Posted on 01/06/2013 3:56:49 PM PST by NYer
Bl. John Henry Newman said it best: “To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.” History paints an overwhelming picture of St. Peter’s apostolic ministry in Rome and this is confirmed by a multitude of different sources within the Early Church. Catholic Encyclopedia states, “In opposition to this distinct and unanimous testimony of early Christendom, some few Protestant historians have attempted in recent times to set aside the residence and death of Peter at Rome as legendary. These attempts have resulted in complete failure.” Protestantism as a whole seeks to divorce Christianity from history by rending Gospel message out of its historical context as captured by our Early Church Fathers. One such target of these heresies is to devalue St. Peter and to twist the authority of Rome into a historical mishap within Christianity. To wit, the belief has as its end the ultimate end of all Catholic and Protestant dialogue – who has authority in Christianity?
Why is it important to defend the tradition of St. Peter and Rome?
The importance of establishing St. Peter’s ministry in Rome may be boiled down to authority and more specifically the historic existence and continuance of the Office of Vicar held by St. Peter. To understand why St. Peter was important and what authority was given to him by Christ SPL has composed two lists – 10 Biblical Reasons Christ Founded the Papacy and 13 Reasons St. Peter Was the Prince of the Apostles.
The rest of the list is cited from the Catholic Encyclopedia on St. Peter and represents only a small fraction of the evidence set therein.
It is an indisputably established historical fact that St. Peter laboured in Rome during the last portion of his life, and there ended his earthly course by martyrdom. As to the duration of his Apostolic activity in the Roman capital, the continuity or otherwise of his residence there, the details and success of his labours, and the chronology of his arrival and death, all these questions are uncertain, and can be solved only on hypotheses more or less well-founded. The essential fact is that Peter died at Rome: this constitutes the historical foundation of the claim of the Bishops of Rome to the Apostolic Primacy of Peter.
St. Peter’s residence and death in Rome are established beyond contention as historical facts by a series of distinct testimonies extending from the end of the first to the end of the second centuries, and issuing from several lands.
That the manner, and therefore the place of his death, must have been known in widely extended Christian circles at the end of the first century is clear from the remark introduced into the Gospel of St. John concerning Christ’s prophecy that Peter was bound to Him and would be led whither he would not — “And this he said, signifying by what death he should glorify God” (John 21:18-19, see above). Such a remark presupposes in the readers of the Fourth Gospel a knowledge of the death of Peter.
St. Peter’s First Epistle was written almost undoubtedly from Rome, since the salutation at the end reads: “The church that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you: and so doth my son Mark” (5:13). Babylon must here be identified with the Roman capital; since Babylon on the Euphrates, which lay in ruins, or New Babylon (Seleucia) on the Tigris, or the Egyptian Babylon near Memphis, or Jerusalem cannot be meant, the reference must be to Rome, the only city which is called Babylon elsewhere in ancient Christian literature (Revelation 17:5; 18:10; “Oracula Sibyl.”, V, verses 143 and 159, ed. Geffcken, Leipzig, 1902, 111).
From Bishop Papias of Hierapolis and Clement of Alexandria, who both appeal to the testimony of the old presbyters (i.e., the disciples of the Apostles), we learn that Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome at the request of the Roman Christians, who desired a written memorial of the doctrine preached to them by St. Peter and his disciples (Eusebius, Church History II.15, 3.40, 6.14); this is confirmed by Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3.1). In connection with this information concerning the Gospel of St. Mark, Eusebius, relying perhaps on an earlier source, says that Peter described Rome figuratively as Babylon in his First Epistle.
Another testimony concerning the martyrdom of Peter and Paul is supplied by Clement of Rome in his Epistle to the Corinthians (written about A.D. 95-97), wherein he says (chapter 5):
“Through zeal and cunning the greatest and most righteous supports [of the Church] have suffered persecution and been warred to death. Let us place before our eyes the good Apostles — St. Peter, who in consequence of unjust zeal, suffered not one or two, but numerous miseries, and, having thus given testimony (martyresas), has entered the merited place of glory”.
He then mentions Paul and a number of elect, who were assembled with the others and suffered martyrdom “among us” (en hemin, i.e., among the Romans, the meaning that the expression also bears in chapter 4). He is speaking undoubtedly, as the whole passage proves, of the Neronian persecution, and thus refers the martyrdom of Peter and Paul to that epoch.
In his letter written at the beginning of the second century (before 117), while being brought to Rome for martyrdom, the venerable Bishop Ignatius of Antioch endeavours by every means to restrain the Roman Christians from striving for his pardon, remarking: “I issue you no commands, like Peter and Paul: they were Apostles, while I am but a captive” (Epistle to the Romans 4). The meaning of this remark must be that the two Apostles laboured personally in Rome, and with Apostolic authority preached the Gospel there.
Bishop Dionysius of Corinth, in his letter to the Roman Church in the time of Pope Soter (165-74), says:
“You have therefore by your urgent exhortation bound close together the sowing of Peter and Paul at Rome and Corinth. For both planted the seed of the Gospel also in Corinth, and together instructed us, just as they likewise taught in the same place in Italy and at the same time suffered martyrdom” (in Eusebius, Church History II.25).
Irenaeus of Lyons, a native of Asia Minor and a disciple of Polycarp of Smyrna (a disciple of St. John), passed a considerable time in Rome shortly after the middle of the second century, and then proceeded to Lyons, where he became bishop in 177; he described the Roman Church as the most prominent and chief preserver of the Apostolic tradition, as “the greatest and most ancient church, known by all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul” (Against Heresies 3.3; cf. 3.1). He thus makes use of the universally known and recognized fact of the Apostolic activity of Peter and Paul in Rome, to find therein a proof from tradition against the heretics.
In his “Hypotyposes” (Eusebius, Church History IV.14), Clement of Alexandria, teacher in the catechetical school of that city from about 190, says on the strength of the tradition of the presbyters: “After Peter had announced the Word of God in Rome and preached the Gospel in the spirit of God, the multitude of hearers requested Mark, who had long accompanied Peter on all his journeys, to write down what the Apostles had preached to them” (see above).
Like Irenaeus, Tertullian appeals, in his writings against heretics, to the proof afforded by the Apostolic labours of Peter and Paul in Rome of the truth of ecclesiastical tradition. In De Præscriptione 36, he says:
“If thou art near Italy, thou hast Rome where authority is ever within reach. How fortunate is this Church for which the Apostles have poured out their whole teaching with their blood, where Peter has emulated the Passion of the Lord, where Paul was crowned with the death of John.”
In Scorpiace 15, he also speaks of Peter’s crucifixion. “The budding faith Nero first made bloody in Rome. There Peter was girded by another, since he was bound to the cross”. As an illustration that it was immaterial with what water baptism is administered, he states in his book (On Baptism 5) that there is “no difference between that with which John baptized in the Jordan and that with which Peter baptized in the Tiber”; and against Marcion he appeals to the testimony of the Roman Christians, “to whom Peter and Paul have bequeathed the Gospel sealed with their blood” (Against Marcion 4.5).
The Roman, Caius, who lived in Rome in the time of Pope Zephyrinus (198-217), wrote in his “Dialogue with Proclus” (in Eusebius, Church History II.25) directed against the Montanists: “But I can show the trophies of the Apostles. If you care to go to the Vatican or to the road to Ostia, thou shalt find the trophies of those who have founded this Church”.
By the trophies (tropaia) Eusebius understands the graves of the Apostles, but his view is opposed by modern investigators who believe that the place of execution is meant. For our purpose it is immaterial which opinion is correct, as the testimony retains its full value in either case. At any rate the place of execution and burial of both were close together; St. Peter, who was executed on the Vatican, received also his burial there. Eusebius also refers to “the inscription of the names of Peter and Paul, which have been preserved to the present day on the burial-places there” (i.e. at Rome).
There thus existed in Rome an ancient epigraphic memorial commemorating the death of the Apostles. The obscure notice in the Muratorian Fragment (“Lucas optime theofile conprindit quia sub praesentia eius singula gerebantur sicuti et semote passionem petri evidenter declarat”, ed. Preuschen, Tübingen, 1910, p. 29) also presupposes an ancient definite tradition concerning Peter’s death in Rome.
The apocryphal Acts of St. Peter and the Acts of Sts. Peter and Paul likewise belong to the series of testimonies of the death of the two Apostles in Rome.
LUMEN GENTIUM, 16: But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Mohammedans, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind. - http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html
Rome clearly states that Muslims, along with us adore the one and merciful God, and this is not the "unknown God" among many possibles that Paul referred to in Acts 17, but much the opposite, Islam claims a certain distinct being as the true God, and imagines to correct us as ones who are in error (regardless of the fact that not one ancient MSS even from before Muhammad agrees with the Islamic "corrective" contradictions).
I know that RCAs labor to reconcile this, this example alone illustrates how RCs cannot escape the need for interpretation of their supreme authority, and is one of the reasons for the RC sects.
The other one is if it you believe that Mary can be prayed to (as the Popes do) and if you believe that salvation comes from Mary without the help of Jesus as Popes have stated as truth.
I know of no statement that in context states the latter. The closest that comes to mind is one attributed to Eadmer (A.D. 1060–1124), an English monk and student of Anselm, “
'...sometimes salvation is quicker if we remember Mary's name then if we invoked the name of the Lord Jesus...[who] does not at once, answer anyone who invokes him, but only does so after just judgment. But if the name of his mother Mary is invoked, her merits intercede so that he is answered even if the merits of him who invoked her do not deserve it.” (http://www.equip.org/PDF/JAC166.pdf)
However, i cannot find the actual source. However, similar excess exaltations which are "above that which is written" (cf. 1 Cor. 4:6) abound:
"As Mother of the Word Incarnate, Mary was elevated to a certain equality with the Heavenly Father."
"surpassing in power all the angels and saints in Heaven."
"It was not only during the Passion that Jesus and Mary suffer ed for our sins, for all their lives that heartrending vision was before them in every detail, and never for a moment forgotten."
"I believe you are thinking of Next to God, she deserves the highest praise......all graces of the Precious Blood come through Mary. No grace is given without her intercession.'
"The union between the Immaculata and the Holy Spirit is so inexpressible, yet so perfect, that the Holy Spirit acts only by the Most Blessed Virgin, his Spouse. This is why she is the mediatrix of all graces given by the Holy Spirit. And since every grace is a gift of God the Father through the Son and by the Holy Spirit, it follows that there is no grace which Mary cannot dispose of as her own, which is not given to her for this purpose."
Sources for above: here :
We were condemned through the fault of one woman; we are saved through the merits of another woman. Just as Eve was the root of death for everyone, so Mary was the source of life for everyone. - Ten Series of Meditations on the Mysteries of the Rosary by John Ferraro
The below attributed quotes are from "The glories of Mary, mother of God,' by Alphonsus Liguori, January 1833, (at the time of the canonization of Liguori nothing was found in his writings meriting censure),
It is a reflection of St. Augustine, that as Mary merited to give human flesh to the Son of God, and thereby prepared the price of our redemption, she is consequently more enabled to obtain our salvation, than all the redeemed together. " You then can entirely save us, O Mary," says St. John Dama scene to her, " for your authority of Mother, gives an irresistible force to your prayers. p. 135
the height of grace. Mary is all my confidence, Mary is the foundation of my hope." p. 145
" You then can entirely save us, O Mary," says St. John Dama scene to her, " for your authority of Mo ther, gives an irresistible force to your prayers. O admirable goodness of our God, who to effect our future happiness, has given us an advocate that gains every cause in which she pleads. p. 145
It is by me they govern their senses and rule over their passions, that they may render themselves worthy of reigning eternally in heaven." Mary is that tower, whence it is said in the Canticles, a thousand bucklers are sus pended with all the arms of the valiant men. To all her servants who have recourse to her in their combats, she is as it were an impregnable tower fortified with arms of every description to enable them to fight against hell. p. 59
...St. Antoninus says, " as those from whom Mary turns her mer ciful eyes, cannot be saved, it necessarily follows, that those on whom she looks with benignity, will share in eternal glory." p. 159
"...the people who will not serve you [Mary] shall perish," ... "he who does not invoke her shall have no share in the kingdom of God ;" p. 159
"...St. Ignatius Martyr, had pronounced, that a sinner can only be saved by having recourse to the blessed Virgin, whose infinite mercy obtains salvation for those who are condemned by infinite justice." p. 146
David already prayed the Lord to preserve him from bell, because of his zeal for the honor of Mary. " Lord" said he, " I have loved the beauty of thy house, let not my soul perish with the impious." He says "of thy house," because Mary is that house of the purest gold, that God himself erected to be his habitation on earth, and his place of repose when he came to dwell amongst us. p. 162,63
When, therefore the winds blow, and the floods of temptation rise, let us say to Mary, what St. Peter said to Jesus Christ, " save us, we perish." p. 123
"...as Pharoah said to the Egyptians, when in want of bread, " go to Joseph," so when we ask some grace of God, he says to us, " go to Mary." " Christians" says Richard of St. Laurence, " can say to Mary, as the Egyptians to Joseph, " our salvation is in thy hands," and Cassian, that " the salvation of all men is in the protection of Mary." p. 124
"...we have not access to Jesus Christ but through Mary, that this divine Saviour whom she has given to the world, may receive us from her hands." p. 125
When Mary, he continues, presents herself before Jesus, the altar of reconciliation, to mediate for us, she ra ther seems to dictate than to supplicate, and has more the air of a Queen than of a subject. p. 131
Undoubtedly," says St. Bernard, " Jesus Christ is the only mediator between God and man, but because men fear that divine person who is destined one day to judge them, it has been necessary to give them [a mediator with the mediator, and none was so fit for this office as Mary his Mother...advocate, who knows how to appease the Lord... p. 141
She moreover procured me the abridgement of my torments in Purgatory the divine justice at her suit.. p. 41
The principal office given to Mary wben she appeared on earth was to raise man from sin and to reconcile him with God Pasce hados tuas Feed your goats said the Lord in creating her We know that sinners arc designated by the goats as the just are by the sheep The goats says William of Paris are confided to you O Mary that you may transform them into sheep thus whilst they deserved to be sent to the left hand they shall through your intercession be placed at the right 146,47 (http://books.google.com/books?id=o1cFAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Glories+of+Mary&hl=en&sa=X&ei=93kEUYrFIsix0QHHqoC4Dg&ved=0CEsQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=Glories%20of%20Mary&f=false)
"our compassionate and benign Mother was satisfied rather to endure any torment than that our souls should not be redeemed, and be left in their former state of perdition." "The Glories of Mary;" 1868; http://www.ewtn.com/library/MARY/7DOLORS.htm
I have faults enough, and that is a gracious reply and all should agree with its spirit.
Amen!
[I posted above that it is Catholic doctrine (from a Pope) that the] Muslims have the same God that Catholics have.(A little more context for clarity)
[Their god is called Allah.]
LUMEN GENTIUM, 16: But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator.They may profess to hold the faith of Abraham, but they do NOT adore the one and merciful God...of the Bible.
In the first place amongst these there are the Mohammedans, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham,
along with us adore the one and merciful God...
Allah has a prophet, Muhammad who was a horrible sinner and murderer.
God the Father from the Bible has a Son, Jesus.
Allah has no son, so he cannot be the same God.
Islam's god converts by the sword (kills "infidels") if a person doesn't convert to their belief system.
The God of the Bible offers salvation by the blood sacrifice of His Son Jesus.
In fact the Islamists hate the fact that our God has a Son, and are working hard to change the Bible
to reflect the attributes of their god, instead of our Christian God.
A simple google search reveals the lengths they are going to to re write the Bible to be Islam friendly.
Google search: new bible translations muslim
Also Jihad Watch
They are trying to merge the God of the Bible with their false god.
The Pope is wrong.
The other one is if it you believe that Mary can be prayed to (as the Popes do) and if you believe
that salvation comes from Mary without the help of Jesus as Popes have stated as truth.
I know of no statement that in context states the latter.
Here are a few, and I have to apologize because I thought I posed the question on this
thread about Salvation through Mary, but it was a different one, nevertheless, I have asked it on this one.
“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.” (Pius IX: Encycl., Ubi primum, February 2, 1849.) — [p. 12, number 12] (No, we obtain everything through Jesus.)The Catholic Church puts ALL her hope in trust in Mary. Not Jesus.
“O Virgin most holy, none abounds in the knowledge of God except through thee; none, O Mother of God, obtains salvation except through thee..." (Leo XIII: Encycl., Adiutricem populi, September 5, 1895.) — [p. 12, no. 13]
“God has committed to the Blessed Virgin Mary the treasury of all good things in order that everyone may know that through her are obtained every hope, every grace and all salvation.” (Pius IX: Encycl., Ubi primum, February 2, 1894) — [p. 18, no. 38]
“O Holy Mother of God; to thee we lift our prayers for thou, powerful and merciful, art the Mediatrix of our salvation.” (Leo XIII: Encycl., Jucunda semper, September 8, 1894.) — [p. 19, no. 43] (No, that is Jesus, not Mary.)
13. “The Catholic Church has always and with justice put all her hope and trust in the Mother of God.” (Leo XIII: Encyclical, Supreme Apostolatus, September 1, 1883.) — [p. 32, no. 104] (Not Jesus, Mary..ALL her [The Catholic Church] hope and trust)
Now I imagine it will be argued, Oh yes, it's through Mary, she points to Jesus.
That is not real clear from Popes IMO.
In fairness they do say this, but the problem is that of attributing to Mary degrees of powers, position and glory which are not shown given to any moral, or even angels, with more titles then are even given to the Lord Himself, and which overall do not have Scriptural warrant.
Believers are not even crowned till He returns, and not one believer prayed to anyone in Heaven but the Lord, let alone having almost unlimited power, and not lacking power to save us due to prayers which are almost like commands, and thru whom all graces flow, and that no one has access to Jesus Christ but through Mary.
Yet Mary is quite marginal in the gospels, which is about the only place she appears, and it is the nature of Divine revelation to manifest extraordinary aspects of its characters, and all the supererogation of praise to Mary, beyond what the Holy Spirit provided, is effectively charging Him with neglect, though that is justified under the concept of Tradition, but which almost makes it a virtual bottomless pit (and no one can tells us where it ends).
Thus Catholics are engaging is what Paul warned about, thinking of souls "above that which is written," (1 Corinthians 4:6) "written" almost always meaning Scripture.
The Holy Spirit records far more from Paul and about Paul, showing his love for the church and for the lost and his great suffering for Christ, than is revealed about Mary, and with Paul being the vessel who brought forth the word of the Lord to the church far more than any other.
But we can imagine the howl from Catholics if we ever claimed such things for Paul as that which they extrapolate for Mary, and vainly attempt to justify.
...the problem is that of attributing to Mary degrees of powers, position and glory which are not shown given to any moral, or even angels, with more titles then are even given to the Lord Himself, and which overall do not have Scriptural warrant.Which tends to get naive people with out a good grounding in scripture to look to Mary instead of Jesus.
... power to save us due to prayers which are almost like commands, and thru whom all graces flow, and that no one has access to Jesus Christ but through Mary.Which of course comes from twisting scriptures to fit the RCC convoluted viewpoint concerning Mary so as to seeming exalt her higher than Jesus.
Again, those not grounded in scripture, but rather more holding to dogmatic "traditions" will ascribe to Mary that which is not scriptural.
... all the supererogation of praise to Mary, beyond what the Holy Spirit provided, is effectively charging Him with neglect, though that is justified under the concept of Tradition, but which almost makes it a virtual bottomless pit (and no one can tells us where it ends).Amen
INDEED!
Now we’re TALKIN’!!
Speaking of what manner of spirit we are of, how much credence is there to the story of Smith beating on someone(s) who reproved him?
And how many Army deaths were they responsible for in the Utah War. The WP pages on Mormonism seems to be mostly by LDS editors.
Which 'Smith'?
I have a factual story about the MRS Smith - the LEGAL one...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_of_Joseph_Smith,_Jr.
DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS
OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTSSECTION 13251–57, Emma Smith is counseled (commanded) to be faithful and true; 58–66, Laws governing the plurality of wives are set forth.51 Verily, I say unto you: A commandment I give unto mine handmaid, Emma Smith, your wife, whom I have given unto you, that she stay herself and partake not of that which I commanded you to offer unto her; for I did it, saith the Lord, to aprove you all, as I did Abraham, and that I might require an offering at your hand, by covenant and sacrifice.52 And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, areceive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and those who are not pure, and have said they were pure, shall be destroyed, saith the Lord God.53 For I am the Lord thy God, and ye shall obey my voice; and I give unto my servant Joseph that he shall be made ruler over many things; for he hath been afaithful over a few things, and from henceforth I will strengthen him.55 But if she will not abide this commandment, then shall my servant Joseph do all things for her, even as he hath said; and I will bless him and multiply him and give unto him an ahundredfold in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children, and crowns of beternal lives in the eternal worlds.
Whatever HAPPENED to Emma???Eliza was a devout Mormon.At age 38, she became Joseph Smith's 14th plural wife (in addition to Smith's lawful wife, Emma).In 1842, after learning Eliza was pregnant, Emma Smith beat Eliza with a broomstick andknocked her down a flight of stairs, causing Eliza to miscarry Smith's baby.Wow!!I guess ol' Emma got VAPORIZED by GOD!!!We know that multiply him thing sure didn't work out!
That is not what i was referring to, but i that is a new one to me. I was referring to her polygamist spouse.
Just like the apostles (sar):
Benjamin F. Johnson recalled how Joseph Smith sometimes lost his temper and resorted to physical violence:
And yet, although so social and even convival [sic] at times, he would allow no arrogance or undue liberties. Criticisms, even by his associates, were rarely acceptable. Contradictions would arouse in him the lion at once. By no one of his fellows would he be superceded. In the early days at Kirtland, and elsewhere, one or another of his associates were more than once, for their impudence, helped from the congregation by his foot.... He soundly thrashed his brother William...
Calvin Stoddard once testified that “Smith then came up and knocked him in the forehead with his flat hand—the blow knocked him down, when Smith repeated the blow four or five times, very hard—made him blind—that Smith afterwards came to him and asked his forgiveness...” (Conflict at Kirtland, p. 132)...
Brigham Young once made this evaluation of Joseph Smith: “Some may think that I am rather too severe; but if you had the Prophet Joseph to deal with, you would think that I am quite mild.... He would not bear the usage I have borne, and would appear as though he would tear down all the houses in the city, and tear up trees by the roots, if men conducted to him in the way they have to me” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 8, pp. 317-18). - http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/changech17.htm
So much for not waging war after the flesh. (2Cor. 10:3)
Mary WAS blessed among women and she is a model for all believers of faith in the midst of adversity, but she did not die as a martyr for Christ. In Hebrews 11 we are given what are called profiles of faith and courage, those who are commended for their faith and who endured unimaginable torment and suffering for righteousness sake. Yet we are not taught in Scripture to pray TO them in hopes that they might have Jesus' "ear" and may be more successful in granting our requests than going directly to Christ would. Having fellow Christians, who are in our lives right now, pray with us, joining with us in prayer, is how God intends for us to intercede with and for each other - it gives us a tangible part in each others' lives and ministry and we see God's hand as he deals with us and He is glorified. That really IS what prayer is for - communicating with God as an individual and knowing that we DO "have His ear" because we are His children by faith. As Jesus said in Matthew 7:11, "If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!"
Mrs. Mary Ettie V. Smith reports in her book Mormonism: Its Rise, Progress, And Present Condition: "It appears the Prophet Joseph had one day broken the leg of my brother Howard, while wrestling ... by an unlucky pass, Howard fell with a broken leg. It was immediately set by the 'Prophet,' ... Howard to this day claims he experienced no pain of any amount, and believes yet that Joseph healed it" (p. 52).
Take THAT, Mary!!!
2 Thessalonians 2:9
The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders,
If it did, I imagine it would point to Stephen as first choice.
He died a horrible death while speaking of Jesus, while Mary died peacefully and was put in a tomb.
Praying to Mary is just a way to get people to look at a domination seeped in the traditions of men which takes their eyes off of Jesus.
It's not about a particular denomination (like the Founders recognized in the Constitution) it's about a personal relationship with Jesus.
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.