[Update (16:33 EDT): The AP has changed its lede to read "The Vatican insisted Friday that it is properly following Christian tradition by excluding females from the priesthood as it issued a new warning that women taking part in ordinations will be excommunicated." (h/t Damian G. of Conservathink).]
According to the Associated Press, the Vatican is "slamming the door on attempts by women to become priests in the Roman Catholic Church." But it's rather hard to slam shut a door that was never open, which is what Catholic Church teaching holds about women serving in the priesthood.
From a May 30 article entitled "Vatican: excommunication for female priests" (paragraph break removed):
VATICAN CITY - The Vatican is slamming the door on attempts by women to become priests in the Roman Catholic Church. It has strongly reiterated in a decree that anyone involved in ordination ceremonies is automatically excommunicated. A top Vatican official said in a statement Friday that the church acted following what it called "so-called ordinations" in various parts of the world.
Yet far from "slamming" shut the possibility of female priests, the Catholic Church holds that God, speaking to His people through the words of Scripture -- not the Pope or the Church -- bars women from clerical office. This, however, by no means diminishes the role of women in the life of the church, as Catholic apologist Jason Evert explains (emphasis mine):
There were other roles that Christ had in mind for women. For example, they played a key role in the spread of the Gospel, being the first to spread the news of the risen Christ. They were also allowed to pray and prophecy in church (1 Cor. 11:1-16), but they were not to assume the function of teaching in the Christian assembly (1Cor. 14:34-38; 1 Tim. 2:1-14), which was restricted to the clergy.
Two thousand years later, no one-including the pope-has the authority to change the designs of the Church that Christ instituted. Specifically, the Church is unable to change the substance of a sacrament. For example, a person cannot be baptized in wine, nor may a substance other than bread be used for the consecration at Mass. If invalid matter is used, then the sacrament does not take place. Likewise, since the priest acts in the person of Christ, the Church has no authority to confer the sacrament on those who are unable to represent the male Jesus Christ.
One other point: the headline choice is similarly misleading. While the Church considers automatically excommunicated those who participate in "ordination" ceremonies, those ceremonies do not in any way confer the office of priest upon the participants. Therefore no female priests would end up being excommunicated since female priesthood is in and of itself a contradiction in terms under Catholic teaching.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Comments Policy
Yes, Ken ...
May 30, 2008 - 13:35 ET by Dave PierreCatholic Answers (Catholic.com) is an excellent resource, and Jason Evert is a terrific apologist and speaker.
In addition, Pope John Paul II addressed this issue in a 1994 apostolic letter: "ORDINATIO SACERDOTALIS".
Quite simply: As explained above, the Church simply does not have the authority to change a sacrament!
...
Frankenlies.com: Al Franken debunked
Thanks, Dave. Not a Catholic
May 30, 2008 - 13:53 ET by Ken ShepherdThanks, Dave.
Not a Catholic myself, but as a Reformed charismatic I also can't agree with women holding pastoral office. Bible is pretty clear on complementary gender roles in the family and in the church. The media are free to disagree with it, but they have to understand that this is an issue of fidelity to Scripture for orthodox Christians across denominational lines.
Another sordid example of
May 30, 2008 - 13:40 ET by lotrAnother sordid example of media bias. The choice of the idiomatic phrase "slamming the door" is totally inappropriate. It would have been far more accurate, professional, neutral, and not to mention, space saving, to simply say "The Vatican is rejecting attempts..." Stupidity runs amuck, it seems, in the journalism profession.
Left wing secularists and
May 30, 2008 - 16:10 ET by celatorLeft wing secularists and Stalanists have been trying to tell the Catholic Church how to run the Church for a long time . They have been successful in warping other institutions (and have made some inroads in the Church as well, sad to say). They use, as you suggest, insulting descriptors, trendy mockery and other distorting techniques to get their way, and the MSM, of course, supports them completely.
...but the gates of hell
May 30, 2008 - 16:23 ET by Thermistocles...but the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
I agree.
May 30, 2008 - 17:23 ET by celatorI agree.
Thoughts on Women's Ordination
May 30, 2008 - 16:40 ET by lotrThoughts on Women's Ordination
Fr. John Morris
http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles4/MorrisFeminism.php
In our supposedly equal
May 30, 2008 - 14:58 ET by ThatDudeIn our supposedly equal society, it should be that women are allowed to preach the holy word just as men do. If the Catholic church finds reason in the Bible as to why women may not do so, then it is their right to exclude women from such positions. I support the Church's right to follow their laws, but would in turn also have no obligations were they to repeal it. Cafeteria Catholics and many others of the church are skewing the traditions and therefore have left the name. Either adhere strictly to tradition, or make note of the fact that you no longer belong to the sect.
Thatdude, Reason's why
May 30, 2008 - 15:06 ET by futbolisgreat1Thatdude,
Reason's why women will never be priests...
1) Jesus Christ chose 12 men to be Apostles, not one of the Apostles was a woman.
2) A priest in the Roman Catholic Church, besides many other things, is the representative of Jessus Christ. Christ as a human being, God, chose to become a man. Not a woman.
3) Tradition.
While over simplifying the reasons, these are it boiled down.
There is nothing sexist or unequal about women not being able to become priests. Shoot, man can't become nuns in the Roman Catholic Chruch, does this mean that the Church is discriminating against men?
Those that see the Church's stance on priests only being men as something sexists and unequal are the ones with a chip on their shoulder that need to prove something. I have run into these men and women in my life and 99.9% of their time they had something to prove. I am not saying this is you.
Finally, I agree with the rest of your post. If you are going to be a Roman Catholic, adhere to its laws, traditions, etc. If you don't like them, LEAVE! no one is forcing you to be a Roman Catholic.
Women have a very, very important role to play in salvation in the RCC. The RCC has canonized countless of women that are set as incredible examples of how a human being should lead and live their lifes. The Virgin Mary is the second highest human being in the RCC after Jesus Christ.
by the way, Thatdude, the Church is not a sect. just thought I make this final correction.
»→ futbol
May 30, 2008 - 15:15 ET by Cool ArrowAre you a Meatloaf fan?
Two out of three ain't bad.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Cool Arrow, eh? don't
May 30, 2008 - 15:22 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
eh? don't understand the Meatloaf question.....sorry.... :(
Futbol,
May 30, 2008 - 15:38 ET by RESTLESS 1Cool is saying you are right on two out of three of your reasons above.
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
Restless 1 Oh,
May 30, 2008 - 15:40 ET by futbolisgreat1Restless 1
Oh, ok....didn't get, thanks for the Youtube link. :) Obviously, not a Meatloaf fan....
Cool Arrow, I am curious to see which one you consider I am wrong.
»→ No you're not futbol
May 30, 2008 - 16:10 ET by Cool Arrow"Tradition" is by far the most divisive,(I won't say the other adjective) contrivance known to Religion.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
"Tradition" is by far the
May 30, 2008 - 16:16 ET by futbolisgreat1"Tradition" is by far the most divisive,(I won't say the other adjective) contrivance known to Religion.
Well, Cool Arrow, according to you.
However, if you read John Paul II and other Pope's reasons of why women will never become priests in the RCC, tradition is one of the reasons, usually the last one, but one of the reasons they give.
As you have shown many times over on NB you are no fan of the the Roman Catholic Church. You have evey right to your opinion, however wrong it may be. :)
»→ futbol
May 30, 2008 - 16:26 ET by Cool ArrowDid I say "women priests" had anything to do with tradition?
As you have shown many times over on NB, you are unable to correctly digest a simple statement without extrapolating it into your persecution complex.
I disagreed with one of your enumerated statements. I did not disagree with your stance on female priests.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Cool Arrow, what? You
May 30, 2008 - 17:39 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
what? You seem to be the one extrapolating what I mean all the time. Stop mirroring unto me who you are.
You do this constantly and then tell those you disagree with that they are the ones doing it.
why do you always turn religion conversations so freaking personal?
»→ Here ya go Futbol
May 30, 2008 - 17:49 ET by Cool ArrowYou have evey right to your opinion, however wrong it may be. - futbolisgreat1
Did you make that comment or not? Looks like you are the one engaging in personal attacks.
I disagreed with one of your three enumerated statements. It was nothing personal, but you chose to personalize it.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Cool Arrow, eh? you
May 30, 2008 - 18:10 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
eh? you take the statement, "...how wrong it may be..." as a personal attack? HA!!! you fool, I said it in jest, but I guess since you are Mister "Know-It-all" you were in my mind and felt the feelings I felt when I wrote that sentence.
You are quite the paranoid one. I was truly smiling and thinking...."Hey, this is great Cool Arrow and I can have a religion conversation without insults." But you just could not resist.
It was not personal, so don't take it as such. Stop accusing me of what YOU do, pretending to know the feelings behind what I write.
Excuse me?
May 30, 2008 - 18:17 ET by tracheostomyFut: Stop accusing me of what YOU do, pretending to know the feelings behind what I write.
http://newsbusters.o...
Pot, meet kettle.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, "No Pearls to the
May 30, 2008 - 18:22 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
"No Pearls to the Swine" my little swine
»→ And there goes futbol
May 30, 2008 - 21:27 ET by Cool ArrowCalling me a fool, but certainly it's not a personal attack.
Wonderful, fut. The image you bow before must be very proud.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Cool Arrow, wait,
May 30, 2008 - 21:35 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
wait, wait....you make a personal attack on me when I tried to have a civil conversation with you and then you cry about me returning the favor?
Cool Arrow, why are people like you such hypocrites? yes, not it is personal.....when I said "how ever wrong it may be..." it was in jest....you were just too slow, proud and paranoid to get it then....
but as they say, you fulfilled your own prophecy....you know the good old self-fulling prophecy....you thought from the get go that I was making personal, so your replied to me in that manner, when all I was trying have a civil conversation with you.
Then when I reply in kind, to your personal attack on me you cry about me not being civil?
wow, talk about having a warped, screwed up, paranoid personality Cool Arrow.....
if you weren't so blind by your paranoia and persecution complex, you would realize that all I was doing at first was trying to have a fun, insightful exchange.....
»→ I'll stop now fut
May 30, 2008 - 21:39 ET by Cool ArrowYou're getting extremely incoherent.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Cool Arrow, Well pardon
May 30, 2008 - 21:44 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
Well pardon my English, since it is my second language....
However, my point stands. You started with the personal attacks and could not stand it when I returned in kind....
Don't dish out that which you can't handle.
but I see that you can't respond to the truth.
but go ahead, keep on with your hate for the Church, your paranoid ways, etc, etc. Believe me, you are not doing yourself any favors. You come accross as one crazed out tool.
Fut,
May 30, 2008 - 17:51 ET by tracheostomyYou're bringing the proverbial knife to a gunfight (again).
There's a clear ranking among the following statements:
A. You're wrong because I say so/believe so. (weak/failure)
B. You're wrong because this authority figure says so. (weak/fallacious)
Then there's.
C. You're wrong because I can show an evidential argument why you're wrong without repeating any stupid fallacies.
Based on your most recent posts, guess where you're sitting right now? Cool Arrow lives almost completely in "C" with a razor-sharp genius level of brevity that I could only dream of. It's like his job or something.
So do the smart thing for a change, turn down the dial on your hubris, and quit while you're ahead.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, "No Pearls to the
May 30, 2008 - 18:13 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
"No Pearls to the Swine" my swine.
This is all he has to react
May 30, 2008 - 18:33 ET by tracheostomyThis is all he has to react with after our little exchange here. . .
http://newsbusters.o...
Give it time to load. It's epic.
Of course, his citation of Matthew 7:6 assumes that he is protecting the real gospel (the holy). However, his arguments have never been covered by the authority of holy scripture or the holy apostles whom Jesus appointed.
Sad.
Thus, Fut's repetition rings rather hollow as well as ironic. But if it helps him sleep at night without regards to the truth, then so be it.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, You will never get
May 30, 2008 - 20:53 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
You will never get it. You are too arrogant, too proud (in the bad conotation), too foolish, too blind, too brainwashed, too selfish, to see that you don't debate to find out the truth, when it comes to religion. You debate to insult, to put others down that don't agree with you.
When it comes to debating religion, religious theology, you are no different than Leon....even Syrius respects other a lot more than you do.
So....the best way to deal with arrogant fools like you is to play with them.
So, keep on replying to my posts....I do not have enough respect for you to bother to reply. It is a waste of time to try to have a respectful, intellectual, theological conversation with you.
Fut,
May 31, 2008 - 00:01 ET by tracheostomyFut: You will never get it. You are too arrogant, too proud (in the bad
conotation), too foolish, too blind, too brainwashed, too selfish, to
see that you don't debate to find out the truth, when it comes to
religion.
Never get what? What was it you're trying to explain to me? Is it this grandiose argument to authority fallacy you worship?
Your statements assume that I am purely self-reliant. As I have demonstrated with you in the past, I am not. As a matter of fact, your problem is with the truth I present and you're unable to refute. To think I actually had to twist your arm to actually open a Bible! Not very intellectually honest, are you?
Fut: You debate to insult, to put others down that don't agree
with you.
"Everyone is entitled to your own opinions, but not their own facts." -Moynahan
Your statements are based on the assumption that I actually approve of your failure.
I don't.
It angers me that you let others handle your religion for you, as you've stated in the past. It grieves me deeply to see someone who professes Christ and embraces so much ignorance, despite the cognitive dissonance before you.
Don't tell me you didn't feel it that day. Thus, the source of your anger.
As stated earlier, stop playing the victim when we're holding you accountable for your professed beliefs. Stand up and actually face the dilemma that is before you. . .for a change.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, hmmm...WHAT?! 1
May 31, 2008 - 12:24 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
hmmm...WHAT?!
1) Me victim? nope. I am just stating a fact. You have never debated to find out the truth, you have never debated religion from the intellectual, exchange ideas point of view. You get on your soap box, grab a bullhorn and start screaming at the top of your longs that everyone else is wrong and you are right. Then you pick and chose the parts of the Bible that you so ignorantly believe suit your McDonald's menu religion.
2) Dilema? what dilema. The dilema that the voices in your head create since you do not know, understand or care to study Roman Catholic Theology? Just because something is way above your IQ level, it doesn't mean that it is a dilema to those that you disagree with. Don't mirror unto others how you feel about things. In fact, it is you the one that is full of dilemas with your McDonald's menu religion that gives an incredible amount of limitations to God, Who on one hand you claim to be all powerful, knowing, etc, etc, then you turn around and give it a huge amount of limitations. Sadly enough, you are too proud, selfish and brainwashed to see this fact. All you will do, once again, is spew out Bible verses that you believe support your point, and you ignore the rest. In other words, you will use the Bible to suit your needs, you will interpret the Bible the way that suits your warped believefs. You will do what Protestans claim they do not know, claim that the Bible is THE authority and then turn around and gag the Bible. Instead you will use what YOU believe the Bible means in order to justify your McDonald's menu religion. I told you a long time ago and just like I told Restless 1 here, if Protestans truly believe that the Bible is THE ultimate authority why don't you shut up and let the Bible speak for itself because the second you go ahead and interpret the Bible, guess what.....you are doing EXACTLY what the Roman CAtholic Church and its Theologians do. I know, I know, you aren't smart enough, humble enough, to understand this.
eh? felt what? the source of my anger towards you Trach, which you have never, never, never, never, never, and will probably never understand is how you debate, or more how you preach down to others as if you were the one with THE truth and everyone else around you are lesser beings that need to be corraled to believe what you believe. You will never, ever get it. When you compare me to Michael Moore, when you compare my religion, my Church to evil things, I will lash at you with a fury that no one has ever experienced. Get it? I will stand up for the Roman Catholic Church and I will not allow some uneducated pharisee like you, Cool Arrow, Restless 1, etc slander the Church.
No one handles my believe in God for me, don't come to conclusions that suit your warped believes of why others are wrong. What I have admitted to is that others are better versed than I am in Roman Catholic theology. I am hoping that you have the mental capacity to understand this.
I do not know why I bother. Honestly. By the way, I told you a long time ago....nothing you say or do will ever, ever persuade me from the The Truth, the Roman Catholic Church. Get it, so talk until your face is blue, you are wasting your time if your goal in all this was, is to change my religion. Many have tried and ALL have failed. My Faith in the Church created by Jesus Christ, in the teachings of the Church is unwavering. God, Christ, the Holy Spirit guide the Church in matters of Faith, nothing you say can come close to the authority, respect, leadership, admiration, etc that I have for the Church, why? Because it has God on its side. You, well, we know who you and your McDonald's menu religion have on your side and it is certainly not God.
and it grieves you deeply? honestly, save your grieve for someone who cares. Your crocodile tears are pathetic. You can wipe them off your eyes and shove them up where the son don't shine.
I told you once, apologize for your insults towards me, towards my Church, admit that you know NOTHING about the Church and Her theology and I will have a civil conversation with you.
Trach understand, I do NOT respect you. Get it? The second you started with your insults in the Woodshed and the private e-mails you lost. And understand, it is not the insults towards me, but the insults you so ignorantly threw at the Roman Catholic Church and Her theologians. Like Cool Arrow, you grab unto anything bad that anyone says about the Roman Catholic Church and believe it without first confirming it, understanding it and making sure whether or not there isn't more to what is being sad. In other words, much like Cool Arrow, you are a blind follower of anything that suits your hate for the Church.
Once again, I do not know why I bother. I know how you will respond, with the same old arrogance, stupidity and ridculousness. You are a broken record, a pre-recorded tape. Honestly, when I exchange posts with you, I truly feel that I am throwing Pearls to a swine. Why waste my valuable time on you?
»→ It's OK fut
May 31, 2008 - 12:31 ET by Cool ArrowYou say you follow the teachings of the RCC.
I guess your church tells you to call people "fool".
What a wonderful Church you must have.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Cool Arrow, The Roman
May 31, 2008 - 12:44 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
The Roman Catholic Chruch says to call it as it is. You, Trach and Restless1 are fools, brainwashed fools at that. Period end of story. You guys are hateful individuals that hate the Church with an incredible passion. You guys are pharisees who much like the pharisees can throw out verbatum the word of God, but do not have a clue how to LIVE the word of God.
I have met many great, decent Protestants and believe me, they are embarrassed by individuals like you.
You err fut
May 31, 2008 - 12:53 ET by Cool ArrowIf my use of the Word of God offends you, It certainly isn't God's Word that is in error.
So you argue from tradition and claim those who come at you with Scripture are the fools?
Maybe you should reassess the source of your authority. You're bondage is great. You fret over the contradictions your faith ignores between itself and the Scripture.
Do you have ulcers? I don't know why I felt it necessary to ask you that. Perhaps you do.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Cool Arrow,I argue from
May 31, 2008 - 13:16 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
I argue from tradition? No, I argue with the word of God which includes the Bible AND Tradition. You argue from Luthers horny point of view....oh wait....his 95 points were sincere...hahaha!!! only a fool believes that.
No my friend, YOUR bondage is great. As I told Trach, my Faith has no contradictions. That YOU believe it has contradictions because you do not understand the one and true Faith, that is your fault, not mine. The contradictions are in your mind because you do not know, or care to know the Roman Catholic Church. Stop mirroring unto me your complete ignorance and confusion that you have about the Roman Catholic Church.
You do not come from Scripture. The pharisees said the same thing to Jesus Christ, they even tried to use the Scriputer against Him and Jesus Christ showed them how they were USING the word of God to suit their personal needs, much like you and Trach.
I find it amusing that you can't understand the simple fact that God reveals things too humanity when He choses and not when YOU or your Protestant friends want it to be revealed.
I find it amusing that you would claim that using contraceptives is ok. Only someone that needs a god to serve them and not a God to serve would make such amoral claims as the ones you have done here and in other religious forums.
You, Trach, Resless1 do not want to serve God, you want God to serve you. You want a religion that makes you feel nice, warm, fuzzy inside. You do not want a religion that tells you, YOU ARE WRONG, Contraceptives are wrong, etc, etc, etc. You want a feel good religion, not THE TRUE religion created by Christ.
You need a religion and a god that tells you that the life you are leading, that the believes that you hold are good and ok. You need this, you, much like Trach, are not intersted in the Truth. All you are interested in is finding a religion that will tell you, "Cool Arrow, your believes are the right ones". That's what you want and desperatly need.
As I said, your blind hatred for the Church is embarrassing. You base your hatred on ignorance. You base your hatred on rumors and hearsay. You base your hatred on lack of education. You base your hatred on a desperate need to justify your misguided beliefs.
»→ Interesting fut
May 31, 2008 - 15:21 ET by Cool ArrowThat you didn't deny having ulcers. Does your body erupt with the pain of your bondage and your mind refuses an awareness of it?
You need to be set free fut.
I'm sorry, fut. I should be praying for your deliverance rather than taunting you.
I will do so now.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Fut: No, I argue with the
May 31, 2008 - 17:59 ET by tracheostomyFut: No, I argue with the word of God which includes the Bible AND
Tradition.
The gospel of John chapter 1, verse 1 states otherwise. All of such truth existed before eternity and therefore prior to man's tradition.
Jesus Himself also states otherwise in his disputes over tradition with the Pharisees.
Hence, the Bible and tradition are not co-equals as you continually assert. They cannot both be right and contradict each other in the same time and in the same place. One must bow before the other.
Fut: You argue from Luthers horny point of view....oh
wait....his 95 points were sincere...hahaha!!! only a fool believes
that.
Then you are therefore obligated to show us exactly which of the 95 theses were written to get Luther laid. IN-SANE!
This is all your accusation. I have never heard another Catholic make this type of insane charge before, ever.
This argument to motive fallacy also flies in the face of actual history, seeing as how Luther had no documented mistresses and waited 4 years after the Diet of Worms to marry. Even St. Augustine saw more action than Luther did!!!
Then there's this little nugget he wrote in 1524 in a personal letter:
"I shall never take a wife, as I feel at present. Not that I am
insensible to my flesh or sex (for I am neither wood nor stone); but my
mind is averse to wedlock because I daily expect the death of a
heretic."
He married one year later.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Fut: You have never
May 31, 2008 - 17:38 ET by tracheostomyFut: You have never debated to find out the truth. . .
This statement here assumes I didn't know it already, and was unable to demonstrate it. The record clearly shows otherwise. I do not debate to "find out" the truth, I debate to expose error.
Fut: . . .you have never debated
religion from the intellectual, exchange ideas point of view.
Not a fair exchange. Your ideas rely on arbitrary arguments and logical fallacies. Furthermore, back when you were still willing to be my friend, the two of us had no idea we would discover the body that was buried in your backyard. And a very embarrassing discovery at that.
With all their doctrinal errors, I never grieved for the church so hard when I came across the doctrine of gradual mitigation.
Fut: You get
on your soap box, grab a bullhorn and start screaming at the top of
your longs that everyone else is wrong and you are right.
Your allegory is rather stretched. If I had a literal bullhorn, I actually would not be able to listen to, or even respond to, your precise words as I do here. Try something else.
Fut: Then you
pick and chose the parts of the Bible that you so ignorantly believe
suit your McDonald's menu religion.
You have still not proven that I follow a so-called "McDonald's menu" religion. This accusation isn't even original, because it's merely a hackneyed variant of the phrase "Cafeteria Catholic."
Take me to the Woodshed and prove it. Otherwise, your accusation is truly empty.
Fut: The dilema that the voices in your head
create since you do not know, understand or care to study Roman
Catholic Theology?
You mean like yourself?
- For example, you simply ignore the disputes between the fathers on when baptism was instituted, settling for Nanny-Church's assurance that they have it all figured out for you. Wake up and smell the coffee!
- For example, let's say the FBI found a body buried in your backyard and it's looking like one of your own did something completely horrible to Doctor Augustine. What do you do? Obfuscate! Hope they don't find your Holy Mother that you tied up and gagged in the attic!
- Cool Arrow (a former Catholic whom you contest is invalid due to this status) points to the Papacy as a theological issue as well. I have done the same with clear discrepancies as to their self-given titles of
"mediator," but to you these simply don't exist.
You have failed to prove any of these otherwise, claiming to value a theological discussion at the same time. You continue to sweep these highly relevant issues under the rug as if they didn't exist.
Fut: Just because something is way above your IQ level,
it doesn't mean that it is a dilema to those that you disagree with.
Then please Fut, be intellectually honest about the superiority of your IQ level, and just once take the time to actually stoop down to show me A, B, C, D, where we are in error.
Take it back to the woodshed. Cite your facts. Pick your champions. Put up or shut up.
Fut: Don't mirror unto others how you feel about things. In fact, it is you
the one that is full of dilemas with your McDonald's menu religion that
gives an incredible amount of limitations to God, Who on one hand you
claim to be all powerful, knowing, etc, etc, then you turn around and
give it a huge amount of limitations.
What limitations? You've limited God to both time and man's ability to literally surprise God through the choice of their salvation unto themselves. You've limited God as wholly incapable of doing all the work of salvation; depending on man's merit to take up some imagined slack.
Fut: All you will do, once again,
is spew out Bible verses that you believe support your point, and you
ignore the rest. In other words, you will use the Bible to suit your
needs, you will interpret the Bible the way that suits your warped
believefs.
If this statement were true, then when I did cite a verse, you would be able to catch me compromising scripture elsewhere. Yet you haven't actually done this.
The entire tapestry of the Bible is easily disturbed when it's used in error. Just pull one thread, and you contradict many other verses that teach the same truth throughout scripture.
As a result, I accuse you of the very same thing you charge me with. Yet who is the one always citing the verses that are being violated? Wisdom is justified by her children. You failed again Fut. I really-really wish you'd stop failing. Because you're not failing me personally. You fail Him.
Fut: You will do what Protestans claim they do not know, claim
that the Bible is THE authority and then turn around and gag the
Bible.
Cite please. This accusation is unsupported.
Fut: Instead you will use what YOU believe the Bible means in order
to justify your McDonald's menu religion. I told you a long time ago
and just like I told Restless 1 here, if Protestans truly believe that
the Bible is THE ultimate authority why don't you shut up and let the
Bible speak for itself because the second you go ahead and interpret
the Bible, guess what.....you are doing EXACTLY what the Roman CAtholic
Church and its Theologians do. I know, I know, you aren't smart
enough, humble enough, to understand this.
Understood. This is a fair statement, but as always, you forget (or chose to ignore) one key fact. We Protestants don't interpret the Bible without the help, sure. But what you are unaware of Fut, is that assistance is far different from having it all done for you like the Nanny Church. We look to ministers and even theologians such as Augustine to assist in our personal study. We ask our ministers how to cut our food for us, we don't have Nanny Church spoon-feed us. We are capable of going to the bathroom on our own; not dependent on Nanny Church to change our diaper.
We inquire, ask, and learn from the likes of Augustine and the church fathers. We see the parts of the Bible they missed.
For example, the doctrine of Limbo was developed under the belief that the Bible didn't have little babies covered. Thus Augustine's soteriology was only complete for adults. The RCC found it shameful, and then they had to gradually mitigate it. Their words, not mine. Look it up in your Catholic Encyclopedia.
But if Augustine had a search engine or a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, he might never have missed what he did back then. Thus, Augustine's sotieriology is justified as stated without help from Nanny, and (ironically) it's more highly valued among Protestants than Catholics. As a matter of fact, it was Augustine's theology that started the reformation, and not Luther's sexual perversion as you have charged.
Fut: When you compare me to Michael Moore. . .
You mean that one time you had to depend on a redactor who edited Augustine's statements all Michael Moore-style to say what he wanted it to say, instead of what St. A. had actually said? You mean THAT comparison? Why haven't you repented of that, Fut?
Fut: . . .when you compare my religion, my Church to evil things, I will lash at
you with a fury that no one has ever experienced. Get it? I will
stand up for the Roman Catholic Church and I will not allow some
uneducated pharisee like you, Cool Arrow, Restless 1, etc slander the
Church.
Because you have no king but the RCC.
Fut: No one handles my believe in God for me, don't come to conclusions
that suit your warped believes of why others are wrong.
Don't make me dig up your quote. I get very angry when people make me do that.
Fut: What I have
admitted to is that others are better versed than I am in Roman
Catholic theology. I am hoping that you have the mental capacity to
understand this.
Who? Who did you say was better at theology than you? Do you mean St. Augustine, or your hand-picked redactor Mr. Windsor? Or maybe you're referring to the Catholic Encyclopedia you depend on that buries Augustine's plain theology under a ton of exceptional clauses? I am hoping you have the mental capacity to understand this.
Fut: I do not know why I bother. Honestly. By the way, I told you a
long time ago....nothing you say or do will ever, ever persuade me from
the The Truth, the Roman Catholic Church.
Your god and your Nanny. As I have stated before, no rational Catholic that I know of would ever even consider resorting to the shameful tactics that you have. Well, maybe your boy Windsor, but that's it.
Fut: . . .and it grieves you deeply? honestly, save your grieve for someone
who cares. Your crocodile tears are pathetic. You can wipe them off
your eyes and shove them up where the son don't shine.
My PMs are available for public viewing upon request. I have nothing to hide.
Fut: I told you once, apologize for your insults towards me, towards my
Church, admit that you know NOTHING about the Church and Her theology
and I will have a civil conversation with you.
We can start over if you think things will turn out different.
Fut: Trach understand, I do NOT respect you. Get it?
I-don't-need-your-respect. My faith and my doctrine stand regardless.
Fut: Like Cool Arrow, you grab unto anything bad that anyone
says about the Roman Catholic Church and believe it without first
confirming it, understanding it and making sure whether or not there
isn't more to what is being sad.
You mean like the conflict with the institution of baptism at the Jordan? You mean like Mary's gag? You mean like gradually mitigating a church father and then paying him lip service?
I'm glad I don't have your respect. If you respected me the way you do Augustine, who needs enemies?
Fut: Honestly, when I exchange
posts with you, I truly feel that I am throwing Pearls to a swine. Why
waste my valuable time on you?
Because fortunately, none of your pearls are insured by actual scripture. You're using scripture to protect a so-called "pearl" that has no foundation in scripture. Of course there is another scripture that shows whether your gem is true or not. For it will be refined with fire and proven as mere wood, hay, or stubble.
Stop trying to swindle everyone with your fake pearls.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, More verbage that
June 1, 2008 - 00:04 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
More verbage that suits your argument to a "T".
Trach: "Stop trying to swindle everyone with your fake pearls".
Why are you so desperate to prove the Roman Catholic Church wrong? why? Why the desperate need?
You some how believe that you have proven me wrong....don't you understand that this is your down fall? your pride, I know you believe that you are speaking THE Truth, but I can assure you you are not. Proven quite a few times in the Woodshed, in the the private e-mails, here, etc, etc.
And go ahead, dig up where I allegedly said that the Church handles the believe of God for me. You will probably be shocked to find that I have always said that I do not do justice to the Roman Catholic Church because I am not as well versed as others when it comes to its theology.
but you assume so much about the RCC. I am sure you are 100% unaware that the Church encourages and demands that ALL Catholics read the Bible on a daily basis. Did you know that? Of course not since you have stated other wise.
Furthermore, I find your assertion that Protestant ministers do not create Protestant "canon" to be a complete and utter lie!
Protestants have also created a set of rules and laws that govern how you need to worship God, what are sins and what are not sins. They do ALOT more than just guide you as you claim. They TELL you, just like the RCC tells you, if you want to belong to that Protestant religion you MUST follow a certain way of worship, you must abstain from certain sins, etc, etc.
This is another GREAT LIE by Protestants. They whine and cry about the RCC putting forth rules, canon, about Faith and say that the Church has no authority to do that. Then they create their own Christian religion to fit their own emotional needs and they themselves create a set of rules. Example you say....here
Anglican Church here in the USA, what is the fight over openly gay ministers and the break that has occured in the USA in the Anglican Church about this? it is all about rules, rules, rules, right? And who created this rule? The authorities of the Anglican Church.
Evangelicals, Baptists, etc forbid prayers to anyone but God and Jesus Christ, right? yes, one and the same, I know. What is this? rules, rules and more rules, created by who? the authorities of these Protestand denominations.
I could go all day long showing you how Protestants have created rules, laws, canon that MUST be follow if you want to be part of their denomination. How different is this from the RCC? It is NOT!
Futhermore, what you fail to understand is that Roman Catholic Tradition is anchored in Scripture, Her canon, Her laws are all based on the word of God Scripture. That you refuse to believe this, that is your problem.
I will also say that you are completly blind if you believe that you speak the Truth.
You also are wrong if you believe that the RCC is my king. Sorry, my only King, my only God, my only Nanny is God, Jesus Christ. Your statements saying other wise prove how you don't have the capacity to understand this.
What you fail to see is this...and I will shock you since you claimed not Roman Catholic would ever say this. Even the Pope and many other RCCs have said it now and in centuries past.
The Roman Catholic Church is THE only Church, its theology is THE only Theology. Its Faith is THE only Faith. Why? Because it was created by Jesus Christ, God. God keeps on watching over the Church through the use of the Holy Spirit.
Furthermore, it is NOT my job to take you from point A, B, C, D....that is your job.
as for debating St. Augustine, you are too dense to debate him anymore. I proved you how wrong you are and you could not stand it. what you did is insult me when I proved you wrong.
As for the gag that you so ignorantly keep on claiming that the Church has put on the Virgin Mary. I already told you and showed you how wrong you are. You claim we put a gag on the Virgin Mary.....you put a gag on the Archangel St. Gabriel whose words clearly show the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary.
As for your claim that the RCC teaches that God would be surprised by men's chosing shows your inability to grasp concepts.
Let me try this and I know I am making a mistake by addressing this point for the 1 millionth time with you.
God doesn't live in Time as we do. God forsaw the choices that we are going to make. So He already knows whether or not we will chose Heaven or Hell. He doesn't pick for us. However, He knows our choice since He is not limited by time. Get it? I know you don't.
St. Augustine argued Predestination as Calvin put it, in his early years, those years in which he lived in sin and his mother for over 20 years prayed for his salvation. However, St. Augustine retracted his early statements about predestination and spoke about it in his later years of his life how the RCC teaches today.
That's the problem with you, Calvin, etc. You grab unto St. Augustines early writings about Predestination, yet you forget to talk about his own corrections to the mistakes he admits to have committed in his early years when he spoke about Predestination.
YOU are gagging the Elder St. Augustine while only using the words of the young St. Augustine.
God doesn't chose for you and me, however, he KNOWS the choice we are going to make since He is not limited by time. This is why there is a book of the saved ones that the Bible talks about. Not because God wrote the names of those that He chose to save, but rather because God wrote the names of those that chose to save themselves through the grace of God.
Oh geez, I know, I Know, I probably use some word I shouldn't have used and you will over analyze every sentence, coman, verbage, etc, etc. Go for it Trach.....however, just because you believe you have the truth, it doesn't mean that it is The Truth.
By the way, once again...
The Roman Catholic Church is THE Church. It is THE Faith, it is THE Theology. Why? Because it has THE authority of Jesus Christ, God, who created the Church.
go for it Trach....
Answered. .
June 1, 2008 - 01:43 ET by tracheostomyAnswered. . .
http://newsbusters.o...
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Futbalisgreat, I disagee with you.
May 31, 2008 - 00:09 ET by shawn228You are so wrong fut because......ummm. I have no idea why your wrong, I know absoloutly nothing about this topic, but a liberal is going to blamed for turning conservatives agains each other anyway, so that was just my cue :-)
roflpmsl Shawn
May 31, 2008 - 00:21 ET by candanceThere's yer problem folks, Shawn's name appears in the thread!
I agree Candance,
May 31, 2008 - 00:35 ET by RESTLESS 1Shawn has taken more than his fair share of grief lately.
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
Restess :-)
May 31, 2008 - 00:39 ET by shawn228Don't you understand,? that is all part of my diabolical plan. I want to get as many people on my side as I can, so I can turn conservatives e against each other, and try to convert them to drinking soy milk and eat tofu....bwahahahahaha.
You are truly evil Shawn.
May 31, 2008 - 00:41 ET by RESTLESS 1You are truly evil Shawn. ;>)
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
No one said Shawn was evil Restless
June 1, 2008 - 14:48 ET by Dee Bunkhe's just manipulative and disrespectful
Youre a regular riot
May 31, 2008 - 00:51 ET by bigtimerYoure a regular riot shawn.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
thanks bt
May 31, 2008 - 01:27 ET by shawn228Ummm...I think.
Cut the crap Shawn - no one said it was a diabolical plan
June 1, 2008 - 14:43 ET by Dee Bunkyou are just rude. If two conservatives are fighting - especially about religion then stay out of it. You have nothing to offer there other than trouble. You are not religious.
It's not required, you can do what you want, but don't expect me to treat you with respect when I see you acting so disrespectful.
Oh please Dee
June 1, 2008 - 18:01 ET by shawn228I never asked you for anything. I was in no way disrespectful to futbol and I just made a lighthearted joke. Futbol does not seem to have problem with me, in fact we had nice conversation, if anyone is having a hissy fit or interjecting uninvited it is you.
Here I thought you were back to your normal self, but your getting that sulky attitude back. Hopefully common sense is as contagious as your laugh.
Oh so now I have to be invited - by who Shawn - You?
June 1, 2008 - 18:12 ET by Dee BunkYou are really disgusting.
Your hypocrisy knows no bounds
June 1, 2008 - 18:19 ET by shawn228First you tell me I am not allowed to join in someone else's conversation because I don't know about the topic, then you do exactly the same thing and now your mad because I am calling you on your hypocricy.
Candance and Restless and I were just having a light hearted conversation and there you were throwing stones about me being manipulative and disrespectful, which you can't back up because details don't matter.
Yes I can - and I have - without drudging up the past
June 1, 2008 - 18:21 ET by Dee Bunkand you know it. You are such a sleazy creep
sticks and stones Dee
June 1, 2008 - 18:27 ET by shawn228Wow, resorting to name calling without backing things up, something you accuse liberals off. Again with the hypocrisy.
This is getting tired, no one asked you to respond to my post.
Some of us should just keep
May 31, 2008 - 00:24 ET by bigtimerSome of us should just keep out of it if we don't know what they are talking about eh shawn?
. "Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
Shawn228, Well, honestly,
May 31, 2008 - 12:28 ET by futbolisgreat1Shawn228,
Well, honestly, I do not believe Trach is a Conservative. He is an extremist. Both sides of the eisle have individuals like Trach. They do great harm to the cause. Pat Buchanan, Michael Savage, Michael Moore, Ann Coulter, Al Franken, examples of extremists on both sides that do great harm. Trach is no different. Trach is a zealot.
He is an embarrassment to Christianity and to Conservatism. It is individuals like him who left wingers point at to prove that Conservatives are not good people.
Trach and Leon are the same kind of people. Extremists in opposite side of the eisle, but at the end the same wild eyed, crazed out zealots.
Good morning fut
May 31, 2008 - 12:50 ET by shawn228To be honest, when guys like you, botg, cool arrow and trach get deep into the bible and scriptures, I feel like I am watching a tv show in a different language so, I cannot comment either way.
My only beef with trach is he will relay the whole conservasation you had with him verbatim and analyze every sentence one by one, but I would not say he is a extremist. Even though I have had my share of heated debates with him, I like trach alot
Shawn228, "... would not
May 31, 2008 - 12:50 ET by futbolisgreat1Shawn228,
"... would not say he is a extremist." Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion how ever wrong they might be. :) Oh shoot, wait, Cool Arrow will claim this is a personal attack on your character. HA!
Well, obviously I disagree. Trach is an extremists, at least with his McDonlad's menu religion. It just becomes pointless and useless to debate him since after two minutes he will spew out his same old talking points over and over again. he will get on his soap box, get a bullhorn and yell at the top of his longs "YOU ARE WRONG, HE IS RIGHT!".
and yes the whole analazying of every sentence is ridiculous, but it is who he is. He love to pretend, much like Cool Arrow to have the ability to read your mind and state your feelings, emotions and believes behind the sentence you wrote.
Cool Arrow and Trach are zealots when it comes to religion. The saddest part is that I do not believe that in their heart they believe their are right. They have an irrational hatred for the Roman Catholic Church which I bet they do not even know where it comes from.
well futbol
May 31, 2008 - 13:42 ET by shawn228This is coming from a truly unbiased pov, because I do not know much about the topic.
I see Restless, Trach and Cool Arrow are very direct and use sarcasm in their responses, but they have not insulted you.
Can you say honestly same the same?
»→ He's very sharp, Shawn
May 31, 2008 - 14:05 ET by Cool ArrowHit him with Scripture or logic and he comes back with something really educated like "you fool".
You gotta respect an illiterate college leach who knows how to spell four letter words.
And as I posted before, I souldn't have belittled what he is so profoundly except he calls me "fool" in violation of a command given by Jesus himself.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Cool Arrow, Is that the
May 31, 2008 - 17:41 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
Is that the best you have?
When have you pointed out to scripture? and logic? you aren't seriously calling the crap that you spew logic are you now Cool Arrow? you think too highly of yourself.
I have brought your "logic" down on its knee, I have proven you to be a liar, a hateful liar and all you have come back with...."oh please, futbol, I beg of you, stop with the insults".
From the outset yesterday you began playing the victimhood card and you keep on going.
All you have done is make claims that are unfounded and untrue. You haven't quoted Scripture once.
Shawn....I have had plenty of religious conversations with this individuals to know EXACTLY where they are coming from
As I told them, just like the pharisees they use Scripture to fit their personal needs. They want a religion that suits their needs. They are not interested in serving God, they want God to serve them.
I do love Cool Arrows pathetic attempt at insulting me by saying, "illeterate college leach". You have to love hypocrites like Cool ARrow that cry about