User Profile: LestWeForget


Member Since: March 02, 2012


123 To page: Go
  • [2] August 16, 2014 at 7:24pm

    Kevin, No there isn’t a difference. If a person cannot function (special needs), or can’t find a job (Obama generation), that person will find a hard time fulfilling any basic “biological” needs like eating or sheltering.

    You expect me to believe that YOU believe a person gains legitimacy only when they don’t need biological cares covered? What an inhumane leftist way to think.

    No one calls it a fetus when it is wanted. Ask your mother. Ask your friends, if you don’t have children. They ALL announce “we’re having a baby” when they are happy about it.

    The ONLY difference is one is loved and one is going to inconvenience a mother for several months. Pure selfishness and evil to murder a person you find inconvenient.

    God will forgive the repentant but as a society we can’t talk about it like it’s anything other than murdering of an innocent, like each of us once was in our own mother’s womb.

  • August 16, 2014 at 4:34pm

    edit: Scientifically or morally.

    Disagree? Prove the intellectual and moral soundness of your thinking. Define “human life”.

  • [4] August 16, 2014 at 4:32pm

    Leeching? Not independent? Inconveniencing mommy?

    Why don’t we kill mentally disabled and physically handicapped people, kevin? Your buddy Margaret Sanger liked that idea, just like Hitler.

    What about 25 year olds in the Obama economy living dependent on mom, in her basement while they type comments on articles online? Leeching.

    Not everything is a shade of gray.

    Unborn humans are LIVING humans by any definition of the term, science or moral.

    Responses (5) +
  • August 16, 2014 at 12:54pm

    despite being off-topic
    Remember, the President ordered the police to show restraint.

  • August 13, 2014 at 8:16am

    ….no matter their weapon of choice (the tongue or the sword)

  • [1] August 13, 2014 at 8:15am

    you are 100% correct that that is where the focus should be within our hearts and in our prayers and what I also said yesterday in comments, which is if people can’t unite in prayer with the Catholic Church because they can’t see past their hatred for the Church to pray with her, they may wish to do some soul-searching. Rapture has several “likes” to calling the Pope the anti-christ. What s/he and the anonymous likers employ is an indefensible form of cowardly persecution toward the Church Jesus founded. It’s the same faith for which many in Iraq are being murdered, and for which more martyrs were made last century than even the 1-2 Centuries.

    If Catholics will die for their faith, couldn’t they at least make the effort to defend the faith in comments? Many people read these and it is good to read the truth as the Church teaches rather than the vile lies anti-Catholics such as fellow Christians and ISIS people would have the world believe. Hatred and division in Christianity is based on lies and is the work of the devil and I don’t know about you but I like to silence that evil fool. The work of the devil can be in a beheading and in a forked tongue. That’s no condemnation of Rapture. S/he may not know they’re spreading lies, though Catholics keep trying to educate.

    Those who hate a holy man more than they show compassion for our persecuted fellow man need to be alerted for the sake of their soul; we pray for the persecuted & our persecutors…..

  • [3] August 12, 2014 at 7:03pm


    YOU: If it were literal Jesus would have pulled out a knife and cut off junks of flesh and opened His veins. He did not
    ME: In His great mercy he allows us to taste wine and bread though the substance has changed. Also, his human body was finite but his divine self is infinite, thus from the sun’s rising to setting a perfect offering may be made to the Glory of His name, in the Eucharist.

    YOU: If you believe you are drinking the blood of Christ and eating His flesh you are taking communion in an unworthy manner because what you are eating with come out of the body as waste
    ME: This is what Jesus instructed to have life within us and for the forgiveness of sins. In His perfect design, God made even the manure of creatures to nourish fields of flowers and vegetation. The only waste we should be worried about is time wasted avoiding the truth as Jesus intended for us. He alone saves. “Unless you eat my flesh, you shall not have life within you.” I choose to take this hard saying as Peter and the Twelve did when Jesus asked them if they, too, would leave after this hard saying: “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life…”

    If it weren’t a big deal, why would Paul warn not to eat it unworthily, lest one get sick and die as some have (he wrote)? How does one eat a cracker unworthily?

    YOU: Eucharist is utterly satanic
    ME: Only if your interpretation is infallible but 2000 yrs of Church teaching isn’t.

  • [2] August 12, 2014 at 6:48pm


    YOU: So you are saying that a man can reenter his mothers womb and be born again?
    ME: No, I’d never said that nor has the Catholic Church, since Nicodemus already asked that question and Jesus answered it. In the waters of Baptism we die with Christ and are born again – born of water AND the spirit. Not born of spirit with no water.

    YOU: Is it not the point that Jesus is making that one needs to be born again SPIRITUALLY and not physically?
    ME: Well, yes! God uses physical means, just as he used circumcision and eating of the passover lamb in the OT. Humans are spiritual and physical beings and through the Sacraments God’s graces are given to us. Jesus was Incarnate through a physical birth, received a physical water Baptism that he didn’t “need” at which time the Holy Spirit descended and the voice of the Father rang out; Jesus died a physical death and both rose and ascended, body and soul.

    YOU: John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

    ME: What are those words that Jesus says are LIFE? Those words are, paraphrasing, Gnaw on my Flesh and drink my blood. The flesh that profits nothing is THEIR flesh, not the Lord’s. He’s teaching them this is something for the spirit to understand, as revealed truths often depend on faith, not reason. You are thinking with your flesh by saying Jesus would cut off chunks to feed them. cont’d…

  • [4] August 12, 2014 at 4:11pm

    In John 6, why would a “symbol” be a hard saying, causing many disciples to walk away? Who would walk away from eating plain ole delicious bread? No one had gluten allergies then. Jesus affirms 5 times he’s being literal.

    (and since you are obsessed with end times, isn’t it interesting that those who refused to take him literally and walked away in repugnance are in verse 6:66?)

    And why would Jesus talk to Nicodemus and then go with His disciples a few verses later where many were baptized, John 3:22, if it were symbolic? If you complete that section, it is clear Jesus was baptizing with water. Later, Peter refers to the great flood in which 8 were saved through water, and in such a way Baptism now saves you (1 Peter 3:21).

    Two is all I have time for on Baptism but one verse should do since scripture, properly interpreted, doesn’t contradict.

  • [1] August 12, 2014 at 3:29pm

    kat, your comment struck me after just replying to you elsewhere on the issue of Christian unity.

    You said “Muslims never turn on one another.”

    Isn’t it sad how quickly and thoroughly Christians do?

    As I wrote earlier, shame on those who would make this about their community’s continuing Protest of the Pope and the Catholic Church rather than uniting in prayer and effort.

    While Obama golfs and goofs on his second vacation this month.

  • [2] August 12, 2014 at 3:17pm

    Kat747, your line of questioning is reasonable.
    God could do many things with this situation. He could be using evil to unite the tragically divided Christianity (Jesus prayed we would be one. We are not.) Peaceful Muslims may convert, seeing the light of Christ through not only the Holy See but the Church Militant. The martyrdom of Christians may convert many souls, just as it did in the early Church.

    As for their brainwashed minds, remember Saul who persecuted Christians?

    He wrote what the Catholic Church came to determine as 1/2 of the New Testament canon. Always have faith that God can work miracles, and know for sure that He will bring good out of evil.

    Let all Christians and Jews unite in prayer.

  • [2] August 12, 2014 at 1:19pm

    *meaning a living earthly authority, for Christ surely lives.

  • [5] August 12, 2014 at 1:18pm

    If not justifying, what does this contribute to the conversation? Do you prefer the Pope remain silent and believe that would be the better action he could take, for those being persecuted?

    What conditions must a group meet in order to speak against evil? Perfection? Who could speak? Protestant communities couldn’t, Mormons couldn’t, Germans couldn’t, atheists couldn’t, Mexicans couldn’t, you couldn’t, I couldn’t.

    I am not without sin myself, but shame on anyone who turns this into anything other than concern for the victims and a demand for these atrocities to stop. Prayer is essential as is unity against evil. If you can’t unite with the Catholic Church in her call for an end to this evil, then you may need to examine the extent of your hatred for the Church. The Church has endured sin of bishops, popes, religious and laity, threats and heresies, schisms and scandals, and yet she still stands, since 33AD, because Jesus promised the gates of hell wouldn’t prevail against her and that He would be with the Church until the end of days. No set of humans could achieve that. Only by the protection of the Holy Spirit does the Church stand, protecting and teaching revealed doctrine, with Christ as the head, and the Holy Father in the office of Peter which Jesus established in order to have a living authority.

    If people don’t like Pope Francis calling for peace, perhaps they should examine their consciences as to why not.

    Now Pray.

    Responses (4) +
  • [1] July 16, 2014 at 9:44pm

    In the Jerusalem Temple with two turtledoves offered as a sacrifice, a month or so after circumcision? That is the example of the Holy Family. Altering the particulars significantly, would be wo/man-made-tradition.

    Did the Apostles dedicate babies or baptize entire households?
    Did Jesus say, “Let the little children come to me, never hinder them” or “Hinder the little children from coming to me, make them wait until they can reason”?

    Just some things to think about, since your post intrigued me. May God bless you. I mean that.

  • [1] July 16, 2014 at 9:17pm

    Full agreement.

  • [9] July 16, 2014 at 4:50pm

    Which verses indicate that Cornelius didn’t have any underage children when his entire household was Baptized at his request? Or that none of his household servants had babies or toddlers? If you see Baptism as a choice and a symbol rather than a means of saving Grace, you won’t see the Catholic viewpoint (or Lutheran, or OE, or Anglican).

    If the purpose is symbolic then the age matters. If the purpose is salvational, then the age matters even more. “Let the children come to me. NEVER HINDER them.”

  • [4] July 16, 2014 at 4:40pm

    You will find good answers to these questions by studying the early Church. Recall the pagan culture. Ours is pagan nowadays, too.

    It’s a minor exorcism which occurs as part of the rite of Baptism.

    The Catholic Catechism says
    1237 Since Baptism signifies liberation from sin and from its instigator the devil, one or more exorcisms are pronounced over the candidate. The celebrant then anoints him with the oil of catechumens, or lays his hands on him, and he explicitly renounces Satan. Thus prepared, he is able to confess the faith of the Church, to which he will be “entrusted” by Baptism.

    That is step one. It doesn’t detract from our Lord, it points to the fact that in Baptism, the Lord’s victory over sin and death (i.e., satan) is shared with all the Baptized, as we are reborn, free from such bondage AND made part of God’s family as adopted children.

    I hope that was helpful in some way.

    Responses (2) +
  • [3] July 16, 2014 at 3:04pm

    Curious as to what you mean. He wore a camel shirt, ate locust and was beheaded. EEEEk. :)

    On a serious note, John the Baptist said Jesus must increase so I (JtheB) must decrease. He didn’t want to draw attention away from Jesus which is the One for whom he (JtheB) prepared the way. It is Christ who founded the Church, not JtheB.

    Like I said, I am curious as to how “figuring it out on your own” is how JtheB operated. He was a great prophet and received his call and authority from God. That is a special vocation no man can claim for himself.

  • [5] July 16, 2014 at 2:56pm

    WHY would parents select “godparents” who weren’t active in their faith?

    By definition, godparents are responsible for raising these children in the faith if the parents fail to or cannot do so.

    WHY would the Anglicans soften their words to appease lukewarm or barely-there Christians? The real problem is with the godparents not the rite. Correction, the real problem is with an ecclesial community that caters to public opinion.

  • [9] July 16, 2014 at 2:48pm

    I hope you’ll give some thought to reading conversion stories of Anglicans, including many priests, who converted to Catholicism and hear their reasoning and how they wrestled with various issues. The common element is typically Authority. Which they finally understood was a Good thing. With a capital G. (from God.) Come home to the Catholic Church.

123 To page: Go