Catholics: Ash Wednesday Tomorrow

[Jon]

Ummmmmm....How so? I am pretty confident of the Early Christian Church and what they believed. It resembles nothing of the NUMEROUS prot denoms going...33,000 plus????

Now THERE'S a story that gains with the telling! Last I recall you were trumpeting 30,000-plus.

 

Theology must have fallen victim to Inflation.

[Guest Knight of Darkness]

Knowing full well that the Catholic Church has the Fullness of the TRUTH and everyone else lacks something of that TRUTH? This is not PRIDE. This is TRUTH.

 

Nice sidestep, but in your original posting, you said you were proud to be a Catholic. You used the word proud, you said nothing about knowing the fullness of truth or whatever other nonsense you can concoct. Would you like me to quote it again? And again? And again? I'll keep bringing your words back to you no matter how many times you attempt to pull a sidestep. Don't you just hate me?

 

In the words of Shakespeare, you've been hoisted by your own petard. And by your own words, you've committed one of the Seven Deadly Sins. Have a nice time in Purgatory, you're going to need to call in those favors from the dearly departed whom you've been trying to help.

 

Then again, as you refuse to acknowledge or repent of your sin, you may not even make it to Purgatory. By your own belief system, and the writings of one of your greatest Popes, you are literally toast. And as I recollect, you and that other idiot, RC, accused me of being aligned with Satan. As I replied, darker than you think, so I'll be seeing you dude.

 

[Guest Knight of Darkness]

Ummmmmm....How so? I am pretty confident of the Early Christian Church and what they believed. It resembles nothing of the NUMEROUS prot denoms going...33,000 plus????

 

You missed the point, I just thought your head would explode if you attempted to grasp the concept of a Venn diagram, but you didn't even bother to try. Good thing, you don't have the brain power to spare.

 

[Jon]

Ummmmmm....How so? I am pretty confident of the Early Christian Church and what they believed. It resembles nothing of the NUMEROUS prot denoms going...33,000 plus????

Childish, 'A Faithful Catholic'.

[A Faithful Catholic]

Nice sidestep, but in your original posting, you said you were proud to be a Catholic. You used the word proud, you said nothing about knowing the fullness of truth or whatever other nonsense you can concoct. Would you like me to quote it again? And again? And again? I'll keep bringing your words back to you no matter how many times you attempt to pull a sidestep. Don't you just hate me?

 

Pride, as one of the SEVEN deadly sins, is not the same type of PRIDE I have when it comes to the TRUTH. Protestants LEFT the true CHURCH, because of there FOUNDERS were FULL OF PRIDE to begin with.

 

In the words of Shakespeare, you've been hoisted by your own petard. And by your own words, you've committed one of the Seven Deadly Sins. Have a nice time in Purgatory, you're going to need to call in those favors from the dearly departed whom you've been trying to help.

 

Catholicism is the TRUE CHURCH of Christ and I belong to it. I have not committed the sin of PRIDE at all. Those that TURNED their back on the TRUE CHURCH and especially the EUCHARIST have committed FAR worse sins then I have ever committed.

Then again, as you refuse to acknowledge or repent of your sin, you may not even make it to Purgatory. By your own belief system, and the writings of one of your greatest Popes, you are literally toast. And as I recollect, you and that other idiot, RC, accused me of being aligned with Satan. As I replied, darker than you think, so I'll be seeing you dude.

 

If you reject Jesus Christ you are TOAST to begin with. I am ALIGNED with the CC. There is NO OTHER CHURCH above that....the rest are latter day off shoots.

 

You have committed FAR worse sins than I have EVER committed by turning your back on the TRUE EUCHARIST.

 

[A Faithful Catholic]

Childish, 'A Faithful Catholic'.

 

"You say so."

 

[Guest Knight of Darkness]

You have committed FAR worse sins than I have EVER committed by turning your back on the TRUE EUCHARIST.

 

 

[Guest Knight of Darkness]

AFC as he sees himself:

 

AFC as normal human beings see him:

[A Faithful Catholic]

 

Now that is FUNNY! Thanks for the laugh!

[A Faithful Catholic]

AFC as he sees himself:

 

AFC as normal human beings see him:

 

Lots of funnies today!

[Kermit]

Ummmmmm....How so? I am pretty confident of the Early Christian Church and what they believed. It resembles nothing of the NUMEROUS prot denoms going...33,000 plus????

 

There he goes with the "prot" thing again. Maybe we PROTESTANTS should start referring to the Catholics as "cats." Show some respect for our religion and our beliefs.

[A Faithful Catholic]

There he goes with the "prot" thing again. Maybe we PROTESTANTS should start referring to the Catholics as "cats." Show some respect for our religion and our beliefs.

 

Why? You LEFT the Catholic Church, at least your FOUNDERS did, and turned their BACK on the TRUE EUCHARIST! What a crying shame. What are you protesting against???????

[Kermit]

Why? You LEFT the Catholic Church, at least your FOUNDERS did, and turned their BACK on the TRUE EUCHARIST! What a crying shame.

 

I didn't leave the Catholic Church. I never belonged to it. Oooops, I had given up arguing with you for Lent. My bad.

[A Faithful Catholic]

I didn't leave the Catholic Church. I never belonged to it. Oooops, I had given up arguing with you for Lent. My bad.

 

That's even worse in a way. You never experienced the MOST HOLY EUCHARIST.........what a crime, not your fault. What are you protesting against???????

[Jon]

That's even worse in a way. You never experienced the MOST HOLY EUCHARIST.........what a crime, not your fault. What are you protesting against???????

'A Faithful Catholic' I'm sure Kermit can answer for himself and would prefer to.

 

However I find your question reflects poorly on you. Coming from someone who is scornful and insulting to Protestants, are we now to gather that you have no need to understand anything in order to hate it?

 

To dispel your ignorance, if the question were addressed by anyone to me I could enlighten them as follows:

 

The word Protestant comes from the Latin 'protestatio', meaning 'declaration'. It refers to the letter of protestation by Lutheran princes against the decision of the Diet of Speyer in 1529, which reaffirmed the edict of the Diet of Worms against the Reformation. That was its origin and remains the case.

 

Since then, 'Protestantism' has become used in additional senses, including reference to Western Christianity that is not subject to Papal authority. Put simply, Protestantism remains a religious protest against the traditional Roman Catholic Church, rejecting both it and Eastern Orthodoxy.

 

'A Faithful Catholic', I'm surprised to learn that you actually had to ask what a Protestant is protesting against. Surely that exposes all your sneering at it as shooting in the dark. How many more of your swaggering affronts will likewise turn out to be ignorant bluff?

 

'Protestant's' historical pedigree as a word has now been spelled out publicly here. Its place in history is as legitimate as 'Catholic' (which you have been pleased to endorse).

 

You now have less excuse than ever to sneer 'Protestant' down to 'prot', so please show some courtesy.

[Guest BC Voice of Reason]

That's even worse in a way. You never experienced the MOST HOLY EUCHARIST.........what a crime, not your fault. What are you protesting against???????

 

Here's what they're protesting about. Please quote each and every one of these with your always insightful rebuttal. That ought to keep you busy for awhile.

 

1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Poenitentiam agite, willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance.

 

2. This word cannot be understood to mean sacramental penance, i.e., confession and satisfaction, which is administered by the priests.

 

3. Yet it means not inward repentance only; nay, there is no inward repentance which does not outwardly work divers mortifications of the flesh.

 

4. The penalty [of sin], therefore, continues so long as hatred of self continues; for this is the true inward repentance, and continues until our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

 

5. The pope does not intend to remit, and cannot remit any penalties other than those which he has imposed either by his own authority or by that of the Canons.

 

6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring that it has been remitted by God and by assenting to God's remission; though, to be sure, he may grant remission in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in such cases were despised, the guilt would remain entirely unforgiven.

 

7. God remits guilt to no one whom He does not, at the same time, humble in all things and bring into subjection to His vicar, the priest.

 

8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to them, nothing should be imposed on the dying.

 

9. Therefore the Holy Spirit in the pope is kind to us, because in his decrees he always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.

 

10. Ignorant and wicked are the doings of those priests who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penances for purgatory.

 

11. This changing of the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory is quite evidently one of the tares that were sown while the bishops slept.

 

12. In former times the canonical penalties were imposed not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

 

13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties; they are already dead to canonical rules, and have a right to be released from them.

 

14. The imperfect health [of soul], that is to say, the imperfect love, of the dying brings with it, of necessity, great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater is the fear.

 

15. This fear and horror is sufficient of itself alone (to say nothing of other things) to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.

 

16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ as do despair, almost-despair, and the assurance of safety.

 

17. With souls in purgatory it seems necessary that horror should grow less and love increase.

 

18. It seems unproved, either by reason or Scripture, that they are outside the state of merit, that is to say, of increasing love.

 

19. Again, it seems unproved that they, or at least that all of them, are certain or assured of their own blessedness, though we may be quite certain of it.

 

20. Therefore by "full remission of all penalties" the pope means not actually "of all," but only of those imposed by himself.

 

21. Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error, who say that by the pope's indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved;

 

22. Whereas he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to the canons, they would have had to pay in this life.

 

23. If it is at all possible to grant to any one the remission of all penalties whatsoever, it is certain that this remission can be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to the very fewest.

 

24. It must needs be, therefore, that the greater part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and highsounding promise of release from penalty.

 

25. The power which the pope has, in a general way, over purgatory, is just like the power which any bishop or curate has, in a special way, within his own diocese or parish.

 

26. The pope does well when he grants remission to souls [in purgatory], not by the power of the keys (which he does not possess), but by way of intercession.

 

27. They preach man who say that so soon as the penny jingles into the money-box, the soul flies out [of purgatory].

 

28. It is certain that when the penny jingles into the money-box, gain and avarice can be increased, but the result of the intercession of the Church is in the power of God alone.

 

29. Who knows whether all the souls in purgatory wish to be bought out of it, as in the legend of Sts. Severinus and Paschal.

 

30. No one is sure that his own contrition is sincere; much less that he has attained full remission.

 

31. Rare as is the man that is truly penitent, so rare is also the man who truly buys indulgences, i.e., such men are most rare.

 

32. They will be condemned eternally, together with their teachers, who believe themselves sure of their salvation because they have letters of pardon.

 

33. Men must be on their guard against those who say that the pope's pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to Him;

 

34. For these "graces of pardon" concern only the penalties of sacramental satisfaction, and these are appointed by man.

 

35. They preach no Christian doctrine who teach that contrition is not necessary in those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessionalia.

 

36. Every truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without letters of pardon.

 

37. Every true Christian, whether living or dead, has part in all the blessings of Christ and the Church; and this is granted him by God, even without letters of pardon.

 

38. Nevertheless, the remission and participation [in the blessings of the Church] which are granted by the pope are in no way to be despised, for they are, as I have said, the declaration of divine remission.

 

39. It is most difficult, even for the very keenest theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the abundance of pardons and [the need of] true contrition.

 

40. True contrition seeks and loves penalties, but liberal pardons only relax penalties and cause them to be hated, or at least, furnish an occasion [for hating them].

 

41. Apostolic pardons are to be preached with caution, lest the people may falsely think them preferable to other good works of love.

 

42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend the buying of pardons to be compared in any way to works of mercy.

 

43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better work than buying pardons;

 

44. Because love grows by works of love, and man becomes better; but by pardons man does not grow better, only more free from penalty.

 

45. 45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a man in need, and passes him by, and gives [his money] for pardons, purchases not the indulgences of the pope, but the indignation of God.

 

46. Christians are to be taught that unless they have more than they need, they are bound to keep back what is necessary for their own families, and by no means to squander it on pardons.

 

47. Christians are to be taught that the buying of pardons is a matter of free will, and not of commandment.

 

48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting pardons, needs, and therefore desires, their devout prayer for him more than the money they bring.

 

49. Christians are to be taught that the pope's pardons are useful, if they do not put their trust in them; but altogether harmful, if through them they lose their fear of God.

 

50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the pardon-preachers, he would rather that St. Peter's church should go to ashes, than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh and bones of his sheep.

 

51. Christians are to be taught that it would be the pope's wish, as it is his duty, to give of his own money to very many of those from whom certain hawkers of pardons cajole money, even though the church of St. Peter might have to be sold.

 

52. The assurance of salvation by letters of pardon is vain, even though the commissary, nay, even though the pope himself, were to stake his soul upon it.

 

53. They are enemies of Christ and of the pope, who bid the Word of God be altogether silent in some Churches, in order that pardons may be preached in others.

 

54. Injury is done the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or a longer time is spent on pardons than on this Word.

 

55. It must be the intention of the pope that if pardons, which are a very small thing, are celebrated with one bell, with single processions and ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

 

56. The "treasures of the Church," out of which the pope. grants indulgences, are not sufficiently named or known among the people of Christ.

 

57. That they are not temporal treasures is certainly evident, for many of the vendors do not pour out such treasures so easily, but only gather them.

 

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the Saints, for even without the pope, these always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outward man.

 

59. St. Lawrence said that the treasures of the Church were the Church's poor, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.

 

60. Without rashness we say that the keys of the Church, given by Christ's merit, are that treasure;

 

61. For it is clear that for the remission of penalties and of reserved cases, the power of the pope is of itself sufficient.

 

62. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

 

63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last.

 

64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

 

65. Therefore the treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they formerly were wont to fish for men of riches.

 

66. The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish for the riches of men.

 

67. The indulgences which the preachers cry as the "greatest graces" are known to be truly such, in so far as they promote gain.

 

68. Yet they are in truth the very smallest graces compared with the grace of God and the piety of the Cross.

 

69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of apostolic pardons, with all reverence.

 

70. But still more are they bound to strain all their eyes and attend with all their ears, lest these men preach their own dreams instead of the commission of the pope.

 

71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed!

 

72. But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!

 

73. The pope justly thunders against those who, by any art, contrive the injury of the traffic in pardons.

 

74. But much more does he intend to thunder against those who use the pretext of pardons to contrive the injury of holy love and truth.

 

75. To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of God -- this is madness.

 

76. We say, on the contrary, that the papal pardons are not able to remove the very least of venial sins, so far as its guilt is concerned.

 

77. It is said that even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could not bestow greater graces; this is blasphemy against St. Peter and against the pope.

 

78. We say, on the contrary, that even the present pope, and any pope at all, has greater graces at his disposal; to wit, the Gospel, powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written in I. Corinthians xii.

 

79. To say that the cross, emblazoned with the papal arms, which is set up [by the preachers of indulgences], is of equal worth with the Cross of Christ, is blasphemy.

 

80. The bishops, curates and theologians who allow such talk to be spread among the people, will have an account to render.

 

81. This unbridled preaching of pardons makes it no easy matter, even for learned men, to rescue the reverence due to the pope from slander, or even from the shrewd questionings of the laity.

 

82. To wit: -- "Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial."

 

83. Again: -- "Why are mortuary and anniversary masses for the dead continued, and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded on their behalf, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?"

 

84. Again: -- "What is this new piety of God and the pope, that for money they allow a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God, and do not rather, because of that pious and beloved soul's own need, free it for pure love's sake?"

 

85. Again: -- "Why are the penitential canons long since in actual fact and through disuse abrogated and dead, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences, as though they were still alive and in force?"

 

86. Again: -- "Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?"

 

87. Again: -- "What is it that the pope remits, and what participation does he grant to those who, by perfect contrition, have a right to full remission and participation?"

 

88. Again: -- "What greater blessing could come to the Church than if the pope were to do a hundred times a day what he now does once, and bestow on every believer these remissions and participations?"

 

89. "Since the pope, by his pardons, seeks the salvation of souls rather than money, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons granted heretofore, since these have equal efficacy?"

 

90. To repress these arguments and scruples of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the Church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christians unhappy.

 

91. If, therefore, pardons were preached according to the spirit and mind of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved; nay, they would not exist.

 

92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Peace, peace," and there is no peace!

 

93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Cross, cross," and there is no cross!

 

94. Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hell;

 

95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven rather through many tribulations, than through the assurance of peace.

[A Faithful Catholic]

However I find your question reflects poorly on you. Coming from someone who is scornful and insulting to Protestants, are we now to gather that you have no need to understand anything in order to hate it?

 

First of all, it was a rhetorical question. Second, I UNDERSTAND the rebellion completely. I don't hate the people, I hate false teachings and errors. I have said this a ZILLION times.

 

To dispel your ignorance, if the question were addressed by anyone to me I could enlighten them as follows:

 

I am no where near ignorant.

 

The word Protestant comes from the Latin 'protestatio', meaning 'declaration'. It refers to the letter of protestation by Lutheran princes against the decision of the Diet of Speyer in 1529, which reaffirmed the edict of the Diet of Worms against the Reformation. That was its origin and remains the case.

 

Since then, 'Protestantism' has become used in additional senses, including reference to Western Christianity that is not subject to Papal authority. Put simply, Protestantism remains a religious protest against the traditional Roman Catholic Church, rejecting both it and Eastern Orthodoxy.

 

A TOTAL rejection of ALL ancient Christianity. The "English Accident" is always treated different then the rest.....Henry VIII hated all the other heretics and burned their writings.

 

Was Jesus without His Church for 15 centuries? Was His Church in ERROR for 15 centuries and everyone went to hell until Luther and his gang showed up? I don't think so.

 

'A Faithful Catholic', I'm surprised to learn that you actually had to ask what a Protestant is protesting against. Surely that exposes all your sneering at it as shooting in the dark. How many more of your swaggering affronts will likewise turn out to be ignorant bluff?

 

It was a rhetorical question.

'Protestant's' historical pedigree as a word has now been spelled out publicly here. Its place in history is as legitimate as 'Catholic' (which you have been pleased to endorse).

 

It came out of the REBELLION. The numerous rebellious sects are not true "churches" but ecclesial communities.

 

I know what the rebellion was all about.

 

You now have less excuse than ever to sneer 'Protestant' down to 'prot', so please show some courtesy.

 

I know exactly what the rebellion was and I study it. The rebellious sects have NOTHING to do with ANY of the Churches (Apostolic Sees) that were founded on the Apostles, by Christ Himself. Nothing at all to do with Ancient Christianity. They simply preach a new gospel. Their whole (most of them) foundation is SOLA SCRIPTURA and PRIVATE INTERPRETATION of scripture that was NEVER practiced, nor believed in, for 15 centuries. Hence, major chaos in doctrines amongst the rebellious, ecclesial communities. They split and divide when they can't agree on anything. At least 20,000 different sects, to put it VERY conservatively.

[A Faithful Catholic]

Here's what they're protesting about.

 

I know what the 95 are. The abuses where corrected. However, Luther had no business changing doctrine nor dogma, because these come from God. He ATTACKED the FOUNDATION of ALL of Christianity with his made up innovations. The Council of Trent dealt with the rebellion pretty well. Luther's new doctrines were NEVER believed in Ancient Christianity and therefore, heretical. Plus, he had no authority to do what he did.

[Jon]

I don't hate the people, I hate false teachings and errors.

Pleased to learn that. In that case you won't mind referring to them by their correct name, will you.

 

I am no where near ignorant.

Then prove it. Show you understand that the benefit of courtesy outweighs the self-indulgence of spiteful "shorthand".

 

A TOTAL rejection of ALL ancient Christianity. The "English Accident" is always treated different then the rest.....Henry VIII hated all the other heretics and burned their writings.

Of course! That's why Protestant Bibles are only one page thick! Everyone knows that.

 

It was a rhetorical question.

Best you leave rhetorical questions to those who know what a rhetorical question is.

 

It came out of the REBELLION.

Who cares what it came out of?? Protestantism is historical fact, as is the Protest that it names. Historical events have Historical names, whether 'A Faithful Catholic' approves or not.

 

I know what the rebellion was all about.

 

I know exactly what the rebellion was and I study it. The rebellious sects have NOTHING to do with ANY of the Churches (Apostolic Sees) that were founded on the Apostles, by Christ Himself. Nothing at all to do with Ancient Christianity. They simply preach a new gospel. Their whole (most of them) foundation is SOLA SCRIPTURA and PRIVATE INTERPRETATION of scripture that was NEVER practiced, nor believed in, for 15 centuries. Hence, major chaos in doctrines amongst the rebellious, ecclesial communities. They split and divide when they can't agree on anything. At least 20,000 different sects, to put it VERY conservatively.

TOTALLY irrelevant! Your ramblings completely sidestep what I was saying (repeated below) about courtesy:

 

'Protestant's' historical pedigree as a word has now been spelled out publicly here. Its place in history is as legitimate as 'Catholic' (which you have been pleased to endorse). You now have less excuse than ever to sneer 'Protestant' down to 'prot', so please show some courtesy.

[Guest Knight of Darkness]

I am no where near ignorant.

 

Agreed, you're just crazy.

 

[Guest Guest]

AFC as he sees himself:

 

AFC as normal human beings see him:

 

 

 

Thank you! Thank you! You have no idea how much this made me laugh!!!!!

[A Faithful Catholic]

Pleased to learn that. In that case you won't mind referring to them by their correct name, will you.

Let's get the record straight: I don't hate one person. I may dislike some people's actions, but I don't hate them. I don't hate those that belong to the ecclesial community. I just do not like the their doctrines that have no foundation anywhere in Christianity. That's all. Those that have been water baptized in the proper form are, IN FACT, related to the Catholic Church, albeit IMPERFECTLY, because by Christ's will, He gave the great sacrament of BAPTISM to the Church He founded, the Catholic Church and NONE other.

 

Side note:

 

The Catholic Church has ruled that most baptisms outside of the CC are VALID if done in the proper form. I believe the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormon baptisms are not valid, if memory serves me correctly. Baptism is SO IMPORTANT to salvation, because Christ, by His own will, attached salvation to it. The CC has loosened the restrictions on it for the entire Christian Community, in terms of validity, many moons ago.

 

Then prove it. Show you understand that the benefit of courtesy outweighs the self-indulgence of spiteful "shorthand".

 

Ok. The Rebellion. How's that?

 

Of course! That's why Protestant Bibles are only one page thick! Everyone knows that.

 

That made me HOWL! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Best you leave rhetorical questions to those who know what a rhetorical question is.

 

I certainly do know what one is. Not every rebellious "church" believes in LUTHER. Luther just kicked off all of the shenanigans. The "English Accident" did not believe in Luther. So, those 95 "complaints" only are relative to those that back Luther.

Who cares what it came out of?? Protestantism is historical fact, as is the Protest that it names. Historical events have Historical names, whether 'A Faithful Catholic' approves or not.

 

The rebels protested the Ancient Christian Church and they started their own version with doctrines FOREIGN to the teachings of the Apostles and Christ! That's the big shame of it all. I hate to think of how many souls those error filled doctrines have sent to hell.....It gives me the shudders.

 

TOTALLY irrelevant! Your ramblings completely sidestep what I was saying (repeated below) about courtesy:

 

'Protestant's' historical pedigree as a word has now been spelled out publicly here. Its place in history is as legitimate as 'Catholic' (which you have been pleased to endorse). You now have less excuse than ever to sneer 'Protestant' down to 'prot', so please show some courtesy.

 

Does the word "rebel" sound better? The word "reformation" is erroneous for sure because NOTHING was "reformed"

[Guest Guest]

AFC has been pummeled! HAHAHAHAHAA!

 

The responses on this thread to a foolish catholic have really shown him/her for the arrogant, narrow-minded, bigoted, SINFUL person he/she/it really is!

 

Thanks to all of you who spoke so eloquently and INTELLIGENTLY against the rants of someone who is clearly nuts!

[A Faithful Catholic]

AFC has been pummeled! HAHAHAHAHAA!

 

I have never been pummeled in terms of Christianity. Not once, never.

 

The responses on this thread to a foolish catholic have really shown him/her for the arrogant, narrow-minded, bigoted, SINFUL person he/she/it really is!

 

Funny, you can't back any of that up....By the way we are ALL sinners...EVEN YOU! I go to confession EVERY WEEK. Do you?

 

It has been said that even the most righteous man falls SEVEN times per day...

 

Thanks to all of you who spoke so eloquently and INTELLIGENTLY against the rants of someone who is clearly nuts!

 

More like INTELLIGENT when it certainly comes to Christianity.

 

Next? I'm getting bored very quickly.

[Guest Guest]

I have never been pummeled in terms of Christianity. Not once, never.

 

 

 

Funny, you can't back any of that up....By the way we are ALL sinners...EVEN YOU! I go to confession EVERY WEEK. Do you?

 

It has been said that even the most righteous man falls SEVEN times per day...

 

 

 

More like INTELLIGENT when it certainly comes to Christianity.

 

Next? I'm getting bored very quickly.

 

 

I notice every time you get cornered, you suddenly state you are getting "bored." :lol: