Posted on 09/02/2018 3:21:38 AM PDT by Repent and Believe
He adhered to the Scriptures in defiance of a corrupt Rome, that did not even want to listen to Scripture at his trial.He did not proclaim his own religion. That is false. He proclaimed Christ and the truth of Scripture.
He did not move away from the teachings of Christ. That is false.
He embraced them and taught them. He translated the Scriptures into the common language so that the average person could read the Scriptures on their own.
He led no one astray. He led them to Christ and to the Gospel of Grace. Thank God!
Since Rome was corrupt, God continued His work by circumventing the corruption.
Rome is still corrupt today.
The perversion is just one form of corruption.
6 There was a man sent from God whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe.
Actually, it is mere like what accusation was not raised against him, mostly falsely, including adultery?
“Well; THIS Prot will GLADLY stand aside and let you poor Catholics have it out with each other if you wish! “
Well I’m not Catholic.
Just get tired of seeing the venomous rhetoric from both sides so often.
Do people really think Christ would give them a high five for the things they are posting?
+1
Yes; on BOTH sides of the aisle.
However; both cannot be right!
The reason prelates’ titles are in quotes is because the actual authority to bestow the order was absent or is at least highly questionable in light of the invalidity of those ordaining and conferring as well as deficiency of the altered matter or form.
The invalidity of the “conferrer” is on account of apostacy with supporting the blatant Modernism of “Vatican II”, for example, a heresy condemned by the very Pope whose feast we celebrate this very day, Saint Pius X!
(All the priests at the “Vatican II” had taken the oath against Modernism prior to their ordination, yet in approving the council did they also remain faithful to that solemn vow?
Dear Saint Pope Pius X, ora pro nobis!
Seems to be a rift in the monolithic façade of Catholicism.
You missed it.
VII was the façade.
“We follow Christ and not sinful men.“
Jesus would go through the Vatican in such a way as to make his visit to the Money Changers look like a Sunday school picnic.
I doubt He would leave a single stone standing.
L
A rift? I’m thinking Grand Canyon size rift.
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.