A French priest, Fr. Jacques Hamel (age 85), was killed while saying Mass two days ago and the terrorists further insulted the God they pretend to honor by filming “themselves preaching in Arabic by the altar.”2
The irony is that those who mistakenly think they can become martyrs3,4,5 by suicide bombing or being killed while murdering “infidels” actually assisted in achieving that glorified status for a fellow human whose faith they despise. Now, the priest in heaven will be interceding on their behalf for their conversions!6
1 – “But some people do go directly to heaven–certainly as in the case of martyrs. Our Lord told the ‘good thief’ [that] he would be in heaven that day (Luke 23:43).” — Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P., http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=667156, 4/19/2012.
2 – “France in shock again after Isis murder of priest in Normandy,” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/26/france-shock-second-isis-attack-12-days, 7/26/2016.
3 – first definition of “martyr” by this source: “a person who voluntarily suffers death as the penalty of witnessing to and refusing to renounce a religion,” http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/martyr
4 – “Sacred Scripture attests to the courage of men and women who were willing to die as martyrs rather than renounce their faith or be unfaithful to God’s law.” “What is the Church’s Teaching on Martyrdom?”http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-is-the-churchs-teaching-on-martyrdom/
5 – “Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life. It is gravely contrary to the just love of self. It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations. Suicide is contrary to love for the living God.” Paragraph 2281 from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November, 2013.
6 – “The witnesses who have preceded us into the kingdom, especially those whom the Church recognizes as saints, share in the living tradition of prayer by the example of their lives, the transmission of their writings, and their prayer today. They contemplate God, praise him and constantly care for those whom they have left on earth. When they entered into the joy of their Master, they were ‘put in charge of many things.’ Their intercession is their most exalted service to God’s plan. We can and should ask them to intercede for us and for the whole world.” Paragraph 2683, Ibid.
CartaRemi 
He was NO Martyr in the Christian sense.
Those muslims were ignorant of the fact that Catholics are NOT Christian.
They always confuse the two.
He died as a member of the cult of Rome i.e. The Whore of Babylon.
He was actually about to conduct a Blasphemous catholic mass.
I do not think he went straight to heaven at all.
He is probably going to be roasting in hell.
Haven’t heard from you in quite a while! I’ll ask the martyred priest to intercede for your conversion, along with his killers’.
Dont bother thanks.
He’s probably smelly by now, and I’m not into Necromancy anyway,like you catholics.
Please do feel free to get yourself a Bible i.e. KJV, perhaps one day you will become a Christian.
Too late for your martyr [ Hamel ] to the cult of Rome,he will be roasting, where he is going.
If you prefer being separate from the Church Christ started, “to whom shall you go?” paraphrasing Peter. You can stay with one of the 30,000 denominations which claim that same-sex “marriage” exists or that contraception and in vitro fertilization is OK because human life is considered on a par with animals or, worse yet, abortion is permissible or that divorce is acceptable even though he who divorces his wife and remarries commits adultery. There are also a lot of “fast-food” options among the separated brethren. However, door is always open for those who would rather have the full-course banquet which Christ offers through His Church and sacraments….. Incidentally, no one in this life can know with certainty that a fellow human ended up in Hell. Just like the date of the end of the world, only the Father in Heaven knows.
You make the false assumption, that Jesus Christ started the roman catholic so called church, he did no such thing.
This fact, makes the rest of your rant redundant.
Ha, ha. No ranting on my end of this exchange even though I have a bunch of reasons to disagree.
Incidentally, which church do you attend weekly and why do you believe it possesses the true faith despite the fact 30,000 others disagree with yours?
I dont belong to a denomination, and if I did, it would be none of your business.
Without guidance from the teaching authority of the Church, how can you be sure that the Trinity exists as it does not appear as such in Scripture?
Back to the “none of my business” aspect, faith is personal but not private. All of us in this life, the Church Militant, struggle together to keep God’s Commandments in the face of daily temptations.
The catholic so called church has no authority to teach because it teaches those things that are contrary to what the Bible teaches.
I do not need validation from a catholic so called priest, or the vatican.
Jesus did not start the RCC.
The trinity exists, and is depicted i Scripture.
The fact that you made the above statement tells me, that you do not know Gods Word, and perhaps that, you have not read the entirety of the Bible.
OK, what are some examples of doctrine that you feel are contrary to what is written in Scripture? Which brings up another question: How did the early Church carry on the faith when the new Testament came after The Ascension and Jesus never ordered it to be written?
Jesus did start the Catholic Church through Peter when He gave him the keys to the Kingdom and apostolic succession. On what authority are the 30,000 denominations started?
And, as we agree, “trinity” is depicted but not mentioned literally. The concept came from the early Catholic Church’s understanding of how Jesus described the relationship between Him, the Father and the Holy Spirit.
[time for lunch and other obligations, I’ll respond later if necessary]
Why did you make that same comment / diatribe twice.
Only curious.?
Duplication arose from a misunderstanding between my internet and me. I thought it was not sent the first time.
I have had the same problem.
OK, what are some examples of doctrine that you feel are contrary to what is written in Scripture? Which brings up another question: How did the early Church carry on the faith when the new Testament came after The Ascension and Jesus never ordered it to be written?
Jesus did start the Catholic Church through Peter when He gave him the keys to the Kingdom and apostolic succession. On what authority are the 30,000 denominations started?
And, as we agree, “trinity” is depicted but not mentioned literally. The concept came from the early Catholic Church’s understanding of how Jesus described the relationship between Him, the Father and the Holy Spirit.
[time for lunch and other obligations, I’ll respond later if necessary]
p.s.
Mary does not and never did give orders to Jesus,except for when he was a young man,even then, I know that Jesus never needed instruction from Mary.
Right, Mary doesn’t give Him orders, but intercedes for us as the saints do in Revelation when they carry the prayers of the faithful to God.
She does not intercede either.
Your teaching lies !!
Book
Chapter
Verse
Since we, who are imperfect, are asked to pray (intercede) for one another and even our enemies (Matthew 5:44, Romans 15:30-32, Ephesians 6:18-20, Colossians 4:4 and several others) — how much better that the living saints in Heaven pray for us as well.
Before we go further, sola scriptura is a man-made tradition without guidance from the Holy Spirit.
There is nothing in Scripture, written by the Apostles, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit,indicating that we should have any reliance on dead saints praying for us.
Neither should we attempt to ask the dead to pray for us.
I do believe that ‘ Necromancy ‘ is proscribed – Forbidden – in the Scriptures.
KJV
Sola Scripture is not a man-made tradition.
😀
I have done posting on this on my Blog somewhere.
The Church does not promote necromancy. While the reunification of our souls with our future glorified bodies will not occur until the end of the world, those who have died and gone to Heaven are very much alive. In the Transfiguration, Jesus is seen talking with Moses and Elijah. In Revelation, the saints are taking the prayers of the faithful to God. And in Maccabees, Onias and Jeremiah are seen praying for the Jewish community.
Part of the confusion about the status of the dead arises from the term “fallen asleep.” It is not a condition of suspended animation, where the souls are awaiting judgment. “Fallen asleep” was an idiom in a similar way when we say someone “passed away” instead of simply “died.”
When we ask for intercessions of those gone before us, we are not to be seeking a response like those who practice improperly in Samuel and Leviticus. This would make someone vulnerable to satanic influences. Intercessory prayer is totally acceptable whether it’s asked of those in Heaven or of each other still in this life.
Quoting Maccabees does nothing to strengthen your argument at all.
There is nothing in Scripture, or given in instruction by Jesus himself, to show that we must seek help or prayers from the dead or, as you say, ‘ those that have gone before us ‘.
There is only one intercessor between Men and God, the Man Christ Jesus.
You are speaking Heresy mister and I suggest that you repent.Get yourself a proper Bible,preferably a King James Bible / AV_1611.
More importantly, you need to repent and get saved and be in right standing with God instead of your catholic so-called priest’s
I leave your future enlightenment to the Holy Spirit as facts from Scripture and the early Church fathers are unable to persuade you to reconsider the inaccuracies promoted by the founders of the Protestant Revolution 500 years ago.
You have expressed no facts at all from Scripture,and you do not decide what the Holy Spirit does or does not do.
I follow what the Bible KJV / AV_1611 teaches, and I don’t follow the founders of the protestant revolution, as you describe it.
The Apostles were actually Protestant.
I cannot ignore this one. 😀 Saying that the apostles were Protestant is even funnier than the Muslims claiming Abraham was a Muslim, which they do! Speaking of authority, King Henry VIII and King James had none with regard to starting a church or contracting a new interpretation of the Bible.
Yes, the Apostles were essentially Protestant.
If only you knew what the word Protestant actually meant ? It is clear to me that your comprehension of history is none existent & warped by catholic so-called priests. It wasn’t an ‘ interpretation ‘ as you describe it. The KJV was translated from the ‘Antioch MSS ‘ / Received-Text.
Your catholic so-called Bible is a derivation from Alexandrian / Egyptian MSS and is corrupt.
Your ignorance is astounding as also are your arrogance & Pretension.
This seems a common trait of the catholic.
Since polite dialogue is no longer likely at this point, I ask the Lord’s blessings upon you in your search for truth, “In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, Amen.”
My search for truth will never lead to roman catholicism and neither should it do so for anyone else.
You really are full of lies and false history.
You need to get saved, Repent, become a Christian.
https://carm.org/roman-catholicism
Yes, the child abuse scandal is one of the great shames in Church history, especially since it came at the hands of those whom people trusted (better that they have a millstone around their necks and thrown into a lake, etc.) and regardless of the fact that the incidence of this horrible sin is roughly the same as experienced in society as a whole.
.You say ‘ Church History ‘,
I say ‘ Catholic so-called church History ‘.
Do you think the activity of your so-called priesthood, has only occurred since the creation of the printing press ?
I believe the Pedophile activity had been introduced by Constantine, [ Or became normalized practice ] when Catholicism was created in the 4th century.
It was no marriage of ‘ Church & State ‘ it was created by Constantine, to keep his empire in-tact.Hence the so-called pope is called ‘ Pontifex Maximus ‘ a title the old Roman emperor’s applied to themselves, thinking that they were gods.
Constantine merely made it no longer punishable to be Catholic. He did not organize the Church’s structure, only stopped the persecution of Catholics when he converted. Pedophilia existed in the Old Testament, as evidences Sodom and Gomorrah before the Catholic Church existed.
Regarding “Pontifex Maximus”, I found a much better author than I am:
http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/a104.htm
Title “Pontifex Maximus” or “Supreme Pontiff”
<>
Of course Christ didn’t appoint Peter to be the Pontifex Maximus. And of course the early Church Fathers spoke of the Pontifex Maximus in such derogatory, paganistic ways. Because when the early Fathers were writing, the Pontifex Maximus was the head of the Roman pagan religion, and the Roman Empire itself was pagan. As any student of Roman history knows, the Pontifex Maximus was an imperial office, usually held by the Emperor himself, which made one the “chief priest” of the Roman “state cult.”
Now as I said, in the days of the early Fathers, this “state cult” was paganism and Emperor worship. Yet, when Constantine the Great became the first Christian Roman Emperor, the “state cult” changed to Christianity. Now, oddly enough, the first Christian emperors all still retained the title of Pontifex Maximus (a traditional title for Emperors) which, under imperial law (though not Church law), actually made them the “Head of the Church” ! It was by this authority, for example, that Constantine called the Council of Nicaea (325 AD) to settle the Arian controversy.
Indeed, it was not until the Empire split in two, with the Western Empire going to the pious, youthful Emperor Gratian (c. 360 AD) that the Pope was given the title Pontifex Maximus. Indeed, feeling that it was not right for he himself to carry that title (since he was, after all, not a Christian priest) the pious young Emperor bestowed it upon Pope Damasus I, who became the first Pope in history to hold the title “Pontifex Maximus.”
Yet, this was only a legal title; and the Popes didn’t pay much attention to it at the time, but continued to maintain that their authority came from the Apostle Peter and Peter alone. It was not until the Popes began to conflict with several heretical Eastern Emperors (who, by the way, never relinquished the title “Pontifex Maximus” in the Eastern Empire) that the Popes began asserting their legal authority under imperial law.
This is why the Pope is referred to as the “Pontifex Maximus” or “Supreme Pontiff” today, and not because of any carry-over from paganism. Just as there were pagan Emperors and Christian Emperors, just as there are pagan kings and Christian kings, so there are pagan Pontiffs and Christian Pontiffs. Our critic’s anti-Catholic prejudice prevents him from appreciating this.
As for Tertullian’s reference to Pontifex Maximus (cited by our critic above), this is most interesting indeed since, despite our critic’s spin on things, it is a powerful proof for the authority of the early Roman Papacy. As already described by both the author and myself, Tertullian was (at the time) a Montanist heretic who clashed with Pope Callistus I (c. 220 AD) over Callistus’ relaxation of the Church’s penitential discipline, allowing repentant adulterers and fornicators back into the Church, even if they were “repeat offenders.”
Catholicism did not exist at the time of Constantine, it came into being because of him [ with assistance from satan/lucifer].
You need to revise your understanding of history as it’s skewed by the drivel that catholic so-called priests’ have told you.
The earliest use of the term “Catholic” is not certain, but it is known that St. Ignatius of Antioch used it in A.D. 107. Constantine did not start the Church, merely made it legal in the empire so that persecutions would stop.
He didn’t volunteer though,And what was hamel a martyr to, the answer is of course the disgusting religion of rome, i.e.The Babylonian Whore Rev 17, KJV.
Well I don’t remember you..
Will you be considering ‘ Christianity ‘ as a viable option in the not too distant future ?
If you become Christian, you don’t need to try and earn your salvation, it is a free gift.
You won’t have to confess your sins to a catholic so called priest / Pedophile enabler,who thinks he is God.
You can go directly to Jesus Christ, a the ONLY mediator between men & God.
It has been a couple of years since we crossed paths…… Regarding the Sacrament of Recociliation, Jesus told his apostles that whatever (sins) they declared loosed on earth would be loosed in Heaven, and whatever they declared bound on earth would be bound in Heaven. Right, we cannot “earn” salvation, but we can throw it away by not following His commands. Or does not being His friends if we don’t, not have any consequences?
Another interesting event was Jesus’ first miracle in His public life. At the wedding feast at Cana, He changed the water into wine at the request of His mother. The wedding group knew Jesus and could have just as easily asked Him directly, but instead, went through His mother.
Mary did not ask Jesus to do any such thing.
She merely pointed out to Jesus that ‘ they had No wine ‘.
STOP PERVERTING THE GOSPEL !!
(John 2:2-5) “And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. {3} And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. {4} Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come. {5} His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.” KJV / AV_1611
That’s the point. Mary leads us to Christ and tells us to do what He instructs us to. He performed the miracle after she made it known that there was a problem.
Mary does no such thing.
Spelling! that’s “Reconciliation”
The word catholic is not in the Scripture.