The Biblical Roots of the [Catholic] Liturgy

Archdiocese of Washington ^ | 11-26-17 | Msgr. Charles Pope

[Salvation]

The Biblical Roots of the Liturgy

Msgr. Charles Pope • November 26, 2017 •

Catholics are often unaware just how biblical the Sacred Liturgy is. The design of our traditional churches; the use of candles, incense, and golden vessels; the postures of standing and kneeling; the altar; the singing of hymns; priests wearing albs and so forth are all depicted in the Scriptures. Some of these details were features of the ancient Jewish Temple, but most are reiterated in the Book of Revelation, which describes the liturgy of Heaven.

The liturgy here on earth is modeled after the liturgy in Heaven; that is why it is so serious to tamper with it. The Book of Revelation describes the heavenly liturgy and focuses on a scroll or book that contains the meaning of life and the answers to all we seek. It also focuses on the Lamb of God, standing but with the marks of slaughter upon it. Does this not sound familiar? It is the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist.

We do well to be aware of the biblical roots of the Sacred Liturgy. Many people consider our rituals to be empty and vain, “smells and bells.” Some think austere liturgical environments devoid of much ritual are “purer” and closer to the worship in “spirit and in truth” that Jesus spoke of in John 4.

To such criticisms we must insist that our rituals, properly understood, are mystical and deeply biblical. Further, they are elements of the heavenly liturgy since almost all of them are mentioned as aspects of the worship or liturgy that takes place in Heaven. In this light, it is a serious mistake to set them aside or have a dismissive attitude toward them.

With that in mind we ought to consider the biblical references to the most common elements of Catholic and Orthodox liturgies. I have added my own occasional note in red.

Candles –

• Rev 1:12-13 Then I turned to see the voice that was speaking to me, and on turning I saw seven golden lampstands, and in the midst of the lampstands one like a son of man. In traditional catholic parishes, there are six candles on the high altar and a seventh candle is brought out when the bishop is present.
• Rev 4:6 Seven flaming torches burned in front of the throne.

Altar –

• Rev 9:13 The sixth angel sounded his trumpet, and I heard a voice coming from the horns of the golden altar that is before God.
• Rev 8:3 Another angel, who had a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense to offer, with the prayers of all the saints, on the golden altar before the throne.

Chair –

• Rev 4:1 and lo, a throne stood in heaven, with one seated on the throne! And he who sat there appeared like jasper and carnelian, and round the throne was a rainbow that looked like an emerald …
• Daniel 7:9 As I looked, thrones were placed and one that was ancient of days took his seat; … In the Sacred Liturgy, the chair of the priest is prominent. But, as he takes his seat, we are invited to see not Father Jones, but rather the Lord Himself presiding in our midst.

Priests (elders) in Albs –

• Rev 4:4 the elders sat, dressed in white garments …

Bishop’s miter, priest’s biretta –

• Rev 4:4, 10 With golden crowns on their heads … they cast down their crowns before the throne … In the Liturgy, the Bishop may only wear his miter at prescribed times. But when he goes to the altar he must cast aside his miter. The priest who wears the biretta in the Old Mass is instructed to tip his biretta at the mention of the Holy Name and to lay it aside entirely when he goes to the altar.

Focus on a scroll (book), The Liturgy of the Word –

• Rev 5: 1 And I saw in the right hand of him who was seated on the throne a scroll written within and on the back, sealed with seven seals; and I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, “Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?” And no one in heaven or on earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll or to look into it, and I wept much that no one was found worthy to open the scroll or to look into it. Then one of the elders said to me, “Weep not; lo, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he can open the scroll and its seven seals.” In the ancient world, books as we know them now had not been invented. Texts were written on long scrolls and rolled up.

Incense, Intercessory prayer –

• Rev 8:3 another angel came and stood at the altar with a golden censer; and he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God …
• Rev 5:7 and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints;

Hymns –

• Rev 5:8 And they sang a new hymn: Worthy are you O Lord to receive the scroll and break open its seals. For you were slain and with your blood you purchase for God men of every race and tongue, and those of every nation.
• Rev 14:1 Then I looked, and lo, on Mount Zion stood the Lamb, and with him a hundred and forty-four thousand who had his name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads … and they sing a new song before the throne and before the four living creatures and before the elders. No one could learn that song except the hundred and forty-four thousand who had been redeemed from the earth.
• Rev 15:3 And they (the multitude no one could count) sing the song of Moses, the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, “Great and wonderful are thy deeds, O Lord God the Almighty! Just and true are thy ways, O King of the ages! Who shall not fear and glorify thy name, O Lord? For thou alone art holy. All nations shall come and worship thee, for thy judgments have been revealed.”

Holy, Holy, Holy –

• Rev 4:8 and day and night they never cease to sing, “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty,

Prostration (Kneeling) –

• Rev 4:10 the twenty-four elders fall down before him who is seated on the throne and worship him who lives for ever and ever; they cast their crowns before the throne …
• Rev 5:14 and the elders fell down and worshiped In today’s setting, there is seldom room for everyone to lie prostrate, flat on the ground. Kneeling developed as a practical solution to the lack of space, but it amounts to the same demeanor of humble adoration.

Lamb of God –

• Rev 5:6 And between the throne and the four living creatures and among the elders, I saw a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain …

Acclamations –

• Rev 5:11 Then I looked, and I heard around the throne and the living creatures and the elders the voice of many angels, numbering myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice, “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!”

Amen! –

• Rev 5:14 And the four living creatures said, “Amen!”

Silence –

• Rev 8:1 When the Lamb opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour. ( And you thought your priest paused too long after communion?)

Mary –

• Rev 12:1 And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; 2she was with child and she cried out in her pangs of birth, in anguish for delivery.

Happy are those called to His “supper” –

• Rev 19:6 Then I heard what seemed to be the voice of a great multitude, like the sound of many waters and like the sound of mighty thunder peals, crying, “Hallelujah! For the Lord our God the Almighty reigns. Let us rejoice and exult and give him the glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and his Bride has made herself ready; … And the angel said to me, “Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.”

Golden vessels, vestments –

• Rev 1:12 And when I turned I saw seven golden lampstands,
• Rev 1:13 and among the lampstands was someone “like a son of man,” dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest
• Rev 5:8 the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp and they were holding golden bowls full of incense
• Rev 8:3 Another angel, who had a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense to offer, with the prayers of all the saints, at the golden altar before the throne.
• Rev 15:16 The angels were dressed in clean, shining linen and wore golden sashes around their chests.
• Rev 15:17 seven golden bowls

Stained Glass –

• Rev 21:10 [The heavenly city] had a great, high wall, with twelve gates, … The foundations of the wall of the city were adorned with every jewel; the first was jasper, the second sapphire, the third agate, the fourth emerald, the fifth onyx, the sixth carnelian, the seventh chrysolite, the eighth beryl, the ninth topaz, the tenth chrysoprase, the eleventh jacinth, the twelfth amethyst. ( The image of stained glass in our Church walls is hinted at here.)

Here is but a partial list, except for one quote drawn only from the Book of Revelation. I invite you to add to it.

Here is an awesome video with wonderful quotes:

[pgyanke]

I know the Scriptures. They do not teach what Ol' Arch-Pope claims. Many people use the Scriptures to explain heresy.

They mean exactly what you say they mean. Forgive the Church for the impertinence of the last 2,000 years, your holiness Pope aMorePerfectUnion.

Can you not see the arrogance in your own argument? You make yourself the authority you believe no one else can claim. If Scripture is so self-interpreting, please explain the fractalization of the Protestant world who, generally, rely on Sola Scriptura...

Acts 8:30-31 & 2 Peter 1:20

Christ desired that we be one in Faith. There is no unity among those who claim personal authority over Scripture understanding. Why don't you read some of the Doctors of the Church and discover some humility.

[ealgeone]

Why don't you read some of the Doctors of the Church and discover some humility.

Which one?

The "Doctors of the Church" are often contradictory in their positions on the issues near and dear to Roman Catholicism.

[daniel1212]

no other person comes close, no other thelogical scholars of the past 2000 years, including those who walked and talked with Christ,

What theological scholars who walked and talked with Christ are you referring to on the issue at contention?

all other scholars and non scholars who have read scripture and been to school for it, over two thousand years or so, have all been wrong, and God has only spoken to you with the real truth of what His word means.... Why are you engaging in a logical fallacy of presuming you know what all other scholars and non scholars believed on this subject?

What source tells me what they all wrote on this subject? If you cannot provide such, how can you say that all concurred with your position?

Also, why must Scripture be so murky that it takes a scholar to see what the NT church believed on this subject? Can a very small minority of common folk be correct on what is from God and its meaning versus learned men?

Moreover, would not your position on assurance of truth be that an assuredly infallible authority (outside Scripture) is essential for determination and assurance of Truth (including writings and men being of God) and to fulfill promises of Divine presence, providence of Truth, and preservation of faith, and authority?

[ealgeone]

Christ desired that we be one in Faith. There is no unity among those who claim personal authority over Scripture understanding.

Vatican I or Vatican II?

The Roman Catholic Church has not produced an exegetical rendering of every verse in the NT...and as some claim they've been around 2000 years. That's a long time not to produce a verse by verse exegetical rendering of the NT.

[pgyanke]

The "Doctors of the Church" are often contradictory in their positions on the issues near and dear to Roman Catholicism.

Don't keep us in suspense... please cite your work.

[ealgeone]

Actually the burden is on the Roman Catholic to prove their point. The RCC claims the ECFs are unanimous in their positions. The burden is upon them to prove this.

[ealgeone]

The Immaculate Conception

In regard to the sinlessness of Mary the older Fathers are very cautious: some of them even seem to have been in error on this matter.

Origen, although he ascribed to Mary high spiritual prerogatives, thought that, at the time of Christ's passion, the sword of disbelief pierced Mary's soul ; that she was struck by the poniard of doubt ; and that for her sins also Christ died ( Origen, "In Luc. hom. xvii").

In the same manner St. Basil writes in the fourth century: he sees in the sword, of which Simeon speaks, the doubt which pierced Mary's soul (Epistle 259). St. Chrysostom accuses her of ambition, and of putting herself forward unduly when she sought to speak to Jesus at Capharnaum ( Matthew 12:46 ; Chrysostom, Hom. xliv; cf. also "In Matt.", hom. 4).

http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=6056

[daniel1212]

you cant debate folks like eagleone or the other doofus who all claim they are the sole arbiters of what is scriptural and what isnt, and thus what is true and not..

again, all the many staunch catholics/martyrs/theologians, down thru the centuries, had no clue about the scriptures, and we were all in the dark until eagleone and AMPU happened on the scene to set us all straight...

Is your position that poor that you must you resort to misrepresenting what others have said? Then you have already marginalized yourself. Or have your combatants actually said that all the many staunch Catholics/martyrs/theologians, down thru the centuries, had no clue about the scriptures, versus that the ones we have writings from on this subject are wrong?

those who walked and talked with Christ and his successors, hundreds of years before the catholic church put together the very scriptures they declare themselves experts and the only experts on, are to be cast aside as misreading, misinterpreting, or under a delusion of evil...as only certain folks can read scripture, and only these two, and perhaps others, have been the only ones in 2000 years to ‘ask God to come into their hearts so that they truly understand his word’.

Which is more of your sophistical strawman from what I see. If disagreeing on this issue what some ancients wrote on this subject means only these two, and perhaps others, have been the only ones in 2000 years to ‘ask God to come into their hearts so that they truly understand his word,’ then they would indeed by part of cult. Instead, you look dishonest and desperate.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

“You make yourself the authority you believe no one else can claim.”

False two times in one sentence.

God’s Word is the authority, or it wouldn’t matter if Arch-Pope tried to find a Biblical basis for the mass. Second, according to the scriptures, God gave teachers to the church to teach a His Word.

“If Scripture is so self-interpreting, please explain the fractalization of the Protestant world who, generally, rely on Sola Scriptura.”

Your question falsely conflates Sola Scriptura (the belief that Scripture contains everything needed for salvation and Christian maturity) with agreement over everything contained in Scripture by all people in all times.

I point out two things to you...

First, Roman Catholicism has never produced an official commentary that explains the meaning of every verse in Scripture. In 2,000 years!

Second, believing Christians who worship with non-Roman assemblies agree on the core doctrines with uniformity, while acting with charity on non-essential areas.

And again I never claimed Scripture is self-interpreting, nor does God. He gave teachers to His church to teach the Scriptures. Peter himself said some of the Apostle Paul’s writings were hard to understand, as are the other scriptures.

What someone needs to understand to gain eternal life can be easily understood by a child who can read.

[daniel1212]

Catholics do NOT worship Mary. We ask her to pray for us.

O please Sal, we have been thru these denials before, and though I do not know the heart of all, neither do you, but based on how Scripture describes worship, the broad denial that Catholics do NOT worship Mary by what they can do as sanctioned by their church have been shown to be playing word games. .

Could your information possibly be mistaken?

That question is for you.

One would have a hard time in Bible times explaining kneeling before a statue and praising the entity it represented in the unseen world, beseeching such for Heavenly help, and making offerings to them, and giving glory and titles and ascribing supernatural attributes to such which are never given in Scripture to created beings (except to false gods), including having the uniquely Divine power glory to hear and respond to virtually infinite numbers of prayers individually addressed to them.

Moses, put down those rocks! I was only engaging in hyper dulia, not adoring her. Can't you tell the difference?

Which manner of "adulation" would constitute worship in Scripture (Words for worship in the NT), yet Catholics imagine that by playing word games then they can avoid crossing the invisible line between mere "veneration" and worship.

And despite the Spirit inspiring the recording of about 200 prayers in the Bible, and of this being a most basic practice, the only prayers or offerings in Scripture to anyone else in Heaven is by pagans, including to the only Queen of Heaven see therein, by souls who were as adamant as many Catholics in defending their blasphemous practice:

As for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the name of the Lord, we will not hearken unto thee. But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes... (Jeremiah 44:16-17)

[daniel1212]

Nor do we idolize her. The following pictures disagree with you and every other Roman Catholic who makes that claim.

A rose by any other name.

[pgyanke]

Go thru every chapter of the Holy Spirit-inspired books of Acts thru Revelation (which is the only inspired record of how the NT church understood the gospels) and tell me where you see the Lord's supper described as,

1. conducted by a Catholic priest (+ see #4);

2. with this being a unique function of such;

Read through 1 Cor 11 again carefully to see what St Paul brought and how special it is. Also, check out Romans 15:16 for a priestly office.

3. and him offering it as a sacrifice for sins;

Here's why you have so much angst... you don't understand what you're criticizing. In the Mass, we offer Christ's Body and Blood as an offering of praise and thanksgiving, not as an offering for sins.

4. and thus with the distinctive word used for a separate sacerdotal class of believers being used for them;

God doesn't have to use your glossary to be God.

5. and dispensing the Eucharist as spiritual food.

Back to 1 & 2 above...

6. with this priestly performance and partaking being the preeminent prominent practice of the NT church;

I'll go the opposite way with you. St Paul tells us he brought the Mass with him in his ministry (1 Cor 11) at the instruction of Christ. An honest reading of the Epistles shows them to be letters of correction from the Apostles to the churches... some with encouragement... some with reproof. The fact that we know the Eucharist to be practiced in the Church and to not be an object of correction actually shows it more powerfully to be central to worship. The Eucharist is what the churches had in common. It was not an area to be taught in Epistles... except where St Paul reinforced it. See also 1 Cor 10:16

7. with this being the partaking of a wafer of bread and sip of wine, and the focus being on receiving this as essential food;

What did Christ offer at the Last Supper? When you answer that, you will answer what the Apostles carried forward in their commission.

I'm not dignifying 8 and 9...

with the focus being on the church as the body of Christ, showing the Lord's death and union with Him and those He bought with His sinless shed blood, by sharing food in a communal meal.

The Church is the Body of Christ... through the Marriage Feast of the Lamb... His Sacrifice on the Cross. We don't engage in roll-playing with a eucharistic celebration of a communal meal. We are united to Christ as one Body in the Church Who partakes of Him fully; Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity. We are united with Him at all times in all places in one Body as the Church presents this Marriage Feast to all the faithful until the end of time.

When you fail to find 1 -7 please do not read into Scripture what is not there as such has been and can be exposed, by God's grace.

Get over yourself and learn something.

[NKP_Vet]

The reason so many Catholic apologists are former Protestants is simple. Most were very familiar with scripture and through many hours, days and sometimes years they wanted the fullness of the Christian faith and could not continue living a lie. They became Catholic. They are also hated with a passion by some Protestants who can’t get it through their thick skulls that someone would actually become Catholic. It’s kind of funny and sad for the same reasons.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/20505525-jimmy-swaggart-made-me-catholic

Tim Staples’ conversion story from Assemblies of God youth minister to Catholic is fascinating! I learn so much about how others view the Catholic faith from converts and admire their love for Jesus. There are still so many misconceptions that Protestants and non-believers have. Staples’ is now head apologist at Catholic Answers. He must have a nearly photographic memory; I am always so impressed at his recall of book, chapter and verse when he responds to callers on the Catholic Answers radio show, Catholic Answers Live (on daily from 6:00 to 7:00 ET).
As with many who have converted, Staples’ had a deep knowledge of scripture, but the AoG has the doctrine of “bible alone” or “sola scriptura”, which ignores most of sacred tradition. I have a deeper appreciation for my Catholic faith after knowing the struggles and challenges Mr. Staples went through. I have seen him in person; his enthusiasm is contagious. He is a wonderful preacher and presenter.

[infool7]

Dear Lord,
May those who love us love us.
And those that don’t love us,
May God turn their hearts.

And if He doesn’t turn their hearts,
May he turn their ankles,
So we’ll know them by their limping.

Interesting Prayer however our Lord seems to be suggesting something different in the following passage. I think you may be familiar with it.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR and hate your enemy.’ “But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. “For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? “If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? “Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

[ealgeone]

Here's why you have so much angst... you don't understand what you're criticizing. In the Mass, we offer Christ's Body and Blood as an offering of praise and thanksgiving, not as an offering for sins.

Not per a Roman Catholic priest...

John O' Brien, Roman Catholic Priest in the Faith of Millions.	Hebrews 9:24-28	Hebrews 10:11-13
When the priest pronounces the tremendous words of consecration, he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man. It is a power greater than that of monarchs and emperors: it is greater than that of saints and angels, greater than that of Seraphim and Cherubim. Indeed it is greater even than the power of the Virgin Mary. While the Blessed Virgin was the human agency by which Christ became incarnate a single time, the priest brings Christ down from heaven, and renders Him present on our altar as the eternal Victim for the sins of man—not once but a thousand times! The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows His head in humble obedience to the priest’s command.	24For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; 25nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. 26Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. 27And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, 28so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.	Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; 12but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD, 13waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET. 14For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.

[ealgeone]

Staples offers some of the weakest apologetics for Roman Catholicism I’ve read. I’ve seen them used on these threads before.

[pgyanke]

You stopped when you had your "proof-text"... you should have kept reading;

But these stray private opinions merely serve to show that theology is a progressive science. If we were to attempt to set forth the full doctrine of the Fathers on the sanctity of the Blessed Virgin, which includes particularly the implicit belief in the immaculateness of her conception, we should be forced to transcribe a multitude of passages. In the testimony of the Fathers two points are insisted upon: her absolute purity and her position as the second Eve (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:22 ).

Over time and through the Holy Spirit, doctrine has developed. It has been a slow process and one full of deliberation and debate. That doesn't invalidate the Church nor the body of theology. It actually enhances it because all sides of issues have been contemplated for millennia. You think you are the first ones to seek answers?

[aMorePerfectUnion]

The reason so many Catholic apologists are former Protestants is simple.

ALMOST NONE ARE FORMER PROTESTANTS.

For every one that converts, tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands do not - their teachers, professors, congregations and fellow students.

For every protestant teacher who converts, there are many Catholic priests who leave Catholicism - as well as nuns.

For every protestant who goes to Catholicism, there are millions of Catholics who leave Rome and come to Christ - and that is just South America alone.

[NKP_Vet]

Pardon me, you’re a hell of a lot smarter than John Henry Newman.

[daniel1212]

As a Anglican (too Catholic as it is) priest convert to Rome, John Henry Newman is often quoted by RCs for his line, "To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant." (An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine; 1845) Another quote along this line is from the Vincentian Canon of St. Vincent of Lerins, "Now in the Catholic Church itself we take the greatest care to hold that which has been believed everywhere, always and by all. That is truly and properly 'Catholic.." (The Commonitory, cp.4; AD 434)

However, since own writings testify to the problems of reconciling RC distinctives with history, Newman is known for his work in the Roman art of Development of Doctrine due to lack of “unanimous consent ” of the fathers (while making use of forgeries ).

In response to the Vincentian profession, Newman writes,

It does not seem possible, then, to avoid the conclusion that, whatever be the proper key for harmonizing the records and documents of the early and later Church, and true as the dictum of Vincentius must be considered in the abstract, and possible as its application might be in his own age, when he might almost ask the primitive centuries for their testimony, it is hardly available now, or effective of any satisfactory result. The solution it offers is as difficult as the original problem. — John Henry Newman, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine (New York: Longmans, Green and Co., reprinted 1927), p. 27.

This required what even the Orthodox criticize as justifying regards certain RC extremes (for the Orthodox themselves teach many Catholic distinctives that certainly were not "believed everywhere, always and by all" in the NT church of Scripture, but are unseen in the inspired record of it):

Roman Catholicism, unable to show a continuity of faith and in order to justify new doctrine, erected in the last century, a theory of "doctrinal development."

Following the philosophical spirit of the time (and the lead of Cardinal Henry Newman), Roman Catholic theologians began to define and teach the idea that Christ only gave us an "original deposit" of faith, a "seed," which grew and matured through the centuries...

On this basis, theories such as the dogmas of "papal infallibility" and "the immaculate conception" of the Virgin Mary (about which we will say more) are justifiably presented to the Faithful as necessary to their salvation.

Yet this development of doctrine did not stop there, but attempts to justify everything from prayer to created beings in Heaven (nowhere seen or taught in Scripture - except by pagans - despite approx. 200 prayers recorded under the Spirit inspiration) to the Roman Caesario-papacy to the making of graven images for religious purposes and bowing down to them, and more. Newman again:

"...the rulers of the Church from early times were prepared, should the occasion arise, to adopt, or imitate, or sanction the existing rites and customs of the populace , as well as the philosophy of the educated class..."

"We are told in various ways by Eusebius [Note 16], that Constantine, in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen, transferred into it the outward ornaments to which they had been accustomed in their own. It is not necessary to go into a subject which the diligence of Protestant writers has made familiar to most of us."

"The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields; sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison [Note 17], are all of pagan origin , and sanctified by their adoption into the Church.." {374} "The introduction of Images was still later, and met with more opposition in the West than in the East." (John Henry Newman, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, Chapter 8. Application of the Third Note of a True Development—Assimilative Power; http://www.newmanreader.org/works/development/chapter8.html)

The reality is that to be deep in history is to cease to find the Catholic church as being that of the NT church, and thus RCs argue that faith in Rome is necessary to both know what Scripture consists of and means, which is contrary to how the NT church began. For under the Catholic basis for veracity, RC belief and submission is not a result of first examining Scripture (or seeing manifest Scriptural substantiation in word and in power) and therefore believing Scriptural Truth, and rejecting as doctrines that the NT church did not manifestly teach, but that church teaching is to be believed because The One True Catholic Church® taught it, and if challenged, then Scripture (as its servant) must be compelled to support it.

Thus as Cardinal Newman affirms,

“Christians have never gone to Scripture for proof of their doctrines until there was actual need, from the pressure of controversy...” — Letter to the Rev. E. B. Pusey" contained in Newman's "Difficulties of Anglicans" Volume II, Dignity of Mary; http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/newman-mary.asp

.“...there are doctrines which transcend the discoveries of reason; and, after all, whether they are more or less recommended to us by the one informant or the other, in all cases the immediate motive in the mind of a Catholic for his reception of them is, not that they are proved to him by Reason or by History, but because Revelation has declared them by means of that high ecclesiastical Magisterium which is their legitimate exponent.” — John Henry Newman, “A Letter Addressed to the Duke of Norfolk on Occasion of Mr. Gladstone's Recent Expostulation.” 8. The Vatican Council lhttp://www.newmanreader.org/works/anglicans/volume2/gladstone/section8.html

Which is akin to what another Anglican convert to Rome who preferred a king to NT leadership, Henry Edward Manning, who incredibly asserted,

“It was the charge of the Reformers that the Catholic doctrines were not primitive, and their pretension was to revert to antiquity. But the appeal to antiquity is both a treason and a heresy. It is a treason because it rejects the Divine voice of the Church at this hour, and a heresy because it denies that voice to be Divine. ”

"I may say in strict truth that the Church has no antiquity. It rests upon its own supernatural and perpetual consciousness. Its past is present with it, for both are one to a mind which is immutable. Primitive and modern are predicates, not of truth, but of ourselves.... The only Divine evidence to us of what was primitive is the witness and voice of the Church at this hour. — Dr. Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, Lord Archbishop of Westminster, “The Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost: Or Reason and Revelation,” (New York: J.P. Kenedy & Sons, originally written 1865, reprinted with no date), pp. 227-228."

For Rome has presumed to infallibly declare she is and will be perpetually infallible whenever she speaks in accordance with her infallibly defined (scope and subject-based) formula, which renders her declaration that she is infallible, to be infallible, as well as all else she accordingly declares.

Which is cultic, not Christian.