Posted on 03/25/2015 10:46:15 PM PDT by Steelfish
I reject it, too. But you imply that I said that (using quotation marks) and I never said it.
And by the way, I find nothing to disagree with in item #9.
So how about these?
10. And yet in truth we must still say with the saints: De Maria numquam satis : We have still not praised, exalted, honoured, loved and served Mary adequately. She is worthy of even more praise, respect, love and service.
11. Moreover, we should repeat after the Holy Spirit, "All the glory of the king's daughter is within", meaning that all the external glory which heaven and earth vie with each other to give her is nothing compared to what she has received interiorly from her Creator, namely, a glory unknown to insignificant creatures like us, who cannot penetrate into the secrets of the king.
12. Finally, we must say in the words of the apostle Paul, "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has the heart of man understood" the beauty, the grandeur, the excellence of Mary, who is indeed a miracle of miracles of grace, nature and glory. "If you wish to understand the Mother," says a saint, "then understand the Son. She is a worthy Mother of God." Hic taceat omnis lingua : Here let every tongue be silent.
“Why the deflection?”
No deflection at all. It’s all about exposing the hypocrisy of anti-Catholics - and it has worked every time.
“I worship the one, true living God — but the Muslims don’t.”
They profess to worship the God of Abraham. So do you. So do Jews.
“’Allah’ is not the one, true living God. And your CCC says Catholics worship the same god as Muslims. So... do YOU?”
Do you worship the God of Abraham? Muslims say they do. So do Jews. Jews DENY the Trinity. So do Muslims. So do Jews really worship the God of Abraham if they DENY the Trinity in general and Christ in particular.
“Uncomfy, isn’t it?”
Not one bit. Honestly, it isn’t uncomfortable for me one bit. Does it bother you, however, that Jews deny the Trinity? Can someone right;y understand God when they deny the Trinity? Do you and the Jews really both worship the same God if they deny two Divine Persons in that Triune Godhead? Uncomfy, isn’t it? Or is it?
“Your Church tells you you worship the same god as Muslims..”
No. It never says “god”. Do you know the difference between God and god? Do Jews (who deny the Trinity) worship God or god? Uncomfy, isn’t it? Or is it? Seeing that anti-Catholic hypocrisy yet? No? Yeah, blindness is a hard thing to fix when it is deliberately chosen.
“and Muslims don’t worship the God of Christianity — Yahweh, or if you prefer, Jehovah, or if you prefer, the Great I AM — so that leaves Catholics in a bit of a pickle, doesn’t it?”
No pickle at all. If Jews deny the Trinity - and the Trinity is the distinguishing characteristic of Christianity - does that create pickle for you? You profess to worship the same God they do yet they deny the Son of God (Jesus Christ) and the Holy Spirit. If you deny Jesus and the Holy Spirit, do you believe in the God of Christians, Hoss? Uncomfy, isn’t it? Or is it? Seeing that anti-Catholic hypocrisy yet?
“And that’s why no one will give me a straight answer to this question.”
You’re completely wrong. It’s exactly the hypocrisy of the anti-Catholic that is making Catholics point out the obvious: Jews deny the Trinity. Muslims deny the Trinity. Yet the anti-Catholics here are saying they worship the same God as Jews but not of Muslims. Yet both Jews and Muslims (and Christians) profess to believe in the God of Abraham. Some anti-Catholics here are even going so far as to say that Muslims are practicing taqiyya when they say they believe in the God of Abraham. The people practicing taqiyya are apparently the anti-Catholics who are either too stupid or too dishonest to understand that Jews must be in the same boat as Muslims according to their understanding of things because both groups deny the Trinity. Neither group has a proper, full, or orthodox understanding of God. Neither one. That doesn’t stop either group from professing they believe in the God of Abraham. Now, an anti-Catholic would have a retort to that. He would say something about how we received the faith from Jews, or Christianity is the fulfillment of Judaism (all true) and Islam is heresy or collection of heresies (right again) and that means that Jewish denial of Jesus and the Trinity is kosher while Muslim denial of it isn’t. Objectively, that doesn’t work.
“For, to answer as one’s heart would tell one (if one is Christian), would be to assent to worshipping the one, true living God;”
I worship the One, True, Living God - Who is a Trinity of Divine Persons - a Trinity denied by Jews and Muslims (and Jehovah’s Witnesses, Oneness Pentecostals, and Mormons too really)
“but that would mean forsaking Mother Church and accepting that Catholicism teaches gross error.”
Nope. The fact that Muslims are in error in their understanding of the God of Abraham (just as Jews are) does not impact the correct understanding one bit - and that’s what I hold. The Trinity is God. There is absolutely NOTHING flawed in that understanding of God. Only the Catholic view makes sense. Otherwise, Jews do not worship the God of Abraham.
“But, to answer with one’s Catholic heart is to forsake the truth of the Gospel,”
No, it is t affirm it. The Trinity is God. Jews and Muslims reject that fact. They both affirm to believe in the God of Abraham.
“reject God Almighty,”
No, it is t affirm it. The fact that Jews and Muslims reject the Trinity changes nothing about Christianity. The Trinity is God. Jews and Muslims reject that fact. They both affirm to believe in the God of Abraham.
“and accept the flawed teaching that makes the God of the Bible, and “Allah” — a false god — equivalent.”
To affirm there is only one God is exactly what every Christian does. There is no flawed teaching there. You might want to contact the Protestants of Malaysia and teach them your version of Christianity: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304391204579179020301035570
Jello...hammer...nail...wall.
Well, if you send someone off on a wild goose chase, trying to support a claim you made, it takes all the burden off you and you can get bragging rights about how no one had an answer for your intellectual prowess.
It’s really the answer for someone who has none.
13. My heart has dictated with special joy all that I have written to show that Mary has been unknown up till now, and that that is one of the reasons why Jesus Christ is not known as he should be.
If then, as is certain, the knowledge and the kingdom of Jesus Christ must come into the world, it can only be as a necessary consequence of the knowledge and reign of Mary. She who first gave him to the world will establish his kingdom in the world.
“Seeing as you cannot know what is in the heart of ANYONE but your own, denying Catholics pray TO statues of Mary and various saints isn’t really proving anything but your own erroneous way of asserting something as “fact”.”
Seeing as you cannot know what is in the heart of ANYONE but your own, denying that Protestants pray TO their own ministers and various televangelists isn’t really proving anything but your own erroneous way of asserting something as “fact”. See how that doesn’t work?
“That others SEE these acts and also cannot know the difference has been the point I sure wish you could grasp.”
I do. I also realize that the MISTAKEN CONCLUSION the Protestants COME TO is due to their ignorance and religious provincialism and I am more than happy to disabuse them of it. If only Protestants weren’t so ignorant about how orthodox Christians practice the faith many misunderstandings on the part of those Protestants would cease to occur. That Protestant ignorance is so widespread and so deeply ingrained in Protestant anti-culture, and it is so widely propped up by outrageous lies - which Protestant anti-Catholics MUST RESORT TO - makes it no easy task to correct those misunderstandings.
“Attaching every response with the polemical label, “anti-Catholic”, only hurts your own Freeper reputation and again demonstrates your inability to know what is in the hearts and minds of those who disagree with you here.”
1) I don’t care about my reputation here or anywhere else. If I am posting what is true - and I do - what does it matter what men think of me? This life is short and this place is not my home. Heaven is and that will last forever.
2) My Freeper reputation is, in fact, just fine with those who love the truth.
3) What is it you think I am missing on seeing in the minds and hearts of anti-Catholics? They post lies. The call the truth lies. One even threatened to kill me - and he was serious - and someone else called the appropriate authorities for my protection. What is it in the hearts and minds of anti-Catholics that I am missing when they post lies, misrepresentations, half-truths, distortions, and death threats? You tell me. What of any consequence am I missing? Will you have no answer? Your silence will speak volumes if you have no response. And if you try to erase the truth of all that, that will say even more. Knowing more or knowing less would not change the truth of anything nor would it change what I do or how I do it. I call truth truth and lies lies. Where is the flaw in that? There is none.
John 3:14-18 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
Romans 10:9-13 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
Who cares about opinion pieces of men written about Scripture?
It doesn’t derive its authority from being given the stamp of approval by men.
Your appeal to men means nothing.
No kidding.....
“Tell that to the ones who join you in Mass.”
Don’t have to - exactly none of them are Collyridians. Quite a few left behind the heresies of Protestantism, however, and one of our priests is a former atheist from a Protestant family.
“To those who profess they are Catholics and who write such things as”
Nothing from St. Louis de Montfort is Collyridian. You should have posted this from him - since it actually shows why he wrote what he wrote:
“Jesus Christ is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end, of all things. We labour not, as the Apostles, says, except to render every man perfect in Jesus Christ. If then we establish the solid devotion of Our Lady, it is only to establish more perfectly the devotion to Jesus Christ, and to put forward an easy and secure means for finding Jesus Christ.” (from the introduction of True Devotion to Mary).
Did you even notice that Montfort was quoting Colossians 1:28 there?
Have you taken any polls lately?
This is Holy Week, is there any chance you could maybe tone it down a bit at least until after Sunday?
“Have you taken any polls lately?”
No. The private messages sent to me are enough to know.
“This is Holy Week, is there any chance you could maybe tone it down a bit at least until after Sunday?”
Nothing to tone down. The truth is always the truth. It should always be told.
Let's take these one by one:
"10. And yet in truth we must still say with the saints: De Maria numquam satis : We have still not praised, exalted, honoured, loved and served Mary adequately. She is worthy of even more praise, respect, love and service."
As Paul says, "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has the heart of man understood what God has prepared for those who love Him." Mary, now participating in the heavenly reality described by Paul, is clothed in a glory and a worthiness --- the work of her Savior, the gift of God --- that is literally unimagined and indescribable in terms of our earthly experience. In that sense, anything we've said so far could not possibly be enough. That's true by definition.
"11. Moreover, we should repeat after the Holy Spirit, "All the glory of the king's daughter is within", meaning that all the external glory which heaven and earth vie with each other to give her is nothing compared to what she has received interiorly from her Creator, namely, a glory unknown to insignificant creatures like us, who cannot penetrate into the secrets of the king."
Join me in investigating the Biblical text on this. Here it is, Psalm 45:13, in a couple of different translations:
King James BibleWhat makes this so fascinating? It's because it's in a Messianic psalm, and the next verse is as follows (v.14):
"The king's daughter is all glorious within: her clothing is of wrought gold."Aramaic Bible in Plain English
"And all the glory of the King's daughter is from within; she has woven her clothing in fine gold."
"She will be led to the King in embroidered work; The virgins, her companions who follow her, will be brought to You."
So the Psalm has you envision the beloved Lady's companions who follow her, being brought to her Lord.
Of course she is glorious within: her soul magnifies the Lord. And of course this surpasses anything on earth: think of what St. Paul said.
In a Messianic psalm, you have shadows, types and images, foretellings of a much greater reality. Paul said (2 Tim. 3:16), "All Scripture is God-inspired and profitable for doctrine," and as St. Augustine said, "The New Testament is concealed in the Old; the Old Testament is revealed in the New."
So it's worth the effort to ask the question "What is being concealed in dozens of OT queen, mother, and female-hero images, which is revealed in the New?" -- and to press forward to get an insight, an answer.
This is a worthwhile rough draft of an 11-minute Video on the OT teachings pointing to Mary. Anyone interested in Scripture would devote a few minutes' time to this!
12. Finally, we must say in the words of the apostle Paul, "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has the heart of man understood" the beauty, the grandeur, the excellence of Mary, who is indeed a miracle of miracles of grace, nature and glory. "If you wish to understand the Mother," says a saint, "then understand the Son. She is a worthy Mother of God." Hic taceat omnis lingua : Here let every tongue be silent.
Think again about what Paul said God has prepared for those who love Him --- US, that is, and Mary in a preeminent way because she was the first disciple, who heard the Word of God and kept it. (And the Word was made flesh!)
And what Peter said (2 Peter 1:4):
"Through these [His glory and excellence] he has given us his precious and wonderful promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature." (American KJV)
"...so that you may partake in the divine nature.." (New International Version)
"...in order that through them you may, one and all, become sharers in the very nature of God..."(Waymouth New Testament.)
"Participate in," "partake," "become sharers in" the divine nature: what do you suppose that means?
It's well enough to say that it surpasses human understanding, but -- below --- I'll quote one of those places in the OT where the NT is concealed and revealed.
We are all commanded to honor our father and our mother. Jesus, of course, would have fulfilled this commandment to an unimaginably magnificent degree: to a perfect degree. But can we find any example in the OT about how a great King "honors" his mother?
1 Kings 2:19-20
So Bathsheba went to King Solomon to speak to him for Adonijah. And the king arose to meet her, bowed before her, and sat on his throne; then he had a throne set for the king’s mother, and she sat on his right. Then she said, “I am making one small request of you; do not refuse me.” And the king said to her, “Ask, my mother, for I will not refuse you.”
Now in this instance with Bathsheba and Adonijah it turns out badly, but I refer to it only to point out the norms for how a king is expected to honor his royal mother:
If that's how a great King of the Line of David thinks it right to honor his mother, how would Jesus do less for His mother, since He is the greatest of Kings? The generosity of the Lord's gift of high esteem towards His mother is only a measure of His own magnificence. A small man gives small esteem; a middling man gives middling esteem; a magnificent King would give magnificent esteem. It pertains to his honor to do so.
It's inconceivable that Jesus would give less homage to His mother, the incomparable Kecharitomene, than Solomon gave to his mother Bathsheba. The fulfillment of OT archetypes in the New and Eternal Covenant is always greater, not less.
If it is "never a source of doctrine", then explain why it was given and still retains the official "Imprimatur" and "nihil obstat" of the Roman Catholic church? These terms imply:
The grant of imprimatur is normally preceded by a favourable declaration (known as a nihil obstat)[3] by a person who has the knowledge, orthodoxy and prudence necessary for passing a judgement about the absence from the publication of anything that would "harm correct faith or good morals"[4] In canon law such a person is known as a censor[4] or sometimes as a censor librorum (Latin for "censor of books"). In this context, the word "censor" does not have the negative sense of prohibiting, but instead refers to the person's function of evaluating—whether positively or negatively—the doctrinal content of the publication.[5] The episcopal conference may draw up a list of persons who can suitably act as censors or can set up a commission that can be consulted, but each ordinary may make his own choice of person to act as censor.[4]
An imprimatur is not an endorsement by the bishop of the contents of a book, not even of the religious opinions expressed in it, being merely a declaration about what is not in the book.[6] In the published work, the imprimatur is sometimes accompanied by a declaration of the following tenor:
If further examination shows that a work is not free of doctrinal or moral error, the imprimatur granted for its publication can be withdrawn. This happened three times in the 1980s, when the Holy See judged that complaints made to it about religion textbooks for schools were well founded and ordered the bishop to revoke his approval. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imprimatur)
Contrary to what a lot of people suppose, there's a lot of liberty of opinion in the Catholic Church about things that aren't defined doctrines. Does every person have an individual Guardian Angel? Maybe, maybe not. What is the eternal destiny of babies who die without Baptism? We don't know --- except that at their funeral services we commend them to the mercy of God. Did Original Sin screw things up for the whole Universe, or just for our planet? I don't think we know even that one. Do we have a line-by-line interpretation of the Revelation of St. John? Not at all: there's a range of opinion, and I would say practically none of it is "defined."
The deal with the Marian devotionals --- if you've been following this thread --- is that a lot of writing in the poetic genre uses figures which are hard to construe, or which might be interpreted in an orthodox or a heretical way.
(Speaking of poetry, would you want to conclude that Elizabeth Barret Browning and Anne Bradstreet were polytheists? Do you understand what I'm saying here?)
I elaborated on that point in this comment (#613, worth looking at) when I noted that certain proposed Marian titles might have both an acceptable and an unacceptable meaning, depending on how they were interpreted.
That's why many devotional and mystical books have Imprimaturs ---- because the Church doesn't jump to the conclusion that something that is loose or extravagant or onscure is formally heretical.
Oops -— #659 was for you, too.
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.