The Council of Trent and its support of paganism.

[GodsGrace]

Working to defend with what you provided is:

#1 Annulment was streamlined

Apostolic Letter Motu Proprio Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus by which the canons of the Code of Canon Law pertaining to cases regarding the nullity of marriage are reformed (15 August 2015) | Francis

Apostolic Letter Motu Proprio <i>Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus</i> by which the canons of the Code of Canon Law pertaining to cases regarding the nullity of marriage are reformed, 15 August 2015

www.vatican.va

#2 Death penalty text was made more clear

New revision of number 2267 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on the death penalty – Rescriptum “ex Audientia SS.mi” (1st August 2018)

New revision of number 2267 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on the death penalty – Rescriptum “ex Audientia SS.mi”, 1st August 2018

www.vatican.va

#3 Gays

Declaration Fiducia Supplicans On the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings (18 December 2023)

Declaration Fiducia Supplicans On the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings (18 December 2023)

www.vatican.va

So we have the 1st schism with the East 1054

Then a 2nd with the reformation 1500+

And you propose now a 3rd beginning?
Timing seems legit.

Lets look at this like that, in three's, omne trium perfectum


The apostles notice of gentiles being clean

Bible Gateway passage: Acts 11:10 - King James Version

And this was done three times: and all were drawn up again into heaven.

www.biblegateway.com

The denial of Jesus by Simon

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 26:34 - King James Version

Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this night, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.

www.biblegateway.com

And his as I perceive, act of contrition and penance to feed the lambs/sheep

Bible Gateway passage: John 21:17 - King James Version

He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

www.biblegateway.com

Perhaps a 3rd schism means the falling away is done?

Bible Gateway passage: 2 Thessalonians 2:3 - King James Version

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

www.biblegateway.com

But we are short one element you seem to refer belongs to the Pope

Bible Gateway passage: 2 Thessalonians 2:4 - King James Version

Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

www.biblegateway.com

The Pope does not do that.

He comes instead a power ordained by God, do you resist that?

Bible Gateway passage: Romans 13:2 - King James Version

Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

www.biblegateway.com

So you see the order of three no?

And order throughout scripture

Bible Gateway passage: Joshua 6:15 - King James Version

And it came to pass on the seventh day, that they rose early about the dawning of the day, and compassed the city after the same manner seven times: only on that day they compassed the city seven times.

www.biblegateway.com

Yet you deny order in the Church?

Despite the warnings?

The Pope, Simon Peter being the first, 2k years ago received an important job, as a porter, with the power to make new rules or change existing ones.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 16:19 - King James Version

And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

www.biblegateway.com

Bible Gateway passage: Mark 13:34 - King James Version

For the Son of Man is as a man taking a far journey, who left his house, and gave authority to his servants, and to every man his work, and commanded the porter to watch.

www.biblegateway.com

Bible Gateway passage: John 10:3 - King James Version

To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.

www.biblegateway.com

What will you do if you find this true?

Will you repent?


Or like Pharaoh remain hard hearted throughout the coming plaques?

I pray the former.

Robert,
You know I have a difficult time reading those blue boxes (or whatever color they are).

If you wish to have a conversation - then just converse and I'll reply.

 

[donadams]

What dont you understand about a command?

Jesus Christ truth itself (Jn 14:6) said it, even if was not His body by God saying it it would become His body! Let there be light! Light Must appear by the command of God! This is my body, this is my blood!

1 cord 11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, (that is tradition btw) that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.

27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. (Die)

31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.

1 cor 10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

Thks

 

[Niblo]

Hi @Fran.

Sorry for the delay.

In Post 36 you write:

‘He (the Pope) changed the doctrine of the death penalty. The church has always been in favor of it. I don't know enough about this to discuss it. He has declared a change in doctrine and the church now condemns it.’

In his Encyclical ‘Evangelium Vitae’, Pope Saint John Paul II writes (my emphases):

‘As time passed, the Church's Tradition has always consistently taught the absolute and unchanging value of the commandment "You shall not kill". It is a known fact that in the first centuries, murder was put among the three most serious sins – along with apostasy and adultery – and required a particularly heavy and lengthy public penance before the repentant murderer could be granted forgiveness and readmission to the ecclesial community.’

There is nothing here to suggest that the Church has ‘always been in favour’ of the death penalty. As you can see, the Church has ‘consistently taught’ that murder requires a considerable degree of public penance on behalf of the repentant murderer, before forgiveness, and readmission to society, could be given.

He goes on (my emphases):

‘Public authority must redress the violation of personal and social rights by imposing on the offender an adequate punishment for the crime, as a condition for the offender to regain the exercise of his or her freedom. In this way authority also fulfils the purpose of defending public order and ensuring people's safety, while at the same time offering the offender an incentive and help to change his or her behaviour and be rehabilitated.

‘It is clear that, for these purposes to be achieved, the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully evaluated and decided upon, and ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity: in other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society.

‘Today however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not practically non-existent.

‘In any event, the principle set forth in the new Catechism of the Catholic Church remains valid: "If bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority must limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person". (‘Evangelium Vitae; 54-56.’)

The Church’s commitment to the abolition of the death penalty was affirmed by subsequent Pontiffs.

Pope Benedict XVI writes; my emphasis:

‘Prisoners are human persons who, despite their crime, deserve to be treated with respect and dignity. They need our care. With this in mind, the Church must provide for pastoral care in prisons, for the material and spiritual welfare of the prisoners. This pastoral activity is a real service that the Church offers to society, and it is one that the state should support for the sake of the common good. Together with the Synod members, I draw the attention of society’s leaders to the need to make every effort to eliminate the death penalty and to reform the penal system in a way that ensures respect for the prisoners’ human dignity. Pastoral workers have the task of studying and recommending restorative justice as a means and a process for promoting reconciliation, justice and peace, and the return of victims and offenders to the community.’ (‘Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Africae Munus’).

Pope Francis re-affirms the Church’s belief that:

‘Today, capital punishment is unacceptable, however serious the condemned’s crime may have been.’ (‘Letter to the President of the International Commission Against the Death Penalty.’).

And again:

‘No matter how serious the crime that has been committed, the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and the dignity of the person.’ (‘Address of His Holiness Pope Francis to Participants in a Meeting Promoted by the Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelisation’; held in the Synod Hall on the 11th October, 2017.

There is no doubt that murder should carry a severe sentence – such as lifetime imprisonment – but there is no moral necessity that it be punished by death.

Continued:

 

[Niblo]

In Post 36 you write:

‘He (the Pope) has OKd blessing to gay couples. A couple means 2 persons. They're trying to explain it away but Bishops around the world (and all those in Africa) have declared that they will no longer follow his teachings or honor the changes he makes.’

On the 18th December, 2023, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) published the declaration ‘Fiducia Supplicans - On the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings’.

We are informed that the Declaration:

‘…remains firm on the traditional doctrine of the Church about marriage, not allowing any type of liturgical rite or blessing similar to a liturgical rite that can create confusion.’ (‘Presentation’; my emphasis.

Clause 31 states (my emphases):

‘Within the horizon outlined here appears the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex, the form of which should not be fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities to avoid producing confusion with the blessing proper to the Sacrament of Marriage.’

‘The blessing, therefore, is intended for those who: ‘recognizing themselves to be destitute and in need of (God’s) help – do not claim a legitimation of their own status, but who beg that all that is true, good, and humanly valid in their lives and their relationships be enriched, healed, and elevated by the presence of the Holy Spirit.’

It is one thing for a priest to: ‘provide for (or) promote a ritual for the blessings of couples in an irregular situation’, and quite another to: ‘prevent or prohibit the Church’s closeness to people in every situation in which they might seek the God’s help through a simple blessing.’ (Clause 38).

The former seeks to legitimise the relationship itself. The latter implores the Beloved to give the actual graces needed for the couple to live in accord with His will.

It is important to note that ‘Fiducia Supplicans’ does not change the Church’s teaching on the nature of marriage; or the immorality of homosexual acts; or on any other matter of moral or theological doctrine.

The Declaration permits only a priestly blessing; one that implores the Beloved’s help to move the persons toward upright living.

In my view, ‘Fiducia Supplicans’ is basically correct in its approach to blessings – accepting that Pope Francis desires only that people receive the blessings of the Church, without priests actually blessing sinful unions. However, it may take years for the Church to work through all the various interpretations – and abuses – that are certain to follow.

I’m still working on the matter of remarried couples and holy Communion!

Blessings.

 

[donadams]

Clarification: the death penalty is NOT murder, it is the law execution of justice by the authority of God.

Rom 13:1-4

Rom 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

 

[donadams]

Sorry “the lawful execution”

 

[Niblo]

Sorry “the lawful execution”

Where do I write that the death penalty is 'murder'?

Most certainly, this is neither my view, nor - more importantly - that of the Church.

Blessings.

 

[donadams]

Where do I write that the death penalty is 'murder'?

Most certainly, this is neither my view, nor - more importantly - that of the Church.

Blessings.

Just to clarify not to accuse!

I’m not exactly comfortable with the Vatican 2 sect being taken as the one true church.

 

[Niblo]

Just to clarify not to accuse!

I’m not exactly comfortable with the Vatican 2 sect being taken as the one true church.

No problemo. Many thanks.

Blessings.

 

[Niblo]

Remarried couples can now receive communion.
This could only be done in the past if a marriage was annuled and there are just a few reasons why a marriage can be annuled. Otherwise it lasts forever. It would be like 2 persons living together and still being able to receive communion.
This happened back in 2015 If I remember, and I could see more coming.

Hello, Fran.

Again, sorry for the delay.

The kerfuffle over Pope Francis’ Apostolic Exhortation ‘Amoris Laetitia’ (publish October 2015) has arisen from a particular interpretation of footnote 351; and from Clause 300.

The footnote is found in Chapter Eight.

Clause 305 of that Chapter states:

‘Because of forms of conditioning and mitigating factors, it is possible that in an objective situation of sin – which may not be subjectively culpable, or fully such – a person can be living in God’s grace, can love and can also grow in the life of grace and charity, while receiving the Church’s help to this end.’

The footnote states (my emphases):

‘In certain cases, this can include the help of the sacraments. Hence, “I want to remind priests that the confessional must not be a torture chamber, but rather an encounter with the Lord’s mercy” (Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013)….I would also point out that the Eucharist “is not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak”’

Historically, couples who have been divorced, but who then remarry – without their first marriage having been declared void under the ‘annulment’ process – have been required to live as ‘brother and sister’; in short, to refrain from sexual relations.

The orthodox reading of footnote 351 is that couples who truly live as ‘brother and sister’ may receive holy Communion, since they are not engaged in adultery.

The heterodox reading of footnote 351 is that couples, whose first marriage has not been declared void, and who fail to abstain from sexual intercourse (in other words, who commit adultery) may also receive holy Communion.

It is claimed that this reading is buttressed by what is known as the ‘internal forum solution’.

This is where couples who are unable, or unwilling, to apply for a declaration of nullity of a previous marriage – or where there is not enough external proof to satisfy a tribunal – can, in the privacy of their own conscience, and in consultation with a priest, consider that marriage invalid.

The ‘internal forum solution’ was rejected by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1994:

‘The mistaken conviction of a divorced and remarried person that he may receive Holy Communion normally presupposes that personal conscience is considered in the final analysis to be able, on the basis of one’s own convictions, to come to a decision about the existence or absence of a previous marriage and the value of the new union. However, such a position is inadmissible. Marriage, in fact, because it is both the image of the spousal relationship between Christ and his Church as well as the fundamental core and an important factor in the life of civil society, is essentially a public reality. (‘Reception of Holy Communion by the Divorced and Remarried Members of the Faithful’)

Pope Francis refers to the ‘internal forum’ in ‘Amoris Laetitia’; my emphasis:

‘Conversation with the priest, in the internal forum, contributes to the formation of a correct judgment on what hinders the possibility of a fuller participation in the life of the Church and on what steps can foster it and make it grow.’ (Clause 300).

Was Pope Francis revoking the 1994 rejection? The bishops of Malta seem to think he was.

In their ‘Criteria for the Application of Chapter VIII of Amoris Laetitia’ – published in January 2017 – Archbishop Charles Scicluna of Malta and Bishop Mario Grech of Gozo declare that:

‘If as a result of the process of discernment, undertaken with ‘humility, discretion and love for the Church and her teaching, in a sincere search for God’s will and a desire to make a more perfect response to it’ (AL 300), a separated or divorced person who is living in a new relationship manages, with an informed and enlightened conscience, to acknowledge and believe that he or she are at peace with God, he or she cannot be precluded from participating in the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist (Clause 10; my emphases).

Edward Peters – Professor of Canon Law at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary of the Archdiocese of Detroit – writes; my emphases:

‘In my view the Maltese Bishops have effectively invited the Catholics entrusted to them (lay faithful and clergy alike) to commit a number of objectively gravely evil acts. That their document was moreover, published in L’Osservatore Romano, exacerbates matters for it deprives Vatican representatives of the ‘plausible deniability’ that they could have claimed (and might soon enough wish they could claim), as it becomes known that the Maltese bishops went beyond what even Amoris ……., if interpreted narrowly, seemed to permit.

‘The Maltese bishops have fallen completely for the canonically and ecclesiologically false view (…….) that an individual’s assessment of his or her own readiness to receive holy Communion (see canon 916) controls the minister’s decision to administer the sacrament (see canon 915).

‘In Malta now, anyone who approaches for the sacraments should be recognized as being “at peace with God”. Objective evidence to the contrary is simply no longer relevant. Canon 916 is thus eviscerated; Canon 915 is effectively repudiated.’

Father Gerald E. Murray (Doctor of Canon Law) writes; my emphasis:

‘Thus Maltese Catholics who are living in adulterous second marriages are now being told by their bishops that they can engage in gravely sinful behavior that is publicly known and not be denied Holy Communion when they “acknowledge and believe” that they are “at peace with God.’ (Taken from the booklet: ‘Is Adultery No Longer a Sin? Notes on the Maltese Bishops’ Criteria for the Application of Chapter VIII of Amoris Laetitia’.)

Continued:

 

[Niblo]

Pope Francis has made it abundantly clear that ‘Amoris Laetitia’ is not giving any sort of approval to adultery.

He declares; my emphasis:

‘It is a matter of reaching out to everyone, of needing to help each person find his or her proper way of participating in the ecclesial community and thus to experience being touched by an “unmerited, unconditional and gratuitous” mercy. No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel! Here I am not speaking only of the divorced and remarried, but of everyone, in whatever situation they find themselves. Naturally, if someone flaunts an objective sin as if it were part of the Christian ideal, or wants to impose something other than what the Church teaches, he or she can in no way presume to teach or preach to others; this is a case of something which separates from the community (cf. Mt 18:17). Such a person needs to listen once more to the Gospel message and its call to conversion.’ (Clause 297).

Note, Pope Francis invokes the language of excommunication for anyone who ‘flaunts an objective sin as if it were part of the Christian ideal’. The objective sin in this context is, of course, adultery. Could he be more forceful?

And again; my emphases:

‘In order to avoid all misunderstanding, I would point out that in no way must the Church desist from proposing the full ideal of marriage, God’s plan in all its grandeur: “Young people who are baptized should be encouraged to understand that the sacrament of marriage can enrich their prospects of love and that they can be sustained by the grace of Christ in the sacrament and by the possibility of participating fully in the life of the Church”. A lukewarm attitude, any kind of relativism, or an undue reticence in proposing that ideal, would be a lack of fidelity to the Gospel and also of love on the part of the Church for young people themselves. To show understanding in the face of exceptional situations never implies dimming the light of the fuller ideal, or proposing less than what Jesus offers to the human being. Today, more important than the pastoral care of failures is the pastoral effort to strengthen marriages and thus to prevent their breakdown.’ (Clause 307; my emphases).

Permit me to remind you what the Church says about marriage; my emphases throughout:

‘The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament. (Canon 1055).

‘From a valid marriage arises a bond between the spouses which by its very nature is perpetual and exclusive; furthermore, in a Christian marriage the spouses are strengthened and, as it were, consecrated for the duties and the dignity of their state by a special sacrament.’ (Canon 1134).

‘Thus the marriage bond has been established by God himself in such a way that a marriage concluded and consummated between baptized persons can never be dissolved. This bond, which results from the free human act of the spouses and their consummation of the marriage, is a reality, henceforth irrevocable, and gives rise to a covenant guaranteed by God's fidelity. the Church does not have the power to contravene this disposition of divine wisdom.’ (Canon 1141). All three examples are taken from the ‘Code of Canon Law’.

Pope Francis makes it abundantly clear that:

‘Neither the synod nor this exhortation could be expected to provide a new set of general rules, canonical in nature and applicable to all cases.’ (Clause 300; my emphasis).

Blessings.

 

[reddogs]

Whew!
Maybe one topic at a time?

Well, even with sermons you have several being prepared, some take much study to say the least..

 

[reddogs]

Jesus Christ instituted the sacraments for the salvation of all men!

Sacramental life of the Christian church: I come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly. Jn 10:10 Jn 1:16-17

Baptism: (initiation into the covenant)
Mk 16:16 Jn 3:5 acts 2:38-39 8:36
1 Corinthians 12:13 2 pet 1:11
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

The Eucharist: (holy communion)
Mt 26:26-39 Jn 6:51-58 1 Cor 11:23-25

Confession of sins:
Jn 20:23 / 1 Jn 1:9 / 2 cor 5:18

Confirmation
Lk 22:32 acts 8:14-17
acts 14:22

Marriage:
Matt 19:4-6

Holy orders: (priesthood)
Jesus Christ continues HIS ministry in His new covenant church thru His priesthood in Peter, the apostles, and their successors with the same mission, power, and authority!
Mt 10:1-8 Mt 16:18 Mt 28:19 Lk 10:16 Jn 8:32 Jn 13:20 Jn 15:5 Jn 16:13
Jn 20:21-22 acts 1:17 acts 6:4 acts 8:26
2 Cor 5:18 1 Tim 4:14 Eph 2:20

Extreme unction: (anointing with oil)
1 Tim 4:14 James 5:14

The ark of salvation: one, holy, catholic, (universal) and apostolic church founded by Jesus Christ on Peter and the apostles!

The thing is they brought in their pagan rites and rituals and renamed them to 'christinize' it to get it by the people like the idols they renamed and brought in...

 

[donadams]

The thing is they brought in their pagan rites and rituals and renamed them to 'christinize' it to get it by the people like the idols they renamed and brought in...

Accusations not facts

Do we believe men unto salvation according to scripture?

 

[reddogs]

Would you be upset if that were biblical?

Bible Gateway passage: 1 Corinthians 11:29 - King James Version

For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

www.biblegateway.com

Perhaps meaning once confirmed you'll seek to strengthen others?

Bible Gateway passage: Luke 22:32 - King James Version

But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.

www.biblegateway.com

I'd add

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 18:20 - King James Version

For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

www.biblegateway.com

As when the priest or extraordinary minister offers the body of Christ and you say Amen then it is at that moment He is present, but only when an ordained priest has offered the gifts and petitioned as they are authorized to do, its all necessary.

Bible Gateway passage: John 16:23 - King James Version

And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you.

www.biblegateway.com

I'd like to suggest you consider the Church has the authority to do what it does, even when it seems wrong to us

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 18:18 - King James Version

Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

www.biblegateway.com

a good example in my opinion of just such a biblical example would be when Jesus rebuked Simon

Bible Gateway passage: Mark 8:33 - King James Version

But when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying, Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men.

www.biblegateway.com

Surely none of us here would have thought Simon was wrong, now Simon becomes Peter, a surname, like Mr Smith its given per occupation, as the Church knows Peter as Pope, and Pope as Father, then Simon Peter is Simon Pope or Simon Father, now he bears the responsibility for all of us, surely we're not really wanting his job?


Yet when we protest, waive our right to the protection of the Church, that's what we do.

What do we get for our efforts?

Bible Gateway passage: Romans 13:2 - King James Version

Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

www.biblegateway.com

Convert and come as a child, humble and submissive, eager to learn.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 18:3 - King James Version

And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

www.biblegateway.com

The Magistrate makes up and decides what ever it choose much like raising the virgin Mary to goddess and then declares itself infallible. You give the lie, then say anyone who doesn't believe it will stand for heresy and burn at the stake, Goebbels was a pauper by comparison. You cannot by any measure do that..

 

[donadams]

The Magistrate makes up and decides what ever it choose much like raising the virgin Mary to goddess and then declares itself infallible. You give the lie, then say anyone who doesn't believe it will stand for heresy and burn at the stake, Goebbels was a pauper by comparison. You cannot by any measure do that..

no! Our holy religion is revealed by God, eph 4:5 Jude 1:3 Christ taught his apostolic church in person for three years!

Mary not a goddess

Worship requires intent, consent and an offering

Bible proves that Mary most holy, ever virgin mother of God & mother of our salvation is not a goddess!

Lk 1:28 Hail, Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed art thou among women.

How can God fill a goddess with grace?
Hail Mary full of grace!

How can the Lord be with a goddess?
The lord is with thee!

How can goddess be blessed!
Blessed art thou, and all generations shall call me blessed!

Lk 1: 43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

How can a goddess be the mother of God?

Lk 1: 45 And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord.

How could goddess be faithful?

Lk 1: 46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,

How could a goddess magnify the Lord?

Lk 1:48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

How could goddess be humble?

Lk 1:49 For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name.

 

[reddogs]

You're a new convert so I'm not going to get into deep discussions.
I'll say this:

Even though men may not be holy,,,
the church and the Church are always holy.
So we can agree on that.

I wouldn't die on the Pope hill.
He may be the tip of the hierarchy of the church,
but above him is God....
and I don't know how God feels about this one.

Keep close to Jesus and to the church....
and pray Catholics get another pope like Benedict.

Who looked over the office of the inquisition, hmm..

 

[reddogs]

no! Our holy religion is revealed by God, eph 4:5 Jude 1:3 Christ taught his apostolic church in person for three years!

Mary not a goddess

Worship requires intent, consent and an offering

Bible proves that Mary most holy, ever virgin mother of God & mother of our salvation is not a goddess!

Lk 1:28 Hail, Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed art thou among women.

How can God fill a goddess with grace?
Hail Mary full of grace!

How can the Lord be with a goddess?
The lord is with thee!

How can goddess be blessed!
Blessed art thou, and all generations shall call me blessed!

Lk 1: 43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

How can a goddess be the mother of God?

Lk 1: 45 And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord.

How could goddess be faithful?

Lk 1: 46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,

How could a goddess magnify the Lord?

Lk 1:48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

How could goddess be humble?

Lk 1:49 For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name.

Bow to the queen of heaven, worship her, give praise and adoration That Only Belongs To Who?

 

[donadams]

Who looked over the office of the inquisition, hmm..

What’s wrong with inquisition?
Only mean an inquiry, the church has a duty from Christ to teach only truth and to condemn error so an inquiry is made

 

[donadams]

Bow to the queen of heaven, worship her, give praise and adoration That Only Belongs To Who

You are in violation of the eighth commandment