Last month, a reader ended an unrelated e-mail by asking me, “Is Shameless Popery dying a slow death with Catholic Answers replacing it?” And the answer is: sort of. I write regularly for Catholic Answers Magazine in both its print and online edition (for the latter, you can see all of my articles here: https://www.catholic.com/profile/joe-heschmeyer), and I’m working on a new book (this one on the Eucharist!), so it doesn’t seem either prudent or all that feasible to create new written content for Shameless Popery, too, particularly since the media landscape has changed pretty dramatically since I started this blog back in 2009.
One of the biggest shifts is that more and more people engage by listening or watching, rather than reading. It’s easy to lament that shift as another instance of us amusing ourselves to death, and I’m even somewhat partial to viewing it that way, but the truth is, the kind of long-form blogging I’ve loved doing on Shameless Popery has been on the decline for a while. The average reader today spends 37 seconds reading a blog post. Written blogs are still a valuable medium, and I think that there really are good and devoted readers who make it all worthwhile, but there are new and valuable opportunities for spreading the Gospel that simply didn’t exist (or were in their infancy) when I started this blog.
But don’t worry, this isn’t last call, and I’m not kicking anyone out. I’m rather announcing a shift that I’m actually really excited about: as many of you know, I co-hosted The Catholic Podcast with Chloe Langr and then Jennie Punswick, back when I worked for School of Faith. Once I left and joined Catholic Answers full-time, I resolved to start a new podcast. That was more than a year and a half ago, but I’m finally making good on that resolution. So (drum roll please) I’d like to present Shameless Popery, the podcast.
Here’s the first episode, in which I respond to James White on the question: what Bible did the Jews use at the time of Jesus?
You can get the podcast on Spotify, Apple Music, or mostly anywhere that does podcasts. Next up: a YouTube version! (Not sure exactly when this will launch, but I think very soon… although you saw how long it took me to do the audio version).
Just listened, was great!
All the best for this!
I first heard you on Catholic Answers earlier this year (responding to a Patrick Coffin video) and I look forward to listening to as many shows that you are on as I can. Your knowledgeable responses given with such humble charity are extremely admirable and inspiring. Thank you for all the work you do! I randomly came to your website today looking for a summary of the “3-2-1 Examen” you mentioned on a CA podcast a few years ago and saw this post about your new podcast. Best of luck in this new endeavor – looking forward to listening to this one and to any future podcasts (or YouTube videos!). Will be praying for you!
Are you going to be posting the episodes on this blog, and responding to questions?
How can anyone be unashamed to be a poper when the pope says the unborn aren’t human and laicizes a priest for opposing abortion? You should be a deeply ashamed poper.
Are you saying Jesus should be ashamed, since he established the papacy? The term refers to the Papacy, not to individual popes. Jesus makes it quite clear that there will be bad popes, and yet he establishes the papacy anyway. One could truly say that Jesus is the first Shameless Poper.
Did He? Didn’t Peter establish other churches before Rome? Assuming with almost no actual evidence that he did establish the church in Rome and was its first bishop etc.
Now those other churches established before Rome, are they part of the Body of Christ; HIS CHURCH?
Where in the New Testament is the papacy mentioned exactly?
“Teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”
Enjoy your serpent audience hall and your pagan obelisk and your eye of horus St. Peters. LOL
Roflmao. Oh James please keep the comments coming, I haven’t laughed this hard in awhile. I think I have tears in my eyes from the stupidity of your comments.
You said: “Did He”
Yes He did
You said: “Didn’t Peter establish other churches before Rome?
No, he established the Church in other places before Rome
You said: “Assuming with almost no actual evidence that he did establish the church in Rome and was its first bishop etc.”
Well, since the ECF’s do say he was there, and they are reliable, I’d say the evidence is plentiful.
You said: “Now those other churches established before Rome, are they part of the Body of Christ; HIS CHURCH”
Ummm, they were all part of the same Church. Man, a third grader can comprehend what you are blind to.
You said: “Where in the New Testament is the papacy mentioned exactly?”
Matthew 16:18. By the way you Protestant scholars and historians that admit that Jesus is clearly establishing an office to be handed down in perpetuity.
You said: “Teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”
Which doctrine?
You said: “Enjoy your serpent audience hall and your pagan obelisk and your eye of horus St. Peters. LOL”
Thanks, it’s a beautiful audience hall.
The Papacy is not mentioned by name, but the concept is clearly there.
There’s some flavor of Reformista charch near me, Radiant Church. They’s Bah-Bule-b’leevin, unlike the Cat’liks down the road a piece.
I always wondered where “Radiant Church” is in the Bible? Izzat, like, OK or some kinda idolatry?
Ahhh radiant. Makes me feel all warm inside!!!!!
Hmmm…pastor-idolator or “poper”…let me think…..
sigh There ain’t no hyperbole like internet fundamentalist hyperbole.
Best wishes for the future.
It is a “sign of the times” that people don’t want to digest information but want an instant hit. How many of us read papal encyclical’s rather than relying on another’s interpretation of them? Mea Culpa …
I do hope you’ll provide accompanying transcripts/written texts. What you write needs digesting and certain paragraph’s are useful to quote in dialogue with others and referring them to your articles. It also encourages deeper reflection and examination of Scripture and the teachings of the Church.
Over the years you have strengthened my faith and my understanding the beauty and coherence of Catholic teaching.. For that I thank you.
May God Bless in your work in this New Year and in all those that ahead.
When is the conclave to elect a new pope now that Benedict has died?
Good one, Shirley!
I kept listening to Podcast #8 as shown above, hoping to learn what Bible the Jews used at the time of Jesus. Silly me! That info is in Podcast #1.
Listening to Episode #8, to Trent and Joe right now. On the couch and in the living room, winning arguments, losing souls, clearing roadblocks, lost memory and written records.
All the best, Joe.
Hard to be a shamless poper when the pope is so shameless.
I come here for what passes as tart Reformista witticism when entertainment is in short supply….the Ozark Bunker Boyz never disappoint.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Pope is now saying priestly celibacy was temporary. I’m sure for him it was. But I can’t imagine anyone willingly doing it with him, so he probably raped someone.
Just like you.
If you don’t like Pope Francis, the first thing you should try to do, is not to be as evil as you think he is….
Why does he not excommunicate Marx for saying sodomy is not a sin? The love of money. Francis’ god is the German mark.
“Francis’ god is the German mark.”
That’s your surmise. I’d say that’s much more correct of the Catholic Church in Germany.
“Why does he not excommunicate Marx for saying sodomy is not a sin?”
Maybe because privately, he does not disagree with Marx, and this is his way of showcasing it. Given Francis has held apparently amicable personal meetings with the open apostate Fr. James Martin, and appointed clerics like San Diego’s McElroy to the rank of Cardinal…..
The Church has survived bad shepherds before this. Matt 16:18…
Remember, a fellow named McCarrick was instrumental in getting Bergoglio elected Pope.
“The Church has survived bad shepherds before this.”
Then the papacy is a manmade and unnecessary contrivance. Just admit it; Prots are right.
Man the stupidity of these comments.
A lot of people had a hand in Cardinal Bergoglio becoming Pope but of course the worst one gets cherrypicked. How in the heck does bad Popes mean it’s a manmade insittution? Nowhere does it say a Pope will be perfect or even good.
“How in the heck does bad Popes mean it’s a manmade institution?”
The US Presidency has had George Washington and Joe Biden occupy the office. Case in point. Good institution occasionally occupied by someone who revels in his fallen nature.
**** happens. God has a Plan.
Oh, and I was commenting on Bergoglio and his ostensible mentor, **not** on the institution of the Papacy. Yes, I did cherry-pick that one because of his influence and maximal sliminess.
I’d guess Pope Leo XIII’s vision of that 100 year timeline is approaching full bore fulfillment.
If one wants to be **really** critical of a Pope, one need look no further than the one who knew Christ personally, walked with Him for three years, saw the miracles, ate the transformed Bread and Wine, and still, in fear and weakness, denied Him.
Even Pope Francis can’t match that one, no matter how hard he may be trying.
God has a Plan.
What was the authority for priestly celibacy anyway? Certainly nothing Christ said; it only appeared in the 12th Century.
Another commandment of men that the open-mouthed swallowed like fish food.
Oh, I keep forgetting: the popes can make up whatever they want and it magically becomes as good as what Christ said.
You’d almost wonder why He said any more than “Peter, you take it from here.”?
You said: “only appeared in the 12th Century.”
Can you read? Look at the decrees of the Council of Elvira, early fourth century.
In reality, the Catholic Church takes her cues from our High Priest and founder, Jesus? Now was he married?
You, on the other hand James, take your cues from Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, or some televangelist, or your own faulty interpretation of Scripture.
Should read: Our High Priest and founder Jesus!!!!
Don’tcha love this guy? Your comebacks are epic.
He and Gary both have a discrete list of atheiesta/reformista talking point bullets…when you call them on one they just ignore you and go to the next bullet, or as in Gary’s case, double down on “Paul and the uncorroborated bright light!” meme.
I asked him, if Paul was insane, and his writings so off the wall, how did they survive as influentially as they have for 2,000 years? Did they promise access to ripe teens or other men’s wives as did Joe Smith? Or access to everything – treasure and people – available in a conquered nation, as did Muhammad? Or a hot blonde wife and fleet of vintage classic cars, right, Rev’rin Osteen?
Nope…Paul promised pain, deprivation, self-abnegation, cross-carrying…as both the Lord and he endured, on the way to salvation. Who would be interested in that, for God’s sake?
Indeed…for God’s sake….
Do I need to review the Scriptures concerning marriage, sexual relations, lust, the Kingdom of Heaven, eunuchs, those who are to hear what they can etc. etc. etc.?
Cues? “I never find that’s quite enough.” LOL
I take nothing from Luther, Calvin, Zwingli etc. I have enough to do studying Scripture myself. I will say though that is a wonder and wonderful how when one approaches Scripture in the right spirit: understanding comes in sudden and startling ways and again and again one is left thinking, “how did I not see that before?”
But if you haven’t had that experience I wouldn’t suggest assuming it means you’ve already got it all! 😉
I happened to see a reference online the other day to 58(?) priests from the Diocese of Los Angeles accused of child abuse over some period of time. Your church has become a veritable Sodom and we both know why. It’s a perfect venue for pedophiles and homosexual predators. Incredible as it may seem to a rational person, many actually seem to believe they can absolve themselves and their confreres of their little “indiscretions” in the usual “hey, presto!” manner.
It doesn’t take long for such practices or at least inclinations become so widespread and pervasive that they actually constitute a sort of sick normality which ceases to surprise or even outrage those it should. The lackadaisical attitude to such crimes reaches to the very top, with a few notable exceptions such the admirable Bishop Vigano.
I suppose these monstrosities have now been going on for centuries, a veritable mountain of misery and perdition. “Father Whoever said I’m all forgiven, he-he!” “Until next week anyway, ha-ha!’ You think so?
Now as for the Synod of Elvira, it seems there is some dispute, surely a happy thing considering the Synod’s “forbidding of the use of images in churches” and those statues of saints and the Virgin Mary you’re so fond of packing about.
While you’re at it, have a look at the Synod of Arles. All kinds of good stuff like the excommunication of all actors and conscientious objectors etc. etc.
So what do you think the Synod of Elvira’s significance is anyway? You seem to want to cherry pick it’s reputed canons, whose very authenticity is somewhat in doubt. It’s very clear these were canons reflective of their times and places and the problems of their times. My point was that celibacy was a relatively late universal imposition, and certainly one there is no scriptural commandment about. The rest seems to be your dear traditions of men, again.
You spend too much time on your talmudic traditions and not enough on the Word of God. But as always, the main stumbling block is the pretense of divine authority, it is literally the father of error.
“You’d almost wonder why He said any more than “Peter, you take it from here.”?”
That’s pretty much what He said to Peter, Matt 16: 17-18 and John 21:17. And Peter passed that Authority on to his successors Some have done well. Others, not so much, and it was St. John Chrysostom who said “the floor of Hell is paved with the skulls of bad priests and bishops.” Fallen humans fall. Just like past Presidents of the National Association of Evangelical Pastors, like Parster Ted “Mancuddles” Haggard.
Still waiting for the Scriptural proofs of your Apostolic inheritance. You and your ilk repeating it over and over again won’t make it true, though as Goebbels observed it will certainly make many believe it.
The sins and failings of some notable Protestants such as Ravi Zacharias pale compared to your pederasts and child rapists. For them the millstone would have been preferable. You’ll notice Christ didn’t say that Father Whoever could wipe it all away in the Friday confessional, did He?
Which of 40,000 “Prots” are right? The class has been waiting for an answer to that one for at least 500 years.
Assuming that none of them have ever fallen as you imply? How about..Parster Ted “Cuddles” Haggard, former president of the US Association of Evangelicals Pastors, culture warrior ‘gains them homma-sexshuls, though he be one?? His being the beatific vision of sleek young men with mud-spattered shaven chests (mmm-mmmm) on a nice Colorado afternoon ATV outing. Should he be the One to lure me from the Church of Matt 16:18?
There are other equally delicious examples. But I’ll just leave you to your basement-born theological contrivances, as are all such offshoots of Luther’s hubris. I can do no other 😉
Meantime, I’ll accept that there from time to time, God’s plan allows for the occasional bad shepherd….whose effect is at worst, fleeting save for lessons learned. Gates of Hell and all that.
Which of 40,000 “Prots” are right?
Even with Eastern Orthodoxy and Romanism counted there aren’t ecen realistically 20 different types of Christianity. Which of the 5 Romanish sects with a different take on the powers of the pope or who is the pope is correct? None.
Protestantism as a general principle is right because popes are stupid and vile and subjugating yourself to another’s person’s discernment rather than your own is lazy and evil. If you are not your own theologian you are following a liar to hell. If you are your own theologian you may stilk be headed to hell but at least you kbow your actually tried.
“The Church has survived bad shepherds before this.”
Because the church was always Protestant. Novody took popes seriously until the 1500s. They saw popes as insane fags larping in kings outfits and ignored them. When a new form of retard called a papist arose in the 1500s the church asserted its perrenial Protestantism. And a brain drain occurred. The papists were left with only drooling fooks on their side….and look what its led to. Enjoy your clown masses!!!
Hoo, boy, an object lesson in the heartbreak of a diet of unfiltered river water and pinto beans.
Here’s a condensed list of your +40,000. And then can’t agree on anything from infant baptism to Sola Whatever to the salvific merit of works to LGBT acceptance to gay marriage to predestination to civil divorce to to to…..nice job, Martin-o – which way do we goo-ooo???
https://aminoapps.com/c/genesis-amino/page/blog/condensed-list-of-40-000-protestant-denominations/KdJm_GXfMuw6qqkdw841GKD6nxnb4X37LB
Protstaticus, whatever latest slick-hair parster and home-cooked dogma from the list gets you hand-wavin’ warm and the sister-wife moisty, you jes’ enjoy yourselfs.
BTW…all the way from 2017…seems the Baptardate (rhymes with Caliphate) is getting more Cat’lik all the time. I’d guess you are the Remnant…kinda like after a high-fiber dinner….
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2017/08/31/u-s-protestants-are-not-defined-by-reformation-era-controversies-500-years-later/
Watch out fer them Opus Dei albinos!
Here’s a whole flat-bed full for yah….any one of them could Affect One’s Salvation….and oh so many unsubjugated and conflicting discernments……just what Jesus intended…..
**Efficacy of baptism, real or symbolic -Infant baptism; one baptism vs. multiple;-Adherence to Levitical law (Messianics); Real Presence in Eucharist – transubstantiation vs consubstantiation vs…piece o’bread: Ministerial priesthood or “the spirit called me, those are my quals;” Private personal confession vs. to an authority; Once Saved Always Saved vs. sin affecting salvation; The Rapture, vs Rapture is a 19th century invention with no basis Scripture; Apostolic succession or no; Male only vs otherwise (including nonbinary) clergy; Homosexual clergy; Predestination vs. free will (some called vs. all called – concept of “the elect”); Trinity vs. Oneness Divinity of Christ (some who call themselves Christian modify or deny the “hypostatic union” of Christ); Sola Scriptura vs. other authorities (e.g. Councils, Tradition); Gospels other than the four canonical (think The Book of Mormon) ; Veneration of Mary suitable; Mary mother of God or just “the human part of Jesus” or “no one special, in the right place at the right time;” Saints dead vs alive – Prayer to saints; Mortal vs. non-mortal sin vs antinomianism; Abortion, sin or OK; Artificial Contraception; Charismata; Consumption of alcohol, sin or fun; Homosexual acts and Church-blessed unions; Validity of civil divorce vs indissolubility of valid sacramental marriage.**
I’d say given all that, the occasional off-rails Pope, considering St. Peter denied Christ to His Face – and from whom we recover nicely and are always stronger – you have a rather bigger set of issues to resolve. Have at it from your bunker….we have blessed Lenten popcorn….
What exactly is the origin of your obsession with “hillbillies”? Do you need some sort of crutch for your theological arguments? Do you think your own heritage is so much better? And if you do, why do you even mention it here? Quite apart from the spiritual worthlessness of such bigoted baggage. If you’re the Croation fellow I recall, you surely have enough spiritual and cultural balls and chains of your own to deal with, considering the vile and vicious history of your region of origin.
Lots of Jim-crack posts today! Mostly the same warmed-over stuff I carry little biodegradable bags for when I walk my two golden retrievers.
I ain’t Croatian (???? – keep guessing, Tinkerbelle)) but I do have ‘Cultural Balls!” Big un’s! A fellow named Paul just loved my dad’s native country. Chaw that awhile.
Did you get your EBT card recharged today, enough gas for the generator and more Sam’s Club beans and rice?
I have fun pegging you but even I know I have no right consigning you to the “down escalatory.” Perhaps you should stop thumpin’ that there KJV Bah-Bule and open it to Luke 18: 9-14…oh, and Matt 7: 3-5.
Happy de-moting, Rufus! Say Howdy to the Sister-Wife. Love to hear you play the banjo sometime.
Cast not your pearls before fanatics George.
Such people think a priest’s incantations or a few discount indulgences will magically make their sins disappear. They think they will slip through the gates because they belonged to the “right” denomination or got the last minute pat & sprinkle – and if you didn’t “well, sorry, down escalator is over there”. They listen to a guy in a triple crown tiara who claims to have all the powers of Christ here on earth, as though Christ needs a substitute; He visits whenever He wishes.
Reminds me of Joseph Smith & friends: “yeah, Christ forgot to say a bunch of stuff so he sent me these here golden tablets to update y’all”
“No man comes to the Father except through me” becomes “Actually, Christ asked me and my consiglieri to take care of things here so you just come talk to me instead of the big guy.”
https://www.askacatholic.com/_webpostings/answers/2016_01JAN/2016JanWhyIsThisDangerous.cfm
“Thou shalt call no man father, for one is thy Father in heaven” becomes “Hey, I’m the Holy Father, so kiss my toe”.
Yes we had a Reformation for a reason, and the folks that learned nothing from it haven’t changed a bit.
And now they run after everyone except those are closest to them in belief!
“Cursed in he who puts his trust in men”.
James sez:
“No man comes to the Father except through me” becomes “Actually, Christ asked me and my consiglieri to take care of things here so you just come talk to me instead of the big guy.”
Hey, Charles Nelson Darby…here’s some thought fer ya to share at your next Billy Bob Jones U Alumni reunion:
So…these passages would imply “forgiving sins” is reserved to God alone…”
“Who is this man who thinks he can forgive sins?” – Like 7: 49-51
“Why does this man speak blasphemies? Who can forgive sins but God alone..?” Mark 2:7-9
OK, got that? Then we have…
“Receive the Holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven. Whose sins you retain, they are retained..” John 20:23.
So….Jesus apparently imparting an implicitly Godlike quality (we Cat’Liks call them “sacraments”) to his Apostles, who passed the same qualities on to their bishops (episkopos), deacons and prebyters (priests). Along with that Transubstantiatory command thang, “do this in memory of me…”
Starting to sound a lot like Christ left a succession of intercessors…an Apostolic Succession, if you will, 1500 years before a disgruntled cleric decide to found his own charch so he could put the wood to a comely ex-nun…..if that’s not what He intended, I am waiting to hear your BBJU erudition….
Maybe you wanna rethink that ‘consiglieri” conceit you spewed, speaking of sneering……?
Or in desperation, just screech out that old Reformista catch-all “it’s just a metaphor..!!!!!!.”
“So….Jesus apparently imparting an implicitly Godlike quality (we Cat’Liks call them “sacraments”) to his Apostles, who passed the same qualities on to their bishops (episkopos), deacons and prebyters (priests). Along with that Transubstantiatory command thang, “do this in memory of me…” ”
Remind us won’t you where the “passed on” bit appears in Scripture??
Trans-substantiation…Okaaay. Eg: “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up”. So you really think – all on your own that is – that Christ was not speaking in metaphor about eating his flesh and drinking his blood? And you really think it becomes the same somewhere down your oesophagus? Well, if the Dear Leaders say so, I guess it must be so, after all, they’re never wrong people!
“So you really think – all on your own that is – that Christ was not speaking in metaphor about eating his flesh and drinking his blood?”
Why don’t you ask Christ Himself meant when He doubled down on “My Flesh is True Food and My Blood is True Drink?” Doubles….down, even changing his use of terminology to emphasize the “gnawing” nature of His dialog. To the point where people *walk away..* (at the risk of their souls, BTW, pretty damn serious) Did He stop and say “oh wait, just a metaphor!!!” Nope…he looked at His Apostles and said “you leaving too?”
The ones that stayed, through their confusion that Passover, got their reward at another Passover one year hence, when Christ held up the consecrated Bead and Wine, and said , “take and eat, and drink.” The light came on, and has been on ever since.
Oh, and why do you think the eyes of the two Disciples at Emmaus were opeened to the presence of Christ “in the breaking of the bread?” Because, my corn-liquor deluded Reformista, Emmaus was the first post-Resurrection Mass complete with Transubstantiation. One of those “coincidences” in which you claim to believe. Or jes’ mo a dem metapho’s..?
THAT, my theological Naif, is Scriptural Literalism. Not from any person, as you in your tick-infested ignorance constantly sneer, but from the Original Source.
I dunno from which Parster Fuzzmuffin you’ve been getting your theology, but he’s sure no Scriptural literalist as you’un Fundies always claim to be.
Sharpen your rubber knife.
“Remind us won’t you where the “passed on” bit appears in Scripture??”
You are kidding, right? Start with Acts and work your way through the Letters. Bishops, deacons, presbyters left in the wake of Paul’s evangelizing. Are you really that obtuse?
“Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up”
BTW..that’s not a metaphor (shocked I have to ‘splain this to you). Jesus **meant** it…His Body was and is a Temple of the Holy Spirit.
I don’t need to explain the “destroy and raise” part..do I?
The ones who are “right” are right in spirit and in truth. You can’t discern who they are and neither can any mortal. The Holy Spirit works through those who are found willing and acceptable and clearly those people are found in many, many denominations and sometimes none at all. But if you wish to measure yourself or others, the proof of who those people are is simply and clearly stated in Mark 16:
[15] And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
[16] He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned.
[17] And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
[18] They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover.
Clear enough?
“The ones who are “right” are right in spirit and in truth. You can’t discern who they are and neither can any mortal.”
Hoo boy…so-ooo…I can be just as right follerin’ Unitarian Rainbow Pastorette Dykeminder, or David Koresh, or Jim Jones.
And all I have to do is drink the latter’s Kool-Aid or stick a boomslang down my shorts to discern whether or not I am follerin’ the right one? ‘Zat about it?
You are most certainly clear enough, and you are welcome to do any of the above to “put the Lord your God to the Test.” (Matt 4:7)
I’ll pass….thank’ee kindly.
Oh, and Prod pastors call on Catholic priests – trained as exorcists – all the time to “Cast out devils.” Becuz they have no Apostolic authority to do so themselves.
You are getting closer to the truth. All we need to tip your point is a good row over John 6.
See you at RCIA.
I see I didn’t address some matters in your two posts above previously. After we get past the usual sneering and jeering we find what? You claiming that Catholic priests are often called on to exorcise by Protestant ministers? And this proves what other than the lack of awareness or preparation on the part of those ministers who are not aware of spiritual warfare or do not/cannot fight it?
They must be singularly uninformed to think that the protracted spiritual slug-fest of the RC ritual is even equal to the efficacy of more careful and studious mostly Protestant exorcists. Ignorance is not confined to any one denomination!
Perhaps you haven’t noticed the irony of your sneering at the idea of possession or oppression on the Protestant side and then your acceptance of it when being fought by RC priests?
I suppose that reflects the fact that your spiritual weltanshauung – irony but surely appropriate considering history – cannot admit the working of the Holy Spirit in or through non-RC Christians. Poor soul. God grant you a better understanding and the willingness to seek it.
“And this proves what other than the lack of awareness or preparation on the part of those ministers who are not aware of spiritual warfare or do not/cannot fight it?”
SIx years of formation, *plus* specific and continuing exorcist training oughtta do it. Reading Chick tracts in the gas station restroom don’t cut it. Tell your parsters the Door is always open.
Tellya what, Rufus….first time I hear tell of a Catholic priest hat-in-handing to a ‘vangerlilercal parster for help in an exorcism, I’ll consider the rest of your rant worth reading.
In the meantime, first read what I wrote in other posts on Catholic Magisterial teaching on the Holy Spirit vis non-Catholics, then go take a heapin’ helpin’ of tumid weltanschauung to the sister-wife before she starts looking for another half-brother.
So after the apparently compulsive hillbilly hyperbole AK, which probably reveals nothing more than some racial/cultural insecurity you suffer from here in the Anglosphere, what have you actually got?
Some dodge about “putting the Lord your God to the test”?
Where did Christ tell us in those verses that they “put God to the test”? Are you seriously suggesting that Christ, who He told us spoke only what the Father in Heaven (not Rome) told Him, was suggesting we put our Father to the test?
You’ll notice I suppose that the verses come right at the end of Matthew. Personally I don’t believe anything in what Christ said or when He said it to be coincidental.
That said, I do realize that when you belong to a cult which believes its leaders are of equal authority to God in the persons of the Trinity, the words of Christ are I suppose at best of only equal authority to that of the Dear Leader.
I was raised in New Jersey. Surrounded by Jews, Greeks, Hispanics, Germans, Armenians, Italians. Hardly the Anglosphere of your undoubtedly lily-white nethers. But I spent time in the Bah-Bule belt. Experience is quite a teacher. Fundie hillbillies? I know one when I see one.
Nice word salad, sound and fury signifying…what? (apologies to the Bard).
You deflected. You have been saying that Apostolic Succession is a sham, with all your snide, sneers at the Papacy and priesthood. You flat failed to address the transfer of authority from Christ to His successors in the matter of the forgiveness of sins, that I specified. You don’t agree with the succession of authority ordained by Christ? Argue with Him. See where that gets you. I’d dig the Ozark bunker just a little deeper.
You said that the way Scripturally to understand who is a Spirit filled pastor is to drink poison or handle a venomous reptile. If you don’t think that’s “putting God to the test,” I can’t help you. No one can, except a really good EMT and toxicologist. Good luck with that. You flat ignored “casting out devils” something done by Catholic priests, more all the time as false teachers like you proliferate.
And you call us cultists.
So you have nothing of substance to say in response, just more of your compulsive attempts to redress some unaddressed inferiority complex with your hillbilly shtick?
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.
So your inability to do any of those things that Christ said would be the hallmarks of believers is somehow putting God to the test?
Looking forward to your exposition of this new doctrine! 😉
Hmmm..hokay…substance…substance….
I addressed your “go to the Father on Friday, hurr hurr” with a detailed explanation of the Sacrament of Confession, including Scripture verses, and three times reiterated my request for relevant comment. I ..got..crickets. Which might be a great green food source per the World Economic forum, but they make for lousy apologetics.
I as well invited you to get intimate with a pit viper, or find Good Reformista Revverin’ Jim Jones – one of your home grown finest – Special Guyana Kool Aid recipe on the internets, and have a big swig, to prove your faith in those verses. I am guessing since you’re still here providing amusement, you haven’t gotten around to it yet. Maybe you could point us to a good Ozark parster who does all – with some corroborated evidence – of that so we could, y’know, see and b’leev? And if no one does all that, I guess **no one** has the Holy Spirit in him and we are all rudderless?
Put your money where your mouth is, Rufus, if you **really believe** Jesus meant for us all to drink poison or get frisky with a mamba. Come talk to me when and if you can after it’s done.
Or do you think that maybe, just maybe, **this** is one of those occasions where Jesus **actually is using a metaphor, serpents and poison for the degraded culture around them?**
Tell the truth, now…does “owning the Papists” get the sister-wife, y’know…excited? ‘Zat why you keep coming back?
You did not address directly how your theology reconciles how Scripture of the authority to forgive sins dovetails and is passed from God to His earthly intercessors. Just some cobbled-together Baptista Scriptural cherry-picking in response, wholly un-contextual to the entirety of Salvation history. .
Noted.
George said: “Then the papacy is a manmade and unnecessary contrivance. Just admit it; Prots are right.”, in reply to AK
This is a non-sequitar. If anything it proves that the Papacy is divinely established, as it would be a miracle for any institution to survive for 2,000 years with bad shepherds, as the Catholic Church has clearly had. And yet She keeps chugging along.
Furthermore, Christ makes quite clear in the Gospels that there will be bad shepherds, just as there was in the OT.
One last thing for you to think about George. I know many people who say Christianity is false. A common argument they use is your exact argument, only it is applied to Jesus. To them it is quite clear since he chose one (Judas), who would go on to betray Him, that Jesus cannot be divine. You, George, have no argument against them, as their main point is the grounds for your (in reality) non-argument against the Papacy.
If I had four thumbs….they’d all be “up.”
“AK says:
June 11, 2023 at 7:17 pm
Lots of Jim-crack posts today! Mostly the same warmed-over stuff I carry little biodegradable bags for when I walk my two golden retrievers.
I ain’t Croatian (???? – keep guessing, Tinkerbelle)) but I do have ‘Cultural Balls!” Big un’s! A fellow named Paul just loved my dad’s native country. Chaw that awhile.
Did you get your EBT card recharged today, enough gas for the generator and more Sam’s Club beans and rice?
I have fun pegging you but even I know I have no right consigning you to the “down escalatory.” Perhaps you should stop thumpin’ that there KJV Bah-Bule and open it to Luke 18: 9-14…oh, and Matt 7: 3-5.
Happy de-moting, Rufus! Say Howdy to the Sister-Wife. Love to hear you play the banjo sometime.”
No one else cares about your dogs or your balls, real or perceptual. You remind me of some of your previous comments which were sadly indicative of a small and filthy mind. What kind of Christian do you actually think you are?
Your persona here gives no indication of that quality without which all others are worthless: Corinthians 1:13. ponder on that unless your poverty is such that you believe some formulaic incantation every Friday on will take care of your sins regardless of your thought, speech, fruits of repentance or lack thereof.
“We have Peter for our Pope” LOL.
Or have you like so many others confused the Body of Christ with a men’s club?
Matt. 12:34-36
“What kind of Christian do you actually think you are?”
A rather poor and humble one, like the tax collector.
How ’bout you, Mr. Jimmy the Pharisee?
By their fruits ye shall know them.
But how will they know themselves?
Not to worry, Father Whoever will make it all good on Friday…
James said: “No one else cares about your dogs or your balls, real or perceptual. You remind me of some of your previous comments which were sadly indicative of a small and filthy mind.”
I care about his dogs. I have no doubt that his mind is much bigger than yours.
James said: “Or have you like so many others confused the Body of Christ with a men’s club?”
Nope, he hasn’t. I believe you have.
Judas never betrayed Jesus. Justin Martyr tells us plainly that the 12 apostles evangelized the world. And Justin did not have Paul which was the exclusive patented copyrighted property of Marcion.
Judas did not commit suicide until the Catholic church suicided him to replace him with Paul circa 160 AD.
Further, as Jesus is made to say in the gospel during the arrest “Daily I was in the temple and no man layed hands on me”….but we’re supposed to believe they forgot what he looked like and would need Judas to identify him with a kiss.
Further did Judas betray him against his will as in the Catholic edited synoptics, or with his permission or by his command as in Catholic edited John? And was the field called Akel Dama because Judas killed himself in it (as in Catholic edited whichever synoptic it is, Matthew probably), or because the chief priests bought a field to burry strangers in with his blood money he gave back to them (as In Catholic edited Acts)?
Was Judas needed to identify Jesus because he was Judas Thomas and Jesus’ twin brother as in the Catholic edited Gnostic material? That would actually be the only good explanation why Judas might be needed to identify Jesus, so they arrest the correct twin. But no, because Justin Marty is clear: Judas did not betray Jesus and did not commit suicide. Even in the Gnostic gospels which Catholucs edited and preserved (ever the pagans) we find Judas Thomas the twin evangelizing India. So so much for Judas having to betray and identify Jesus becaus he was his twin.
Friend, when you think you can contradict the Gospels you might as well take yourself off to Jonestown or Antelope OR or some swami in India. As for Judas, in one of the books of the Tanach, there is a page which contains in skip letter sequence, among other things, all the names of the Apostles except one: your friend Judas. The name of his replacement is there: Matthias. Written how many centuries before any of them were born?
Which page of the Tanakh James?
I don’t recall. Why don’t you look into it? Books have been published on the matter for decades now. You may find knowledge of the matter not only strengthens you in faith, but may do the same for people you know. I daresay it will stick in the craw of many a “scientific atheist”, and many an honest sceptic has been led to the truth by such proofs. The Shroud of Turin is another such proof.
I already know, it’s Is. 53. The only problem is you can do ELS and come up with many other names also. And many of the same codes found in the Tanakh have been found in many other non-bilical books using ELS. Does that make them inspired? You can probably find Huey, Dewey, and Louie in the Tanakh using ELS. Does that make them unknown Apostles?
https://www.maa.org/external_archive/devlin/devlin_6_98.html
Yes, twelve Apostles *did indeed* evangelize the world, after Matthias replaced Judas. Acts 1: 12-26 – that makes 12, even in Ozark math – or maybe Acts is not a legitimate text to whatever one of 40K subcults you do the big-tent hand wave on weekends?
Judas had free will as do we all. That’s pretty much a period dot. And the Sanhedrin needed an insider to betray Jesus to at
least provide a veneer of legitimacy for their serious request for crucifixion, not only to the Roman authorities, but to the Jewish citizenry of Jerusalem who just days before had welcomed Him with palms and adulation…and might not look kindly on the betrayal of one of their own to the hated occupiers. That message is pretty clear except maybe to like, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons. God only knows what they – and you – think
News for you…the “Catholic Edited” Scripture was just that because the Catholic Church was the only and true Church – still is – until 1517, and on that Matt 16:18 authority determined the Canon. The determining Councils were a lot closer to the time the components of Scripture were written than whatever bunker-bound parster who has your attention. The remainder of your barely coherent rant (“Paul which was the exclusive patented copyrighted property of Marcion.” – really???) is the most specious form of nonsensical ahistorical cherry picking. But if it makes you happy….
I’m surprised you wasted your valuable time replying to Roman Stupidski
I guess I didn’t know him…I do now.
He’s welcome to the last word if he has enough left on his EBT card to buy another gallon of gas for the bunker generator to fire up the Dell Turbo running XP/SP3.
Hey AK! You’ve not lost one itch of your slick sortie facility. Good to see you still working!
Best of the Blessed Season.
MAR-GOOOO! Good to see you again. I took a break for awhile, but where I ‘broke” was not and could never be Shameless Popery…with it’s lovely eclectic crew of DNA-level Cat’liks…..like you.
So.. I am back 😉 and thank you for the fetching Margo-esque welcome -much appreciated!
😀😀😀
You two still sound like the same angry, sneering and generally un-Christian fanatics you did in the past. The student of history is not surprised. Legalism attracts the same personality profiles today as it did 2000 or 10,000 years ago.
The worst part of such mentalities when found among Christians is that they have not the excuse of ignorance that pagans have. And no, “Father Whoever” can’t get you off with a pat, a wave and a few Hail Marys.
God help you and all like you.
“You two still sound like the same angry, sneering…”
We are neither angry nor sneering, just guffawing as a keyboard allows. We just find you sooo-ooo amusing! Please do continue!
Hey Duane..I think James the Historian (BA, Billy Bob Jones University, 2022) is trig-ggered….should I recommend a good therapist? My son has a thriving Catholic-based practice, here in the heart o’the Evangelical Vatican, Colorado Springs. There is a definite need.
And thanks James, for lowering yourself (that’s pretty low) to call Catholics, Christians. We’uns ‘preciate it.
Oh, and Calvin, you are the one who came here with a chip and an attitude, not looking for honest civil debate, but to “Sock it to the Papists.” Something for which Billy Bob Jones left you woefully unprepared.
News fer ya..this isn’t England of Henry the Adulterer, where Catholics had to hide in priest holes away from the like of you. You come to an apologetic gun fight with a theological rubber knife, expect the natural result.
Salve……
James said: “And no, “Father Whoever” can’t get you off with a pat, a wave and a few Hail Marys.”
Oh yes he can!! Christ gave the authority to forgive sins to his Church. Sadly for you, he did not give it to the denomination you belong to.
Duane: James’ response to my clear demonstration of Scriptural continuity between Christ and the Apostles (and their successors) was typical Scriptural deflection by cherry-picking an unrelated topic.
And advocated snake-handling/drinking poisoned Kool Aid to discern who has the Spirit.
I wish him well.
Joe,
Just have to tell the world! Rector Magnificus from Pontificia Università San Tommaso d’Aquino sent ME an e-mail reply to a question I believed only he could answer. Truly, I delved deep into his Trinity book trying to find the answer, which probably was there, but which escaped my pea-sized intellect regarding a Thomistic explanation/understanding of the nature of Christ’s human-divine person in heaven.
Analogically I compare my happy blessing (in some oh-so-very-small-way) to the awe the women at the tomb must have had when they found it empty on the first day.
So, Joe, I daresay he was not your teacher when you left….else you would not have.
Anyway, I just had to share my news of joy. Thanks for listening.
Did you guys see that miracle of the Sun today? No? Only 3 retarded children saw it? Its still legit.
Hey, don’t take your sads out on us, bro. We’re with you!
Keep doing what you’re doing; gay conversion therapy has been known to work, you just have to find the right Jesus Camp.
Have faith, and make Mama proud!
sigh As if this page wasn’t full of snide trolling comments already.
Question: Why do Christians assume that Muhammad and Joseph Smith were deranged for their uncorroborated supernatural claims but give a free pass to Paul of Tarsus for his?
Likely first, because Paul did not invent his own religion, simply proselytized the one given him by Jesus Christ.
Second, expanding that thought, Joe Smith invented a religion so he could access underage woman and other men’s wives. That fact becoming public is hemorrhaging multitudes of Mormons away from their ..church. Ref; the CES letter, Google is your friend. Lots of $$$ is keeping them afloat. We’ll see where they are in 100 years.
Muhammad? Add little girls to the fun prospect of “converting” barbarian steppe-dwellers with the prospect of conquering and plundering vast areas while giving the inhabitants the choice of “join or die…or at the least, pay the jizya.” While contributing comely wives, sisters, sons and daughters to the tents of warriors and harems of local sultans (ref: the history of Ottoman and other conquests) and the bureaucracies and armies of Islam (ref: Janissaries and the practice of Devshirme). An economic/political system masquerading as a religion.
Both not quite an appeal to the basic Christian foundational “follow and suffer for the Cross to gain salvation” of Paul. If Paul was a flake his ideas – not designed to appeal to the senses or the purse – would have evaporated as “deranged.” And deranged ideas rarely have staying power if they don’t appeal to the senses (Smith) or the senses and personal gain (Islam). There’s a lot more but you get the idea.
I note another righteous activist for liberty and justice has found her way to the Faith – it keeps happening:
https://www.ncregister.com/interview/prominent-dutch-philosopher-and-convert-charts-her-path-to-the-catholic-church?mkt_tok=NDI3LUxFUS0wNjYAAAGLVzQ3Hifv9kf1SsP6yxpcCLmsjxPizFpZkaAgtgUoDbPmBMM9wPOrWAWUKTTy_rAIO8gGrV2Ohv7ZKiFsdPRJdtabJm3EF0ZUkiCXfg
“Likely first, because Paul did not invent his own religion, simply proselytized the one given him by Jesus Christ.”
Paul did not invent Judaism. According to Paul and most Christians today, Christianity is the fulfillment of Judaism. Joseph Smith believed that Mormonism was the fulfillment of Christianity. This is how every sect and cult on the planet starts: They take a belief in the mother religion, give it just enough of a twist that they are considered heretics by members of the mother religion, and voila! You have a new religion.
How can you know that Paul was not mentally ill? Why do you trust Paul’s tale of seeing a talking bright light on a dark desert highway?
” If Paul was a flake his ideas – not designed to appeal to the senses or the purse – would have evaporated as “deranged.” And deranged ideas rarely have staying power if they don’t appeal to the senses (Smith) or the senses and personal gain (Islam).”
How do you explain all the nativist superstitions (many which have persisted for millennia) around the world? Your claim is an assumption based on a generalization. That is not good evidence. Any person today claiming to have encountered a talking bright light on a dark desert highway would be locked up and medicated. So why do you believe this guy from the first century; someone whom you have never met?
First of all, just about no one today gets locked up and medicated. I hold our major cities and their catch/release legal paradigms as examples. Y’know, guys who defecate into a plastic bag, slap an elderly woman subway rider with it, and end up on the street right afterwards.
Ever hear of a guy named Michael Laudor? Google is your friend…
Nativist superstitions…please tell me about those, especially the ones that are not artifacts surviving only because they have become ingrained in national cultures, and have little to no appeal outside that culture? That have not only survived unchanged for +2,000 years, but spread around the world? I of course speak only for Catholicism, not for the 40,000 and counting offshoots out there that seem to grow new dogmas the way a teenager grows zits. Most of the converts I have had the privilege of shepherding into the Church have named “denominationalism” as their main motivation for conversion/reversion.
Did not invent Judaism? Gold star for you. He sure was one until he saw Jesus on the Road to Damascus. Several others heard a disembodied voice as well, but since you weren’t there, that passage can be of course discounted. I can just as easily dispute the historicity of Caesar’s Gallic Commentaries, for which far less written record exists than Holy Scripture. I choose to believe. YMMV.
Paul’s writings, erudite, rational and and completely in consonance with the message and Church Christ established on Earth, are well-documented far into Church history by Apostolic and Nicene/Post Nicene Fathers who were a lot closer to the actual events than Sam Harris, or you. And have stood the test of time, unchanged and never successfully challenged. Your “scholarly” apologetic boils down to, simply, is “it just **can’t** have happened, so I and my fellow hipsters don’t believe.”
“Nativist superstitions…please tell me about those, especially the ones that are not artifacts surviving only because they have become ingrained in national cultures, and have little to no appeal outside that culture? That have not only survived unchanged for +2,000 years, but spread around the world? ”
Your argument: Since Paul’s uncorroborated tale of seeing a talking bright light on a dark desert highway has survived for 2,000 years and has become the basis of the largest religion on the planet, it MUST be true. That is not good logic, my friend.
“He [Paul] sure was one [a Jew] until he saw Jesus on the Road to Damascus. Several others heard a disembodied voice as well, but since you weren’t there, that passage can be of course discounted. I can just as easily dispute the historicity of Caesar’s Gallic Commentaries, for which far less written record exists than Holy Scripture. I choose to believe. YMMV.”
I never discounted as fiction every story told in the Christian Bible. Too many skeptics and Christians treat the Christian scriptures as all or nothing. All fact or all fiction. Most text from Antiquity are a blend of both. The tough part is figuring out which parts are fiction and which parts are fact, being so far removed from the alleged events in question. Bottom line: Christianity only has ONE undisputed eyewitness (Paul) statement (Galatians), and he tells us ZIP about what he allegedly saw. All other appearance claims, whether they be in the Early Creed of First Corinthians 15 or in the Gospels are hearsay.
“Paul’s writings, erudite, rational and and completely in consonance with the message and Church Christ established on Earth, are well-documented far into Church history by Apostolic and Nicene/Post Nicene Fathers who were a lot closer to the actual events than Sam Harris, or you.”
Did Jesus ever explicitly claim to be God in the Synoptics? No.
Did Jesus ever tell converts to stop observing Kosher? No.
Did Jesus ever tell converts to stop circumcising their baby boys? No.
Did Jesus ever tell converts that they could stop obeying Moses’ Law? No.
Paul’s teachings were radically different from Jesus’ teachings.
” And have stood the test of time, unchanged and never successfully challenged. Your “scholarly” apologetic boils down to, simply, is “it just **can’t** have happened, so I and my fellow hipsters don’t believe.” ”
Christianity is dying in the educated West, and will begin to die in the developing South once everyone has access to the internet and a public university education. Modern educated people just are not buying supernatural tall tales anymore. The social respectability of Christianity, and in particular, Roman Catholic Christianity, has plummeted. Just look at Ireland for a striking example.
“Christianity only has ONE undisputed eyewitness (Paul) statement (Galatians), and he tells us ZIP about what he allegedly saw.” Jesus allowed Paul’s blindness to be cured in Damascus. He then spent three years in Arabia – 3 years, just as did the other Apostles – learning from Jesus, on which time he was ready to return to Jerusalem and establish his creds as the 13th Apostle. His journeys of evangelism and letters are witness to what he learned from Christ in those years. Fail 1.
“All other appearance claims, whether they be in the Early Creed of First Corinthians 15 or in the Gospels are hearsay.” Once again, there is far more historical and documentary evidence for the letters of Paul than there is for the Gallic Chronicles. Fail 2.
Did Jesus ever explicitly claim to be God in the Synoptics? No. Yes. John 10: 30-38. Mark 14: 62. There’s more but you get the idea. Fail 3.
Did Jesus ever tell converts to stop observing Kosher? No.
Did Jesus ever tell converts to stop circumcising their baby boys? No.
Did Jesus ever tell converts that they could stop obeying Moses’ Law? No.
Jesus gave the Apostles **and their successors** the responsibility to govern His church on earth. (John 20:23) All those Levitical rules you enumerate were disallowed at the Council of Jerusalem, (Acts 15) under the authority of those same Apostles, as well as the visions of St. Peter (Acts 10:13).
“Paul’s teachings were radically different from Jesus’ teachings.” Fail 4.
I suggest some Scriptural self-study before you bring a rubber knife to an apologetic gunfight.
“Christianity is dying in the educated West” “and a public university education.”
Ooohhh, that public university eddication. Gender and ethnic studies!!! How’s that working out lately?
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/education/why-more-americans-are-skipping-college#:~:text=Nationwide%2C%20undergraduate%20college%20enrollment%20dropped,from%20the%20National%20Student%20Clearinghouse.
Meanwhile, back at the Church house….
https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2022/02/15/catholic-school-enrollment-rebound-242401
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/covid-19-and-woke-culture-drive-enrollment-increases-at-conservative-religious-colleges
“Just look at Ireland for a striking example.”
94% of Nigeria’s Catholics attend Mass weekly (and yes, we all know what you’re thinking…).
God has a Plan. That’s what I’m thinking….
Jesus never said He was God? Really? Luke 21:27? John 10:30-38? The Apostles acting as the clear post-Resurrection agents of Christianity, never abrogated the Levitical Laws in the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 10:13 and 15)? No demonstration on your part how the writings and life of Paul do anything but support all preceding.
College admissions are down almost 10%; trad Catholic and Reformed Christian universities can’t keep up with demand. Ask yourself what’s up with that.
Ireland? Perhaps…but Nigeria’s Catholic population sees 94% weekly Mass attendance.
God has a Plan. Since you obviously have left apologetics behind for trolling, I’ll waste no more time on you. You are welcome to the last word.
Well Gary I’m afraid you’ve got it backwards: Christianity is growing by leaps and bounds all over the world, particularly the Second and Third Worlds, China in particular. Even in Moslem countries according to the concerned mullahs.
As for the authenticity of Scripture, “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.”
Take it or leave it pal.
James said: “You two still sound like the same angry, sneering and generally un-Christian fanatics you did in the past.”
I’m not angry. I’m not sneering either. Are you angry or sneering AK? I’m just shocked at the asinine things you say. Nothing un-Christian about it.
James said:” The student of history is not surprised.”
How can you say something like this when you just said that celibacy only appeared in the 12th. century? I just showed you the Council of Elvira, which clearly decrees celibacy in the 4th. century.
Are you saying you’re a student of history because you keep flunking history, so you have to take the history courses over and over again?
What, me angry? I am having fun! It’s good to be your wingman, Duane.
Mary Baker Eddy here just doesn’t get it.
BBJU I’d reckon is light on history and divinity – lot’s of degrees marked “studies.” We need to cut him/her/ze/zir a break.
James, at the end of the day, your problem isn’t with the Catholic Church. Your problem is with Jesus. He founded the Catholic Church, and gave her many gifts. At some point in history, your ancestors chose to leave the Church Christ founded, and they chose to set up a competing church. James, ask yourself this question: if your church were to suddenly start teaching a doctrine that you disagreed with, would you remain, and start supporting that doctrine?
You want to conflate your denomination with Christ Himself, but your edifices, your traditions, your doctrines and history are worth no more than what was destroyed in Jerusalem, and several times at that. Your “inheritance” is no greater, in fact less, than those whom John the Baptist reminded of their own insignificance. You seem to be looking at worldly things and estimating your sect’s importance on that scale; a futile endeavour if ever there was one.
So what about all the other denominations? The Armenians, who long predate Rome, the Eastern Orthodox, the Copts, etc. etc. Surely you’re not still pretending they are all damned heretics because they don’t kiss the pope’s ring?
Poor Duane, you are trapped in a net of exceptionalist sophistry and get-out-of-hell-free-cards constructed to deceive and control the ordinary believers. A shameless and disgusting perversion of the Gospel of Christ which has caused uncountable misery and perdition to men, women and children over the last millennium or so. All the blood, physical and spiritual will be held to the account of those who caused it to be shed. I should say, “Christ help them”, but there are some who do not deserve it.
The Body of Christ is the body of believers, not who you or I or a body of cardinals says are believers, but those whom God in His three persons finds acceptable. You do not know the mind of God and neither do I. There is only one who can open the Book of Life and it is not open yet. Yes, some silly Protestants go around talking about the surety of their salvation, blah, blah. Same old people, same old human nature: love of security, love of belonging to some club, love of self, the miserable exaltations of self-righteousness etc. etc.
“But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men, and needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man.” Amen, amen.
“And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.”
Could be your church or your country Duane. Or it could be both.
James, instead of making stupid comments as is your won’t, can you just answer the question I posed to you?
I also have another question for you. In Matthew 18:17, Jesus’ said in a dispute to take it to the Church. Which Church do you recommend I take a dispute to?
I am still waiting for:
– James’ ‘splanation just how the Scripturally-clear passing of a Divine authority – forgiveness of sins – to the Apostles is not Apostolic Succession. Did everything just stop after the last one died?
– A video of James swilling a snifter of certified potassium cyanide solution or dropping a pissed-off water moccasin (easy enough to get from his fellow Ozark theologians) down his track suit bottoms, and then walking away. Or showing us someone who has. Or in the absence, ‘splaining how Jesus words in Mark were *not* metaphor, as I was able to explain re: John 6.
I think there were a few others in there but this is enough for now. I also note he makes favorable mention of the Shroud of Turin, one of the few sensible things he has said in this whole perfervid exchange. Isn’t that dangerously close to Cat’lik relic idolatrizing for a Calvinista?
I’m still waiting too AK. Where is your doctrine of apostolic succession mentioned in Scripture? Perhaps you’d like to sum up the doctrine for us first, the better to expound it from Scripture?
I’ve read the Gospels any number of times, but I don’t recall anywhere Christ said that Peter’s authority, or the same authority WHICH WAS GIVEN TO ALL THE APOSTLES was to be somehow inherited by someone else?
So, then YOU ‘splain how the Authority of the Church Christ founded got passed on through all those persecutions over all those centuries?
Did everything just …stop…and sit dormant after the last Apostle died, just waiting for Martin Luther or Joseph Smith or Charles Nelson Darby or Mary Baker Eddy or Charles Taze Russel or Jim and Tammy Faye, or…Billy Bob Larson? Despite Christ’s clear imprecation that the Gates of Hell would not prevail against His Church?
The Christian continuity of the life’s work and martyrdoms of the like of Justin Martyr, Irenaeus of Lyon, Ignatius of Antioch, Augustine of Hippo, Thomas Aquinas, Ignatius of Loyola, John Henry Newman, all meant nothing cuz Parster Billy Bob had not yet started pray-chin’ of the back of his flatbed?
Yeah, Rufus, you run with that one…..we all have popcorn..
“Peter’s authority, or the same authority WHICH WAS GIVEN TO ALL THE APOSTLES”
Soo-ooo…did Jesus have a big pre-Ascension group grope with the Apostles where he told no one of them in particular to “feed my sheep?” Like…three times?
Did He throw the Keys of the Keys of the Kingdom in the air like a wedding bouquet and then say, y’all boys are now all The Rock (confusing I know) but, share nice y’hear…? And make straight the paths for Billy Bob 2,000 years from now….”
What the hell are you even doing here?
Hey AK, do you want a good laugh? Go to page 10 of this website to the comments on Burden Shifting Protestants and Atheists. About halfway down James posted a lot of laughable things there. One of the funny things he did was link to a book to support his position, but the book actually refuted his position. Anyone that refutes his position he calls a fanatic.
He sure did love Pastor Bob in his comments.
Duane – website didn’t come through?
This website. Lol. ShamelessPopery
Gotcha! Little slow this AM….
I just had the chance to find it. My God…there *is* a Billy Bob, and he’s a miracle worker! I noted in his debates with you he was true to televangelist form, sprouted a few 1/4 truths leavened into complete lies, and expecting a “oh, I didn’t know tha-aat…”
He came to the wrong place for easy pickings.
I remember my poor, wheelchair bound grandmother watching Oral Roberts and his nauseatingly fake “AH kin FEEL the POWER!!” as he laid hand on another prognathous audience plant screeching “Ah’M HEALED! Thank’ee JEEBUS!”
At the age of 8 or 9 I knew what sickening grifters these guys were. Thank God my grandma was an old-country Catholic, and such displays had little practical effect.
SO I looked up this Bob Larson….another one cut from that televangelical selvage of used TP. Exorcisms over Skype. With his teen daughters presiding. I have now heard everything.
You sound very much AK like someone with a compulsion, some are merely psychological, but some are spiritual in origin. You make yourself sound more ridiculous with every such comment, but you carry on regardless as though you cannot it. What do you know of your own family history? You might want to look into it. Weren’t the Ustashi murdering Jews, Moslems and Serbian Christians by the tens, nay hundreds of thousands in cold blood within living memory? Bloody hands have a way of getting around you know. Curses of different kinds can be very, very persistent. Scripture makes many references to them and to their effects, even many centuries later. I realize most people so afflicted go through their lives never recognizing or in some cases admitting the nature of their afflictions, but if you find Pastor Bob’s expositions intolerable you might want to listen to Derek Prince who spoke and wrote extensively about such matters. You’ll find his academic qualifications at least a match for best Jesuits. True, you would have to admit that the Holy Spirit works through non-Catholics as well. Hopefully you’re able to peer far enough out of that spiritual bunker to admit the fact. Good luck, I hope you may be delivered from the spirit of anger that seems to afflict you. You’ll find they rarely work alone, though not always in legions.
So you’ve grad-diated from Internet theologian (good thing, no future in that fer ya) to online shrink! Good luck! Planning to concierge by the hour or bartering for herbal remedies, jerked meat, dried berries and gas for the generator?
Curses? Listen to a guy named Fr. Chad Ripperger, Diocese of Denver Exorcist. Accomplished author, his magnum opus, Dominion, is highly recommended. His knowledge of the subject of demonology is suffused with 2000 years of Catholic experience, not picked up in Mom’s basement perusing Chick tracts, which seems to be the basis of your theology, talking about anger.
Ustasi? What’s this Hrvatska obsession? I told you, maybe the Ozark eddication don’t concentrate on reading comprehension – I-am-not Croatian. I gave you a clue which you did not note, no surprise. Obsessions can be debilitating. Too bad I can’t put you in touch with my son, he has a crackerjack Christian counselling practice. Lots’a Reformistas being (mentally) say-yyved by him and his convert wife.
My most recent post absolutely affirmed Catholic magisterial teaching that the Holy Spirit can work on a discrete basis through anyone God chooses. In response to your allusion to Mark. Apostolic Succession and the Magisterial Authority of the Church still stands. Try reading before bloviating.
Derek Prince? That uber-degrees guy who believed the unique Covenant with Israel is still valid, even after, like Acts 15 and Jesus opening salvation to the Gentiles.? That guy? Yup, I know him. What makes his dogma any more valid than any of the other 40K whose opinions smell the same as the alimentary nethers of all the rest?
One more thing you haven’t picked up on the social cue that not only am I not angry, .I am absolutely having a great time pinata’ing your increasingly more desperate posts. I suspect you have a masochistic streak…..
Discernment Duane. I realize yours is atrophied for the members of cults never need to use theirs; all is decided for them. Bob Larson is what he is. He may well be one of those who will find at the last day that despite casting out devils, healing the sick or prophesying in Christ’s name, he won’t make the cut. If so, it hardly bodes well for the likes of you or I, except that our Heavenly Father knows all and knows what all of us are capable of. Or it could be that despite what you or I find unappealing about Pastor Bob, the Almighty will find the scales tip more in his favour on that day. Perhaps he, unlike you, has imperfect understanding and does merely his poor best? His poor best will be worth more than your exalted middling. One thing we know Duane, you won’t be the judge, so you might as well save your breath now for something that will accrue more to your spiritual benefit.
That verse I referred to surely proves that people like yourself who preen themselves on their affiliations or their performance may well find their assumptions null and void.
James, I am working out my salvation in fear and trembling. Just remember what you say about Pastor Bob can be said about any one of us, Catholic or non-Catholic, including you. I thank God that I am not the judge, and thankfully you are not the judge either.
James, when you make comments in your postings, which turn out to be false, and I call you out on them (such as your priestly celibacy first appears comments, or showing you that Foxe admitted he made numerous errors), you never admit your mistake, or try to correct them.
With someone as error prone as you, who does not even try to correct the record, why should I trust your interpretation of Scripture?
Wow, the level of arrogance and irony is nothing short of extraordinary. This guy talks about Catholic preening, and cults, and cardinals dictating perverted doctrines, but he apparently is a cult unto himself. God help any of the poor souls he and his mouth run into the jungles of Guyana. I hope they like grape flavor Kool Aid. and James’ pet vipers.
I notice he doesn’t like the US either – that oft-repeated “exceptionalism” and “your country” crack. I wonder which paradise he is from, that would be happily Sieg Heiling were it not for American industry, technology, logistics, steel and blood – three theaters of war’s worth. Or…good day, Comrade’ing, what’s left in the bread line?
The most righteous servants of God on earth have the biggest bulls-eyes painted on them, which is why there are Vietnams and Jim Crow and Iraq’s and naked-man Pride parades and child abuse scandals. Fallen arrogant humans gonna fall. But for the Church, there’s always Matt 16:18. For the US, God save the United States is all I can say at this point in history.
But, were it not for Catholicism, and the US, his nation and his denomination would be bones to be chewed by whatever totalitarian self-styled god is waiting in the wings. If chastisement is is coming, I suspect he’ll find a way to fit right in with the Babylonians.
James sez:
“The Body of Christ is the body of believers, not who you or I or a body of cardinals says are believers, but those whom God in His three persons finds acceptable.”
How does he know God is in three persons. Isn’t that dogmatism, as arrogant as assuming Transubstantiation, the efficacy of confession or the authority of the successor to Peter? It’s not arrogant if I do it….
And note he doesn’t answer **anything** directly, just devolves to righteous Calvinist-suffused word salad spouting the same warmed-over dogsh** Jeremiads.
Heard it before, pal….
“I am working out my salvation in fear and trembling. Just remember what you say about Pastor Bob can be said about any one of us, Catholic or non-Catholic, including you. I thank God that I am not the judge, and thankfully you are not the judge either.”
Precisely, including all of us little mortals of whatever denomination. Welcome to the great equality of sinners! 😉
Now I invite you and your friend to recall what you have said about Pastor Bob. You’ve just chosen counterweight for when your turns on the scales appear…And while we’re on the subject, you might recall those freelance exorcists, the first “schismatics” we assume LOL, who took it upon themselves to cast out demons in Christ’s name. Those of whom you claim to be the successors, being quite like some of their purported successors, ran to tell them not to, and then no doubt expecting approval hurried to tell the Lord of their enforcement of unity, LOL. I’m sure you know the rest of the story? Can you see the point of it though? The Holy Spirit recalled that incident to the writer’s mind for a reason that is beyond dispute; though you may wish to dispute the reason?
“Fear and trembling”? I see no sign of it on this forum, just smug complacency and legalistic and doctrinaire pettifogging in many cases. Jeering and sneering by those who think they’re in the lifeboat watching the others drown. You’re so immersed in this stink perhaps you can no longer smell it. One of the things we will be held to account for is the blood of those whom we simply left to go their own ways without any intercession actual or prayerful.
The perpetual result of ever such grossly mistaken assurance is complacency, pride, idleness and every other sin. Some priest magically forgiving your sins because he purports to be Christ’s spiritual cousin 187 times removed with the undiluted authority of the Apostles? Rubbish. Every one a little infallible pope? For what greater authority is there than to forgive sins? And how can they be forgiven by mistake?
What else could be more calculated to trivialize sin than the ridiculous idea that every Tom, Dick & Harry in a clerical collar can do so at will for a suitable donation or a few incantations? The behaviour of so many of your priests, quite apart from the laiety, proves how trivial sin has become in their minds.
Only God can forgive sin; even the Israelites knew that, had they but known that He walked among them doing so.
Hail Marys, Last Rites, and Absolutions will get no one into Paradise, any more than cheerful self-assurances of salvation “by faith alone”, “pre-destination” or any other such nonsense. We are born naked and alone and that is how we leave this world, pope or prince or pauper.
If your church can ever give up its pretensions of exclusivity, its blasphemous usurpations of divine authority, then on that happy day we may again have Christian unity, or a great deal more of it than we have now.
So our nations and bodies political and religious come and go according to our spiritual and civic virtues or lack thereof, the effect is momentous in this world, but what is it in the next world where each is judged alone?
Enough of this. Many perish through lack of knowledge, and in particular through trusting others to do their reasoning and their praying for them. Thanks be to God that we all get a fair hearing.
James you are a fool, and I do not say that lightly. You clearly do not know the Scriptures, as you have made another claim about God that Scripture itself denies. You make claims, and when I have proven them false, you never retract anything you say, you just motor on with another mindless screed. You made a claim about priestly celibacy that I easily proved false. When I asked you to respond, nothing but crickets on your part. In our last dialogue a few years back, you linked to a book, that actually refuted what you said. When I called you on it, you responded with this:
For anyone following this discussion, when James is easily proven wrong, the best he can do is call you a fanatic. No honesty and humility in saying that he was wrong on a certain topic. When I linked to Protestant scholars and historians who refuted what he said, again crickets.
In another part of same discussion, he told me to look something up in the Catholic Encyclopedia. When I did and then asked him if he had read their writing on the topic, which added context, he refused to read from the book that he himself recommended.
I could go on, but to show you how James makes it clear that he doesn’t know the Scriptures, or wilfully twists them to his own destruction, I will end with this little false gem of his.
James said:
James, you are refuted by the Apostle John in ch.20
Did Jesus lie here?
Well Duane, you probably remember the injunction concerning “racca”?
You didn’t prove anything about “priestly celibacy” FROM SCRIPTURE. Allow me to remind you DUANE that the Word of God is authority, your popes and priests are just men.
Part of your problem seems to be that you are so wrapped up in your inherited doctrines that are apparently incapable of actually looking at them as others would.
Remind me of your book Duane. If it “proved me wrong” in the manner of the Synod of Elvira I probably didn’t miss anything.
In regard to your “false gem” I was referring to who could forgive sins after the Apostolic age was over. You should know this for I referred specifically to the possession of you dear “Keys” by ALL the Apostles, in the context of the complete absence of any statement by Christ that implied such authority would be “inherited” by anyone else. Christ made many statements referring to other and later times and what would occur in those times etc. Your assumption of that succession is nothing more than an assumption, but it is of course the key to the whole Roman edifice. No wonder you defend it regardless of the lack of proofs.
Ohhh, I have tears in my eyes from laughing so hard. Not only are you a fool James, but you’re also a liar.
James said:
“every Tom, Dick & Harry in a clerical collar”
Priests spend six years in formation and discernment. Philosophy, theology, Latin, Greek, courses in the historical and moral basis of Western Civilization. They **earn** their collar, Tinkerbelle.
‘Vangerlilercal parsters can get themselves a flock and nice portfolio right out of Mom’s basement if they have a little charisma and just enough contrived sola theology to sham the simple-minded into thinking “he’s got the Spirit in him, he shore do!” (looking at you, James).
🤣🤣🤣🤣he shore do. Classic
“And while we’re on the subject, you might recall those freelance exorcists, the first “schismatics” we assume LOL, who took it upon themselves to cast out demons in Christ’s name.”
Yes, Corn-Liquor-Breath, we recognize Mark 9: 38-40.
First, I don’t see any efficacy conflating a real, Scriptural, Christ-recognized exorcism event with your fave slick-haired grifting televangelist Larson. Any more than that faker Oral Roberts. You want to be a fanboi, knock yourself out.
Second, the Church is ‘way ahead of you on this issue:
Jesus teaches us that a person who performs miracles in his name, including the exorcism of a demon, recognizes Christ’s authority. Here we are reminded of the words of Vatican II’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium), which teaches that “many elements of sanctification” that are proper to the Catholic Church are operative, by God’s grace, “outside of its visible structure” and work “toward Catholic unity” (8).
In other words, as A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture provides on page 920,
The dispositions and faith of such a person may be imperfect, but his miracles are a commendation of Christ and his teaching. Unlike the Scribes and the Pharisees who were [seemingly] irreconcilable in their opposition, he is making common cause with the disciples.
And so we work with other Christians and others of goodwill wherever possible, and pray that we are ultimately all one as Jesus and the Father are one (John 17:20-23). – Catholic Answers
Third – thus, Catholicism allows for the possibility God works in His own ways, even outside of the Ecclesaim. Doesn’t take one jot nor tittle from the authority of Apostolic Succession. You keep spouting “by their fruits”… as Duane did, Catholic exorcists work behind closed doors, focusing on saving a soul in torment, while Parster Billy Bob sets up the cameras and hot lights focused on…him, and his girlies. Prayze Jeebus.
I know which fruit I’d rather use for spiritual nourishment.
Fourth – **you,** my little poison corn flower, are the one who come here in the arrogance of your basement-born self-worship, in a spirit of uncharity determined to “own the Papists” and if that can’t happen, becuz your chaotic and formless theology won’t support a nanometer of apologetic success, at least to spread some quality Reformista venom before you belly-crawl away to your bunker.
So don’t preach to us how we are the ones fomenting disunity and un-Christian lack of charity.
“And so we work with other Christians and others of goodwill wherever possible, and pray that we are ultimately all one as Jesus and the Father are one (John 17:20-23). – Catholic Answers”
Ah, a winding via media which allows you to retain the old exclusivity while “sort of” acknowledging other Christian’s spiritual gifts? A dodge presumably intended to salve the conflicts between dogma and visible proofs that are so hard to avoid in this information age.
Yes, such a person may indeed be “imperfect”. In fact I’d say it’s a complete certainty, LOL but the implication that a Roman Catholic doing the same works might be perfect is nothing if not amusing.
I find Pastor Bob both self-important and materialistic if you really want to know, but I’m old enough now to know that my “gut” reaction to his style of operation is just that. The question surely is whether his activities are offensive to God and His Word? And whether his work helps or hinders the cause of Christ. Is he perfect? No more than you or I. Do “his” methods work? It seems they often do. Better than “yours” in fact. Now they certainly weren’t all “his”, and I’m not sure I agree with all of his premises, but perhaps what’s most important is that some are delivered of their burdens and Christ receives the glory.
“Self-worship”? Sorry chum, you don’t know me and I surely don’t worship my self.
But it is clear to me that you have a deep well of pride, anger and hatred and I am not trying to score points off you when I suggest you try to rid yourself of that for your own good. And it won’t be easy. Pride is a pernicious and persistent enemy and will use whatever it can to retain a hold. Look at your own compulsive attempts to assert that those you dislike are yokels and hillbillies. Yes friend, you are full of pride to the gills! And no, it’s not your friend even if it does make you feel “good” in a shallow, carnal way. Things to do…Good luck on your journey.
Wow AK, same. My grandmother watched those televangelists too. Except she was under their spell. My grandfather would laugh, he knew they were the proverbial wolves in sheeps’ clothing.
By the way, you hit the bullseye with your response to James quoting snake handling verse. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.thestate.com/living/religion/article216995475.html
My son, a former seminarian at Mount St. Mary’s in Emmitsburg, MD (an exceptionally holy place) , and his fellow seminarians (now all priests) referred to that sad period between VII and Pope St. John Paul the Great, as both “the great exodus” and “the dark ages.” My Catholic education of that period (1963-1972) was sadly lacking. Fortunately, since JPII’ “Great Evangelization” a new energy has been poured in a slow, but accelerating, reversal. Sites like this are a sign. MY own 4 years pent in the Denver Catholic Biblical School is a manifestation of positive, Matt 16:18-fueled change.
Televangelists? Just maggots feeding on the wounded dead flesh of that period of time. When the rot subsided, pretty much, so did they. A few squirming parasitical remnants like Kenneth “I need another private jet to do Jeebus’ work” Copeland, Joel “Hot Wives, Vintage Cars, and Prosperity through Grift” and this Larson character remain.
I knew about that event and have seen the like in my military time spent deep in the Bible (Only) Belt. Simple people fed a perverted and deadly permutation of a sadly errant dogma. What’s really sad is when the younger ones realize they have been had, they step away from God altogether.
“So, then YOU ‘splain how the Authority of the Church Christ founded got passed on through all those persecutions over all those centuries?
Did everything just …stop…and sit dormant after the last Apostle died, just waiting for Martin Luther or Joseph Smith or Charles Nelson Darby or Mary Baker Eddy or Charles Taze Russel or Jim and Tammy Faye, or…Billy Bob Larson? Despite Christ’s clear imprecation that the Gates of Hell would not prevail against His Church?
The Christian continuity of the life’s work and martyrdoms of the like of Justin Martyr, Irenaeus of Lyon, Ignatius of Antioch, Augustine of Hippo, Thomas Aquinas, Ignatius of Loyola, John Henry Newman, all meant nothing cuz Parster Billy Bob had not yet started pray-chin’ of the back of his flatbed?
Yeah, Rufus, you run with that one…..we all have popcorn..
AK says:
June 15, 2023 at 9:55 pm
“Peter’s authority, or the same authority WHICH WAS GIVEN TO ALL THE APOSTLES”
Soo-ooo…did Jesus have a big pre-Ascension group grope with the Apostles where he told no one of them in particular to “feed my sheep?” Like…three times?
Did He throw the Keys of the Keys of the Kingdom in the air like a wedding bouquet and then say, y’all boys are now all The Rock (confusing I know) but, share nice y’hear…? And make straight the paths for Billy Bob 2,000 years from now….”
What the hell are you even doing here?”
You don’t know why Christ asked Peter three times if he loved Him?
Much sound and fury, but where is the Scriptural “inheritance” spelled out?
Yes, the Holy Spirit has worked through many wonderful men and women of faith over the centuries. I hope you’re able to accept that they weren’t all Roman Catholics?
But perhaps your traditions are of more weight than the proofs of the work of the Holy Spirit?
“What am I doing here?” I do wonder if it’s worth bothering. Your denominational pride is as monumental as the Pharisees. People who torture and murder supposedly in the name of Christ are doubly cursed. Your Church is almost certainly under a curse for it has never repented of its crimes. And as I mentioned above, curses are a serous matter. I doubt it is a coincidence that the very last word of the Old Testament is “curse”.
Christ told us how to handle disagreements between Christians. Much of the disagreement and controversy of course originates in the impudent presumptions of those who think they can attempt to define and delimit was God chose not to define or delimit.
“Christ told us how to handle disagreements between Christians. Much of the disagreement and controversy of course originates in the impudent presumptions of those who think they can attempt to define and delimit was God chose not to define or delimit.”
Hoo boy…this from the guy who, David Koresh-like, arrogantly posits he doesn’t need anyone else to interpret Scripture for him. It’s obvious from the thread of “thought” in your posts that you are a whole denom unto yourself, picking and choosing, ignoring clear Scripture-based refutations, and then saying the-same-thing over and over again. Isn’t that the definition of insanity?
Take a peek at Acts 8: 29-31. They’re talking to YOU, Rufus. Or is that verse, like the Eucharistic Narratives of John 6 and the Synoptics, or the clear Scripture verses where Christ passes on Divine Authority to forgive sins to his very human Apostles, a bunch of “la-la-la’s?” Passages that, as Scott Hahn recounts his very Baptist mom saying, she could not reconcile so she “put them on a shelf?” I’d check to make sure the mollies holding **your** shelf up are not pulling out of the unpainted drywall.
It’s interesting a guy who thinks the Reformation “needed to happen” speaks admiringly of Abp Vigano. He has a lot of (IMHO) of admirable things to say, but unlike your nun-diddling forebear Luther, he – like many saints past who saw the failure and corruption of fallen men, worked within the structure of the Church guided by the Holy Spirit to effect change instead of breaking away, whelping his own church, and bequeathing Christianity with the curse of denominationalism. The sight of which, by the way, plagued him to the end of his miserable life. “I can do no other” indeed, especially when you are an arrogant, bloviating narcissist.
It would be arrogant of *me* – or my Church, which I have demonstrated does not – to posit the Holy Spirit can act only through Catholics. Doesn’t change a damn thing about the Magisterium. Your mileage varies – the difference between you and me is, I am not ate up with a psychotic sense of my own mission – talking to you, Rufus – to convert the infidels. My personal example has led to a few conversions…all you are doing is pissing people off.
A 19th century shrink with an iron-grey beard might say you are in the grip of a pitiful monomania. Today, we call it an “obsession.” Pretty humorous your amateur internet shrinkology projects that “quality” onto me. Arguing with you, it is painfully obvious, is equivalent to attempting a rational discussion with a street-corner psycho. They ramble, circle back, and suck you into the vortex of their insanity. If this is your life, God has a plan somewhere I guess.
Salve….
You’re not reading carefully enough AK; nowhere did I say I don’t listen to or consider the scriptural interpretations of others. Derek Prince is one of the most gifted I would say. I recommend him to you. Being a Fellows of Kings College before 30 and IIRC an literate in Greek, Latin and Hebrew, I think he’ll past your academic requirements. 😉
Once we’re done with the usual manifestation of your resident spirit of pride: Koresh, “Rufus” etc, and your extrapolations therefrom, what do we have of substance? Where is the evidence from Scripture that the gifts Christ gave to ALL the Apostles were to be inherited in perpetuity by the purported successors of ONE of them, to whit Peter?
At Pentecost the Apostles received a gift of tongues didn’t they? Their speech was heard by many listeners in their own languages. Have any of their “successors” manifested this miraculous gift of the Holy Spirit?
I already quoted you the passage where Christ defined the gifts of “those who believe”; speaking in tongues was one of them. What’s your Church’s position on that phenomenon?
Those of us who haven’t manifested any of those gifts of the Spirit yet in our lives apparently are not of a sufficiently clean or faithful mind or “heart” to do so. I can only conclude that we haven’t tried hard enough. It may be of course that we are simply the “one pound” Christians and the “five pound” or “ten pound” Christians are those to whom it is given, not us. But that is a tangential speculation on my part so far from your cosey assurance that it will probably be incomprehensible to you.
Acts 8: 29-31 So Phillip the Apostle, one of those specifically endowed by Christ with gifts of the Spirit interprets Scripture? Is there something surprising about that? You’ll note that Phillip was then “carried away” by the Spirit to another place. Is that a spiritual gift any of his purported Roman successors have manifested? If not, why not?
Oh, you want the right to forgive sins and bind and unbind everything else, but speaking in tongues or being “carried away” by the Spirit. “No, thanks anyway!” LOL
Well, I don’t know if Luther was a “nun-duddler” but I suppose it would be preferable to being a pederast, though the pederasts probably thought it most irregular. Still, you surely don’t hold such a consensual sin against him do you, since the forcible sodomy of youths is so easily forgiven?
“The Magisterium”; I never noticed that term in Scripture. A “majestic” word for the same old presumption: “we and we alone can decide what Christ said and what the Father meant. We don’t even have to justify it from Scripture because we’ve got the Keys!” Hooray! I quoted Cardinal Manning on that once before. It is a “vain doctrine having no foundation in Scripture”. As for your “unwritten traditions”: not worth the paper they’re not written on.
You ought to read a bit more about that 19th Century shrink you refer to. Let’s be charitable and say that he was spiritually afflicted. He found that sexual abuse was epidemic in Roman Catholic Vienna. When he revealed his findings he was all but anathematized and being first of all creature of pride and ambition soon realized he must do something different or his career would die on the vine. And so with Jesuitical impudence he turned reality on its head and proclaimed that the abuse was all fantasy and proceeded to create an ideology to support the premise which countless similar seekers after power, pride and professional invulnerability have licked up ever since. I might add that somewhere in his writings he stated that what he really wanted to so was find some way to attack “Rome”, which in his poor mind meant Christ and his followers. Next?
Apart from the monumental presumptions of conflating Christ with your church, then presuming to have His authority, you seem to think a lot of history, edifices and writings add up to much with the Almighty. He could speak us all out of existence or into existence in flash. Can you understand our triviality? Man needs to find out what is important to Him not go about admiring his own works. Christ didn’t bother with the Sanhedrin or the Pharisees or the Sadducees or any other body of men. And now you’ve created all the same sorts of structures all over again and go on and on about their history and their commentaries and how many angels dance on the head of pin.
Look at these Synods you refer to: so full of holes it’s not funny. Some regional synod in Gothic Iberia, dealing with the problems of that time and place to the best of their ability, where we’re told some of the canons aren’t even known to authentic. And you think this proves something? You think it has some authority?
“I already quoted you the passage where Christ defined the gifts of “those who believe”; speaking in tongues was one of them. What’s your Church’s position on that phenomenon?”
Google is your friend. If I note someone in my parish speaking in tongues I’ll deal with it then. If it’s a concern of yours, then talk to a parish priest in your area.
“Acts 8: 29-31 So Phillip the Apostle, one of those specifically endowed by Christ with gifts of the Spirit interprets Scripture?”
Yes, and the Nubian Eunuch (talking to you, Rufus) was smart enough to realize he needed help of an Authority in the chain of Apostolic Succession to help him understand,. As you need help. Desperately
“Well, I don’t know if Luther was a “nun-duddler” but I suppose it would be preferable to being a pederast,”
Sorry, I meant “diddler.” A little whataboutism? Pederasty, is not Church dogma, though some small percentage of it’s clerics practiced in secret, doing tremendous damage in the wake. A homosexual, not a dogmatic problem, being nicely dealt with from the seminaries on up, as I had pointed out previously and do not need to re-attack. Your hero institutionalized his sin by corrupting a woman who had taken sacred vows. And a disturbing number of Reformista offshoots are taking up the rainbow flag and normalizing the perversion it represents. A Why are they wrong? Any of those pastors and pastorettes could twist Scripture to justify their positions – just as you do. People are coming to Catholicism because, despite the waywardnesss of some of it’s prominent clerics, hold fast to Scripture and Tradition through its unchanging dogma.
“The Magisterium”; I never noticed that term in Scripture.” And why does the term have to be in Scripture, again? Where in the Bible is the Bible mandated as the sole rule of faith? Oh, I forgot…you guys made that one up as you went along.
“You ought to read a bit more about that 19th Century shrink you refer to.” You rant sounds like a jump straight to Sigmund Freud – whom I never mentioned nor averred – who you conveniently cast as a hero in the eternal struggle against Catholicism rather than your original more correct characterization, a man sorely spiritually afflicted. Who in is secular arrogance sought to replace the priest in the confessional with the inscrutable and God-like persona which the orthodox psychoanalyst adopts during analytic sessions. An in-depth of Freud is out of scope here, but your bringing him up to bolster your case is a bit of a punji pit. Watch where you step, GI. No happy ending for you.
Christ is the Body of Christ, just as He told Saul on the road to Damascus. If you have a problem with that, as Duane and I have told you repeatedly, take it up with Him. a sure you can find something new and different every time you go on a Scriptural cherry-pick to bolster your confirmation bias.
You still never addressed the issues of Divine authority to forgive sins (no, the Church did not just stop when the last Apostle died), above, or offered to drop that diamondback down your trousers…… I have popcorn, enough to share with the sister-wife.
I forgot to add that even though I no doubt differ from Bishop Vigano on points of history and theology, he strikes me as an honest and upright man, and sadly it seems he stands out almost alone from his fellow bishops, to say nothing of the cardinals. I would guess that he believes that right and truth is more important than “church discipline”; his example will convict the others no doubt. People of moral courage are always to be admired; they are rare.
As a Christian it grieves me to see any part of the Body of Christ polluted by sin and error, but God sees each of our hearts and knows our weaknesses and afflictions; and it seems where the heart is right and the spirit humble He will overlook even sincere errors of doctrine or understanding. It shouldn’t surprise anyone since He told us to “go and preach the Gospel” not to extrapolate from it.
How happy it would be if wounds of the Body could be healed, but until pride is ground under the heel it will not happen.
And that is why there is no one but the man Christ Jesus between us and the Father, and between us and perdition.
“He told us to “go and preach the Gospel” not to extrapolate from it.”
Isn’t that precisely what 40,000 self-interpreting denoms and non-denom AND individuals – like you – are doing?
Without Authority you and they are rudderless. The self-promoting fiction of Luther the bold individualist who said “Here I stand and I can no other,” functioned as an invitation to his own children to themselves be self-glorifying individualists. Who like Luther, would be condemned as heretics by their own Lutheran Church. And hence the history of the Protestant Church has been the history of splits and schisms – an endless cascade of heretical dilution of Christianity.
The Catholic Church stands fast. Deal with it;. .
“II would guess that he believes that right and truth is more important than “church discipline”
Vigano is a maverick *precisely* because he advocates holding to the discipline of the Magisterium – which you can’t seem to y’know, find – while others more worldly and venal deviate to match modern fads and curry favor with secular powers. You should hate Vigano for his traditional Catholic intransigence.
How did one of your intuition miss that? Oh wait…..
Better formatting to the comment I made above.
Ohhh, I have tears in my eyes from laughing so hard. Not only are you a fool James, but you’re also a liar.
James said:
From Matthew ch.5:
Are you my brother? No. You are not a sibling or relative of mine.
James said:
Here is your statement James, which I easily proved you wrong on:
When did priestly celibacy appear James? The authority Christ gave to the Church through the power of the Keys. Also the example that Christ Himself set. He is our High Priest. He sets the example. Was He married? Or does He say celibacy is the better way?
James said:
James in our discussion four years ago, you told me to look something up in the Catholic Encyclopedia, which I did. I then asked you if you had read what you recommended to me. You replied no and that you wouldn’t. Really dumb to recommend something to read that you yourself won’t read. But with you it’s par for the course. Like four years ago when you posted from a book a passage that refuted what you were claiming.
James said:
Are you a crackhead, or do you have dementia? You constantly change statements that you made, and then act as if that is what you were asking all along. You made a blanket statement saying only God can forgive sins, and I showed you were wrong. You were wrong because you have no clue what Scripture teaches. And now you change and say you were referring to Apostolic age, rather than man up and admit you were wrong. You said you specifically mentioned the keys. That is a LIE. You did not once mention the keys in the comment that I replied to. You know so little about Scripture that you don’t even realize that the power to forgive has nothing to do with the Keys.
Where does Scripture say that the power to forgive ended with the Apostolic age? It doesn’t. Why would the power to forgive only be needed in the Apostolic age, but not going forward?
Now James, will you show me where Christ or the Apostles ever taught that any doctrine or Rule of Faith can only be derived from Scripture? Because I believe that doctrine can only be derived from Scripture is a man-made doctrine started by the Protestants.
Keep the comedy coming James. I think I’m losing weight from all the laughter after I read your comments.
Hey Duane…remember “Barry Baritone?” I suspect your riposte and mine will result in a round of what I used to term his “thunderation!” Something I have heard in the few Reformista funerals I have been forced to attend. Pretty much, screaming that “if’n you don’t b’leev me, you don’t b’leev Jesus! WHO ARE YOU TO DENY JESUS!!??”
Just, wow…..
Sound and fury with the substance of cigar smoke, less perhaps. By their fruits shall you know them…and boy, we have a whole grove of bananas here…..
Haha. Took me awhile to remember him. Also called himself Barry the Bulldog. I called him Barry the Chihuahua because his arguments had so little meat on the bone. Did we Bury the Bulldog? 🤔
You mean the Yapping Yorkie?
What else could he say that he hadn’t said? After awhile one runs out of permutations of “yew evil Cat’liks” and “prove to me what you have apologetically already proved six times previously that I can’t address so I’ll just keep asking until you trip up…”
Too bad, because all he had to do is look at and follow the examples of other non-Catholics here who put up an enjoyably good debate because they are relatively well-read **and** leave the attitude in the clapboard meetin’-house…
Anyway, I am awed at the breadth of your knowledge and a pleasure wingmanning with you!
Yes, it was enjoyable working with you too.
On priestly celibacy I meant to write the authority comes from Christ when He….
Priestly celibacy appears with Christ Himself. Unless of course James believes Christ was married
Mebbe he’s a Dan Brown fanboi, along with Parster Billy Bob?
“AK says:
June 16, 2023 at 12:30 pm”
“I already quoted you the passage where Christ defined the gifts of “those who believe”; speaking in tongues was one of them. What’s your Church’s position on that phenomenon?”
Google is your friend. If I note someone in my parish speaking in tongues I’ll deal with it then. If it’s a concern of yours, then talk to a parish priest in your area.
A smarmy dodge is your only answer? Admittedly it’s a small step above your Appalachian obsession. LOL
“Acts 8: 29-31 So Phillip the Apostle, one of those specifically endowed by Christ with gifts of the Spirit interprets Scripture?”
“Yes, and the Nubian Eunuch (talking to you, Rufus) was smart enough to realize he needed help of an Authority in the chain of Apostolic Succession to help him understand,. As you need help. Desperately”
Read it again: it proves nothing about “interpretation”; it says he “preached” to the eunuch. The rest of course was done by the Holy Spirit. How does this text support “succession”? How does it support “interpretation”? But fanatics just say the same things over and over no matter how illogical or implausible. Have you nothing better?
“Well, I don’t know if Luther was a “nun-duddler” but I suppose it would be preferable to being a pederast,”
“Sorry, I meant “diddler.” A little whataboutism? Pederasty, is not Church dogma, though some small percentage of it’s clerics practiced in secret, doing tremendous damage in the wake. A homosexual, not a dogmatic problem, being nicely dealt with from the seminaries on up, as I had pointed out previously and do not need to re-attack. Your hero institutionalized his sin by corrupting a woman who had taken sacred vows. And a disturbing number of Reformista offshoots are taking up the rainbow flag and normalizing the perversion it represents. A Why are they wrong? Any of those pastors and pastorettes could twist Scripture to justify their positions – just as you do. People are coming to Catholicism because, despite the waywardnesss of some of it’s prominent clerics, hold fast to Scripture and Tradition through its unchanging dogma.”
Yes, what about your whataboutism? What relevance does Luther’s purported fornication have to do with the forgiveness of sin and who can do it? What relevance does it have to the little sodoms that your less-than-celibates bring with them in such vast numbers? Some it seems, like that dying priest whose video I linked to previously, seem to think a little pederasty is a harmless diversion not to be compared to heterosexual relations in gravity of sin! But if history teaches us one thing it’s that humans are suggestible and if child sacrifice is “normal” or worshipping idols or cutting bits off a girl’s genitalia, well they cheerfully go along with never a second thought! As true today as it was in 1500 BC or 1500 AD.
People are coming to Roman Catholicism for all sorts of reasons, for some the same reasons they join Mormonism, the JW’s, Free Masonry, or any other cult: they want to belong to some cohesive, highly structured group which offers them a sense of belonging, a sense of identity, material advantage and best of all, a good-two-shoes belief that they’re “in with the in crowd” and can jeer at everyone else. They want someone else to tell them what the answers to their questions are. In short they want a “spiritual MD” who will tell them what pills to take or what operations to undergo; a “white coat” who will save them the trouble of not only studying their own health, but of making changes which require self-discipline or the sacrifice of unhealthy pleasures, the efforts of exercise etc. etc.
Others look around this disintegrating world – an indictment and conviction first and foremost of your church’s stewardship if you claim its universal authority; did that ever occur to you? They look around and at a glance they see that Rome is attacked by the Luciferians and think therefore it must be somehow validated by their attacks. A little more study and perception would show them instead that the enemies of Christ attack Rome mostly for strategic reasons as the largest and most cohesive overtly Christian organization.
The more sophisticated enemies have long since found ways to infiltrate the RC Church and rot it from the inside by introducing errors and perversions of doctrine calculated to cause division and perdition. They enjoy parading their covert power by hiding in plain sight the evidences of their power. You scoffed stupidly at the iconography of St. Peter’s when I mentioned it as an example of this. You would do better to examine Bernini and his confreres. As for your luciferian audience hall, I don’t know how much more flagrant it needs to get. Clearly they realize that the wilfully blind can “un-see” almost anything, so why parade it in front of their noses and laugh at their obtusity!
The enemies of Christ are often guided by demonic intelligence; the power and scope of their attacks on human society and Christ’s body is of such a level of sophistication and breadth of methods and venues that no other conclusion is possible. Whether they are usually aware of their guiding spirits is another question.
All the assorted clowns and fools who think they can bend Christ around their flagpoles; are they better or worse than your perverts and perversions of His Gospels? “ Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth”
Oh, and are you still teaching that all non-Christians go to hell etc. etc.? Did you notice the part about “If ye were blind, ye should have no sin”. How would the God of Mercy condemn those who had never heard His Word? As for the rest of us, well, we’re on the hook!
Well yes, we poor Protestants do know that pederasty is not RC doctrine – though from its prevalence and the prevalence with which it is swept under the confessional rug it might as well be.
Luther’s not my hero and I’ve never said he was. “He corrupted a woman”? Consensual relations between adult men and women are not the moral equivalent of rape or pedophilia, or is your world different? What’s your point anyway? He apparently had a good deal of moral courage whatever his other failings, for he risked his life to speak up about your church’s abuses and errors. And the very fact of that risk shows how far the RC Church was and is from Christ. Welcome to the Calvin club, though he burned only one IIRC! Luther certainly bent backwards and forwards trying to find a way to stay within the RC Church, but in the end, as for millions of others, the abuses and perversions were simply too much to tolerate.
When Christ said that He came not to bring peace but a sword, that’s a man’s enemies would be they of his own house, that a man ought to pluck out his eye or cut off his right hand rather than follow them down to hell, perhaps that gives you some idea of the seriousness of the matter? And if the Friday confessional was enough to take care of all that, why cut off anything or anyone? Duh!
Great Scott, you grasp at puny straws like Phillip preaching (not “interpreting”) to a eunuch, and then you fail to see this? Incredible.
If some priest can absolve your sins, why would Christ say that whoever caused one of the little ones who believe in him to stumble, that person would be better off dead rather than having done so?
You think Monsignor Kiddie-Diddler is going to get off with an absolution or two and an extreme unction? Read it again: “better for him that a millstone was hung around his neck and he were cast into the sea”. So Christ was just trying to frighten us, actually Father Whoever can take of all that on Friday?
The Magisterium”; I never noticed that term in Scripture. “And why does the term have to be in Scripture, again? Where in the Bible is the Bible mandated as the sole rule of faith? Oh, I forgot…you guys made that one up as you went along.”
You didn’t answer the question, again.
As for your Vulgate it wasn’t even settled until the 16th Century and the latest revision is 1979, for Pete’s sake. As for your Apocrypha, one can see how some bits came in handy for the sale of this and that, but Protestants having no such angle to work could focus on matters more spiritual. You can read about it here, among other places: https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_395.cfm
Feel free to post your detailed refutation.
You ought to read a bit more about that 19th Century shrink you refer to. “Your rant sounds like a jump straight to Sigmund Freud – whom I never mentioned nor averred – who you conveniently cast as a hero in the eternal struggle against Catholicism rather than your original more correct characterization, a man sorely spiritually afflicted. Who in is secular arrogance sought to replace the priest in the confessional with the inscrutable and God-like persona which the orthodox psychoanalyst adopts during analytic sessions. An in-depth of Freud is out of scope here, but your bringing him up to bolster your case is a bit of a punji pit. Watch where you step, GI. No happy ending for you.”
So which “shrink” do you refer to then? “Cast as a hero”?? Read it again; you’ve got it upside down! LOL. The “eternal struggle” is against sin and evil in all its forms, wherever it appears. Simple, lazy or mendacious minds prefer to believe that their denomination has a lock-hold on salvation or is immune to sin. Scripture and life proves otherwise.
“Christ is the Body of Christ, just as He told Saul on the road to Damascus. If you have a problem with that, as Duane and I have told you repeatedly, take it up with Him. a sure you can find something new and different every time you go on a Scriptural cherry-pick to bolster your confirmation bias.”
Your brass monkeys approach to Scripture won’t work with people who are willing to think and be led by the Spirit. You can repeat as many times as you like that the RC Church is the [exclusive] Body of Christ; you might as well put it in a buddhist prayer wheel and hook it up to a motor and save yourself the trouble.
Where is your “succession” in Holy Scripture? For the sixth or seventh time of asking?
“You still never addressed the issues of Divine authority to forgive sins (no, the Church did not just stop when the last Apostle died), above, or offered to drop that diamondback down your trousers…… I have popcorn, enough to share with the sister-wife.”
The weakness, and probably the insecurity of your arguments, to say nothing of your spiritual afflictions is revealed, except sadly to you, by your compulsive sneering and pretense of intellectual superiority. If you had the wit or the will to realize it, God has no need of any human wisdom. It seems He prefers the faithful dullard to the brilliant snob or the clever scoffer.
“Never addressed the issue of Divine authority to forgive sins”?? How many times do I need to spell it out for you? How many times do I need I ask where your “succession” of authority to do so is found in Holy Scripture? Lame repetitions of your doctrines does not prove them.
It’s becoming clear that you suffer from some kind of mental block; at some level you are unable to follow a line of argument to its logical conclusion. No wonder so much of your posts are mere hyperbole and childish ranting; such stuff helps you hide from what you prefer not to see.
“no, the Church did not just stop when the last Apostle died”. That’s right, the Body of Christ is alive and well and growing every day. Those Roman Catholics whose faith and life of faith are found acceptable by Christ on that day will be saved; the same as every other person who calls themselves a Christian and who is found acceptable. We will all be weighed and measured, by our circumstances, our capacity for understanding, our efforts to keep His commandments, etc. etc. And no, you won’t get a denominational lifetime free pass. LOL
“He seeks those who will worship Him in SPIRIT and in TRUTH.” What does that mean? It must mean, among other things, that we need to have the right “spirit”. What spirit is that? Humility first of all, I suggest. Pride is the sin of Lucifer, IIRC the sin most hateful to God. Vanity can’t be far behind.
Our Judge is perfect and His judgments are perfect, but we are wise to remember that the gate is narrow and few are they who find it. There will be those who even “performed” miracles and yet will not get through. And that is why the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom. “He that hath power to cast down into hell, verily I tell you, fear him.”
Hooo-boy, you are certainly long winded! I must’ve triggered you inner Billy Bob. That was a veritable wagonload of Thunderation! Tell me, do you, like have your own buckboard where you dispense hellfire while selling bottles of Everclear suffused with rattlesnake heads, caramel coloring and Franks Red Hot? I suppose one has to find a way to fund ones kids through Billy Bob Jones U, tuition is skyrocketing.
You are like some twisted theological ruminant, with seven stomachs that process and regurgitate the same homegrown cud over and over again, insanely hoping for some different result. But it looks and smells like the same green sludge every time it comes out. This iteration of your overactive theological alimentary canal is no different than the last of multiples.
You still haven’t adequately addressed my point about the passing on of Divine Authority – hell, even come close – nor have I seen any proof you dropped that coral snake down your oversized Nike swoosh shorts.
You never got the point of Acts 8: 26-40 did you? No surprise there. I feel sorrier for you than I do the eunuch. All he lost was his junk; he could still think…someone actually took your brain.
For the eight time., Scripture set the conditions for succession, by the passing on of Divine authority from Christ to the Apostles, who in turn passed it on to men like the Apostolic Fathers, and those who followed them. You want to deny the Catholicity of those who provided continuity from Christ to today, please be my guest, It’s been tried before. I have popcorn. Do **you** have a Scripture version that covers the entire continuity of Christianity from Revelations to now? I don’t either but I do have Church History. If you don’t believe in mine, make up your own. It’s what you Reformistas have been doing since 1517..
“People are coming to Roman Catholicism for all sorts of reasons, for some the same reasons they join Mormonism, the JW’s, Free Masonry, or any other cult: they want to belong to some cohesive, highly structured group which offers them a blah blah blah..”
Hey Rufus, have you ever read the OT and the way God sets up a church on earth? Temples, rituals, robes, bells and smells. He understands sane, grounded people **like** structure and fellowship. As opposed to …what? Your perverted version of Christianity where millions of Scrooge-like discrete entities retire to their rude garrets, like that character in the Simon and Garfunkel song too many years for me to remember back, but instead of books and poetry, I have my Bah-Bule! And it talks to me, I don’t need anyone else (unless maybe they agree with me, the Great Koresh, and join my cult)! You must thrive in an age where everyone gets sucked into their personal electronic devices. I suggest “Bible in a Year” by Fr. Mike Schmitz for your app library. Pay attention to Romans 14:7 when you get there.
“And no, you won’t get a denominational lifetime free pass. LOL”
Where do you get this stuff? Your understanding of Catholicism is analogous to a salamander’s perception of particle physics. Catholicism is WORK, baby. Pick up your cross, sufferings in joy, all that. No Joel Osteen hotwife vintage car collection prosperity grift. No antinomian “once saved always saved” crap. Salvation is a continuous process until you arrive. Sacraments are provided by God and are there to keep one on the narrow way, which in the end is a personal responsibility. Confession for example, depends on repentance; without it there is no absolution. Which for the 4th time pretty much takes care of your Baptarded sneer about Father on Fridays. Where in Scripture did Jesus say, all you disciples, you can forgive yourselves!! You also need to re-familiarize yourself with Matt 18: 21-22 about the nature of repentance and forgiveness.
“He prefers the faithful dullard..” God would strike me dead if I said what I was thinking. You do leave yourself wide open.
I used to train golden retrievers to hunt and field trial. One rule I always tried to follow was, end a day’s training on a good note. Since this is *your* training session, I’ll end on a point you made with which I agree: ” And that is why the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom.”
Wo-oof.
You’re merely making a spectacle of yourself with your personal insults, or attempts at them. If you don’t like “long-winded” stick to the facts and avoid trying to puff yourself up.
Here’s your chance to finally tell us what you “point about the passing on of Divine Authority”!
You’ve told us any number of times of your cheerful ASSUMPTION of authority, but where the proof from Holy Scripture?
I’ve only asked you for that about eight times now.
Acts 8: 26-40: your “point” is imaginary, or based on some “interpretation” perhaps that you swallowed whole but cannot now enunciate? Let me help, if you’re not beyond it: The Holy Spirit led Phillip to the eunuch. The eunuch was reading and thinking “how can I understand this if someone does not interpret it for me”. INTERPRET. Phillip approaches and him and led by the Holy Spirit Phillip explains to the eunuch that the text refers to Christ. One of many texts in the Old Testament that do so. Are you still with us?
Then what does the Scripture say: “he PREACHED” Christ Jesus to the eunuch. It was the eunuch who said “INTERPRET”, not Phillip. Phillip SCRIPTURE TELLS US, “PREACHED”. It doesn’t say he interpreted, it says he preached. Yes, he explained to the eunuch whom the text referred to! Explaining is something preachers do all the time.
So by what feat of imagination does this text relate to your churches purported right to “interpret” Scripture however they wish at any given point in time?
Leaving aside the ridiculous concept that different popes can “interpret” Scripture in different ways at different times and it’s all somehow fine and dandy because we’ve got the keys etc. etc.
Just like Joseph Smith or Brigham Young or any other cult leader getting his latest purported “revelation” LOL.
So are you going to explain this from Scripture or are we just going to have more huffing and puffing and name-calling?
“For the eight time., Scripture set the conditions for succession, by the passing on of Divine authority from Christ to the Apostles, who in turn passed it on to men like the Apostolic Fathers, and those who followed them.”
Oh, really? Where in Scripture are “the conditions for succession” spelled out again?
Here’s a whopper from you: “Where in the Bible is the Bible mandated as the sole rule of faith?”
Where in the Bible is any other document mandated as A rule of faith?
“Hey Rufus, have you ever read the OT and the way God sets up a church on earth? Temples, rituals, robes, bells and smells. He understands sane, grounded people **like** structure and fellowship.”
It seems that God knows what can be expected and required of man at any given time of history. Where’s the Temple now? Ever read what happened when they tried to built it again in 365 under Julian the Apostate? Any lesson to be learned from that?
Sure, you’ve got a good thing going: “we’ve got the keys, we can pat you on the head and send you away forgiven till next week…don’t worry, be happy. Just keep smiling and tithing and don’t ask questions”. Oh do people love that?? You bet they do. What kind of people? The simple, naive souls, God bless them, the lazy conformists, the go-alongs, the pretenders, the mendacious power-lovers, the cynics who see a flock they can feed off, and all those whose faith is reduced to a bunch of formulas incanted by priests who are supposedly the Untouchables of the Kingdom of Heaven. Yes, it’s well calculated to appeal to a practical majority of the population LOL. After all, they’ve been refining the brand and the techniques for quite a time now.
As opposed to …what? Your perverted version of Christianity where millions of Scrooge-like discrete entities retire to their rude garrets, like that character in the Simon and Garfunkel song too many years for me to remember back, but instead of books and poetry, I have my Bah-Bule! And it talks to me, I don’t need anyone else (unless maybe they agree with me, the Great Koresh, and join my cult)! You must thrive in an age where everyone gets sucked into their personal electronic devices. I suggest “Bible in a Year” by Fr. Mike Schmitz for your app library. Pay attention to Romans 14:7 when you get there.
Now that you’ve taken your little demons of anger and pride out for their walk, maybe we can return to matters of substance? LOL
You sound a lot like the Apostles trying to show Christ the Temple: “look how wonderful our edifice is!” Where is it now? Mistaken for the foundation of the Antonia Fortress, sad irony of ironies. Christ did not come into this world to make comfortable churches and opportunities for social gatherings. He said “take up your cross and follow me”.
Yes, read your “Bah-bule”, that would be a good idea. If you approach it in humility and genuine desire to know what it tells, the Holy Spirit will give you, and anyone, that level of understanding which is appropriate and necessary for you at that time. But a mind already made up like yours is not looking for what you think you already have. Your position is worse than that of a complete atheist for they are cold as ice and your heat shows clearly enough here what it is composed of!
“Confession for example, depends on repentance; without it there is no absolution.” And what else does forgiveness depend on in the words of Christ?
Repentance? When you pretend that Father Whoever has the power to forgive sins the same as God Himself, what need is there for repentance? You pretend that God in the person of some priest has just spoken forgiveness and if he told you to say three Our Fathers and six Hail Mary’s and go on your way rejoicing, well that’s it isn’t it? “God” has just forgiven you! Does the priest hand you a little leaflet saying, “make you’re really repentant now!” on your way out? I’d LOL, but it’s no laughing matter.
Yes, people who love power and control are like pedophiles and other miscreants: where the corpse is the vultures gather. Create positions and institutions that are useful to them and voila, they appear. Your reference to dog-training is amusing in that it tells more than you intended. Once a person comes to understand something of how widespread spiritual afflictions are, and how devious and persistent they are, one gains a new perspective on “human nature” and why many people behave and think as they do. One’s demons are very clever at hiding from and manipulating their hosts. Sadly you may never come to that understanding because yours have found ways to keep you where they want you.
I can learn from anyone, but so far you refuse to produce the goods. At this point most would conclude you don’t have them, and are simply here for the pleasure of venting your pride and complacency. I repeatedly ask myself, and my Lord if there is any point, or if I am simply here for some pleasure of argument myself. Unity in the Body of Christ would be a wonderful thing, but if it enforced by censure, torture and murder as your church used to do it is less than worthless, it is an abomination. And if it is not enforced it cannot exist, as the Father and Son of course foresaw. But mortal man is full of pride and love of power…Good luck, though luck will play no part I’m afraid.
“He prefers the faithful dullard..” God would strike me dead if I said what I was thinking. You do leave yourself wide open.”
I don’t mind your long-windedness. It’s, as Duane said, side-splitting. Cheap suit off the back of a buckboard preaching to the dull-witted….but Dr. FeelGood, you’re no longer in four-corners at the intersection of two dirt roads in Ozarkville.
“I’ve only asked you for that about eight times now.” And I have showed you but you have that dullard thing going on.
Phillip at that time **was** the Church, to the Eunuch. The Eunuch needed the Church to explain Scripture. As apparently you do, as well….very badly. None so blind…..
“Yes, read your “Bah-bule”, that would be a good idea. If you approach it in humility and genuine desire to know what it tells,”
Strongly suggested for you, esp that humility part. I do suspect you’ll lean to the David Koresh ‘terpretations, given your evident theological sociopathy.
“Explaining is something preachers do all the time…” Sure, all 40K varieties, Who’s right? David Koresh? Jim and Tammy Faye? Billy Bob Larson?
“Just like Joseph Smith or Brigham Young or any other cult leader getting his latest purported “revelation” LOL.”
You do know that the Mormons have a dogma of continuous revelation, where any dogma can change at any time based on their Apostles “rebbu-lashuns.” Catholicism has set dogmas that do not change, like Transubstantiation, the hypostatic nature of Christ, etc., unlike Reformistas which deviate from Scripture all the time on the sanctity of marriage, homosexuality, etc etc. whatever fad is convenient to their lifestyle or cultural conditions….or the Mormons who found it convenient to say dark-skinned humans were no longer “cursed” or that plural marriage was no longer OK (wink wink).
Catholicism does not change, dogmatically, preexisting truths like the Immaculate Conception are revealed, and all beliefs build on each other, never conflicting as my Mormon example. Or your Reformista shelving of Matt 19:6 becuz we parsters can’t say no to a flock that luvs them some serial relationships, and butts in seats are more important than eternal truths….thus, you Reformatards metastasize into tens of thousands of differently-believing forms of theological cancer based on convenience and glitz. But yours of course is Right.
“You sound a lot like the Apostles trying to show Christ the Temple: “look how wonderful our edifice is!” Where is it now?”
Funny about that. A Temple that became outmoded by its unfaithfulness and merited destruction, and was predicted by Christ Himself. Doesn’t change the fact we are hard-wired for the transcendence of holy liturgy, in a setting that (poorly at best, but hey) mirrors the glories of Heaven as best as Man can create on earth, which in case you hadn’t noticed is what Revelations is all about. You also know that in the times before the Edict of Milan, when persecutions were not happening, the first thing the early Christians, outgrowing their home churches, did was not retire to individual pods, but erect basilicas. Big un’s. But I guess they weren’t really Christians, y’know, deluded for 1900 years until Parster Billy Bob crawled out in the like 1980’s. Or Mary Baker Eddy. Or Charles Taze Russell. Or Joe Smith. Or or or…..
“Unity in the Body of Christ would be a wonderful thing, but if it enforced by censure, torture and murder as your church used to do it is less than worthless, it is an abomination.”
Have you ever done any research on just which branch of Christianity was doing all those witch burnings in the 1500-1700’s Northern Europe? In a fit of Reformatard Scriptural literalism – something with which you obviously are sorely afflicted – hundreds of thousands of women were accused of witchcraft and “suffered not to live.” At the same time, Holy Inquisition ecclesiastical courts were condemning Catholic clerics to punishment, sometimes even death for unjustly murdering women accused of witchcraft. Your miserable form of Scriptural perversion made it across the ocean as well – were those Puritans who hanged and pressed women to death, raving Papists?
The Church did not do forced conversions – they always were considered invalid by Catholic doctrine. People who claimed to have converted to Catholicism, but secretly practiced something else, Islam or Judaism, were considered traitors to the State and punished by that entity. Ecclesiastical courts would petition the State courts to show mercy. Lest you puff your own self up for your Protestantista example of mercy and humility, I’d love to invite you to research the way Catholics were treated during the reigns of the monarchs including and who followed Henry VIII – you know, that magnificent example of heterosexual probity, like Martin “Poke ‘Em in the Habit” Luther…..
Christ breathed on his disciples, and they received the authority to forgive sins and at the Last Supper, to recreate his Body and Blood in the Sacrifice of the Mass. They in turn passed that Authority per Matt 16:18 onto their successors. Nothing you can spin changes that history. You have not come close to refuting that except for your eternal limp-weiner Cry of the Vangerilercal Loon “whay dat in the Bah-bule?” You answer me this…if such authority did not pass on, how do you explain the continuity of Christianity to this day? Were the early Christians all Ozark-dweller prototypes locked in their slums reading from their KJV? Or were they breaking transubstantiated bread and wine in homes and churches, per the writings of the like of Justin Martyr’s First Apology and Ignatius of Antioch Seven Letters? Oh…I forgot….they had never ‘sperienced Parster Billy Bob’s Great Awakening so they weren’t real Chrisshuns…..
You are a soul lost to the sound and smell of the gaslight you emit on a climate-changing scale.
Oh, and I’d *really* be curious how you spin 1 Corinthians 11: 23-30 into a non-Eucharistic “metaphor.”
“Captain, deflectors are buckling…I’m headed to RCIA…..”
For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: 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. 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. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come. 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. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
It’s a clear warning not to partake of Holy Communion when bound or burdened by unrepented sin. What constitutes for each individual person their capacity for understanding of sin and repentance of it is known only to He who sees all and knows all, and therefore only He can judge.
One thing we can say with surety: those who claim the authority to teach what is sin and repentance will be held liable for what they teach.
And if you are referring to transubstantiation, well read it. “Do this as oft as ye shall drink it” Drink what, blood? No, wine. “For as often as ye eat this bread…” Bread, not flesh. Even Christ at the last supper said, “But I say to you that I shall not drink again from this fruit of the vine until the day in which I shall drink it with you new in the Kingdom of my Father.” “Fruit of the vine” from the mouth of mouths.
Is that clear enough?
Matt 26: 26-28
26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is My Body.”
27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is My Blood of the[a] covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
A clear line establishing the dogma of Transubstantiation (“whar dat big word in duh Bah-Bule?”) from John 6 to the Last Supper Narratives.
Yes, clear enough.
30 When he was at the table with them, he took bread, gave thanks, broke it and began to give it to them. 31 Then their eyes were opened and they recognized him, and he disappeared from their sight. 32 They asked each other, “Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?”
33 They got up and returned at once to Jerusalem. There they found the Eleven and those with them, assembled together 34 and saying, “It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.” 35 Then the two told what had happened on the way, and how Jesus was recognized by them when he broke the bread. Luke 24: 30-35
Note, my buzzing Reformista gnat, when Christ disappeared – in “the breaking of the bread” – same procedure first introduced in John 6, as mandated in the Synoptics, and that *every Catholic priest* performs during the Liturgy of the Eucharist. He became the Bread and the Bread became Him, as it happens every day at Holy Mass…..
Emmaus, in case you hadn’t guessed, was was the first post-Resurrection Mass, complete with Liturgies of both Word and Eucharist, performed by the Original High Priest Himself.
Showing from then to the end of time, how it’s done for those to whom the Authority is passed.
Clear!
The poopacy has done nothing about the German bishops blessing faggot “marriages.” Therefore its official Papist doctrine that gay is ok now. Its ex cathedra.
The chloropromazine isn’t working. Talk to your doctor before you hurt yourself.
It’s vewy vewy quiet in here. 🤫
The wabbits are in hiding 😉
Arguing with the wilfully blind is a fruitless occupation; even our Lord wasted no time on it.
If you want to remind yourselves just how rotten and far from the Spirit of Truth you are, fill your boots here: https://www.barnhardt.biz/
You have been proven that you lied. Proven several times that you are ignorant of Scripture. Proven that articles you linked to refuted what you claimed. What does that say about you James? Methinks you need to get the log out of your eye.
James said:
“If you want to remind yourselves just how rotten and far from the Spirit of Truth you are, fill your boots here:”https://www.barnhardt.biz/
All that link shows is that Francis is a horrible pope. Yah? We’ve had terrible popes before in the Church, and we’ll have them in the future. Jesus never said that those who held offices in the Church he founded would all be saints. In fact He’s quite clear that the Church would be filled with wheat and tares.
Can you imagine, James using an uber-trad, “Remforatards are the Devil,” website to prove his point?
Parster Jimmy White must be running outta credible (bwa-ha-ha) Papist bashing sludge?
Desperation makes strange bedfellows, though I am guessing Ms. Bernhardt would swipe James a hard left on theological Tinder…..
And by “you” I mean your church and many of its doctrines and traditions, not you personally. 😉
The shamelessness will only get worse I fear.
Goodbye and good luck.
“….not you personally. 😉…”
News fer ya, Elmer Gantry…the Church is His Body, and we **are** the Church.
Attack us, you attack Him.
Acts 9:4
The pope appointed a gaylord over the office of inquisition. Soon straight Catholics will be targetted as heretics for not sleeping with him.
True. Then all he’ll have to fall back on is closeted-queer Baptists (probably a good 50% of the total) secular Jews (every good progressive Jewish mother needs at least one gay son – one must keep up, you know) and all Unitarians.
One sometimes has to settle.
The 50% that are the Calvinist ones; Augustinianism breeds faggotry.