"He was the only one on the ballot and no one voted against him, according to state media".
Anyone voting against him would have been shot and the people know that, so naturally voted for the only name on the ballot sheet. That's the ultimate evolution of socialism - not people power - complete obedience to those who gain the power to tell you what to think and believe. Russia, China and the other communist utopias demonstrate the same despotic politics.
And don't forget this is what Obama and his Democrats want for America.
Does Catholic dogma agree with John Yurich that not believing in transubstantiation is not against Catholic morals?
"Like Baptism, the Eucharist is necessary for salvation to be received either sacramentally or in desire. Christ's words, "if you do not eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you will not have life in you" (John 6:53), means that Holy Communion is necessary to sustain the life of grace in a person who has reached the age of reason
The main reason that I would use to argue that the Eucharist is necessary for salvation is because Grace is necessary for salvation, and in the Eucharist there is Grace. Thatâ€™s what Jesus is really saying in John 6 â€“ that if we donâ€™t receive the Eucharist, we will not have Grace within us"
also confirmed at several Catholic forums, they teach no salvation without it. Do you think you can find a priest who thinks it is okay not to venerate Mary and offer prayers to her or use the Rosary? Obviously, his "beliefs" are against Catholic morals, care to try again John?
penned wrote: sounds like franchises. and could just be the next step in the evolution of the incorporated church during a depression when local communities are low on funds. concerns me their use of the phrase "healthy churches" -- "healthy churches" means those who are getting lots of numbers and $$$.
Earlier in this thread I described a church where their additional site was in my opinion a positive, but all too often it might be as you say: a brand with different flavors or even franchise to share that 'healthy'ness. My main concern is Christian accountability with members bouncing around site to site seduced by which location tickles their ears
Mourner, there is a time to mourn, but even in our sufferings a time to rejoice. I do hope you can also rejoice in the Lord, knowing your eternal position with Christ. May I ask you what you mean by "familiar fellowship"? Do you mean a casual disregard for sacred things in conversation? Do you think its ok every once in awhile to make a cup of tea enjoy some sunshine and tell a knock knock joke? You will be missed if you must leave for a time!
Dolores, I think there's quite a few kind souls here that care about one another, it is a news thread. Seems these are times when many have struggles in their local communities, a sign of the times I guess! Good day!
John Yurich USA wrote: No I don't agree with liberal Catholics not making their views on supporting abortion and homosexuality known to their priest as being Pro Abortion and Pro Homosexuality is against Catholic moral teaching and liberal Catholics should be excommunicated from the Catholic Church. But I am a Conservative Catholic Republican who is against abortion and homosexuality and who doesn't believe that the Mass is a sacrifice, that the Virgin Mary and the Saints are intercessors between God and man and who doesn't believe in transubstantiation. Not believing in those doctrines I listed above is not against Catholic moral teaching. And thus I don't have to make my priest cognizant that I don't believe in those doctrines listed above.
It's good to know you don't participate in the Catholic parts to the Catholic church. And it is understandable why you don't want your priest to know.
Jim Lincoln wrote: With baby bush,"ignorance was bliss," so the buck should have stopped there. Apparently the committee members have been tight-lipped thank goodness. It would have even looked worse, if everything was discussed in public.
Especially since the committee has been under control of the Democrats since 2006.
mourner, Billy Graham is Baptist and Ruth Graham was Presbyterian and got along fine and had a great marriage. I am a Christian with Baptist beliefs and mother was a Methodist and so was her parents. She was sprinkled and I was immerged. She is in heaven and I know I will see her again in heaven. My beliefs are different than some on here but God called me to be a witness, not Judge and jury. I refuse to put God in a box because my God is much bigger than that. I have said this before, there will be a people in every visible church that are His true child, the Sheep. There are also those in every church that will be the tares or goats, those that Jesus will say depart from me ..I never knew you. I know my salvation is real and Paul said work out your own salvation with fear and trembling and that's what I am doing. I don't think the way most do on here so I will probley never have fellowship with most but that's fine with me because I am not trying to please man but God and will put me in a lonely place at times.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: I have been silent on this matter for a long while, and will more than likely continue to refrain. However, the thing is John Y, you cannot deny that you practice the RCC means of salvation by attending their services and partaking in their mass. (It is hogwash that you somehow participate only in part, NO ONE watching you would say the same) when you stand in the judgment is your non-denominational brother going to intervene (alas it would do him and you no good)when you hear those awful words, depart from me I NEVER KNEW you???? We should start praying that God will defeat the voices of those who lead John Y down the path to destruction.(that would include SteveR) They are messrngers of Satan set to hinder you. Ultimately only God can open your eyes and heart to the truth but Jesus condemned the lawyers for hindering the path of others. May God silence their witness as He did the girl in Acts 16.
Yes I can deny that I practice the RCC means of salvation because I don't go to Individual Confession, I don't believe that the Mass is a sacrifice and I don't believe in transubstantiation. I refrain from saying the unscriptural statements during the Mass.
Mike wrote: Then you agree with liberal Catholics who don't make the priest cognizant of their views, and thereby get to stay in the RCC, because their views are none of his business?
No I don't agree with liberal Catholics not making their views on supporting abortion and homosexuality known to their priest as being Pro Abortion and Pro Homosexuality is against Catholic moral teaching and liberal Catholics should be excommunicated from the Catholic Church. But I am a Conservative Catholic Republican who is against abortion and homosexuality and who doesn't believe that the Mass is a sacrifice, that the Virgin Mary and the Saints are intercessors between God and man and who doesn't believe in transubstantiation. Not believing in those doctrines I listed above is not against Catholic moral teaching. And thus I don't have to make my priest cognizant that I don't believe in those doctrines listed above.
penned wrote: I thought you might all find this interesting if you missed it when it happened. but subway had some kind of chemical apparently used in yoga mats that they put in their bread. I think it was only used in their American stores. after a news story came out on it, they announced they would take it out. it does help when people are informed.
A chemical found in Yoga mats is found in Subway subs? OK
When John Y didnt testify that he avoided the unScriptural foods on the McDonalds menu, I was wondering what the religious significance for this story being posted on SA was
I thought you might all find this interesting if you missed it when it happened. but subway had some kind of chemical apparently used in yoga mats that they put in their bread. I think it was only used in their American stores. after a news story came out on it, they announced they would take it out. it does help when people are informed.
SteveR wrote: Relax Dont spin your head in circles and spew vomit on the board, I merely put your wickedness in context. It was mourners observation that you consistently misrepresent Reformed Theology. To me, its no big deal...its just a dog returning to its vomit
You should know all about dogs returning to vomit; you've practiced it to perfection and displayed it for all to see on this forum.
As for reformed theology, since you haven't a clue what its about, you're in no position to judge whether this is misrepresented or not. Stick to Romanism, your preferred vomit. You're better suited to it. A match made in hell.
And as usual, since you are not going to make good that baseless accusation, you child of the devil, I'm back to ignore TROLL mode.
Observer wrote: Why you snake! Hissing at the saints again. Care to make good your accusation? Or would you like us to prove that that accusation (i.e. constant false representation) is true of you? Happy to spend the time to prove to any reader's satisfaction that you are an utter hate filled hypocrite.
Relax Dont spin your head in circles and spew vomit on the board, I merely put your wickedness in context. It was mourners observation that you consistently misrepresent Reformed Theology. To me, its no big deal...its just a dog returning to its vomit
Hurt and upset feelings found expression in the egging of Mr. and Mrs. Silvesterâ€™s house on Luker Avenue in early February. If he is an ignorant hater, as charged, it is a grievous fault and grievously has he paid for it at the hands of these noble citizens.
It embiggens the smallest man under the cover of night to throw an egg at the face of oppression ...
God bless this man for speaking against their sins.
R. K. Borill wrote: John Y writes: So, Francis is the one and only Anti-Christ mentioned in the Book of Revelation that will appear near the Second Coming of Christ? You can prove that of course? Why don't you think before making such a stupid statement like Francis is the one and only Anti-Christ? R. K. Responds, John you fail to see that the Anti-Christ is a principality much like the Presidency. It's head is replaced periodically. That is why it is called a beast with multiple heads. Francis just happens to be the head of the beast for now.
The Bible states that the Anti-Christ will be a real man and not a principality. The Bible states that the Anti-Christ will be killed and come back to life and thus convincing many that he is the Messiah come again.