Posted on 04/30/2010 8:03:48 AM PDT by Quix
.
|
7 “When you pray, don’t babble on and on as people of other religions do. They think their prayers are answered merely by repeating their words again and again. 8 Don’t be like them, for your Father knows exactly what you need even before you ask him! 9 Pray like this: Our Father in heaven, --New Living Translation 7And when you pray, do not heap up phrases (multiply words, repeating the same ones over and over) as the Gentiles do, for they think they will be heard for their much speaking. [I Kings 18:25-29.] 8Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him. 9Pray, therefore, like this: 15But if you do not forgive others their trespasses [their [j]reckless and willful sins, [k]leaving them, letting them go, and [l]giving up resentment], neither will your Father forgive you your trespasses. --Amplified Pray with Simplicity 5"And when you come before God, don't turn that into a theatrical production either. All these people making a regular show out of their prayers, hoping for stardom! Do you think God sits in a box seat? 6"Here's what I want you to do: Find a quiet, secluded place so you won't be tempted to role-play before God. Just be there as simply and honestly as you can manage. The focus will shift from you to God, and you will begin to sense his grace. 7-13"The world is full of so-called prayer warriors who are prayer-ignorant. They're full of formulas and programs and advice, peddling techniques for getting what you want from God. Don't fall for that nonsense. This is your Father you are dealing with, and he knows better than you what you need. With a God like this loving you, you can pray very simply. Like this: 16-18"When you practice some appetite-denying discipline to better concentrate on God, don't make a production out of it. It might turn you into a small-time celebrity but it won't make you a saint. If you 'go into training' inwardly, act normal outwardly. Shampoo and comb your hair, brush your teeth, wash your face. God doesn't require attention-getting devices. He won't overlook what you are doing; he'll reward you well. |
Mark Kirby: O Mother of Good Counsel, I am all thine, Most Holy Mary, There is no part of my life that is not open to thee, I want to be completely transparent with thee, Praying in this way, I can be at rest, |
.
.
.
“”There is no priesthood provided for in the NT””
You’re in error again
From New Advent...
The Christian priesthood
In the New Testament bishops and priests are, according to Catholic teaching, the sole bearers of the priesthood, the former enjoying the fullness of the priesthood (summus sacerdos s. primi ordinis), while the presbyters are simple priests (simplex sacerdos s. secundi ordinis). The deacon, on the other hand, is a mere attendant of the priest, with no priestly powers. Omitting all special treatment of the bishop and the deacon, we here confine our attention primarily to the presbyterate, since the term “priest” without qualification is now taken to signify the presbyter.
The divine institution of the priesthood
According to the Protestant view, there was in the primitive Christian Church no essential distinction between laity and clergy, no hierarchical differentiation of the orders (bishop, priest, deacon), no recognition of pope and bishops as the possessors of the highest power of jurisdiction over the Universal Church or over its several territorial divisions. On the contrary, the Church had at first a democratic constitution, in virtue of which the local churches selected their own heads and ministers, and imparted to these their inherent spiritual authority, just as in the modern republic the “sovereign people” confers upon its elected president and his officials administrative authority. The deeper foundation for this transmission of power is to be sought in the primitive Christian idea of the universal priesthood, which excludes the recognition of a special priesthood. Christ is the sole high-priest of the New Testament, just as His bloody death on the Cross is the sole sacrifice of Christianity. If all Christians without exception are priests in virtue of their baptism, an official priesthood obtained by special ordination is just as inadmissible as the Catholic Sacrifice of the Mass. Not the material sacrifice of the Eucharist, consisting in the offering of (real) gifts, but only the purely spiritual sacrifice of prayer harmonizes with the spirit of Christianity. One is indeed forced to admit that the gradual corruption of Christianity began very early (end of first century), since it cannot be denied that Clement of Rome (Ep. ad Cor., xliv, 4), the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (Didache, xiv), and Tertullian (On Baptism 17; “De præsc. hær.”, xli; “De exhort. cast.”, vii) recognize an official priesthood with the objective Sacrifice of the Mass. The corruption quickly spread throughout the whole East and West, and persisted unchecked during the Middle Ages, until the Reformation finally succeeded in restoring to Christianity its original purity. Then “the idea of the universal priesthood was revived; it appeared as the necessary consequence of the very nature of Christianity. . . . Since the whole idea of sacrifice was discarded, all danger of reversion to the beliefs once derived from it was removed” (”Realency cl. für prot. Theol.”, XVI, Leipzig, 1905, p. 50).
To these views we may answer briefly as follows. Catholic theologians do not deny that the double “hierarchy of order and jurisdiction” gradually developed from the germ already existing in the primitive Church, just as the primacy of the pope of Rome and especially the distinction of simple priests from the bishops was recognized with increasing clearness as time advanced (see HIERARCHY). But the question whether there was at the beginning a special priesthood in the Church is altogether distinct. If it is true that “the reception of the idea of sacrifice led to the idea of the ecclesiastical priesthood” (loc. cit., p. 48), and that priesthood and sacrifice are reciprocal terms, then the proof of the Divine origin of the Catholic priesthood must be regarded as established, once it is shown that the Eucharistic Sacrifice of the Mass is coeval with the beginnings and the essence of Christianity. In proof of this we may appeal even to the Old Testament. When the Prophet Isaias foresees the entrance of pagans into the Messianic Kingdom, he makes the calling of priests from the heathen (i.e. the non-Jews) a special characteristic of the new Church (Isaiah 66:21): “And I will take of them to be priests and Levites, saith the Lord”. Now this non-Jewish (Christian) priesthood in the future Messianic Church presupposes a permanent sacrifice, namely that “clean oblation”, which from the rising of the sun even to the going down is to be offered to the Lord of hosts among the Gentiles (Malachi 1:11). The sacrifice of bread and wine offered by Melchisedech (cf. Genesis 14:18 sqq.), the prototype of Christ (cf. Psalm 109:4; Hebrews 5:5 sq.; 7:1 sqq.), also refers prophetically, not only to the Last Supper, but also to its everlasting repetition in commemoration of the Sacrifice of the Cross (see MASS). Rightly, therefore, does the Council of Trent emphasize the intimate connection between the Sacrifice of the Mass and the priesthood (Sess. XXIII, cap. i, in Denzinger, “Enchiridion”, 10th ed., 957): “Sacrifice and priesthood are by Divine ordinance so inseparable that they are found together under all laws. Since therefore in the New Testament the Catholic Church has received from the Lord’s institution the holy visible sacrifice of the Eucharist it must also be admitted that in the Church there is a new, visible and external priesthood into which the older priesthood has been changed.” Surely this logic admits of no reply. It is, then, all the more extraordinary that Harnack should seek the origin of the hierarchical constitution of the Church, not in Palestine, but in pagan Rome. Of the Catholic Church he writes: “She continues ever to govern the peoples; her popes lord it like Trajan and Marcus Aurelius. To Romulus and Remus succeeded Peter and Paul; to the proconsuls the archbishops and bishops. To the legions correspond the hosts of priests and monks; to the imperial bodyguard the Jesuits. Even to the finest details, even to her judicial organization, nay even to her very vestments, the continued influence of the ancient empire and of its institutions may be traced” (”Das Wesen d. Christentums”, Leipzig, 1902, p. 157). With the best ofgood will, we can recognize in this description only a sample of the writer’s ingenuity, for an historical investigation of the cited institutions would undoubtedly lead to sources, beginnings, and motives entirely different from the analogousconditions of the Empire of Rome.
But the Sacrifice of the Mass indicates only one side of the priesthood; the other side is revealed in the power of forgiving sin, for the exercise of which the priesthood is just as necessary as it is for the power of consecrating and sacrificing. Like the general power to bind and to loose (cf. Matthew 16:19; 18:18), the power of remitting and retaining sins was solemnly bestowed on the Church by Christ (cf. John 20:21 sqq.). Accordingly, the Catholic priesthood has the indisputable right to trace its origin in this respect also to the Divine Founder of the Church. Both sides of the priesthood were brought into prominence by the Council of Trent (loc. cit., n. 961): “If any one shall say that in the New Testament there is no visible and external priesthood nor any power of consecrating and offering the Body and Blood of the Lord, as well as of remitting and retaining sins, but merely the office and bare ministry of preaching the Gospel, let him be anathema.” Far from being an “unjustifiable usurpation of Divine powers”, the priesthood forms so indispensable a foundation of Christianity that its removal would entail the destruction of the whole edifice. A Christianity without a priesthood cannot be the Church of Christ. This conviction is strengthened by consideration of the psychological impossibility of the Protestant assumption that from the end of the first century onward, Christendom tolerated without struggle or protest the unprecedented usurpation of the priests, who without credentials or testimony suddenly arrogated Divine powers with respect to the Eucharist, and, on the strength of a fictitious appeal to Christ, laid on baptized sinners the grievous burden of public penance as an indispensable condition of the forgiveness of sin.
As for the “universal priesthood”, on which Protestantism relies in its denial of the special priesthood, it may be said that Catholics also believe in a universal priesthood; this, however, by no means excludes a special priesthood but rather presupposes its existence, since the two are related as the general and the particular, the abstract and the concrete, the figurative and the real. The ordinary Christian cannot be a priest in the strict sense, for he can offer, not a real sacrifice, but only the figurative sacrifice of prayer. For this reason the historical dogmatic development did not and could not follow the course it would have followed if in the primitive Church two opposing trains of thought (i.e. the universal versus the special priesthood) had contended for supremacy until one was vanquished. The history of dogma attests, on the contrary, that both ideas advanced harmoniously through the centuries, and have never disappeared from the Catholic mind. As a matter of fact the profound and beautiful idea of the universal priesthood may be traced from Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho 116), Irenæus, (Against Heresies IV.8.3), and Origen (”De orat.”, xxviii, 9; “In Levit.”, hom. ix, 1), to Augustine (City of God XX.10) and Leo the Great (Sermo, iv, 1), and thence to St. Thomas (Summa, III, Q. lxxxii, a. 1) and the Roman Catechism. And yet all these writers recognized, along with the Sacrifice of the Mass, the special priesthood in the Church. The origin of the universal priesthood extends back, as is known, to St. Peter, who declares the faithful, in their character of Christians, “a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices”, and “a chosen generation, a kingly priesthood” (1 Peter 2:5, 9). But the very text shows that the Apostle meant only a figurative priesthood, since the “spiritual sacrifices” signify prayer and the term “royal” (regale, basileion) could have had but a metaphorical sense for the Christians. The Gnostics, Montanists, and Catharists, who, in their attacks on the special priesthood, had misapplied the metaphor, were just as illogical as the Reformers, since the two ideas, real and figurative priesthood, are quite compatible. It is clear from the foregoing that the Catholic clergy alone are entitled to the designation “priest”, since they alone have a true and real sacrifice to offer, the Holy Mass. Consequently, Anglicans who reject the Sacrifice of the Mass are inconsistent, when they refer to their clergy as “priests”. The preachers in Germany quite logically disclaim the title with a certain indignation.
By this statements,thanks for rightfully giving credit to the Council of Trent
Time for me to be finished and spend time with family for tonight
I wish you a peaceful evening!
“Mad Dawg to count-your-change
This is not as hard nor as good an opportunity for potshots as you want it to be.”
You used the term. What did you think you were saying?
“”If Catholics believe that Scripture is inspired and the Catholic Church is built on it, why do they appeal to the church fathers so much to back up their teachings””
Try reading their lives and love they had for Christ and you might understand why..
Start with Saint Ignatius
http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=677
Excerpt
In his pastoral letters he regularly thanked his brother and sister Christians for their concern for his well being but insisted on following through in his final witness of fidelity: “I know what is to my advantage. At last I am becom¬ing his disciple. May nothing entice me till I happily make my way to Jesus Christ! Fire, cross, struggles with wild beasts, wrenching of bones, mangling of limbs-let them come to me, provided only I make my way to Jesus Christ. I would rather die and come to Jesus Christ than be king over the entire earth. Him I seek who died for us; him I love who rose again because of us.”
Bishop Ignatius was not afraid of death. He knew that it had been defeated by the Master. He followed the Lord Jesus into his Passion, knowing that he would rise with Him in his Resurrection. He wrote to the disciples in Rome: “Permit me to imitate my suffering God ... I am God’s wheat and I shall be ground by the teeth of beasts,
One would have to have a hardened heart NOT to think Saint Ignatius was not of Christ
Good Night, I wish you a Blessed Evening!
Nestorians were certainly more Christian than the nicolaitans that created the idolatrous
. Roman church.
lol. I hope you know I wasn’t addressing that loud sentence to you?
You will always be Mr. Doofus to me.
Lots of verbal gymnastics there, but none of it scriptural.
Mary, the human woman, a sinner, bore the body of Jesus a sinless fully human male, who housed the spirit of YHWH, the pre-incarnate son of God.
Mary didn't have anything to do with YHWH, the pre-incarnate son, the eternal creator of all things, including Mary herself. Your theory is vile balsphemy.
.
However, as we've seen through a variety of sources--a pile of them in Ferraro's manual about the Rosary--the Roman Catholic et al/Vatican Edifice disagrees.
p32 5 - She became Queen of us sinners, to assist us through the dangers of this life and to help us in difficulties. 6 - She became the ruler of hell, that trembles at her slightest gaze and is defeated by her power. "Just as a rock extracted from earth will precipitate into the abyss, so will man, left without Mary's help, quickly slide toward hell." --Richard of St Victor p37 p41 p43 p45 p46 9 - God loved Mary so much that He gave her the keys to His heart. 'No one can go to God without Mary drawing him.' [Qx: I guess Holy Spirit has been relegated to a 'Walter Mitty' role as spouse of Mary? That's SOME POWER to cancel & take over HOLY SPIRIT'S role to draw men to God!] p47 5 - "She desired the safety of everyone, went in search of it, and obtained it; it was also through her that this salvation was wrought." [QX: What an unnecessary waste of precious Blood and suffering on THE CROSS!!!/sar] p47 p50
Mary is crowned Queen of heaven and earth, dispenser of all graces . . .
4 - She became Queen of Purgatory, where she exercises her power as mediatrix in behalf of these suffering souls.
Sacred Heart of Jesus, Thy kingdom come; Thy kingdom come through Mary! --Partial Indulgence
"Mary is the tree of life to those who grasp her, and he is happy who hold her fast." --Prov. 3:18
1 - "Hail Mary, beloved daughter of the Father, Mother of the Divine Son, Spouse of the Holy Spirit, complement of the most august Trinity!"
6 - To her was granted grace greater than that conferred upon all others, 'that she might vanquish sin in every respect.' [Qx: I guess Christ's vanquishing sin was unnecessary--or ineffectual without Mary's assistance?]
7 - "Mary is the dawn of God because, just as the dawn marks the end of darkness and the beginning of day, so Mary indicates the end of vices and the beginning of virtue." [Qx: I guess Christ's conquering on The Cross and HIS conquering trip to hell were unncessary?]
4 - "Mary, trusting in the word of the angel, destroyed the sin Eve committed by trusting in the serpent.' [Qx: Evidently, she beat Christ to the job of vanquishing sin!]
10 - "As Noah's Ark saved all the animals that entered it, so Mary saves all the souls that entrust themselves to her care."
8 - "If she were not so holy as she is, how could God appoint her to be the ladder of Paradise, the advocate of the world, meatrix between HIm and us?"
[QX: WOW, What a POWER STOMPIN' MAMA!--Puts both Jesus and Holy Spirit out of work! She must have made abundantly clear to God Almighty how HE JUST HAD to rework HIS PERFECT PLAN OF SALVATION THROUGH CHRIST ALONE! /sar]
It is abundantly clear, from such as the above, that to anyone with sufficient English skills that millions of Roman Catholics et al [thankfully not all of them] construe Mary to be an essential part of, if not the key to, their ETERNAL SALVATION.
It is difficult to overstate the idolatrous, blasphemous affront this represents to the DEITY AND ROLE OF CHRIST IN THE LIFE AND ETERNAL DESTINY OF THE CHRISTIAN.
I don't know how to put the truth any more gently and accurately.
Rationalizing it; slipping and sliding around it; slathering it with all manner of euphemisms just will not wash. Such will certainly not wash with ALMIGHTY GOD. Nor will such wash with anyone grounded in authentic Scripture.
I'm greatly sobered beyond what even I expected in coming to this inescapable conclusion. I wish it were not so. I wish there were a rational way to excuse what I've found and observed in such matters. There is not.
The precious folks under the Vatican umbrella have been seduced, hoodwinked, enslaved with a horrific falsehood fabricated in the design studios of hell.
Fancy footwork will not solve the problem.
Fancy rationalizing will not solve the problem.
.
Rubber dictionaries will not solve the problem.
Citations of the powers of mother's love will not solve the problem.
.
Citatioins to the Christian Church's early years will not solve the problem.
Blaming poor Catechsis sp? is an exceedingly disingenuous farce of an explanation and will not solve the problem.
.
Trusting ANY RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION above God's Word is PART of the problem and NOT a solution.
Trusting custom and !!!!TRADITIONS!!!! above God's Word is PART of the problem and NOT any kind of solution.
I recognize the short comings of wikipedia, but have found it useful for brief summaries of topics and as a springboard to learn more, following the links.
However, this passage from the article stuck out.....
“Nestorius’ teachings became the root of controversy when he publicly challenged usage of the long-used title Theotokos (Mother of God) for the Virgin Mary. He suggested that the title denied Christ’s full humanity, arguing instead that Jesus had two loosely joined natures, the divine Logos and the human Jesus. As such he proposed Christotokos (Mother of Christ) as a more suitable title for Mary.”
And just what IS the problem with recognizing that Mary is the mother of Christ?
God the Father has no mother. God in Christ does.
Calling Mary the mother of God is inaccurate to say the least. She is the mother of Christ as HE is the one with the human and divine nature.
Who in their right mind accepts on faith the words of fallible, often spiritually confused men that disagreed with each other on many many matters.
= = =
INDEED TO THE MAX.
What an abomination corrupting Scripture like that.
Proverbs 3: 13 Blessed is the man who finds wisdom, the man who gains understanding, 14 for she is more profitable than silver and yields better returns than gold.
15 She is more precious than rubies; nothing you desire can compare with her.
16 Long life is in her right hand; in her left hand are riches and honor.
17 Her ways are pleasant ways, and all her paths are peace.
18 She is a tree of life to those who embrace her; those who lay hold of her will be blessed.
The verse is about wisdom, NOT Mary.
Prottys agree with one another
AT LEAST
AS MUCH
As all the divergeant components of the Vatican edifice/ Roman Catholic et al institution agree with each other.
Do I really need to repost that post demonstrating that extensively? It will only make your assertion look all the more foolish.
Thank you. You have advanced the thought better than I could.
And we’re not immune from this same problem today.
Today in pursuit of mainstream popularity Christianity is normalizing homosexuality and The Gospel is not preached as much as universalism is. It's no different than 1700 yrs ago when Constantine had a statue of the mother-goddess Cybele set up in the Forum presented in a posture of Christian prayer. Over time Cybele and Isis were replaced by Mary in the popular culture, especially after she was declared the "Mother of God".
The point being without any rule of faith that doesn't change over time these outrageous things become a part of the norm. It's a never ending battle.
“You will always be Mr. Doofus to me.”
Well, that’s a step up from what I’ve been called.
Sorry, but the following is still glaringly out of order, to me:
The thing is, to honor Mary, we gathered to worship her Son
JESUS IS WORTHY WORSHIP BECAUSE OF WHO HE IS.
I believe it is usually quite hazardously UNFITTING--to put it mildly--to attach, to bind other adorations, venerations, worship to CHRIST.
The FATHER has gone to the paragon length of PUTTING ALL THINGS UNDER CHRIST'S FEET.
NOT under Christ's and Mary's collective feet.
There are abundant evidences in Scripture of THE FATHER'S attitude toward Christ's unfettered, paragon position, status, Deity with absolutely NO HANGERS-ON of any kind.
For any man or any institution to then counter-mand God's priorities, declarations, doings in the matter is a grossest of insults to THE FATHER as well as THE SON.
Of course, your entire post is wonderful.
These lines are particularly potent, imho:
= = =
We Christians must not accept or assist any belief which denies that Jesus Christ is the Lord:
Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into [your] house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds. - 2 John 1:9-11
God’s Name is I AM and Alpha and Omega.
Because he hath set his love upon me, therefore will I deliver him: I will set him on high, because he hath known my name. - Psalms 91:14
Again, we Christians must ask: Why is there no Christ is your Christianity? Where is He? You have Isaiah. You have Jeremiah. You have Paul. Why is it that you have no Christ? If you would give up the mockery of Christianity that Calvin foisted upon us, then we would welcome you back into the sheepfold of Christ. Discard your hubris and your pride and come back to Christ.
Rock of Ages, cleft for me,
Let me hide myself in Thee;
Let the water and the blood,
From Thy wounded side which flowed,
Be of sin the double cure;
Save from wrath and make me pure.
Not the labor of my hands
Can fulfill Thy law’s demands;
Could my zeal no respite know,
Could my tears forever flow,
All for sin could not atone;
Thou must save, and Thou alone.
Nothing in my hand I bring,
Simply to the cross I cling;
Naked, come to Thee for dress;
Helpless look to Thee for grace;
Foul, I to the fountain fly;
Wash me, Savior, or I die.
While I draw this fleeting breath,
When mine eyes shall close in death,
When I soar to worlds unknown,
See Thee on Thy judgment throne,
Rock of Ages, cleft for me,
Let me hide myself in Thee.
### end of hymn ###
= = =
= = =
= = =
The Rock of Ages is not the church, it is God the Trinity.
Psalm 18.2
The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; my God, my strength, in whom I will trust; my buckler, and the horn of my salvation, and my high tower.
Psalm 28:1 O LORD, you are my rock of safety. Please help me; don’t refuse to answer me. For if you are silent, I might as well give up and die.
Psalm 62:2 He alone is my rock and my salvation, my fortress where I will never be shaken.
Psalm 62:7 My salvation and my honor come from God alone. He is my refuge, a rock where no enemy can reach me.
Psalm 91:2 This I declare of the LORD: He alone is my refuge, my place of safety; he is my God, and I am trusting him.
Psalm 144:2 He is my loving ally and my fortress, my tower of safety, my deliverer. He stands before me as a shield, and I take refuge in him. He subdues the nations under me.
Jer. 16:19 LORD, you are my strength and fortress, my refuge in the day of trouble! Nations from around the world will come to you and say, “Our ancestors were foolish, for they worshiped worthless idols.
Proverbs 2:7 He grants a treasure of good sense to the godly. He is their shield, protecting those who walk with integrity.
2 Samuel 22:3 my God is my rock, in whom I find protection. He is my shield, the strength of my salvation, and my stronghold, my high tower, my savior, the one who saves me from violence.
Proverbs 18:10 The name of the LORD is a strong fortress; the godly run to him and are safe.
Then the focus of the worship was to honor Mary. That is NOT why we worship Jesus! We worship Jesus because He alone is worthy of worship. We don't USE Him to honor ANYONE. Human beings don't deserve that kind of attention or honor.
And Catholics can't figure out why they're accused of idolatry?
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.