Pope tells Anglicans, "Come on Down!"
- Thread starter Spade
- Start date
Be afraid, cliffy.. be very afraid. We are sorting out some 'specialists' to deal with your type, with special instructions from the Grand Inquisitor :angel7::angry5:.
.. but in reality.. if you think the Pope is scary, you should see his opposition. ;-)
American women religious pushing back against Vatican Talebanization.
Women religious not complying with Vatican study | National Catholic Reporter
Women religious not complying with Vatican study | National Catholic Reporter
I thought the Jesuits already had a hit squad to take out dissidents like me and to perpetrate political assassinations.
Wow! When did they start calling nuns women religious? That is about the most ridiculous politically correct title I ever heard.
The term 'religous' as a descriptive noun for those in professed religious vociations.. like priests, monks, nuns.. has been an accepted term, likely from the earliest period of the Church.
Some of the women's monastic orders have become encampments of feminist ideology, especially those associated with educational professions, but it has even crept into contemplative orders, especially in the U.S..
Somehow a very rebellious spirit has permeated orders that are oath obliged to chastity, poverty, obedience and have become hotbeds for dissent against the Magisterium.
They are certainly entitled to those opinions, but they are not to use the Catholic Church's pulpit as a platform for their grievances.
Somehow a very rebellious spirit has permeated orders that are oath obliged to chastity, poverty, obedience and have become hotbeds for dissent against the Magisterium.
They are certainly entitled to those opinions, but they are not to use the Catholic Church's pulpit as a platform for their grievances.
Last edited:
You may be right. Women religious are rebelling against sexual apartheid. "Equal but separate..." How dare they "have a dream!" Time to gather dry faggots. Got a match?
Contributing faggots (er.. the traditional definition of the term) to burn heretics used to worth a partial indulgence of 40 days off one's term in Purgatory.
But the Church rid itself of all that and other baggage in the Counter Reformation and the Council of Trent. That ended in 1563. You need to bring yourself up to date, Spade. :smile:
As soon as they convince me they are not selling this fate I will listen to their whole speech, as it is I stop at the first balk until that hurdle is passed.
Re:2:4:
Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee,
because thou hast left thy first love.
Re:2:5:
Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen,
and repent,
and do the first works;
or else I will come unto thee quickly,
and will remove thy candlestick out of his place,
except thou repent.
Re:2:6:
But this thou hast,
that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans,
which I also hate.
If hanging a 'portrait of Jesus' on a wall is idol worship (hell) just how much more worse is worshiping a false God? (feiry lake) The RCC has a fascination with another they call father, there are two alone, and earthly one and a spiritual one. Their sin breaks the first Law so it is given a severe penalty, grace is absent. Not only do they miss the 1,000 years they are also part of the ones whose bones are gathered after Christ's return.
Jews can lose their guarantee to immortality by killing a Christian.
This sets up that there will be vengeance against those who kill Christians,
2Th:1:4:
So that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure:
2Th:1:5:
Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God,
that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God,
for which ye also suffer:
2Th:1:6:
Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;
2Th:1:7:
And to you who are troubled rest with us,
when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
2Th:1:8:
In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God,
and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
2Th:1:9:
Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord,
and from the glory of his power;
2Th:1:10:
When he shall come to be glorified in his saints,
and to be admired in all them that believe
(because our testimony among you was believed)
in that day.
Isn't the KJV1611the straw that broke the RCC's stranglehold on Christian Religion? Since neither can heal the sick (by touch alone) and the 987 differences in doctrine.
Why would it be a good idea? Demand a certain amount from each attend services at the other Church, 10 mins for the sermon and 50 minutes for debate by those who actually showed up. lol 'the survivors go onto the next round. The last time that was tried was in (wait for it) Ireland, didn't go over quite as well as originally planned. Is this the start of the Xtian War Wagon rumble. Nothing at all to do with the Biblical end-times. (unless 'they' say-so, nudge-nudge-wink-wink)
The changes over the centuries of the church's position on the oppression of women and minorities has had nothing to do with enlightenment and everything to do with economics. The church has always been opportunistic, adapting pagan gods, goddesses and rituals to facilitate conversion of masses of humanity to help fill their coffers.
In that I have come to see the church as the last vestige of the Roman empire, as Constantine's legacy of power and corruption. With two thousand years to perfect its corruption, the church has long since outlived its purpose on this planet and it is time the empire fell for good. Humanity needs to heal this festering wound.
In that I have come to see the church as the last vestige of the Roman empire, as Constantine's legacy of power and corruption. With two thousand years to perfect its corruption, the church has long since outlived its purpose on this planet and it is time the empire fell for good. Humanity needs to heal this festering wound.
Healing one wound while leaving the 967 other wounds to bleed and fester will do nothing to 'solve' societies problem(s). In the vast number of crimes committed (that would result in lengthy prison terms) how many are motivated just by religion? I admit some crimes will be a combination of things that could involve religion as a catalyst or at least a factor to some extent. Poverty would seem to be a much easier problem to solve than 'religion' and it would certainly put an end to the motivation to some crimes. If that isn't ever going to be addressed, your waiting for 'your solution' is in vain. Somehow you want 'it' to be destroyed, would that include using the same methods (ie violence, lies) that you condemn in religion?
Congrats on seeing the RCC (and most off-shoots ) as an extension of the old Roman way. The appearance of the Pope was a replacement to having a Caesar. The voice of the RCC had influence with the Roman Gov before they officially fell. All of Europe came to have the RCC as being a body that could, and did, demand things of Kings like using his armies to further their agenda, protect them from any mobs that might try to harm them. They also basically got immunity from punishment if some plot didn't go right. That 'attitude' came from the old Roman ways (and a lot further back than that) not from the Bible. Those same 'types of people' also control all forms of commerce and military forcers when used for missions of conquest. Are those two ever going to make your list or will religion stay your one and only complaint about how the world currently works?
Morning....lol
Congrats on seeing the RCC (and most off-shoots ) as an extension of the old Roman way. The appearance of the Pope was a replacement to having a Caesar. The voice of the RCC had influence with the Roman Gov before they officially fell. All of Europe came to have the RCC as being a body that could, and did, demand things of Kings like using his armies to further their agenda, protect them from any mobs that might try to harm them. They also basically got immunity from punishment if some plot didn't go right. That 'attitude' came from the old Roman ways (and a lot further back than that) not from the Bible. Those same 'types of people' also control all forms of commerce and military forcers when used for missions of conquest. Are those two ever going to make your list or will religion stay your one and only complaint about how the world currently works?
Morning....lol
Good to see you again Mhz.
I'd say no to that. KJV is deeply respected in the Catholic religion for the poetic beauty of its language. It was however written after the Church of England's schism with Rome, and reflects in many ways a clear Protestant bias in its translations and omissions.
The KJV was not the first vulgate version of the Bible. The Catholic Church's original opposition to them was based on its concern that they would be interpreted in pieces and contradictions, rather than in the light of the Church's revelation.. which proved to be correct.
However that opposition has been rescinded for centuries, the Catholic Church now providing the keys to its interpretation through its dogma, to those who care to use them.
The RSV, published by the Catholic Bible Society of Great Britain in the late 19th Century, in the first full translation from original texts since the 17th Century was intended to retain the beauty of the KJV while restoring the most literal and complete translation from its sources.
And as far as a 'stranglehold' as you phrase, a quick look at the Christian landscape will show you it is not the Catholic Church that is in crisis, but the Protestant diaspora.. fragmented, confused, or in the case of the Anglican Church, completely adrift.
I'd say no to that. KJV is deeply respected in the Catholic religion for the poetic beauty of its language. It was however written after the Church of England's schism with Rome, and reflects in many ways a clear Protestant bias in its translations and omissions.
The KJV was not the first vulgate version of the Bible. The Catholic Church's original opposition to them was based on its concern that they would be interpreted in pieces and contradictions, rather than in the light of the Church's revelation.. which proved to be correct.
However that opposition has been rescinded for centuries, the Catholic Church now providing the keys to its interpretation through its dogma, to those who care to use them.
The RSV, published by the Catholic Bible Society of Great Britain in the late 19th Century, in the first full translation from original texts since the 17th Century was intended to retain the beauty of the KJV while restoring the most literal and complete translation from its sources.
And as far as a 'stranglehold' as you phrase, a quick look at the Christian landscape will show you it is not the Catholic Church that is in crisis, but the Protestant diaspora.. fragmented, confused, or in the case of the Anglican Church, completely adrift.
Last edited:
It is not the Catholic Church that oppresses women. It reveres women. The first disciple and paragon of the faith is Mary, of manifest virtue and courage.
It is feminism, women's liberation, that has oppressed women, and deformed the feminine ideal beyond all recognition. It is this idol of freedom that has led to abortion, the debasement of marriage as a sacrament.. and caused untold misery to women who cannot reach their potential within the contrived images of feminism.
lol I used to be fascinated by twisted views like this.
Sorry, Peewee, but the Bible says the Christian god made a woman from a man's rib, and Christianity in general has been of the general opinion that women are secondary to men ever since. Feminists strive to bring equality to women. Men decide what they can do with their own bodies and it used to be that they decided what women could do with their own bodies, but that is changing. Women are gaining control over their bodies and men are losing it and fighting every millimeter of the way.
That is why they murdered thousands of female herbalists as witches because they had the nerve to help people heal when the church had declared that only the church had a right to do that. That is why they turned the High priestesses of the Celts into
concubines for the priesthood (nuns).
Mary is stolen from the Celtic goddess Gaia. Mary is barely mentioned in the bible and was only made a paragon of the church when Rome overran the Celts and used Mary to convert those heathen savages by using their own goddess in the guise of Mary. That is why Mayans, Incas and Aztecs to this day insert a statue of their goddess inside the statue of Mary when they parade her about in some of their festivals.
I don't think the church reveres women so much as they fear them. The bishops and the pope know that women are more powerful than men. For centuries they forced women to cover their heads so as to disconnect them from the light while in church. They knew that if women knew how powerful they were they would usurp those male chauvinist pigs.
Indeed. Let me give an example of how Catholic Church reveres women. In the Dark Ages, the Church had decreed that nothing must be done to help alleviate the suffering, the pain of the women during child birth. Childbirth pain was supposed to be the punishment of Eve, for leading Adam astray.
Anyway, one woman was having a particularly difficult, prolonged childbirth. The doctor in attendance could not stand to see the woman suffer, could not stand her screams, her writhing, twitching with pain. Feeling sorry for her, he gave her something to relieve her pain.
For his troubles, he was burnt at the stake by the Catholic Church. Now, admittedly it does not happen today, mainly because the Church doesn’t have the authority to do so. But the nasty, vicious, hate filled attitude towards women very much persists.
Excuse me? speaking as a woman, i have absolutely NO desire to be revered or put on a pedestle. for the record, the ony women who were revered by the Catholic church WERE Mary and some saints . sorry - i know my Bible and I know that the ONLY people who kept faith with Jesus WERE women - they never denied him and they never doubted him. and what did the Church do to recognize their faith and devotion?Gradually robbed them of any power they had. They used to run churches and preach in the early church, but 'saints' like Augustine and others denied their abilities and capabilities and pretty soon they were left to pretty much be the washer of priestly laundry and the polishers of the alter rails.
Think I'm terrible for talking about power? do you think all those princes of the church have got to where they have by not having a trunk load of ambition and a desire to run things? what makes you think women don't have those same ambitions - or abilities? where in the New Testament did Christ ever say that women should have a subserviant role to men? He never did. Paul did. Augustine and all those early church fathers did.
Take your church and its pedestal and the impossibly ridiculous profile that it wants to put women into.
womens liberation? I was only a child when it began, but I remember women staying in abusive marriages because they were told it was their womanly duty. i read employment ads that had employers hiring men and women for the same job - but offering women a much lower salary. I know women who had child after child , wearing out their bodies prematurely because their priest told them that it was their religious duty.
Tell me that it's womens lib that demeans women? You're so obviously a man who never had to deal with any of the above. You want to be put on a pedestal? fill your boots. I'd rather be teated like a human being who is striving to be a better person, all the good and the bad of me.
