Posted on 01/02/2017 4:25:11 AM PST by BlessedBeGod
...If the Church were to change its rules on shared Eucharistic Communion it would “go against Revelation and the Magisterium”, leading Christians to “commit blasphemy and sacrilege,” an Italian theologian has warned.
Drawing on the Church’s teaching based on Sacred Scripture and Tradition, Msgr. Nicola Bux, a former consulter to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, stressed that non-Catholic Christians must have undertaken baptism and confirmation in the Catholic Church, and repented of grave sin through sacramental confession, in order to be able to receive Jesus in the Eucharist.
Msgr. Bux was responding to the Register about concerns that elements of the current pontificate might be sympathetic of a form of “open Communion” proposed by the German Protestant theologian, Jürgen Moltmann.
The concerns have arisen primarily due to the Holy Father’s own comments on Holy Communion and Lutherans, his apparent support for some remarried divorcees to receive Holy Communion, and how others have used his frequently repeated maxim about the Eucharist: that it is “not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak.”
The debate specifically over intercommunion with Christian denominations follows recent remarks by Cardinal Walter Kasper who, in a Dec. 10 interview with Avvenire, said he hopes Pope Francis’ next declaration will open the way for intercommunion with other denominations “in special cases.”
The German theologian said shared Eucharistic communion is just a matter of time, and that the Pope’s recent participation in the Reformation commemoration in Lund has given “a new thrust” to the “ecumenical process.”
Pope Francis has often expressed his admiration for Cardinal Kasper’s theology whose thinking has significantly influenced…the priorities of this pontificate, particularly on the Eucharist.
For Moltmann, Holy Communion is “the Lord's supper, not something organized by a church or a denomination”...
(Excerpt) Read more at ncregister.com ...
As our court jester you still don’t get it! We do not condemn Aquainas, we reject the stupid notion of Mary the Mother of Jesus being the mother of god and due some worship! You know that because it is what you keep trying to twist into something you can condemn us for not worshipping Mary like you do, but you keep falling on your face with your foolishness.
Selah!
NEVER before this morning have I EVER heard these words before.
Ad Deum quilatificat I remember when I studied to be an alter boy and ring-a-ling the bells.
Latria?
Sounds like military ... never mind.
You are correct MM. someone who is not saved, can not possibly understand spiritual truths. Sooner could a fish live in a tree, than an unsaved man understand spiritual truth.
I admit that I don't have a clue who Thomas Aquinas is or was, and don't have a clue what he said. All I can say, is that if he deviated from the "Book," then I wouldn't listen to him either.
If Aquinas was here today than he would be refuted, and indeed his sophistry here is. Which is not the first time an intelligent man misused his ability.
who said, “Since, therefore, the Blessed Virgin is a mere rational creature, the worship of latria is not due to her, but only that of dulia: but in a higher degree than to other creatures, inasmuch as she is the Mother of God. For this reason we say that not any kind of dulia is due to her, but hyperdulia.”
Which in reality is mere word games, since latreia is not the only word that is used for worship, and is actually rarely (5 times) used, and the noun is never even of worship of Christ, while other words are also used for worship, and which manner of Marian worship too often corresponds to, as described.
We stand here on FR and together condemn Saint Thomas Aquinas who we deem nought but a idol worshipping pagan.
No, the conclusion is not that he is "nothing but a idol worshipping pagan," which is another of your unbroken string of fallacious arguments to me, but that in this case he is does defend idolatry, by supporting the usual word games that attempt to exclude what Scripture calls and describes as worship by calling it another name.
We, daniel1212, knarf, metmom, MHGinTN, redleghunter, Mark17, Elsie, and Springfield Reformer know better than Saint Thomas Aquinas”
At the least in this case, based upon the wholly inspired assured word of God, while your argument by scholastic weight condemns you, a fringe double standard peon who essentially claims to know what valid Catholic teaching is and means better than learned popes and prelates.
Ouch! That one is gonna hurt! ... and rightly so, though it still will not bore through the dead wood to the heart.
Your logic is wrong, and unbiblical.
Peter and those he influenced pseudo-selected Matthias and wrongly numbered him with The Eleven. Never heard from again in the scriptures.
Jesus, Lord and Christ selected Saul of Tarsus to be the twelfth apostle, and the scriptures flowing from his Spirit-controlled teaching provide the mass of New Testament guidance of the churchES.
Jesus did the selecting, Paul did the receiving, and the local prototype Jerusalem panel of elders, guided by the Holy Spirit, discerned that this was true, and awarded the ministry to the Gentiles into Paul's primary care, whilst reserving the ministry to the Jewish Christians to be supervised by Simon Peter. The Jerusalem church was governed by a plurality of elders, which is the model for any legitimate local independent autonomous assembly of Christian disciples throughout the ages.
The RCC is not one of them. Their supposedly unifying "transubstantiated" theory of the Remembrance Supper is spurious, not to be accepted by Bible-trained believers.
“We do not condemn Aquainas (sic)...”
Ah, but Saint Thomas Aquinas said,
“Since, therefore, the Blessed Virgin is a mere rational creature, the worship of latria is not due to her, but only that of dulia...”
Then you ARE with R&B in agreement with Aquinas’ assessment above?
May I have a word with you . . . or maybe a few:
WORSHIP
Definitions from Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged (1981)
[In the contexts below, a bracket of left (<) and right (>) carets set off a phrase illustrating an instance
of the word's particular usage.]
************
wor ship n [ME worschipe, worshipe, fr OE weorthscipe, fr weorth worthy + -scipe -ship -- more at WORTH]
1 a archaic : HONOR, REPUTE, CREDIT b archaic : DIGNITY, IMPORTANCE, RANK c sometimes esp chiefly British : a person of standing or importance -- used as a title or mode of address, esp for holders of high offices < his Worship the Sheriff >
2 : the reverence or veneration tendered a divine being or supernatural power; also : an
act, process, or instance of expressing such veneration by performing or takig part in religious exercises or ritual < all worship is an effort of the individual to realize . . . the real presence of the Divine --N. W. Comfort >
3 : a form or type of worship or religious practice with its creed and ritual < foreigners had been crowding to Rome, bringing with them their foreign cults, and she had prmitted these worships --John Buchan >
4 : respect, admiration, or devotionfoe an object of esteem < the worship of the machine --C. I. Glicksberg >
**********
wor ship vb worshiped or worshipped; worshiped or worshipped; worshiping or worshipping; worships [ME worschipen, worshipen, fr worschipe worship] vt
1 : to honor or reverence as a divine being or supernatural power : VENERATE < the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are uncreated and are to be worshipped together as one God --K. S. Latourette > < the emperor . . . worshipped as a god, is to serve as an instrument --Vera M. Dean >
2 : to regard with respect, honor, or devotion : ADORE < in the Renaissance, men worshiped antiquity --Stephen Spender >
************
Hebrew:
Strong's Number H7812
שׁחה shâchâh shaw-khaw'
Strong's Definition:
A primitive root; to depress, that is, prostrate (especially reflexively in homage
to royalty or God): - bow (self) down, crouch, fall down (flat), humbly beseech, do (make) obeisance,
do reverence, make to stoop, worship.
Brown, Driver, Briggs Definition:
1) to bow down
. . 1a) (Qal) to bow down
. . 1b) (Hiphil) to depress (figuratively)
. . 1c) (Hithpael)
. . . . 1c1) to bow down, prostrate oneself
. . . . . . 1c1a) before superior in homage
. . . . . . 1c1b) before God in worship
. . . . . . 1c1c) before false gods
. . . . . . 1c1d) before angel
Part of Speech: verb
=========
Aramaic (only eight instances, all in Daniel 3):
Strong's Number H5457
סגד
segid
seg-eed'
Strong's Definition:
(Chaldee); corresponding to H5456: - worship.
Brown, Driver, Briggs Definition:
1) to prostrate oneself, do homage, worship
. . 1a) (Peal) to do homage
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root
=========
Greek:
Strong's Number G4352
προσκυνέω
proskuneō
pros-koo-neh'-o
Strong's Definition:
From G4314 and probably a derivative of G2965 (meaning to kiss, like a dog
licking his master’s hand); to fawn or crouch to, that is, (literally or figuratively) prostrate
oneself in homage (do reverence to, adore): - worship. Thayer Definition:
1) to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence
2) among the Orientals, especially the Persians, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence
3) in the NT by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication
. . 3a) used of homage shown to men and beings of superior rank
. . . . 3a1) to the Jewish high priests
. . . . 3a2) to God
. . . . 3a3) to Christ
. . . . 3a4) to heavenly beings
. . . . 3a5) to demons
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from G4314 and a probable derivative of G2965 (meaning to kiss, like a dog licking his master’s hand)
-----------
Strong's Number G4576
σέβομαι
sebomai
seb'-om-ahee
Strong's Definition:
Middle voice of an apparently primary verb; to revere, that is, adore: - devout, religious, worship. Thayer Definition:
1) to revere, to worship
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: middle voice of an apparently primary verb
Used one occasion, recorded in two gospels:
"This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips;
but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the
commandments of men" (Mt. 15:8-9; cf Mk. 7:7 AV).
------------
Strong's Number G1391
δόξα
doxa
dox'-ah
Strong's Definition:
From the base of G1380; glory (as very apparent), in a wide application (literally or figuratively,
objectively or subjectively): - dignity, glory (-ious), honour, praise, worship.
Thayer Definition:
1) opinion, judgment, view
2) opinion, estimate, whether good or bad concerning someone
. . 2a) in the NT always a good opinion concerning one, resulting in praise, honour, and glory
3) splendour, brightness
. . 3a) of the moon, sun, stars
. . 3b) magnificence, excellence, preeminence, dignity, grace
. . 3c) majesty
. . . . 3c1) a thing belonging to God
. . . . 3c1) the kingly majesty which belongs to him as supreme ruler, majesty in the sense of the
absolute perfection of the deity
. . . . 3c2) a thing belonging to Christ
. . . . . . 3c2a) the kingly majesty of the Messiah
. . . . . . 3c2b) the absolutely perfect inward or personal excellency of Christ; the majesty
. . . . 3c3) of the angels
. . . . . . 3c3a) as apparent in their exterior brightness
4) a most glorious condition, most exalted state
. . 4a) of that condition with God the Father in heaven to which Christ was raised after he had achieved his work on earth
. . 4b) the glorious condition of blessedness into which is appointed and promised that true Christians shall
enter after their Saviour’s return from heaven
Part of Speech: noun feminine
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from the base of G1380
Used only once, referring to table manners, not veneration, adoratiom, or bowing in homage.
----------------
Strong's Number G3000
λατρεύω
latreuō
lat-ryoo'-o
Strong's Definition:
From λάτρις latris (a hired menial); to minister (to God), that is, render religious homage: - serve, do the service, worship (-per).
Thayer Definition:
1) to serve for hire
2) to serve, minister to, either to the gods or men and used alike of slaves and freemen
. . 2a) in the NT, to render religious service or homage, to worship
. . 2b) to perform sacred services, to offer gifts, to worship God in the observance of the rites instituted for his worship
. . . . 2b1) of priests, to officiate, to discharge the sacred office
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from latris (a hired menial)
Used only twice:
"But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:" (Acts 24:14 AV).
"For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh" (Php. 3:3 AV).
*************
VENERATE
What "venerate" means, in the English dictionary, and in the Bible(s) is as follows:
Definitions from Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged (1981)
[In the contexts below, a bracket of left (<) and right (>) carets set off a phrase illustrating an instance
of the word's particular usage.]
************
ven er able adj [ME, fr L. venerabilis, fr L venerari to venerate + abilis -able]
1 : deserving to be venerated : worthy of honor and respect usu. by reason of
prolonged testing (as o character or in office) < a venerable judge > -- deacon of a church
of the Anglican Communion or a person recognized by Roman Catholics as having attained the
lowest of three degrees of sanctity
2 : made sacred by religious, historic, or other associations : meriting to be regarded with
awe and treated with reverence < the venerable walls of a church > < venerable relics of our
forefathers > < the venerable silence of the library --Ernst Krenck >
3 a : calling forth respect through age, character, and attainments < venerable sages > < a venerable leader >; broadly : conveying an impression of aged goodness and
benevolence < his ruddy features and snow-white hair gave him a venerable appearance >
b : impressive by reason of age < that venerable coat had sheltered
three generations >
4 : obs : showing or giving deep respect : REVERENTIAL
syn see OLD
*************
ven er ate vt [L. veneratus past participle of venrerari : to regard wih reverential respect or with admiration and deference as being hallowed
or as having nobility esp if accompanied with age : REVERE < we venerate noble parents >
< do not know of a man more to be venerated for uprighteousness of heart and loftiness of
spirit -- Sir Walter Scott >
syn see REVERE
**************
ven er a tion n [ME veneracion fr L veneration-, veneratio, fr veneratus (past participle of venerari) + -ion- -io -ion]
1 : a feeling of respect mingled with awe excited by the dignity, wisdom, or superiority of a
person, by sacredness of character, by consecrated state,, or by hallowed association < the
tremendous veneration in which art and artists have been held --Huntington Hartford >
< regarded their teachers and institutions with the deepest veneration >
2 a : the act of venerating esp by the expressing of deeply reverent feeling -- compare ADORATION
b : the act of admiring humbly and respectfully
3 : the condition of one that is venerated < hoping to obtain veneration from his subjects >
4 : the phrenologic faculty of reverence - venerational (adj)
************
ven er a tor n [L fr veneratus (past participle) + -or]
: one that venerates < a venerator of tradition >
*********note********
Exodus 39:29 (39:30 in the AV and LXX)
DRB : the plate of sacred veneration of the purest gold
AV : the plate of the holy crown of pure gold
Vulgate : lamminam sacrae venerationis de auro purissimo
Darby : the thin plate, the holy diadem, of pure gold
The LXX calls it an aphorism (no Strong's number/word),
αφορισμα
Looking this up in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, one can only conclude that this noun comes from the verb αφοραω which has the meaning to turn the eyes away from other things and fix them on something; cf. αποβλεπω (to look away from); figuratively, to turn one's mind to
*******
in English:
1 : a concise statement of a principle
2 : a terse formulation of a truth or sentiment : adage
Hebrew:
Strong's Number H6731
צץ ציץ
tsı̂yts tsits
tseets, tseets
From H6692; properly glistening, that is, a burnished plate; also a flower
(as bright colored); a wing (as gleaming in the air): - blossom, flower, plate, wing.
Brown, Driver, Briggs Definition:
1) flower, bloom
. . 1a) flower, bloom
. . 1b) shining thing (of gold plate on high priest’s mitre) (metaphorically)
2) feather, wing
. . 2a) meaning dubious
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from H6692
========
The only place the word veneration appears in the above Bibles is in the DRB, from the Vulgate, and it does not refer to speak of an attitude of regard toward a human or to a thing of this world. In no case does it ever, in English or in Scriptural matters, refer to burning a candle or incense, or of bowing, kneeling, or prostrating oneself in homage regarding any human being or natural or manufactured object or image.
The designation "veneration" by Romanism to conduct such exercises toward idolatrous images is a term misusing an action carried to the extreme so as to avoid using the only proper term describing such action, which would be to worship, IMHO.
According to the dictionary, Mary is of the lowest of three degrees of sancity, whatever that means in Roman terms.
*************
The only words in either the Old Testament or the New, which could be used for the act of lighting candles, or burning incense, and/or bowing/kneeling/prostrating in homage to Mary is defined in the English language solely as to worship, is it not?
Trying to excuse this attitude toward Mary (or worse yet, toward images purporting to be of her) by using the word "venerate" or "veneration" is only trying to walk away, in the face of direct challenges, that what is really going on is worship that is not authorized anywhere in the Old or New Testaments, and is in fact forbidden, in my estimation.
Uniformly, the 101 instances for the use of the word "worship" in the KJV is matched up with its equivalent replacement in the Douay-Rheims Bible--to adore--coming from Jerome's translation of the Vulgate based on variations of the verb adorare in Latin. There is no intermediate term in which the level of elevated regard (for Mary, for instance) stops at "venerate" without going on to total abnegation of the supplicant to the object of his/her esteem. The Bible being worshiped? Surely, for the Savior Himself is The Word Personified. So, . . .
**********
And, knarf, you are right. This always seems to be a perennial session of tag-match debate-wrestling or relay race, wherein the Romanists pass the baton on when one of the team gets worn out or has something "better" to do; with the non-RCC pool of contributors hoping that sometime at least one of these blinded recalcitrant Romanists will finally perceive the hopeless path they are all following, and simply give up the revulsion of the acceptance of salvation by faith alone in the Peron and Work of Christ Jesus alone, and be guided from thence by the same Authoritative Scripture alone which brought them the Good Irreplaceable News.
Ride on, FRiend, ride on . . .
Worth Repeating!
"Little Children, Keep yourself from idols." - Apostle John
Is Jesus alive ?
Did HE save you ?
Why bother with any one else ?
Thank You Jesus, for every saved soul here in FR and forgive the naysayers to Your Grace alone ... Amen
Thank You Lord for saving me.
That last jot was a period ... the end .... done deal.
And Catholics can argue semantics til the cows come home and they can do it like no others.
But the long and short of it is God commands us to NOT bow down before graven images and there are countless images on the internet of Catholics, including priests and popes, doing exactly that in violation of the second commandment.
They can claim it’s not worship and while that is up for debate because nobody knows what’s in another’s heart, the actions are verifiable and undeniable.
They can deny it’s worship all they want but if it looks like worship, and sounds like worship, they’re going to have a hard time convincing others it’s not.
But then that allows them to play the poor, innocent, misunderstood, persecuted victim because we don’t *believe* them.
Hey, actions speak louder than words. talk is cheap and I judge based on what I see, now what words come out of a person’s mouth.
Second, as you know, once a group dethrones the Living and Active, Spirit-inspired Scripture and replaces it with anything else, they can rationalize anything to justify paganism.
“...And you stand here on FR and condemn the pope and college of cardinals who you deem naught but a heretic...”
And here is how I legally can as today’s college commit heresy in the reconstruction of a masonic protestantized and thus invalid version of the Mass and other aberrations during “The Vatican II Council”:
In his Tractatus de Ecclesia Christi (“Treatise on the Church of Christ”), Cardinal Billot addresses the question of occult (secret) vs. public heresy and teaches, in agreement with other theologians, that occult heretics are still members of the Church, whereas public heretics are not. Juxtaposing the consequences of occult heresy with those of public heresy, Billot invokes the case of Nestorius to support his thesis that public heretics cease to be members of the Church from the very moment their heresy becomes manifest, quite automatically and without the need for any judgment or declaration:
At length we come to another argument. To be sure, whoever dwells outside the Church is ipso facto rendered unfit for all ordinary jurisdiction, say, episcopal jurisdiction [1]. The reason is that a person who has ordinary jurisdiction or truly episcopal jurisdiction possesses the dignity of being the head, and no one can be the head of even a particular church if he is not a member of the Church. Indeed, what was ever a head that was not a member? Hence, if occult heresy were to put a man outside the Church, whenever a doubt about the legitimacy and authority of pastors could arise, there would not be moral certitude about their internal faith. But God forbid that the establishment of Christ should endure such a monstrous anomaly whereby the sinews of discipline would be loosened. We do not solely employ more probable arguments in this matter, because distinctly and expressly we are informed that a bishop by reason of heresy does not lose his own power of binding and loosing, except when he preaches heresy and openly professes it. In this regard, among other documents, there is extant the letter of Pope Celestine to the clergy and people of Constantinople in the case of Nestorius, where the Pontiff first urges Catholics to fight bravely for the faith, bear hardships patiently, and not fear exile. “No Christian,” he says, “should bewail a temporal exile imposed upon him, because no one is an exile to God. Let us fear exile from the realm of the living, that is, the realm that we wish to be our homeland. That is our perpetual and eternal abode. Indeed ours is no ephemeral place, but those things are truly ours, which a most certain hope promises.” Then declaring invalid the opinion whereby Nestorius had removed some people from either their office or the communion of the faithful, he continues: “Nevertheless, lest the opinion of one who had already called down upon himself a divine judicial sentence seem valid even at the time, the authority of our See has decreed that, from the moment that Nestorius and those like him begin to proclaim such [heresy], We do not regard as exiled or excommunicated any of the bishops or clerics or Christians by any profession who were dispossessed of office or cast out of communion by him and his followers. Rather all were and still remain in communion with Us, because a person who erroneously preached such [heresy] could not eject or remove anyone” [2]. Therefore you see that a bishop who is a heretic in secret is still vested with the power of binding and loosing, since he loses episcopal jurisdiction and the power of excommunication only from the time at which he begins to preach heresy openly. Furthermore, the conclusion is readily seen. For if he who is not in the Church cannot possess authority in relation to the Church, and a occult heretic can have authority — better still, at some time possesses it in reality — it clearly follows that a occult heretic has not yet been cut off from the body of the Church.
_______________
[1] Note the deliberate phrasing: of all ordinary jurisdiction; for with regard to extraordinary and merely delegated jurisdiction in a case of necessity, it is not the same idea, as will be readily clear upon consideration.
[2] Pope Celestine, Epistle 14, n. 7 (Migne, Patrologia Latina, volume 50). Also see the same Celestine’s Epistle 12 to John of Antioch, n. 2: “But if anyone has been either excommunicated or divested of episcopal or clerical dignity by Bishop Nestorius or those who follow him, it is clear that the person remained and remains in communion with Us from the moment [Nestorius and his followers] began to preach such [heresy], etc.”
(Louis Billot, S.J., Tractatus de Ecclesia Christi, 3rd ed. [1909], Thesis XI, Q. 7; pp. 300-301; italics in original; underlining added. Translation by Novus Ordo Watch.)
More at http://novusordowatch.org/2016/02/nestorius-salza-siscoe/
Which again raises the question of who or what gives you the authority to sit in judgment on your Catholic church and determine that they are wrong and in heresy?
Your Own Personal Interpretation of Catholicism?
YOPIOC.
1.2 billion interpetations strong.
“So many words wasted on a dead man.
Is Jesus alive ?
Did HE save you ?
Why bother with any one else ?...”
If that is so, why do you bother commenting on it, do you think that you can help someone to salvation by your comments?
Why bother reading your comments if all I need is Jesus?
ILLOGICAL.
I fear you lack the intellect to understand ‘no’.
YOU are the reason Catholics get into trouble around here
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.