Saturday, November 07, 2009 Last Update:12:05 pm ET

Church|Thu, Jun. 25 2009 07:04 PM EDT

Support for New Anglican Body Grows

By Lillian Kwon|Christian Post Reporter

More Anglican leaders from across the global communion have joined in support of the newly formed Anglican Church in North America.

  • anglican
    (Photo: ACNS)
    Hundreds of Anglicans convene in Bedford, Texas, for the inaugural assembly of the Anglican Church in North America, June 22-25, 2009.

The Anglican Province of Jerusalem and the Middle East and the Province of Southeast Asia sent their congratulations and welcomed the new conservative body.

"Our prayers are for you and for the new Province to continue to stand firm in faith as you have always done," the Most Rev. Mouneer H. Anis of the Jerusalem and Middle East province wrote. "May the Lord keep your unity in order to advance the gospel of Jesus Christ in North America!"

Bishops from England, Sydney and parts of Africa also celebrated the ACNA and recognized it as authentically Anglican.

So far, nine of the 38 provinces in the Anglican Communion indicated support for the ACNA, which was constituted this week as a biblically-centered province.

The ACNA unites some 100,000 Anglicans in 700 parishes – which have severed ties with The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada – into a single church.

According to its newly ratified constitution, the orthodox Anglicans say they are "grieved by the current state of brokenness within the Anglican Communion prompted by those who have embraced erroneous teaching and who have rejected a repeated call to repentance."

The conservative group has been calling on The Episcopal Church – the U.S. arm of Anglicanism – to repent and get back in line with traditional Anglicanism and Scripture, particularly since it consecrated an openly gay bishop in 2003. But the conservatives saw little hope that the U.S. church body would change direction.

Bishop Martyn Minns of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, one of the breakaway groups that make up the ACNA, said that by forming the new province, they are establishing that they want to stay within the Christian mainstream.

"The teachings we hold to are the teachings that have governed the Anglican branch of Christianity for decades," Minns said.

Bishop Jack Iker of Fort Worth said constituting the ACNA marks "the beginning of the recovery of confidence in Anglicanism as a biblical, missionary church."

Establishing an Anglican national province where such a national church already exists is unprecedented. And although the ACNA has gained support from some of the largest provinces in the Anglican Communion, formal recognition as the 39th province may take years.

The Most Rev. Robert Duncan, who was installed Wednesday as the first archbishop of the ACNA, said he is in regular contact with the Archbishop of Canterbury, the spiritual leader of the global communion.

More than 900 people gathered this week for the inaugural assembly of the ACNA in Bedford, Texas. As they concluded the historic meeting on Thursday, they were reminded of why they created a new province.

The ACNA was not formed to relieve the pain and angst of the past, the Rev. Dr. Todd Hunter, past president of Alpha USA, said. It was established to help build the Kingdom of God, he stressed.

Archbishop Duncan said he wants to start 1,000 churches during his five-year term.

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
  • Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:12 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Is it true that Catholics don't believe in cremation because it will be resurrected, and God isn't big enough to put it back together? What about the Catholics who died in fires? Are they without hope in the resurrection? Or is that view simply another fable along with the plethora of other false doctrines of the catholic church?

  • Sat Jul 04, 2009 9:19 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    dan, no one says that God's Word is the only truth, but rather it is the foundation for all truth and anything that claims to be truth that either contradicts, violates, and/or supersedes the Word of God such as much of the extra-biblical teachings of the roman catholic church that is not truth.

  • Sat Jul 04, 2009 9:01 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    danpart,

    "That's because you have made a "voluntary choice not to read anything other than Scripture (not even Scripture says it is the "only truth")"

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    So Mormonism is of God?

  • Sat Jul 04, 2009 4:49 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    dan, don't you find it odd that probably 90% or more of your defense of roman catholic teaching is found in only extra-biblical teachings as opposed to the Word of God and to validate some of your beliefs you have to totally ignore clear teaching in the Bible such as in your defense of Mary's perpetual virginity where you have to totally ignore Matthew 1:24-25 and all the verses that speak to the fact Jesus had half-brothers and half-sisters who were the children of Mary and Joseph where Mary was indeed Jesus mother, but God was His Father.

  • Sat Jul 04, 2009 4:41 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

    dan, her house was flown by the angels from Nazareth to Loreto Italy in the 12 century, where is the world did you dig up this, although I saw a similar event in the Wizard of Oz when Dorothy and Toto were taken from Kansas to the Land of Oz in a tornado!

  • Sat Jul 04, 2009 8:53 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Dan,

    Thanks for your continual willingness to share, discuss, and debate. . . However, these last couple of days still has not answered my original question . . . If Mary was without sin as you propose, why would she need a Savior?

    "And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour" (Luke 1:47).

  • Sat Jul 04, 2009 2:44 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    They have spread lies for thousands of years. Teaching doctrines that are against the Scriptures. Denying and condemning the Scriptures. That Mary was sinless. That Mary had no other children. That she didn't die. That they are to pray to dead people. That God can't answer prayers or forgive people or heal people. They teach idolatry and witchcraft.
    But praise be to God for bringing out of that apostate church those who sought the truth. God did not forsake His children, but He heard their cry and brought out a remnant from among the pagan cult, and brought them into the Truth. Thank you Lord, for not forsaking your Children.

  • Sat Jul 04, 2009 2:39 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    The Catholic church is an abomination to God. When they elevate Mary to one who brings salvation and claim that God "needed" Mary, it is revealed that the Catholic Church is indeed the great Harlot of Babylon.

  • Sat Jul 04, 2009 2:09 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    ". Q: How can you say that Mary was bodily assumed into heaven when in verse 56 it says:

    "And Mary abode with her (Elisabeth) about three months, and returned to her own house."

    You must be new to Scripture. Refer to your original "so called Reformers" ... they have a lot to say about Mary which is not heresy...

    This was when Mary was pregnant with Jesus (age 14);
    she was given to St John to live with by His (Jesus) "Seven Last Words" - "Son behold thy Mother; Mother behold thy son." (Mary lived until age 64 (with St John whom Jesus gave Her to as He died; see above) [this kind act of Jesus also gives Mary to "mankind" as our Mother; you don't really think St John was Her son do you?

    So Our Lady was not taken bodily to Heaven until age 64; have you ever heard of any Archeologists looking for Mary's body? You won't either-they are not dumb people-it is nowhere; however the house she lived in is in Loreto Italy when it was flown from Nazareth here by angels in the twelth century. Archologists have studied the site and have affirmed that the dirt and artifacts surrounding the house (of Loreto) are "not" from "Italy origin" But match Nazareth "fingerprints" ...

    Again, the only explanation I have is "My ways are not your ways, nor are MY thoughts your..."

    God Bless and good night--have a couple of wheel chair people in the morning and four Baptists to care for

  • Sat Jul 04, 2009 1:53 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Part II

    "Clearly" in Scripture study is the first "tip off," that "it ain't true for the writer is hallucinating. There is nothing "clear" in the Scriptures - proof - you guys "contradicting" each other constantly, the Lutherans, the Methodists, the Episcopaleans, the Anglicans, the Baptists, the Presbyterians, as their worldwide numbers fall continuously [all splitting and sueing each other] because "the Scripture "clearly supports gay ministers, "clearly" supports homosexual marriages, women priestesses, ditching of the Sacraments--"gay marriage" - okay; (as the satan rejoices).

    Believer: "which doesn't make sense that God would select a divorced man to be His Son's earthly father'
    Again, Protestants "restricting God on what He can do or not do."

    And God answers this "arrogance" this way and this is why you do not understand His Word: ("it doesn't make sense."

    "For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
    neither are your ways my ways,"
    declares the LORD.

    9 "As the heavens are higher than the earth,
    so are my ways higher than your ways
    and my thoughts than your thoughts.

    And how easily you make a Logic 101 non-sequitor error in your post, i.e., [Believer] "...that God would select a divorced man to be His Son's earthly father'..."

    You are assuming Joseph is a "divorced" man; again, your eye doth deceive you; the Catholic Church (Christ's Church) designates St Joseph as a "Widower."

    Jesus "Seven last words" Holy with Catholics - state that (Jesus, beholding His beloved Mom and his beloved Apostle St John, from the Cross:

    " When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to his mother, "Woman, behold your son!" Then He said to the disciple, "Behold your mother!" And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home." (John 19:25-27, NKJV."

    [If Joseph and Mary had had "other children" Jesus would have given Mary to them; not to St. John]

    "Joseph is also of the House of David he doesn't count..."

    Again - the restricting of what God can and cannot do.

    I loved this post - there were so many logical error assumptions and actual errors that it alone proves why "individuals" should not "guess" at Scripture.

  • Sat Jul 04, 2009 1:53 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Part I

    Believer: "dan, Mary was a godly young woman who loved God and was a virgin and she was of the House of David,

    This is respectful...

    Believer: ..."no where do we read she was sinless other than in her sexual life [she had none-nada ever] nor do we read that any of her ancestors going all the way back to David were sinless.

    That's because you have made a "voluntary choice not to read anything other than Scripture (not even Scripture says it is the "only truth") - Scripture please [just love playing Protestant - none of it makes any sense] that's why this is a heresy--self-imposed. So let's break this post down --

    This is why a Protestant walking through the burial grounds of those wonderful Saints who gave up their lives in the Colliseum, Lucy, Agnes, Polycarp, thousands more, has to put his hands over his eyes to avoid the truths as he sees the many "post" of the early Christians writing on the walls affirming all of the Christian truths which Protestants do not believe in (because of following one former Catholic priest)
    Even here they cherry-pick, for I've already given you the proofs found easily on line of the wonderful homage the original Protestants pay to my Mom...

    Believer: "And she remained a virgin until after she gave birth to Christ and she and Joseph had children together as the Bible clearly says. [out with "clearly"] "

  • Sat Jul 04, 2009 1:19 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Dan,

    Wow; I would not have imagined all that was contained in this one verse . . .

    "And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour" (Luke 1:47).

    Seriously, you did not remotely explain this passage in its context . . . Q: How can you say that Mary was bodily assumed into heaven when in verse 56 it says:

    "And Mary abode with her (Elisabeth) about three months, and returned to her own house."

    Your analysis once again contradicts the Word of God; it would be helpful for everyone here if we could interpret the Scriptures in their proper context . . .

  • Sat Jul 04, 2009 1:03 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "Dan "No one listens to women's comments having been affirmed by the Lord by his choosing all men to spread the Gospel."

    "Okay, sweet thang. I had a conversation with my Mom about an hour ago and apoligized if She took it personally. She assured me She did not; nevertheless, She deserves my most humblest respect (like the real Protestants affirmed)"

    Thanks for the tip.

  • Sat Jul 04, 2009 1:00 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    ""For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23)."

    "For the longest hands shall have the shortest grip."
    (Irish 20:28)

  • Sat Jul 04, 2009 12:58 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Change your eyeglasses. Jc Penney is having a great sale.

    Mary was "assumed bodily" into Heaven. Where else would you have God put Her; of course He is the Savior "of us all;" aborted babies are "without sin" also, so would you deny that God is "all merciful" and think my Loving God would commit them to hell or purgatory. One needs not only to deal with the Savior saving people from "their sins," but also for people who have "not sinned"--aborted babies, those inflicted with BO's infanticide.

    No way. This is why "individual Scripture" interpre-tations lead one to error.

    Persons below the age of seven (usually referred to "the age of reason" by the great Theologians are not responsible for any actual sins; original sin still applies but that is why Baptism is necessary.

    Mortal sin is a deadly offense against God, so horrible that it destroys the life of grace in the soul. Three simultaneous conditions must be fulfilled for a mortal sin:


    1. Serious Matter (things listed below)

    2. Knowledge or firm belief that the act is seriously wrong prior to committing the act;

    3. Full consent of the will.

    All three of these conditions must be present simultaneously for a sin to be mortal. This means that if you did not know the act was seriously wrong, then you are not guilty of having committed a mortal sin. If you did not will the act, e.g., if you were forced or if it was in a dream, if you were impaired or emotionally distraught or terrified, etc., you are not guilty of the act committed. There have also been cases of people (forget her name but that rich girl about 30 years ago and forced into a "bank robbery" which breaks the seventh Commandment "Thou shalt not steal;" however since she was forced it lacked free will and so she is not culpable.

    Hey, this is interesting. I just confessed a "supposed sin I thought I had committed in "a dream," and the priest said to me, "You must be kidding. We are not responsible for things "in a dream." I should have known that since it violate the rule of 3 above.

    "Scripture please."

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 11:30 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Dan,

    Your last seven posts did not explain this passage . . . "And my spirit hath rejoiced in God MY SAVIOUR" (Luke 1:47)"

    What does it mean?

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:24 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "And my spirit hath rejoiced in God MY SAVIOUR" (Luke 1:47)"

    I'd be happy too if I was a woman and God chose me to be His Mommy." What hath dis ta do wit sin?

    She was "assumed bodily" into Heaven. Where else would you have God put Her; of course He is the Savior of us all; aborted babies are "without sin" also, so would you deny God is all merciful and think my Loving God would commit them to hell.

    Short-circuited thinking is why "sometimes" Theologians are necessary; call "Dial a Theologian" at I-luv-dani.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:18 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Prophet: "I wonder what lie is next from the catholic cult? That God consulted them about creating the world? Deciding who His chosen people would be? I wait with curiosity."

    Stay tuned for "the Beast." BOO!

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:16 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    ""And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour" (Luke 1:47)? If she was without sin why would she say such a thing?

    The biblical testimony is this: "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one" (Romans 3:10).


    "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23)."

    Again, the cherry picking of Sola Scriptura leads one into further error and divisions--check this site for proof, Lutherans, Episcopals, Anglicans, all cherry-picking their way in disintegration.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:13 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "Dan "No one listens to women's comments having been affirmed by the Lord by his choosing all men to spread the Gospel."

    Well, you got me on this one. I will make an exception on my Mom's comments. I will apologize to Her tonight.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:11 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "no where do we read she was sinless other than in her sexual life ..."

    You'll never find the truth because of the heresy of Sola Scriptura which even many of your own say is not "Biblical." It is heresy because you reject "history" which you never would on something like WWII today. This keeps you "if the blind lead the blind both will fall into the pit." In your error it make you reject the burial places of the first Christians, the Fathers of the Church Ignatius, Origin, etc., the Roman Historian Tacitus, and even your own founders; you are forever "bound" in your own error and, until you read, Church history like Scott Hahn (former minister; Msn70 on this site; Chas) And you hold "two truths can be held at the same time" (a logical error) while Protestantism disintegrates into further lawsuits and divisions over "false Scripture readings."
    It doesn't make me happy-it makes me sad.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:03 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "Which is it? Is he all powerful? Or did He need help?If God is all powerful (as the protestants believe) then He didn't NEED Mary. God could have brought Jesus from a hole in the ground. I guess if that had happened the Catholic Church would have:"

    This is a highly confused lady; take an aspirin.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:02 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Online4Him: "Care to interpret this verse?"

    Catholics never "interpret" individually. All authority was given by Jesus to His Catholic (Universal) Church. Therefore there is only "one" interpretation for the situation, viz (as in the Nicene Creed - the "Marks of the Church Christ founded - "One" (One doctrine) "Holy" (feeding on the Body and Blood of Our Savior; feeding the hungry; clothing the naked; visiting prisons, nursing homes, et al) Catholic (Universal - worldwide) since the Apostles traveled Jesus - "He who hears you hears me." Apostolic (steming directly from the Apostles (through the Bishops of Rome (unbroken) from Peter - 265 so far.

    The Holy Spirit cannot affirm "two opposing translations at the same time," e.g., homosexuality either was approved by Christ or it wasn't., and you know the Catholic Church's doctrine on this, etc., "so the confusion does not happen in the Catholic Church." Jesus is ONE -- not many conflicting opinions.

    Personally, I read Scripture because I love it and really love the Psalms. At every Mass Scripture is read before the Consecration; e.g., the Letters of St Paul, perhaps an OT reading, then the Gospel; I go daily and have for 44 years basically because I want to receive the Body and Blood of Jesus each morning. Too many Catholics don't appreciate this miracle which Jesus left us.

    God Bless, Dan

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:25 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Dan,

    Open your bible . . . "And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour" (Luke 1:47).

    Care to interpret this verse?

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:02 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "Danpart: "The Catholic Church teaches God is all Powerful"

    Danpart: "Jesus Who is God needed Mary."

    It's both. Have you not heard of child birth? All persons are created by God for his Divine Plan; Mary's was to give birth to a Savior.

    Formula:

    No Mary - No Jesus - No Salvation

    Stop in at your local Pedeatric clinic and ask them for a synopsis of giving birth to a child (usually a woman); if too difficult mayber they'll let you watch the process.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 8:48 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    "But, like God, true Christians don't need Mary or the Saints. They know that Jesus is their all in all. Their everything."

    Jesus created Mary and the Saints - Mary for our salvation and the Saints for our emulation of a Christ- filled life, of which many were martyred for Christ. Cast the gifts of the Lord at your own risk.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 6:41 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    But, like God, true Christians don't need Mary or the Saints. They know that Jesus is their all in all. Their everything.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 6:40 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "He did chose the Perfect Vessel; but because of your heresy, you would reject "Betty," or "Wanda, et al"

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Here's a bit of Catholic heresy: Mary was perfect.
    The truth? "For ALL have sinned...."

    To say that Mary was sinless would be to call God a liar.


    But heres another tidbit of danpart's double mindedness.

    Danpart: "The Catholic Church teaches God is all Powerful"

    Danpart: "Jesus Who is God needed Mary."

    Which is it? Is he all powerful? Or did He need help?If God is all powerful (as the protestants believe) then He didn't NEED Mary. God could have brought Jesus from a hole in the ground. I guess if that had happened the Catholic Church would have:

    "Hail hole,
    Full of Grace,
    The Lord is with thee.
    Blessed art thou among holes,
    and blessed is the fruit
    of thy hole, Jesus.
    Holy hole,
    Creator of God,
    pray for us sinners now,
    and at the hour of death.
    Amen."

    I wonder if the Catholics would still claim the hole was a perpetual virgin....

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 11:58 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    dan, Mary was a godly young woman who loved God and was a virgin and she was of the House of David, no where do we read she was sinless other than in her sexual life nor do we read that any of her ancestors going all the way back to David were sinless. And she remained a virgin until after she gave birth to Christ and she and Joseph had children together as the Bible clearly says. They were not Joseph's children from another marriage for two reasons, Joseph would have had to been divorced if the children did not reside with Mary and him which doesn't make sense that God would select a divorced man to be His Son's earthly father and if Joseph's wife had died then his children would have been with Mary and him when they went to Bethlehem for the census. And if the concept of the immaculate conception were true then she would not be of the House of David and even though Joseph is also of the House of David he doesn't count since he had no part in the conceiving of the Christ child and God said the Messiah would come from the House of David, for that prophecy to be true Mary had to come biologically from the House of David.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:53 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    Mary "And my spirit hath rejoiced in God MY SAVIOUR" (Luke 1:47)

    Dan "No one listens to women's comments having been affirmed by the Lord by his choosing all men to spread the Gospel."

    I pray today that you would listen to hers!! If she was without sin why would she say such a thing?

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:35 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Flagged as inappropriate. show It is wonderful to see "The Church" rejecting "the world" and its ways. The Humanist/secularist agenda takes a set back, but they'll try some other sneaky tactic to warp the Church into worldy ways. hide

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:05 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    (He did chose the Perfect Vessel; but because of your heresy, you would reject "Betty," or "Wanda, et al")

    Where do you get this stuff ... lol. Sorry, the Word of God does not support your position .... Why does Mary say, "And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour" (Luke 1:47)? If she was without sin why would she say such a thing?

    The biblical testimony is this: "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one" (Romans 3:10).


    "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23).

    So, Mary along with the rest of us was a sinner and needed a savior! Personally, I choose to believe the reliable witness of God's Word . . .

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:17 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "As I pointed out in my last three comments

    No one listens to women's comments having been affirmed by the Lord by his choosing all men to spread the Gospel.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:15 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "It is foolish to say ... No Mary - No Jesus; you need to be reminded that it is Jesus who created ALL things! He could have chosen any vessel to enter the world..."

    He did chose the Perfect Vessel; but because of your heresy, you would reject "Betty," or "Wanda, et al"

    What you need is a little bit of Medical School training; for Jesus to have come into the world in childbirth, He needs a woman, and as God, no ordinary woman, since God is sinless and perfect, His vessel has to be perfect and sinless; because God and Sin are not compatible; in fact, you may not have noticed from your Bible, but God hates sin. (He loves the sinner like myself but He hates sin) A Logic 101 error - two opposites cannot be true at the same time - God and sin are opposites and nothing "tainted" can co-exist with God. Just like heresy cannot exist with truth: see the bunch of heresies through the ages beginning with Marcion NT.

    Next a course in Metaphysics, Nicomachean Ethics, Logic 101 hmmm, and maybe 102 might help.

    No Mary - No Jesus (Medical fact) - No Redemption

    Doing it your way:

    No Betty - No Jesus (Medical fact) - No Redemption

    No Wanda - No Jesus (Medical fact) - No Redemption

    Same result - ignorance

    Another factor you miss is Our Lady's "sinlessness" has been a Christian belief since the Apostolic age: Proved by: (1) the Early Church Fathers:

    Athanasius (Alexandria, 293-373);
    Epiphanius (Palestine, 315?-403);
    Jerome (Stridon, present day Yugoslavia, 345?-419);
    Augustine (Numidia, now Algeria, 354-430);
    Cyril (Alexandria, 376-444);
    and others.

    (2) the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church founded by Jesus while He was on earth (3) the grafitti written in the early Christian places of their burials after their martydom (for your edification they are called catacumbus [catacombs], the Ecumenical Councils "Council of Constantinople," the Protestant so called Reformers, M Luther, John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli, and the Theologian, Harnack among others.

    So a ton of evidence exists in the Christian world that Our Lady was sinless and forever sinless affirmed by both Catholic and Protestant sources [they had to because we would not have a Savior without a sinless Our Lady]

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:53 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    I wonder what lie is next from the catholic cult? That God consulted them about creating the world? Deciding who His chosen people would be? I wait with curiosity.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:50 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "
    Close, but no cigar. At this rate though she will begin the learn the Bible in, ahh, maybe 30 years?"


    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

    As I pointed out in my last three comments, I seriously doubt you have cracked open a Bible, yet. All you talk about is the rhetoric spewed out by a false church. I mean, what can you say about a group of people that think that God needs them? ROTFL. The word "cult" comes to mind.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:47 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    He (Jesus) alone is most powerful. - But Jesus could not give us Saints as role models. [limit someone all powerful? [a contradiction]"

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Can't or won't. Big difference. God can do anything, doesn't mean He will. Now, if you're saying that God gave us Saints as role models, I'd say you set your standards WAY too low. My role model will always be Jesus. Because He is everything I need. No contradiction there, just conviction.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:44 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    I shouldn't laugh. The Catholics idolatry and deification of humans is going to get them in a world of bad judgement on that Day.

    God could have created Jesus from the dust of the earth. Instead, He chose a simple, sinful lady to do the trick. So Catholics hold her in a place above God. I wish the Catholics needed God as much as they think He needs them. But their pride won't let them.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:40 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "Jesus Who is God needed Mary; but of course once again you place yourself above God.

    No Mary - No Jesus - No redemption (at least My Lord, Jesus and Master understood this, but of course He is God and you are man (oops-woman)"

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Hahahaha...now THAT is hilarious. Our God, who created man from the dust of the earth and spoke our universe into existance NEEDED Mary? There is the Catholic pride in action. Again, placing man above God. Since when did God ever NEED man to accomplish anything? Answer: NEVER.
    C'mon danpart. Quit putting God into a box and limiting His power.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:31 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Prophet: "So, since He is everything and all that a Christian needs, to "venerate" Mary to deity is to say the Jesus is insufficient. What a sad way to live."

    Gee, I thought after four weeks Prophet finally went to a dictionary and looked up "venerate;" but alas, she has once again not understood, "adorate" elevates one to a "deity" not "venerate." To venrate "is to place someone in a high honor; like you do your president BO.

    Close, but no cigar. At this rate though she will begin the learn the Bible in, ahh, maybe 30 years? This is "sad," the state of our public schools today. St Augustine and the early Church Fathers knew this "detail" 1600 - 2000 years ago.

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:24 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Dan,

    It is foolish to say ... No Mary - No Jesus; you need to be reminded that it is Jesus who created ALL things! He could have chosen any vessel to enter the world...

    Again, Mary was not immaculately conceived: this is another invention of men!

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:24 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Prophet: "He alone is most powerful..."

    I love Prophet's disjointed statements...oops another Logic 101 error:

    He (Jesus) alone is most powerful. - But Jesus could not give us Saints as role models. [limit someone all powerful? [a contradiction]

    He (Jesus) alone is most powerful. - But Jesus could not give us the Sacraments to aid us in our quest to Heaven
    [limit someone all powerful? [a contradiction]

    He (Jesus) alone is most powerful. - But Jesus could not give us the His Body to eat nor His Flesh to drink "John 6:48 [limit someone all powerful? [a contradiction]
    â

  • Fri Jul 03, 2009 12:47 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    "Why do I need Mary? I don't. Jesus is EVERYTHING and ALL I need..."

    Not only is this ignorant it is actually funny.

    Jesus Who is God needed Mary; but of course once again you place yourself above God.

    No Mary - No Jesus - No redemption (at least My Lord, Jesus and Master understood this, but of course He is God and you are man (oops-woman)

  • Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:53 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Hmmm, these passages objectively state that JESUS ALONE is the ONLY mediator.

    For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; (1 Timothy 2:5).

    And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance (Hebrews 9:15).

    Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and ONLY Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords (1 Timothy 6:15).

  • Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:04 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Besides,
    Why do I need Mary? I don't. Jesus is EVERYTHING and ALL I need. He alone is my salvation. He alone hears and answers my prayers. He alone is my comforter. He alone is the Morning Star. He alone is the Shepherd of the Church. He alone is the Head of the body. He alone can forgive all my sins. He alone is most powerful. He alone is most pure. He alone is the seat of wisdom. He alone is the cause for my joy. He alone is the mirror of justice. He alone is the tower of David. He alone is the Ark of the Covenant. He alone heals the sick. He alone was conceived without original sin. He alone is the Prince of peace.

    So, since He is everything and all that a Christian needs, to "venerate" Mary to deity is to say the Jesus is insufficient. What a sad way to live.

  • Thu Jul 02, 2009 9:42 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    dan, I went to David MacDonald's website and read his testimony about his struggles but found no reference to Mary whatsoever other than Queen St. Mary Street in Ottawa where he grew up I believe. Could you provide a link to the portion of his testimony that you shared?

  • Thu Jul 02, 2009 9:27 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "Most Christians would agree that it is completely safe to pray to Jesus about anything. I would like to invite you to pray to Jesus about Mary."

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Gee, I'm glad it's safe. LOL.

    I did pray to Jesus about Mary. He said she was a good woman. Had a good heart. Wasn't perfect though. He loved her other sons as well. She's up in heaven with all the other Christians worshipping and all that. And says she can't hear a single prayer you all have been praying to her. The saints, too, for that fact. He said He'd like to do more for the Catholic Church, but they seem to like Mary more than Him. And they're lying about His Word. He says that hopefully the Catholics will discover the truth, but He knows how hard the hearts of men can be.

  • Thu Jul 02, 2009 9:20 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    dan, so we're back to square one in that you can provide no valid biblical support for Mary's perpetual virginity and Peter appointing James as head of the Jerusalem Council.

  • Thu Jul 02, 2009 9:16 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    dan, and any good translation points out that what some call the protestant ending to the Lord's Prayer is not found in some of the ancient manuscripts.

  • Thu Jul 02, 2009 9:13 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    dan, and yet you not shown us one legitimate error from the Word of God!

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Also on CP
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Health
  • Church
  • Gifts
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Zondervan

Struggling to succeed in the Nashville music scene, talented singer/songwriter Parker James finds the competition fierce even deadly. A young woman's murder, industry corruption, a

Featured Advertiser Links