Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

Full story: CBC News 579,137
The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ. Read more
LTM

Sault Sainte Marie, Canada

#412174 Dec 28, 2012
LTM wrote:
You would think you walked into a mad house"
So said John Arnott of the Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship
(Click here to see the video clip where he says this
Audio/Video Documentation of Pentecostal Heresy!
The Largest collection on the web with over 50 clips!
(All Videos require Real Player and a minimum 28.8 KB connection)
John Scotland at "Toronto Blessing" Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship (TACF)
Kenneth Hagin
Kenneth Copeland
"Toronto Blessing" John Arnott Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship (TACF)
Rodney Howard-Browne
Benny Hinn
Photogallery of fake miracle trinkets
Steve Hill & John Kilpatrick: Brownsville Revival
Peter Popoff Certified fraud that does the same stuff as the rest!
Some Pentecostals behave in church, in ways Christians discipline their Children for.
The behaviour of Pentecostals on this video is identical to many occult world religions
KM, I wanted to discuss this with you. I don't listen to any of these men. But the Pentecostal movement as I understand it is very mixed I don't know what to believe.
My father was pentecostal preacher, but I never followed it.
I find it greatly exaggerated by some , as the man said it was like I walked into a mad house.
Anthony MN

Andover, MN

#412175 Dec 28, 2012
After the death of Christ on the cross, and in the centuries before 419 A.D., there were many, perhaps hundreds of writings, and some forgeries that had to be sorted out and decided upon as to if they were canonical (canon = rule or official list) or not. The early Catholic Church was scattered out in communities over a wide geographic area. Many people in these communities liked the Shepherd of Hermas and it was very popular and read as if it were scripture. On The Shepherd of Hermas; in the document The Muratorian Fragment, approx. 170-180 A. D., it is written: "was written quite recently in our own time by Hermas, while his brother, Pius, was filling the chair of the Church of the city of Rome".( Pope Saint Pious I apparently occupied the chair of Peter approx. 140 - 155 A. D.). Origen ( 185-232 A.D.) believed the author of The Shepherd of Hermas to be the same Hermas referred to by Saint Paul in Romans 16:14. The Epistle of Barnabus was accepted as Scripture by Clement and Origen but not by Saint Jerome. While both of the books; the Shepherd of Hermas and the Epistle of Barnabus, were read and accepted by many Early Church communities they are not found in today's Bibles

The Gospel of Thomas was also in circulation and accepted by some followers of Mani ( Manicheans ). Saint Cyril of Jerusalem, in his Cathechesis V ( approx. 348 A.D.), states: "Let none read the gospel of Thomas, for it is the work, not of one of the twelve apostles, but one of Mani's three wicked disciples." Manichaeanism is a heretical idea that has echoed down the centuries and has persisted even unto today. Likewise, Gnosticism ( Gnostics were Docetists = Greek "to appear" ) teaches that salvation is liberation from the body because the material world is evil. These heretical teachings and writings were rejected as false by ecclestical authority. The important thing to remember about heretical ideas is that they will continue to re-emerge, in more virulent form ( variants ), and under different name, throughout the centuries.
Anthony MN

Andover, MN

#412176 Dec 28, 2012
Some communities did not accept the Book of Revelation (Apocalypse) as Scripture, so it was not so popularly read and it was a disputed book. The Council of Laodicea about 360 A.D. did not include Revelation in the Canon of Scripture. Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, also rejected it and forbade it's reading in public or private as well. Athanasius, Bishop of Alexanderia, accepted it as Scripture as it is shown in his festal letter of 367 A.D.[1] Disputes over the canonicity of the Book of Revelation contributed to divisions in the Eastern Church communities, and some Greek Churches of today do not accept it as Sacred Scripture.[2][3]

The Bible did not come complete with an index, telling us which books, and how many, are inspired writings and canonical or not. It was the bishops of the Catholic Church under the guidance of the Holy Spirit that sorted out and decided the canon of Sacred Scripture. The bishops were preserved from falling into error, as our Lord promised, on this important matter concerning the Holy Catholic Church.(Matt. 16:18; 28:18-20)(John 14,15, and 16)(1 Tim. 3:14-15)(Acts 15:28) They included Tobit, Baruch, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), 1 Maccabees, and 2 Maccabees. Roman Catholics call these books deuterocanonical. Protestants call them Apocrypha. There are some additional passages in Daniel and Esther not found in Protestant Bibles.

Relatively recent archeological findings and analysis of the Dead Sea scrolls (Qumran) of 1947 revealed that several deuterocanonical books were originally composed in Hebrew (Sirach, Judith, 1 Maccabees,) or Aramaic (Tobit). The Protestant reformers of the 16th century were not aware of the Hebrew and Aramic Versions of the deuterocanonical books in the Alexandrian canon. These are significant and noteworthy because it proves that some of these books were in circulation in Palestine and were accepted by Jewish groups there. Many of the Christian evangelists and apologists used the Alexandrian canon ( Septuagint LXX ) preserved (not composed or originally written) in Greek. Hellenists Jews from outside Palestine had their own synagogue where the Bible was read in Greek.
The Hebrews were native Palestinian Jews with their own synagogue. Their language was Aramaic and their Bible was read in Hebrew. There were complaints and disputations amongst these two Jewish groups ( Hellenists and Hebrews ), who used different languages, as is noted in ( Acts 6:1-2 ).
Anthony MN

Andover, MN

#412177 Dec 28, 2012
The Protestant Reformers (not preserved from falling into error) thought that all the deuterocanonical books in the Alexandrian canon had been composed in Greek. The Protestant reformers accept 39 books found in the Hebrew Canon. They do not accept 46 books as they thought their to be seven (7) additional books to the canon of the Holy Bible only composed in Greek (LXX). Actually, many of the the books were preserved in Greek (not composed or originally written in Greek). Here, the reformers of the 16th century had taken, or been guided into, a historical and spiritual, wrong way turn. The archeological evidence available to the reformers of the 16th century led them to believe that the deuterocanonical books were later Greek language compositions and additions to the Holy Bible. Relatively recent archeological findings and analysis of the Dead Sea scrolls (Qumran) of 1947 revealed that several deuterocanonical books were originally composed in Hebrew or Aramaic.
[In their own presumptuous way, and promoting individual authority, the reformers of the 16th century adopted a shorter 66 book canon of the Holy Bible. Today's Catholic Bibles usually count a 73-book canon of Scripture not 72. This is simply because they number the book of Lamentations separate from Jeremiah. However, once dogmatically defined, there can be no dispute as to the canonicity of the sacred books on the part of Catholics. The Reformers accept the 27 books of the New Testament.

(Martin Luther dishonored and nearly eliminated some of the New Testament books like James, Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation. The insistence of his friends stopped him from eliminating some of the New Testament canon. Luther was suffering from scrupulosity.) The 16th century Protestant Reformers were wrong about the canon - as are some modern day "Bible Christians" - such as Erwin W. Lutzer. Note the contradiction(s) in historical facts as exemplified by footnote's 4 and 5 below. As always, read both books in context.]
Anthony MN

Andover, MN

#412178 Dec 28, 2012
The Bible came out of the Catholic Church around the end of the 4th century.( No small feat!) The Synods of Hippo, 393 A.D., and Carthage, 397 A.D.,and later, Carthage 419 A.D.,( along with the Traditional Bible or Latin Vulgate ( LV ), 406 A.D., by Saint Jerome ),gave us the canon of Sacred Scripture as Catholics know it today. Relatively recent archeological findings and analysis of the Dead Sea scrolls (Qumran) of 1947 revealed that several deuterocanonical books were originally composed in Hebrew or Aramaic. This is very relevant and significant because earlier Protestant reformers of the 16th century, were very suspicious of, and rejected books, only available to them in the Greek Language. In part therefore, the Protestant canon of 66 books of Sacred Scripture is deficient - short seven (7) books.

The regional or local Catholic Church Councils of Hippo, 393 A.D., and Carthage, 397 A.D., and later, Carthage 419 A.D. gave us the canon of Sacred Scripture as we know it today. Although these were just local councils, Saint Augustine did insist that the list given by these councils be sent to Rome for approval. Pope Saint Siricius (384-399 A.D.) approved the canon just as his papal predecessor Pope Damasus I had done in a Synod in 382 A.D. with a formal writing "Decretal of Gelasius", de recipiendis et non recipiendis libris.(The archeological findings and analysis pertaining to the Council of Rome 382 A.D. and some of the Popes may not be a settled fact.)

A friend of Saint Jerome, Saint Exuperius of Toulouse, a Gallican bishop, wrote to Pope Innocent I in a formal letter requesting the list of canonical books. The Pope replied - honoring Saint Exuperius - with a letter listing the canonical books:
Consulenti Tibi Dated February 405 A.D.

. This list is the same as the canonical list that Catholics have today. This includes the Protestant apocrypha or Catholic deuterocanonical books of the Holy Bible.

Around the end of the fourth century more evidence on the canon is found from the Church in Spain, in the work of the heretic Priscillian, Bishop of Avila (died 385 A.D.). Priscillianism is a variant of Gnostic-Manichaean.. In his work "Liber de Fide et Apocryphis" Priscillian defends and includes the deuteros although he does not claim that all the deuteros are inspired only some. In the Early Church their was much debate on The Canon of The Old Testament.
Anthony MN

Andover, MN

#412179 Dec 28, 2012
The Ecumenical Council of Florence again affirmed the list of inspired books in 1442 A.D., about 100 years before the Council of Trent. The "Decretum pro Jacobitis" by Pope Eugenius IV lists the inspired books, and according to the common teaching of theologians, these documents are infallible True meaning of infallible states of doctrine. Since there was no urgent challenge or compelling reason why it should, the Ecumenical Council of Florence did not dogmatically pass on the canonicity of the inspired books. It did however teach that the books were inspired.

The decrees of the local or regional Church councils (Synods) of Hippo, 393 A.D., and Carthage, around 400 A.D., were submitted to the "transmarine Church" (Rome) and approved by the Popes and are considered official Church teachings by official Church councils. Although these councils were merely local, and they in themselves did not have universal binding authority, their decrees were submitted to various Popes and approved.[6] The Latin Vulgate (LV) version of the Bible by Saint Jerome was completed about 406 A.D. and included the deuterocanonical books. About 1000 years later, the Council of Trent, Session Four, would state: "If anyone does not accept as sacred and canonical the aforesaid books in their entirety and with all their parts, as they have been accustomed to be read in the Catholic Church and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate Edition, and knowingly and deliberately rejects the aforesaid traditions, let him be anathema."

The canon of the Bible was solemnly defined and made dogmatic Dogma and Classes of Revealed truth by the Fourth Session of the Ecumenical Council of Trent of the Catholic Church held in northern Italy 1545-1563 A.D. by the Decree "De Canonicis Scripturis" on April 8th, 1546. Pope Pius IV formally confirmed all of its decrees in 1564 A.D. This put the canonicity of the whole Traditional Bible (LV) beyond the permissibility of doubt on the part of Catholics. The books of the canon were listed individually and agreed with the earlier listing already taught (for about 1000 years prior to the Council of Trent) by the Ordinary Magisterium of the Catholic Church.[7][8][9]

http://www.catholicevangelism.org/h-canon1.sh...
Anthony MN

Andover, MN

#412180 Dec 28, 2012
LTM wrote:
<quoted text>
KM, I wanted to discuss this with you. I don't listen to any of these men. But the Pentecostal movement as I understand it is very mixed I don't know what to believe.
My father was pentecostal preacher, but I never followed it.
I find it greatly exaggerated by some , as the man said it was like I walked into a mad house.
Uh oh, I smell another protestant slugfest a brewin'.

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

"ISA 55:11--"MATT 10:27"

#412181 Dec 28, 2012
who="LTM"
KM, I wanted to discuss this with you. I don't listen to any of these men. But the Pentecostal movement as I understand it is very mixed I don't know what to believe.
My father was pentecostal preacher, but I never followed it.
I find it greatly exaggerated by some , as the man said it was like I walked into a mad house.

**********

First we must establish WHO introduced Pentecost. John Baptist declared that the Messiah would come.

Mar 1:6 And John was clothed with camel's hair, and with a girdle of a skin about his loins; and he did eat locusts and wild honey;
Mar 1:7 And preached, saying, There cometh one mightier than I after me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose.
Mar 1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.

Jesus Himself commissioned the Apostle's to 'make converts'. But He told them to tarry (wait) until they received power...which happened on the day of Pentecost.

Then we must examine the evidence. Sometimes someone wants to appear great, as when Ananias and Sapphira pretended to give all they had to the church.

Then, sometimes something 'appears' strange, and we judge it, and condemn it. Suppose we had been there when Jesus spat on the ground, made mud, and wiped it on the blind man! If some present day Pentecostal did such a thing, he would be run out of town!

You spoke of a 'mad house'. When the Holy Ghost moves with power on an individual, they will react in different ways. A person with some real emotional problems may react loudly...as they are being set free from those problems. Demons cried out when Jesus drove them out. When guilty consciences or depressions are lifted, people often shout, cry, even laugh.

If you recall, the Apostle's poured out on the street when the Holy Ghost began moving on them...and people there declared that they were drunken.

The Holy Ghost is the living presence of God, and we cannot judge Him or His work by the actions of men. As you can see, real Christians and hypocrites (and ignorant people) may seem to be doing the same things...so unless, and until you learn what is going on, it is safer NOT to condemn.

Act 5:34 Then stood there up one in the council, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in reputation among all the people, and commanded to put the apostles forth a little space;
Act 5:35 And said unto them, Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what ye intend to do as touching these men.
Act 5:36 For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and brought to nought.
Act 5:37 After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.
Act 5:38 And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:
Act 5:39 BUT IF IT BE OF GOD, YOU CANNOT OVERTHROW IT; LEST HAPLY YOU BE FOUND EVEN TO FIGHT AGAINST GOD.

God is STILL the God of miracles.(We follow God, not men.)

I hope this helps.
KayMarie

Since: Dec 12

United States

#412182 Dec 28, 2012
The catholic church is the beast in the Bible the number 666 is fulfilled by the pope. His official title is vicarius filii dei which when you add up with roman numerals is 666. when you read daniel chapter 2 and 7. Rome is the 4th kingdom from which the little horn (the papacy) came from. In revelation 13, 17, &18. Give more details about the catholic church. Dressed in purple and scarlet, using the golden cup. They changed God's commands and substituted with pagan teaching. They abolished the sabbath saturday and began sunday worship in honor of sun god. They tortured more than 70 million people to make the changes during the dark ages. They abolished the Passover through which Jesus promised eternal life. They adopted christmas falsly saying it is Jesus birthday when in fact it originated from pagan festival in honor of sun god birthday. They adopted easter which originated from fertility goddess worship. They are an organization given power by satan to lead the whole world astray. If you want to know truth contact me or go to www.english.watv.org
truth

Perth, Australia

#412183 Dec 28, 2012
1 2 3 6 9 o'clock
church of holy Marty Anastassia build 1693

my family been Marty ..

After prayers i go in deep sleep..who ever need Marcy any soul from me..i find myself front of me church beginning open door..then i stop from right side front of Altar i remember..then after Altar i find myself in white dress.
truth

Perth, Australia

#412184 Dec 28, 2012
Who open door..which Spirit bring me in church..door is been close..but opening bythemselves big big big door..i did not done nothing..only my prayers.
God listening prayers.
truth

Perth, Australia

#412185 Dec 28, 2012
truth

Perth, Australia

#412186 Dec 28, 2012
http://www.google.com.au/search...

Why you against me confe?

You liked give dictate to holy Spirit..did you?
why don't you see o'clock is mine..thief's coming and take..why don't you judging them?
truth

Perth, Australia

#412187 Dec 28, 2012
i pray rosary blade of Jesus Christ..yes i hear strongest possible like thunder trough sky..its left him..
Are you for sure Confe you speak about that?

Jesus Christ say..they will attack you as they do to me..then explain...is really my prayers been very weak or i need pray on entire voice strongest then ever.
truth

Perth, Australia

#412188 Dec 28, 2012
http://www.google.com.au/search...
http://www.stjohnsbyzantinecathedral.com/inde...
Orthodox as well Catholic
see confe
why you greedy with your explanation..they stay on my numbers 1693 where my family is..oh oh oh confe
truth

Perth, Australia

#412189 Dec 28, 2012
They are against woman as always been..what a shame?

Woman's can suffer others can't.
Clay

Minneapolis, MN

#412191 Dec 28, 2012
Anthony MN wrote:
The Ecumenical Council of Florence again affirmed the list of inspired books in 1442 A.D., about 100 years before the Council of Trent. The "Decretum pro Jacobitis" by Pope Eugenius IV lists the inspired books, and according to the common teaching of theologians, these documents are infallible True meaning of infallible states of doctrine. Since there was no urgent challenge or compelling reason why it should, the Ecumenical Council of Florence did not dogmatically pass on the canonicity of the inspired books. It did however teach that the books were inspired.
The decrees of the local or regional Church councils (Synods) of Hippo, 393 A.D., and Carthage, around 400 A.D., were submitted to the "transmarine Church" (Rome) and approved by the Popes and are considered official Church teachings by official Church councils. Although these councils were merely local, and they in themselves did not have universal binding authority, their decrees were submitted to various Popes and approved.[6] The Latin Vulgate (LV) version of the Bible by Saint Jerome was completed about 406 A.D. and included the deuterocanonical books. About 1000 years later, the Council of Trent, Session Four, would state: "If anyone does not accept as sacred and canonical the aforesaid books in their entirety and with all their parts, as they have been accustomed to be read in the Catholic Church and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate Edition, and knowingly and deliberately rejects the aforesaid traditions, let him be anathema."
The canon of the Bible was solemnly defined and made dogmatic Dogma and Classes of Revealed truth by the Fourth Session of the Ecumenical Council of Trent of the Catholic Church held in northern Italy 1545-1563 A.D. by the Decree "De Canonicis Scripturis" on April 8th, 1546. Pope Pius IV formally confirmed all of its decrees in 1564 A.D. This put the canonicity of the whole Traditional Bible (LV) beyond the permissibility of doubt on the part of Catholics. The books of the canon were listed individually and agreed with the earlier listing already taught (for about 1000 years prior to the Council of Trent) by the Ordinary Magisterium of the Catholic Church.[7][8][9]
http://www.catholicevangelism.org/h-canon1.sh...
very valuable info Anthony. Thanks.
Clay

Minneapolis, MN

#412192 Dec 28, 2012
LTM wrote:
Catholics contend that the whole world is indebted to the Roman Catholic church for the existence of the Bible. This is another of their attempts to exalt the church as an authority in addition to the Bible.
Please notice the following from Catholic sources:
"If she had not scrutinized carefully the writings of her children, rejecting some and approving others as worthy of inclusion in the canon of the New Testament, there would be no New Testament today.
"If she had not declared the books composing the New Testament to be inspired word of God, we would not know it.
"The only authority which non-Catholics have for the inspiration of the Scriptures is the authority of the Catholic Church." (The Faith of Millions, p. 145)
"It is only by the divine authority of the Catholic Church that Christians know that the scripture is the word of God, and what books certainly belong to the Bible." (The Question Box, p. 46)
"It was the Catholic Church and no other which selected and listed the inspired books of both the Old Testament and the New Testament...If you can accept the Bible or any part of it as inspired Word of God, you can do so only because the Catholic Church says it is." (The Bible is a Catholic Book, p. 4).
The Catholic writers quoted above state that one can accept the Bible as being inspired and as having authority only on the basis of the Catholic Church. In reality, the Bible is inspired and has authority, not because a church declared it so, but because God made it so. God delivered it by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and declared that it would abide forever. "All scripture is inspired of God..." (2 Tim. 3:16). "...Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit." (2 Pet. 1:21). "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away." (Matt. 24:35). "The grass withered, and the flower has fallen--but the word of the Lord endures forever." (1 Pet. 1:24-25). The Catholics are wrong, therefore, in their assumption that the Bible is authoritative only because of the Catholic Church. The Bible does not owe its existence to the Catholic Church, but to the authority, power and providence of God.
In a sense, your post is correct. God gave us the Bible, not the Church. Catholics would actually agree to this.
But how did He do it?
That's the argument. The authority of the Catholic Church guided by the hand of God, gathered, edited, and compiled the New Testament books, even though Christ (when on Earth) never instructed them to do so.
4GVN

Wentzville, MO

#412193 Dec 28, 2012
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
What's funny is you saying you believe the bible is true and then say it's not.
" To all that are at Rome, the beloved of God, called to be saints. Grace to you and peace, from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ. First, I give thanks to my God, through Jesus Christ, for you all: because your faith is spoken of in the whole world. 9 For God is my witness, whom I serve in my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I make a commemoration of you"
And in your mind, this is a reference to the 'Roman Catholic Church?
4GVN

Wentzville, MO

#412194 Dec 28, 2012
Dust Storm wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bible itself records instances where God commanded that formal, legal inquiries—that is, inquisitions—be carried out to expose secret believers in false religions. In Deuteronomy 17:2–5 God said: "If there is found among you, within any of your towns which the Lord your God gives you, a man or woman who does what is evil in the sight of the Lord your God, in transgressing his covenant, and has gone and served other gods and worshiped them, or the sun or the moon or any of the host of heaven, which I have forbidden, and it is told you and you hear of it; then you shall inquire diligently [note that phrase: "inquire diligently"], and if it is true and certain that such an abominable thing has been done in Israel, then you shall bring forth to your gates that man or woman who has done this evil thing, and you shall stone that man or woman to death with stones."
It is clear that there were some Israelites who posed as believers in and keepers of the covenant with Yahweh, while inwardly they did not believe and secretly practiced false religions, and even tried to spread them (cf. Deut. 13:6–11). To protect the kingdom from such hidden heresy, these secret practitioners of false religions had to be rooted out and expelled from the community. This directive from the Lord applied even to whole cities that turned away from the true religion (Deut. 13:12–18). Like Israel, medieval Europe was a society of Christian kingdoms that were formally consecrated to the Lord Jesus Christ. It is therefore quite understandable that these Catholics would read their Bibles and conclude that for the good of their Christian society they, like the Israelites before them, "must purge the evil from the midst of you" (Deut. 13:5, 17:7, 12). Paul repeats this principle in 1 Corinthians 5:13.
These same texts were interpreted similarly by the first Protestants, who also tried to root out and punish those they regarded as heretics. Luther and Calvin both endorsed the right of the state to protect society by purging false religion. In fact, Calvin not only banished from Geneva those who did not share his views, he permitted and in some cases ordered others to be executed for "heresy" (e.g. Jacques Gouet, tortured and beheaded in 1547; and Michael Servetus, burned at the stake in 1553). In England and Ireland, Reformers engaged in their own ruthless inquisitions and executions. Conservative estimates indicate that thousands of English and Irish Catholics were put to death—many by being hanged, drawn, and quartered—for practicing the Catholic faith and refusing to become Protestant. An even greater number were forced to flee to the Continent for their safety. We point this out to show that the situation was a two-way street; and both sides easily understood the Bible to require the use of penal sanctions to root out false religion from Christian society.
The fact that the Protestant Reformers also created inquisitions to root out Catholics and others who did not fall into line with the doctrines of the local Protestant sect shows that the existence of an inquisition does not prove that a movement is not of God. Protestants cannot make this claim against Catholics without having it backfire on themselves. Neither can Catholics make such a charge against Protestants. The truth of a particular system of belief must be decided on other grounds.
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-inquisitio...
Nice spam Dusty. So you tell me, are you defending the INQUISITION? Do you believe that it is a 'Christian' practice. Perhaps you feel that the RCC should re-enact it? What do YOU believe is right? Or do you have the ability to make that decision for yourself?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Pope Benedict XVI Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News United House of Prayer for All People: Bishop's... (Apr '08) 11 hr Mr Sir 9,036
News Obamas to host Pope Francis at White House Sept... 20 hr barefoot2626 35
News Allah is great.... (Jul '13) Sat YaWay 173
News Vatican backs Obama as Nobel Peace Prize Winner (Oct '09) Mar 25 swedenforever 32
News Pope finds popularity and dissent at 2-year mark Mar 22 ELIAS IBARRA 4
News Was Obama right about the Crusades and Islamic ... Mar 17 barefoot2626 2,030
News Francis expects short papacy Mar 16 ELIAS IBARRA 2
More from around the web