Posted on 04/09/2008 12:36:13 PM PDT by annalex
How do you explain this from the writings of Ignatius of Antioch, AD 107:
“You must follow the bishop as Jesus Christ follows the Father, and the presbytery as you would the Apostles. Reverence the deacons as you would the command of God. Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop, or by one whom he appoints. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there, just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.”
>.Got any more earth shattering insights, categorical statements and pronouncements, Calvin?<<
Thanks Hobbs. That about does it for now. ;)
Yes.
1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a narration of the things that have been accomplished among us; 2 According as they have delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word: 3 It seemed good to me also, having diligently attained to all things from the beginning, to write to thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, 4 That thou mayest know the verity of those words in which thou hast been instructed.Luke 1
Theophilus "has been instructed" and afterwards the Gospel is written. Tradition preceded the Gospel.
[the Apostles were Jewish and] were not "Catholic", nor ever self identified as such.
The word "catholic" emerged in the writings of St. Ignatius who died in AD 107. The New Testament were not sorted out till much later. There is nothing in the writings of the Holy Apostles that looks a tiniest bit un-Catholic or un-Orthodox; the Church that fought off heresies and assembled the scripture was Catholic Orthodox.
the founding of the "RCC
The birth of the Catholic Church is prophesied in Matthew 16 and recorded in Acts 2.
Your posted quotes are part of the reason I am not Catholic.
What I know is that God doesn’t have a mother. What I observe is that the RCC is deliberate in deifying Mary - creating dogmas that have no Scriptural substance for reasons that can only be concluded to be idolatrous.
There is no positive proof that Mary is therein- There is a very good argument that the vision is representative of Israel, and that fits much better with the rest of the scripture. In that it is vision, and prophecy, and is subject to interpretation, we will not know for certain until such time as it is perfectly revealed.
St. Paul’s remark that women are sanctified in their childbearing is hard to understand other than if it is a reference to Mary.
Chapter and verse plz...
It is also not true that the veneration of Mary makes her “more than the human mother of Christ” — this is precisely why she is venerated.
Co-redemptrix and Co-mediatrix seem to be "more than the human mother of Christ".
There is no direct sanction to venerate statues of saints specifically, but there is a passage in St. Paul how contemplation of icons brings us to holiness. Adoration of the Crucifix is mentioned twice that I can think of by St. Paul. There is, of course, a direct scriptural sanction to venerate relics of saints.
Chapter and verse, plz...
Here is a lesson in traditional theology:
Jesus Christ was both completely human and completely divine at the same time. He was both a human being and the eternal Logos (the Word). He had two natures.
God does not have a mother. But Jesus Christ did, because he was both of man and of God.
The Logos was not concieved in Mary’s womb, but Jesus Christ was, because in him, God and man were united together in one body in order to save and redeem mankind
Let me help with what the early Christians believed regarding Our Blessed Mother
Mary’s Immaculate Conception
“This Virgin Mother of the Only-begotten of God, is called Mary, worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, one of the one.” Origen, Homily 1(A.D. 244).
“Let woman praise Her, the pure Mary.” Ephraim, Hymns on the Nativity, 15:23 (A.D. 370).
“Thou alone and thy Mother are in all things fair, there is no flaw in thee and no stain in thy Mother.” Ephraem, Nisibene Hymns, 27:8 (A.D. 370).
“O noble Virgin, truly you are greater than any other greatness. For who is your equal in greatness, O dwelling place of God the Word? To whom among all creatures shall I compare you, O Virgin? You are greater than them all O Covenant, clothed with purity instead of gold! You are the Ark in which is found the golden vessel containing the true manna, that is, the flesh in which divinity resides.” Athanasius, Homily of the Papyrus of Turin, 71:216 (ante AD 373).
“Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin.” Ambrose, Sermon 22:30 (A.D. 388).
“We must except the Holy Virgin Mary, concerning whom I wish to raise no question when it touches the subject of sins, out of honour to the Lord; for from Him we know what abundance of grace for overcoming sin in every particular was conferred upon her who had the merit to conceive and bear Him who undoubtedly had no sin.” Augustine, Nature and Grace,4 2[36] (A.D.415).
This is was belived by even Martin Luther
“It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary's soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God's gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin.”
Martin Luther, (Sermon: “On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God,” 1527).
The heretical belief that Mary sinned did not gain much ground until after the reformation,over 1500 years later.It really started to gain ground in the 1800’s
This is why the Church declared it Dogma in order to stop the gaining heretical belief from effecting its members.
This is often the case regarding Dogma's,it is NOT that the majority of Christians historically never believed certain things overwhelmingly,it is to make them concrete
Take for example the Dogma of Christ's Divinity
When did the Church declare that Jesus was God as dogma? At the council of Nicea in 325 AD. Nearly 300 years after Christ's death, correct? Does that mean that the Church DID NOT already believe this? Of course it did! Jesus was worshiped during the liturgy. People prayed to Him during their daily prayers and through their actions. The Church already KNEW that Jesus was God , the Church DEFINES that He was God infallibly based on the guidance of the Spirit already at work in the Church.
The Church also needed to act to put an end to the Arian heresies that denied the Divinity of Christ,much like it did in declaring the Immaculate Conception with the protestant heresies
I don’t disagree with your lesson. I do agree with your statement “God does not have a mother.” Jesus did have a mother. Amen to the Lamb of God.
None who are the Mother of God, received Annunciation of that fact from an angel of God, was met by three wise men who came from far away to give exquisite gifts. None who witnessed their son turn water into wine, or heard from his disciples and others of his miracles. None whose son raised anyone from the dead. None who was crucified, died, was buried and later reappeared resurrected. In other words, no, none of my friends have a son named Christ, a Savior foretold by generations past.
This is comical.
I agree. You should make that your tagline.
Heck why not make Adam and Eve sinless, then none of this would have been necessary.
Precisely true- There is a game afoot, and while God himself wrote the rules, He tends to play according to them, as can be attested by His attention to Hebrew Law in divorcing His wife "The House of Israel".
While we cannot fully understand the game at this point, we certainly can understand the rules- They are right there for all to see.
Yes, Mary made salvation possible through her obedience to God. But I don’t think for a second that God’s plans for salvation rested on the decision of one person. If Mary has refused, God would have brought it about another way. To presume that any person can frustrate the will of God is sheer arrogance.
There is some evidence that it would have to be Mary- in considering the ascent from the throne of David. Jesus bloodline needs to wind up in the high house of Judah, and that must hapen through His mother, as his legal 'father' was from a cursed line of kings.
That cursed line (Jeconiah) was necessary, IMHO, to complete the Prophecy that he would come from the House of Solomon. He was later legally adopted, supposedly into Mary's House, where He would have to be the eldest to have a righteous claim to David's throne... But that line comes out of the line of Nathan, not Solomon. That all being said, the matriarchal line would have to come from Mary's family, or so one could suppose.
Amazing how you count points, as if keeping score in some kind of sick game of "Hate the Catholics."
I used the Catholic RSV And when his family heard it, they went out to seize him, for people were saying, "He is beside himself." "Houston, we have a problem."
If you are a Bible-believing Christian, why don’t you believe the words in Luke?
“And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.” Luke 1:28
“And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.” Luke 1:31
“Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” Luke 1:34-35
“And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.” Luke 1:38
“And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” Luke 1:41-43
“And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.” Luke 1:46-48
Sacred Scripture says that she is the Mother of the Lord and that all generations will call her blessed. The Angel Gabriel (who says in verse 19 that he stands in the presence of God) calls her blessed among women - from God’s lips to our ears! Evidently God already thought she was blessed among women, even before Jesus was born. So, are you arguing with the inspired Word of God?
They are not just called "brothers" in those verses, they are called "his brothers" and they are even called "his brothers" in my Imprimatured Catholic Bible. Bishop Challoner translated it "his brothers" -- not his cousins -- but "his brothers". Is your Greek better than that of Bishop Challoner???
Many things you believe are not to the point of losing your salvation, but error is very dangerous. The Bible doesn't say what you might think or believe other than Jesus was born of a virgin, He lived a perfect life, and His sacrifice on the cross was a substitution for my punishment so I could be received in Heaven. All the other stuff is good to know info, but it won't keep you out of Heaven. You faith is what saves you, not works, not your denomination, etc. What you teach IS dangerous however. It could lead to things like worship of the wrong deity, conversion to the "Mother Earth" worship, and so on. The verse that Catholics base their whole church dogma on is even wrong. When Jesus asked Peter "Who do you say that I am?" He answered "The Christ". Jesus said that only the Father in Heaven could have revealed that to him. You guys get all hung up on Peter, but you miss the meaning of the statement. Jesus was saying that He built His church on the principle that ONLY GOD can reveal Jesus to you as the Christ and His church would be built on that principle. A person cannot know that Jesus is Christ unless the Holy Spirit reveals it to him/her. Jesus said that the Father gives Him His saints. It had NOTHING to do with Peter. Peter was no more powerful than Paul or John, or anybody after this statement was made. There is no mention of a pope, cardinals, or any of the other governmental stations made by Catholics. All the stuff about nuns and celibacy and fish on Friday and purgatory and indulgence's and on and on is just made up stuff. The killer for me was when they said my children were bastards if they weren't in the Catholic church. Sounds like Bin Laden and his ilk to me.
I have given up on evo threads, and should give up here because it is very difficult to de program Catholics without being in person with our Bibles and talking face to face. I do appreciate your tone, however, because most Catholics would have threatened me or called me names by now. If Christians can't discuss the Bible then we aren't much better than Muslims.
***********************
I don't make any assumptions about anyone's married life, but then I don't spend much time speculating about the sex lives of my friends.
I am glad you posted that, but it will mean nothing to the Catholic-haters who come here playing “The Game.”
After all, in the Game, it is THEY who decide what Catholics believe, even down to the meaning of individual words. Pointing out the bankruptcy of their position only returns cries of “Spin! Spin! Spin!”
Some of them can be observed here keeping score.
So, you don’t think the writings of the Early Church Fathers hold any weight? You don’t think that these people knew the Apostles, or their successors personally? That they might be handing on the teachings of the Apostles, as they had learned it personally from Christ? You think this was just made up? Or do you just not like what they said? What part bothers you?
>>“This Virgin Mother of the Only-begotten of God, is called Mary, worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, one of the one.” Origen, Homily 1(A.D. 244).<<
We are ALL one of the one. We are all individual and individually responsible for our own relationship with Him.
Other than that I see the words of a man about his beliefs about Mary. I am puzzled about his strong focus on the issue, but maybe it was his focus at the time.
Regarding the phrase “immaculate of the immaculate”, it sounds like a politician.
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.