Posted on 07/26/2017 10:35:48 AM PDT by ebb tide
Only a truly ignorant person says there is “no proof” when he has simply not examined the proof.
I know where you could start, if you were interested. The first-generation disciples of the Apostles would be good. We are privileged in this 21st century that they are mostly all online and in adequate translations, meaning they are far more available to us then they were to, say, Aquinas, or than they have been in all of human history.
Let me suggest you start with St. John’s disciple Polycarp, and Ignatius of Antioch.
God be the source, the path, and the destination of your search.
Well, it’s in 3 of the 4 Gospels. That should count.
It was the basis of your argument.
I'll let the "ignorant thing pass."
I'll address your other claim.
1. I specifically asked you for proof a number of years ago. I've made the same request of others here. You failed to demonstrate the practices before 100 ad. If I remember the conversation correctly, you did dig up things from the catacombs hundreds of years after Christ. No unbroken chain of custody as you claim.
2. I've read thousands and thousands and thousands of pages of church history as part of my seminary training. What you claim is not there. It is perhaps a cherished belief you hold dear, but it isn't there. Not in Christian literature, not in Scripture, not in secular writings or art before 100 ad.
You are precisely, 180 degrees wrong. My argument , because it is in defense of the selection made in the texts of the Tridentine Mass, is that a valid, meaningful, honest, representative selection CAN, and HAS been made.
You didn’t catch that I was defending the Scriptural integrity of the liturgical text??
But any “selection” is selective -— by definition, it is not the whole.
I realize you hold that view. It is not representative, since it leaves out the Gospel and adds to it, distorting it.
Meant for a different thread.
What denomination are you?
It was intended for the Moochelle thread.
The Mass NEVER leaves out the Gospel (seriously, aMPU, have you ever been to Mass?) -— and as for “adding “ to it, have you no use for a song or a sermon? Or are these to be abolished, because they “add to,” the Gospel?
But it fit in here so perfectly!
Awesome! I was resistant to it at first, but now we go almost exclusively. It has really deepened my faith.
It can be a little confusing in the beginning because it’s not just the language barrier but the whole focus of the rite is different.
But I wouldn’t go back now for anything. :)
Christian.....just as the disciples were called at Antioch.
_______________
The current Mass.....in the Gospels.....nope.
“The Mass NEVER leaves out the Gospel (seriously, aMPU, have you ever been to Mass?) -— and as for “adding “ to it, have you no use for a song or a sermon? Or are these to be abolished, because they “add to,” the Gospel?”
As a Former Catholic who came to know Christ, and a former (unmolested) alter boy, I’ve heard a great many masses. In addition, weddings and funerals.
It always leaves out the whole Gospel.
As for adding, I did not refer to music.
Best
Weak argument from a lack of evidence. Where is the proof that there was a change?
If we see that the Roman Church, the Corinthian Church, the Alexandrian Church, the Antiochene Church, the Church of Jerusalem, *all kept communion with one another*, then the presumption must be that they held fundamental doctrines in common. We know from the Quartodeciman controversy in the mid-100s that there *were* disagreements, but of course these disagreements had nothing to do with the doctrines that you see as innovations. That's telling.
If Rome had gone off the rails from Apostolic teaching, why didn't Antioch call it out on it? If Rome became heretical, how come Alexandria and Carthage still kept communion with it? Did the whole Christian world become heretics all at once? Were there no voices, NOT ONE raised against this supposed shift in doctrine?
Point me to a historical source that says "Rome innovated and did X, and we register our disagreement". And further that such innovation was from an originally "Protestant" position. Go ahead. Find me one.
Francis put on a political show south of our border, and called it a mass. Were Jesus in Francis work Hillry Clinton would be president.
Francis put on a political show south of our border, and called it a mass. Were Jesus in Francis's work Hillry Clinton would be president.
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.