Archbishop Chaput: I can’t vote for pro-abortion Obama

posted at 10:41 am on September 18, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Whither the Catholic vote in this election?  Late last week, a poll showed Obama ahead by eight among Catholic registered voters (to which I’ve lost the link), although the data didn’t come from one of the regular national pollsters such as Pew, Gallup, or Rasmussen.  With Abortion-Palooza in Charlotte still ringing in the ear and the provocative HHS contraception mandate threatening religious liberty — as well as Paul Ryan’s supposedly apostate budget in the mix — the Catholic vote may end up being critical to the outcome, or at least a bellwether of it.

National Catholic Reporter asked Archbishop Charles Chaput about his own personal take on the election, Barack Obama’s support for abortion, and the Ryan budget, and Chaput declined the opportunity to tell his flock how to vote.  However, he wasn’t shy about sharing his own personal view on the presidential election, and strongly rebutting the argument that there is an equivalence between abortion and cuts to government spending (via LifeNews):

We’re speaking on the night Barack Obama is delivering his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention. Let me ask flat-out: Do you believe a Catholic in good faith can vote for Obama?
I can only speak in terms of my own personal views. I certainly can’t vote for somebody who’s either pro-choice or pro-abortion.

I’m not a Republican and I’m not a Democrat. I’m registered as an independent, because I don’t think the church should be identified with one party or another. As an individual and voter I have deep personal concerns about any party that supports changing the definition of marriage, supports abortion in all circumstances, wants to restrict the traditional understanding of religious freedom. Those kinds of issues cause me a great deal of uneasiness.

What about the wing of the church that says a party that supports the Ryan budget also ought to cause concern?
Jesus tells us very clearly that if we don’t help the poor, we’re going to go to hell. Period. There’s just no doubt about it. That has to be a foundational concern of Catholics and of all Christians. But Jesus didn’t say the government has to take care of them, or that we have to pay taxes to take care of them. Those are prudential judgments. Anybody who would condemn someone because of their position on taxes is making a leap that I can’t make as a Catholic. … You can’t say that somebody’s not Christian because they want to limit taxation. Again, I’m speaking only for myself, but I think that’s a legitimate position. It may not be the correct one, but it’s certainly a legitimate Catholic position; and to say that it’s somehow intrinsically evil like abortion doesn’t make any sense at all.

That said, do you find the Ryan budget troubling?
The Ryan budget isn’t the budget I would write. I think he’s trying to deal with the same issue in the government I’m dealing with here locally, which is spending more than we bring in. I admire the courage of anyone who’s actually trying to solve the problems rather than paper over them. I think a vigorous debate about the issues, rather than the personalities, is the way through this problem. It’s immoral for us to continue to spend money we don’t have. I think that those persons who don’t want to deal with the issue are, in some ways, doing wrong by putting it off for their own political protection or the protection of their party.

Why immoral?  We’re not spending our own money.  We’re spending our grandchildren’s money.  One can make an argument that this represents theft, or at least taxation without representation:

Chaput gives one of the clearest and easily-digestible answers on the difference for Catholics on budgets and abortions.  One is in the realm of prudential judgments, while the other is intrinsically evil.  That doesn’t mean that Catholics have to like Ryan’s budget, but it does mean that they shouldn’t use it as an excuse to support pro-abortion candidates, especially after the week-long celebration of the Democratic Party sacrament in Charlotte earlier this month.

Update: I had the link right, but the interview was with the National Catholic Reporter, not the National Catholic Register.  Thanks to Thomas L. McDonald of both Patheos and National Catholic Register for the correction, as well as a good laugh:

I’ve fixed it above.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 12:30 PM

I used to hate religious debate, but now, I’d rather talk to a reasonable Protestant about religion than a liberal about anything! Ü

SailorMark on September 18, 2012 at 12:36 PM

This why Chaput was sent to Philadelphia. He is going to be outspoken on these issues. There are a huge number of Catholics in eastern Pennsylvania that will listen.

rockmom on September 18, 2012 at 10:55 AM

I’d be very curious to see what the clergy at St Monica’s and Our Lady of Assumption say during their homilies on Sundays from here on out…

JohnGalt23 on September 18, 2012 at 12:37 PM

As one who hasn’t picked up a Bible since about 1975 in my Bible study courses on both the Old and New Testaments in college, I really appreciate this post, and especially all the great commenters on this thread who’ve contributed to my understanding.

The Catholic Church (and especially, my Episcopal church) has really disappointed me over the years in taking their liberal social justice positions and in their practically unwavering support for pro-abortion politicians. (My first clue was when the Episcopals removed “Onward Christian Soldiers” from our liturgy back in the late ’60′s.)

As I understand it, liberal dogma is almost completely at odds with what I understood the Bible to be saying. This political hypocrisy in the name of “biblically-justified” social justice, really is the major reason I left the Episcopal Church. (bonus: Bishop Spong, anybody?)

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM

SailorMark on September 18, 2012 at 12:28 PM

I think it helps to view salvation as three stages.

First is initial salvation. This is when we believe (faith alone) in Jesus Christ.

Our position before God, the way the Father sees us, is perfection. God imputes His righteousnees to us, It is a forensic action.

Second is the process of sanctification. This is where James comes in. If we have been through “stage one” then it will be evidenced in our righteous deeds.

Third is glorification when we enter the presence of God. “Stages” one and two become one and we are eternaly holy with God.

Going to step two without having first gone through step one profits nothing.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 12:40 PM

I used to hate religious debate, but now, I’d rather talk to a reasonable Protestant about religion than a liberal about anything! Ü

SailorMark on September 18, 2012 at 12:36 PM

I enjoy debate. I hate to argue.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM

The “Protestant” Bible is contained within the “Catholic” Bible.

If what is said in the Catholic additions to the Bible conflict with
the rest of the Bible then Houston Rome, we have a problem.

The Catholic Magisterium does indeed claim authority over the Bible.

That does not entertain me; it saddens me.

Your shrug puzzles me. If this is not important to you, why did you respond. This is very serious business.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Your ignorance and insecurity make me shrug.

There are no Catholic Additions to the Bible…only later protestant subtractions.

Catholics comprised and edited the bible long before King James was born let alone Luther or Calvin.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 12:45 PM

I enjoy debate. I hate to argue.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Of course, I’m not above rattling some cages once in a while.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Second is the process of sanctification. This is where James comes in. If we have been through “stage one” then it will be evidenced in our righteous deeds.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Then you agree, that it is through faith and works that we are saved?

SailorMark on September 18, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Is this guys name really “Kaput”?

paulsur on September 18, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Chaput is pronounced “shaapoo”.

Lily on September 18, 2012 at 12:46 PM

This political hypocrisy in the name of “biblically-justified” social justice, really is the major reason I left the Episcopal Church.

I too left the Episcopal Church USA for the same reasons and now am a member of the Episcopal Missionary Church, a conservative Anglican splinter church.

http://www.emchome.org/article/2/about-us

We do not have many parishes, but there are other similar-minded Anglican parishes out there. You might look for one in your area.

Missy on September 18, 2012 at 12:46 PM

The Catholic Church (and especially, my Episcopal church) has really disappointed me over the years in taking their liberal social justice positions and in their practically unwavering support for pro-abortion politicians.

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM

I really believe this is starting to turn around.

SailorMark on September 18, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Your ignorance and insecurity make me shrug.

There are no Catholic Additions to the Bible…only later protestant subtractions.

Catholics comprised and edited the bible long before King James was born let alone Luther or Calvin.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Ok.

If the Catholic Bible is not coherent in what it says, the you have a problem.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 12:47 PM

As I understand it, liberal dogma is almost completely at odds with what I understood the Bible to be saying. This political hypocrisy in the name of “biblically-justified” social justice, really is the major reason I left the Episcopal Church. (bonus: Bishop Spong, anybody?)

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Your understanding is right on the money. When I was in college in the 80s I saw the first theological attempts to justify homosexual behavior. I thought to myself,”This can’t be possible. This is irrational. Church teaching and the Bible may be vague or murky in spots but on this issue it is clear as crystal: homosexual activity is condemned. Unequivocally.” Little did I know that it was just the beginning. Spong went so far as to deny the Resurrection of Jesus, the sine qua non of Christian doctrine, the source dogma of faith, and he just went on publishing books and giving lectures. And Christians listened and nodded their heads. I came to appreciate the reality and the power of heresy.

Same thing is happening with the Constitution of the U.S. Listen to Dr. Utopia and Holder, Hillary, Rice, and despair.

spiritof61 on September 18, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Thanks for putting your profound ignorance on display. We have some nice parting gifts.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 12:22 PM

You may not like the way I put things but what I said is consistent with RCC teaching. Can’t keep from wondering what those parting gifts might be.

Annar on September 18, 2012 at 12:51 PM

The Catholic Church (and especially, my Episcopal church) has really disappointed me over the years in taking their liberal social justice positions and in their practically unwavering support for pro-abortion politicians.

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Whoa! Hold on a second. When has the Catholic Church ever offered unwavering support for pro-abortion politicians? I’m talking about as the Church, not the opinions of some of its misguided members.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Whoa! Hold on a second. When has the Catholic Church ever offered unwavering support for pro-abortion politicians? I’m talking about as the Church, not the opinions of some of its misguided members.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Ever heard of Nanzi Pelosi? She should have been excommunicated YEARS AGO. Silence of the Catholic Church regarding such individuals equals complicity.

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Your ignorance and insecurity make me shrug.

There are no Catholic Additions to the Bible…only later protestant subtractions.

Catholics comprised and edited the bible long before King James was born let alone Luther or Calvin.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Ok.

If the Catholic Bible is not coherent in what it says, the you have a problem.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 12:47 PM

I’d suggest more study before you engage in apologetics.

The Catholic bible is coherent. (eyes rolling here)

Next you’ll tell me Purgatory isn’t in the bible and is just a pagan invention borrowed from the Greeks.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Then you agree, that it is through faith and works that we are saved?

SailorMark on September 18, 2012 at 12:45 PM

We must be careful. One can, like the thief on the cross, be saved and not have any works.

But if a person claims saving faith in Jesus and has not works, he/she is likely not saved.

Paul writes to the Phillipians, “Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling.”

That working out is the process of sanctification, setting us apart from the world. And, yes, it is part of salvation, a growing to be more like God.

But all the good, or bad, works will not effect our standing before God. That standing is perfection.

That is our essence before God. Our experience, of course, is that we have an infinite amount of growing, saving, if you will, to go.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 12:59 PM

The Catholic Church (and especially, my Episcopal church) has really disappointed me over the years in taking their liberal social justice positions and in their practically unwavering support for pro-abortion politicians.

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Whoa! Hold on a second. When has the Catholic Church ever offered unwavering support for pro-abortion politicians? I’m talking about as the Church, not the opinions of some of its misguided members.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 12:52 PM

You’re right, the Church never has. I took him to mean the perception the last twenty years or so that the Church has become watered down and a little too tolerant of things. I see a swing back the other way lately, though.

SailorMark on September 18, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Next you’ll tell me Purgatory isn’t in the bible and is just a pagan invention borrowed from the Greeks.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Heh. It’s not in my Bible.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Thanks for putting your profound ignorance on display. We have some nice parting gifts.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 12:22 PM

You may not like the way I put things but what I said is consistent with RCC teaching. Can’t keep from wondering what those parting gifts might be.

Annar on September 18, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Confusing political factions within the church with catholic teaching was your first mistake.

Social Justice is a principal that was hijacked and distorted by liberal factions within the church particularly in South America…Pope Benedict as Cardinal Ratzinger fought against it as a heresy for years under Pope John Paul II.
As Pope he is now fighting against heresies started under Vatican II.

Your parting gifts would be a saint’s prayer card so that you could ask that Saint to pray for your endangered immortal soul.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 1:06 PM

If more than faith is necessary, then Jesus Christ was made a liar – when he told his fellow crucified that, “To-day, shalt thou be with me in paradise.” [Luke 23:43]. His fellow crucified had no time to perform works. He was saved, because he had faith.

Moreover, how many times did Jesus say that “faith,” not “faith and works,” had saved a person? He didn’t say, “your faith and your works have saved you.” If works lead to salvation, then we could bypass the sacrifice of Jesus, and get to heaven on our own merit. That, of course, is ludicrous. As

davidk

has indicated, works are simply an indicator of, and a logical extension to, faith.

The following are just a few examples:

Matthew 9:2 -

And, behold, they brought to him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed: and Jesus seeing their faith said unto the sick of the palsy; Son, be of good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee.

Matthew 9:22 -

But Jesus turned him about, and when he saw her, he said, Daughter, be of good comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole. And the woman was made whole from that hour.

Matthew 15:28 -

Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.

Mark 2:5 -

When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.

Luke 7:50 -

And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.

davidk

You’ve done an exceptional job in explanation. Well done.

OhEssYouCowboys on September 18, 2012 at 1:07 PM

If the Catholic Bible is not coherent in what it says, the you have a problem.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Actually, the good Archbishop Chaput, himself, while preaching the homily at confirmation mass at my parish said on the question of faith vs. works “It’s not a matter of either or, it is a matter of both, like two blades of a pair of scissors.”

If you don’t have faith, then it doesn’t matter what kind of works you do. Atheists can do good works, but they have no faith. And how can you say you have faith if you do not care for the weak and the poor to the best of your ability? Jesus himself said, “Not every one that says unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” Matthew 7:21

Lily on September 18, 2012 at 1:07 PM

But all the good, or bad, works will not effect our standing before God. That standing is perfection.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 12:59 PM

I’m sorry. I believe you can blow salvation, just as you can merit it through works and faith.

SailorMark on September 18, 2012 at 1:08 PM

You may not like the way I put things but what I said is consistent with RCC teaching.

Annar on September 18, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Wrong, what you said displays a profound ignorance of the teaching of the Catholic Church.

A large percentage of Catholics do not practice, or may not even believe, what their cult teaches.

Just calling the Catholic Church a “cult” immediately exhibits your ignorance and animosity. A “Catholic” who does not believe in the teachings of the Catholic Church is, ipso facto, not a Catholic.

They’ll pull the pro abortion D lever in the voting box and then get instant forgiveness in the confessional box later.

As has been pointed out previously, excercising one’s right to vote is not a sin and does not require confession, let alone absolution. (Unless one is a Catholic elected official who casts a vote legalizing or making abortion easier to obtain, in which case you just excommunicated yourself).

If what Rome teaches were true Al Capone will probably be partying with the angels while some poor slob who died in a car accident after some out of wedlock carnal activities will roast forever in hell.

Again, your ignorance shines through here. Certainly Al Capone, or even Charles Manson or Adolf Hitler can enter heaven, provided that they have accepted jesus Christ as their savior, made a true and genuine confession and received absolution. That’s precisely why Christ died for us. Likewise, the “slob” who has sinned can also enter heaven. The rules are the same for everyone.

Sane people don’t really believe such nonsense.

This one was just a cheap and ignorant insult. No comment.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 1:10 PM

Next you’ll tell me Purgatory isn’t in the bible and is just a pagan invention borrowed from the Greeks.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Heh. It’s not in my Bible.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Well The book of Maccabees isn’t in the Jewish Tanakh either although they still celebrate the holiday Hanukkah.

Traditions are understood and practiced long before they are recorded in writing.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Ever heard of Nanzi Pelosi? She should have been excommunicated YEARS AGO. Silence of the Catholic Church regarding such individuals equals complicity.

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Nancy Pelosi is NOT the Catholic Church. There is absolutely no need for the Catholic Church to excommunicate her since she already excommunicated herself latae sententiae a long time ago. There is absolutely no further action required by the Church.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 1:15 PM

On the Sola Fide question of Justification, check out the Pope’s 2008 statement–he is a theologian of high standing. Both Protestant and Catholic are essentially saying the same thing.

For this reason Luther’s phrase: “faith alone” is true, if it is not opposed to faith in charity, in love. Faith is looking at Christ, entrusting oneself to Christ, being united to Christ, conformed to Christ, to his life. And the form, the life of Christ, is love; hence to believe is to conform to Christ and to enter into his love. So it is that in the Letter to the Galatians in which he primarily developed his teaching on justification St Paul speaks of faith that works through love (cf. Gal 5: 14).

Paul knows that in the twofold love of God and neighbour the whole of the Law is present and carried out. Thus in communion with Christ, in a faith that creates charity, the entire Law is fulfilled. We become just by entering into communion with Christ who is Love. We shall see the same thing in the Gospel next Sunday, the Solemnity of Christ the King. It is the Gospel of the judge whose sole criterion is love. What he asks is only this: Did you visit me when I was sick? When I was in prison? Did you give me food to eat when I was hungry, did you clothe me when I was naked? And thus justice is decided in charity. Thus, at the end of this Gospel we can almost say: love alone, charity alone. But there is no contradiction between this Gospel and St Paul. It is the same vision, according to which communion with Christ, faith in Christ, creates charity. And charity is the fulfilment of communion with Christ. Thus, we are just by being united with him and in no other way.

spiritof61 on September 18, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Actually, the good Archbishop Chaput, himself, while preaching the homily at confirmation mass at my parish said on the question of faith vs. works “It’s not a matter of either or, it is a matter of both, like two blades of a pair of scissors.”

If you don’t have faith, then it doesn’t matter what kind of works you do. Atheists can do good works, but they have no faith. And how can you say you have faith if you do not care for the weak and the poor to the best of your ability? Jesus himself said, “Not every one that says unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” Matthew 7:21

Lily on September 18, 2012 at 1:07 PM

The either or stance is one of the protestant rhetorical fallacies used to justify their schism.

The schism was politically motivated not theologically motivated…It was a giant money & land grab.

The theological argument didn’t hold up then or now because it depends on historical revisionism & distortion to manipulate the ignorant.

*shrug*

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Ed, not to beat up on my non-Protestant brethren, but I’ve warned them for DECADES about the danger of supporting Liberals. Unfortunately, I’ve also warned many of Protestant brothers and sisters of the same thing. I’m tired of talking. I appreciate the archbishops sentiments, but frankly I think it’s too little too late.

oldleprechaun on September 18, 2012 at 1:22 PM

To me, it just doesn’t make sense that you could sit there and say “I believe” and expect that to be enough, without trying every day to live and do God’s will. I want to know why Protestants think otherwise.

SailorMark on September 18, 2012 at 12:24 PM

That is what James is addressing. i.e., one can’t just mouth the words. If one has faith, then one will do good works, not out of obligation, but out of gratitude for what has been done for us. Scriptures clearly teach that our salvation is through Christ alone, not our works. Works are outward evidence of the faith within. One of the elements of the Catholic faith is that one can do good works to atone for sins one has committed. That takes away from the atoning work that Christ did for us; we are not rely on our works for our salvation, but what Christ has done for us. The idea that we can make up for a sin we have committed by doing something good is the equivalent of getting stopped for doing 65 in a 55 zone and telling the officer that you will atone for it by doing the next 20 miles at 45 in that 55 zone. The good works you do are what is expected of you, they can’t atone for what you have done that was wrong.

Isaiah 64:6
All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away.

Even our good works have some element of sin in them. The only way they are acceptable to God is because he sees us as his own through Christ.

AZfederalist on September 18, 2012 at 1:24 PM

I’m sorry. I believe you can blow salvation, just as you can merit it through works and faith.

SailorMark on September 18, 2012 at 1:08 PM

I think you can reject your salvation. But you cannot effect your salvation by anything you do, so you cannot lose your salvation by anything you do, which is to say, anything you don’t do.

Otherwise, your salvation is based on works.

It was said of the Messiah that a “smoldering wick He will not quench and a bruised reed He will not break.”

I belive that a Christian can be mired in sin, bound up by an addiction, and still his/her standing before God is perfection.

The wages of sin is death. If you don’t live in accordance with God’s principles: in your marraige, finances, sexuality, dietary that area will die. Sometimes slowly; somtimes quickly.

God through His Holy Spirit will correct and discipline you to do right. If you ignore those promptindgs, eventually God, in judgement will further harden your heart (cf, Pharoah) and you could get to the point where you reject the salvation you once had.

Some say God will take you out before you get to that point. I hope so.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 1:25 PM

The same old Catholic don’t vote dem because they’re pro choice guilt trip bullsh*t resurfaces every 4 years.

Yawn.

Dave Rywall on September 18, 2012 at 1:26 PM

OhEssYouCowboys on September 18, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Thank you.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 1:27 PM

We must be careful. One can, like the thief on the cross, be saved and not have any works.

But if a person claims saving faith in Jesus and has not works, he/she is likely not saved.

Paul writes to the Phillipians, “Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling.”

That working out is the process of sanctification, setting us apart from the world. And, yes, it is part of salvation, a growing to be more like God.

But all the good, or bad, works will not effect our standing before God. That standing is perfection.

That is our essence before God. Our experience, of course, is that we have an infinite amount of growing, saving, if you will, to go.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Several times in this thread, Catholics have quoted a passage from a Scripture reading that was used this past weekend at our Sunday Mass. I have yet to see anyone on the “Protestant side” of the debate address it. Granted, this is a long thread and I may have missed it. But you so intelligently and eloquently express the opposite point of view (from my own Catholic point of view, that is), that I would be curious to get your response.

The relevant passage comes from James 2:14-18, which states:

What good is it, my brothers and sisters,
if someone says he has faith but does not have works?
Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister has nothing to wear
and has no food for the day,
and one of you says to them,
“Go in peace, keep warm, and eat well, ”
but you do not give them the necessities of the body,
what good is it?
So also faith of itself,
if it does not have works, is dead.

That seems to state, pretty clearly, that faith without works is not sufficient for salvation.

Shump on September 18, 2012 at 1:27 PM

spiritof61 on September 18, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Sola scriptura is a rhetorical devise deigned to undermine the teaching authority of the Bishop of Rome (Apostolic successor to St. Peter).

It wasn’t the first political schism costumed in theological gloss…

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 1:30 PM

If you don’t have faith, then it doesn’t matter what kind of works you do. Atheists can do good works, but they have no faith. And how can you say you have faith if you do not care for the weak and the poor to the best of your ability? Jesus himself said, “Not every one that says unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” Matthew 7:21

Lily on September 18, 2012 at 1:07 PM

I agree with what is said there.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 1:31 PM

The same old Catholic don’t vote dem because they’re pro choice guilt trip bullsh*t resurfaces every 4 years.

Yawn.

Dave Rywall on September 18, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Yeah, that same thousands of years old belief in the sanctity of all human life from conception to natural death just keeps on going. Just really inconveniences the pro-death folks don’t it? Makes it hard to defend your position.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 1:32 PM

Yeah, that same thousands of years old belief in the sanctity of all human life from conception to natural death just keeps on going. Just really inconveniences the pro-death folks don’t it? Makes it hard to defend your position.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 1:32 PM
———-
Woooooosh. Watch out. Low flying jet.

Dave Rywall on September 18, 2012 at 1:34 PM

So, what’s changed since 2008? Obamas stance on abortion hasnt and I dont think the Christian religion has either.

So whats the point of this article?

Politricks on September 18, 2012 at 1:35 PM

That seems to state, pretty clearly, that faith without works is not sufficient for salvation.

Shump on September 18, 2012 at 1:27 PM

You quote James, I’ll quote Jesus [again]:

Matthew 9:2 -

And, behold, they brought to him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed: and Jesus seeing their faith said unto the sick of the palsy; Son, be of good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee.

Matthew 9:22 -

But Jesus turned him about, and when he saw her, he said, Daughter, be of good comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole. And the woman was made whole from that hour.

Matthew 15:28 -

Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.

Mark 2:5 -

When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.

Luke 7:50 -

And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.

OhEssYouCowboys on September 18, 2012 at 1:36 PM

Woooooosh. Watch out. Low flying jet.

Dave Rywall on September 18, 2012 at 1:34 PM

You’re funny!

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 1:10 PM

Just calling the Catholic Church a “cult” immediately exhibits your ignorance and animosity. A “Catholic” who does not believe in the teachings of the Catholic Church is, ipso facto, not a Catholic.

Not quite. Otherwise ‘confession, penitence and forgiveness’ would be vacuous concepts. Nor would the process of excommunication be needed. Surely when high level Dhimmicrats do the communion thing just to promote every kind of abortion the next day they must either feel that what they do is not sinful, or a simple confession will erase their ‘sin,’ or are just plain hypocrites.

Again, your ignorance shines through here. Certainly Al Capone, or even Charles Manson or Adolf Hitler can enter heaven, provided that they have accepted jesus Christ as their savior, made a true and genuine confession and received absolution. That’s precisely why Christ died for us. Likewise, the “slob” who has sinned can also enter heaven. The rules are the same for everyone.

The poor ‘slob’ died in the state of mortal sin so hell would be his abode. Who knows where Mary Jo would end up under this scheme but the murdering Lion of the Senate Kennedy will paling around with Al Capone since they both got to confess and get their last rites.

People ‘believe’ things at different levels and tend to interpret the writings and teachings as they see fit. For example, Christians condemn homosexuality but few indeed would follow up with the punishment prescribed in Leviticus.

Annar on September 18, 2012 at 1:40 PM

spiritof61 on September 18, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Sola scriptura is a rhetorical device designed to undermine the teaching authority of the Bishop of Rome (Apostolic successor to St. Peter).

It wasn’t the first political schism costumed in theological gloss…

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 1:30 PM

I need a new keyboard…scuse’

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 1:40 PM

It always cracks me up how any Religious debate always dissolves into people shouting what THEY think Jesus/God WANTS.

I’m of the belief that if their is a creator then he certainly doesnt need a lowly human to advance his message nor his will.

But humans in all our glory feel that we are so special that a God of countless galaxies, would care about the every day activity of less then .0000000000000000000001 of his creations.

When you sit back and think about how insignifigant you are in the giant scheme of things, it makes the likihood of a creator who actually “watches over you” seem less and less likely.

But to each their own.

Politricks on September 18, 2012 at 1:41 PM

OhEssYouCowboys on September 18, 2012 at 1:36 PM

So are you saying that people are sick because they don’t have faith?

Or are you saying that these people Jesus talks about were free to go off an do whatever they wish without doing the will of the Father since they have been saved?

Lily on September 18, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Catholics and Protestants have and use different bibles…Books were edited out of the newer Protestant Bibles.

This is not strictly true. If it were, the Lutheran church would have removed the Epistle of James from the Canon. The books to which you refer are the Apocrypha that are a separate class of books from the universally acknowledged canon of the 66 books of the Bible (39 Old Testament, 27 New Testament). Both Catholic and Protestant theologians agree that the Apocrypha are not divinely inspired as are the books in the Canon.

For Catholics Tradition holds equal weight to scripture…always has and always will.

The tradition of practicing Faith & Works goes back to apostolic times & is foundational to the Catholic Church.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 12:13 PM

This is one of the issues with the Catholic theology; it actually places tradition above the Word of God. That should be of concern, there are warnings about adding to, or taking away from what is written in scripture:

Revelation 22:18
I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this scroll.

What God says about His Word:

That tradition is not a basis for theology should be clear from Christ’s words when speaking to the Scribes and Pharisees, who had, over the past centuries built up a pretty solid tradition of their own. The original intent of their tradition was actually honorable; because they did not want to sin, they built fences around the Law and extended the Law of Moses to add new laws such that by following those laws, they would not break God’s laws. Christ brought back the fact that the only norm and rule for our lives is the scripture (God’s word, not man’s traditions):

John 5:39
You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me,

That the scripture should be our measure for how we live:

2 Timothy 3:14-17 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, and how from infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God[a] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Note this says, “thoroughly equipped”, not “with this plus tradition you will be equipped”

AZfederalist on September 18, 2012 at 1:44 PM

Paul and James are looking at salvation from two xseparate angles.

Paul is positional.

James is experiential.

Martin Luther couldn’t see that. He wanted to remove James from the Bible.

Gotta go to work.

I appreciate the kind comments and the stimulating discussion.

davidk on September 18, 2012 at 1:45 PM

“I can only speak in terms of my own personal views. I certainly can’t vote for somebody who’s either pro-choice or pro-abortion.”

What a weasel. As this is the Catholic Church’s idea of a “leader”, I am not surprised by the Church’s continuing decline.

Over50 on September 18, 2012 at 1:47 PM

Romans 3:27 -

Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

Romans 4:2 -

For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

Romans 4:

[5] But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

[6] Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, ***

Romans 9:32 -

Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

There’s more. But, I’m going to move on. Let those who believe in works, rely on their works.

OhEssYouCowboys on September 18, 2012 at 1:48 PM

The Justification Debate is tangential to Chaput and the Catholic vote, but I think it important to note that this is an unfortunate theological distinction without a real difference. In practical terms both sides are often wrong because they misunderstand the doctrine.

Catholics (some of them) are mistaken to believe that going to Mass, receiving Sacraments, going to Confession and doing good works will save you, i.e. unite you with God eternally. Faith–in its fullness, which is demonstrated in works of charity (love/agape) toward God and your fellow man–saves you.

Protestants (some of them) are mistaken to believe that making an altar call and accepting Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior will save you. You may apostatize afterward and worship false gods; you may rest complacent in the false doctrine of “once saved always saved” and not fulfill the commandments of God. Faith–in its fullness, which is demonstrated in works of charity (love/agape) toward God and your fellow man–saves you.

It’s the same salvation, the same faith.

spiritof61 on September 18, 2012 at 1:52 PM

Or are you saying that these people Jesus talks about were free to go off an do whatever they wish without doing the will of the Father since they have been saved?

Lily on September 18, 2012 at 1:43 PM

I’m not saying anything. I’m quoting Jesus Christ. They were saved, because they believed in Jesus Christ. They had FAITH in Him.

They had no WORKS to offer Him – they offered their FAITH, and their FAITH saved them.

This discussion isn’t about people who BELIEVE that Jesus is the Christ, and are free to do what they will. The demons BELIEVED that Jesus was the Christ.

BELIEF is not FAITH. And only FAITH in Jesus can save us.

OhEssYouCowboys on September 18, 2012 at 1:53 PM

It always cracks me up how any Religious debate always dissolves into people shouting what THEY think Jesus/God WANTS.

I’m of the belief that if their is a creator then he certainly doesnt need a lowly human to advance his message nor his will.

But humans in all our glory feel that we are so special that a God of countless galaxies, would care about the every day activity of less then .0000000000000000000001 of his creations.

When you sit back and think about how insignifigant you are in the giant scheme of things, it makes the likihood of a creator who actually “watches over you” seem less and less likely.

But to each their own.

Politricks on September 18, 2012 at 1:41 PM

Oh Brother.

I wouldn’t think any serious consideration to a notion of a Creator could blossom in the dry soil of your superior intellect….But then again it’s indicative of the general downward spiral of philosophy since philosophy focuses now primarily on constructs of Cartesian dead ends and are equally boring in the post modern era.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Nancy Pelosi is NOT the Catholic Church. There is absolutely no need for the Catholic Church to excommunicate her since she already excommunicated herself latae sententiae a long time ago. There is absolutely no further action required by the Church.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Well, when Nanzi takes to her PUBLIC podium and proclaims PUBLICLY in the media to be such a staunch adherent to Catholicism, it is incumbent on the Catholic Church to take PUBLIC action to distance itself from her disgusting lies which damage the PUBLIC perception and reputation of the Catholic Church.

Here, IGTFY

This woman must be loudly and publicly rebuked by the Catholic Church. Like most people, I couldn’t care less about any supposed “latae sententiae” self-excommunication. That passive, ineffectual assumption is just a head-in-the-sand excuse for the Church to not confront the issue.

Letting stuff like that go is exactly why public regard for the Catholic Church is so low. They won’t stand up for their own doctrines.

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 2:01 PM

I have to say that I’ve really enjoyed reading the discussions and debates in this thread, and while my own contributions aren’t nearly as well expressed as many others, what strikes me is that, in general, the contributions from people of faith seem to be so much better thought out and presented than those offered by the religion detractors or denigrators. While Christians can disagree on various points and have reasonable discussion on them, I think what you have all been able to do is to show the anti-religion folks here that we, as Christians, have actually thought about our faith, have something to base it upon, and have demonstrated our faith is not some “cult” based on a “zombie god” and all the other mockery we’re generally exposed to. Well done!

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 2:01 PM

This is one of the issues with the Catholic theology; it actually places tradition above the Word of God

AZfederalist on September 18, 2012 at 1:44 PM

Oh Brother…

Catholics do not place tradition higher than scripture….Tradition and scripture bear equal weight.

It’s OK if you don’t like that…But you write a distortion and claim it as fact.

This is not apologetics…it is opinion disguised as fact and a lame fallacy.

If you want to debate whether tradition bears equal weight as scripture that would be apologetics

I won’t debate an obvious fallacy.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 2:03 PM

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 1:54 PM

One consolation: If this thread were being debated in the Dar al-Islam everybody would already have a fatwa on his head by now. Atheists at the head of the list, of course.

spiritof61 on September 18, 2012 at 2:04 PM

This woman must be loudly and publicly rebuked by the Catholic Church. Like most people, I couldn’t care less about any supposed “latae sententiae” self-excommunication. That passive, ineffectual assumption is just a head-in-the-sand excuse for the Church to not confront the issue.

Letting stuff like that go is exactly why public regard for the Catholic Church is so low. They won’t stand up for their own doctrines.

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 2:01 PM

She and others like her have been soundly & repeatedly rebuked…you just don’t see that on TeeVee.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Catholics do not place tradition higher than scripture….Tradition and scripture bear equal weight.

I won’t debate an obvious fallacy.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 2:03 PM

… and when your tradition and scripture obviously contradict one another? Which takes precedence? There are traditions that directly contradict scripture, such as performing good works (beyond restitution to someone wronged) to atone for one’s sins when scripture clearly states that only Christ can atone for sins. So, which takes precedence, scripture or tradition?

AZfederalist on September 18, 2012 at 2:11 PM

If you don’t have faith, then it doesn’t matter what kind of works you do. Atheists can do good works, but they have no faith. And how can you say you have faith if you do not care for the weak and the poor to the best of your ability? Jesus himself said, “Not every one that says unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” Matthew 7:21

Lily on September 18, 2012 at 1:07 PM

yeeeeeeee, I going to hell! bless your hearts!

nathor on September 18, 2012 at 2:11 PM

I am Catholic because when He established His church, Jesus said:

“Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.”

I am Catholic because Jesus saith to Simon PETER: “Simon son of John, lovest thou me more than these?” …”Feed my lambs.” He saith to him again: “Simon, son of John, lovest thou me?” …”Feed my lambs.” He said to him the third time: “Simon, son of John, lovest thou me?”

PETER was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: “Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee.”

He said to him: “Feed my sheep.” The Good Shepherd appoints a shepherd for His flock when He is away. Peter, the first Pope.

I am Catholic because Jesus said, “Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever.”

And because when His disciples said of this, “This is a hard saying, who can hear it?” and then they walked with Him no more because of it, He did not go after them and say He was only speaking metaphorically. He meant it. I am Catholic because of The Holy Eucharist.

I am Catholic because He said, “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.” The Sacrament of Confession.

I am Catholic because Jesus prayed, “Those whom thou gavest me have I kept; and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition, that the scripture may be fulfilled. … Sanctify them in truth. Thy word is truth. As thou hast sent me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. And for them do I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth.

And not for them only do I pray, but for them also, who through their word shall believe in me; that they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.”

How can we be one if everyone is free to interpret and decide morality for themselves? With thousands upon thousands of dissenting ‘denominations’, is it any wonder so few in the world truly believe?

I am Catholic because He said, “…I go to the Father; and you shall see me no longer…I have yet many things to say to you: but you cannot bear them now. But when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will teach you all truth. For he shall not speak of himself; but what things soever he shall hear, he shall speak; and the things that are to come, he shall shew you.”

He knew that things to come would require a source for Truth. ie, contraception, in-vetro fertilization, cloning, … The Good Shepherd does not leave His flock without a shepherd. He established the Church with a single shepherd in charge of the priesthood, and the Paraclete guides/shews him.

Are there some wayward priests, bishops and even popes? Yes, but Judas was hand picked by Jesus, Himself, and even so, The Holy Spirit, the Paraclete promised by Christ, has guided the Church in matters of Faith and Morals as is evident by examples such as the promulgation of Humanae Vitae by Pope Paul VI, not exactly a hard core Traditionalist, at a time when the tide was violently against it. And it turns out his encyclical was prophetic.

How many former Catholics left the Church because of their rejection of this teaching, though they claim it is for other reasons, even though it was given by the man granted the authority to bind or loose by Jesus, when He said, “What you hold bound…” The successor of Peter. Peter himself established the apostolic succession we know today, when he called for a successor to Judas and Matthias was numbered with them. The Church structure was formed at the beginning, as can be seen in the writings of the early Church. The Didache, for one example speaks of bishops, receiving teachers of the Gospel, etc…

Jesus said, “Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.” He did not say, “Write it all down in a book and let them figure it out on their own.”

In fact, John writes that Jesus did so many more things that if they were all written, the very earth could not hold the books. There are of course many more reasons that I am Catholic, based on Scripture and Sacred Tradition, but this is already so long I doubt anyone is still reading.

I am Catholic because it is the only thing that makes sense based on all of what Jesus said.

pannw on September 18, 2012 at 2:13 PM

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 1:54 PM

One consolation: If this thread were being debated in the Dar al-Islam everybody would already have a fatwa on his head by now. Atheists at the head of the list, of course.

spiritof61 on September 18, 2012 at 2:04 PM

All religions go though a kill the heretics phase(s) as they establish.

Islam is stuck there…but this too will change I think as philosophy is part of human nature.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 2:01 PM:

Well, when Nanzi takes to her PUBLIC podium and proclaims PUBLICLY in the media to be such a staunch adherent to Catholicism, it is incumbent on the Catholic Church to take PUBLIC action to distance itself from her disgusting lies which damage the PUBLIC perception and reputation of the Catholic Church

Look, I could get up and proclaim myyself to be the Sun God Ra, it doesn’t make me so. Pelosi prattling on about being a Catholic doesn’t make her one either. Why does the Church need to distance itself from Nancy Pelosi? In the bigger picture Pelosi is a mere microbe on an elephant’s arse to the Church

Like most people, I couldn’t care less about any supposed “latae sententiae” self-excommunication. That passive, ineffectual assumption is just a head-in-the-sand excuse for the Church to not confront the issue.

It doesn’t really matter whether you could not care any less about excommunication latae sententiae and I can promise you that the Vatican is not losing a moment’s sleep worrying about your opinion of it. The fact of the matter is that its Church law that’s she’s excommunicated herself, so why should the Vatican take action that Church law doesn’t require of them?

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 2:14 PM

With all due respect, I think you missed three important passages. The first from John’s Gospel regarding illness:

9:2 And his disciples asked him, saying, Rabbi, who sinned, this man, or his parents, that he should be born blind?
3 Jesus answered, Neither did this man sin, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him. John 9:2-3 (ASV)

We often tend to forget that EVERYTHING serves G_D’s purpose. He doesn’t owe us any explanation. If you’re really interested, read the Book of Job and consider that Job was described as “...a man in the land of Uz,…and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and turned away from evil. Job 1:1-3 (ASV)

Job’s testing was not a result of his own sin but was requested by Satan and allowed by G_D to prove Job’s faith.

The second, regarding salvation:

2:8 for by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
9 not of works, that no man should glory. Ephesians 2:8-9 (ASV)

Think about it. If you work for wages, you obligate your employer. You have something to exchange with your employer, ie; your labor. What do you have that G_D has not given you? The answer is: nothing. Even the faith to believe in Christ for your salvation is a gift from G_D.

Third, don’t make the mistake of confusing ‘salvation’ with ‘rewards’. Salvation is a free gift. Rewards will be exactly that. Am I saved? Yes. Will I be in Heaven thanks to nothing but the Grace of G_D? Yes. Will my rewards by the same as those of D.L. Moody or Jim Elliott? Not hardly, at least at this point. But then I haven’t gone home yet…

oldleprechaun on September 18, 2012 at 2:16 PM

All religions go though a kill the heretics phase(s) as they establish.

not true…

Islam is stuck there…but this too will change I think as philosophy is part of human nature.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 2:13 PM

islam did evolve, into more moderate forms(sufism, allawis,druze ,ismailis, etc). the problem is that intolerant forms of islam are still very much in power and they are very supporter by theology.

nathor on September 18, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Letting stuff like that go is exactly why public regard for the Catholic Church is so low. They won’t stand up for their own doctrines.

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 2:01 PM

You’re right. Pelosi should be publically warned not to present herself for communion. And Cuomo. And Sebelius, and Kennedy when he was alive, and…so many others, the vast majority with D after their names. “If bishops had cojones” is a fantasy. It’s like daydreaming about Mitt Romney annihilating Soetoro in a speech every evening at 6:00. They don’t have the nads to risk the media/administration retaliation, the threats of withdrawal of tax-exempt status, and they’ve been caught too often in their own shenanigans covering up for their boy-loving friends. There aren’t that many Chaputs around, but the number is growing, and there is hope for the future (I do believe he laid down the law to Sister Sebelius, for example).

When Henry VIII took England out of the Church so he could marry Anne Boleyn, only 2 bishops out of over a hundred (?) refused to acknowledge the King’s absurd and heretical claims. We’ve probably got a better percentage of good bishops now in America. There is such a thing as Progress!

spiritof61 on September 18, 2012 at 2:18 PM

She and others like her have been soundly & repeatedly rebuked…you just don’t see that on TeeVee.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 2:09 PM

But she and others have not been excommunicated nor denied the ability to take the Lord’s Supper. That is a problem because she is publicly committing a sin, not just against the Church, but against Christendom by publicly endorsing the murder of the innocent and claiming that it is perfectly within the doctrines of the Church that she hold such a viewpoint. This is consistent with church discipline as stated in Matthew 18:

“If your brother sins, go and point out his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won him over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he still refuses to listen, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

Certainly, her words are divisive in terms of subverting Christian doctrine:

Titus 3:10
Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him.

By the Catholic church still allowing her in fellowship to claim membership and take the Lords supper, the church is not having nothing to do with her.

AZfederalist on September 18, 2012 at 2:21 PM

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Your reply to Politricks puts on display the underlying narcism of the believers. Some god made all of this with me in mind and the way to salvation is though him (usually J.C. on these pages). Those unfortunates who live as polytheists (Hindus etc.), Muslims and, of course, atheists, are doomed. The universe can churn along just fine without a creator and those made up by the various religions solve no problems but have resulted in much unneeded hatred and violence.

Annar on September 18, 2012 at 2:23 PM

One consolation: If this thread were being debated in the Dar al-Islam everybody would already have a fatwa on his head by now. Atheists at the head of the list, of course.

spiritof61 on September 18, 2012 at 2:04 PM

its true, atheists are bellow christians and jews in the islamic worldview. we do not even get to pay jizia and live…
but ofcourse, we can lie… we can even pretent to be muslims just to keep our heads…

nathor on September 18, 2012 at 2:23 PM

It might surprise people on this thread to know that there are Protestants converting to Catholicism. I’m one of those.

One of the factors is that while growing up, I never learned any history of the faith. Nothing past the New Testament. Why is this so? Why is it Protestant Sunday schools teach nothing in the way of Church history? How often I heard growing up that we were New Testament Christians….never considering for a moment how impossible that was, given the fact that they had no New Testaments in the early church.
But I digress.
Catholics in America are rebelling against their liberal clergy and teachers. More than anyone thinks.

There are a lot of outlets for conservative Catholics online:
Church Militant TV is just one of them.

Jewel on September 18, 2012 at 2:28 PM

…CAUTION…septic field backed up…troll turd surfacing

KOOLAID2 on September 18, 2012 at 11:49 AM

I’ve been a member of this site since 2007. Romney is wishy-washy on abortion AT BEST. Suffice to say, he doesn’t care much about the issue.

nazo311 on September 18, 2012 at 2:32 PM

its true, atheists are bellow christians and jews in the islamic worldview. we do not even get to pay jizia and live…
but ofcourse, we can lie… we can even pretent to be muslims just to keep our heads…

nathor on September 18, 2012 at 2:23 PM

I think Taqiyya is reserved for the believers but it’s worth a shot.

Annar on September 18, 2012 at 2:32 PM

nathor on September 18, 2012 at 2:23 PM

You would be well advised to do just that. In fact if you should be so unlucky as to fall into the hands of the more hyperactive members of the Muslim Brotherhood you should immediately shout that there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is Allah’s Messenger–and request instruction on how to pray properly. Technically, you are a Muslim then and they can’t slaughter you like a dog or an American ambassador.

Just make sure you do everything they tell you to do. If they think you’re faking it that would make you an apostate from Islam, and you’ll be starring in a decapitation video in short order.

spiritof61 on September 18, 2012 at 2:33 PM

It might surprise people on this thread to know that there are Protestants converting to Catholicism. I’m one of those.

Jewel on September 18, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Good for you, and welcome. Went through RCIA, confirmation and 1st communion myself in 2009.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 2:37 PM

“I can only speak in terms of my own personal views. I certainly can’t vote for somebody who’s either pro-choice or pro-abortion.”

What a weasel. As this is the Catholic Church’s idea of a “leader”, I am not surprised by the Church’s continuing decline.

Over50 on September 18, 2012 at 1:47 PM

Dude, it’s a dog whistle. He can’t say what he wants to directly because he’ll lose tax exemptions for the entire diocese. Why do you think he came out as being “personally” against Obama’s re-election? If he wanted to appear apolitical, he wouldn’t have said that. He could have condemned Obama’s positions but expressed no ultimate preference as to particular candidates, but he went a step beyond that (just short of landing the Church in trouble with the Feds).

blammm on September 18, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Some great posts by AZfed, davidk and others. Not on the main topic, but I couldn’t let this one go by without commenting.

So do you believe that one cannot go to Heaven without being baptized? Because we Catholics do, but most Protestant denominations do not.
Shump on September 18, 2012 at 11:12 AM

I’m no authority on what all Protestant denominations believe, but Baptists, the most numerous by far of all Protestant demoninations in the US, does not believe that baptism is a requirement for salvation.

Baptism – As indicated by their name a primary Baptist distinction is their practice of believer’s baptism and their rejection of infant baptism. Baptists consider Christian baptism to be an ordinance for believers only, by immersion only, and as a symbolic act, not having any power in itself. The act of baptism pictures what Christ has done for the believer in His death, burial, and resurrection. It pictures what Christ has done for the believer through the new birth, enabling death to the old life and newness of life to walk in. Baptism gives testimony to a salvation already received; it is not a requisite for salvation. It is an act of obedience to Jesus Christ.

SoonerMarine on September 18, 2012 at 2:39 PM

I think Taqiyya is reserved for the believers but it’s worth a shot.

Annar on September 18, 2012 at 2:32 PM

its real and fake muslims even have a name: munafiq

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munafiq

fake muslims have been around since the time of the pedophile prophet!

nathor on September 18, 2012 at 2:40 PM

But she and others have not been excommunicated nor denied the ability to take the Lord’s Supper… By the Catholic church still allowing her in fellowship to claim membership and take the Lords supper, the church is not having nothing to do with her.

AZfederalist on September 18, 2012 at 2:21 PM

I suggest you take this complaint up with the Archbishop of her diocese..If he doesn’t respond you can always write the Bishop of Rome…Here’s his address

His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI
Apostolic Palace
00120 Vatican City

*shrug*

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 2:47 PM

The fact of the matter is that its Church law that’s she’s excommunicated herself, so why should the Vatican take action that Church law doesn’t require of them?

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Because in this media-drenched world, perception is reality.

By publicly claiming to be a practicing Catholic like that, she is fraudulently using the silence of the church as her tacit endorsement BY the Church [and that IS how it is perceived publicly, tacit endorsement] to lie and deceive voters into supporting those who are in fact, enemies of Catholic doctrine.

Public silence on Pelosi and her ilk constitutes tacit endorsement in the public mind. It is incumbent on the Church to publicly rebuke this, and until they do so, a great many pews will remain unfilled.

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Fantastic thread. I had to go back and read them all from the start.
A most interesting debate. Jesus Lives!

Buttercup on September 18, 2012 at 2:48 PM

You would be well advised to do just that. In fact if you should be so unlucky as to fall into the hands of the more hyperactive members of the Muslim Brotherhood you should immediately shout that there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is Allah’s Messenger–and request instruction on how to pray properly. Technically, you are a Muslim then and they can’t slaughter you like a dog or an American ambassador.

one think I would is to lie that I am a christian first. they would at least keep me for ransom.

Just make sure you do everything they tell you to do. If they think you’re faking it that would make you an apostate from Islam, and you’ll be starring in a decapitation video in short order.

spiritof61 on September 18, 2012 at 2:33 PM

:) look, muslims are not idiots. I am talking the hypothetical case of a muslim takeover of the US(not im my life time for sure). if that happened, I would fake conversion to avoid jizia and other nasties…

nathor on September 18, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Baptism is not necessary for salvation. From http://www.carm.org

“The problem with baptismal regeneration (the belief that baptism is part of salvation and necessary for it) is that it contradicts other scriptures that state we are justified by faith. Justification is God’s declaration upon a sinner that the person is declared righteous in God’s sight. In other words, only Christians are justified; only Christians are saved. Please consider the following verses:

•Rom. 4:3, “For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.”
•Rom. 5:1, “Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.”
•Gal. 3:8, “And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.”
•Eph. 2:8, “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.”
•See also Rom. 4:5; 9:30; John 5:24; Gal. 2:16; Gal. 3:11-14; and Phil. 3:9.

“There are other verses, but these are sufficient to show that we are made right in God’s eyes — justified, forgiven — by faith, not by faith and baptism…”

“Another way of making this clear is to use an illustration. Let’s suppose that a person, under the conviction of the Holy Spirit (John 16:8), believed in Jesus as his savior (Rom. 10:9-10; Titus 2:13), and has received Christ (John 1:12) as Savior. Is that person saved? Of course he is. Let’s further suppose that this person confesses his sinfulness, cries out in repentance to the Lord, and receives Jesus as Savior and then walks across the street to get baptized at a local church. In the middle of the road he gets hit by a car and is killed.

“Does he go to heaven or hell? If he goes to heaven, then baptism isn’t necessary for salvation. If He goes to hell, then trusting in Jesus, by faith, isn’t enough for salvation. Doesn’t that go against the Scriptures that say that salvation is a free gift (Rom. 6:23) received by faith (Eph. 2:8-9)? Yes, it does…”

KyMouse on September 18, 2012 at 2:52 PM

islam did evolve, into more moderate forms(sufism, allawis,druze ,ismailis, etc). the problem is that intolerant forms of islam are still very much in power and they are very supporter by theology.

nathor on September 18, 2012 at 2:17 PM

The evolution of Islam was interrupted and quashed into factional infighting…and that is where it is stuck.

In the West we no longer persecute or execute heretics…unless this applies to Marxist regimes executing religions/religious opposed to worshiping an atheist state.

China for example which is currently seizing property (churches & some private property) of congregations who insist on practicing their religions without government control….and then there’s always Tibet.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Because in this media-drenched world, perception is reality.

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 2:47 PM

I get what you’re saying, and I personally wish the Pope himself would fly to San Francisco and hold a ceremony kicking her out of the Church. But that’s not how it’s done and aside from making outraged Catholics feel some kind of vengeance, it really doesn’t serve a purpose. She’s already excommunicated. As for media-driven perception, you may have noticed that the Catholic Church doesn’t generally bend to public opinion.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 2:58 PM

I am talking the hypothetical case of a muslim takeover of the US(not im my life time for sure). if that happened, I would fake conversion to avoid jizia and other nasties…

nathor on September 18, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Really? I’d fight the b@st@rds to the death…theirs or mine.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 2:59 PM

It might surprise people on this thread to know that there are Protestants converting to Catholicism. I’m one of those.

Jewel on September 18, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Good for you, and welcome. Went through RCIA, confirmation and 1st communion myself in 2009.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 2:37 PM

Welcome Home…You are the renewal

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 2:59 PM

Because in this media-drenched world, perception is reality.

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 2:47 PM

It is up to the Archbishop of her diocese…If he’s a liberal he’ll not do much.

Most of the liberals are dying off anyway.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 3:01 PM

The evolution of Islam was interrupted and quashed into factional infighting…and that is where it is stuck.

ok

In the West we no longer persecute or execute heretics…unless this applies to Marxist regimes executing religions/religious opposed to worshiping an atheist state.

so, are you afraid that atheists might kill religious ppl today? lol!

China for example which is currently seizing property (churches & some private property) of congregations who insist on practicing their religions without government control….and then there’s always Tibet.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 2:56 PM

chinese are control freaks. nothing new here….

nathor on September 18, 2012 at 3:05 PM

and a short P.S.:

I would NEVER join a church that allows Nanzi Pelosi or any of her abortion-luvving ilk to take communion, or to even remain a member in good standing. Why should I? Catholic Church doctrine isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on if the Church will not PUBLICLY defend and protect itself from a filthy wraith like Pelosi.

She views the Bible progressively, just like she views the Constitution – a living, breathing, flexible, malleable, changing, evolving sand castle on the beach that just washes away with the next tide.

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 3:06 PM

As for media-driven perception, you may have noticed that the Catholic Church doesn’t generally bend to public opinion.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Maybe, but low-information voters do. IN SPADES.

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 3:08 PM

pannw on September 18, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Just some food-for-thought – re: the Catholic focus upon Peter:

Peter was one among many “pillars” of the Church -

Galatians 2:9 – “And when James [‘the Lord’s brother’ – Galatians 1:19], Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, …”

2 Corinthians 11:5 – “For I suppose I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles.”

2 Corinthians 12:11 – “…: for I ought to have been commended of you: for in nothing am I behind the very chiefest apostles, though I be nothing.”

Ephesians 2:19 – “Now therefore ye are … of the household of God; [20] And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;”

1 Corinthians 3:9 – “For we are labourers together with God: …, ye are God’s building. [10] According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. [11] For other foundation can no man lay that that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”

Christ is the head of the Church -

Ephesians 5:23 – “… even as Christ is the head of the Church: …”

Peter was directed by the apostles -

Acts 8:14 – “Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: …”

Peter was held accountable to the other apostles -

Acts 11: 1-18 [Peter preaches to the Gentile – Cornelius the Centurion in Caesarea]

Peter was rebuked by Paul -

Galatians 2:11-14 – “But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. [12] For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. [14] But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?”

Paul was chosen by God to minister unto the Gentiles -

Acts 9:15 – “But the Lord said unto him [Ananias], Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles and kings, and the children of Israel:”

Acts 22:21 – “And he [the Lord] said unto me, Depart: for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles.”

Acts 23:11 – “And the night following the Lord stood by him, and said, Be of good cheer, Paul: for as thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome.”

Acts 25:10 – “Then said Paul, I stand at Caesar’s judgment seat, where I ought to be judged: … [12] Then Festus, when he had conferred with the council, answered, Hast thou appealed unto Caesar? unto Caesar shalt thou go.”

Acts 27:24 – “[The ‘angel of God’] Saying, Fear not, Paul; thou must be brought before Caesar: …”

Jesus Christ as mediator, between God and mankind -

Romans 8:34 – “Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.”

Ephesians 2:18 – “For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.”

1 Timothy 2:5 – “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;”

Hebrews 4:16 – “Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, …”

Hebrews 7:25 – “Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.”

Hebrews 9:15 – “And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, …”

2 Corinthians 3:4 – “And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:”

Both John and James, along with Peter -

Mark 5:37 – “And he suffered no man to follow him, save Peter, and James, and John the brother of James.” [the healing of Jairus' daughter]

Matthew 17:1 – “And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, [2] And was transfigured before them: …” [the transfiguration]

Mark 14:32 – “And they came to a place which was named Gethsemane: and he saith to his disciples, Sit ye here, while I shall pray. [33] And he taketh with him Peter and James and John, and began to be sore amazed, and to be very heavy.” [the agony at Gethsemane]

Peter beckons John -

John 13:23 – “Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved. [24] Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake.”

John, the only apostle at the Cross -

John 19:26 – “When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! [27] Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.”

OhEssYouCowboys on September 18, 2012 at 3:19 PM

Every one happy that their Mom was pro-life raise your hand.

Herb on September 18, 2012 at 3:22 PM

Catholics do not place tradition higher than scripture….Tradition and scripture bear equal weight.

I won’t debate an obvious fallacy.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 2:03 PM

… and when your tradition and scripture obviously contradict one another? Which takes precedence? There are traditions that directly contradict scripture, such as performing good works (beyond restitution to someone wronged) to atone for one’s sins when scripture clearly states that only Christ can atone for sins. So, which takes precedence, scripture or tradition?

AZfederalist on September 18, 2012 at 2:11 PM

There is no contradiction. The sacraments are the sacraments and come down to us from Apostolic Tradition.

Reading the Early Church Fathers & Doctors confirms it.

You could start with St. Augustine & St. Thomas Aquinas on the nature of Sin? Neither contradict scripture but illuminate.

Studying the Catholic Apologetics interesting as well and in keeping with a long writtenand oral tradition of theological debate within and outside the church.

John Henry Newman explained it in an 1884 essay entitled “Inspiration in its Relation to Revelation.”

Newman’s argument

He wrote: “It is quite evident that this passage furnishes no argument whatever that the sacred Scripture, without Tradition, is the sole rule of faith; for, although sacred Scripture is profitable for these four ends, still it is not said to be sufficient. The Apostle [Paul] requires the aid of Tradition (2 Thess. 2:15). Moreover, the Apostle here refers to the scriptures which Timothy was taught in his infancy.

“Now, a good part of the New Testament was not written in his boyhood: Some of the Catholic epistles were not written even when Paul wrote this, and none of the books of the New Testament were then placed on the canon of the Scripture books. He refers, then, to the scriptures of the Old Testament, and, if the argument from this passage proved anything, it would prove too much, viz., that the scriptures of the New Testament were not necessary for a rule of faith.”

Furthermore, Protestants typically read 2 Timothy 3:16-17 out of context. When read in the context of the surrounding passages, one discovers that Paul’s reference to Scripture is only part of his exhortation that Timothy take as his guide Tradition and Scripture. The two verses immediately before it state: “But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it, and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 3:14–15).

Paul tells Timothy to continue in what he has learned for two reasons: first, because he knows from whom he has learned it—Paul himself—and second, because he has been educated in the scriptures. The first of these is a direct appeal to apostolic tradition, the oral teaching which the apostle Paul had given Timothy. So Protestants must take 2 Timothy 3:16-17 out of context to arrive at the theory of sola scriptura. But when the passage is read in context, it becomes clear that it is teaching the importance of apostolic tradition!

The Bible denies that it is sufficient as the complete rule of faith. Paul says that much Christian teaching is to be found in the tradition which is handed down by word of mouth (2 Tim. 2:2). He instructs us to “stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thess. 2:15).

This oral teaching was accepted by Christians, just as they accepted the written teaching that came to them later. Jesus told his disciples: “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me” (Luke 10:16). The Church, in the persons of the apostles, was given the authority to teach by Christ; the Church would be his representative. He commissioned them, saying, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations” (Matt. 28:19).

And how was this to be done? By preaching, by oral instruction: “So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ” (Rom. 10:17). The Church would always be the living teacher. It is a mistake to limit “Christ’s word” to the written word only or to suggest that all his teachings were reduced to writing. The Bible nowhere supports either notion.

Further, it is clear that the oral teaching of Christ would last until the end of time. “’But the word of the Lord abides for ever.’ That word is the good news which was preached to you” (1 Pet. 1:25). Note that the word has been “preached”—that is, communicated orally. This would endure. It would not be
supplanted by a written record like the Bible (supplemented, yes, but not supplanted), and would continue to have its own authority.

This is made clear when the apostle Paul tells Timothy: “[W]hat you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2). Here we see the first few links in the chain of apostolic tradition that has been passed down intact from the apostles to our own day. Paul instructed Timothy to pass on the oral teachings (traditions) that he had received from the apostle. He was to give these to men who would be able to teach others, thus perpetuating the chain. Paul gave this instruction not long before his death (2 Tim. 4:6–8), as a reminder to Timothy of how he should conduct his ministry…”

What Fundamentalists and Evangelicals often do, unfortunately, is see the word “tradition” in Matthew 15:3 or Colossians 2:8 or elsewhere and conclude that anything termed a “tradition” is to be rejected. They forget that the term is used in a different sense, as in 1 Corinthians 11:2 and 2 Thessalonians 2:15, to describe what should be believed. Jesus did not condemn all traditions; he condemned only erroneous traditions, whether doctrines or practices, that undermined Christian truths. The rest, as the apostles taught, were to be obeyed. Paul commanded the Thessalonians to adhere to all the traditions he had given them, whether oral or written.

The task is to determine what constitutes authentic tradition. How can we know which traditions are apostolic and which are merely human? The answer is the same as how we know which scriptures are apostolic and which are merely human—by listening to the magisterium or teaching authority of Christ’s Church. Without the Catholic Church’s teaching authority, we would not know with certainty which purported books of Scripture are authentic. If the Church revealed to us the canon of Scripture, it can also reveal to us the “canon of Tradition” by establishing which traditions have been passed down from the apostles. After all, Christ promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church (Matt. 16:18) and the New Testament itself declares the Church to be “the pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15).

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/scripture-and-tradition

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 3:26 PM

I would NEVER join a church that allows Nanzi Pelosi or any of her abortion-luvving ilk to take communion, or to even remain a member in good standing. Why should I? Catholic Church doctrine isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on if the Church will not PUBLICLY defend and protect itself from a filthy wraith like Pelosi.

She views the Bible progressively, just like she views the Constitution – a living, breathing, flexible, malleable, changing, evolving sand castle on the beach that just washes away with the next tide.

Harbingeing on September 18, 2012 at 3:06 PM

You’re making a mistake if you consider the the teachings of the Church vitiated by sins/faults/poor judgment/cowardice/corruption of its clergy. These are two separate categories. Your reasoning is similar to that used by commenters here who refuse to vote for Romney because he’s a RINO or a jerk or whatever. The purity of the cause has been tainted by his (or the party’s) glaring faults so I can’t be associated with it, and so on.

We agree that the Church should do more to show that it repudiates Pelosi’s silly, untrue and heretical statements. The Church has not been forthright and clear on this. But that does not mean that the Church does not teach the Faith in all its fullness. Even in the case of individual priest this rule applies: the most despicable, vile, ignorant and corrupt priest still confers the valid Sacrament. Ex opere operato.

Again, Pelosi is at this moment lawfully excommunicated in the eyes of the Church. A priest who knowingly gives her Communion has mortally sinned. But both the Botox Girl and Father Feminism are still loved by God, who is calling them both to repentance and salvation.

spiritof61 on September 18, 2012 at 3:26 PM

OhEssYouCowboys on September 18, 2012 at 1:48 PM

Well done.

God’s standard is PERFECT HOLINESS. Remember, Jesus said, “Be PERFECT as my Father is PERFECT.” Without God’s perfect holiness there can be no ETERNAL LIFE. For if there be any , I mean the very smallest of discrepancy or corruption at all, then there will be decay, …and if decay,.. then death will surely follow. If you break the very least of the law, you have broken them all. So when you trust in HIM and receive HIM, you receive the FINISHED WORK also. HIS perfect and finished righteousness is imputed to your account. IF you truly receive HIM, you don’t have to worry!….the fuits WILL FOLLOW…there will be good works.

Afterall, remember, the bible is clear,…we are saved FOR good works,..not BY them.

Jesus said, I’ve come not to destroy the law but to fullfill it.” He didn’t fullfill it for himself,…He did that for us!
All the law is fullfilled in Christ. When we try to add our righteousness to his, in essence, we are saying that the job he did wasn’t complete! It’s also like adding our filthy rags to his spotless garment! NO! BELIEVE ME, …IT IS FINISHED!
When we stand before God one day, we will either stand in our righteousness or HIS. Filthy rags or a spotless garment. Do you want to trust in your garments? Heck!, I can’t even live up to my own standards!…Let alone, GOD’S!!! I don’t know about Y’all, but I’m standing and resting on HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS and HIS ALONE. Now that is solid ground! …anything else is sinking sand my friends. Trust HIM,..He WILL uphold you with HIS RIGHTEOUS RIGHT HAND. You can rest in him. Those that call upon the name of the Lord, SHALL BE SAVED.
A great analogy I heard someone say was,…”You may believe an airplane can fly, but if you don’t climb aboard, and place your weight on the plane, you haven’t trusted in the plane and the airplane will never take you anywhere.”
Friends,…It’s the same with Christ and HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS. You need to surrender,…place your weight and rest in HIM and HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS ALONE.

He IS MY SALVATION.

W.KY-hillbilly on September 18, 2012 at 3:26 PM

so, are you afraid that atheists might kill religious ppl today? lol!
chinese are control freaks. nothing new here….

nathor on September 18, 2012 at 3:05 PM

That is not what I said. What I eluded to is the Marxist tendency to replace religion of the supernatural and it’s attendant social/moral structures with a religion of the material propped up by the latest scientific theory. This political apparatus is a form of Paganism and has been confirmed repeatedly in the brutal facts of the last century….How is North Korea doing lately?

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Really? I’d fight the b@st@rds to the death…theirs or mine.

Trafalgar on September 18, 2012 at 2:59 PM

I would fight too, and risk my life for freedom. Its very hypotetical… I am was assuming that it was a lost fight.

nathor on September 18, 2012 at 3:36 PM

Also, remember when the lamb was broutht for an offering to the Priest, the priest didn’t look the one that was seeking atonement over for blemishes, he looked solely at THE LAMB.

Christ is THE LAMB of God … without blemish,…slain before the foundation or the earth.

W.KY-hillbilly on September 18, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Every one happy that their Mom was pro-life raise your hand.

Herb on September 18, 2012 at 3:22 PM

not me! she had 18 more childreen after me, and i had to work to support them!
*joking*

nathor on September 18, 2012 at 3:38 PM

OhEssYouCowboys on September 18, 2012 at 3:19 PM

Jesus chose Peter as the rock. St. Peter was the first Bishop of Rome (Pope)

Apostolic Succession proceeds from the traditional authority of Apostolic teaching…But over all is the primacy of the dioceses of Rome after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

The Authority is with Peter and Paul recognized that.

nuff said.

workingclass artist on September 18, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4