Posted on 10/31/2010 11:59:22 AM PDT by RnMomof7
In Christ Alone lyrics
Songwriters: Getty, Julian Keith; Townend, Stuart Richard;
In Christ alone my hope is found He is my light, my strength, my song This Cornerstone, this solid ground Firm through the fiercest drought and storm
What heights of love, what depths of peace When fears are stilled, when strivings cease My Comforter, my All in All Here in the love of Christ I stand
In Christ alone, who took on flesh Fullness of God in helpless Babe This gift of love and righteousness Scorned by the ones He came to save
?Til on that cross as Jesus died The wrath of God was satisfied For every sin on Him was laid Here in the death of Christ I live, I live
There in the ground His body lay Light of the world by darkness slain Then bursting forth in glorious Day Up from the grave He rose again
And as He stands in victory Sin?s curse has lost its grip on me For I am His and He is mine Bought with the precious blood of Christ
The Emperor Constantine's communications were recorded. He politely encouraged the bishops to make peace and end quarrels because civil war was threat to his political interests. He had neither knowledge of religion nor legitimacy to resolve the issues. There were 314 bishops in attendance, mostly from the East. They resolved many issues and condemned the growing Arian heresy which denied that Jesus was fully God and man with both a human and divine nature. After the council, the Arian heresy was reformulated as Semi-Arianism, which only accepted a partial divinity for Christ and rejected the divinity of the Holy Spirit. This development led to the civil wars that the Emperor had hoped to avoid.
Rome and religion were working very closely together for the same end result. Keeping Rome powerful, if not by politics, then by religion.
The Emperors and most of the bishops sided with the powerful Semi-Arians, but one courageous bishop, St. Athanasius, and the bulk of the people held fast to the orthodoxy that had been affirmed at Nicea. The Emperor seized Pope Liberius from Rome and held him captive in Turkey. The Catholic people defended the purity of the faith by successive bloody attacks against the heretical bishops. This went on for decades until the Emperors finally decided it was easier for them to accept the orthodox position of St. Athanasius. In the process of defending the faith, St. Athanasius removed the last apocryphal scriptures to establish the final canon of the New Testament.
Never mind that Roman paganism found its way to the Catholic Church. That too was conveniently merged together. And so it's been down the years, until lately, voodoo is the new paganism finding its home in Rome.
Syncretism is condemned by the Church but it does occur. Pope Leo XIII sent a letter to American Bishops warning them against a heresy he called "Americanism." This is the idea that "the Church should shape her teachings more in accord with the spirit of the age and relax some of her ancient severity and make some concessions to new opinions." American bishops denied the heresy but history and current events prove that Pope Leo XIII's warning was prescient. Despite infiltration, the Church maintains the "ancient severity" of her doctrines in opposition to all the world.
I am not on 24/7 and habitually begin where I left off my previous session. (Sorta like reading a book from front to back dontchaknow?) For that reason I missed the admonition from the RM.
1. Your "quote" was not linked in the post I responded to. It is not my habit to trace each post backwards without reason.
2. You will note once again I did not ping the RM with this silliness. The RM has more important things to do.
bkaycee wrote:
“Again, perpetual virginity serves NO purpose and even if TRUE, was apparently irrelevant to the writers of the New Testament.”
This is exactly the point I have been making in regard to the reason why the matter of Mary having or not having other children is both an adiaphoron, that is, something not conclusively provable one way or the other on the basis of Scripture alone, and IRRELEVANT!
The great men of the Reformation examined this matter very carefully. And they simply concluded that eyes of faith look to Christ, not to Mary. And of Him the Scriptures are clear and plain and united! So, whether the early church fathers believed she was perpetually virgin or not doesn’t matter. In fact, whether they were right or not doesn’t matter. Salvation is grounded in Christ, the Son of God from eternity and also the Son of the virgin Mary born in time.
The only purpose I see is to maintain Mary’s demi goddess status and support the “Queen of Heaven” and “Co-Redemptrix” titles, Moving the focus from Jesus.
ABSOLUTELY INDEED.
Here is what you posted in #2097:
Uh Uh! Isn't it against the rules to plagarize [sic] the words of others? No quotation marks, no indicationn [sic] it is not an original thought. Criminal! Dishonest! My my!
Here is my original post where I clearly credited the words to Schaff and the block quoting clearly indicates that they are HIS WORDS and negates the need for quotation marks:
To: smvoiceThen how about just nipping it? "Nip it in the bud"That's fine, we'll just agree that Schaff acknowledged how complete the list of popes is and never suggested that Saint Peter was never in Rome:
It must in justice be admitted, however, that the list of Roman bishops has by far the preeminence in age, completeness, integrity of succession, consistency of doctrine and policy, above every similar catalogue, not excepting those of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, and Constantinople; and this must carry great weight with those who ground their views chiefly on external testimonies, without being able to rise to the free Protestant conception of Christianity and its history of development on earth.
I wouldn’t call it hip.
Peterson took great pains to be faithful to the spirit, tone, meaning, context, vernacular of Scripture.
God evidently took great pains to insure that the originals were written in the language of the day . . . not earthy in the dirty sense . . . but very earthy in the nitty gritty life of the common people.
Prissy translations seem to edit that flavor of God’s original Word out.
I PRAISE GOD THAT HE LED Peterson to put those flavors back.
Folks who are unfamiliar with THE MESSAGE are missing out.
There’s a vibrancy and Presence of the God of The Bible that has enriched my relationship with God greatly.
Enough has been said on the subject. It’s time to drop it and return to the issues.
Have you ever heard of Pope Honorius? Apparently the church of his era had never heard of this dogma of ex cathedra infallibility.
Pope Honorius was condemned as a heretic by the 6th Ecumenical Council for what he taught in a letter, which he wrote as the bishop of Rome, to Sergius. The Council stated explicitly that Honorius and the others 1) taught the heresy, 2) in words "hurtful to the soul", and that 3) "the former Pope of Old Rome, who with the help of the old serpent had scattered deadly error."
Pope Leo II confirmed the decrees of that Council and also explicily stated that he too anathematized Honorius.
The anathema of Honorious also appears in the canons of the Council of Trullo.
It is repeated in the decree of faith of The Seventh Council.
For three hundred years this condemnation was repeated by all popes at their installation: “smites with eternal anathema the originators of the new heresy, Sergius, etc., together with Honorius, because he assisted the base assertion of the heretics.”
Honorius made a theological mistake because he was unfamiliar with the issues involved. His letters that disseminated the error, "in novel terms, amongst the orthodox people, an heresy ...” were around to mislead people for forty years before they were burned at the Council.
See for example, The Heresy of Honorius
Cordially,
A pronouncement cannot be ex cathedra if it conflicts with previously established infallible teaching. An infallible teaching, by its nature, can never be overturned.
Exactly, they see grace as a substance one can use up and need to refill with acts of piety or the sacraments
Bottom line is if it is a work it is not grace..
SOLA GRATIA
SOLA FIDE
SOLA SCRIPTURA
SOLUS CHRISTUS
SOLI DEO GLORIA! !!!!!!!! Amen to Luther...
All men, even catholic men , commit sin, all men DESERVE hell ..so why are some saved and not others? The ones that are saved have a Savior, that has paid for their sin, and redeemed them .... so Luther was correct..
I have put on Christ, He is in me and I am in Him ... every sin I have ever or will ever commit is covered the white robe of Christ I wear ..a wedding robe given to me by my Lord ...
Luther had eyes to see what the unsaved natural man can not ...
1Cr 2:14
What I find interesting every time a catholic accuses Luther of anti semitism is he was a Catholic as was Hitler himself..
“The Catholic Church considered the Jews pestilent for fifteen hundred years, put them into ghettos, etc., because it recognized the Jews for what they were. . . . I am moving back toward the time in which a fifteen-hundred-year-long tradition was implemented. . . . I recognize the representatives of this race as pestilent for the state and for the church and perhaps I am thereby doing Christianity a great service for pushing them out of schools and public functions.” Hitler 1933
Akten deutscher Bischöfe, vol. 1, pp. 100-102. Quoted in Saul Friedländer, Nazi Germany and the Jews, p. 47.
“The Jews are the most worthless of all men. They are lecherous, greedy, rapacious. They are perfidious murderers of Christ. They worship the Devil. Their religion is a sickness. The Jews are the odious assassins of Christ and for killing God there is no expiation possible, no indulgence or pardon. Christians may never cease vengeance, and the Jew must live in servitude forever. God always hated the Jews. It is essential that all Christians hate them.”" St. Ambrose,
" “Where Christ-killers gather, the cross is ridiculed, God blasphemed, the father unacknowledged, the son insulted, the grace of the Spirit rejected. . . .If the Jewish rites are holy and venerable, our way of life must be false. But if our way is true, as indeed it is, theirs is fraudulent. I am not speaking of the Scriptures. Far from it!.. I am speaking of their present impiety and madness.”Saint John Chrysostom
In an interview with Zionist leader Theodor Hertzl, Pope St. Pius X says: "I know, it is disagreeable to see the Turks in possession of our Holy Places. We simply have to put up with it. But to sanction the Jewish wish to occupy these sites, that we cannot do... The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people... If you go to Palestine and your people settle there, you will find us clergy and churches ready to baptize you all" 1904
After forcing many Jews to be baptized and then referring to them as Marranos (swine), and after an Inquisition in which some 700 Marranos were burnt at the stake for showing signs of "Jewish" taint, Spain expels all Jews from the country 1492
People in glass houses should not throw stones
A pronouncement cannot be ex cathedra if it conflicts with previously established infallible teaching. An infallible teaching, by its nature, can never be overturned.
The Infallibility of the pope is a figment of vain imaginations made up out of whole cloth.
Catholic theologian Hans Küng, critical of this dogma, argues for four principle reasons: "Pius IX had a sense of divine mission which he carried to extremes; he engaged in double dealing; he was mentally disturbed; and he misused his office."
Pius may have been insane. He suffered from seizures his entire life and later developed memory loss and an inability to think clearly for long periods of time (by his own admission). By 1869, disease and stress had taken a serious toll on his psychological state and people noticed that he had become unpredictable, irrational, emotional and dictatorial — sometimes acting like a megalomaniac. Historian Ferdinand Gregorovius reported that 1870:
The pope recently got the urge to try out his infallibility...While out on a walk he called to a paralytic: "Get up and walk." The poor devil gave it a try and collapsed, which put [the pope] very much out of sorts. The anecdote has already been mentioned in newspapers. I really believe he's insane.
Pius may have been dishonest. Pius stacked the council heavily in his favor. Cardinal Gustav von Hohenlohe told a friend: "In my entire life, I have never met a man who was less particular about the truth than Pius IX." Other bishops, like Bishop Henir Manret, openly called Pius IX a liar, so the charge was not at all unusual.
Upon later reflection, many of the inexperienced members came to believe that their ill-fated appointments occurred only so that they could more easily be outmaneuvered by the pope's supporters. One, Bishop Joseph Karl Hefele wrote to a friend:
"The longer I stay here, the more clearly I see the duplicity behind my appointment as consultor concilii. That was just Rome's way of hoodwinking the public with the appearance of neutrality. In reality, I have no idea what I'm supposed to be doing here."
Who originally came up with the idea of papal infallibility? It was the creation of Peter Olivi, a Franciscan who was more than once accused of heresy (an auspicious parent for the concept of infallibility, wouldn't you say?). His reason for attempting to limit papal power seems to have been to prevent future popes from rescinding a ruling favorable to Franciscans made by Pope Nicholas III (1277-1280). Nicholas was willing to go along with this idea, but later popes rejected it outright. For example, Pope John XXII (1316-1334) went so far as to call it "...a work of the devil...the Father of Lies." and in 1324 actually issued a papal bull condemning it as heresy.
http://www.oldcatholichistory.org/wiki/papal_infallibility_part_2
This is your dog and pony show:
The University of Dayton is recognized as a top-tier national university and one of the 10 best Catholic universities in the nation. Learn more about our high-quality programs - and our distinctive approach to education that prepares our students for work and life.
University Of Dayton
There was no such title as "Pontiff" in Rome when Constantine called the Council of Nicaea. Bishop Sylvester did not attend, ostensibly because of his age and infirmity.
No. Emperor Constantine was baptized on his deathbed and his mother, St. Helena, was a pious Christian.
A legend is a legend is a legend. There is no historical record whatsoever which documents the so-called "conversion".
One more example of "retroactive history".
There is NO typology of Mary in the OT..the Typology all points to Christ and the cross..NOT TO MARY
This false teachng points to the inability of the Catholic church and its "scholars" to rightly divide the word of God..
The entire Bible is all about Jesus, every one of the jewish OT books is Christocentric . Only the need to have a goddess puts Mary in the place of Christ
Amen...you pretty much nailed it by that explanation.
Read your history. Emperor Constantine died in 337 AD soon after he was baptized by bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia.
What is that, post-death baptism??? Wonder if that is where the LDS got the idea?
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.