Posted on 08/15/2013 7:03:11 PM PDT by annalex
Once a woman in the crowd surrounding Christ and His disciples cries out to Him:
Blessed is the womb that bore thee, and the paps that gave thee suck. (Luke 11:27)
What is it? We have, clearly, an act of venerating Mary. Note that the Blessed Virgin is venerated properly: not on her own but as the mother of Christ. Yet the reason for venerating is indeed concerning: it is her physiological and physiologically unique relationship with Jesus that is emphasized. That is not yet paganism with its crude theories of gods giving birth to other gods, but it is lacking proper focus and Jesus corrects it:
Yea rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God, and keep it. (Luke 11:28)
|
| The Virgin with the Child on her knees and a prophet pointing at the star. Catacomb of Priscilla, late 2nd c. Source |
Having gotten past this linguistic hurdle, we can understand clearly what this passage, Luke 11:27-28, does: it establishes veneration of saints based not on their blood relation to Christ but on their obedience to God. It is in that sense that we venerate Our Lady: given that Christ is the Word of God personified, she heard and kept both Him in person as her Child and His teaching, figuratively. In Mary the essence of sainthood is seen in the flesh as well as in the mind. We could say that by the late second century at the latest, when we find evidence of the veneration of both the prophets and the Mother of God in the catacombs, the two reasons to venerate a saint: his martyrdom as in the case of Polycarp, or his obedience to the Word, as in Mary, -- unite into a single practice.
I’m flabbergasted at the doublespeak we get from Catholics. There are times when a post from them has so many errors in it you just don’t know where to start.
Smvoice, you are correct. All Catholic sacraments work as intended if they are combined with a living Catholic faith. Besides, the sacrament in question, — ability to defend the Faith is Confirmation, not baptism.
Correct, the eye-needle is a metaphor and “eat my flesh” is not. It is rather obvious why: there is no words of Christ to the effect “amen, amen I say to you unless to go through an eye needle you cannot enter life everlasting”; there is no sacrament of going through needles that Christ would institute, and the turn of the phrase is clearly offering a comparison of salvation of a rich man to a fat animal squeezing through something narrow. There is a similar one about “entering by narrow gate”.
Generally, when trying to understand scripture we look for signs in the text to see if the speech is allegorical or direct. In John 6 and in the scenes of the Last supper, the speech is direct and matter-of-fact: “this is my body”; “this is food indeed”.
Of course not. This is what the saints do; this is why we venerate them.
In the post you are responding to; also Luke 12:33, Luke 16:19-31.
Nothing in this beautiful prayer to Mary takes away from the epithets of God even when similar or identical epithets are used, or replaces Christ.
St. Paul raised people from the dead; why can’t we praise St. Anthony for restoring eyesight?
Why, Job is a saint of the Catholic Church, so he was saved. That is the riches his patience obtained for him. Also, the post you are responding to is referring to “the gospel” and not to the Old Testament.
Saints are not dead (Christianity 101).
Then what are the saints in Rev. 5 and 8 doing offering prayers? Read the Bible every once in a while, especially the passages already pointed out to you.
When someone other than the author reads something and then offers opinions about it, he “interprets” what he read. When the Church, who canonized the Old Testament and wrote, collectively, the New Testament speaks of the Holy Scripture, the Church explains which is her own product, with authority.
That cannot be because the story concludes "a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven". Read the gospel every once in a while, then post opinions about it.
I will liken that story, that lesson, to the idolater's in the Roman Catholic organization
That would be your opinion. The text however speaks for itself: "everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life", so therefore it is good to join, for example, a monastery if one wants to gain eternal life.
Romans 3: 19
...speaks of the futility of "works of the law" and says nothing about joining or not joining monasteries, donating wealth or anything like that.
Now we know, that what things soever the law speaketh, it speaketh to them that are in the law, etc.
And your point is? Romans 3:19-25 is Catholic teaching: works of any law have nothing to do with salvation; we are justified by grace of Christ alone.
He was mocking me, the irony is in context and noted. I, however, always attach verse number and a translation, but it is all in good fun anyway.
Saints are not dead (Christianity 101). -anniealways trying
Saints are not dead (CatholicError 101). Maybe you ought to find that new source called SCRIPTURE as a cure for ignorance! Apparently, it isn't used so much in Catholicism except to compound the error-laden confusion by men.
They're dead, Annie!
1 Thessalonians 4: 13 Brothers and sisters, we do not want you to be uninformed about those who sleep in death, so that you do not grieve like the rest of mankind, who have no hope. 14 For we believe that Jesus died and rose again, and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. 15 According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.
I know; that is Old Testament. Moreover, mystically he was blessed with Life Eternal, for that is wealth that matters. I made that point quite a few times already.
I posted to you the entire text and added Greek original for "saints". Check 2062, in the chain of posts you are responding to.
It is rude, you know, to get a detailed response form me, ignore it and continue droning on without paying attention to the stuff I write. If you prefer, I may be ignoring your posts as well.
You can deny it all you want. The fact remains that Catholics have given what belongs to Christ alone to others and will suffer greatly for it.
I don't exactly disagree with your post here, Boatbums, but the text of the gospel clearly speaks of donating wealth to the poor and compares rich people to camels squeezing through eye of a needle. Obviously, if someone makes money and then donates all of it, then he is fine per the Gospel so it is not wealth itself that weighs the rich people down but their love of it.
Why, people who preferred to be poor and saved.
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.