Posted on 06/23/2018 7:48:28 AM PDT by Salvation
Bowing at the mention of Jesus’ name is an old practice that has since fallen into wide disuse
Msgr. Charles Pope June 10, 2018
Question: I was taught to nod my head when the name of Jesus was spoken. I see some priests and congregants do it, but not most. What is the current practice? — Diane Garrett, via email
Answer: Liturgically it is not required. This is a pious custom that, while less common today, is still observed by many. This is not only in the liturgy, but at any time the name of Jesus is uttered, and also, quite commonly, the name of Mary. In the traditional Latin Mass, where clergy wear birettas (a kind of square hat with a pom), there is the additional tipping (lifting off) of the biretta at the names of Jesus, Mary and the saint of the day. This external and very visible action also helped the faithful remember to bow their heads.
This laudable custom has sadly declined. Some clergy and others still observe it, and, while it is not required, it is worthy of being encouraged. Other customs too should not be forgotten, such as making the Sign of the Cross when passing a Catholic Church, praying the Angelus at noon and 6 p.m., and so forth. The generations raised in the 1960s and ’70s largely abandoned such practices. However, many of their children have rediscovered some of these lost customs like a precious heirloom brought down from the attic. Thus, while being careful not to harshly judge those who do not follow this non-required custom, many can joyfully take it up again and encourage others to do so.
1: Yes there is a reliable teaching authority; it’s called Holy Scripture, inspired by God himself. You should read it sometime.
2: Fathers, yes.
Doctors, yes.
Saints, yes.
Martyrs, oh my goodness yes; you Catholics certainly made a LOT of martyrs out of Protestants who confessed their faith in the face of death. Look up the Huguenots sometime. And before Luther, there was of course Jan Hus, murdered by the Catholics.
3: Funny that you whine about a so-called ‘Magisterium’ that should protect it as a ‘deposit of faith’ when YOUR Magisterium is busy having cocaine sodomy orgies and alternately boinking kids or covering up for the ones who were boinking kids. To say nothing of your Antichrist pope. I don’t know about you, but I personally would be utterly repulsed by the teaching of THAT kind of Magisterium.
But I guess there’s no accounting for taste.
L
“That you do not credit him but claim that it is from the Bible does not change that this teaching is Luther’s invention”
***
Robert Bellarmine listed eight earlier authors who used sola (Disputatio de controversiis: De justificatione 1.25 [Naples: G. Giuliano, 1856], 4.501-3):
Origen, Commentarius in Ep. ad Romanos, cap. 3 (PG 14.952).
Hilary, Commentarius in Matthaeum 8:6 (PL 9.961).
Basil, Hom. de humilitate 20.3 (PG 31.529C).
Ambrosiaster, In Ep. ad Romanos 3.24 (CSEL 81.1.119): “sola fide justificati sunt dono Dei,” through faith alone they have been justified by a gift of God; 4.5 (CSEL 81.1.130).
John Chrysostom, Hom. in Ep. ad Titum 3.3 (PG 62.679 [not in Greek text]).
Cyril of Alexandria, In Joannis Evangelium 10.15.7 (PG 74.368 [but alludes to Jas 2:19]).
Bernard, In Canticum serm. 22.8 (PL 183.881): “solam justificatur per fidem,” is justified by faith alone.
Theophylact, Expositio in ep. ad Galatas 3.12-13 (PG 124.988).
Theodoret, Affectionum curatio 7 (PG 93.100; ed. J. Raeder [Teubner], 189.20-24).
Thomas Aquinas, Expositio in Ep. I ad Timotheum cap. 1, lect. 3 (Parma ed., 13.588): “Non est ergo in eis [moralibus et caeremonialibus legis] spes iustificationis, sed in sola fide, Rom. 3:28 [Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)] : Arbitramur justificari hominem per fidem, sine operibus legis” (Therefore the hope of justification is not found in them [the moral and ceremonial requirements of the law], but in faith alone, Rom 3:28 [Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)] : We consider a human being to be justified by faith, without the works of the law). Cf. In ep. ad Romanos 4.1 (Parma ed., 13.42a): “reputabitur fides eius, scilicet sola sine operibus exterioribus, ad iustitiam”; In ep. ad Galatas 2.4 (Parma ed., 13.397b): “solum ex fide Christi” [Opera 20.437, b41]).
All these used ‘faith alone’ long before Luther was born.
In other words, you are absolutely WRONG when claiming that ‘sola fide’ is an invention of Luther.
“Martyrs, oh my goodness yes; you Catholics certainly made a LOT of martyrs out of Protestants who confessed their faith in the face of death.”
Romanism was established and maintained at the point of a sword, as was Islam.
I have demonstrated that in Galatians Paul is only talking about the works of the Mosaic Law. The same is true in Romans.
True
***
False!
“Is the law then contrary to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could give life, then righteousness would indeed be by the law. But the Scripture imprisoned everything under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.”
Galatians 3: 21-22
In other words, NO law can give life. And that includes Romanist law.
Indeed, and when the Catholic church took over, they continued the slaughter.
It was not biblical.
So are you telling me that the Apostle Paul contradicts Jesus?
It sounds like you’re claiming that Holy Scripture contradicts itself.
It also sounds like you’re claiming that you can perfectly love both God and your neighbor.
Is that true?
What package are these quotes from?
Remember....for the Roman Catholic they can bring in “tradition” which often contradicts Scripture and supports doctrines not found in Scripture.
I actually pulled the citations from here:
https://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2006/02/luther-added-word-alone-to-romans-328.html
Yep. A good one.
Nice condescending words.
Now answer the questions. Do you REALLY think that you can obey God’s law of love perfectly?
AND are you claiming that Jesus and the Apostle contradict each other?
I wonder, do the posters know that Abraham lived a few years before Moses? Did they miss Paul’s references to Abraham, who lived BEFORE the Mosaic law has given?
Unlikely.
Even some Catholic versions of the New Testament also translated Romans 3:28 as did Luther. The Nuremberg Bible (1483), “allein durch den glauben” and the Italian Bibles of Geneva (1476) and of Venice (1538) say “per sola fede.”
The poster was wrong indeed!... but so insistent!
Based on readings of the OT at Mass....probably not.
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.