Posted on 02/10/2011 7:57:12 AM PST by Christian Engineer Mass
Jesus said that the truth will set us free. (John 8:32) However, He did not say that the truth would necessarily be easy to accept. It was painful for me to learn the information that I am about to share with you, but it was also liberating and it led to a closer relationship with God.
As a faithful Catholic, and later as a nun, I practiced Mary worship for many years without realizing it. The prayers and practices were so familiar. They were taught to me by good people, sincere people that I trusted. I prayed rosaries and wore a scapular and engaged in other “devotions” which I honestly thought were good and pleasing to God. Because of my lack of knowledge of the Bible and of Church history, I honestly had no idea that I was actually worshipping Mary.
If modern Catholic teachings and doctrines about Mary are true, then they will not be contrary to Scripture, the writings of the Early Fathers, or the decrees of past popes. For a devout Catholic to question these issues and put them to the test can be painful. It certainly was for me. However, it would be far more painful to have God correct us when we face Him on Judgment Day.
LETTING THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SPEAK FOR ITSELF
I believe in letting people speak for themselves. Therefore my primary sources about Catholic doctrines and history come from the Catholic Church.
First and foremost is the official Catechism of the Catholic Church which was written for the purpose of summarizing the essential and basic teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. It was approved by Pope John Paul II in 1992 and the English translation was released in 1994.
(Excerpt) Read more at parkviewgospelhall.com ...
You might want to read a bit more history before saying Jesus accepted Maccabees as scripture.
Yes, Jesus cited scripture. The Apostles did as well. They knew it and quoted it as authoritative.
And like a number of OT prophets, Jesus made the point that the letter of the law wasn’t what God was after, but an obedient heart. He distinguished between what God would allow as civil law, and what was the highest purpose God was pointing them to achieve. He did so to burst the self-righteous bubble many lived in...
So I should attach no importance to the argument that the important part is scripture alone?
>>Asking the Saints to pray for us is really no different from asking the living to pray for us.<<
That is a bit redundant, since the Bible clearly teaches that all believers are saints. A better way to word your sentence, and this is strictly my opinion, is “Asking dead Saints to pray for us is really no different from asking the living saints to pray for us.”
And to demonstrate how protestants see the lunacy of such a statement is to use one that is analogous: “Asking a dead mechanic to fix your car is no different than asking a live mechanic to fix your car.”
I’m not saying you will agree with this. I am saying that gives a rough perspective of how protestants see this.
Of course, this is why Luther and others decided that the Scriptures available to Jesus, in the Temple, should not be considered by Protestants.
The Septuagint has Maccabbees.
Jesus cites freely from the septuagint, ie ‘Moses said, X, I say, Y”. Scripture says, etc.
You are correct that he doesn’t cite Maccabbees in a direct reference, but the Septuagint was in common use at the time of Christ.
The versions of it that we possess today, have Maccabees in it. As do the early Christian texts we possess prior to the Vulgate. Pretty strong evidence to me that the only evidence we do have argues in favour of Maccabees.
Your car is physical.
Our souls are spiritual.
The Dead Saints can, indeed, help us with one but not the other.
Yes. But they are all alive.
Alive, but asleep.
” 20But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. 22For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. 23But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. 24Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power.” - 1 Cor 15
“13But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. 14For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. 15For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord. 18Therefore encourage one another with these words.” - 1 Thess 4
>>Saying that one cannot be saved without a bible *is* bible worship. Saying that by scripture alone you are saved, *is* bible worship.<<
I would agree with that. I’ve been a protestant since 1981 and have never met a person that believed that.
I remember when I first heard on FR that someone believed that Mary died a virgin, I thought they were joking. When I found out they weren’t, I was so shocked that I went back to the bible and pulled all references to Mary (I mean the mother of Jesus) and references to the mother of the Messiah and other similar scriptures. Not only did I find nothing whatsoever to support this, but I noticed a trend: Jesus was not especially respectful in how he referred to her. He seemed to use every opportunity to make it clear that she was “just another fully human being”.
IOW, the good thing about this discussion is that it helped me to solidify my belief with much more research and understanding.
FWIW, my wife was Catholic for a little over 30 years and her whole family is very devout Catholic. This “Mary was ever-virgin” claim was something my wife says she had never heard of before.
When I cite the Catechism I will give paragraph numbers rather than page numbers.
I will summarize what it says.
Her summaries and writings are, at best, disingenuous and many are outright lies. Anyone who accepts her opinion and distorions of Catholic teaching as fact is a gullible fool.
II. Devotion to the Blessed Virgin
971 "All generations will call me blessed": "The Church's devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship."513 The Church rightly honors "the Blessed Virgin with special devotion. From the most ancient times the Blessed Virgin has been honored with the title of 'Mother of God,' to whose protection the faithful fly in all their dangers and needs.... This very special devotion ... differs essentially from the adoration which is given to the incarnate Word and equally to the Father and the Holy Spirit, and greatly fosters this adoration."514 The liturgical feasts dedicated to the Mother of God and Marian prayer, such as the rosary, an "epitome of the whole Gospel," express this devotion to the Virgin Mary.515(emphasis added)
513 Lk 1:48; Paul VI, MC 56.
514 LG 66.
515 Cf. Paul VI, MC 42; SC 103.
In addition "Mary Ann Collins", if she even exists:
Will the real Mary Ann Collins please stand up?
was never a nun. She spent two years in a convent as a postulant and a novice and according to her biography, was asked to leave.
Those are facts that you must deal with.
That the Septuagint was a commonly used Greek translation of books is undeniable. That Jesus or the Jews accepted all of it as scripture is deniable, because they didn’t.
They used to sell Bibles that included the Book of Common Prayer, but that didn’t make the latter scripture.
>>“Honor thy Father and Mother”
pretty clear, huh?“Honor thy Father and Mother”
pretty clear, huh?<<
Apparently not. First, Mary is not MY mother. Second, you need to look up what is meant by “honor”. It is sort of in the vein that love is not a feeling, but an action. And when Jesus turned the water into wine, he “honored” his mother by doing what she asked. However, he also said this:
>>Jesus’ mother told him, “They have no more wine.”
“Is that your concern, or mine?” replied Jesus. “My time has not come yet.”<<
But he did it anyway. His mother asked him to. He “honored” her.
“which “scripture” to exclude, was based on Catholic TRADITION”
No, it was based on real universal church gatherings, led by the Holy Spirit, before the bad popes.
You do grasp the meaning of ‘full of grace?’
This is the bottom line.. Catholics pray exactly the same to God and to Mary .. but they are taught it is different ... one is worship and one is veneration.. but the words and practices are exactly the same.. the only difference is the word they use to describe it
Wasn’t us who sold them with the common prayer, sir. You might want to talk to the Anglicans as to why ‘scripture alone’, apparently involves attaching the common prayer.
Who said they didn't? I don't think you're following my argument.
Your point is not clear.
I'm saying there was a "Bible" before the New Testament canon was put together; that was my original comment to you. The authority of the "Bible" (or Scripture or however you might term it) goes back to 1400 BC.
That’s a huge reach though. It doesn’t say you can pray to people. It says to GOD all are alive, not to YOU!
It is an interesting story but how do you explain the cape (tilma)? Also human sacrifice stopped after the locals converted.
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.