Thursday: Bishop Wilton Gregory, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops with Pope John Paul II.
VATICAN CITY ‚ÄĒ The U.S. Roman Catholic Church's new sexual abuse policy was officially rejected on Friday by the Vatican, which said the zero-tolerance hard line taken by the American bishops needed to be revised because elements conflicted with universal church law.
As predicted by Fox News on Thursday, the Holy See recognized the bishops' efforts to stamp out clerical abuse, but said the adopted policy held provisions that were "difficult to reconcile" with church law, were not easy to interpret and left open procedural questions that needed to be resolved.
"For these reasons it has been judged appropriate that before the recognitio [Vatican approval] can be granted," the Vatican statement said, "a further reflection on and revision of the 'Norms' and the 'Charter' are necessary."
The statement, signed by Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, head of the Congregation of Bishops, proposed the...
I only want to comment on DM's remarks regarding the age of the "relevant sermons" at the bottom of this page. DM, you must understand that our God is constant and so is the Bible. It doesn't matter if a sermon was preached 100 years ago or yesterday...it is still the same.
To Mr. Stannard; I have found that consistency and accuracy do not require 'updates', therefore when I read the old preachers like Spurgeon or Bunyon, or when I read Sproul or MacArthur and I see how clearly they line with Scripture, that is a lesson in itself, isn't it?
Trish, I commend your attitude that we should base our doctrines on the Bible and the Bible alone. I would like to correct one misconception, though, if I may. Protestants did not bring out of the RCC 'baptismal regeneration'or 'idolatry', and not all have infant baptisms. Protestants do not believe in it. Consider our beliefs summarized in the 'solas'...sola scriptura, sola gratia, sola fide, solus Christos and soli Deo Gloria; which summed up tell us the Bible alone for doctrine, faith alone through grace alone in Christ alone for salvation, to the glory of God alone. There is no room in this for any kind of regeneration but that which comes from God. In addition, having come from an independent Baptist background, and now in a Reformed church, you will not find near as many statues or even pictures of Christ or men in the latter as the former. Considering infant baptism, while I disagree with it, Protestants do not do it with the same understanding as do RCC; to them it's a covenantal thing :-).
Having been on the internet discussing Scripture and Christian beliefs for some time now, I can tell you from experience it truly will help you and be edifying to the church to make sure you do not speak for others without plenty of research. I do appreciate your zeal in what you believe. Thank you.
When Trish or Mr Perry become the fourth person in the Trinity, then I will grant to them the priveliges of being God, until that time I believe the use of that kind of word is un-christian to say the least. How can you see the fleck in the eyes of 60 millon Catholic and several million other Protestant denominations when there is a timber in your own eye. Sound familiar?
Mr. Stannard, I believe that Trish was quoting the Bible. If God uses the word, perhaps it's OK for us to use it as well?
Also take a look at Matthew 7:1-6. We are told not to judge (or condemn), but that does not stop Jesus from telling people not to throw their pearls before swine.
Given that Jesus's audience were mostly poor Jews, it is doubtful that they owned pearls or hogs. Matthew 7:6 is, then, Jesus using a very strong epithet to describe the character of people. In the same way, the prophets consistently refer to unfaithfulness as prostitution.
For people who are commanded not to judge others, you sure throw the "Whore" word around alot. Maybe Jesus was kidding when he said "That they may be one as you (God the Father) and I are one". Where in "Your" Bible does it condemn ecumenicism and charismaticism, or did your Pastor suddenly see the light between the lines. As far as I can tell there are still plenty of Protestants and Evangelicals to go around and none of them are fixing to throw in the towel.
What I was referring to is the ecumenical/charasmatic movement that is sweeping the globe. EVERYONE is pushing this wickedness. The charasmatic movement crosses all borders: catholic, anglican, lutheran, and all protestant "denominations" alike. The Catholic church is loving this because all of her daughters (Protestants who departed during the reformation) are coming back to "Momma". Soon a one world "church" will be formed with the Whore (Revelation 17) leading the way. Beware of Rome!
I am a Bible believing, sin hating, soul-winning, Savior loving, woman who has been washed in the blood of the Lamb (Amen!). I once attended several different Protestant churches, but, upon studing the history of our Lord's church, was convicted by the Holy Spirit to begin attending an independant Baptist church. In my studies I discovered that the Protestants, although they protested against Rome, remianed much like Catholics. When they departed from the Vatican, they took with them many of her traditions (infant baptism, idolatry, baptismal regeneration, etc. which are not found in the word of Truth). Another tradition which they practised is the persecution and murder of real Bible believers -- not to mention the severe persecution and hatred of the blessed Word of our Lord -- throughout the "dark ages". Mr. Martin Luther, who prompted the Protestant revolution, continued to persecute and murder people who held to the Bible. Mr. Luther believed that one had to be baptized in order to be saved (please see cnview.com/on_line_resources/infant_baptism.htm). If you have time, please visit http://www.picknowl.com.au/homepages/rlister/baphist/blood/trail.htm and read what J. M. Carroll wrote about our Lord's church (through the ages) and why Protestant churches are simply daughters of the Vatican (who will one day return to her). Two other great sites are biblebelievers.com and wayoflife.org.
I hope and pray that this will be a blessing to you.
This is an excellent example of what happens when you mix the authority of the Bible with a church's tradition. Read closely; this article basically says that Catholic bishops in the U.S.A. could not find a doctrinally acceptable way of punishing errant priests.
Per Mr. Stannard's request, the first reason that I am a Protestant is that Protestant churches believe in the Word.
I think its about time that you all get some new material. Your "1950's Radio debate" and "Why I am a Protestant" are ancient and your other sermons are at least 20 years old. Has no one since 1965 found a reason to be a "Prot", come...come lets get our thinking caps on, shall we. How can you portray yourselves to be defenders of the Protestant faith, with old stuff like this.