I am excited....

[LC627]

Safe travels, BOL

 

[Willie T]

Well, at least THIS Catholic seems to be agreeable to allowing McGrath to breath the same air he does. LOL
Alister McGrath: How Beauty, Meaning, and Purpose Brought an Atheist to Christianity. - The Catholic Astronomer

 

[Helen]

Good grief – here we go again . . .

I was just packing for a little vacation this weekend and thought I’d have one last look at the posts on this forum before I left – and I saw this putrid pile of anti-Catholic manure. You guys have GOT to stop reading those moronic Jack Chick tracts. This thread is so full of gaping holes, it’s difficult to know just where to begin . . .

Hello my friend.
When I read " I was just packing..." I thought you were going to say that you were just packing up and moving to another Site ...bored because there has not been much anti-catholic stuff on here for you to post about.

At least when you get back, you will have some people to post to.
NOT that I would say this bunch are wildly anti-catholic.
Only a handful on this Site are.

Bless you, and have a nice break...take care....Helen

 

[Willie T]

Is this not considered a valid and accurate historical document?
Martin Luther's 95 Theses

 

[Enoch111]

Is this not considered a valid and accurate historical document?
Martin Luther's 95 Theses

#10 is a good one: "Those priests act ignorantly and wickedly who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penalties for purgatory."

 

[Willie T]

#10 is a good one: "Those priests act ignorantly and wickedly who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penalties for purgatory."

Wait till you get down into the 20's and beyond. LOL

 

[BreadOfLife]

Is this not considered a valid and accurate historical document?
Martin Luther's 95 Theses

I never challenged what is written in Luther’s document. I challenge the false allegations by many based on what he wrote.
Ummmmm, have you actually read through the entire document?

First of all – NOT all of his “95 theses”were protests against the Church. Some of them actually AGREED with Church teaching. Case in point – look at the first three that mirror what is taught in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC):

Thesis 1: When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, “Repent” (Mt 4:17), he willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.

• CCC 1431: Interior repentance is a radical reorientation of our whole life, a return, a conversion to God with all our heart, an end of sin, a turning away from evil, with repugnance toward the evil actions we have committed.

Thesis 2: This word [i.e., Christ’s call to repent in Mark 4:17] cannot be understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, that is, confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.

• CCC 1427: Jesus calls to conversion. This call is an essential part of the proclamation of the kingdom: “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” [Mark 4:17]. In the Church's preaching this call is addressed first to those who do not yet know Christ and his Gospel. Also, Baptism is the principal place for the first and) fundamental conversion.

Thesis 3: Yet it [i.e., the call to repent in Mark 4:17] does not mean solely inner repentance; such inner repentance is worthless unless it produces various outward mortification of the flesh.

• CCC 1430: Jesus' call to conversion and penance, like that of the prophets before him, does not aim first at outward works, “sackcloth and ashes,” fasting and mortification, but at the conversion of the heart, interior conversion. Without this, such penances remain sterile and false; however, interior conversion urges expression in visible signs, gestures, and works of penance.

What I challenge are the false allegations in the book you read about the CHURCH selling Indulgences and the false statements about Purgatory. that I PROVED wrong in my last post.

 

[Taken]

… to have discovered a recently written book concerning the development of Protestantism.

Thanks for sharing.

IF
man (A) can Control the Purse of man (B).....
Man (A) can Control man (B).

It is an Old and ancient "formula" used by kings and So Effective....
Organized Governments, Churches, Banks, Employers, Parents, Bullies use the Same "formula"....(not saying "All", just saying that method is not confined to only ONE organization.)

God Bless,
Taken

 

[BreadOfLife]

Wait till you get down into the 20's and beyond. LOL

As long as you ignore the first three - right??

 

[Nancy]

believe it or not they are forgiven, which is going to be even worse for them

Indeed.

 

[LC627]

Is this not considered a valid and accurate historical document?
Martin Luther's 95 Theses

Good point.

 

[Willie T]

Good point.

I figure if the Church wasn't doing it, Martin Luther wouldn't have complained about it..... No one would have even noticed his rant. But, as it seems it was...………… the Church officials were quite upset with him.

 

[Willie T]

I never challenged what is written in Luther’s document. I challenge the false allegations by many based on what he wrote.
Ummmmm, have you actually read through the entire document?

First of all – NOT all of his “95 theses”were protests against the Church. Some of them actually AGREED with Church teaching. Case in point – look at the first three that mirror what is taught in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC):

Thesis 1: When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, “Repent” (Mt 4:17), he willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.

• CCC 1431: Interior repentance is a radical reorientation of our whole life, a return, a conversion to God with all our heart, an end of sin, a turning away from evil, with repugnance toward the evil actions we have committed.

Thesis 2: This word [i.e., Christ’s call to repent in Mark 4:17] cannot be understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, that is, confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.

• CCC 1427: Jesus calls to conversion. This call is an essential part of the proclamation of the kingdom: “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” [Mark 4:17]. In the Church's preaching this call is addressed first to those who do not yet know Christ and his Gospel. Also, Baptism is the principal place for the first and) fundamental conversion.

Thesis 3: Yet it [i.e., the call to repent in Mark 4:17] does not mean solely inner repentance; such inner repentance is worthless unless it produces various outward mortification of the flesh.

• CCC 1430: Jesus' call to conversion and penance, like that of the prophets before him, does not aim first at outward works, “sackcloth and ashes,” fasting and mortification, but at the conversion of the heart, interior conversion. Without this, such penances remain sterile and false; however, interior conversion urges expression in visible signs, gestures, and works of penance.

What I challenge are the false allegations in the book you read about the CHURCH selling Indulgences and the false statements about Purgatory. that I PROVED wrong in my last post.

Luther never set out to subvert nor replace the church. What he was saying in those first things is "that since it is true that we say we believe and we teach these truths, WHY are we introducing all these other things that we (the Church) use to bilk money out of the believers?"

 

[BreadOfLife]

I figure if the Church wasn't doing it, Martin Luther wouldn't have complained about it..... No one would have even noticed his rant. But, as it seems it was...………… the Church officials were quite upset with him.

Luther never set out to subvert nor replace the church. What he was saying in those first things is "that since it is true that we say we believe and we teach these truths, WHY are we introducing all these other things that we (the Church) use to bilk money out of the believers?"

And, as I’ve already stated – the Church WASN’T doing this. It was an abuse by men like Tetzel. This was NEVER a Church-mandated practice – nor was it ever endorsed by the Church.

It’s funny how you conveniently refuse to address this and completely ignore my challenge to you to provide documented evidence for your claims that the CHURCH was responsible for the selling of Indulgences.

Anyway – I NEVER claimed that Luther was trying to subvert or replace the Church. This just seems to be a dodge by YOU to ignore my challenge . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Good point.

Read post #27 . . .

 

[Willie T]

Read post #27 . . .

I like that #. Read the same # (27) in the theses. Obviously the Church's own priests were doing this preaching.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I like that #. Read the same # (27) in the theses. Obviously the Church's own priests were doing this preaching.

How many times must I remind you that this was an ABUSE, not a directive??

 

[Willie T]

How many times mist i remind you that this was an ABUSE, not a directive??

And the Church leaders never heard a word about it? Where did they think all that money was coming from?

 

[BreadOfLife]

And the Church leaders never heard a word about it? Where did they think all that money was coming from?

ONE MORE TIME . . .

It was an ABUSE. This means that there were people within the Church who were involved. Was EVERY person involved a parish priest?? Probably NOT.

Could this information have been kept from the hierarchy? Absolutely.

This was the 16th century. There were no phones, no fax, no internet, no email, no radio, no television, noTMZ, no press, no bank statements – NOTHING.

 

[Taken]

I like that #. Read the same # (27) in the theses. Obviously the Church's own priests were doing this preaching.

Willie ~ How could you make a thread about Protestants.....and not even mention Catholics? LOL.

Despite the OP,
Didn't take long for a Catholic to join in with accusations and name calling.

God Bless,
Taken