Posted on 12/22/2013 1:46:25 PM PST by piusv
"The Gospel tells us nothing: if she said a word or not ... She was quiet, but in her heart - how much she said to the Lord! 'You told me then - that's what we have read - that He will be great. You told me that You would give him the throne of his father David, that he will reign over the house of Jacob forever. And now I see Him there!' The Blessed Mother was human! And perhaps she would have wanted to say, 'lies! I have been cheated!'.
(Excerpt) Read more at eponymousflower.blogspot.co.uk ...
These are actual sins; obviously they did not sin. His holiness, and I, speak of temptations, and yes, it is fair to assume that they were tempted like all humans.
a terrible sign when Protestants agree with a pope’s teaching of the Blessed Mother.
It is a sign of the possibility of their conversion and very good news.
Where was I "critical"? They have their religion and I have mine. One day that will convert and I am looking forward to the day.
Biblical reference please, though it doesn’t exist. Jesus was the only one born without sin.
I’ve already grafted in, as I suspect you have in the past at some time.
Adam and Eve were created without sin until they ate from the forbidden tree.
Besides God, the Father, did not choose the Bible to send us Jesus, He chose Mary. The Ark of the Covenant was perfect. Mary was the Ark of the Covenant. You dis Mary, you dis the Father.
It is a sign that they find the current tone less in conflict with their Protestant beliefs, not a sign that they are any more likely to join the Church than before. A more promising sign would be Protestant churches beginning to reflect the teachings of the Catholic Church as a result of his witness. The cult of personality that is forming around Pope Francis is in direct response to the perception that he is less concerned about orthodoxy than his predecessors. How can this be interpreted as "a sign of the possibility of their conversion and very good news"?
Ask the Protestant posters here if their approval of Pope Francis' approach is leading them to seriously consider entering the Catholic Church. The Protestants with whom I have discussed this in the real world, while praising Pope Francis as being superior to his predecessors, have no intention of changing ships, and his strategy of softening Church teaching (e.g. tone down the abortion talk, etc.) is not likely to inspire many genuine conversions.
The 1st Century Church was primarily Jewish and struggled with the problem of how to bring Gentiles into the mix. When the Gentiles twisted that around into requiring that a Jewish Christian repudiate his Jewishness--ceasing to keep all of the cultural markers like the Feasts, kashrut, tzitzit, etc. that the Holy One Himself commanded us to keep--then the term changed meanings in a way that makes it impossible for someone today to identify as both Jewish and Christian. Ergo, using the more Hebraic term "Messianic" serves to both identify us with the Messiah of Israel and to distinguish ourselves from those who have historically persecuted the Jews--especially the Christian Jews.
His Jewishness was irrelevant to his faith, as he plainly spoke (Galatians 3:28, Romans 10:12)
How do you figure it was irrelevant? I've detailed in the last several posts just what lengths he went through to continue to live in a distinctly Jewish, Torah-observant manner. Paul simply believed, as I do, that one does not have to be Jewish to be saved--but neither does a Jew cease to be a Jew to be saved.
This is no different than how the entire body of Jewish faith having been absorbed, transformed and clarified by the Holy Church.
No, no it really wasn't, and you ignore Paul's warning against being arrogant towards the natural branches of Israel's tree (Rom. 11:18). You call the Jews broken off? Fine. "So do not become proud, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you" (vv. 20-21).
In other words, if you think the Eternal One can cast aside the Jewish people because of their disobedience, you have absolutely no assurance at all that He hasn't done the same to the Roman Church for its many and manifest sins.
Paul twice pronounced anathema on anyone who preached a gospel other than the one he preached (Gal. 1:8-9), and Paul's Gospel was that Jews were saved as Jews and Gentiles as Gentiles, and "Let every man abidein the same calling wherein he was called" (1Co. 7:20). Paul himself kept the Torah and denied that he ever called any Jew to forsake it or the way of our fathers, as I've more than adequately documented in this thread.
Therefore, every time you attack Jewish followers of a Jewish Messiah living just as the very Jewish Paul did, it is you who preach a false gospel and come under condemnation.
And when you see Israel today, back in the Land exactly as prophesied from Moshe Rabbeinu to John the Revelator, that is the Holy One's rebuke and call to repentence to those who have boasted over the root and branches. And if you will not repent, then all of the curse of the law that fell upon the Jews in the exile will fall upon you as well (Deu. 30:7).
Perhaps you should hear the Word of God and the words of your own popes, who have since JPII called the Jews the elder brothers of the Christians. What did Jesus say about those who hate their brothers in their hearts?
I don’t know what to tell you, Mary was a normal woman, chosen to do something extraordinary. I pray to Jesus. I don’t pray to dead relatives or other dead people.
Obviously, a vow compatible with Christianity, such as the Nazirite vows are (we have monks today for that reason), -- remains a vow. It is also obvious that ethnic provenance cannot be removed, nor the foreskin cut away reattached. However, the scripture you cite to support the claim that Jews of Jewish faith should keep their Jewish faith, -- if that is what you claim, for you avoid clarifying the sense in which you say "Jews", -- that scripture speaks the opposite of what you want it to prove:
...let him not procure uncircumcision (1 Cor. 7:18)
...is followed up by:
Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing: but the observance of the commandments of God. Let every man abide in the same calling in which he was called. Wast thou called, being a bondman? care not for it; but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather. For he that is called in the Lord, being a bondman, is the freeman of the Lord.(Ibid. 7:19-22)
Clearly then, the Jewish distinction of circumcision is called "nothing" and the obedience of God is what is equally required of Jew and Greek, and of freeman and slave. There is no call for Jews to remain Jews of Jewish faith.
Stand fast, and be not held again under the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul tell you, that if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. And I testify again to every man circumcising himself, that he is a debtor to the whole law. You are made void of Christ, you who are justified in the law: you are fallen from grace. (Gal. 5:1-4)
This indeed says that Jewish faith is a bondage removed by Christ; it is hard to see here a call for the Jews to stay in the bondage and away from grace, especially, as you note since the "the middle wall of partition" has been broken down.
starting in the 2nd Century and culminating in the 4th, the middle wall was errected again
What wall? A Jew could convert to Christianity then no less than he could in the time of St. Paul or today.
Well, the pope indicates our Blessed Mother could have had “wrath” over being deceived. Just look at the title of the article.
This Pope has a unique way of seeing things and stating things.
I haven’t figured him out yet, but I am giving him the benefit of the doubt. (Pun intended.)
Merry Christmas to all!
P.S. Mary knew her Son would suffer from the day of His Circumcision when Simeon prophesied. I think that by the time she knelt at the foot of the cross at Calvary, she had become most resigned to the will of God. She had lived her whole life within that Will. Not that that made it any easier for a mother to watch her Son suffer and die. But she had already made that sacrifice in her mind and in her heart. That’s what makes her so admirable, and so “Blessed amongst Women.”
Indeed. But my point is different: the Biblical connotation for "Jew" in the New Testament ranges from neutral to negative, and that makes it unlikely that "Jew" would be used as identifier of the Christian faith. It is a minor point, and in an argument I did not start. Obviously, the negativity of the Biblical connotation should not translate to people of the Jewish race in general; in modernity especially, there is very little, if any, hostility to Christ among the Jews.
How dare you use their sufferings as an excuse to hate their people
I don't hate anyone, quite the opposite: I wish all the Jews today, as well as all the Protestants, unbelievers, Muslims, etc to convert to Catholic Christianity and join me in one true religion. To the extent that they do so already, they are blessed. Come, all ye faithful.
Jews who are also Jews by faith, rather than Christians of Jewish ancestry.
What I said is the same St. Paul said and you repeated: "no more Jew nor Gentile in the matter of salvation". We are discussing faith, not nose shapes, aren't we?
theological anti-Semitism
I am theologically Christian and not a Jew, and I ask them to come to conversion and become Christian like me. That is "anti-Semitism"?
Thank you. Interesting how the original topic has become forgotten.
Christ predicted that the Christians will be "thrown out of synagogues" (John 16:2, several similar); do you think that His prophesy was untrue, or historically followed the Council of Nicaea? How about the stoning of St. Stephen, -- was that Nicaea's fault also? And what problem do you have, exactly, with the Christian Church deciding the form and content of Christian worship?
It is a good sign because due to Pope Francis conversational style they are understanding him better. For example, the false concept of Catholics deifying Mary has now fallen for them.
There is a group of Catholics, -- generally quite orthodox, -- called, I believe New Catechumens, who are doing just that. It is of course, possible for a Catholic of any ethnicity to add his ethnic color to his worship of Christ, -- the ethnic Jews are absolutely free to immerse their worship in the Jewish culture. The reason they have not, has to do with, unfortunately, their small number and their dispersion. The Church, however, has two concerns with what you describe especially with the Jews as they convert not from vacuum but from a religion in a complex relationship with ours.
1. That this behavior might indicate false conversion; that triggered the Spanish Inquisition given the geo-political costs of such phenomenon at the time. This is non-existent today.
2. That such behavior might indicate a theological error of taking the Old Testament, rather than the Gospel of Grace, as the way of salvation. That, I suspect is the error you are making, -- despite a clear repudiation of your view in Galatians and Romans; that is the heresy of Judaizing. Correct me if I am wrong.
No, he doesn't. Despite your putting the word in quotes, I don't find it as source. All I see is that he describes the possibility of Mary being tempted in a certain way, or perhaps the possibility that anyone else in her position would have yielded to temptation.
a shame too, it is a fascinating topic. But you have the patience of Job, woman - you have been keeping it on topic like a captain trying to stay the course in a hurricane - bless ya for it!
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.