Spotlight On The Disasterous RCC "Celibacy" Requirement

[epostle1]

**The media, sex abuse, and Hollywood:
Is abuse only evil if committed by a Catholic priest?**

*SPECIAL REPORT* Media Hypocrisy in Tinseltown: Child Abuse No Big Deal When Committed by the Rich and Famous

Experts Declare Pedophilia ‘Rampant Today’ in Hollywood, Yet the Usual Media Suspects Go Mute

Hollywood Awards Accused Child Abuser and Elmo Actor With Three Emmys; Media Sees No Problem

Not the Catholic Church? NY Times Ignores Shocking Hollywood Pedophilia Charges

Celeb’s Hollywood Pedophilia Stunner Met With Media Whimper
Appearing in an interview on ABC's "Primetime Nightline" last week (Thu., 8/10/11), Hollywood actor Corey Feldman aired a truly brave and shocking claim:

"I can tell you that the No. 1 problem in Hollywood was and is and always will be pedophilia. That's the biggest problem for children in this industry … It's the big secret."
Hollywood sex abuse accusations

BishopAccountability.org UNCOVERED

Lawsuit by Ex-SNAP Insider Exposes Lawyer Kickback Schemes, Exploitation of Victims, and Corruption of SNAP

Falsely Accused Priest Finally Fights Back! Missouri Cleric Files Federal Lawsuit Against False Accusers, SNAP, and St. Louis Police

Hypocrisy Alert: SNAP Leader Clohessy, Who Refused To Call Police To Report Abusive Priest, Now Lectures Church on Reporting Abuse

**Blockbuster** SNAP’s Clohessy Resigns In Wake of Lawsuit Scandal That
SNAP Took Lawyer Kickbacks and Exploited Victims
SNAP : Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests UNCOVERED

At the end of 2011, a Missouri judge ordered David Clohessy, the president of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP), to be deposed regarding his role in cases of priestly sexual abuse. Clohessy fought the order vigorously, but lost. On January 2, 2012, he was deposed; the deposition was made public only recently

[click here]. [NOTE: all pages cited are taken from the deposition.]
SNAP UNRAVELS

it goes on and on and on

 

[TammyinWI]

Thank you for the Blessing.

It seems to me you are suggesting that Christians that are members of "organized religion" (denominational churches?) are NOT bible-believing Christ followers?

Did you know that thru historical writings we KNOW that the Christians of the 1st century AD, the people who walked and talked with the Apostles, were "organized"?

Mary

I do not think that it is the same type of "organized." JMTCW..., in thinking about it...not even close!

Wow, to have walked the earth when Jesus was here and hear Him teach!

The enemy moved in as soon as he could to contradict and dilute the Gospel, and deceive, has not let up but stepped it up!

There has got to be some order, but the proper order. "Religiosity" and religion these days is too "watered down," too inclusive, too universal, and awkward at times...also sometimes scary.

In the area I live in, like the end times describes, there is a spiritual dryness. There are no "churches" out of many, that teach and mentor all Bible teachings and Blessings, rightly dividing the Word of Truth. No Deliverance Ministries, no teaching and focusing on the Gifts of the Spirit, etc.

 

[TammyinWI]

So you prefer disorganized religion?

No, in fact, good point...a lot of that these days, too.

Like I wrote to Marymog just above on this thread, there has got to be proper order and teaching and mentorship on the whole Bible, not just watered down, "non-offensive" (get-more-$$$-in-the-collection-plate) preaching.

 

[TammyinWI]

She said she's a bible believing Christ follower.
What makes you think she prefers disorganized religion?
Does one need to belong to an "organized group" in order to follow Christ?
I know people who never go to a church, simply because they live in remote areas.
They read their bibles and worship at home without "belonging to an organized group".
They are dedicated Christians, more so than some people in "organized" groups.

And you call it "religion", Christianity is not a religion.
Christianity is a relationship with Jesus Christ.
When people ask me "which religion do you follow", I tell them "I don't follow a cult", I am a Christian.

Thank you. I know of people that were called out of the"church" they were attending by the Lord.

Happened for me. Instructions are Instructions.

And people that are not real happy about some things their church is about or teaches, but they go anyway.

 

[TammyinWI]

ALL of which makes you a Protestant - IF you are indeed still a christian.

I don't know why "Protestant" is such an abhorrent, 4-letter word to some Protestants like yourself. Your Protestant Fathers wore that moniker proudly . . .

I hope you will not get insulted, but you think too black and white. There are many, many, many grey areas.

What I am indeed, is a "protester" against your accusations based on grasping at straws.

Again, for the second time in reply to you: no, I am not.

 

[epostle1]

IF ONLY PRIESTS WERE TEACHERS

If priests were teachers, they would be afforded special protections under state law, insulated from changes in the statute of limitations, never be fired (which means they would be kept in ministry indefinitely), treated with kid gloves by the media, and generally be held unaccountable for misconduct.

Michael Goodwin, a columnist for the New York Post, is one of the exceptions to the media cover-up of miscreant public school teachers. In today’s paper
[click here], he cites documents showing that 7,300 teachers in New York City have been found deficient to teach: the offenses range from incompetence to sexual assault. All are protected by unions, at a cost of well over $100,000 each in salary and benefits. Moreover, there are some 500 teachers who have been convicted of criminal offenses, “including assault, sex crimes, kidnapping, burglary, prostitution and lewdness.”

This is nothing new. We know from previous studies that approximately 10 percent of public school students nationwide have been sexually victimized by teachers and other staffers. Four years ago it was reported that the incidence of sexual abuse in New York State had tripled in recent years. Last year, we learned that New York City was laying out over $40 million a year in salaries alone for teachers not to teach, many of whom were charged with sexual molestation. To top things off, New York City still has no background checks for new teachers (last year a former prostitute got tenure after her former status was disclosed).

Unlike the situation with priests accused of wrongdoing, these are not old accusations—they are happening right now. But don’t look for Jay Leno, Bill Maher, “The View” panelists or the New York Times to weigh in on this issue. It is obviously not the offense that gets them exercised, it’s the status of the offender. And we know why.

 

[TammyinWI]

You think there are no demons in the catholic church?

The Catholic Church is quietly preparing for an unparalleled episode of spiritual warfare, training more clergy to meet the inexplicable but steadily increasing demand for exorcisms. Church officials say a rise in materialism and pop obsession with the occult is to blame.
( From a Catholic website.)

Exorcism? Sorry, but no true Bible-teaching church does exorcisms or has exorcists. Here is what that means in Scripture:

Exorcist [EBD]
(Acts 19:13). "In that sceptical and therefore superstitious age professional exorcist abounded. Many of these professional exorcists were disreputable Jews, like Simon in Samaria and Elymas in Cyprus (8:9; 13:6)." Other references to exorcism as practised by the Jews are found in Matt. 12:27; Mark 9:38; Luke 9:49, 50. It would seem that it was an opinion among the Jews that miracles might be wrought by invoking the divine name. Thus also these "vagabond Jews" pretended that they could expel daemons.

The power of casting out devils was conferred by Christ on his apostles (Matt. 10:8), and on the seventy (Luke 10:17-19), and was exercised by believers after his ascension (Mark 16:17; Acts 16:18); but this power was never spoken of as exorcism.

Sorcery.
Matthew 12:27; Acts 19:13) David, by playing skillfully on a harp, procured the temporary departure of the evil spirit which troubled Saul. (1 Samuel 16:23) The power of casting out devils was bestowed by Christ while on earth upon the apostles, (Matthew 10:8) and the seventy disciples (Luke 10:17-19) and was, according to his promise, (Mark 16:17) exercised by believers after his ascension. (Acts 16:18)

Mt 26:63)): 1. Definition: One who expels demons by the use of magical formulas. In the strict etymological sense there is no exorcism in the Bible. The term "exorcists" is used once (Acts 19:13) in a way to discredit the professional exorcists familiarly known both among Jews and Gentiles.

2. Method of Expelling Demons in the New Testament: The method of Jesus in dealing with demoniacs was not that of the exorcists. While it is said (Mt 8:16) that He "cast out the spirits with a word," it is abundantly clear that the word in question was not ritualistic but authoritative.

In Lk 4:35 we have a typical sentence uttered by our Lord in the performance of His cures: "Hold thy peace, and come out of him." In Mk 9:29 we have Christ's own emphasis upon the ethical element in dealing with these mysterious maladies: "This kind can come out by nothing, save by prayer." In Mt 12:28 Jesus gives His own explanation of the method and power used in His cures: "But if I by the Spirit of God cast out demons, then is the kingdom of God come upon you."

In Lk 9:1 the terms "authority" and "power" are used in such a way as to show the belief of the evangelists that to cure demon-possession an actual power from God, together with the right to use it, was necessary. This group of passages gives the New Testament philosophy of this dread mystery and its cure. The demons are personal evil powers afflicting human life in their opposition to God. It is beyond man unaided to obtain deliverance from them. It is the function of Christ as the redeemer of mankind to deliver men from this as well as other ills due to sin. Miraculous cures of the same kind as those performed by Christ Himself were accomplished by His disciples in His name (Mk 16:17). The power attributed to "His name" supplies us with the opportunity for a most enlightening comparison and contrast.

Continued:

 

[TammyinWI]

Continued from previous post:
3. Exorcism in Ethnic and Jewish Writings: Exorcism among ancient and primitive peoples rests largely upon faith in the power of magical formulas, ordinarily compounded of the names of deities and pronounced in connection with exorcistic rites, upon the bodies of the afflicted. The words themselves are supposed to have power over the demons, and the mere recital of the correct list of names is supposed to be efficacious.
Attention should be called again to the incantation texts of the Babylonians and Assyrians (see, for translations and full exposition of texts, Rogers, Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, 146 ff). In this direction the absurdities and cruelties of superstition have carried men to extreme lengths. In the case of Josephus we are amazed to see how even in the case of an educated man the most abject superstition controls his views of such subjects. In Ant, VIII, v, in speaking of the wisdom of Solomon, he says that "God enabled him to learn that skill which expels demons, which is a science useful and sanitative to him." He also describes, in the same connection, a cure which he alleges to have seen, "in the presence of Vespasian and his sons," performed in accordance with methods of incantation ascribed to Solomon. A ring to which was attached a kind of root mentioned by Solomon was placed at the nostrils of the demoniac and the demon was drawn out through the nostrils. The proof that exorcism had actually taken place was given in the overturning of a basin placed nearby.

The absurdities of this narrative are more than equaled by the story of exorcism told in the Book of Tobit (see Lunge, Apocrypha, 151-53) where the liver and heart of a fish, miraculously caught, are burned upon the ashes of incense, and the resulting smoke drives away a demon. This whole story is well worthy of careful reading for the light it throws upon the unrestrained working of the imagination upon such matters.

In the rabbinical writers the very limit of diseased morbidness is reached in the long and repulsive details, which they give of methods used in exorcism (see Whitehouse, HDB, article "Demon," I, 592b; compare 593b; Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, II, 775-76).

4. Contrasts of New Testament and Popular Methods with Demons: In most striking contrast with this stand the Biblical narratives. The very point of connection which we have noted is also the point of contrast. The mighty and efficacious word with which Jesus rebuked and controlled demons was no exorcistic formula spoken by rote, but His own living word of holy power. "In the name of Jesus" did not mean that the sacred name formally uttered possessed magical power to effectuate a cure. The ancient Semitic formula, "in the name of," given a deep ethical meaning in the Old Testament, had a still deeper meaning in the New Testament. The proper and helpful use of it meant a reliance upon the presence and living power of Christ from whom alone power to do any mighty work comes (Jn 15:5).

This fundamental difference between the ideas and methods of Jesus and His disciples and current conceptions and usages becomes the more striking when we remember that the lower range of ideas and practices actually prevailed among the people with whom the Lord and His followers were associated. The famous passage (Mt 12:24 and parallel) in which the Pharisees attribute to demoniacal influence the cures wrought by Jesus upon the demonized, usually studied with reference to our Lord's word about the unforgivable sin, is also remarkable for the idea concerning demons which it expresses. The idea which evidently underlies the accusation against Jesus was that the natural way to obtain control over demons is by obtaining, through magic, power over the ruler of demons. In reply to this Jesus maintains that since the demons are evil they can be controlled only by opposition to them in the power of God.

It is most suggestive that we have in Acts 19:13 ff a clear exposition, in connection with exorcism, of just the point here insisted upon. According to this narrative a group of wandering professional Jewish exorcists, witnessing the cures accomplished by Paul, attempted to do the same by the ritualistic use of the name of Jesus. They failed ignominiously because, according to the narrative, they lacked faith in the living Christ by whose power such miracles of healing were wrought, although they were letter-perfect in the use of the formula. This narrative shows clearly what the New Testament understanding of the expression "in my name" implied in the way of faith and obedience.

Here as elsewhere, the chastened mental restraint under which the New Testament was composed, the high spiritual and ethical results of the intimacy of the disciples with Jesus, are clearly manifest.

Our Lord and His disciples dealt with the demoniacs as they dealt with all other sufferers from the malign, enslaving and wasting power of sin, with the tenderness of an illimitable sympathy, and the firmness and effectiveness of those to whom were granted in abundant measure the presence and power of God.

Louis Matthews Sweet

NETBible: Exorcist

 

[epostle1]

Spotlight On The Disasterous RCC "Celibacy" Requirement

What disaster? The one invented by the media that has not a shred of evidence?
What a stupid thread title.
Where is the spotlight on Hollywood and public school teachers??? There is no celibacy requirement for them, and the sex abuse has not stopped.

 

[TammyinWI]

Thank you Tammy,

I'm curious....If your not Protestant (any church denomination started after the reformation) then what are you?

Have you asked God to remove the demons from the Protestant churches?

Curious Mary

Some people might call me a Fundamentalist or "legalistic" LOL. I am a Repentant, Bible-believing Christian with a lot of flaws.

We are called to pray without ceasing. I guess that I could pray for what you wrote.

In the big scheme of things, we could pray and pray and pray for many things...out of a million concerns. Just like documentaries or studies...can't fit it all in with the cares and responsibilities of life and sleep (though I am Blessed to be able to pray extensively while at work, at times, and get some Scripture in if I want, at times)!

I will add that to my prayer list, including the same for all churches, including Catholicism. I will do that, unless He tells me to stop and that I should not pray for that. Thank you!

 

[epostle1]

Continued from previous post:
3. Exorcism in Ethnic and Jewish Writings: Exorcism among ancient and primitive peoples rests largely upon faith in the power of magical formulas, ordinarily compounded of the names of deities and pronounced in connection with exorcistic rites, upon the bodies of the afflicted. The words themselves are supposed to have power over the demons, and the mere recital of the correct list of names is supposed to be efficacious.
Attention should be called again to the incantation texts of the Babylonians and Assyrians (see, for translations and full exposition of texts, Rogers, Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, 146 ff). In this direction the absurdities and cruelties of superstition have carried men to extreme lengths. In the case of Josephus we are amazed to see how even in the case of an educated man the most abject superstition controls his views of such subjects. In Ant, VIII, v, in speaking of the wisdom of Solomon, he says that "God enabled him to learn that skill which expels demons, which is a science useful and sanitative to him." He also describes, in the same connection, a cure which he alleges to have seen, "in the presence of Vespasian and his sons," performed in accordance with methods of incantation ascribed to Solomon. A ring to which was attached a kind of root mentioned by Solomon was placed at the nostrils of the demoniac and the demon was drawn out through the nostrils. The proof that exorcism had actually taken place was given in the overturning of a basin placed nearby.

The absurdities of this narrative are more than equaled by the story of exorcism told in the Book of Tobit (see Lunge, Apocrypha, 151-53) where the liver and heart of a fish, miraculously caught, are burned upon the ashes of incense, and the resulting smoke drives away a demon. This whole story is well worthy of careful reading for the light it throws upon the unrestrained working of the imagination upon such matters.

In the rabbinical writers the very limit of diseased morbidness is reached in the long and repulsive details, which they give of methods used in exorcism (see Whitehouse, HDB, article "Demon," I, 592b; compare 593b; Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, II, 775-76).

4. Contrasts of New Testament and Popular Methods with Demons: In most striking contrast with this stand the Biblical narratives. The very point of connection which we have noted is also the point of contrast. The mighty and efficacious word with which Jesus rebuked and controlled demons was no exorcistic formula spoken by rote, but His own living word of holy power. "In the name of Jesus" did not mean that the sacred name formally uttered possessed magical power to effectuate a cure. The ancient Semitic formula, "in the name of," given a deep ethical meaning in the Old Testament, had a still deeper meaning in the New Testament. The proper and helpful use of it meant a reliance upon the presence and living power of Christ from whom alone power to do any mighty work comes (Jn 15:5).

This fundamental difference between the ideas and methods of Jesus and His disciples and current conceptions and usages becomes the more striking when we remember that the lower range of ideas and practices actually prevailed among the people with whom the Lord and His followers were associated. The famous passage (Mt 12:24 and parallel) in which the Pharisees attribute to demoniacal influence the cures wrought by Jesus upon the demonized, usually studied with reference to our Lord's word about the unforgivable sin, is also remarkable for the idea concerning demons which it expresses. The idea which evidently underlies the accusation against Jesus was that the natural way to obtain control over demons is by obtaining, through magic, power over the ruler of demons. In reply to this Jesus maintains that since the demons are evil they can be controlled only by opposition to them in the power of God.

It is most suggestive that we have in Acts 19:13 ff a clear exposition, in connection with exorcism, of just the point here insisted upon. According to this narrative a group of wandering professional Jewish exorcists, witnessing the cures accomplished by Paul, attempted to do the same by the ritualistic use of the name of Jesus. They failed ignominiously because, according to the narrative, they lacked faith in the living Christ by whose power such miracles of healing were wrought, although they were letter-perfect in the use of the formula. This narrative shows clearly what the New Testament understanding of the expression "in my name" implied in the way of faith and obedience.

Here as elsewhere, the chastened mental restraint under which the New Testament was composed, the high spiritual and ethical results of the intimacy of the disciples with Jesus, are clearly manifest.

Our Lord and His disciples dealt with the demoniacs as they dealt with all other sufferers from the malign, enslaving and wasting power of sin, with the tenderness of an illimitable sympathy, and the firmness and effectiveness of those to whom were granted in abundant measure the presence and power of God.

Louis Matthews Sweet

NETBible: Exorcist

The Book of Tobit, written around the 2nd century BC, contains a lot of folklore. You paint a rather nasty portrait of a book you seem to take literally. The Rite of Exorcism, like all biblical rites and doctrines, underwent development. They are no more absurd as Genesis read in the same light as Matthew.

Matt.. 7:12 – Jesus’ golden rule “do unto others” is the converse of Tobit 4:15 – what you hate, do not do to others.

Matt. 11:25 – Jesus’ description “Lord of heaven and earth” is the same as Tobit 7:18 – Lord of heaven and earth.

Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 – Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.

Luke 2:29 – Simeon’s declaration that he is ready to die after seeing the Child Jesus follows Tobit 11:9.

Rev. 1:4 – the seven spirits who are before his throne is taken from Tobit 12:15 – Raphael is one of the seven holy angels who present the prayers of the saints before the Holy One.

Rev. 8:3-4 – prayers of the saints presented to God by the hand of an angel follows Tobit 12:12,15.

Rev. 19:1 – the cry “Hallelujah” at the coming of the new Jerusalem follows Tobit 13:18

Rev. 21:19 – the description of the new Jerusalem with precious stones is prophesied in Tobit 13:17.

2 Tim. 3:16 – the inspired Scripture that Paul was referring to included the deuterocanonical texts that the Protestants removed. The books Baruch, Tobit, Maccabees, Judith, Sirach, Wisdom and parts of Daniel and Esther were all included in the Septuagint that Jesus and the apostles used.

The rite of exorcism used by Catholic priests has nothing to do with Babylonians and Assyrians. The idea is rather silly.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I hope you will not get insulted, but you think too black and white. There are many, many, many grey areas.

What I am indeed, is a "protester" against your accusations based on grasping at straws.

Again, for the second time in reply to you: no, I am not.

A "Protestant" by definition is a Christian who does not belong to the Catholic or Orthodox Churches.

Quasi-Christian sects are those that are NOT even Christian and reject the Trinity - like Jehovah's witnesses, Mormons, Oneness Pentecostals, Unitarians, Christadelphians, etc.

If YOU are a Baptized Christian who is not a member of the Catholic or Orthodox Churches - you are a Protestant. This is not an insult - but a reality.
Otherwise - you are quasi-Christian or something else . . .

 

[Phoneman777]

No - YOU are inventing things that just aren't there.
In MOST other countries besides the United States, meat is NOT eaten at every meal - nor at at every dinner.

YOU need to learn about other cultures before you continue making these embarrasingly idiotic remarks.

I'll make a deal with you: I'll discuss the sex abuse cases among priests if YOU openly discuss the fact that the pedophilia problem is much worse in your own Protestant sects. We'll go over the actual statistics on why it is so bad among you Protestants.

DEAL??

[/QUOTE]
I thought it was obvious to you that I was referring to the U.S., not the entire world, and that I didn't mean there was a Papal Bull requiring the eating of fish on Fridays - new adult Catholics or a child Catholic that had questions about alternatives to meat would be told to eat fish on Friday - my previous comment wasn't a "lie" though it seemed such to someone like you who is anxious to make a mountain out of molehills.

Speaking of mountains and molehills, no one denies sex abuse happens in Protestantism, but the NYT and the RCC and you would have us believe the problem is out of control - like over at the RCC. Sorry, it's not. Priests who harm kids sexually should be put to death, instead of coddled, enabled, and defended by RCC members like yourself.

 

[epostle1]

SPOTLIGHT ON EVANGELICAL SEX SCANDALS

• “I am a survivor of 10 years of sexual abuse at the hands of my preacher father. I have now become an advocate for victims of abuse. For years I have been saying that when the full scope of the abuse within the evangelical church comes to light, the Catholics will pale in comparison. I have talked to thousands of abuse victims and it would shock you how many are preacher’s kids, missionary kids and kids who have grown up in evangelical homes. The problem with tracking these numbers is because the evangelicals don’t have the hierarchical system that the Catholics do. Abuse victims can’t take it ‘up the chain of command’ because so many of these churches have no accountability. I seriously warn evangelicals about gloating over the Catholic scandals because our day is coming and it isn’t going to be pretty when we see what has been swept under the rug for decades. God is cleaning his church and this is a day that I have long prayed for. May every pedophile and predator preacher be exposed and may our churches become safe havens for the brokenhearted.”XXX

Why did the Catholic Church seemingly have this huge problem and other Christian and secular groups seemingly did not? I later found out that the Protestant arena had as large or larger problem with sex abuse among their clergy than the Catholic Church, according to the insurance companies that insure them. And there was a much larger problem in the secular world.
Sex Abuse Scandals: Catholic, Protestant and Secular – You May Be Surprised | Defenders of the Catholic Faith | Hosted by Stephen K. Ray

The thread title is stupid.

 

[epostle1]

Catholic priests abuse at a rate far lower than that of other males in the general population.
"If anyone believes that priests offend at a higher rate than teachers or non-celibate clergy, then they should produce the evidence on which they are basing that conclusion. I know of none. Saying 'everybody knows' does not constitute scientific methodology."
– Dr. Philip Jenkins, Pennsylvania State University.

A professor of sociology at an accredited university can't find any evidence, but anti-Catholic byrd brains can assume it and make offensive thread titles.

 

[epostle1]

Exorcism? Sorry, but no true Bible-teaching church does exorcisms or has exorcists. Here is what that means in Scripture:

Exorcist [EBD]
(Acts 19:13). "In that sceptical and therefore superstitious age professional exorcist abounded. Many of these professional exorcists were disreputable Jews, like Simon in Samaria and Elymas in Cyprus (8:9; 13:6)." Other references to exorcism as practised by the Jews are found in Matt. 12:27; Mark 9:38; Luke 9:49, 50. It would seem that it was an opinion among the Jews that miracles might be wrought by invoking the divine name. Thus also these "vagabond Jews" pretended that they could expel daemons.

No, that is not what Scripture means. That is an editorialized definition and there are legitimate exorcists in both Catholic and Protestant communities. "Sorry, but no true Bible-teaching church does exorcisms or has exorcists." is false.

The power of casting out devils was conferred by Christ on his apostles (Matt. 10:8), and on the seventy (Luke 10:17-19), and was exercised by believers after his ascension (Mark 16:17; Acts 16:18); but this power was never spoken of as exorcism.

Does it have to be? Where is "Trinity" in the Bible? Incarnation? Hyper-literalists do violence to Scripture.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I thought it was obvious to you that I was referring to the U.S., not the entire world, and that I didn't mean there was a Papal Bull requiring the eating of fish on Fridays - new adult Catholics or a child Catholic that had questions about alternatives to meat would be told to eat fish on Friday - my previous comment wasn't a "lie" though it seemed such to someone like you who is anxious to make a mountain out of molehills.

WRONG again.

There is not ONE single document or decree from the U.S. Bishops that states a Catholic must eat fish on Fridays - and there NEVER has been. there isn't even a document suggesting it - only to abstain from meat on Fridays during Lent.

So - everything you have said so far is a complete LIE.

Speaking of mountains and molehills, no one denies sex abuse happens in Protestantism, but the NYT and the RCC and you would have us believe the problem is out of control - like over at the RCC. Sorry, it's not. Priests who harm kids sexually should be put to death, instead of coddled, enabled, and defended by RCC members like yourself.

What about Protestant ministers?? Should they be put to death??
And what makes you think the problem is NOT out of control in the Protestant sects??

Evangelical Sex Abuse Record ‘Worse’ Than Catholic, Says Billy Graham’s Grandson

Protestant Churches Grapple With Growing Sexual Abuse Crisis : NPR

Protestants can no longer dismiss abuse as a ‘Catholic problem’

Child Sex Abuse More Prevalent Among Protestants Than Among Catholics

There Is More Sexual Abuse In The Protestant Churches Than Catholic

Catholic priests no guiltier of sex abuse than other clergy

Data Shed Light on Child Sexual Abuse by Protestant Clergy

Looks pretty out of control to me.
Your ignorance is only outshone by your hypocrisy . . .

 

[Marymog]

I do not think that it is the same type of "organized." JMTCW..., in thinking about it...not even close!
Wow, to have walked the earth when Jesus was here and hear Him teach!

The enemy moved in as soon as he could to contradict and dilute the Gospel, and deceive, has not let up but stepped it up!

There has got to be some order, but the proper order. "Religiosity" and religion these days is too "watered down," too inclusive, too universal, and awkward at times...also sometimes scary.

In the area I live in, like the end times describes, there is a spiritual dryness. There are no "churches" out of many, that teach and mentor all Bible teachings and Blessings, rightly dividing the Word of Truth. No Deliverance Ministries, no teaching and focusing on the Gifts of the Spirit, etc

Thank you.

No doubt that "the enemy moved in as soon as he could to contradict and dilute the Gospel, and deceive". After all, that is what scripture says happened.

How do we determine if the historical writings we have from the 1st and 2nd century Christians are the writings of the enemy you speak of or the legitimate Christians that followed Christ and The Apostles? example: The Didache

Who decides what is "proper order"? What does "proper order" look like to you?

Where do you live?? It sounds cold and dark.

Curious Mary

 

[Marymog]

Some people might call me a Fundamentalist or "legalistic" LOL. I am a Repentant, Bible-believing Christian with a lot of flaws.

We are called to pray without ceasing. I guess that I could pray for what you wrote.

In the big scheme of things, we could pray and pray and pray for many things...out of a million concerns. Just like documentaries or studies...can't fit it all in with the cares and responsibilities of life and sleep (though I am Blessed to be able to pray extensively while at work, at times, and get some Scripture in if I want, at times)!

I will add that to my prayer list, including the same for all churches, including Catholicism. I will do that, unless He tells me to stop and that I should not pray for that. Thank you!

Thank you for you honest answer. That would put you in the "Protestant" category.

I like your plan to pray for all churches. Not sure why the Spirit of the Lord would tell you to stop..... but another spirit may tell you to stop!

Mary

 

[TammyinWI]

A "Protestant" by definition is a Christian who does not belong to the Catholic or Orthodox Churches.

Quasi-Christian sects are those that are NOT even Christian and reject the Trinity - like Jehovah's witnesses, Mormons, Oneness Pentecostals, Unitarians, Christadelphians, etc.

If YOU are a Baptized Christian who is not a member of the Catholic or Orthodox Churches - you are a Protestant. This is not an insult - but a reality.
Otherwise - you are quasi-Christian or something else . . .

This above post is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read. I can't believe it.

Please stop trying to label me or put me in one of your weird boxes!

Protestant

Also found in: Thesaurus, Legal, Financial, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia.
Prot·es·tant
(prŏt′ĭ-stənt)
n.
1. A member of a Western Christian church whose faith and practice are founded on the principles of the Reformation, especially in the acceptance of the Bible as the sole source of revelation, in justification by faith alone, and in the universal priesthood of all the believers.
2. A member of a Western Christian church adhering to the theologies of Luther, Calvin, or Zwingli.
3. One of the German princes or cities that supported the doctrines of Luther and protested against the decision of the second Diet of Speyer (1529) to enforce the Edict of Worms (1521) and deny toleration to Lutherans.
4. protestant (also prə-tĕs′tənt) One who makes a declaration or avowal.