Testimony of a Former Irish Priest

BereanBeacon.Org ^ | Richard Peter Bennett

[Dr. Eckleburg]

“Doth he thank that servant because he did the things that were commanded him? I trow not. So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do.” (Luke 17:9-10)

Jesus own words shoots down any concept of merit.

AMEN!

Mercy, and not debt.

[Deo volente]

Explain the Immaculate Conception OF MARY, please. How were her parents NOT part of Adam's original sin?

Her parents WERE "part of Adam's original sin", as you put it. She, however, was given the singular grace of being preserved from original sin at the very moment of her conception in the womb of her mother, St. Anne. This gift was given to her in anticipation of the graces her Son would win on the Cross at Calvary. It was a unique gift meant for a unique woman. Of course Our Lord was also free from original sin, since He is the Son of God and not subject to sin. That would be an absurdity.
The angel Gabriel calls her "full of grace" in the gospel of Luke. She herself says that "all generations will call me Blessed", and that "He who is mighty has done GREAT THINGS for me..."

We have to remember that Mary needed a savior, just like every other human descendant of Adam. She was saved beforehand, however, "in view of the merits of Jesus Christ..." as the encyclical states. She was preserved from all stain of sin, due to her immense dignity as the Mother of God.

[small voice in the wilderness]

Interesting. Maybe you wlll find this interesting, too:

The early Christians received the Bible from The Holy Spirit, who inspired it, not from the Roman Catholic Church.

But don't listen to me. Listen to what the "OFFICIAL TEACHINGS of the Roman Catholic Church" says in regard to both the Old Testament and New Testament books of the Bible:

"These books the church holds to be sacred and canonical not because she subsequently approved them by her authority after they had been composed by unaided human skill, nor simply because they contain revelation without error, but because, being written under the inspiration of the holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and were as such committed to the church". - First Vatican Council. (emphasis added by me for clarity).

[Mad Dawg]

Trying to tack an RC down to their dogma and the dogma’s source documents is like —trying to catch fireflies with tweezers and frozen fingers —trying to build a castle on quicksand —a 2 year old trying to capture the end of a run-away full sized firehose.

Let that be so. Then why when something is said clearly is it immediately dismissed as a rationalization or dishonest in some way.

How, when everything is dismissed one way or another can your side claim to know what we teach?

De Montfort clearly lays down an initial qualifier under which everything else said about Mary is to be understood. So it's dismissed. He GAVE you what, at least HE was saying, and you wouldn't not accept that he was really saying it.

At least some of the difficulty in understanding Catholic teaching comes from the pre-emptive editing out the parts that make the teaching look plausible or acceptable.

So to do that and then complain that it's hard to find out what the teaching is is hard to understand IF one assumes that there is a real interest in knowing the teaching.

[Deo volente]

The more that is known, the more I wonder just WHAT Christ’s role is in HIS OWN DEATH FOR OUR SINS< AND RESURRECTION FOR OUR SALVATION, actually means to a Catholic. It is almost as if He is relegated to a secondary role.

You should look at the prayers of the Mass, the central act of the Church's worship, which is offered day in and day out in churches throughout the world. This worship is so important that Catholics are bound under the pain of mortal sin to attend Mass every Sunday and holy day, unless they have a good excuse.
Mary is mentioned a few times, of course, but the main thrust of the liturgy is the commemoration of the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The Eucharistic Prayer, which is the heart of the Mass, is one tremendous prayer to God the Father, through Christ, in the unity of the Holy Spirit.

The words that Our Lord spoke at the Last Supper are said once again by the priest, and the one Holy Sacrifice is re-presented, in an unbloody manner, as Jesus commanded his disciples to do. There is a wonderful focus at every Mass on Christ's "death for our sins and His resurrection for our salvation", as you put it..

[Mad Dawg]

"Hyperdulia" was a "smoke" distinction invented by Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, A.D. 1270, to define the distinction between the "worship" of Jesus and the "worship" of Mary.

Thanks, I learned something new today.

You learned that in 1270, about 250 years before Luther, Thomas Aquinas invented a term to confuse the issue about the worship paid to God and the worship paid to a creature -- why? So that 250 years later we Catholics would have something to say to non-Catholics to deny (falsely, it goes without saying) the charge that we pay Mary divine honors?

I don't get it.

[Mad Dawg]

The foundation of all Our confidence, as you know well, Venerable Brethren, is found in the Blessed Virgin Mary

For 9 months that was unquestionably true for any Christian.

For Christians who understand the timelessness of God, because it is a truth about Jesus, it is an eternal truth about Jesus.

For those who came in late, Jesus is "the foundation of all our confidence." It seems silly to have to point that out, but our antagonists don't seem to be able to remember it or to bring that simple notion to their criticism of many Marian statements.

[Deo volente]

"These books the church holds to be sacred and canonical not because she subsequently approved them by her authority after they had been composed by unaided human skill, nor simply because they contain revelation without error, but because, being written under the inspiration of the holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and were as such committed to the church". - First Vatican Council. (emphasis added by me for clarity)."

You should have emphasized the rest of that phrase as well, "after they had been composed by unaided human skill,". Then the sentence makes sense. The Church would never have approved, "by her authority", books which were not written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and call them sacred. That's the grammatical sense of the sentence, my friend.

The books were authored by God, of course, and were committed by Him to His Church. The bishops of that Church selected the correct, inspired books from the many different "gospels" and "epistles" which were floating around during the three centuries after Christ. You should see how many apocryphal books were extant. It was a large number.

[xone]

What’s the problem here? Mary is a creature, yet the highest of all created things other than the human nature of Jesus.

Than how do Catholics account for the words of the Lord in Matthew 11:11?

[the_conscience]

You seem more Romanist than Orthodox. It seems to me that it is just a matter of that the Orthodox have better incense.

[don-o]

(emphasis added by me for clarity).

Bold type clarifies exactly what? Why not explain with your own words your agreement / disagreement.

Not simply that you agree or disagree, but which part and show why it is right or wrong.

[small voice in the wilderness]

God has committed to her the treasury of all good things, in order that everyone may know that through her are obtained every hope, every grace, and all salvation. For this is his will, that we obtain everything through Mary.- and the little bit you left out was "And likewise in our own day, Mary, with the ever merciful affection so characteristic of her maternal heart, wishes,through her efficacious intercession with God, to deliver her children from the sad and grief-laden troubles, from the tribulations, the anxiety, the difficulties, and the punishments of God's anger which afflict the world because of the sins of men. Wishing to restrain and to dispel the violent hurricane of evils which, as We lament from the bottom of Our heart, are everywhere afflicting the Church, Mary desires to transform Our sadness into joy. The foundation of all Our confidence, as you know well, Venerable Brethren, is found in the Blessed Virgin Mary

Then explain this to me, Mad Dawg. Is "The Blessed Virgin Mary" the "foundation of all our confidence" if you are Catholic. Or is it Jesus Christ?

[small voice in the wilderness]

Does highlighting the portion in question for explanation bother you?

Get over it. I'm posting the words of Catholic Doctrine, simply because I am tired of getting 50 different versions of what Catholic teach/believe.

[Natural Law]

"Than how do Catholics account for the words of the Lord in Matthew 11:11?"

the verse concludes with the phrase; "yet the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he." Clearly through Mary's unique status and divine grace she was already a part of the kingdom of heaven.

[don-o]

You seem more Romanist than Orthodox. It seems to me that it is just a matter of that the Orthodox have better incense.

Another demonstration of clouded perception and wild fancy. I have rarely mentioned the divergence of the two sections of the ancient faith. There are differences. But, open threads on the ghetto are not the venue of my choosing to discuss them. Besides, Jesus told us about what not to do with our pearls.

[don-o]

Oh. I just noticed - you must have forgotten to supply the supporting evidence for your assertion that the Roman Catholic church returned to Peleganism. Just a friendly reminder.

[small voice in the wilderness]

By the way, we wouldn't even have the New Testament if the Church had not compiled the various books and determined that they, and they alone, were the inspired canon of Scripture.

Because your argument was that we have the New Testament because the Church compiled the various books and determined that they, and they alone, were the inspired canon Scripture. You did not state HOW they did this, just that they did it.

[don-o]

OK. I thought maybe you had something interesting to say about what you had discovered. Silly me.

[caww]

I do realize those of the catholic faith believe what you posted. But I do not see Peter as “the Rock” rather “Christ Jesus” as the head of the church. You believe that the Apostolic authority was handed down to your church...I do not. You believe the ‘Catholic Church” denomination is the “universal” church. I do not, rather that Christ's church are all the believers who have found new life in Christ and are united thru His Spirit as One in Him. Regardless of their church affiliation.

We wouldn't have the New Testament if it weren't for Christ...and the Holy Spirit who moved men to write. It is His words to us not the churches. And frankly we wouldn't have the scriptures...old or new...if it weren't for the Jews....If any deserve the credit for what we have to day from days gone by, it is the Jewish Nation who carefully transcribed and handed down the text. The new testament stands on the old testament.

All through the Old Testament we read "Messiah is coming"...the Gospels cry out..." He is Here"....Revelations tells us.."He is coming Again". The entire scriptures are all about Christ from beginning to end...not the catholic church...rather all those who looked for Him to come, who believed in Him when He was here...and those who would believe in Him in the future....and the Jews travel throughout both testaments as well.

The path of how the New Testament was transcribed and given to us is secondary to the author and finisher of our faith Christ Jesus. Frankly I am pleased that the Lord God saw to it that we have it today and it has endured way beyond anything the catholic church might have had a hand in. What is significant is that we have it and the Holy Spirit uses it as our compass thru life and our understanding of Gods will.

[small voice in the wilderness]

There are lots of discoveries to be made and discussed. But why would I ask you? You’re not even Roman Catholic, per your ghetto post. And yes, silly you.