My Personal Savior

I paused for a moment to consider the question. Not because I don't recognize the Son of God as my Lord and Savior, but because my response would say a lot about me and the Church.

We Christians really should have a common language, but the truth is that we don't often communicate with each other well. The trouble is that words have meaning and some words mean different things to different people.

For an Evangelical, for example, "accepting Jesus" refers to a discrete event in time during which a person submits to Jesus' Lordship, and becomes a Christian. The new Christian recognizes Jesus as his Lord and Savior, and usually follows this decision with a prayer asking Jesus to come into his heart.

For a Catholic, "accepting Jesus" is not a one time event, but has many and varied meanings.

"Accepting Jesus" could mean daily conversion of heart where we surrender our lives once again to Christ in the Morning Offering: "Lord Jesus, I offer you my works, prayers, joys and sufferings this day for the intentions of your Sacred Heart and in union with the holy sacrifice of the Mass throughout the world."

"Accepting Jesus" could also mean receiving our Lord in the Most Holy Eucharist where we physically receive His Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity under the appearance of bread and wine.

Both of these methods of accepting Jesus speak of personal relationship with the Savior. I have written many times about the communal nature of our Catholic faith, that we are joined to the Church in Heaven (Church Triumphant) and in Purgatory (Church Suffering) through our baptism (cf 1 Peter 3:20-21, Eph 4:5). Being aware of our connection to the rest of the Church is important, but we should not neglect our own personal relationship with our Lord either.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church weighs in on the subject of personal relationship Jesus: Because God creates through wisdom, his creation is ordered: "You have arranged all things by measure and number and weight." The universe, created in and by the eternal Word, the "image of the invisible God", is destined for and addressed to man, himself created in the "image of God" and called to a personal relationship with God (#299).

You see, we must neither confine our relationship with Jesus to Holy Mass nor the quiet of our rooms, for Jesus Christ is both King and Brother. While different spiritualities appeal to different people, we must both unite ourselves with the whole Church and present ourselves to Jesus Christ as individuals. To loose one is to diminish the other.

Submitting to the Lordship of Jesus should be more than just a one-time event; instead it is a daily act of love and gratitude for our Lord's sacrifice on the Cross. Our response to His love must never be merely a fond memory of the day we gave our lives to Christ.

Having said all that, we shouldn't loose sight of the need to truly give ourselves over to the Lordship of Jesus Christ. The Evangelical's surrender-event is a good model; daily conversion of the heart has to start somewhere...we just must never let it remain there.

So what answer did I give to my earnest evangelist when he asked me if I'd accepted Jesus as personal savior?

Without being a paleobibliographer (there's a big ol' pompous word for ya, Brothah Dawg!) (say it twice and notice the bubbly mouth-feel) I can find authority for devotion to Mary and the other saints via the authority of the Church, which clearly has its authority in Scripture.

Plus the practice of all the faithful, and I mean all of them, for a stretch of at least 1100 or 1200 years (I'm counting from between the Nicene Council in the 4th century and the, uh, events of the 16th century.)

I won't be persuaded that the Holy Spirit, promised to guide the Church into all truth, was just MIA for a millennium.

"Do you have any idea how far back you'd have to go to find the origins of (I can't write it in Greek):

By the prayers of the Holy Theotokos,O Savior, save us"

"Ταῖς πρεσβείαις τῆς Θεοτόκου, Σῶτερ, σῶσον ἡμᾶς". :)

Likely you'd go back to the 4th century at least. This antiphon is an ancient one. As for Ante Nicene Fathers discussing the Most Holy Theotokos, I think NYer gave you the premier ones. Certainly by the 4th century, veneration of Panagia was well established. Don't forget, of course the Protoevangelium of +James which is from about 150.

"Another promising area to research would be the various very ancient "Rejoice, O Pure Virgin" canticles from the Bright Week Orthros."

That is from the early 7th century.

I knew you had the stuff! Thank you!

I think liturgical research is s fascinating. It's like tracing the mitochondia of cells back to the earliest identifiable ancestor. Many hymns were already "old" before they were even written down.

That's another strong inference we can make about Marian hymns, also catacomb graffiti, icons properly so called, and other objects of devotion. If such devotions were not well-rooted in the hearts and the practice of the broad "laity," there would have been disturbances, riots, schisms if somebody tried to "impose" them after the Nicene Council.

The fact that these objects of devotion were treasured and preserved without debate or discord in the Christian community shows a kind of "organic" sociological continuity which argues for their great antiquity.

For a Catholic, "accepting Jesus" is not a one time event, but has many and varied meanings.

NO it doesn't...It has a universal meaning for all people...This guy doesn't get it...

The evangelist didn't as this person as a Catholic...The evangelist ask this person as a sinner, headed for hell, if he knew Jesus personally...If Jesus was the Lord of his life...When he goes to bed, when he gets up in the morning, at lunch and supper time and all the areas in between...And what was the guy's response???

"Accepting Jesus" could mean daily conversion of heart where we surrender our lives once again to Christ in the Morning Offering:

"Accepting Jesus" could also mean receiving our Lord in the Most Holy Eucharist where we physically receive His Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity under the appearance of bread and wine.

Both of these methods of accepting Jesus speak of personal relationship with the Savior.

No, they certainly don't...

Being aware of our connection to the rest of the Church is important, but we should not neglect our own personal relationship with our Lord either.

As with most things Catholic, it's not either/or...it's both/and.

Wrong again...Those of you who are saved know what a personal relationship with Jesus is, and it doesn't have anything to do with a church...

Submitting to the Lordship of Jesus should be more than just a one-time event;

That wasn't the question...This fella doesn't understand the question...We're not talking about dedication to a supreme being...We're talking about a one on one personal relationship as in 'Hi God, it's me again'...

instead it is a daily act of love and gratitude for our Lord's sacrifice on the Cross.

Isn't that what muzlims do??? They kill Jews and Christians to show their love for 'Allah'...

Our response to His love must never be merely a fond memory of the day we gave our lives to Christ.

Jesus didn't ask for your life...He ask you to take His...That's the difference...

I answered, "Yes, everyday."

This fella in my view has never asked Jesus to be his Saviour...It's not something you do everyday...Once it's done, it's done...

Do it today...Ask Jesus to be your Personal Saviour...

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.