Misconceptions of Christianity 2

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
861

If anyone believes, Protestants I am talking to you, that Catholics casts aside the Bible. I hold a few challenges to see what you can find out on your own.

First challenge, how many services do you have at your Church. You only need to count a max of one service per day.

Second challenge, in at least one service see how many passages are said. Not just verses, but passages, a story. &c.

Third challenge, now look at how long it takes for your Church to go through the Bible.

Fourth challenge, go to your local parish, there should be a book store or gift shop. Go inside and ask that nice lady, now don’t worry I don’t think God will smite you for being inside a Catholic book shop. Ask her if you can have a missal, some parishes sell them some of them just give them away. If they sell them they shouldn’t go for more than a few dollars.

Now, I want you to take the book home and I want you to go to the date of the day that you hold that book and look at what it says. If you go to any Catholic church (as long as they speak English and you aren’t going to an Italian, Latin, Spanish &c mass) you will hear those words being read in every Church. And you know what you are going to read inside that book? Holy Scripture. Yes, the Bible passages for that day (three of them) will be printed in there a long side a psalm. Everyday (7 days a week) the Church reads at the minimum four pieces of Holy Scripture. In a period of three years, if you go to Church everyday, you will hear the entire Bible.

Oh, and Tirib, I’m sorry but your preachers teaching of Assumption of Salvation is wrong. It is not Biblical.

862

I was reading the Gospels tonight, OMG a Catholic reading the Bible, get CNN on the phone.

And I decided to read the Introductions to the Gospels by Curits Mitch in the front of the book I found something was very nicely written about the Church and the Gospels.

"The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John ar the foundational documents of historic Christianity. Most of what is known about the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth is known from these four books. Interlaced with their factual information about Christ is also the faith of the Church, the conviction that Jesus was the Messiah of ancietn expectation and the eternal Son of God come in the flesh.

It is no surprise, then, that Christian tradition gives the four Gospels pride of place among the books of Sacred Scripture. They are placed first in the collection of New Testament writings, much as the five books of Moses, being the formative religious texts of Israel, stand at the head of the Old Testament. Without the Gospels, the Church would lack not only crucial information about her divine Founder but a vital source of strength and inspiration for her mission in the world.

Authority of the Gospels Becausae the Gospels give us unique access to the words and eeds of Jesus, the possess the very highest authority. The Church acknowledges this in various ways, most obviously in the liturgy. where the Gospels are held aloft in procession, perfumed with incense, and proclaimed as the word of God. Selections from all parts of the Scriptures are represented in the Church’s lectionary, but the Gospel reading is always feature as the highpoint of the Liturgy of the Word. The belief is that Jesus is made present to his people in word and sacrament, both in the inspired accounts of the evangelists and in the consecrated elements of the Eucharist.

The authority of the Gospels is ultimately grounded in their divine inspiration, as is the hcase with all books of the Bible. However, in addition to this theological coniction, the Church also maintains the historical conviction that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John bear witness to the preaching of the apostles. As recently as Vaticann II, this teaching was reaffirmed with clarity and emphasis: “The Church has always and everywhere maintained, and continues to maintain, the apostolic origin of the four Gospels” (Dei Vrebum 18). Unlike the many apocryphal gospels that proliferated in the second and third centuries, the four cannonical Gospels coe firectly from the apostolic age. They express in written form what the apostles were preaching and teaching about Jesus in the earliest decades of Christian history."

There is more, but this will do to show my point.

863

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Next time I drive by the reservation, I’ll keep your suggestions for us in mind. But, I also be wondering if you’ll lead the way. Maybe we can get neighboring seats on the flight to Europe?[/quote]

Please forgive me, but I am a light weight as many has seen on here. The protestants that moved to American and founded this Country, wrote in the Constitution that there is to be separation of Church and State. The original set up that God ordained in the Old Testament. The acts of the Government is not led by any church whether Protestant, nor Catholic.

Are you saying that the Native Americans here in America were forced to go to the Reservation because the Protestant Churches in this Country took their land?[/quote]

Um, the governments in the OT, didn’t have seperation of Church and State.[/quote]

Um, yes it did. The King was not to preform the priestly duties, and the priests were not to be the King. Look at Saul. Saul slaughtered all those bulls because he wanted to get to fighting. In doing that God told him through the prophet that his lineage would be destroyed. His kingdom would be taken away from him. God used the priests to tell the King what God wanted, but the priests never went to war to fight in the battles. That was the Kings duties. Separation of church and state at its pureist form.[/quote]

Lawl, that is not seperation of Church and State. That’s a seperation of duty. The David ate of the bread that was reserved for the Priests. David wrote Psalms. David ruled a Godly kingdom, so did Solomon. David tried to follow God’s will, and he made religious deisions I’m sure. Like curtailing other religions in his Kingdom, and the Jewish Judges went to war with other people for religious reasons. Not really a seperation of Church and State there.[/quote]

No, it is a separation of church and state. Separation of duties is what keeps the separation. We have Presidents that follow religion, but they are not the preist or pastor of a church. David was never the high priest or any priest for that matter, of the Jewish temple. Solomon was never the priest of the Jewish Temple. Both men were confronted by prophets and priests to repent. That is pure separation of church and State. God wanted to be the King and God is the only one that can keep both offices as one. God separated the two offices of King and Priest so that there would be no absolute power by one man.

864

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
OK, so then who else is allowed to extort and steal, keep and utilize the gain and call that repentance?
[/quote]

Apparently the white protestant male.[/quote]

Your argument also applies to any religion in this country. Not just the white protestant male. White Catholic Males, have houses and churches just like the protestants.

865

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
I was reading the Gospels tonight, OMG a Catholic reading the Bible, get CNN on the phone.

And I decided to read the Introductions to the Gospels by Curits Mitch in the front of the book I found something was very nicely written about the Church and the Gospels.

"The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John ar the foundational documents of historic Christianity. Most of what is known about the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth is known from these four books. Interlaced with their factual information about Christ is also the faith of the Church, the conviction that Jesus was the Messiah of ancietn expectation and the eternal Son of God come in the flesh.

It is no surprise, then, that Christian tradition gives the four Gospels pride of place among the books of Sacred Scripture. They are placed first in the collection of New Testament writings, much as the five books of Moses, being the formative religious texts of Israel, stand at the head of the Old Testament. Without the Gospels, the Church would lack not only crucial information about her divine Founder but a vital source of strength and inspiration for her mission in the world.

Authority of the Gospels Becausae the Gospels give us unique access to the words and eeds of Jesus, the possess the very highest authority. The Church acknowledges this in various ways, most obviously in the liturgy. where the Gospels are held aloft in procession, perfumed with incense, and proclaimed as the word of God. Selections from all parts of the Scriptures are represented in the Church’s lectionary, but the Gospel reading is always feature as the highpoint of the Liturgy of the Word. The belief is that Jesus is made present to his people in word and sacrament, both in the inspired accounts of the evangelists and in the consecrated elements of the Eucharist.

The authority of the Gospels is ultimately grounded in their divine inspiration, as is the hcase with all books of the Bible. However, in addition to this theological coniction, the Church also maintains the historical conviction that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John bear witness to the preaching of the apostles. As recently as Vaticann II, this teaching was reaffirmed with clarity and emphasis: “The Church has always and everywhere maintained, and continues to maintain, the apostolic origin of the four Gospels” (Dei Vrebum 18). Unlike the many apocryphal gospels that proliferated in the second and third centuries, the four cannonical Gospels coe firectly from the apostolic age. They express in written form what the apostles were preaching and teaching about Jesus in the earliest decades of Christian history."

There is more, but this will do to show my point.[/quote]

We never said you do not read the bible. Our confusion is that you hold tradition at the same level as the bible. If tradition was the same as the bible why was the bible cannonized? As Tirib has stated the bible is the direct inspired word of God. The word became flesh in the form of Jesus. Yes the catholic church gave us the bible and we are appreciative.

866

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

I’m gonna go out on limb and submit that you haven’t done Rome any PR favors here to which I’m sure you’ll reply that that isn’t your job or problem.
[/quote]I’m still curious about the apostolic Church Christ did leave us, with the ministerial priesthood we see in scripture itself, and which must–Per Christ’s assurance it would prevail even against the gates of hell–exist yet today.[/quote]When I say I would love for there to be one true holy apostolic church I mean that. I mean it in the same sense as I sincerely mean that I hunger and long for this: (1 Peter 1:14-16)

[quote]"13-Therefore, gird your minds for action, keep sober in spirit, fix your hope completely on the grace to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ. 14-As obedient children, do not be conformed to the former lusts which were yours in your ignorance, 15-but like the Holy One who called you, be holy yourselves also in all your behavior; 16-because it is written, “You shall be holy, for I am holy.” [/quote]Neither I nor anyone else will be able to be holy like He is in all our behavior this side of the resurrection. Yet here is Peter telling us to do just that. Paul’s calls to unity make me raise my hands to heaven and cry out for it to be so (if you only knew). Yet, I know that just as fallen individual men will never attain in this life what we will be at His coming, neither will the “mystical body of Christ”, (I like that term btw. It fits the biblical doctrine well) to say nothing of the visible church, achieve that level of unity in this life.

I DO NOT buy, though I am fully and comprehensively aware of every detail of Rome’s interpretation of Matthew 16:16-18 Aramaic n all. Therefore neither do I buy Rome’s definition of “church”. I also see in the epistle to the Hebrews ONE glorified ministerial Priest after the order of Melchizedek who by His presence in the hearts of ALL believers extends that priesthood to them.

Listen my friend. While were on the subject, beseech the Lord for wisdom and read the book of Hebrews. That is a blood curdling, cold sweaty Roman Catholic nightmare. UNLESS… you lay your mind and your soul at the feet of the papacy beforehand and let them tell you what it says and means. Do you understand at all that that’s what happened to Martin Luther? He desperately tried to induce reform from within. He trusted and loved “the church” believing that Christ lived though her.

When it finally became undeniable to him that “the church” was only interested in fleecing it’s destitute subjects to finance it’s unholy building project he threw the AAALLLLL conditioning spectacles of the papacy from his face and began to study the holy scriptures and simply allow them to say what they would to him. Thus was born the face palm of the millennium as it all came into focus for Luther. Dear God in heaven… WHAT HAVE WE DONE!!!

Whatever all this is it DID NOT come from these scriptures and no wonder they’re willing to go to sleep at night in their soft pampered beds of affluence after a hard day of financially and spiritually raping the lowly starving faithful. Not only is this not “THE one true most holy apostolic church” in which is enthroned “the vicar of Christ”, this is no church at all that the Christ of these scriptures would recognize. It became crystal clear to him that the vatican project was a mere symptom of an entire system of anti scriptural, anti Christian dogma. Just as it’s continued un truly repentant existence, ownership and use by the Roman “church” continues to be today. The gates of hell prevailed against Rome many centuries ago, but she’s being maintained for a purpose. (I am not yelling or being hateful. I am speaking my conscience)

That’ll have to do for now and yes I understand completely that I have not addressed the authority structure of the first 4-5 centuries, the emerging theology and the implication of both for what would undeniably pretty much become THE (at least western) church for 1000 years. We’ll get there, but my ol buddy Chris seems a bit down and he might feel neglected if I don’t give him some love too =]

867

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I’m still curious about the apostolic Church Christ did leave us, with the ministerial priesthood we see in scripture itself, and which must–Per Christ’s assurance it would prevail even against the gates of hell–exist yet today.

When I say I would love for there to be one true holy apostolic church…[/quote]

It doesn’t matter what you or I would love. It has to exist. I’m going to take the liberty to assume you can’t show us the Church left by Christ. In which case, this whole debate is bunk, because Christianity has been demonstrated as a false and failed religion. And all of these threads are pointless, because we debate over a savior whose promise was already broken.

But, if his Church remains, please, again, point it out. We know it has a ministerial priesthood and a hierarchy, so I would hope the we don’t get an answer about us all being “priests in the churches of our homes.”

868

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
The bible is not to be used as a weapon and to be used as a sense of pride for men. [/quote]

Pat I have to differ. I know you do not like cut and paste verses of the Bible, but this makes my point. The Bible is a weapon, it is a sword. The Sword in Roman Times was the weapon of choice. The Word of God cuts all the way to the heart. That is what it is to be used for. It hurts no doubt about it when your heart is soft and receives it. It will heal you after it cuts out all your sins.

Eph 6: 10-18

10Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 11Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. 12For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. 13Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. 14Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 15and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 16In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. 18And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the saints.[/quote]

I meant against each other.

869

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

I’m gonna go out on limb and submit that you haven’t done Rome any PR favors here to which I’m sure you’ll reply that that isn’t your job or problem.

[/quote]

I’m still curious about the apostolic Church Christ did leave us, with the ministerial priesthood we see in scripture itself, and which must–Per Christ’s assuarance it would prevail even against the gates of hell–exist yet today.[/quote]

This struck me as an interesting question.

What do you think Christ meant when he said the gates of hell will not prevail?

870

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
<<< Oh, and Tirib, I’m sorry but your preachers teaching of Assumption of Salvation is wrong. It is not Biblical.[/quote]Did you actually get through the whole thing? I’ll give ya sincere credit for that. He would say “assurance” as would I, having been blessed with it even when I didn’t wanna be and tried very very hard not to be. My sin was nailed to the cross of Christ once for all and the life that I now live I live by faith in the risen Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me. You do what you want. I’ll keep my assurance.

Lemme throw out here too that I have never nor would I say that the RCC disregards the bible. What I and it are saying is that in the RCC the light of the holy scriptures dies a death of a thousand “traditional” additions, qualifications and manipulations.

One more thing. You really don’t understand us at all. Our lady of loretto RCC is where I vote and it’s about 500 yards from my house. I sometimes go there to be by myself and pray. It’s always open and I’ll always be the only one there. I have no fear of being in a catholic building LOL! It’s all God’s my friend. He knows my heart. He has no regard for bricks and wood. http://www.ourladyoflorettoparish.org/

871

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
<<< I am not wrong, so I am not worried. People choose their own paths, I am small issue to it. I just don’t appreciate the unwarranted cut downs on my faith. I did nothing to deserve it. Next, you do not know enough about Catholicism to know it’s wrong. So you don’t know where people are being led by the church. We’re all about the Lord.[/quote]OK, We’re not even speaking the same language. All of us non catholics here have differing beliefs in some areas, but we speak the same language. The church I go to is 95% black in the heart of the Detroit ghetto. We disagree on some things, but on the meat of the gospel and living the Christian life? Boy do we ever speak the same language. On a totally unrelated note the city of Detroit would be won for Christ in a month if every “black” church in town were like this one. The senior pastor is a true Calvinist =] Different story.

You shouldn’t need to go to seminary for 4 years to understand the gospel of Christ. If someone can read as much as I have and still be as far off as you claim I am, then I don’t know how anything in the book of Acts could have ever gotten done.[/quote]

You talk as if you know, but you do not know, nor do you care. Being right is all you care about. Not only being right, but being right with dramatic flare. You do not understand the faith, yet you attack it vociferously, with out cause. The problems you claim you have with the church, don’t even exist. There is no idolatry, there is not worship of anything other than God.

You are rallying against fictions. One of my best friends is evangelical, we discuss religion all the time. He has no problem with my faith and I have no problem with his.

Now, I will tell you this truly. If you think I am going to hell for the faith I practice, I will see you there. You are not better than me and your faith is in no way superior to mine.

872

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

I’m gonna go out on limb and submit that you haven’t done Rome any PR favors here to which I’m sure you’ll reply that that isn’t your job or problem.

[/quote]

I’m still curious about the apostolic Church Christ did leave us, with the ministerial priesthood we see in scripture itself, and which must–Per Christ’s assuarance it would prevail even against the gates of hell–exist yet today.[/quote]

This struck me as an interesting question.

What do you think Christ meant when he said the gates of hell will not prevail?
[/quote]

It means that Satan will try, but not succeed at destroying it. He will protect it ultimately. History bares this out. It was attempted to be squashed by Nero and the Church grew huge. It was attempted to be destroyed from with in, yet it stands. It was attempted to be divided, but yet it remains.

873

Maybe this could be a new Misconception?

What is the definition of Church?

To me it is not a building but the people that Christ lives in. We are all the body of the Church.

874

[quote]Sloth wrote:
And, if you’re demanding we do public ‘works,’ such as in liquidating our Vatican and it’s art…the evangelical, friend or not, can take his white anglo-saxon protestant butt right back to europe before I’ll take him seriously.[/quote]

I have seen some very elaborate evangelical churches. I drive by one daily…No request for purging their riches I see. I live in the Bible belt. There’s lots of very rich evangelical communities.

Really this is a stupid thing to bitch about. The Vatican is also a country, a very small one, but a country unto it’s own.

It’s an amazing place. As soon as I walked in, I had goose bumps all over my body, the hair on my neck stood up. It was awesome.

875

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
OK, so then who else is allowed to extort and steal, keep and utilize the gain and call that repentance?
[/quote]Apparently the white protestant male.[/quote]Unless you are still talking about the wholly non analogous United States by conquest of America, please explain. And also please assume the friendliest of communications from me unless I give you clear evidence to the contrary. That goes for you too Pat. I am trying to bridle my demonstrative personality and writing style in such a way as to not appear quite so vituperative. When you can’t see somebody’s face or hear their voice the tone can be misconstrued.
[/quote]

Both of you are missing the point. Where do you get that anything was stolen at all? The only argument you can make for plunder would be that the marble was taken from the Colosseum. That’s why there is a gaping hole there. It had nothing to do with erosion. Considering they used to feed Christians to the lions there, I am ok with taking their marble. It was approve by the governement of the time anyhow.

876

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Next time I drive by the reservation, I’ll keep your suggestions for us in mind. But, I also be wondering if you’ll lead the way. Maybe we can get neighboring seats on the flight to Europe?[/quote]

Please forgive me, but I am a light weight as many has seen on here. The protestants that moved to American and founded this Country, wrote in the Constitution that there is to be separation of Church and State. The original set up that God ordained in the Old Testament. The acts of the Government is not led by any church whether Protestant, nor Catholic.

Are you saying that the Native Americans here in America were forced to go to the Reservation because the Protestant Churches in this Country took their land?[/quote]

Um, the governments in the OT, didn’t have seperation of Church and State.[/quote]

Um, yes it did. The King was not to preform the priestly duties, and the priests were not to be the King. Look at Saul. Saul slaughtered all those bulls because he wanted to get to fighting. In doing that God told him through the prophet that his lineage would be destroyed. His kingdom would be taken away from him. God used the priests to tell the King what God wanted, but the priests never went to war to fight in the battles. That was the Kings duties. Separation of church and state at its pureist form.[/quote]

Lawl, that is not seperation of Church and State. That’s a seperation of duty. The David ate of the bread that was reserved for the Priests. David wrote Psalms. David ruled a Godly kingdom, so did Solomon. David tried to follow God’s will, and he made religious deisions I’m sure. Like curtailing other religions in his Kingdom, and the Jewish Judges went to war with other people for religious reasons. Not really a seperation of Church and State there.[/quote]

No, it is a separation of church and state. Separation of duties is what keeps the separation. We have Presidents that follow religion, but they are not the preist or pastor of a church. David was never the high priest or any priest for that matter, of the Jewish temple. Solomon was never the priest of the Jewish Temple. Both men were confronted by prophets and priests to repent. That is pure separation of church and State. God wanted to be the King and God is the only one that can keep both offices as one. God separated the two offices of King and Priest so that there would be no absolute power by one man. [/quote]

I agree separation of Church and state was the best thing that ever happen to Christianity and religion as a whole. It definitely removes a keeps at least one profaning element, more or less out of church.

877

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Maybe this could be a new Misconception?

What is the definition of Church?

To me it is not a building but the people that Christ lives in. We are all the body of the Church. [/quote]

The Church left to us, without any room for debate, had a hierarchy and a ministerial priesthood. This is not up for debate. If I have to start breaking out NT verse to demonstrate this to ‘biblical Christians,’ I’m going to be pretty darn dissapointed. For the ‘fundamentalist,’ they must recognize what I just said to be scriptural, thus they must accept it.

Now, being that this hiearchial and ministerial priesthood must exist (or Jesus was a fraud), I’d really like to see our critics put it all on the line, and name this Church. Name some if it’s Elders and deacons. Say something, for crying out loud. Don’t just write paraghraphs of critcism, throwing dung in all directions, hoping for something to stick. Take a stand. Name the Church, or declare the Christ has failed.

878

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I’m still curious about the apostolic Church Christ did leave us, with the ministerial priesthood we see in scripture itself, and which must–Per Christ’s assurance it would prevail even against the gates of hell–exist yet today.

When I say I would love for there to be one true holy apostolic church…[/quote]

It doesn’t matter what you or I would love. It has to exist. I’m going to take the liberty to assume you can’t show us the Church left by Christ. In which case, this whole debate is bunk, because Christianity has been demonstrated as a false and failed religion. And all of these threads are pointless, because we debate over a savior whose promise was already broken.

But, if his Church remains, please, again, point it out. We know it has a ministerial priesthood and a hierarchy, so I would hope the we don’t get an answer about us all being “priests in the churches of our homes.” [/quote]In short (very short)
Matthew 18:20

I don’t think you read the rest of my post. It is not possible for both the bible to be the Word of God and the RCC to be what it says.

879

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I’m still curious about the apostolic Church Christ did leave us, with the ministerial priesthood we see in scripture itself, and which must–Per Christ’s assurance it would prevail even against the gates of hell–exist yet today.

When I say I would love for there to be one true holy apostolic church…[/quote]

It doesn’t matter what you or I would love. It has to exist. I’m going to take the liberty to assume you can’t show us the Church left by Christ. In which case, this whole debate is bunk, because Christianity has been demonstrated as a false and failed religion. And all of these threads are pointless, because we debate over a savior whose promise was already broken.

But, if his Church remains, please, again, point it out. We know it has a ministerial priesthood and a hierarchy, so I would hope the we don’t get an answer about us all being “priests in the churches of our homes.” [/quote]In short (very short)
Matthew 18:20

I don’t think you read the rest of my post. It is not possible for both the bible to be the Word of God and the RCC to be what it says. [/quote]

At this point it looks like I’d have to wait until eternity. So, I’ll bow out of responding until I see someone, anyone, actually answer my challenge.

As to my claims about the nature of the Church–ministerial priesthood, hierarchy–plenty of plain scripture to be found here. http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0503fea4.asp

“Is any among you sick? Let him call for the elders (presbyteroi) of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith will save the sick man, and the Lord will raise him up; and if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.”
James 5:14â??15

880

[quote]pat wrote:

I agree separation of Church and state was the best thing that ever happen to Christianity and religion as a whole. It definitely removes a keeps at least one profaning element, more or less out of church. [/quote]

Agreed.