Electing New Pope

[BeyondET]

When people like you and your equally-ignorant buddy @BeyondET are trying to seduce people away from their Christian faith with your moronic lies?

Not a chance, I’d rather just expose you on their behalf . . .

Your being ignorant of changes in the CC.

I'll give you another stance that has been changed the idea of limbo zone the catholic church stopped believing in such a place 2007

 

[Illuminator]

Your being ignorant of changes in the CC.

I'll give you another stance that has been changed the idea of limbo zone the catholic church stopped believing in such a place 2007

Limbo was never an official teaching of the Church, as The Catholic Encyclopedia, published in the early 1900s, makes clear. But it was a common theological opinion for a good number of years. Limbo describes a place where unbaptized children and those unbaptized persons who had reached the age of reason but had not committed mortal sin would go upon their deaths. It is not heaven yet it is a state of complete natural happiness.

In the Middle Ages theologians came up with the theological construct of limbo, which never has been a defined doctrine. Limbo does get around two sticking points: the absence of sanctifying grace, which implies no possibility of heaven, and the absence of personal guilt, which implies no hell. Unbaptized infants die with neither, so it might seem that they are destined neither for heaven nor hell.

The new catechism implies that the infants might be able to achieve sanctifying grace before their particular judgment, though how this might happen we cannot say with any certitude. Some theologians speculate that the infants are given an opportunity not unlike that once granted the angels, before their fall, to accept or reject God. But we just do not know—and perhaps we never will know, down here.
Out on a Limbo

The fate of the souls of unbaptized infants (i.e. those who died in miscarriage) has not been divinely revealed, leaving theologians to speculate. There is no change in something that was never an official teaching in the first place.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church 1261 states, “As regards to children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them."

Whatever happened to limbo? - Catholic Straight Answers
Out on a Limbo

 

[BeyondET]

Limbo was never an official teaching of the Church, as The Catholic Encyclopedia, published in the early 1900s, makes clear. But it was a common theological opinion for a good number of years. Limbo describes a place where unbaptized children and those unbaptized persons who had reached the age of reason but had not committed mortal sin would go upon their deaths. It is not heaven yet it is a state of complete natural happiness.

In the Middle Ages theologians came up with the theological construct of limbo, which never has been a defined doctrine. Limbo does get around two sticking points: the absence of sanctifying grace, which implies no possibility of heaven, and the absence of personal guilt, which implies no hell. Unbaptized infants die with neither, so it might seem that they are destined neither for heaven nor hell.

The new catechism implies that the infants might be able to achieve sanctifying grace before their particular judgment, though how this might happen we cannot say with any certitude. Some theologians speculate that the infants are given an opportunity not unlike that once granted the angels, before their fall, to accept or reject God. But we just do not know—and perhaps we never will know, down here.
Out on a Limbo

The fate of the souls of unbaptized infants (i.e. those who died in miscarriage) has not been divinely revealed, leaving theologians to speculate. There is no change in something that was never an official teaching in the first place.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church 1261 states, “As regards to children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them."

Whatever happened to limbo? - Catholic Straight Answers
Out on a Limbo

Rather formal or nonformal doctrine, it was an unofficial teaching that they had to officially state on 07 to stop unofficially teaching it which I remember was being taught by catholics

 

[BreadOfLife]

We try to get folks away from the seduction of the great whore(RCC) and her massive monasteries full of statues that seduce folks into thinking God is in them via visuals.
Statues are powerfully imaginary tools of the RCC.
The RCC even tells their over imaginative constituents that some of those statues may come to life if they imagine hard enough.

It’s a good thing that God rejects your view.

When Solomon built the Temple,, he place huge statues of angels in it – and God was PLEASED. His Spirit FILLED the Temple (2 Chron. 5:7-14).

Do your homework . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Your being ignorant of changes in the CC.

I'll give you another stance that has been changed the idea of limbo zone the catholic church stopped believing in such a place 2007

And once again, in the depths of your amazing ignorance – this is NOT a change in a doctrinal position.

“Limbo” has NEVER been a doctrine of the Catholic Church. It was merely one of several ways of understanding and reasoning the mercy of God in the case of deceased infants because the Scriptures are SILENT on the matter.

“Limbo” was merely an opinion – and one that Catholics are free to believe in.

So – your original claim that the Catholic Church‘s doctrines have undergone “changed considerably” is as FALSE as it was when you first vomited it out.

In short – you’ve been CAUGHT LYING again . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Cause whatever rose up after peter and the others and took over this state and religoin merged monster , KNEW Not the truth . Sure they did have scribes that did faithfully rewrite and recopy the truth . ONLY the leaders never coverted to said truth . ITS NO different than if i myself recopied the whole bible
and YET didnt heed it , didnt teach it . It dont make me a true follower . It only means i copied the truth but didnt know the truth .
Same problems occured in israel . THEY Too had faithful scribes who word for word faithfully would recopy the torah .
BUT the leaders were DECIEVERS and sadly most of the people loved to have it so . JUST LIKE TODAY . JUST LIKE
The RCC has been since her birth . When constantine and the church merged and they made christanity a state religion
THEY SOLD OUT . Cause politicians of the world know the only way to have peace is GET ALONG .
SO ROME adopted some serious pagan ideals and accepted things and pratices which no christain should dared to have done .
YALL got a mess on yalls hands and sadly the protestant realm in large is just as bad .
This one world mindset that ROME COOKED UP is all bad news . And you cant see it .
POPES kissing budda statues and korans and all other sorts of evil . BUT YOU and many see it as GOOD
cause yall think this world peace and unity stuff is the goal of GOD . NO IT AINT .
DID you ever read or see in torah where GOD said , I want you to make and have world peace
with other religoins , KISS thier statues , say things like we all serve the same GOD .
Worse todays so called christains do this in the name OF THE MESSIAH . WHO himself said
DO YE THINK i came to bring peace on earth , i tell you nay but rather divsion .
OH there is one coming to bring peace upon the earth and by peace shall he destroy many . ONLY DONT FOLLOW THAT ONE
hims of the devil . WHEN DID the mission of evangelism become TO STOP PREACHING JESUS and instead
JUST FIND A WAY TO GET ALONG . tell that to your popes . cause for the last fifty years or so
ITS exactly what the mission has become . TOSS THE GOSPEL aside , DONT PREACH JESUS , DONT PROLESYTIZE JESUS
DONT say anything that might offend . JUST COME TOGETHER , FIND COMMON GROUND and we all serve the same GOD LIE .
Your church has tanked my friend , just as has most all of the protestant realm .
YOu really cant see what is going on my friend . WE are being sold a lie that will merge all religoins
BUT NO one bothered asking UNDER WHO or under what . A HINT IT WONT BE GOD and IT WONT BE CHRIST
RATHER its the dragon preparing the tribes of the world and her religoins to all merge as one
RIGHT UNDER HIM and the very beast THIS ONE WORLD WOKE WORLD will be handed right too .
You cant see this . You support pope francis , who i might add is one of the worst ones in this ball game .

WOW. That is a gigantic place of gobbdlygook.
Unfortunately – you’re as LOST as your other friends here . . .

There’s so much idiocy in this rant – I’ll just touch on the points above in RED.

It’s YOUR contention that the Church rose up in the 1st century – and after the Apostles died, ALL of the leaders were “evil” until the 16th century?? And yet YOU wanna be taken seriously??
There’s bit a SINGLE Scripture scholar or historian alive that would agree with YOUR asinine view. There is simply ZERO evidence for this nonsense.

Other than randomly pulling these bits of rubbish out of your head – what evidence do you have for making these idiotic claims?

Additionally – your claim that the Church – which YOU admit was there from the beginning – is now “LOST” is a DIRECT rejection of the promise of Christ, who said:

Matt. 16:18
And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Shame on YOU for calling our Lord a, “Liar”.

FINALLY – you STILL haven’t told me WHY you adhere to a Canon of the NT that “corrupt leaders” in the Catholic Church declared.
The scribes are NOT the ones who declared the Canon.

 

[amigo de christo]

Hey bread of life , MY LORD aint pope francis and HE is a liar . You need to flee that place and that man and never look back .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Amen.

Could you imagine the boldness of BOL if he had remission of sins via Acts 2:38?

If he had the Holy Ghost?

He could turn this world upside down.

Funny, how You go around telling people whether or not they have the Holy Spirit in them.

The Bible – YOUR SOLE Authority - says s that only GOD knows what’s in a person’s heart (1 Kings 8:29).
I was indwelt with the Holy Spirit at Baptism (John 3:5) – and, like the Apostles on Pentecost, more fully at my Confirmation.

It’s a rookie blunder – but YOU should know better . . .

 

[BeyondET]

And once again, in the depths of your amazing ignorance – this is NOT a change in a doctrinal position.

“Limbo” has NEVER been a doctrine of the Catholic Church. It was merely one of several ways of understanding and reasoning the mercy of God in the case of deceased infants because the Scriptures are SILENT on the matter.

“Limbo” was merely an opinion – and one that Catholics are free to believe in.

So – your original claim that the Catholic Church‘s doctrines have undergone “changed considerably” is as FALSE as it was when you first vomited it out.

In short – you’ve been CAUGHT LYING again . . .

Yes I hadn't look into it enough I apologize for over stating the changes they weren't considerable enough to change anything dramatically but there have been changes here and there which isn't much dwell over.

Now as to you vomiting out that I called Mary a party animal I did no such thing.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Yes I hadn't look into it enough I apologize for over stating the changes they weren't considerable enough to change anything dramatically but there have been changes here and there which isn't much dwell over.

Now as to you vomiting out that I called Mary a party animal I did no such thing.

In post #115 – YOU stated the following about Mary at the Wedding at Cana:
"The catholic have made false doctrine out of many things. No Mary did not have compassion for the wedding reception guest, she wanted the party to go smoothly thus Jesus reaction to the request woman why you concern me with this trivial stuff."

Here is the text:
John 2:1-5
On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. Jesus also was invited to the wedding with his disciples. When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” And Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”

Tell me – WHERE do you get your idiotic idea that Mary didn’t care about the hosts and that she just wanted the party to continue?
This is the problem with people like YOU who read too much into the text and invent your own doctrinal positions.

 

[Behold]

That is a discipine of the Roman rite. With good reason. .
Do you have a problem with men who offer their entire lives to serve Christ and His Church?

Paul had a problem with a "doctrine of Devils, that is to forbid marriage".

So, you are not being honest.
As you are trying to pretend that the Cult of Mary, only allows men who have made the decision to remain celibate. of their own accord.
But that is not the case.... at all.
The TRUTH IS... the Cult of Mary does not accept a man into the Priesthood, unless they SUBMIT to a life of Celibacy, that is enforced by the cult of mary upon a Priest.
Paul said this teaching, """to forbid marriage, is a Doctrine of Devils.""
There is your Cult of Mary.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Paul had a problem with a "doctrine of Devils, that is to forbid marriage".

So, you are not being honest.
As you are trying to pretend that the Cult of Mary, only allows men who have made the decision to remain celibate. of their own accord.
But that is not the case.... at all.
The TRUTH IS... the Cult of Mary does not accept a man into the Priesthood, unless they SUBMIT to a life of Celibacy, that is enforced by the cult of mary upon a Priest.
Paul said this teaching, """to forbid marriage, is a Doctrine of Devils.""
There is your Cult of Mary.

You should know BETTER.

I already schooled you about Paul’s teachings on celibacy back in post #93.
Paul was a BIG advocate for NOT marrying and remaining CELIBATE in order to better serve the Lord (1 Cor. 6:7, 1 Cor. 7:8-9, 1 Cor. 7:27-34, 1 Cor. 7:38).

I also taught you about the Gnostics and their “Doctrines of Demons” that Paul was condemning (1 Tim. 4:1-5):
- They forbade ALL to marry.
- They rejected ALL material wealth.
- They rejected certain foods, etc.

Do your homework – but above ALL – TRY to be honest.
God doesn’t like liars (Exod. 20:16) . . .

 

[Truther]

It’s a good thing that God rejects your view.

When Solomon built the Temple,, he place huge statues of angels in it – and God was PLEASED. His Spirit FILLED the Temple (2 Chron. 5:7-14).

Do your homework . . .

The RCC is OT.

Thy speech just betrayeth thee, Catholic.

 

[Truther]

Funny, how You go around telling people whether or not they have the Holy Spirit in them.

The Bible – YOUR SOLE Authority - says s that only GOD knows what’s in a person’s heart (1 Kings 8:29).
I was indwelt with the Holy Spirit at Baptism (John 3:5) – and, like the Apostles on Pentecost, more fully at my Confirmation.

It’s a rookie blunder – but YOU should know better . . .

You recieved the Holy Ghost as a newborn?

Are you John the Baptist?

 

[BreadOfLife]

The RCC is OT.

Thy speech just betrayeth thee, Catholic.

Close.

The Catholic Church of the FULFILLMENT of Judaism.
Remember – Jesus fulfills the OT – and His Church is part of that.

 

[Illuminator]

Paul had a problem with a "doctrine of Devils, that is to forbid marriage".

So, you are not being honest.

Paul was talking about the Gnostics who taught that the flesh was evil; that's why the "enlightened ones" didn't marry. They didn't follow the teachings of Jesus and Paul on marriage. The same with certain foods the Gnostics didn't eat, because they believed the food was evil.

As you are trying to pretend that the Cult of Mary, only allows men who have made the decision to remain celibate. of their own accord.
But that is not the case.... at all.

"Cult of Mary", which you are unable to define, has nothing to do with celibacy.

The TRUTH IS... the Cult of Mary does not accept a man into the Priesthood, unless they SUBMIT to a life of Celibacy, that is enforced by the cult of mary upon a Priest.

Disagreeing with Catholic teaching one thing, making up nonsense as you go along is quite another.

Paul said this teaching, """to forbid marriage, is a Doctrine of Devils."
There is your Cult of Mary.

Matrimony is elevated to the level of a sacrament whereas celibacy is not. "Cult of Mary" has to do solely with liturgy, it has nothing to do with celibacy. Bearing false witness is a serious sin. Fortunately for you, invincible ignorance gets you off the hook.

IV. Celibacy is Church Practice, Not Dogma
Matt. 19:11-12 – Jesus says celibacy is a gift from God and whoever can bear it should bear it. Jesus praises and recommends celibacy for full-time ministers in the Church. Because celibacy is a gift from God, those who criticize the Church’s practice of celibacy are criticizing God and this wonderful gift He bestows on His chosen ones.

Matt. 19:29 – Jesus says that whoever gives up children for the sake of His name will receive a hundred times more and will inherit eternal life. Jesus praises celibacy when it is done for the sake of His kingdom.

Matt. 22:30 – Jesus explains that in heaven there are no marriages. To bring about Jesus’ kingdom on earth, priests live the heavenly consecration to God by not taking a wife in marriage. This way, priests are able to focus exclusively on the spiritual family, and not have any additional pressures of the biological family (which is for the vocation of marriage). This also makes it easier for priests to be transferred to different parishes where they are most needed without having to worry about the impact of their transfer on wife and children.

1 Cor 7:1 – Paul teaches that it is well for a man not to touch a woman. This is the choice that the Catholic priests of the Roman rite freely make.

1 Cor. 7:7 – Paul also acknowledges that celibacy is a gift from God and wishes that all were celibate like he is.

1 Cor. 7:27 – Paul teaches men that they should not seek marriage. In Paul’s opinion, marriage introduces worldly temptations that can interfere with one’s relationship with God, specifically regarding those who will become full-time ministers in the Church.

1 Cor. 7:32-33, 38 – Paul recommends celibacy for full-time ministers in the Church so that they are able to focus entirely upon God and building up His kingdom. He “who refrains from marriage will do better.”

1 Tim. 3:2 – Paul instructs that bishops must be married only once. Many Protestants use this verse to prove that the Church’s celibacy law is in error. But they are mistaken because this verse refers to bishops that were widowers. Paul is instructing that these widowers could not remarry. The verse also refers to those bishops who were currently married. They also could not remarry (in the Catholic Church’s Eastern rite, priests are allowed to marry; celibacy is only a disciplinary rule for the clergy of the Roman rite). Therefore, this text has nothing to do with imposing a marriage requirement on becoming a bishop.

1 Tim. 4:3 – in this verse, Paul refers to deceitful doctrines that forbid marriage. Many non-Catholics also use this verse to impugn the Church’s practice of celibacy. This is entirely misguided because the Catholic Church (unlike many Protestant churches) exalts marriage to a sacrament. In fact, marriage is elevated to a sacrament, but consecrated virginity is not. The Church declares marriage sacred, covenantal and lifegiving. Paul is referring to doctrines that forbid marriage and other goods when done outside the teaching of Christ and for a lessor good. Celibacy is an act of giving up one good (marriage and children) for a greater good (complete spiritual union with God).

THE PRIESTHOOD - FATHERS, CELIBACY & WOMEN'S ORDINATION - Scripture Catholic

Celibacy is a discipline, not a doctrine, and practiced only in the Latin or Roman rite. That allows the Church to make exceptions.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You recieved the Holy Ghost as a newborn??

Yup.
With regard to the promises of the Holy Spirit and Baptism - Peter told the crowd:
Acts 2:39
“For the promise is for you AND FOR YOUR CHILDREN and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”

We Catholics put ALL of our faith and trust in God – not ourselves . . .

 

[Blue Dragonfly's]

Since four rounds of balloting are taken every day until a candidate receives two-thirds of the vote. In the past, 15 to 20 days after a papal vacancy, the cardinals gathered in St. Peter's Basilica for a Mass invoking the guidance of the Holy Spirit in electing a new Pope. Only cardinals under the age of 80 are eligible to vote in a conclave.

Question: What makes a "cardinal" incorruptible?

For example, a Pope is voted in by cardinals, what makes a cardinal worthy? is it an exam or test he must pass? And, if so, then couldn't anyone pass that same exam and then be worthy to vote in a Pope. Haven't some early Popes bought their way into the papacy?


Is not the Pope voted into an incorruptible office by corruptible man? And, once in power, have not a few proceeded to become drunken with power, deeming heresies? And, being equal to scripture authority may say NO MORE SOLA SCRIPTURA?


Athanasius Creed:
Whoever desires to be saved must above all hold to the catholic faith.
Anyone who does not keep it whole and entire will doubtless perish eternally.

That's quite a statement. Is that designed to keep life long customers? And, this is coming from an incorruptible office?

I love the Catholic people, but hate certain doctrines of those in authority over them.

Why is this thread open and talking about electing a new Pope?

Is Francis leaving the office?

 

[BeyondET]

In post #115 – YOU stated the following about Mary at the Wedding at Cana:
"The catholic have made false doctrine out of many things. No Mary did not have compassion for the wedding reception guest, she wanted the party to go smoothly thus Jesus reaction to the request woman why you concern me with this trivial stuff."

Here is the text:
John 2:1-5
On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. Jesus also was invited to the wedding with his disciples. When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” And Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”

Tell me – WHERE do you get your idiotic idea that Mary didn’t care about the hosts and that she just wanted the party to continue?
This is the problem with people like YOU who read too much into the text and invent your own doctrinal positions.

Wanting a reception party to go smoothly doesn't equal someone being a party animal you exaggerated on that. And more exaggerated comment you just made who said mary didn't care about the host???? Not me and if you would of read my other post, I agree she had compassion for the host family name not guest.

 

[BeyondET]

Why is this thread open and talking about electing a new Pope?

Is Francis leaving the office?

Rumors are he is thinking about it, though it may just be from the comment about slowing down the traveling