- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Pope Francis has Died
Posted on 4/21/25 at 2:48 pm to GreenRockTiger
Posted on 4/21/25 at 2:48 pm to GreenRockTiger
quote:There are two: the Byzantine Rite and Western Rite, and it is how services are celebrated, i.e., hymns to celebrate, chanting style, and treated as a localized variation of the same liturgical tradition.
is this why there are so many rites in the Orthodox Church?
Catholics have 24, right?
quote:I simply asked how the Vicar to Christ can espouse universalism and sexual perversions (e.g., lgbtq), and was met with severely uniformed attacks and outright lies. You ought to expect a retort when you don't know what you speak of.
no reason to be rude
When I see the debasing of one of the Apostolic churches and everyone from baby killers to trans activists celebrating its leader, it concerns me. My grandparents and all of one side of my family are Catholic. The world is a better place when the Catholic church is unified under its leader, but you can be sure if the next Vicar is celebrated by certain secular segments of society and power, that the choice has been a poor one — which goes back to my original question: how can the Pope be the representative of Christ on earth (the literal definition of Vicar of Christ) and head of church with such controversial views?
That's all I'm going to say. I pray the church chooses wisely in these most dubious of times.
1
Posted on 4/21/25 at 2:51 pm to mudshuvl05
quote:
quote:
Are you saying they never signed a letter explicitly saying, "Rome has authority over me"?
No, they didn't.
Also, it seems you misunderstood me here. I know they never signed such a letter. . . I was making the point that if that's your standard for "entertaining Papal authority" then you will not find anything that rises to that standard.
And then all this:
quote:
What you are stating is an outright lie, and undermines the Orthodox patriarchates to the degree where you ought to be ashamed, but since papal primacy is a cult like obsession for so many, I know you won't.
. . .is just childish. There's no need for any of it.
Posted on 4/21/25 at 3:30 pm to grizzlylongcut
quote:But they are. And they do.
In reality, so long as they aren’t adding to, or taking away from scripture, and not in open rebellion to the word and what it says, I don’t have a problem with them.
For instance,
quote:is simply not true. Faith without works is dead, and we do works not so that we can receive mercy, but because we have received mercy. If Pol Pot confessed his faith 5 minutes before dying, I am no one to say he's not saved, but I highly doubt it. Nowhere in Scripture is sola fide spoken of. Faith without works (e.g., vibrant active works) is dead, and the Apostolic churches have 2000 years of authority and scripture to back that up.
The Bible teaches that faith and faith alone will get you saved.
quote:But some protestant Pentecost denominations say that you can't handle them without being bitten unless you have faith? Sola Scriptura, I thought? Sola fide, I thought? If I'm bitten do I not have faith? If I do not, then I am obviously without sola fide and in danger of hell. Ludicrous. Apostolic church tradition is everything, else you wind up with tens of thousands of contradictory heretical nonsense.
It doesn’t teach that faith and faith alone will guard you from consequences of picking up a rattlesnake.
quote:But I thought Sola Scriptura? It's either sola scriptura or it's not, no?
No we shouldn’t. But that’s in the Bible as well. So the churches that do that are in open rebellion to God and His word.
quote:But we're talking about tradition, remember? And how Catholics would do well to not insist on it? Why are protestant traditions okay (e.g., southern Baptists and their "abstinence" from alcohol), but not Apostolic ones?
I’ve never once heard a single Baptist preacher say that your salvation rests upon whether or not you consume alcohol. They warn against it, sure. But there isn’t a single one that I’ve ever heard say that your salvation is incumbent upon it.
quote:But many are not, and their traditions are far more ludicrous and built on shaky ground than the ones you find so absurd in Catholicism.
but if their teaching is doctrinally sound and doesn’t go against the word of God,
quote:I am absolutely serious. You made the assertion. Show it.
You can’t be serious, right?
quote:Ah, but Catholics and Orthodoxy can. Remember those traditions that you and the other poster said causes the Apostolic churches to not be able to see the forest for the trees? Many, many of them are passed down from the apostles themselves- like Paul at Thessalonica.
I can’t speak to what all Paul taught them during his time in Thessalonica other than what is in his letters, just as you yourself cannot and to do so is speculation at best
quote:Are you comparing 45 thousand protestant denominations with wildly different viewpoints and many in open rebellion to the two Apostolic churches with that of Christ bringing the new covenant?
I seem to also remember a Jewish carpenter who went against thousands of years old of religious tradition. Was he wrong to do so?
I just want you to be clear; because let's not forget what we're debating in the first place: that you think Catholic insistence on 2000 year old Apostolic tradition is getting in the way of seeing the forest for the trees. The Crucified One brought clarity and built his Church from the day of Pentecost, not the day of Martin Luther and 45 thousand subsequent interpretations.
Posted on 4/21/25 at 3:56 pm to mudshuvl05
Who's the front runner for the next pope?
Religious warrior hopefully not another SJW hack
Religious warrior hopefully not another SJW hack
Posted on 4/21/25 at 4:05 pm to GreenRockTiger
quote:
someone’s sexual orientation has nothing to do with being a priest
Leviticus 18:22. So there it is in your Good book but yet you’re okay with a priest leading your cult?
Hmm
Posted on 4/21/25 at 4:10 pm to cubsfinger
thinking Catholicism is a cult Posted on 4/21/25 at 4:11 pm to CatholicLSUDude
quote:I didn't misunderstand anything, that's a quote of what you said.
Also, it seems you misunderstood me here.
quote:Yes, I can. It's called the Great Schism and the Mutual Excommunications of 1054.
I was making the point that if that's your standard for "entertaining Papal authority" then you will not find anything that rises to that standard.
Again, it's not up for debate: Papal primacy has never — not in the first thousand years like you said, nor the thousand after — been accepted by the other majority Eastern churches and never will be, and Francis is/was exhibit A as to why the dogma is outlandish to the Orthodox church.
Hopefully the college chooses wisely this time around, because the Christ I follow says the only way to God is through Him and Him only. A proper Vicar this time around should hopefully clarify that and other such heretical and divisive statements made by the previous Pope.
This post was edited on 4/21/25 at 4:15 pm
Posted on 4/21/25 at 4:18 pm to mudshuvl05
quote:
is simply not true.
So Paul was wrong in Romans and Ephesians?
quote:
That if thou confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus that God hath raised Him from the dead thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
quote:
For by grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God. Not of works lest any man should boast.
What confidence can one have in their salvation if it is works based? If you couldn’t do any works to gain your salvation, how then can your works after you’re saved keep you out of heaven? Salvation is a gift from God. That is not to say that a truly saved person wouldn’t do good works. But then again, what is a good work? If the best of our works are but filthy rags to he who died for us, what are good works?
And no, I do not say that once you’re saved, you should just go on wantonly sinning either. However, I’m saying what confidence could you ever have in your own salvation if you could lose it based on your works? If that were the case then I would assume most Christians would be neurotic to the point of paralysis.
quote:
But some protestant Pentecost denominations say that you can't handle them without being bitten unless you have faith? Sola Scriptura, I thought? Sola fide, I thought?
That’s neither one of those things.
quote:
Apostolic church tradition is everything, else you wind up with tens of thousands of contradictory heretical nonsense.
How about just reading the layout that is given in the Holy Bible?
quote:
But I thought Sola Scriptura? It's either sola scriptura or it's not, no?
It’s not sola scriptura to allow homosexuality. Why are you arguing otherwise? I never once said that it was. I said the “churches” that do that are in open rebellion against God. I’m confused as to what you’re talking about here.
quote:
But we're talking about tradition, remember? And how Catholics would do well to not insist on it? Why are protestant traditions okay (e.g., southern Baptists and their "abstinence" from alcohol), but not Apostolic ones?
It isn’t a tradition. There isn’t a single Baptist church that will excommunicate a member because they drink alcohol. They may warn against it and say that you should steer away from it. But not a single one says that you can’t be a member, you can’t get saved, and you’re going to hell because you consume alcohol. It’s not a tradition and it really isn’t even a practice. I was born into and raised in a southern Baptist household, my father is an ordained deacon. Not one time in my life have I ever heard a Baptist preacher say “you must never partake in alcohol.” I have heard them say things like “you should be careful if you drink” or “I have seen enough horrors from drinking to say that it’s best if you didn’t.” But never once have I ever heard them say anything of the sort you’re describing.
quote:
But many are not, and their traditions are far more ludicrous and built on shaky ground than the ones you find so absurd in Catholicism.
Really? I find them no more shaky and ludicrous than asking for Mary to intercede on your behalf.
quote:
just want you to be clear; because let's not forget what we're debating in the first place: that you think Catholic insistence on 2000 year old Apostolic tradition is getting in the way of seeing the forest for the trees.
Yes, it is. Insisting on speaking in Latin when 0% of the world speaks Latin is 100% not seeing the forest for the trees. Which is what I originally spoke about in this thread. You just decided to take a shot at all denominations of Christians.
“Hey let’s speak a language no one else speaks just because we did so thousands of years ago. Never mind the fact that the man in which we’re basing this entire thing off of was a Hebrew and spoke Aramaic.”
And let’s be real here, you may not say that you believe Protestants will go to hell simply for the fact of being Protestant openly. But a lot of Catholics sure do speak about Protestants in that way without openly saying it. It makes me wonder.
This post was edited on 4/21/25 at 4:28 pm
Posted on 4/21/25 at 4:23 pm to mudshuvl05
quote:
If Pol Pot confessed his faith 5 minutes before dying, I am no one to say he's not saved, but I highly doubt it. Nowhere in Scripture is sola fide spoken of
Luke 23:43
Posted on 4/21/25 at 4:24 pm to mudshuvl05
quote:
the Christ I follow
Odd
Posted on 4/21/25 at 4:40 pm to redstick13
Next pope needs to stay out of politics
Posted on 4/21/25 at 4:45 pm to AlextheBodacious
Correct
Posted on 4/21/25 at 5:12 pm to GreenRockTiger
quote:
someone’s sexual orientation has nothing to do with being a priest.
It doesn't when their sexual identity doesn't define themselves, but since naturally being homosexual ends up being more than a preference - and becomes an identity - it eventually does.
Hence the Lavender Mafia.
At the core, this stemmed from the shared identity, the "connection" that they believed they had was different than just being Catholic and Priests. And while you might be right, it's idealistic - being homosexual is FAR more complicated and does impact being a priest. The safer way is to avoid it completely. There's no need to go down the path.
Posted on 4/21/25 at 5:18 pm to mudshuvl05
quote:
quote:
Also, it seems you misunderstood me here.
I didn't misunderstand anything, that's a quote of what you said.
You misunderstood me. Look at the next line of what I said:
quote:
Are you saying they never signed a letter explicitly saying, "Rome has authority over me"? I suppose I'd grant that.
There's no need for you to tell me they didn't sign such a letter and then insult me. I am very well aware they didn't do that. That was my point. They did, however, accept ecumenical councils from the first millennium that directly or indirectly lay out the primacy of Rome.
quote:
I was making the point that if that's your standard for "entertaining Papal authority" then you will not find anything that rises to that standard.
Yes, I can. It's called the Great Schism and the Mutual Excommunications of 1054.
Again, it's not up for debate: Papal primacy has never — not in the first thousand years like you said, nor the thousand after — been accepted by the other majority Eastern churches and never will be
Your response doesn't make sense.
I was arguing that you will find nothing that rises to the very high standard of a simple statement signed by the patriarchs plainly stating "Rome has authority over us." Citing the Great Schism does not meet an analogous standard for your side of the argument because the Great Schism took place centuries after the several ecumenical councils in which the primacy of Rome was asserted directly or indirectly. All eastern churches accepted these councils, and they still do. Therefore, they have "entertained Papal authority". You or Jay Dyer saying "it's not up for debate" does not make it so.
Posted on 4/21/25 at 5:49 pm to TigerSprings
quote:
letting priests marry would lead to more people becoming priests
You would have to bi-pass their vows of poverty so that a priest could support a family.
Having no rights of inheritance is why the Catholic church has preserved its wealth as long as it has.
Posted on 4/21/25 at 6:12 pm to mudshuvl05
It may be a silly question but how are popes interred? Is there a strict process or is it according to their wishes?
Posted on 4/21/25 at 6:38 pm to cubsfinger
quote:if priests’ rules are based on Leviticus then a priest better not eat pork, shrimp, or rabbit
Leviticus 18:22. So there it is in your Good book but yet you’re okay with a priest leading your cult?
And if the church would allow men to marry - would they have to follow the rules in Leviticus 15??
Priests shouldn’t be having sex - hetero or homosexual - so their sexual orientation shouldn’t matter.
Posted on 4/21/25 at 6:41 pm to TigerBaitOohHaHa
quote:diocesan priests do not take a vow of poverty
You would have to bi-pass their vows of poverty so that a priest could support a family.
Posted on 4/21/25 at 6:44 pm to GreenRockTiger
Do you believe the trash that comes out of your mouth? Men leading the church should be leading while having sex with men or women. This is supposed to be a higher figure who represents a connection with your god.Being the sheep you are, I see why you’re a follower of the cult now. I’m still almost certain it’s mandatory to touch little boys to be a priest btw.
Posted on 4/21/25 at 6:54 pm to cubsfinger
quote:
Do you believe the trash that comes out of your mouth? Men leading the church should be leading while having sex with men or women. This is supposed to be a higher figure who represents a connection with your god.Being the sheep you are, I see why you’re a follower of the cult now. I’m still almost certain it’s mandatory to touch little boys to be a priest btw.
Based on my experience, you seem incredibly depressed. Are you ok?
Page 12 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News