingly fills up the measure of servile righteousness. Through these nothing is accomplished except that the people learn to fear and flee and dread the penalty of sins, but not the sins themselves. Therefore, the results of indulgences are too little seen but we do see a great sense of self-security and licentious sinning; so much so that, if it were not for the fear of the punishment of sins, nobody would want these indulgences, even if they were free; whereas the people ought rather to be exhorted to love the punishment and embrace the cross. Would that I were a liar when I say that indulgences are rightly so called, for to indulge means to permit, and indulgence is equivalent to impunity, permission to sin, and license to nullify the cross of Christ. Or, if indulgences are to be permitted, they should be given only to those who are weak in faith, that those who seek to attain gentleness and lowliness through suffering, as the Lord here says, may not be offended. For, not through indulgences, but through gentleness and lowliness, so says he, is rest for your souls found. But gentleness is present only in punishment and suffering, from which these indulgences absolve us. They teach us to dread the cross and suffering and the result is that we never become gentle and lowly, and that means that we never receive indulgence nor come to Christ. Oh, the dangers of our time! Oh, you snoring priests! Oh, darkness deeper than Egyptian! How secure we are in the midst of the worst of all our evils! (LW 51:31-33).
  • Luther would be horrified by the world he forged

    10/15/2017 6:48:12 PM PDT · 177 of 214
    boatbums to piusv; metmom
    I think the general point here is that Church practice includes granting indulgences (without cost). Abuses happened (indulgences for sale) and the Council of Trent is condemning those abuses.

    Yet indulgences are still granted in exchange for many things (i.e., prayers, pilgrimages, doing good deeds, Mass, etc.) as well as alms giving or monetary donations. The whole concept of it was ripe for abuses from the start and numerous popes, bishops and other clergy - though some tried to prevent the abuses - during the time of the Reformation permitted it to go on because of the need for massive funds to build the Basilica in Rome as well as fill the Pope's coffers - Leo X's gambling debts in particular. It's unfathomable to me how a Catholic today can vehemently insist there was NEVER approval for the selling of indulgences when so much evidence proves the opposite.

  • Luther would be horrified by the world he forged

    10/15/2017 6:22:27 PM PDT · 174 of 214
    boatbums to metmom; ealgeone; RegulatorCountry

    Did you know that the Roman Catholic church STILL grants indulgences for “alms giving”? Now a few pedantics will argue repeatedly that “granting” is not the same thing as “selling”, but if the church accepts money in exchange for something - like purchasing rosaries, holy water or saint statues - and those things are in turn used for some spiritual purpose, how is that NOT the same thing?

  • Believers in The Rapture (shouldn't fight about it)...

    10/14/2017 10:32:14 PM PDT · 6 of 7
    boatbums to pastorbillrandles
    Excellent point! We are told to look forward to and hasten the coming of the day of our Lord's return (II Peter 3:12). We should not be like the scoffers and skeptics who say, “Where is the promise of His coming? they will ask. “Ever since our fathers fell asleep, everything continues as it has from the beginning of creation.” We know that He WILL return and I also believe it is soon. I love the saying:

    Live each day as if it were your last.
    One day, you will be right.
  • [Hillary] Clinton: We made a person who committed sexual assault president

    10/14/2017 10:01:02 PM PDT · 74 of 180
    boatbums to dirtboy
    Look, we just elected someone who admitted sexual assault to the presidency

    Uh, no, Hilliary, Trump NEVER admitted he sexually assaulted anyone! He stated in his off-mic aside that when one is a celebrity (and handsome and wealthy), it is common for women to throw themselves at you and let you do whatever you want to them - and certain women DO that all the time. That is NOT sexual assault. It's strange that she, of all people, doesn't know the difference.

  • [Hillary] Clinton: We made a person who committed sexual assault president

    10/14/2017 9:55:47 PM PDT · 72 of 180
    boatbums to dirtboy

    She was talking about her hubby Billy, right???

  • Luther would be horrified by the world he forged

    10/14/2017 9:02:18 PM PDT · 123 of 214
    boatbums to ealgeone; metmom
    The good news was that after the Reformation and Luther's Theses, there was a Counter Reformation where the Roman Catholic church addressed the abuses that were associated with indulgences. Luther was NOT wrong in his objections and there were many abuses involving the pope-sanctioned purchasing of indulgences. Tetzel and his fellow indulgence peddlers could not have continued like they did without papal knowledge and at least tacit approval and the Basilica DID get rebuilt in large part from the proceeds of such abuse.

      The Council of Trent in its decree "On Indulgences" (Sess. XXV) declares: "In granting indulgences the Council desires that moderation be observed in accordance with the ancient approved custom of the Church, lest through excessive ease ecclesiastical discipline be weakened; and further, seeking to correct the abuses that have crept in . . . it decrees that all criminal gain therewith connected shall be entirely done away with as a source of grievous abuse among the Christian people; and as to other disorders arising from superstition, ignorance, irreverence, or any cause whatsoever--since these, on account of the widespread corruption, cannot be removed by special prohibitions—the Council lays upon each bishop the duty of finding out such abuses as exist in his own diocese, of bringing them before the next provincial synod, and of reporting them, with the assent of the other bishops, to the Roman Pontiff, by whose authority and prudence measures will be taken for the welfare of the Church at large, so that the benefit of indulgences may be bestowed on all the faithful by means at once pious, holy, and free from corruption." After deploring the fact that, in spite of the remedies prescribed by earlier councils, the traders (quaestores) in indulgences continued their nefarious practice to the great scandal of the faithful, the council ordained that the name and method of these quaestores should be entirely abolished, and that indulgences and other spiritual favors of which the faithful ought not to be deprived should be published by the bishops and bestowed gratuitously, so that all might at length understand that these heavenly treasures were dispensed for the sake of piety and not of lucre (Sess. XXI, c. ix). In 1567 St. Pius V canceled all grants of indulgences involving any fees or other financial transactions. (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07783a.htm)
  • Luther would be horrified by the world he forged

    10/14/2017 8:08:33 PM PDT · 120 of 214
    boatbums to vladimir998
    Not a single one of the 95 theses actually shows a single source about a pope or council authorizing the sale of indulgences. Tetzel was not a pope. He was not a council. He was just a priest and was not authorized to sell indulgences as his own appointment letter makes clear. Thanks for playing.

    I'm sure this all seems like a game to you, but it's not to me. Did you read the points I gave? Did you miss the parts about the selling of indulgences that went on before the Reformation, the many bishops and popes who authorized them, the appointment of Tetzel AND others to go out and sell the indulgences, the financing of St. Peter's Basilica refurbishing as well as the personal gambling debts of the pope, etc.? How is it possible to quibble over semantics when everyone already acknowledges there were abuses with the selling of indulgences? Luther's primary objection to this practice was that it cheapened confession and missed the whole reason for repentance. Seeing as he WAS a doctor of the church, I'm sure he knew what he was talking about and I'd take his experience over that of a Catholic apologist five hundred years later.

    I'm pretty sure you opened this thread for the sole purpose of arguing with "Protestants" and probably to boast of your superior knowledge of history. I've yet to read any objective history from you and conclude it all is rather a game. I won't play.

  • Trump administration: 'Life begins at conception'

    10/14/2017 7:44:14 PM PDT · 19 of 24
    boatbums to Salvation

    I like that!

  • Trump administration: 'Life begins at conception'

    10/14/2017 7:43:16 PM PDT · 18 of 24
    boatbums to stars & stripes forever
    Would this nullify the recently passed ILLINOIS HB 40 that designates a baby in the womb as a nonhuman?

    What "kind" of life is the fertilized with HUMAN sperm HUMAN egg but human life??? A fish? A reptile?...

  • Luther would be horrified by the world he forged

    10/14/2017 7:24:53 PM PDT · 106 of 214
    boatbums to ealgeone

    What do you think???

  • Luther would be horrified by the world he forged

    10/14/2017 7:24:22 PM PDT · 105 of 214
    boatbums

    Curious...posted by one who is guilty of the same “heresies” Luther is said to be...rejection of the Pope of Rome, Francis. What is that saying about people who live in glass houses and throwing stones?

  • Luther would be horrified by the world he forged

    10/14/2017 6:56:25 PM PDT · 101 of 214
    boatbums to vladimir998; metmom; ealgeone
    Thus, there were never any sales of indulgences authorized by the Church. And you will never post evidence to the contrary. . . because no one has ever found evidence to the contrary.

    Let's go back to Luther's 95 Theses, shall we?

      The demand for contrition was somewhat more difficult to meet. But here too there was a way out. Complete contrition included love to God as its motive, and the truly contrite man was not always easy to find; but some of the scholastic Doctors had discovered a substitute for contrition in what they called “attrition,” viz., incomplete contrition, which might have fear for a motive, and which the Sacrament of Penance could transform into contrition. When, therefore, a man was afraid of hell or of purgatory, he could make his confession to the indulgence-seller or his agent, receive from him the absolution which gave his imperfect repentance the value of true contrition, released him from the guilt of sin, and changed its eternal penalty to a temporal penalty; then he could purchase the plenary indulgence, which remitted the temporal penalty, and so in one transaction, in which all the demands of the Church were formally met, he could become sure of heaven. Thus the indulgence robbed the Sacrament of Penance of its ethical content.

      Furthermore, indulgences were made available for souls already in purgatory. This kind of indulgence seems to have been granted for the first time in 1476. It had long been held that the prayers of the living availed to shorten the pains of the departed, and the institution of masses for the dead was of long standing; but it was not without some difficulty that the Popes succeeded in establishing their claim to power over purgatory. Their power over the souls of the living was not disputed. The “Power of the Keys” had been given to Peter and transmitted to his successors; the “Treasury of the Church,” F32 i.e., the merits of Christ and of the Saints, was believed to be at their disposal, and it was this treasury which they employed in the granting of indulgences F33 but it seemed reasonable to suppose that their jurisdiction ended with death. Accordingly, Pope Sixtus IV, in 1477, declared that the power of the Pope over purgatory, while genuine, was exercised only permodum suffragii , “by way of intercession.” F34 The distinction was thought dogmatically important, but to the layman, who looked more to results than to methods, the difference between intercession and jurisdiction was trifling. To him the important thing was that the Pope, whether by jurisdiction or intercession, was able to release the soul of a departed Christian from the penalties of purgatory. It is needless to say that these indulgences for the dead were eagerly purchased.

      In filial love and natural affection the indulgence-vender had powerful allies. 3. The Indulgence of 1515. — The XCV Theses were called forth by the preaching of the “Jubilee Indulgence” F35 of 1510, which was not placed on sale in central Germany until 1515. The financial needs of the papacy were never greater than in the last years of the XV. and the first years of the XVI. Century, and they were further increased by the resolve of Julius II. to erect a new church of St. Peter, which should surpass in magnificence all the churches of the world. The indulgence of 1510 was an extraordinary financial measure, the proceeds of which were to pay for the erection of the new Basilica, but when Julius died in 1513, the church was not completed, and the money had not been raised. The double task was bequeathed to his successor, Leo X. On the 31st of March, 1515, Leo proclaimed a plenary indulgence for the Archbishoprics of Magdeburg and Mainz, and appointed Albrecht, of Brandenburg, who was the incumbent of both sees and of the bishopric of Halberstadt as well, Commissioner for the sale of this indulgence. By a secret agreement, of which Luther was, of course, entirely ignorant, one-half of the proceeds was to be paid to the Fuggers of Augsburg on account of moneys advanced to the Archbishop for the payment of the fees to Rome, and of the sums demanded in consideration of a dispensation allowing him to occupy three sees at the same time; the other half of the proceeds was to go to the papal treasury to be applied to the building of the new church. The period during which the indulgence was to be on sale was eight years.

      The actual work of organizing the “indulgence-campaign” was put into the hands of John Tetzel, whose large experience in the selling of indulgences fitted him excellently for the post of Sub-commissioner. The indulgence sellers acted under the commission of the Archbishop and the directions of Tetzel, who took personal charge of the enterprise. The preachers went from city to city, and during the time that they were preaching the indulgence in any given place, all other preaching was required to cease. F36 They held out the usual inducements to prospective buyers. The plenary nature of the indulgence was made especially prominent, and the people were eloquently exhorted that the purchase of indulgence-letters was better than all good works, that they were an insurance against the pains of hell and of purgatory, that they availed for all satisfactions, even in the case of the most heinous sins that could be conceived, F37 “Confessional letters” F38 were one of the forms of ‘this indulgence. They gave their possessor permission to choose his own confessor, and entitled him to plenary remission once in his life, to absolution from sins normally reserved, etc.

      The indulgences for ‘the dead were zealously proclaimed, and the duty of purchasing for departed souls released from the pains of purgatory was most urgently enjoined. So great was the power of the indulgence to alleviate the pains of purgatory, that the souls of the departed were said to pass into heaven the instant that the coins of the indulgence-buyer jingled in the money-box. F39 4. Luther’s Protest . — The Theses were Luther’s protest against the manner in which this indulgence was preached, and against the false conception of the efficacy of indulgences which the people obtained from such preaching. They were not his first protest, however. In a sermon, preached July 27th, 1516, F40 he had issued a warning against the false idea that a man who had bought an indulgence was sure of salvation, and had declared the assertion that souls could be bought out of purgatory to be “a piece of temerity.” His warnings were repeated in other sermons, preached October 31st, 1516, and February 14th, 1517. F41 The burden of these warnings is always the same: the indulgences lead men astray; they incite to fear of God’s penalties and not to fear of sin; they encourage false hopes of salvation, and make light of the true condition of forgiveness, viz., sincere and genuine repentance.

      These warnings are repeated in the Theses. The preaching of indulgences has concealed the true nature of repentance; the first thing to consider is what our Lord and Master Jesus Christ means,” when He says, “Repent.” (Taken from http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2005/10/disputation-of-doctor-martin-luther-on.html)

  • Luther would be horrified by the world he forged

    10/14/2017 3:27:07 PM PDT · 69 of 214
    boatbums to vladimir998; ealgeone
    No, Luther did forge much of the world as we have it today since he is the father of Protestantism. Whole nations abandoned orthodox Christianity for the novel set of ideas (many heretical) called Protestantism. This changed the destiny of nations and continents. Wars were started over this. Rebellions began over this. Already existing divides became more intense and religious in nature where no religious cause previously existed. If a new religion could replace the only one anyone had ever known so could new states, new systems of economics, new cultural norms, new customs, and so on. This cannot be denied. We can look at Europe’s history and see it.

    "No"...the knee-jerk response of those who prove consistently unable to see history for what it is when their "church" is criticized. It's all just a misunderstanding of Luther's, right? If even your own previous Pope (Benedict) admitted the deplorable condition of the clergy and the "Catholic" church of the Middle Ages and its NEED for reform, then why can't modern day RCs do it?

    You know, it really is amazing how Martin Luther is the favorite whipping boy after all these years - especially when he is trotted out so frequently in support of Catholic dogma on these threads. "Luther Derangement Syndrome" - indeed! Make up your minds!

    Here's a history lesson - Luther was NOT the "father of Protestantism" - that's just a derogatory label polemist Catholics like to use to label him when they aren't trotting him out to support their dogmas. There were MANY "reformers" before AND after him that sought to right the ship of what claimed Universal Christian Church authority in those times. It was FAR more widespread than some seem comfortable with. It was a necessary and NEEDED action in a time when those who wore the mantle of "Apostleship" proved repeatedly they had NO concept of what the term even meant past the ability to demand obedience. Were the Popes and bishops of those days held to the standards the REAL Apostles established for clergy (much less members), they would have been banished to outer darkness for their duplicity and sins. Seriously...can this even be debated?

    There was no "new" religion of the Reformation - as you ought to honestly acknowledge - but a battle to return to the genuine faith once delivered to the saints. A faith that did NOT include paying alms to forgive sins or free loved ones from a fictitious Purgatory. A faith that was based on the once-for-all sacrifice of Jesus Christ for the sins of the world and which HIS righteousness was imputed to those who by faith received Him as Redeemer. The just shall live by faith...it's NEVER changed.

  • Luther would be horrified by the world he forged

    10/14/2017 2:37:57 PM PDT · 68 of 214
    boatbums to ealgeone

    It would be like a person is convicted by a judge and sentenced to the death penalty and the executioner carried it out. The judge says, “I didn’t kill anyone.” That’s how our FRoman friends defend their church from accusations they killed “heretics”. Yeah, it doesn’t convince me either.