Posted on 12/09/2018 7:45:01 AM PST by Salvation
you posit that we Catholic regard her as a goddess to be adored on a par with God. It's simply not true.
Mary is not treated as a goddess by catholic doctrine, but as a demigoddess - above humans, but slightly short of God.
She has divine powers, has been made into a sinless/perfect entity, and is a universal mother figure that is to be approached to gain extra leverage to get prayers answered. In short, she becomes an idol and is idolized.
None of this is in Scripture.
Ealgeone, if this isn't what you meant, you can correct my writing. Best to you and Merry Christmas.
In the Glories of Mary the following is recorded [emhphasis mine]: 'At the command of Mary all obey, even God'. Saint Bernadine fears not to utter this sentence, meaning indeed, to say that God grants the prayers of Mary as if they were commands. And hence Saint Anselm, addressing Mary, says, 'Our Lord, O most holy Virgin, has exalted thee to such a degree, that, by His favor, all things that are possible to Him should be possible to thee. For thy protection is omnipotent, O Mary, says Cosmas of Jerusalem.
'Yes, Mary is omnipotent,' repeats Richard of Saint Lawrence;
'for the Queen, by every law, enjoys the same privileges as the King.' 'And as,' he adds, 'the power of the Son and that of the Mother is the same, a Mother is made omnipotent by an omnipotent Son. 'And thus,' says Saint Antoninus, 'God has placed the whole Church, not only under the patronage, but even under the dominion of Mary.'....But that she is so, is evident from the fact, that whatever the Mother asks for, the Son never denies her; and this was revealed to Saint Bridget, who one day heard Jesus talking with Mary, and thus address her: 'Ask of me what thou wilt, for no petition of thine can be void.'
St Alphonsus de'Liguori, The Glories of Mary, p146 The book carries this statement: WE hereby approve of this Translation of "The Glories of Mary," and cordially recommend it to the Faithful. Nicholas Card. Wiseman, Archbisop of Westminster
To illustrate the statements above aren't from the average Roman Catholic I provide the following below.
To my knowledge none of their statements above have been repudiated by Rome.
Liguori was canonized by Pope Gregory XVI and proclaimed a Doctor of the Church by Pope Pius in 1871.
Saint Bernadine was canonised by the Catholic Church as a saint. He is also referred to as the Apostle of Italy.
Saint Antoninus is venerated as a saint by the Catholic Church
Saint Anselm was proclaimed a Doctor of the Church by a bull of Pope Clement XI in 1720.
There is a whole bunch more of this rot from the same source.
I call upon Roman Catholics everywhere to refute these lies and begin to follow Christ and only Christ as their Savior.
Only He can save an individual.
“I call upon Roman Catholics everywhere to refute these lies and begin to follow Christ and only Christ as their Savior.”
Crickets so far... I’ll keep listening.
As I noted in the post...these aren't lightweight random opinions from nobodies in Roman Catholicism. These are their heavyweights.
Usually when confronted with these writings most Roman Catholics don't want to deal with them or try to dismiss them as "something they don't have to believe". Yet when asked for them to come out and condemn it, to stop praying to Mary, to toss their scapulars, etc....they refuse to do so.
It's really sad to see this. I know we're not the first ones to try and expose the light of Truth on this topic.
We will continue to try and pray they see the light of Truth and place their faith in Christ and only Christ for their salvation.
If you want to see an example of verbal gymnastics, try a protestant explaining how Jesus was just kidding about ‘This is my body’.
Disrespecting a man’s mother can be dangerous. Dissing the mother of Jesus? Go ahead! Sounds like a great idea!
If understood in context it's pretty easy to understand.
But what's more fun is watching the Roman Catholic try to explain the shift from literal to non-literal in their rendering of John 6.
As usual...you bring nothing of substance to the discussion. No wonder you get the notes you do.
It is the Roman Catholic who has "dissed" the mother of Jesus by attributing to her many of the characteristics of the Son and Spirit and saying whatever she says God does.
Christians correctly count Mary as blessed for being the mother of Christ and being the humble bondslave she was.
Your posts continue to confirm my observations of many, though not all, Roman Catholics on these threads.
Something that might have some bearing on which books where included, and which were left out, is mentioned in 4 Ezra (aka, 2 Esdras)
Brief desc from Wiki:
God appears to Ezra in a bush and commands him to restore the Law. Ezra gathers five scribes and begins to dictate. After forty days, he has produced ninety-four books: the twenty-four books of the Tanakh and seventy secret works:
God tells Ezra:
Make public the twenty-four books that you wrote first, and let the worthy and the unworthy read them; but keep the seventy that were written last, in order to give them to the wise among your people." (2 Esdras 14:45–46 RSV; 4 Ezra 12:45–46)
More from Wiki:
The "seventy" might refer to the Septuagint, most of the apocrypha, or the lost books that are described in the Bible.
Most Latin editions of the text have a large lacuna[13] of seventy verses between 7:35 and 7:36 that is missing due to the fact that they trace their common origin to one early manuscript, Codex Sangermanensis I, which was missing an entire page. In 1895 Robert Lubbock Bensly and James published a critical edition restoring the lost verses; it is this edition that is used in the Stuttgart edition of the Vulgate. The restored verses are numbered 7:35 to 7:105, with the former verses 7:36–7:70 renumbered to 7:106–7:140.[14] For more information, see the article Codex Sangermanensis I.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_Esdras
Also, while scanning through my notes and studying further, another book caught my attention: *The Didache*.
__________
The Didache is one of the oldest surviving extant piece of non-canonical literature. It is a handbook for new Christian converts, consisting of instructions derived directly from the teachings of Jesus. The book can be divided into three sections. The first six chapters consist of Christian lessons; the next four give descriptions of the Christian ceremonies, including baptism, fasting and communion; and the last six outline the church organization.
The Didache claims to have been authored by the twelve apostles. While this is unlikely, the work could be a direct result of the first Apostolic Council, c.50 C.E. (Acts 15:28).
From The Encyclopedia of Lost and Rejected Scriptures: The Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha, Kindle Edition.
__________
Curiosity got the best of me, and I began reading through it - then something REALLY got my attention:
2:2 You shall do no murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not corrupt boys, you shall not commit fornication, you shall not steal, you shall not deal in magic, you shall do no sorcery, you shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill them when born, you shall not covet your neighbor's goods, you shall not perjure yourself, you shall not bear false witness, you shall not speak evil, you shall not cherish a grudge, you shall not be double-minded nor double-tongued;
From The Encyclopedia of Lost and Rejected Scriptures: The Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha, Kindle Edition.
__________
That's a pretty amazing and directly related directive, even if from non-canonical scripture. It needs vetting, checked against oldest copies available, as it's almost as if someone added it in during our times.
Previously, the most direct directive from scripture, concerning abortion, I've found:
Exodus 21:22-23:
"If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,"
[Translated?: If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman, and she gives birth prematurely, but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined …if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life.]
__________
I thought this might also interest to you...:)
The Didache - The Complete Text
Catholic Word of the Day: DIDACHE (Teaching of the twelve Apostles), 03-20-14
Excerpt from: The Didache (The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles) [Catholic/Orthodox Caucus]
What the early Church had to say about abortion
Church History: The Didache [Catholic/Orthodox Caucus]
Catholic Word of the Week: DIDACHE (Teaching of the twelve Apostles), 05-18-10
Early Christians and Abortion
The Time Capsule
The Didache or The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles
The Didache - The Lord's Teaching Through the Twelve Apostles to the Nations
TY!
You’re so welcome. Have a blessed second week of Advent.
TY U2 ;)
Absolutely true.
Jesus also made the Church the arbiter of disputed questions amongst believers:
(Matthew 18:15-18 RSV)
"If your brother sins against you, If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.
But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you,
that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses.
If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church;
and if he refuses to listen even to the church,
let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
" Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven,
and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
So everything else follows from these two statements.
Are you refusing to listen even to the Church?
There will not be contradictory messages given on salvation.
Your denomination is in grave error on this issue as it is not condemning these false writings.
Get any 5 FReepers Christians together, and they'll objectively survey the whole text and in an unbiased way select the dozen contexts they like best, resulting in a
And that doesn't even include our beloved cousins the FReeper Jews, who say we are illegitimately culturally appropriating and misapplying the whole blessit OT context and wrenching it away from its original meanings!
(Happy Hannukah, cousins.)
Which means, in short, that varied contexts can be like the stars in the sky, as the dots may be interpreted as the Bear (you never looked in the sky and saw "the Bear, did you? Or did you?), Orion, and Pleiades which are listed in Job and Amos, or grouped (re-contexted) differently and called something else.
That's an analogy, ealgeone, for textual contexts. Different people connect the data dots different ways.
And some "dots" are missed altogether. For instance, I have never once heard a non-Catholic FReeper comment one syllable about the many, many OT types, prophecies and references to Mary --- except the Ashtareth thing which does NOT refer to Mary. Guess your contexts are ... different.
Bottom line: because of the marvelous perspicuity of Scripture (love that phrase), you will either have to either tolerate 10,000 notions of what is the proper context --- within the non-Catholic community alone --- OR you will have to "take it to the Church."
And "if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector."
BTW, I will cheerfully admit to being abysmal in so many ways. I am likewise deplorable --- I was deplorable before deplorable was cool.
Happy Second Week pf Advent.
Tagline
I love the Didache, by the way. It is not canonical Scripture, but it is certainly -- as far as I can tell --- authentic, edifying, and true.
I intend to look over it again when I can spend more time with it.
Tip o' the hat to you.
Perhaps because there aren't the "many, many" references to Mary Rome has read into the texts.
In either case, you're not willing to deal with the writings I've provided from ROMAN CATHOLIC sources which are in contradiction of the Sciptures.
Bottom line: because of the marvelous perspicuity of Scripture (love that phrase), you will either have to either tolerate 10,000 notions of what is the proper context --- within the non-Catholic community alone --- OR you will have to "take it to the Church."
No. You can understand the clear meaning of the text from the context of the passage. I know that's a new concept for a lot of Roman Catholics.
Take it to the RCC?? The RCC claims to have been around 2000 years yet has only dogmatically commented on less than 20 - 30 verses in this time. We will be long gone before Rome gets around to explaining the verses.
Meanwhile, we thankfully have the Spirit to guide in these matters.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.