Posted on 01/05/2010 9:46:47 PM PST by the_conscience
I just witnessed a couple of Orthodox posters get kicked off a "Catholic Caucus" thread. I thought, despite their differences, they had a mutual understanding that each sect was considered "Catholic". Are not the Orthodox considered Catholic? Why do the Romanists get to monopolize the term "Catholic"?
I consider myself to be Catholic being a part of the universal church of Christ. Why should one sect be able to use a universal concept to identify themselves in a caucus thread while other Christian denominations need to use specific qualifiers to identify themselves in a caucus thread?
Only madring them up because the other side madrs up things like the Bible doesn’t use the word “Pray” except about address to God, and once the idea is made up then you don’t put it down.
good grief
I agree that “discerning the body” also has that wider application, as discerning the need for social communion with one another as well as a spiritual communion with God. For that reason, as well as for the reasons of sacramental theology the Catholic Communion is closed to those who in their own spiritual home do not enjoy a valid Sacrament of the Eucharist; and it is open to those who do, like the Orthodox.
We do participate in wider social activities, such as ecumentical prayers, gatherings, festivals and so on. We are encouraged to visit other houses of worship and participate in things that do not contradict the Catholic faith, such as scripture readings.
However, the passage in 1 Cor 11 that is our view also has the narrow Eucharistic focus, because in it St. Paul directly mentions the literal and not metaphorical body of Christ delivered up for us. If he meant solely the discernment of the body of Christ which is the Church, he would not have referred to His passion. Neither in John 6 it is possible to substitute the Church for the flesh of Christ which is “food indeed”.
I have not offered to shoulder the burden of your ignorance. You have an obligation to learn if you ask a question. After you have determined what the meanings and differences between the words worship, prayer, intercession, and saint reread my posts 1083 and 1097.
But for those who want to know the full story here is a good beginning:
You may already have but don't know it because you don't understand the difference.
NGR invoked (TC variant).
In other words, don't ask me to support my theological arguments. "I'll have'em, you explain'em"
I'm not Protestant. I grew up in the Lutheran church, but I have dumped them.
You have yet still to provide me with scripture that allows us to pray to Mary, the Saints or angels!!
We pray to saints so that they intercede and mainly because of Most Holy Saint Luke.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%2016:19-16:31&version=NIV
With all due respect, what difference would that make to you. Scripture prohibits you from lying about Catholics and our belief system but that hasn't stopped you.
You are quite right that it has nothing to do with something not one of us says. YOU may think we inappropriately perceive that the "Lord is glorious in His saints," but WE do not think that any saint decides to acquire God's glory or presumes to do so on His own, and WE do not condone stealing. So that little piece of rhetoric is not an argument. It's a jab, and that's why I don't argue with you. I WILL jab back, but I don't much enjoy it. I prefer discourse without jabs. I'm interested in truth and clarity. Jabs obfuscate the subject and cloud the vision.
As to the rest, your interpretation MAY be right. But the simple, straight forward reading says, "The Glory of the Lord shone round about them." It doesn't say any of the stuff you say.
When we try to interpret like that, the usual suspects gather around and mock us. The point was that the Bible has no incident of God giving or sharing His glory. I don't think that's true. I think the account of the Transfiguration contradicts it. But never mind. Here's a text. All I have to do is to show that this case MIGHT be such a thing. Your interpretation is influence by your contention so your argument is circular. That's how it seems, anyway. It's a circular as defining prayer as something one should only to to an object of worship and then saying is preposterous that we claim to pray to someone we don't worship.
This isn't about learning. It's about nerf balls or something.
now with the insults, must be Saturday night live
And this may help you with the most blessed Virgin Mary.
http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/mary.htm
So I find a use of the word directed toward Philip and with no condemnation. If it looks silly it's because the challenge was silly.
Mary spoke with angels. Abraham poke with the Angel of the Lord. Jacob bargained with an angel. I'm not allowed, after Christ's sacrifice, to talk to angels?
James 1:22-25...However, become doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves with false reasoning, For if anyone is a hearer of the word, and not a doer, this one is like a man looking at his natural face in a mirror. For he looks at himself, and off he goes and immediately forgets what sort of man he is. But he who peers into the perfect law that belongs to freedom and who persists in {it}, this {man}, because he has become, not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, will be happy in his doing {it}.
Well, first let us acknowledge that this is different from what you were asking before. You were saying before that because salvation is from Christ alone, one should not pray to (for example) Mary. That assertion, as I think I showed, is absurd since it is for that salvation that can only come from Christ that I pray when I pray to Mary.
Now you ask why should I choose to do so. Others asked this in the very thread, and I have the same answer as the other day: I ask for the prayers of a particular saint when I want to pray not alone but in the company of that saint. Often, I pray to Mary because I want to pray to Jesus in her company. This is no different from how the fathers of the Church asked for the prayers of others, and those petitions are recorded multiple times in the Bible. The need to pray in communion with others and not always alone is also recorded in the Bible. The prayer that Christ gave us verbatim, "Our Father", begins in single person plural, -- it is a communal prayer. I do pray to Christ directly as well, -- a prayer to Mary or another saint is not a substitute for direct prayers but rather an enhancement of it.
I just want to know, where in the Bible, He says it's okay to pray to Jesus earthly mother
Nowhere does it say directly in so many words that it is OK to pray to Mary. Nor does it say anywhere that we should not pray to Mary. The Bible also does not say that before we do something we should find it mentioned in the Bible. The Bible covers the period when most saints were still alive, and like I mentioned earlier, examples of asking for prayers of living persons, and of living saints praying for others are abundant in the Bible.
I pray to God, through Jesus, always. No messing up that one!
You know, quit whining and defend your theology biblically. NoGrayzone has asked, quite nicely, for biblical verses on why you pray to everyone but God. Rather than admit that there is none, you cast around for anything whether in context or not, it doesn’t seem to matter, and when asked about it, you start playing the victim.
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.