Posted on 01/01/2006 4:48:03 PM PST by HarleyD
I'm sorry but this "humility" in prayer thing has completely lost me. I can think of no greater "humility" than understanding that we have fallen from God's grace, God have had to restore us, and that we are solely dependent upon His provincial hand to substain us. Going before Mary, Joseph, or "Saint" Sir Thomas More, seems silly when one can go directly to the throne of God.
I'm told by many here (Catholics included) (and wrongly I might add) that Jesus stands at "the door and knocks" and all we need to open that door. Well, if that's the case, why then don't you take ALL your prayers to Him since He wants to have fellowship with you?
There is NOTHING St. Joseph is going to teach you. There is only ONE teacher and it's not any of the "saints".
And if you don't think kids take away time from your wife, then, as an experiment, send them off to camp. You'll find out how wrong this analogy is.
The easiest thing to do is to say "Lord, Lord" and be done with what you give the Lord. Other than that, the Protestants make up their own little private theology as it suits them, and even establish whole new "churches" or denominations, sometimes for no other reason that for disagreeing with the pastor.
Comfy, perhaps even selfish IMHO.
Excuse me? Have you ever heard of Catechism? Apparently not. Ignorance is bliss. And by whose standards are Proestants being "proved?" There is nothing easier than convincing oneself that what you believe is true and "guided" by the Holy Spirit.
But you can sin boldly (pecca fortiter) all you want, right? Oh, wait, that's Lither! Let me guess, your truth is Calvin? Or is it Zwigli? Or is it you?
When we fall into sin, Jesus is there to pull us out
Comfy, easy, right? Nothing is required of you, God's gotta do everything for you.
But the reason of the Spirit is so that we may abide in Christ
I though it was Christ Who abides in you.
"Apostle" Forest Keeper, may God have mercy on you!
2 Tim. does not exclude anything else, it excludes anything else EXTRA. So, if I taught orally, right from the Bible, that would be good. Sola Scriptura does not mean that the only way to get good information is to read it directly by yourself. Teaching from the Bible is good. Speaking of this, your Ephesians passage means what I just said in this context, that teaching is good. It certainly does not imply to teach outside of what is now the Bible.
If you believe that MORE is needed, besides scripture, then you must believe that "thoroughly equipped" is not good enough. What can Tradition add to "thoroughly equipped"?
The command is given to man, and that is exactly what the elect will experience, persevering. However, since this can only happen through God's promises to His elect (because no large group of humans could possibly all persevere if human decision was the final determinate), God ensures that none are lost by causing the elect to persevere. It is a classic POV difference.
Then if there is a pecking order of effective prayer (the righteous get what they want more so than the less righteous), does Mary also discriminate on whether she will pray to God on behalf of less righteous people? I mean, if Mary prays for everyone equally, then that is a skirt around the original rule. Any bum could pray to Mary and get the same result as a righteous man. However, if Mary DOES discriminate, like God does, then why bother going to Mary in the first place if you wind up in the same place? She would be of no special advantage then (if she discriminated).
Several reasons. First, it is an act of humility to appeal to another person for help. Do people just walk right up to the Queen of England and ask for help? No, they usually go through someone close to the Queen for a favor.
Do you think the Queen of England wants to have a personal relationship with you? Do you think God does? I think this is important. If you believe that God really desires to put dead people as "buffers" between Himself and His living children, then you believe in a much more impersonal God. I believe that our God wants us to trust Him completely for everything, and therefore come DIRECTLY to Him. God has an open door policy.
How much does God want us to communicate with Him? Certainly not as much if He prefers that we go through middle management with our (intercessory) prayers. That is not communication with God, it is communication with dead people. This is completely different from communicating with a living friend about prayer. The Bible is clear that this is common and proper. However, the Bible does NOT teach that it is common and proper to seek out the dead.
God has placed other people in our lives for the reason of bringing us closer to Him. God formed a Church, a society which we all are helping each other to achieve fruitation. Just as in a human family, we often rely on each other for help.
Sure, and that is fine. But what do all of these people you speak of have in common that dead people do not have? A pulse. All of the people who have ever helped me have communicated to me. No dead person ever has. Why do you seek the dead when the living are all around you? You indicated in your other post that it was because a dead saint will pray for God's will, and therefore, there is a greater chance that it will be granted. Why not just tell all of your living friends to also pray for God's will? Does it really change anything anyway? God's will is God's will no matter who prays for it, right? It's not going to help you get whatever you originally wanted if it's outside of God's will, is it?
"The Church" in the OT became corrupt over and over again, too many times to count. God led prophets to reform the Church, and for God's reasons the Church was reformed, even though it would not last for very long in many cases. Therefore, there was no need to start a breakaway group of followers. God never led them to do that. However, 500 years ago, God did lead several men to break away. Although not to the same degree, He also led either you or the Orthodox to break away 500 years before that. God had His reasons for doing it, so it was done. And if you want to say that I am comparing Calvin and Luther to the prophets or the Apostles, then just remember that all of your Fathers already have that status as a group because Tradition is equal with scripture. If numbers matter so much to be correct, then my side also has a group.
Excuse me. Protestants have Catechism as well. There is quite a bit of difference between memorizing doctrinal beliefs and study to show yourself approved.
There is nothing easier than convincing oneself that what you believe is true and "guided" by the Holy Spirit.
Except perhaps having someone tell you what to believe because THEY are guided by the Holy Spirit.
" The second quote is similar and I think I can agree in principle to it with one hitch: "He who is frightened of this death and has preserved himself from it ...". I think there could be some wiggle room here, but it just struck me as something possibly intended to convey an accomplishment by man's self, rather than God through man. But maybe I'm reading too much into it. :) In any case, I felt reasonably receptive to both quotes."
None of us can preserve ourselve from spiritual death without grace. That's a given. Perhaps where the rub come for you, FK, is that your concepts of predestination are at odds with what Orthodoxy believes. We believe that God does not compel us, as was noted elsewhere. We do play a part in responding to God's grace, which as we know, falls equally on the good and the evil like rain on the earth. +Gregroy Palamas puts it this way:
"But we also know that the fulfillment of the commandments of God gives true knowledge, since it is through this that the soul gains health. How could a rational soul be healthy, if it is sick in its cognitive faculty? So we know that the commandments of God also grant knowledge, and not that alone, but deification also. This we possess in a perfect manner, through the Spirit, seeing in ourselves the glory of God, when it pleases God to lead us to spiritual mysteries."
So, you see, through grace we strive to fulfill the commandments and in their fulfillment, we "find" God. This is a process which gradually through the Holy Spirit transforms us. +Symeon the New Theologian, as I have quoted before but perhaps now you can understand it a bit better, taught:
"'Can a man take fire into his bosom, and his clothes not be burned?' (Prov. 6:27) says the wise Solomon. And I say: can he, who has in his heart the Divine fire of the Holy Spirit burning naked, not be set on fire, not shine and glitter and not take on the radiance of the Deity in the degree of his purification and penetration by fire? For penetration by fire follows upon purification of the heart, and again purification of the heart follows upon penetration by fire, that is, inasmuch as the heart is purified, so it receives Divine grace, and again inasmuch as it receives grace, so it is purified. When this is completed (that is, purification of heart and acquisition of grace have attained their fullness and perfection), through grace a man becomes wholly a god."
"It also diverts attention from the finished work of Christ upon the cross to the errors of pagan philosophies, such as the cult of Cybele."
_________________________________
This can't be emphasized enough.
Thanks for listing the book. I look forward to reading it.
"I think Mary was on to something. We should all be "pointing to Jesus," and no one else."
________________________
Absolutely!
We should always think of Mary with the greatest respect.
"I have to take it back, Christianity is easier in this sense, we persevere in faith to finish the course laid out for us by God well, because of love, His for us and ours for Him, not because we fear we will not be saved when He calls us home. The salvation question was answered once and for all when He drew us to Himself."
______________________________
It's those moments when the HOLY SPIRIT convicts you in your sin and you realize that your Christian walk has failed to glorify GOD that are hard.
"The Orthodox and Roman Catholics have as much if not more diversity in their ranks but don't have the liberty to leave and form other sects of like minded people because their salvation is not bound solely in Jesus but tied to the church."
We do? There is very little theological "diversity" within Orthodoxy or Roman Catholicism on matters of dogmatic belief. In fact, there is "none". Those who don't want to believe what The Church teaches are certainly free to leave. That's where you Protestants came from, BD.
"...because their salvation is not bound solely in Jesus but tied to the church."
Interesting comment BD. It displays one of the fundamental tenets of Protestantism, I suppose, and demonstrates how Protestantism rejected 1500 years of Christian teaching in its mania to break with Rome. I suppose its possible that the reformers were ignorant of the writings of +Ignatius of Antioch (100 AD or so. +Ignatius was the second successor of +Peter as bishop of Antioch and was a disciple and friend of of +John. Some writings say he was the child called to sit on Christ's lap. At any rate, in his letter to the Smyrneans he wrote:
"You must all follow the lead of the bishop, as Jesus Christ followed that of the Father; follow the presbytery as you would the Apostles; reverence the deacons as you would God's commandment. Let no one do anything touching the Church, apart from the bishop. Let that celebration of the Eucharist be considered valid which is held under the bishop or anyone to whom he has committed it. Where the bishop appears, there let the people be, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the catholic (universal) Church. It is not permitted without authorization from the bishop either to baptize or to hold an agape; but whatever he approves is also pleasing to God. Thus everything you do will be proof against danger and valid."
You see, BD, making a distinction, for us humans and for our salvation, between The Church, being the bishop surrounded by his clergy and laity centered on the Eucharist, and all of us centered on Christ, is a false distinction, or so The Church has taught since the beginning. Now Protestantism may well hold that +Ignatius didn't know what he was talking about. The evidence would sem to point otherwise however. So if +Ignatius did know what he was talking about because he learned it from +Peter and +John, then it would seem that those "reformers" who set put to destroy The Church with heresy were wrong. Here one might well ask why they would do such a thing. The easy answer may be that the medieval Rome Church had itself fallen into such apostasy that reform was divinely ordained, but then got out of control. If we accept that, then why did it get out of control? Personally, I think the answer is pretty simple:
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." +John Chrysostomos.
You flatter yourself as much as you judge others. No, we don't believe we earn our salvation. Whatever is guiding you to "earn" your salvation is probably not from God.
"I'm sorry but this "humility" in prayer thing has completely lost me."
_________________________________
FWIW, JESUS did not send a surrogate to the cross.
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.