Posted on 06/15/2010 6:38:10 AM PDT by bkaycee
To complete the circle?
So you say.
No, just that I doubt Luther killed any as opposed to the secular authorities.
Of course you do because, as a Catholic, you've been indoctrinated for all of your catechal life that the Church Fathers were all good Catholics who completely reflected Holy Mother Church's doctrines and practices from the very beginning. Therefore, you have an theological lens through which you view these writers that acts to filter out anything that doesn't fit the indoctrination, while simultaneously magnifying anything that does.
As a non-Catholic, I don't have the same lens, therefore, when I read the patristics, I don't automatically filter out everything that doesn't fit the preconceived meme, while enhancing what does. I simply see them for what they are.
Also, you have failed to answer what we make of the first 1024 years before the schism. Where did they go wrong to make what became the Catholics and Orthodox?
What to make of them? These years were dominated by gradual drifting into apostasy by much of professing Christianity, which especially accelerated after the marriage of church and state which began with Constantine I, but continued in enhanced form with his successors. The doctrines that we know of as Catholic/EO distinctives developed during this time.
For instance, take the doctrine of transubstantiation. This doctrine was obviously not there from the beginning. For the first five centuries of Christianity, the patristics give entirely conflicting reports pertaining to the nature of the Lord's Supper, with transubstantiation only being represented in any great respect during the later part of that period. As late as the end of the 5th century, a POPE (of all people) basically refutes transubstantiation. Church doctors fought over the doctrine throughout the early Medieval period, and the issue was finally only "settled" in the Catholic West by the fiat of the Lateran Council of 1215. It had been "settled" a little earlier in the eastern churches, typically around the 7th century.
Not any more than the Kennedys or Pelosi are 'Catholic'
You’d rather not apologise for killing Anabaptists?
I didn't kill any of them, nor do I think Lutheran churchmen did either. A sad consequence of church-state union. But the Catholic hands remained clean, because they would never kill an Anabaptist right?
I'm not enough of a lib I guess.
Kosta50 is an agnostic, who believes the scriptures have been corrupted and does not believe them.
just an FYI
You ought to consider that very, very, very carefully while looking in a mirror. You might also want to look at 2 Pet 2:1-3 while looking in that same mirror.
A wonderful verse, that more RC's should carefully consider.
2 Pet 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. 3 In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.
We have been arguing this very thing. We have been arguing that the one deposit of Faith was given to the Saints for all time and is found in total in the scriptures.
Who is it that introduced New/developed, teaching (Marian doctrine, papal infalibity, purgatory, etc...) into the church, that was most definitely not part of the deposit of Faith given to the Apostles/Saints?
Thank you for the FYI, bkaycee. Kosta50 is a cat who likes to lay in the sun and swipe at others he perceives as toys. Fun stuff for a while. Until the Lion comes up behind him..
I think you need to read more Saint Cyril Of Jeruslem ,Dear Friend
From Cyril of Jerusalem, Homily on the Dormition...
http://www.uoregon.edu/~sshoemak/texts/coptic/Cyril.htm
Excerpts...
"This is the day of the Holy Offering, which is wholly pure in soul and spirit. This is the day wherein the Queen, the mother of the King of Life, tasted death like every other human being, because she was flesh and blood."
This clearly supports Mary Queen Of heaven!
More...
Behold, when they see her they shall praise her through God the Father. All the virgins who are in the heavens shall rejoice with thee when thou shalt meet them, and those who have preserved their virginity shall come forth to thee, and shall bow in homage before thee, saying, Well hast thou come (i.e. Welcome)! O mother of all virgins! It was time for thee to come unto us, O thou mother!
And let us send up to her thanksgiving, saying, 'Remember us, O true Queen, and do thou plead on our behalf before God, so that He may shew mercy unto us and so that me may celebrate a festival to Him at all times.' Let us give alms to the poor in the name of the Virgin, [so that] she may not forsake us in the place to which we are going. Let us ascribe glory unto her by the utterances of our lips, and let us say, 'Through thee honours have been bestowed upon the city by our God.' And again, 'The death of the saints is precious in the sight of the Lord.' (Ps 116.15) And again, 'The sound of rejoicing and salvation is in the habitation of the righteous.' (Ps 118.15) And now the time hath arrived for us to offer up the Holy Offering, the Body and Blood of Jesus the Christ, our Lord, and moderation in everything is good. By the Will of God we will give the remainder of the exegesis in the holy shrine.
You realize that this text is a pseudograph, right?
Yes ,but +Cyril does write as Mary in line with New Eve that flows with this too,so it's not a stretch
Heck,there are some people who claim 2 Peter was actually written by Peter,but we do believe that it was what Peter believed
"This is the day of the Holy Offering, which is wholly pure in soul and spirit. This is the day wherein the Queen, the mother of the King of Life, tasted death like every other human being, because she was flesh and blood."
Yes, it certainly appears Cyril held to some form of Marian doctine.
It also appears that the assumption was not part of what he believed.
That’s kinda like an autograph but with a four speed, right?
Well, it is a couple of centuries different...that's all.
I agree that pseudographs can be important for understanding the popular piety at the time they were written, but it's important to acknowledge that Ps-Cyril is not the same as +Cyril.
Being Flesh and Blood and Dying does not nullify the Assumption.
Perhaps you need to read up on the Assumption
Agreed.
Thanks for posting. The Catholics that have commented on this have only said the statue is “over the top”. Apparently it is not over the top in Italy. Hmmm, I wonder why it is over the top here. Gee, I thought Catholicism was unified, none of those 30,000 groups for them.
I’m not going to do your research for you. I gave you the proof that Jesus was spoken of in the Old Testament. Do with it what you want.
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.