Cardinal Manning said...

[thessalonian]

Originally posted by neal4christ:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> But hey, it is you guys (according to most baptists on this board) that have the true Holy Spirit. Surely your behavior would be better than ours in this regard.

How did I get lumped into this? I have not made one accusation or connection and in fact have said that it is pointless and fruitless. I was just asking if you knew of a connection that I may not be aware of, that is all. I am not trying to attack you or connect you with a priest all the way on the other side of the world.

God Bless You,
Neal </font>[/QUOTE]That statement was not directed at you per sey. Though your connection is that you are a Baptist who those whom I am speaking of would recognize as having the true holy spirit. I find your posts to be a ray of light in this dark conversation as you seem to have an open mind and are not blinded by our differences. Though I think you must objectively say that unfortuanetly when those who call themselves baptist sin, you cannot divorce yourself from it. The body of Christ suffers when it's members sin. There is no such thing as a personal sin.

 

[neal4christ]

Though I think you must objectively say that unfortuanetly when those who call themselves baptist sin, you cannot divorce yourself from it. The body of Christ suffers when it's members sin.

I would agree with that to an extent. It does grieve me when someone who calls himself a Baptist sins (I am especially referring to very public, repulsive sin), not because he is a Baptist, but more importantly because he calls himself a Christian. It is the name of Christ that concerns me. And yes, I have differences with Catholics, but when a Catholic priest is accused of pedophila or whatever, it grieves me because he bears the name of Christ. So yes, when anyone commits a grievous sin, it grieves me because it is the name of Christ I am concerned with.

God Bless You,
Neal

 

[Lorelei]

Thess,

Since my sources have been called into question I might point out that the link you shared is some users site on geocities and that would hardly make it credible. As has been stated, anyone can make a page saying anything you want it to. Why not post a link from the official site of the vatican and if you would, please share with me a link that shows what the council of German Bishops officially stated. Also, could you tell me if this council's ruling had authority outside of Germany and did the vatican ever "officially agree" with it?

~Lorelei

 

[trying2understand]

Originally posted by Lorelei:
Why not post a link from the official site of the vatican and if you would, please share with me a link that shows what the council of German Bishops officially stated. Also, could you tell me if this council's ruling had authority outside of Germany and did the vatican ever "officially agree" with it?

I would also be interested in any source that tells us that any Baptist offical (pastor, association, etc.) has ever denounced Thom Robb, the Baptist pastor and Grand Wizard of the KKK.

 

[neal4christ]

Thom Robb, the Baptist pastor and Grand Wizard of the KKK.

Do you know what type of Baptist he is? I am really interested and would like to know (honestly

).

God Bless You,
Neal

 

[Lorelei]

Originally posted by trying2understand:
I would also be interested in any source that tells us that any Baptist offical (pastor, association, etc.) has ever denounced Thom Robb, the Baptist pastor and Grand Wizard of the KKK.

We do not claim to have the power to do so, it is the RCC and them alone that claim they are the only way to salvation and in one proclamation can condemn a man eternally to hell. We have no official proclamations in the negative or positive that claims to carry the weight a catholic proclamation professes to carry. It is a mute point. Here, I bascially summed it up in this post.

Originally posted by Lorelei:


And this is why we go in circles. You can not compare apples to oranges. Baptists (1) do not claim infallibility and (2) do not mandate what other baptists must believe.

If a church mandates what you must believe and claims to be infallibile in those mandates, then they must be held accountable and be able to prove that infallibility. Sins committed and/or covered-up by those who claim infallibilty or by those who were appointed by the pope (therefore appointed by God according to your doctrine) are relevant to questioning whether or not their infallibilty did indeed come from God.

To say they are infallible in doctrine alone is merely a convenient ploy that has no basis scripturally. There is no credible reason for anyone to believe such doctrine save the fact that the church who made the doctrine states it to be true. Those of us not willing to take their word for it have no other means of testing that doctrine as the Bereans tested Pauls.

So you see, when we question the infallibility of your church leadership based off of the fact that the leaders in your church, sometimes the pope himself are committing such crimes, we are not looking for the "well they are sinners just like everyone else" excuse. We want proof that they are infallibile, some other proof then the fact that "they said so."

So here we go in circles, because irrational people who are not allowed to question the pope's infallibility must defend that stand. Turning the conversation to "see you do it too" is the ONLY argument they can make because they do not believe it based upon proof but based upon the fact that "the church said so." Never did any of the apostles claim that this would be the case. Paul showed us what church leaders must be like and to allow men who violate those standards to still claim infallibilty goes against the very word of God they claim to profess. It makes no scriptural or logical sense.

So continue to bash the KKK and we will continue to agree that the KKK is evil. In doing so we show the world that the leadership of the RCC has committed crimes just as vile as those of the KKK and therefore is not infallible.

~Lorelei

 

[thessalonian]

Originally posted by Lorelei:
Thess,

Since my sources have been called into question I might point out that the link you shared is some users site on geocities and that would hardly make it credible. As has been stated, anyone can make a page saying anything you want it to. Why not post a link from the official site of the vatican and if you would, please share with me a link that shows what the council of German Bishops officially stated. Also, could you tell me if this council's ruling had authority outside of Germany and did the vatican ever "officially agree" with it?

~Lorelei

The Vatican doesn't have to agree. That is the part that you people don't get. The Catholic Church is not a dictatorship. The individual bishops have supreme authority over their diocese and individual bishops as well as collectively have the authority to excommunicate in accord with Mt. 18, binding and loosing. The Vatican would recognize any such excommunication. I can cite canon laws and official Church sources supporting this if you like. By the way, if a Baptist is cast out of a Baptist Church in lousiana according to Mt. 18, is he also cast out in Montana?

You are free to question my source. It was howevere pertinent to the discussion and calls in to question your accusation. I have looked for supporting information but as yet have not found it, though I have heard this before from another source. Can't recall offhand what it was. That was what prompted me to look.

 

[trying2understand]

Originally posted by trying2understand:
[qb]I would also be interested in any source that tells us that any Baptist offical (pastor, association, etc.) has ever denounced Thom Robb, the Baptist pastor and Grand Wizard of the KKK.

Originally posted by Lorelei:
We do not claim to have the power to do so, it is the RCC and them alone that claim they are the only way to salvation and in one proclamation can condemn a man eternally to hell. We have no official proclamations in the negative or positive that claims to carry the weight a catholic proclamation professes to carry. It is a mute point.

No power to do so?

Other Baptist pastors cannot say that he is wrong for his public participation in the KKK?

Whatever associations he or his church belong to have no power to say it is wrong?

The seminary that graduated him has no pwoer to say it is wrong?

Baptists have no shortage of power to condemn Catholics for their actions, why the sudden change in zeal where it comes to the sins of fellow Baptists?

 

[neal4christ]

Other Baptist pastors cannot say that he is wrong for his public participation in the KKK?

If you want, I could get my pastor to say he is wrong. I can guarantee he would. And I was a youth pastor and am a seminary student now. I condemn his participation in the KKK.

Do you know the name of his church? I really want to know who he is associated with.

God Bless You,
Neal

 

[Rakka Rage]

I would gladly drop this line of arguementation as I agree that the connection is not explicit. But then neither is the connection when they say "the pope has blood on his hands for saying X." and some government uses it to decide to burn heretics.

http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/

 

[trying2understand]

Originally posted by neal4christ:
If you want, I could get my pastor to say he is wrong. I can guarantee he would. And I was a youth pastor and am a seminary student now. I condemn his participation in the KKK.

That's good, but I am wondering how it is that this guy has been Grand Wizard for over 15 years and there is nothing that I can find where any baptist has been critical of his association with a group like the KKK.

Given the history of the SBC (founded as a reaction against the end of slavery)wouldn't you think that it would be in their interest to publicly disassociate themselves from his this guy?

Do you know the name of his church? I really want to know who he is associated with.

Don't know. I saw something the other day about the Baptist seminary he gradutated from but can't recall the name right now.

As far as the general nonbaptist public is concerned, what difference does it make exactly what kind of baptist he is? The baptist tag on Robb makes all baptists look racist, doesn't it?

Baptists should be shouting from the roof tops, screaming and condemning this guy. But not a peep for 15 years.

 

[Lorelei]

Originally posted by Lorelei:
We do not claim to have the power to do so, it is the RCC and them alone that claim they are the only way to salvation and in one proclamation can condemn a man eternally to hell.

Let me clarify the first part of my sentence and keep in context with the last part of the same sentence, which you failed to do.

We have the power to say someone is wrong and I am certain several Baptists pastors have and would readily denounce this man. But that is all it would be, a pastors statement saying this man is wrong. It carries "no official weight" with any other church and carries with it "no official condemnation." It is the catholic church that professes to hold that authority.

The catholic church claims to hold the right to profess a man anathema, or to pardon a mans sins, and he claims this power comes straight from God. We do not profess to the authority to pardon this man's sins, we can only point out what the scripture says about his sins, we can neither pardon nor condemn him, that power belongs solely to God.

You have been around the BB long enough to have a least a little bit of knowledge as to how our churches differ in belief and practice. It really should not have been necessary to explain this fact, surely you "understand" it by now.

So, if a Baptist Pastor denounced this man, would that carry any weight in the catholic church? If he denounced the pope would that have any weight upon the catholic church? No, but the catholic church claims to be the "only" church, so their denouncement of such things is necessary if they are going to really stand for what they profess to believe. If the church, claiming the power that they do, remains silent on such an important issue it appears that Christ himself is silent, and I doubt seriously He would be.

~Lorelei

 

[Lorelei]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
The Vatican doesn't have to agree. That is the part that you people don't get. The Catholic Church is not a dictatorship. The individual bishops have supreme authority over their diocese and individual bishops as well as collectively have the authority to excommunicate in accord with Mt. 18, binding and loosing.

Is this supreme authority given only in binding and losing or can they choose to ignore the pope in all areas of the faith if they wish?

Originally posted by thessalonian:
The Vatican would recognize any such excommunication. I can cite canon laws and official Church sources supporting this if you like.

Yes, please do, especially the decree that excommunicated all nazi's and explain why these men who were excommunicated still held their positions in the church.

Originally posted by thessalonian:
By the way, if a Baptist is cast out of a Baptist Church in lousiana according to Mt. 18, is he also cast out in Montana?

I believe you know the answer to this. What is your point?

~Lorelei

 

[neal4christ]

Given the history of the SBC (founded as a reaction against the end of slavery)wouldn't you think that it would be in their interest to publicly disassociate themselves his this guy?

Does he claim to be associated with the SBC?

Listen, there are so many who claim the name Baptist but are not. Same thing goes for Catholics. But the most important is the name of Christ. This is what concerns me. The Catholic sex scandal grieves me, because it taints the name of Christ. This Baptist KKK whatever grieves me, because he taints the name of Christ. That is my utmost concern. Denominations are secondary.

May God Bless You,
Neal

 

[trying2understand]

Originally posted by Lorelei:
We have the power to say someone is wrong and I am certain several Baptists pastors have and would readily denounce this man. But that is all it would be, a pastors statement saying this man is wrong. It carries "no official weight" with any other church and carries with it "no official condemnation." It is the catholic church that professes to hold that authority.

Please show me where one single Baptist has denounced this guy.

Wouldn't such condemnation by a Baptist pastor carry weight with other Baptists at least to the extent that they would agree that having a Baptist pastor as the Grand Wizard is just a little bit not right?

we can only point out what the scripture says about his sins,

So show me where this has been done with Thom Robb

You have been around the BB long enough to have a least a little bit of knowledge as to how our churches differ in belief and practice. It really should not have been necessary to explain this fact, surely you "understand" it by now.

You are right. I understand that some baptists are very gleeful to point out the sin of a Catholic, yet remain silent when it comes to the public sin of a Baptist.

 

[neal4christ]

Please show me where one single Baptist has denounced this guy.

Ooo! Ooo! Me! Me!

And I was a youth pastor and am a seminary student now. I condemn his participation in the KKK.

May the Name of Christ Be Exalted,
Neal

 

[trying2understand]

Originally posted by neal4christ:
Does he claim to be associated with the SBC?

Not to my knowledge, but I mention the SBC because Robb tars them with his actions.

The independence of baptist churchs may be meaningful to you, but to nonbaptists it simply looks like an excuse for not concdemning really bad behavior in other baptists.

Perhaps Robb is a good arguement against the baptist system of church government. After all he appears to be totally accountable to no one.

 

[neal4christ]

The independence of baptist churchs may be meaningful to you, but to nonbaptists it simply looks like an excuse for not concdemning really bad behavior in other baptists.

I would agree with this statement. It is kind of like all the false notions of the Catholic Church.

After all he appears to be totally accountable to no one.

Of course, he is accountable to God.

Bless You,
Neal

 

[Kathryn]

DHK:

You are only proving my revisionist history charge. The site you present including Catholics and Jews in the KKK, also says the KKK were actually the good guys!

Doesn’t academic credentials mean anything around here? If we are talking history we need some credibility, not this drivel.

DHK, says:
The issue was more about color than anything else:

"The most unfortunate victims of the Reconstruction Era were the poor whites and freed Negroes who fared the worse under the violent conditions. The most infamous villains were the Carpetbaggers and Scalawags, most of whom just happened to be Jewish. But there is documentation that ex-Confederate Jews, as well as many Catholics also joined the Klan. Religious distinctions were not part of the original Ku Klux Klan's doctrine."

http://www.kkklan.com/briefhist.htm

From same site:

“ It is widely held today that the KKK was a lawless group that just went around the post war South looking for innocent Negroes to hang. Such is nonsense. But the myth is deliberately perpetuated by today's biased media and historians . We have many books available that disprove this and we mention other books that we don't sell, but are available else where. Here I will just briefly show some details that the Klan tried to police the situation and prevent innocent Negroes from being harmed .”


Like I say I am amazed at the depths you are going to make the KKK a "Catholic thing". I trust no Baptists or practing Catholics are in this organization. Could you have made a mistake by posting this?


God Bless

[ June 18, 2003, 01:07 PM: Message edited by: Kathryn ]

 

[Lorelei]

Originally posted by trying2understand:
Given the history of the SBC (founded as a reaction against the end of slavery)wouldn't you think that it would be in their interest to publicly disassociate themselves from his this guy?

Originally posted by trying2understand:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by neal4christ:
Does he claim to be associated with the SBC?

Not to my knowledge, but I mention the SBC because Robb tars them with his actions. </font>[/QUOTE]You admit the man does not claim to be associated with the SBC.

You claim the SBC is tarred by the actions of a man who claims no association with the SBC.

You claim the SBC should publically denounce their association with a man they never claimed to be associated with and who never claimed to be assoicated with them.

And you wonder why they have never done so?

Because his actions do not "tar" the SBC, since neither side claims any association. Therefore, there is no need for them to do so.

Hitler, on the other hand, WAS associated with the Catholic Church at one time. He was baptized catholic. There WAS some association that needs to be addressed.

But your church has not addressed it, have they?

~Lorelei