I thought of that, too, but "The Papacy" seemed the closest to it since the Papacy carries with it the doctrine of Papal Infallibility which, in turn, is alleged to be an aspect of the RCC's belief that the denomination is itself infallible.Mine isn't in the list - infallibility.
I don't believe it to be that at all.That familiar proposition always strikes me as a form of self-flattery.
And they are challenges to "traditional CHRISTIAN morality," not to CATHOLIC morality.I don't believe it to be that at all.
I don't feel myself flattered in any way. I have never considered myself all that pretty in the first place...But I think that opposition of the modern world as a whole to Catholic Church centres more on the chasm that exists between traditional CHRISTIAN morality and the beliefs that the modern western world have on the subject.
Corrupt practices are certainly front and foremost in criticism of the Catholic Church too.
I wonder if Catholic dogma on social morality might not bother more people in general than all of the above? Abortion, marriage, contraception, are what the world most hates about Catholicism.
That world includes many of a secular bent, as well as Protestants and more than a few Catholics too.
Searching for the above I came across this:Usually an "x" in the occult world symbolizes cross bones from a skull and cross bones symbol or picture.
Well you and I are lashed at the hip in the social morality threads. You will find Evangelicals support the moral issues you list above even contraception and hating divorce.I wonder if Catholic dogma on social morality might not bother more people in general than all of the above? Abortion, marriage, contraception, are what the world most hates about Catholicism.
That world includes many of a secular bent, as well as Protestants and more than a few Catholics too.
I keep clippings of hair and finger and toe nails in jars in the hopes that, Please Lord, I may be canonized a Saint and these remains may help future Catholics become Saints that will be more Holy than I!Searching for the above I came across this:
View attachment 225095 View attachment 225096
@JesusLovesOurLady perhaps add creepy human remains relics to the poll .
Searching for the above I came across this:
View attachment 225095 View attachment 225096
@JesusLovesOurLady perhaps add creepy human remains relics to the poll .
Can you add relics to the poll so I can vote.I'm glad I decided not to pay too much attention to this thread, I was just interested in the statistics. I'll just take the statistics, Satan can have the blasphemous attacks in the One True Church, they are his works after all.
Well let's get you both over to the formal debate thread.I would gladly debate this issue. I'm writing a paper on this subject for my seminary course and I'm teaching a Sunday school class on Sola Scriptura!
Satan can have the blasphemous attacks in the One True Church, they are his works after all.
I appreciate that you said "no debate" and some of us have strayed away from that; but that is an inflammatory statement.
It is only the view of the Catholic church that they are the "one True Church" - and the implication is that those who aren't Catholics are in false churches.
Just to say so, I used to always find it offensive as well that Catholic churches wouldn't allow me to take communion. But the older I got, and the more knowledgeable in the scriptures I got, the more I realized how absolutely appropriate it is.I disagree with Transubstantiation, but don't find it practically offensive. At least, it encourages faith in the possibility of a mystical connection with the living Christ during the Eucharist. What I object to is the exclusion of Protestants from partaking of the holy elements. Here are 2 negative experiences that demonstrate why:
(1) I once regularly attended a joint Catholic Episcopal charismatic prayer meeting, which culminated in an ecumenical Communion service. When the local Catholic bishop got wind of this, he prohibited Catholics from taken part; they had to confine themselves to their own Eucharist. The result? A bitter dissolution of the long-standing loving prayer meetings!
(2) When I was a Theology professor, a monk invited me to take part in a Catholic Communion service. I jumped at the chance, but when the other Catholics saw me participate, they were outraged and I stopped participating. I was most angry because at the time I was unaware that I was forbidden to partake of Catholic Communion and was only accepting the Catholic monk's invitation.
Well, first, we follow Jesus and not Peter. We are told in Scripture to imitate Christ and not Peter so this pictorial symbol has the wrong focus.
Second, Peter was crucified upside down but it was not on an inverted cross. Peter was crucified upside down on a regular upright cross. The Romans always provided an upright cross for crucifixion.
Three, Eugène Vintras (1807–1875) may be the first to use the inverted cross in a distinctly anti-Christian way. He was a Gnostic revivalist operating in France during the middle of the 19th century.
This was long before the Catholics adopted this anti-Christian symbol.
Three, not only are the 3 satanic upside crosses a problem on your shield, the crossing of the keys on your shield is pagan in origin, as well. Usually an "x" in the occult world symbolizes cross bones from a skull and cross bones symbol or picture.
The keys I do not even want to go into because it would not be appropriate to say here.
You need one more option, all of it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?