In Scripture, numbers indicate something beyond just an enumeration of something. The authors of Scripture were usually not concerned with literalistically counting things. Their primary purpose in presenting numbered things was to convey a message through their symbolic meaning. The literalistic meaning can be true as well (such as the days of Creation), but often it is not. Here are some of the numerical values and their meanings as I understand them.
Matthew's Genealogy: The Gospel according to Matthew lists 14 generations between three key people/events (Abraham-David, David-Exile, Exile-Jesus). This doesn't exactly match the Old Testament, but Matthew wasn't trying to be so accurate. He was conveying a certain message to us through his numeration. David's name in Hebrew (transliterated) is DVD. (There were no vowels in the alphabet then). The numerical values of the letters D V D add up to 14. This indicates that Jesus is the Davidic heir & king, the prophesied Messiah and Savior. Three 14's indicates the absolute, strongest and perfect meaning. (Hebrew didn't have the modifiers -er and -est. (as in big,bigger,biggest). To describe something as the biggest they would say big-big-big. An example is in Revelation4 & Isaiah6, the angels are exclaiming "holy holy holy is the Lord" meaning God is the absolute perfectly holy one.) As we read this genealogy we can see hidden in it "DAVID DAVID DAVID" concluding in Jesus. So, Jesus is the perfect fulfillment of the kingly/messianic prophecies.
====
The Samaritan woman at the well had "five" husbands.
The 10 northern tribes were assimilated into "five" gentile nations. In Jesus' time the 10 lost tribes were known as the Samaritans.
====
John 21:11 - 153 fish. "Simon Peter went up, and
drew the net to land full of great fishes, an hundred and fifty and three: and
for all there were so many, yet was not the net broken."
OT - not there? Then what's the meaning? Outside Scripture can be found this number. It's the number of known species of fish at that time. This could mean that all men will be "caught" in the salvation "net".
====
Acts 2:41 - "about 3000" people were
baptized, hence brought into God's family.
Exodus 32:28 - "about 3000" people were lost from God's family
(the slain idolators)
We can see that with
the coming of the New Covenant certain bad things of the past are undone by
certain good things.
====
Sunday, June 23, 2013
Monday, June 3, 2013
Semites and Hebrews and Jews, Oh My!
Semites and Hebrews and Jews, Oh My!
Did you ever wonder where these terms come from? And mean?
Technically, Semites means descendants of Shem (son of Noah), Hebrews means descendants of Eber (great-grandson of Shem), and Jews means descendants of Judah (son of Israel). Some folks writing on the subject say Arabs are descended from Ishmael (son of Abraham) while others say not. But, any descendants of Ishmael would be considered Shemites and Hebrews, technically, since Abraham is descended from Shem through Eber. In practice, though, these terms seem more often to point only to Israelites, who were descendants of Jacob (son of Isaac the son of Abraham).
After David's kingdom split (soon after the death of Solomon) 10 tribes went north. The southern Kingdom at Jerusalem was then called Judah even though it was composed of Judah, Benjamin and Levi. (It's just that Judah had the greatest number of people.) The northern Kingdom, in the region that came to be called Samaria, was known as Israel or Ephraim. (The books of Samuel, Kings & Chronicles describe these things.) The northern kingdom tribes were conquered by the Assyrians in the 700's B.C. and mostly assimilated into gentile people groups and came to be called Samaritans. (The Jews considered the Samaritan-Israelites to be half-breed unclean folks because of their mixture with gentiles. ) But the southern kingdom tribes retained their identities through their exile & return to Jerusalem (500's B.C.). By the time of Jesus the term "Jew" referred to all the "true" Israelites, whether of Levi, or Benjamin or Judah tribes. Paul specifies his tribal specifics (Benjamin) in his letter to Philippians but in general conversation he was lumped into the term "Jew" (as in Romans, Colossians, Thessalonians). In Philippians we see usage of the term "Hebrew" as well.
Addendum:
OT prophets said the 12 tribes would be gathered together again by the coming Messiah. This He has done. Jesus has brought back the 10 lost tribes by bringing in all the gentile people groups (which includes those into which the 10 tribes were assimilated) to join God's Kingdom. This is the restored and perfected Kingdom of David... the new Israel... the new Jerusalem. It is also called His Church. He built His New Kingdom, His Church, on the foundation of the Apostles (Eph2). Jesus commanded and empowered the Apostles to lead/teach/protect/discipline the inhabitants of this restored Kingdom of God, this Church (ie Isaiah22:20ff; Jer3:15; Matt16:13ff; Luke22:29ff; John21:15ff).
Did you ever wonder where these terms come from? And mean?
Technically, Semites means descendants of Shem (son of Noah), Hebrews means descendants of Eber (great-grandson of Shem), and Jews means descendants of Judah (son of Israel). Some folks writing on the subject say Arabs are descended from Ishmael (son of Abraham) while others say not. But, any descendants of Ishmael would be considered Shemites and Hebrews, technically, since Abraham is descended from Shem through Eber. In practice, though, these terms seem more often to point only to Israelites, who were descendants of Jacob (son of Isaac the son of Abraham).
After David's kingdom split (soon after the death of Solomon) 10 tribes went north. The southern Kingdom at Jerusalem was then called Judah even though it was composed of Judah, Benjamin and Levi. (It's just that Judah had the greatest number of people.) The northern Kingdom, in the region that came to be called Samaria, was known as Israel or Ephraim. (The books of Samuel, Kings & Chronicles describe these things.) The northern kingdom tribes were conquered by the Assyrians in the 700's B.C. and mostly assimilated into gentile people groups and came to be called Samaritans. (The Jews considered the Samaritan-Israelites to be half-breed unclean folks because of their mixture with gentiles. ) But the southern kingdom tribes retained their identities through their exile & return to Jerusalem (500's B.C.). By the time of Jesus the term "Jew" referred to all the "true" Israelites, whether of Levi, or Benjamin or Judah tribes. Paul specifies his tribal specifics (Benjamin) in his letter to Philippians but in general conversation he was lumped into the term "Jew" (as in Romans, Colossians, Thessalonians). In Philippians we see usage of the term "Hebrew" as well.
Addendum:
OT prophets said the 12 tribes would be gathered together again by the coming Messiah. This He has done. Jesus has brought back the 10 lost tribes by bringing in all the gentile people groups (which includes those into which the 10 tribes were assimilated) to join God's Kingdom. This is the restored and perfected Kingdom of David... the new Israel... the new Jerusalem. It is also called His Church. He built His New Kingdom, His Church, on the foundation of the Apostles (Eph2). Jesus commanded and empowered the Apostles to lead/teach/protect/discipline the inhabitants of this restored Kingdom of God, this Church (ie Isaiah22:20ff; Jer3:15; Matt16:13ff; Luke22:29ff; John21:15ff).
Sunday, May 19, 2013
Melchizedek is Shem, the son of Noah...
Melchizedek is Shem, the son of Noah...
... well, it's not explicit in Scripture but it is very plausible, Scripturally. (Also, the Talmud, a central text of Rabbinic Judaism, holds this view, and some Church Fathers have promoted the idea.) Genesis 14 describes the meeting of Abram & Melchizedek. Looking at the ages of Abraham & Shem, we find that Shem was still alive at the time, even outliving Abraham.
According to Genesis 11 Shem lived 600 years and the Flood happened when he was 98 so he died 502 years after the Flood. Abram was born about 292 years after the Flood. Abram-Abraham lived to be 175 (Genesis 25), dying in 467. So, Shem lived 35 years after Abraham died.
One thing supporting the idea that Melchizedek is Shem is because of the way in which God's blessing would be handed down to subsequent generations. The normal custom was for the first-born son to grow up and lead the family when the patriarch died. The patriarch would give the blessing to that son at some point. (Although, in the OT, most of the first-born sons forfeited their right and a younger son would get the blessing (ie Cain, Esau)). Noah gave the blessing to Shem. The scene with Melchizedek & Abraham is seen as continuing the line of Godly men, bridging the Old World (Shem who was born pre-flood) to the New World (Abram post-flood).
more info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melchizedek
http://www.bibletruthonline.com/melchizedek.htm
http://www.thesacredpage.com/2007/10/who-was-melchizedek.html
... well, it's not explicit in Scripture but it is very plausible, Scripturally. (Also, the Talmud, a central text of Rabbinic Judaism, holds this view, and some Church Fathers have promoted the idea.) Genesis 14 describes the meeting of Abram & Melchizedek. Looking at the ages of Abraham & Shem, we find that Shem was still alive at the time, even outliving Abraham.
According to Genesis 11 Shem lived 600 years and the Flood happened when he was 98 so he died 502 years after the Flood. Abram was born about 292 years after the Flood. Abram-Abraham lived to be 175 (Genesis 25), dying in 467. So, Shem lived 35 years after Abraham died.
One thing supporting the idea that Melchizedek is Shem is because of the way in which God's blessing would be handed down to subsequent generations. The normal custom was for the first-born son to grow up and lead the family when the patriarch died. The patriarch would give the blessing to that son at some point. (Although, in the OT, most of the first-born sons forfeited their right and a younger son would get the blessing (ie Cain, Esau)). Noah gave the blessing to Shem. The scene with Melchizedek & Abraham is seen as continuing the line of Godly men, bridging the Old World (Shem who was born pre-flood) to the New World (Abram post-flood).
more info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melchizedek
http://www.bibletruthonline.com/melchizedek.htm
http://www.thesacredpage.com/2007/10/who-was-melchizedek.html
"Sons of God" = Angels? or Aliens?...
"Sons of God" = Angels? or Aliens?...
Genesis 6 informs us the "sons of God" bred with the "daughters of men" and produced "mighty men...men of renown". Some folks see in this pericope evidence that angels copulated with humans and their kids were bigger and stronger than humans because of that. Some others see this as supporting their notion that aliens bred with humans resulting in superhuman beings. (Gigantic skeletal remains purportedly support one of these theories.) Both of these interpretations fail when scrutinized in the light of the rest of Scripture.
Angels are non-material beings and so have no physical sexual components with which to inseminate a material creature. Neither do they have the creative power to generate human equipment and God would not give them that power because He said to Adam and Eve, not an angel, "be fruitful and multiply". Humans and animals reproduced only "after their own kind" and so angels would not be allowed to attempt it.
Aliens? Not likely. They'd be genetically incompatible. People and animals only breed "after their own kind". But if they were human it might work. Perhaps God whisked away some of Adam's kids to another planet... whatever...
The likely-true interpretation is less dramatic than either of those probably-misinterpretations. In context, "sons of God" refers to the Godly line of descendants from Seth and "daughters of men" refers to the unGodly line of people descended from Cain. Look at Genesis 4, through Genesis 5, into Genesis 6. (Some disputer might refer you to Job where "sons of God" does refer to angels, but that's just there, the context everywhere else is pointing to humans.) Chapter 5 describes the Godly line. The Godly line was that which began to "call on the name of the Lord." (4:26). Then in Chapter 6 the narrative goes on to say how "the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose."(6:2). Verse 4 says the children were "mighty men...men of renown." Now, they could easily have been large powerful men, but this doesn't primarily mean they were famous, though they could certainly have been the stuff of folk legends in the centuries after them. The phrase "men of renown", in Hebrew, more literally says "men of the name". That implies they tried to make a name for themselves, instead of glorifying God's name, as the Godly line of Seth did.
The sons of God did a bad thing by marrying into the unGodly line. God was not happy with that nor with their polygamy. The Flood was the result, eliminating those who would never accept Him and were doing bad things, the remnant of Godly folk being preserved.
In conclusion: Genesis 4-6 does not describe generation of other-worldy hybrid creatures (whether angels or aliens). It describes the two sides of the battle between Good & Evil. The "sons of God" refers to the good side, those who "called on the name of the Lord", which means they worshiped God and gave Him glory (even though the ended up sinning grievously). The "daughters [& sons] of men" refers to the evil side, those who were, effectively, sons of Satan, who preferred to glorify themselves and not God. (That same sin was the sin of the builders of the Tower of Babel. They wanted to "make us a name" (Gen11:4)).
Here's an article touching on both sides of this issue... "Nephilim, Incubi, and Succubi"...
http://www.deadphilosopherssociety.com/2014/04/14/nephilim-incubi-and-succubi/
Genesis 6 informs us the "sons of God" bred with the "daughters of men" and produced "mighty men...men of renown". Some folks see in this pericope evidence that angels copulated with humans and their kids were bigger and stronger than humans because of that. Some others see this as supporting their notion that aliens bred with humans resulting in superhuman beings. (Gigantic skeletal remains purportedly support one of these theories.) Both of these interpretations fail when scrutinized in the light of the rest of Scripture.
Angels are non-material beings and so have no physical sexual components with which to inseminate a material creature. Neither do they have the creative power to generate human equipment and God would not give them that power because He said to Adam and Eve, not an angel, "be fruitful and multiply". Humans and animals reproduced only "after their own kind" and so angels would not be allowed to attempt it.
Aliens? Not likely. They'd be genetically incompatible. People and animals only breed "after their own kind". But if they were human it might work. Perhaps God whisked away some of Adam's kids to another planet... whatever...
The likely-true interpretation is less dramatic than either of those probably-misinterpretations. In context, "sons of God" refers to the Godly line of descendants from Seth and "daughters of men" refers to the unGodly line of people descended from Cain. Look at Genesis 4, through Genesis 5, into Genesis 6. (Some disputer might refer you to Job where "sons of God" does refer to angels, but that's just there, the context everywhere else is pointing to humans.) Chapter 5 describes the Godly line. The Godly line was that which began to "call on the name of the Lord." (4:26). Then in Chapter 6 the narrative goes on to say how "the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose."(6:2). Verse 4 says the children were "mighty men...men of renown." Now, they could easily have been large powerful men, but this doesn't primarily mean they were famous, though they could certainly have been the stuff of folk legends in the centuries after them. The phrase "men of renown", in Hebrew, more literally says "men of the name". That implies they tried to make a name for themselves, instead of glorifying God's name, as the Godly line of Seth did.
The sons of God did a bad thing by marrying into the unGodly line. God was not happy with that nor with their polygamy. The Flood was the result, eliminating those who would never accept Him and were doing bad things, the remnant of Godly folk being preserved.
In conclusion: Genesis 4-6 does not describe generation of other-worldy hybrid creatures (whether angels or aliens). It describes the two sides of the battle between Good & Evil. The "sons of God" refers to the good side, those who "called on the name of the Lord", which means they worshiped God and gave Him glory (even though the ended up sinning grievously). The "daughters [& sons] of men" refers to the evil side, those who were, effectively, sons of Satan, who preferred to glorify themselves and not God. (That same sin was the sin of the builders of the Tower of Babel. They wanted to "make us a name" (Gen11:4)).
Here's an article touching on both sides of this issue... "Nephilim, Incubi, and Succubi"...
http://www.deadphilosopherssociety.com/2014/04/14/nephilim-incubi-and-succubi/
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
'Queen of All' by Jim Tetlow, Roger Oakland, Brad Myers
Queen of All by Jim TETLOW, Roger OAKLAND, Brad MYERS
http://www.eternal-productions.org/PDFS/Queen.pdf
My thoughts:
The be-all end-all purpose of true, Godly, apparitions is to cause people to become closer to God, to help them, ultimately, to get to heaven. But not as an alternative to Jesus... it's an additional measure God is taking to draw people to Himself. This is also the prime purpose of the Church Jesus built on the foundation of the Apostles. (The difference is that the Church is necessary, in that it is the planned construct of God to spread His Gospel to draw people to Himself. The fellowship of earthly Christians and the heavenly Christians is just one feature of that Church. If a Christian chooses not to spend any time or effort honoring or praying to Mary, they can still get to heaven. God knows the heart.) Satan and demons can easily appear as an apparition of Mary or an angel. For this reason all apparitions should be met with scepticism and treated as false until proven true and of God. The best way for us average Christians to know whether or not any given apparition is of God is to compare it to the teachings of the Church Jesus founded. That means looking at Scripture and the doctrinal statements of His Church. The Church Jesus founded is not just a spiritual association of believers. (Nor is it a mere fellowship of people following the Bible "alone"). It is also a visible society with a recognizable hierarchical leadership structure. The Church is the fulfillment/transformation/renewal of the Abrahamic/Davidic Kingdom covenants. That kingdom had ministers and a vicar of the king (Isaiah22:20ff). Jesus empowered the Apostles as the visible leaders (Luke22:29-32) with Peter as His vicar (Matt16:19,note the keys as in Isaiah. Precedents of a King giving plenary ruling authority to a man include Joseph/Pharoah and Daniel/Nebuchadnezzar. The king in question first recognizes divine revelation through the man, then gives him vicarious ruling power. This is just what happened with Jesus & Peter). Since King Jesus is not on earth, His vicar, guided by the Spirit, shepherds/teaches/guards the earthly flock (John21:15-17, Jer3:15). A few centuries after the Apostles had all gone to heaven that same Church provided the world with the authenticating verdict of what composes sacred Scripture, so that we can know with certainty that the Bible alone is the written Word of God. That same Church is also the final arbiter when it comes to resolving disputes of interpretation of the written Word.
All visions or apparitions are private revelations and, as such, other folks are not required to accept them. (We are only required to believe the public revelation of the Gospel, which came to a close with the death of the last Apostle, that's what is called the "Deposit of the Faith" http://www.catholic.com/tracts/private-revelation). While there are many visions, not all are authenticated & endorsed by the Church leadership. The Church leadership investigates to determine legitimacy (ie, based on the message's compliance to established doctrine and miraculous events associated with it) and informs the world. If it is authentic, we can safely accept the message. Logically, the teachings of a non-authenticated message cannot be used against Catholicism. Even an authenticated vision is not required to be accepted by other folks, because it is a private revelation. While accepting these messages can be beneficial to one's spiritual growth, a believer will not be condemned for not accepting them. They don't teach new doctrines, they express aspects of Apostolic doctrines which many people hadn't seen before. That's why it might appear to be "new" doctrine. No new doctrines have ever been promulgated by the Church leadership based on an approved apparition's message. (And, in fact, no NEW doctrine has ever been promulgated by the Church leadership at all since the death of the last Apostle.)
Some folks feel all these apparitions are definitely not of God. As far as I can tell, there are two reasons for this view:
1) because they believe the messages contradict Scripture. But, concerning the authenticated apparitions, the contradiction is only with that person's interpretation of Scripture and/or their interpretation of the message. Scripture rightly interpreted is supportive of those approved messages, and vice versa.
2) Another error is thinking that it is flatly contra-biblical for any one to ever accept any communications from a person (besides God) not living on earth or an angel. This is false. What is proscribed is the act of calling on other-worldly souls to get supernatural information, going around God to do it (ie Saul and the witch of Endor). God's family exists in heaven (the "Church Triumphant") and on earth (the "Church Militant"). Sometimes God empowers and directs an angel or a soul in heaven, especially His greatest creature, Mary, to give messages to us on earth, for the purposes of His salvation plan or to enhance the spiritual growth of believers. All the approved messages ultimately point us to Jesus, not away from Him.
This association between the earth-side part of the family and the heaven-side part of the family is called the Communion of Saints and is quite Biblical. Here's a good description of it: http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m4/sts.html
Seeking aid, help, or "entrusting our needs to" Mary, is not saying she has divine power. It is not usurping the role of Jesus as sole Mediator. I manifests God's designs in His Salvation Plan. Jesus is the sole Mediator to whom we all go when we pray for ourselves or other people. We entrust our needs to others when we ask them to pray for us. That doesn't take away from Jesus' sole mediatorship. Of course, we primarily pray directly to God ourselves. Mary, also, can pray for us. That is how she gives aid to us, not by any power she possesses in and of herself (which is nil).
I don't pay attention to apparitions which have not been authenticated by the Vatican (ie Medjugorje). (There's too much canonical material out there to read, there's no time to waste on unproved apparitions). I also don't believe what New Age people say about their Mary's messages. If New Age Mary promotes contra-Scriptural things, it is not Jesus' mother, probably a demon, as I believe was the "angel" that gave Mohammad the Koran.
If Mary (Jesus' mother) appears to different people-groups in appearances tailored to those cultures, what's the problem with that? She's becoming "all things to all men", but not to the extent of compromising the Gospel (as Paul says in 1Cor9:22 "I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some"), in order to gather as many people to her son, Jesus, as possible before the end of time. If Mary appears to some Muslims or Hindus and because of that they then come to know Jesus and follow His teachings, that's a good thing.
Then we come to the task of how to determine veracity of an apparition's message. The authors are right... We must compare the message of an apparition to the Word of God. The disagreement I have with the authors is their interpretation of Scripture and/or their interpretation of the message in question. One or the other, or both, are often misinterpreted by the authors. (I also disagree with their adherence to the doctrine that is Sola Scriptura, which I have found to be a self-contradicting concept that was not popular until the 1500's, but that's a whole nuther discussion in itself).
They present a lot of quotes, so instead of commenting on all of them here, I'd be glad to comment on any in particular that anyone wants.
The authors say the witnesses of the visions "worship" Mary. But kneeling & bowing is not defacto worship. To worship means one is giving credit to the target as the source of their blessings, love, salvation, etc. However, Mary is not treated as the source. (As the moon has no light of it's own but just reflects the light of the sun, so Mary only reflects the Light of the Son.) But she is greatly honored with respectful posturing and verbage. It's the same way Jacob honored Esau and how Israel's king was honored, even the queen (the king's mother) was honored this way.
Some prayers seem to use worshipful language toward Mary, but they are not really worship when they are considered in context and you compare them to a prayer said in the Catholic Mass called the Gloria. This is what it looks and sounds like when Catholics are worshiping God, as opposed to honoring a Saint...
Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to people of good will.
We praise you,
we bless you,
we adore you,
we glorify you,
we give you thanks for your great glory,
Lord God, heavenly King,
O God, almighty Father.
Lord Jesus Christ, Only Begotten Son,
Lord God, Lamb of God, Son of the Father,
You take away the sins of the world, have mercy on us;
You take away the sins of the world, receive our prayer;
You are seated at the right hand of the Father, have mercy on us.
For you alone are the Holy One,
You alone are the Lord,
You alone are the Most High,
Jesus Christ,
with the Holy Spirit,
in the glory of God the Father. Amen.
Now that is worshipful and adoring of God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit as the THE SOURCE of all power, grace and salvation! The Gloria exemplifies the worship and adoration Catholics give to God alone. No other being receives such worship and adoration from Catholics! Saints are venerated and angels are honored but none of them are worshiped as God is duly worshiped.
The legitimate Marian apparitions might seem to be saying she, herself, by her own inherent power, can save you, but this is definitely a misinterpretation. As with Scripture, quotes from an apparition should be considered in the context of the whole message, not in isolation. Mary is many things, by God's grace only. But she is the source of nothing and inherently is as powerless as any of us. But by the grace of God and for the purposes of His plans, she is in fact the Queen of Heaven... not a false pagan queen goddess but the true one of God's true Kingdom. (http://vivacatholic.wordpress.com/2007/11/09/hail-holy-queen/)
Mary has other titles as well... even though these exact phrases might not be applied to Mary in Scripture, her place in God's Salvation Plan and her actions fit the descriptions of these "titles" the Church has given her:
"Mother of God": Jesus is God. Jesus was conceived & born by Mary. She is hence His mother. Therefore, she is the mother of God. This doesn't give her divine status, it just recognizes the fact of the incarnation of God and emphasizes Jesus' true humanity and true divinity.
http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/mother.htm
"New Eve": Mary is the mother of Jesus who is the firstborn son of God's family. All christians are brothers and sisters of Jesus, being adopted children of God, and in that sense Mary is their spiritual mother. The first Eve was mother of all the living. In the New Covenant, Christians are "all the living", as opposed to those outside God's family who are spiritually dead. so, Mary is the new mother of all the living, hence the title "New Eve".
http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/KEY2MARY.HTM
"New Ark of the Covenant" or "Ark of the New Covenant": The Mosaic Ark was a container for three things... the Word of God (the decalogue or 10 commandments), a jar of manna (bread from heaven) and Arron's Rod (symbol of Priesthood). Eventually, Jesus personified all three... He is the Logos, the Word of God; He is the true bread from heaven; He is the true High Priest, the one Mediator. Mary carried Him in herself for 9 months. Therefore, she is the Ark of the New Covenant. More: http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m4/ma.html
"Co-Redeemer" or "Co-Redemptrix": This is another description which doesn't really give divine power to her. It just recognizes the fact that by her cooperation with God's grace she helped accomplish the redemption of the world. It's the same as the idea that my parents are co-creators of human life. This doesn't imply that they have divine creative power. It just says they did their God-empowered part (providing the two halves of my DNA) while God provided my soul. Humans and God become co-creators, together. In like fashion, Mary is the Co-Redemptrix.
"Mediatrix of all Graces": Again, this is another description which doesn't really give divine power to her. Her mediation is secondary to Jesus and entirely dependent on Him. Throughout salvation history God has chosen a mediator from among men (ie Abraham, Moses, David). Their mediatorship was entirely dependent on God. God chose Mary as a mediator of the New Covenant and this co-mediatorship depends entirely on Jesus' truly worthy mediatorship..
Another point of view: All the grace that is in the world came through Mary. That's not to say she caused this to happen. She can't. She's a mere human like us and without God she'd be nothing, just like us. But, all grace that is in the world is because of the incarnation of God which came through her. In that manner, she mediated the transmission of grace into the world. (A mere human as a mediator is not unprecedented... if you notice in Scripture, non-divine humans have served as mediators of the covenants which marked the progress of God's salvation plan: Adam, Noah, Abram, Moses, David. Jesus is the final and eternal mediator. With the incarnation & death & ressurection of Jesus the final and perfecting covenant was made & ratified.)
More: http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/MARYMEDI.htm
"Immaculate Conception": for her unique role in Salvation History Mary was given a unique gift: preservation from all stain of Original Sin. She needed a savior just like we did, the difference is that where we are pulled up out of the mire of Sin, she was prevented from falling into it in the first place.
http://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/marya2.htm
For more info:
Mary, Queen of Heaven. From catholicbridge.com, the website of a former Evangelical Christian. (Not just Mary-issues, He also addresses all the other differences he used have with Catholicism...)
http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/mary_queen_of_heaven_and_earth.php
Online Bible Study... Holy Queen: the Mother of God in the Word of God
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/holy_queen_the_mother_of_god_in_the_word_of_god
Mary, Holy Mother
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m4/m.html
The Perpetual virginity of Mary (considering the cultural context)
http://www.ewtn.com/library/answers/talmud.htm
History of the idea of the Perpetual virginity of Mary (It goes back to the beginning. Historically, those who denied it were heretical in other (core) doctrines as well, such as the humanity or divinity of Jesus.)
http://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/maryc2.htm
The Woman clothed with the sun: ( Ap. 12) by Bernard J. Le Frois
Marian Typology in the Fathers and the Liturgy by Bernard Capelle
What is Scripture?... here is the Vatican II document "Dei Verbum". Describes how God revealed Himself to the world. http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651118_dei-verbum_en.html
Online Bible Study Courses... learn how to make sense (or "senses") out of the seemingly convoluted and complex nature of God's Salvation Plan... hint: it's not so hard to grasp when certain basic principals are considered.
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online
Karl Adam, The Spirit of Catholicism
http://www.ewtn.com/library/THEOLOGY/SPIRCATH.HTM#07
http://www.eternal-productions.org/PDFS/Queen.pdf
My thoughts:
The be-all end-all purpose of true, Godly, apparitions is to cause people to become closer to God, to help them, ultimately, to get to heaven. But not as an alternative to Jesus... it's an additional measure God is taking to draw people to Himself. This is also the prime purpose of the Church Jesus built on the foundation of the Apostles. (The difference is that the Church is necessary, in that it is the planned construct of God to spread His Gospel to draw people to Himself. The fellowship of earthly Christians and the heavenly Christians is just one feature of that Church. If a Christian chooses not to spend any time or effort honoring or praying to Mary, they can still get to heaven. God knows the heart.) Satan and demons can easily appear as an apparition of Mary or an angel. For this reason all apparitions should be met with scepticism and treated as false until proven true and of God. The best way for us average Christians to know whether or not any given apparition is of God is to compare it to the teachings of the Church Jesus founded. That means looking at Scripture and the doctrinal statements of His Church. The Church Jesus founded is not just a spiritual association of believers. (Nor is it a mere fellowship of people following the Bible "alone"). It is also a visible society with a recognizable hierarchical leadership structure. The Church is the fulfillment/transformation/renewal of the Abrahamic/Davidic Kingdom covenants. That kingdom had ministers and a vicar of the king (Isaiah22:20ff). Jesus empowered the Apostles as the visible leaders (Luke22:29-32) with Peter as His vicar (Matt16:19,note the keys as in Isaiah. Precedents of a King giving plenary ruling authority to a man include Joseph/Pharoah and Daniel/Nebuchadnezzar. The king in question first recognizes divine revelation through the man, then gives him vicarious ruling power. This is just what happened with Jesus & Peter). Since King Jesus is not on earth, His vicar, guided by the Spirit, shepherds/teaches/guards the earthly flock (John21:15-17, Jer3:15). A few centuries after the Apostles had all gone to heaven that same Church provided the world with the authenticating verdict of what composes sacred Scripture, so that we can know with certainty that the Bible alone is the written Word of God. That same Church is also the final arbiter when it comes to resolving disputes of interpretation of the written Word.
All visions or apparitions are private revelations and, as such, other folks are not required to accept them. (We are only required to believe the public revelation of the Gospel, which came to a close with the death of the last Apostle, that's what is called the "Deposit of the Faith" http://www.catholic.com/tracts/private-revelation). While there are many visions, not all are authenticated & endorsed by the Church leadership. The Church leadership investigates to determine legitimacy (ie, based on the message's compliance to established doctrine and miraculous events associated with it) and informs the world. If it is authentic, we can safely accept the message. Logically, the teachings of a non-authenticated message cannot be used against Catholicism. Even an authenticated vision is not required to be accepted by other folks, because it is a private revelation. While accepting these messages can be beneficial to one's spiritual growth, a believer will not be condemned for not accepting them. They don't teach new doctrines, they express aspects of Apostolic doctrines which many people hadn't seen before. That's why it might appear to be "new" doctrine. No new doctrines have ever been promulgated by the Church leadership based on an approved apparition's message. (And, in fact, no NEW doctrine has ever been promulgated by the Church leadership at all since the death of the last Apostle.)
Some folks feel all these apparitions are definitely not of God. As far as I can tell, there are two reasons for this view:
1) because they believe the messages contradict Scripture. But, concerning the authenticated apparitions, the contradiction is only with that person's interpretation of Scripture and/or their interpretation of the message. Scripture rightly interpreted is supportive of those approved messages, and vice versa.
2) Another error is thinking that it is flatly contra-biblical for any one to ever accept any communications from a person (besides God) not living on earth or an angel. This is false. What is proscribed is the act of calling on other-worldly souls to get supernatural information, going around God to do it (ie Saul and the witch of Endor). God's family exists in heaven (the "Church Triumphant") and on earth (the "Church Militant"). Sometimes God empowers and directs an angel or a soul in heaven, especially His greatest creature, Mary, to give messages to us on earth, for the purposes of His salvation plan or to enhance the spiritual growth of believers. All the approved messages ultimately point us to Jesus, not away from Him.
This association between the earth-side part of the family and the heaven-side part of the family is called the Communion of Saints and is quite Biblical. Here's a good description of it: http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m4/sts.html
Seeking aid, help, or "entrusting our needs to" Mary, is not saying she has divine power. It is not usurping the role of Jesus as sole Mediator. I manifests God's designs in His Salvation Plan. Jesus is the sole Mediator to whom we all go when we pray for ourselves or other people. We entrust our needs to others when we ask them to pray for us. That doesn't take away from Jesus' sole mediatorship. Of course, we primarily pray directly to God ourselves. Mary, also, can pray for us. That is how she gives aid to us, not by any power she possesses in and of herself (which is nil).
I don't pay attention to apparitions which have not been authenticated by the Vatican (ie Medjugorje). (There's too much canonical material out there to read, there's no time to waste on unproved apparitions). I also don't believe what New Age people say about their Mary's messages. If New Age Mary promotes contra-Scriptural things, it is not Jesus' mother, probably a demon, as I believe was the "angel" that gave Mohammad the Koran.
If Mary (Jesus' mother) appears to different people-groups in appearances tailored to those cultures, what's the problem with that? She's becoming "all things to all men", but not to the extent of compromising the Gospel (as Paul says in 1Cor9:22 "I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some"), in order to gather as many people to her son, Jesus, as possible before the end of time. If Mary appears to some Muslims or Hindus and because of that they then come to know Jesus and follow His teachings, that's a good thing.
Then we come to the task of how to determine veracity of an apparition's message. The authors are right... We must compare the message of an apparition to the Word of God. The disagreement I have with the authors is their interpretation of Scripture and/or their interpretation of the message in question. One or the other, or both, are often misinterpreted by the authors. (I also disagree with their adherence to the doctrine that is Sola Scriptura, which I have found to be a self-contradicting concept that was not popular until the 1500's, but that's a whole nuther discussion in itself).
They present a lot of quotes, so instead of commenting on all of them here, I'd be glad to comment on any in particular that anyone wants.
The authors say the witnesses of the visions "worship" Mary. But kneeling & bowing is not defacto worship. To worship means one is giving credit to the target as the source of their blessings, love, salvation, etc. However, Mary is not treated as the source. (As the moon has no light of it's own but just reflects the light of the sun, so Mary only reflects the Light of the Son.) But she is greatly honored with respectful posturing and verbage. It's the same way Jacob honored Esau and how Israel's king was honored, even the queen (the king's mother) was honored this way.
Some prayers seem to use worshipful language toward Mary, but they are not really worship when they are considered in context and you compare them to a prayer said in the Catholic Mass called the Gloria. This is what it looks and sounds like when Catholics are worshiping God, as opposed to honoring a Saint...
Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to people of good will.
We praise you,
we bless you,
we adore you,
we glorify you,
we give you thanks for your great glory,
Lord God, heavenly King,
O God, almighty Father.
Lord Jesus Christ, Only Begotten Son,
Lord God, Lamb of God, Son of the Father,
You take away the sins of the world, have mercy on us;
You take away the sins of the world, receive our prayer;
You are seated at the right hand of the Father, have mercy on us.
For you alone are the Holy One,
You alone are the Lord,
You alone are the Most High,
Jesus Christ,
with the Holy Spirit,
in the glory of God the Father. Amen.
Now that is worshipful and adoring of God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit as the THE SOURCE of all power, grace and salvation! The Gloria exemplifies the worship and adoration Catholics give to God alone. No other being receives such worship and adoration from Catholics! Saints are venerated and angels are honored but none of them are worshiped as God is duly worshiped.
The legitimate Marian apparitions might seem to be saying she, herself, by her own inherent power, can save you, but this is definitely a misinterpretation. As with Scripture, quotes from an apparition should be considered in the context of the whole message, not in isolation. Mary is many things, by God's grace only. But she is the source of nothing and inherently is as powerless as any of us. But by the grace of God and for the purposes of His plans, she is in fact the Queen of Heaven... not a false pagan queen goddess but the true one of God's true Kingdom. (http://vivacatholic.wordpress.com/2007/11/09/hail-holy-queen/)
Mary has other titles as well... even though these exact phrases might not be applied to Mary in Scripture, her place in God's Salvation Plan and her actions fit the descriptions of these "titles" the Church has given her:
"Mother of God": Jesus is God. Jesus was conceived & born by Mary. She is hence His mother. Therefore, she is the mother of God. This doesn't give her divine status, it just recognizes the fact of the incarnation of God and emphasizes Jesus' true humanity and true divinity.
http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/mother.htm
"New Eve": Mary is the mother of Jesus who is the firstborn son of God's family. All christians are brothers and sisters of Jesus, being adopted children of God, and in that sense Mary is their spiritual mother. The first Eve was mother of all the living. In the New Covenant, Christians are "all the living", as opposed to those outside God's family who are spiritually dead. so, Mary is the new mother of all the living, hence the title "New Eve".
http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/KEY2MARY.HTM
"New Ark of the Covenant" or "Ark of the New Covenant": The Mosaic Ark was a container for three things... the Word of God (the decalogue or 10 commandments), a jar of manna (bread from heaven) and Arron's Rod (symbol of Priesthood). Eventually, Jesus personified all three... He is the Logos, the Word of God; He is the true bread from heaven; He is the true High Priest, the one Mediator. Mary carried Him in herself for 9 months. Therefore, she is the Ark of the New Covenant. More: http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m4/ma.html
"Co-Redeemer" or "Co-Redemptrix": This is another description which doesn't really give divine power to her. It just recognizes the fact that by her cooperation with God's grace she helped accomplish the redemption of the world. It's the same as the idea that my parents are co-creators of human life. This doesn't imply that they have divine creative power. It just says they did their God-empowered part (providing the two halves of my DNA) while God provided my soul. Humans and God become co-creators, together. In like fashion, Mary is the Co-Redemptrix.
"Mediatrix of all Graces": Again, this is another description which doesn't really give divine power to her. Her mediation is secondary to Jesus and entirely dependent on Him. Throughout salvation history God has chosen a mediator from among men (ie Abraham, Moses, David). Their mediatorship was entirely dependent on God. God chose Mary as a mediator of the New Covenant and this co-mediatorship depends entirely on Jesus' truly worthy mediatorship..
Another point of view: All the grace that is in the world came through Mary. That's not to say she caused this to happen. She can't. She's a mere human like us and without God she'd be nothing, just like us. But, all grace that is in the world is because of the incarnation of God which came through her. In that manner, she mediated the transmission of grace into the world. (A mere human as a mediator is not unprecedented... if you notice in Scripture, non-divine humans have served as mediators of the covenants which marked the progress of God's salvation plan: Adam, Noah, Abram, Moses, David. Jesus is the final and eternal mediator. With the incarnation & death & ressurection of Jesus the final and perfecting covenant was made & ratified.)
More: http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/MARYMEDI.htm
"Immaculate Conception": for her unique role in Salvation History Mary was given a unique gift: preservation from all stain of Original Sin. She needed a savior just like we did, the difference is that where we are pulled up out of the mire of Sin, she was prevented from falling into it in the first place.
http://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/marya2.htm
For more info:
Mary, Queen of Heaven. From catholicbridge.com, the website of a former Evangelical Christian. (Not just Mary-issues, He also addresses all the other differences he used have with Catholicism...)
http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/mary_queen_of_heaven_and_earth.php
Online Bible Study... Holy Queen: the Mother of God in the Word of God
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/holy_queen_the_mother_of_god_in_the_word_of_god
Mary, Holy Mother
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m4/m.html
The Perpetual virginity of Mary (considering the cultural context)
http://www.ewtn.com/library/answers/talmud.htm
History of the idea of the Perpetual virginity of Mary (It goes back to the beginning. Historically, those who denied it were heretical in other (core) doctrines as well, such as the humanity or divinity of Jesus.)
http://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/maryc2.htm
The Woman clothed with the sun: ( Ap. 12) by Bernard J. Le Frois
Marian Typology in the Fathers and the Liturgy by Bernard Capelle
What is Scripture?... here is the Vatican II document "Dei Verbum". Describes how God revealed Himself to the world. http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651118_dei-verbum_en.html
Online Bible Study Courses... learn how to make sense (or "senses") out of the seemingly convoluted and complex nature of God's Salvation Plan... hint: it's not so hard to grasp when certain basic principals are considered.
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online
Karl Adam, The Spirit of Catholicism
http://www.ewtn.com/library/THEOLOGY/SPIRCATH.HTM#07
Monday, December 17, 2012
Prayers to God, Prayers to Mary
Prayer to souls in heaven, especially Mary, does not usurp the authority or role of Jesus. Nor is it worship as due to God alone. It actually manifests God's designs. Scripture depicts God fathering a family, not creating a race of mere servants. Adam was the first son of God (refer to Luke's geneology) and God assigned him to be the steward of creation, but by his rebellion he lost that sonship (sonship means eternal dwelling with God) for himself and all his descendants (because we can't inherit what our parents don't have) . But God had a salvation plan and that plan resulted in Adam's rebellion being undone by Jesus' obedience (even to the point of death on a cross). Now every person can become adopted into God's family as His son or daughter (aka "justified"). This is how we gain entrance into heaven. (Otherwise we will be relegated to eternal separation from God.) We are now a big family, whether toiling on earth or triumphant in heaven. In a healthy family, siblings interract and help eachother. That's what it is when we pray to the saints in heaven. They are our elder siblings. Those such as the Apostles, for example, are currently greatly rewarded in Heaven for their service and obedience while on earth. They are some of God's greatest creatures, because they so cooperated with His grace that they accomplished great things. Since God glorifies them, He is pleased when we honor them because we are only acknowledging and honoring God's own handiwork in men (as opposed to the man's own inherent qualities, which are shabby).
Non-Catholic Objections to Praying to Heaven-Dwellers:
Objection 1) Scripted prayers to Mary use allegedly worshipful terminology.
(Note: historically the term "worship" has had a slightly different meaning than we commonly use it today. While we most commonly use it to mean worship of God as due to Him alone, it used to mean also merely honoring when it was in the context of creatures, as opposed to context relating to God. In my commentary I will use "worship" in our modern sense of "as due to God alone".)
Let's take a closer look, and compare with a prayer addressed to God Himself.
Here are a couple Marian Prayers... (Many can be found at http://www.marypages.com/PrayerstoMary.htm)
Hail Mary, Full of Grace,
The Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou among women
And Blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary, Mother of God,
Pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death.
Hail, holy Queen, Mother of Mercy, Our life, our sweetness and our hope.
To thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve, To thee do we send up our sighs, Mourning and weeping in this valley of tears.
Turn then, most gracious Advocate, thine eyes of mercy toward us, And after this our exile, show unto us the blessed fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
O clement, O loving, O sweet Virgin Mary! Pray for us, O Holy Mother of God, That we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.
Amen.
At first glance those two prayers maybe can be perceived as worship. But looking closer reveals there is no idolatry or worship of a false god in them...
The "Hail Mary" is mostly directly from Scripture. "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you: blessed are you among women" is Luke 1:28. "Blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb" is Luke 1:42. "Holy Mary, Mother of God", while not a direct quote, is implicit in Scripture... She is holy, since she is in Heaven. She is the Mother of God because Jesus is God (ie Luke 1:43). The remainder of the prayer is asking her to pray for us. All of us earthly Christians request prayers of eachother. It's no different to seek a sibling in Heaven to pray for us.
The "Hail Holy Queen" is simply another petition for Mary to pray for us. The phrases used in the prayer to describe her are not worship, but acknowledgement of God's grace working in and through her. (That's what God can do to and through any meager human who cooperates with His grace.) She is "holy Queen" because her son is the King. (Scripture depicts that in the Davidic dynastic tradition the queen of the kingdom was the king's mother, not a wife. David's kingdom was the Kingdom of God (aka Kingdom of Heaven) manifested on earth. Jesus is heir to David's throne and is the King of Heaven. Therefore, the present queen of Heaven would be His mother, Mary.) This is not ascribing to her divine power or characteristics. She is not treated as if she is the source of grace and salvation... only One is that and He is Jesus Christ. She is implored as "our life, our sweetness, our hope". This is in the context of her role in God's salvation plan, as the human gateway through which God Incarnate entered the world. Jesus came to us through her and if it weren't for that, she'd be just another human creature, not the mother of God. She has no inherent value beyond what any other human creature has. But by God's grace and her willing cooperation she has been glorified by God Himself. We obey Him when we honor her.
She is called an advocate and intercessor. That's not worship. Even you or I can be an advocate and an intercessor, if we pray for someone else. (There is only one true Mediator, but there are many intercessors. Intercessor = one who prays for another. Refer to 1Timothy 2:1. Paul exhorts people to intercede for others.) We then have "eyes of mercy" when we do so, because it's a merciful act, to pray for someone.
This prayer (as well as all Marian prayers) is not to be a replacement for prayer to God. We pray worshipfully and petitionaly to God the Father and God the Son and God the Spirit, but we also seek others (in this case, Mary in heaven) to pray for us. Someone who prays to Mary and the Saints, to the exclusion of praying to God Himself, is violating Church teaching and God's designs, and should stop praying to them entirely, concentrating on God alone, until their priorities are adjusted.
Now, by way of comparison, let's take a look at a prayer addressed to God Himself, a prayer from the Catholic Mass, called The Gloria...
Glory to God in the highest,
and on earth peace to people of good will.
We praise you,
we bless you,
we adore you,
we glorify you,
we give you thanks for your great glory,
Lord God, heavenly King,
O God, almighty Father.
Lord Jesus Christ, Only Begotten Son,
Lord God, Lamb of God, Son of the Father,
you take away the sins of the world, have mercy on us;
you take away the sins of the world, receive our prayer;
you are seated at the right hand of the Father, have mercy on us.
For you alone are the Holy One,
you alone are the Lord,
you alone are the Most High,
Jesus Christ,
with the Holy Spirit,
in the glory of God the Father. Amen.
Now THIS is worshipful and adoring of God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit as the THE SOURCE of all grace and salvation!!! The Gloria exemplifies the worship and adoration Catholics give to God alone. No other being receives such worship and adoration from Catholics! Saints are venerated and angels are honored but none of them are worshiped as God is duly worshiped.
Compare any Marian prayer to The Gloria. You will find that Mary receives great veneration and honor, but not worship as due to God alone. This means that someone's contention with this practice is only whether it is "biblical" to pray to bretheren in Heaven at all. Which leads us to Objection 2...
Objection 2) Contact with the "dead" is prohibited in Scripture.
That is true, mostly. The story of Saul is an example of what this directive prohibits: seeking to glean supernatural (actually, preternatural) information from a source other than God, such as spirit. Saul didn't have an answer from God so he went to a witch to bring up the spirit of Samuel. This is the kind of contact with the dead which is prohibited by Scripture. (Today, this includes tarot cards & ouija boards & "fortune tellers"). But a Catholic praying to the souls in Heaven is nothing like this episode. We pray to the saints to get them to add their prayers to our own prayers to God, not to acquire supernatural information. It's no different than when I ask my fellows on earth to pray for me.
Objection 3) Departed souls can't hear us, they're "asleep" until the final judgement.
This concept of "soul sleep" is false doctrine. Those who have died in the friendship of Jesus are consciously enjoying the heavenly benefits of membership in God's family (or soon will be, after their individual purging of imperfections). Scripture depicts them actively worshiping God (Rev___) and witnessing earthly events (Heb 12:1).
Objection 4) Catholics kneel or bow in proximity to a statue or image of Mary as they pray for her intercession. In Exodus and Deuteronomy, God prohibits making graven images or bowing to them.
The critic of this Catholic practice feels that it is worshiping an idol (which is unarguably prohibited). But kneeling or bowing to someone is not de facto worshipful. Many societies today feature bowing as a sign of respect, and that's not worship. Scripture also features bowing as a way of honoring (Jacob bowed to Esau, etc.). Our Critic might point out how in the New Testament when a man (Peter or John) bowed to an angel, the angel said "don't do that!". However, the context of those pericopes shows that the man was bowing to worship, not merely to honor.
Related to this Objection is the charge that the Catholic Church deleted the 2nd Commandment (which prohibits making idols) and rearranged the numbering to get back to ten commandments. This is just plain bogus. The fact is, Scripture does not give us the numbering of the Commandments. It just tells us what all the Commandments are. The two numbering schemes in question (Protestant & Catholic) go back to Origen & Augustine. Most Protestants/Evengelicals/Bible-Christians & Eastern Orthodox Christians use Origen's enumeration. The Catholic scheme is Augustine's numbering. (Most Lutherans also use Augustine's numbering, which makes sense since he was an Augustinian monk before his revolt.) The details supposedly deleted by the Catholic Church are fleshed out in the Catechism section on the 10 Commandments.
Additional Information...
Saints: Holy Siblings
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m4/sts.html
Mary, Holy Mother
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m4/m.html
Mary, Ark of the Covenant
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m4/ma.html
Communion of Saints
http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/any-friend-of-god-is-a-friend-of-mine
The Woman clothed with the sun: ( Ap. 12) by Bernard J. Le Frois
Marian Typology in the Fathers and the Liturgy by Bernard Capelle
Friday, December 14, 2012
The Passover Feast: Catholics Celebrate It with Every Mass
Exodus 12 features God instituting the Passover Memorial Feast. It was to be annually celebrated for ever.
14 And this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast to the Lord throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever.
There's no indication that this commandment was ever abrogated or superseded (as were Works of the Law such as the bloody animal sacrifices and circumcision).
By participating in the Mass, Catholics obey God's directive to celebrate the Passover memorial feast instituted in Exodus 12. Those who do not participate in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass are not keeping the Feast (as Paul says in 1Cor5 "... Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast,...") and are hence not being obedient to God because they are not celebrating the Passover as directed.
For more Scriptural support of the reality of Jesus in the Eucharist check these out:
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m4/4cp.html
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m4/ech.html
The Bible and the Mass:
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/the_lambs_supper_the_bible_and_the_mass
Church Fathers on the subject:
http://www.cin.org/users/jgallegos/realp.htm
Eucharistic Miracles
http://home.sprynet.com/~bryaneadm/miracles.htm
http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/eucharistic-miracles-evidence-of-the-real-presence
P.S.:
Non-Catholics wonder why they are not allowed to participate in the Catholic Communion ceremony. One reason is that they do not share all the Catholic beliefs. Participating in the Communion ritual implies that one agrees with the doctrines of those with whom one is communing. If a person participates in Communion when he is not really "in communion", he is making a liar out of himself or the congregation with whom he's, superficially, communing.
A couple other reasons...
1) God commanded (Exodus12) that only those who were full members of the family could participate (ie all the males had to be circumcised, even servants who wanted to participate) in the Passover celebration.
2) To participate without believing in the Real Presence of Christ in the consecrated host is to bring God's judgement upon oneself. As Paul put it: "For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body." 1Cor11:29. So, when the Christian is disallowed to participate, their Catholic friends are actually protecting them from God's wrath. Be grateful, my friend.
===============
Other notes on Scriptural indications for the idea that the consecrated Bread and Wine ARE the Flesh and Blood of Jesus...
OT pre-figurements:
Genesis: Abraham & Melchisedeck
Ezekiel 39: vv 17-19, God describes how His people will eat worthy flesh and worthy blood (as opposed to pagans' sacrifices of flesh and blood of inferior creatures), of the sacrifice He will provide (which is fulfilled in Jesus, the Lamb of God, given to us to eat via the Last Supper).
"eat" someone's flesh, "eat up" someone: Scriptural context...
Psalm 27 "eat up my flesh" means to persecute, destroy.
Greek OT uses "fagit" (root fago, to eat/dine)
John6 Jesus uses fago, then switches to trogo, to emphasize actual feasting on His flesh
Jesus was taken literally because in Jewish cultural/language context, to eat someone's flesh in a figurative way is to persecute or slander them. Jesus could not, therefore, have been speaking figuratively (ie, to mean "consume my teachings"), but literally. That's why He switched to trogo, in order to stress His point that we must literally eat His flesh (which He made available to us one year later when He gave bread, saying "Take THIS and eat it. THIS is my body." This fulfills His statement in John 6 where He said "The bread I will give is my flesh.").
In John 6, Jesus was not speaking symbollically. To use the phrase "eat my flesh" symbolically, Jesus would have been saying "insult, slander me". That is the way the phrase was used in the Jewish culture of that time and place: to insult, to slander, or otherwise do ill to someone. Scripture demonstrates this symbolic use of the the phrase "to eat" someone...
Psalm 14 & 53 (similar psalms)
4 Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the Lord.
Psalm 27
2 When the wicked, even mine enemies and my foes, came upon me to eat up my flesh, they stumbled and fell.
Galatians 5
14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.
The miracles of multiplication of the loaves Jesus performed (where He "gave" bread) were prior to Him saying (John 6) "the bread I will give is my flesh" (note the future tense "will")... the next time He "gave" bread was the next Passover a year later, the Last Supper... the miracles of multiplication foreshadowed the Eucharist by providing more than enough bread for all who partook of it. The "leftovers" implies the infinite servings of Jesus' glorified Flesh available to feed all people of all time. (Some folks object to the doctrine of the Eucharist on the basis of Jesus' human Body being a limited thing as ours are, but Jesus' glorified body is not constrained by this universe's natural laws, never mind the fact that Jesus is a divine person (having human nature AND God nature, and so He is infinitely powerful and can make His Flesh superabundant.)
14 And this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast to the Lord throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever.
There's no indication that this commandment was ever abrogated or superseded (as were Works of the Law such as the bloody animal sacrifices and circumcision).
The synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) depict Jesus, at the Last Supper (a Passover feast), transforming/perfecting the Old Covenant Passover event in order that it be carried over into the New Covenant, thus enabling Christians of all time to keep God's directive to celebrate it forever. Jesus, the true Lamb of God (John1:29), changed bread & wine into His flesh & blood for the participants to eat because the Passover rules required them to eat the sacrificial lamb. (Notice, there is no mention of a baby sheep or goat in the Upper Room. This is because Jesus is Passover Lamb for this and all future Passover feasts.) He also commanded and empowered the Apostles to perform this same miraculous conversion, with His words "Do this...". Those Apostles handed on this empowerment to their successors so that we today, nearly 2000 years later can still obey God's directive and celebrate the Passover (in the Mass, the Eucharist), transported into the Upper Room on that night, to commune physically with the Lamb. In John 6 Jesus says "Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you." This reflects the Passover requirement of the people of God to eat the sacrificial Lamb (truly, not symbolically). If the Lamb was not eaten, death would ensue. When we partake of the Eucharist, we eat the Passover Lamb presented in the Upper Room and are preserved from death, spiritually, and sometimes physically, as miraculous healings have occurred through the ages by the agency of the Eucharist.
Paul supports the Real Presence of Jesus in the form of bread & wine in Ephesians 5:30-32 " For we are members of his
body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man
leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two
shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery:
but I speak concerning Christ and the church."
Paul is saying that in the marriage covenant the man & woman become one flesh (they partake of eachother in a physical, material way and each belongs to the other). He lets us know that our covenantal relationship with Jesus also includes sharing in a physical, material manner. In the marriage covenant it is achieved through sexual union, in the covenant with Jesus ("The new covenant in my blood") it is achieved through the ritual He instituted at the Last Supper. Today it's called Eucharist or the Mass.By participating in the Mass, Catholics obey God's directive to celebrate the Passover memorial feast instituted in Exodus 12. Those who do not participate in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass are not keeping the Feast (as Paul says in 1Cor5 "... Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast,...") and are hence not being obedient to God because they are not celebrating the Passover as directed.
For more Scriptural support of the reality of Jesus in the Eucharist check these out:
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m4/4cp.html
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m4/ech.html
The Bible and the Mass:
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/the_lambs_supper_the_bible_and_the_mass
Church Fathers on the subject:
http://www.cin.org/users/jgallegos/realp.htm
Eucharistic Miracles
http://home.sprynet.com/~bryaneadm/miracles.htm
http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/eucharistic-miracles-evidence-of-the-real-presence
P.S.:
Non-Catholics wonder why they are not allowed to participate in the Catholic Communion ceremony. One reason is that they do not share all the Catholic beliefs. Participating in the Communion ritual implies that one agrees with the doctrines of those with whom one is communing. If a person participates in Communion when he is not really "in communion", he is making a liar out of himself or the congregation with whom he's, superficially, communing.
A couple other reasons...
1) God commanded (Exodus12) that only those who were full members of the family could participate (ie all the males had to be circumcised, even servants who wanted to participate) in the Passover celebration.
2) To participate without believing in the Real Presence of Christ in the consecrated host is to bring God's judgement upon oneself. As Paul put it: "For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body." 1Cor11:29. So, when the Christian is disallowed to participate, their Catholic friends are actually protecting them from God's wrath. Be grateful, my friend.
===============
Other notes on Scriptural indications for the idea that the consecrated Bread and Wine ARE the Flesh and Blood of Jesus...
OT pre-figurements:
Genesis: Abraham & Melchisedeck
Ezekiel 39: vv 17-19, God describes how His people will eat worthy flesh and worthy blood (as opposed to pagans' sacrifices of flesh and blood of inferior creatures), of the sacrifice He will provide (which is fulfilled in Jesus, the Lamb of God, given to us to eat via the Last Supper).
"eat" someone's flesh, "eat up" someone: Scriptural context...
Psalm 27 "eat up my flesh" means to persecute, destroy.
Greek OT uses "fagit" (root fago, to eat/dine)
John6 Jesus uses fago, then switches to trogo, to emphasize actual feasting on His flesh
Jesus was taken literally because in Jewish cultural/language context, to eat someone's flesh in a figurative way is to persecute or slander them. Jesus could not, therefore, have been speaking figuratively (ie, to mean "consume my teachings"), but literally. That's why He switched to trogo, in order to stress His point that we must literally eat His flesh (which He made available to us one year later when He gave bread, saying "Take THIS and eat it. THIS is my body." This fulfills His statement in John 6 where He said "The bread I will give is my flesh.").
In John 6, Jesus was not speaking symbollically. To use the phrase "eat my flesh" symbolically, Jesus would have been saying "insult, slander me". That is the way the phrase was used in the Jewish culture of that time and place: to insult, to slander, or otherwise do ill to someone. Scripture demonstrates this symbolic use of the the phrase "to eat" someone...
Psalm 14 & 53 (similar psalms)
4 Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the Lord.
Psalm 27
2 When the wicked, even mine enemies and my foes, came upon me to eat up my flesh, they stumbled and fell.
Galatians 5
14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.
The miracles of multiplication of the loaves Jesus performed (where He "gave" bread) were prior to Him saying (John 6) "the bread I will give is my flesh" (note the future tense "will")... the next time He "gave" bread was the next Passover a year later, the Last Supper... the miracles of multiplication foreshadowed the Eucharist by providing more than enough bread for all who partook of it. The "leftovers" implies the infinite servings of Jesus' glorified Flesh available to feed all people of all time. (Some folks object to the doctrine of the Eucharist on the basis of Jesus' human Body being a limited thing as ours are, but Jesus' glorified body is not constrained by this universe's natural laws, never mind the fact that Jesus is a divine person (having human nature AND God nature, and so He is infinitely powerful and can make His Flesh superabundant.)
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Helpful Articles and Useful Links...
Frequently-Referred-to online Bibles:
King James Version Pure Cambridge Edition (a "KJV-only" site, but the layout of the books is handy for searching)
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/thebible.htm
Parallel New Testament, 15 versions
http://greeknewtestament.com/
Parallel Old Testament, 12 versions
http://www.hebrewoldtestament.com/
Parallel Bible, Greek-English (Knox)-Latin (Vulgate)
http://www.newadvent.org/bible/gen001.htm
Greek New Testament, provides pronunciation and definitions
http://www.greekbible.com/index.php
Bible Studies:
Covenant Love: Introducing the Biblical Worldview
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/covenant_love
Genesis to Jesus, A Journey Through Scripture
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/genesis_to_jesus_a_journey_through_scripture
The Lamb's Supper: The Bible and the Mass
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/the_lambs_supper_the_bible_and_the_mass
The Kingdom of God in Scripture
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/he_must_reign_the_kingdom_of_god_in_scripture
Holy Queen: The Mother of God in the Word of God
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/holy_queen_the_mother_of_god_in_the_word_of_god
Reading the Old Testament in the New
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/reading_the_old_testament_in_the_new_the_gospel_of_matthew
Papacy:
The Authority of the First Popes
Other:
Catholic Evidence Training Outline: Though over 80 years old, this document provides some of the best summations of the veracity of Catholic doctrines. It includes information on how to preach on the street corner to generic crowds (not my cup of tea, but may be yours), and has extensive references for study.
http://www.ewtn.com/library/answers/cathevid.htm
The Vatican Library:
http://www.vatlib.it/home.php?ling=eng&res=1440x900
Online Catholic Encyclopedia:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/
Library of Church Documents:
http://www.newadvent.org/library/index.html
Works of the Church Fathers:
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/
Answering Common Objections to Catholicism (Papacy,Purgatory,Mary,Saints,Eucharist):
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m4/pp.html
Sacraments:
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m5/Mod5.html
King James Version Pure Cambridge Edition (a "KJV-only" site, but the layout of the books is handy for searching)
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/thebible.htm
Parallel New Testament, 15 versions
http://greeknewtestament.com/
Parallel Old Testament, 12 versions
http://www.hebrewoldtestament.com/
Parallel Bible, Greek-English (Knox)-Latin (Vulgate)
http://www.newadvent.org/bible/gen001.htm
Greek New Testament, provides pronunciation and definitions
http://www.greekbible.com/index.php
Bible Studies:
Covenant Love: Introducing the Biblical Worldview
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/covenant_love
Genesis to Jesus, A Journey Through Scripture
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/genesis_to_jesus_a_journey_through_scripture
The Lamb's Supper: The Bible and the Mass
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/the_lambs_supper_the_bible_and_the_mass
The Kingdom of God in Scripture
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/he_must_reign_the_kingdom_of_god_in_scripture
Holy Queen: The Mother of God in the Word of God
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/holy_queen_the_mother_of_god_in_the_word_of_god
Reading the Old Testament in the New
http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online/reading_the_old_testament_in_the_new_the_gospel_of_matthew
Papacy:
The Authority of the First Popes
Other:
Catholic Evidence Training Outline: Though over 80 years old, this document provides some of the best summations of the veracity of Catholic doctrines. It includes information on how to preach on the street corner to generic crowds (not my cup of tea, but may be yours), and has extensive references for study.
http://www.ewtn.com/library/answers/cathevid.htm
The Vatican Library:
http://www.vatlib.it/home.php?ling=eng&res=1440x900
Online Catholic Encyclopedia:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/
Library of Church Documents:
http://www.newadvent.org/library/index.html
Works of the Church Fathers:
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/
Answering Common Objections to Catholicism (Papacy,Purgatory,Mary,Saints,Eucharist):
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m4/pp.html
Sacraments:
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m5/Mod5.html
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
"Quotes" of the Popes: Their Context and Legitimacy
Here's my take on some "papal" quotes which seem to shine negative light on the office of the papacy. I've found that there are categories by which anti-Catholics contend with the Papacy or Catholic doctrines or why the quote is wrong or misleading:
1) Biblical Exegesis: They just disagree in it.
2) Context: Failure to consider the full context in terms of the times and places and events surrounding a given quote, and the quote's context within the document, can lead to misinterpretation. (Just as in Scripture).
3) Some are not historically substantiated. They usually have no reference besides a name and maybe dates of office. These can be traced back to some literary work condemning RCC and that work doesn't have source document references. (ie Louis Marie DeCormenin, Loraine Boettner, Dave Hunt). So, if a quote has no documentary reference it is a gratuitous assertion and therefore can be equally as gratuitously denied authenticity.
I've researched only via internet (out-of-copyright books can be found at openlibrary.org and archive.org ). As such, I could be missing some information. I am open to being referred to print-only documentation, if someone wishes to enlighten me. Loraine Boettner's Roman Catholicism, David Hunt's A Woman Rides the Beast, and Hislop's The Two Babylons, are common sources for many anti-Catholics. Hislop's, especially, being a couple centuries old, seems to be a prime source.
Here's some quotes I have had presented to me to demonstrate the purported un-Biblical nature of Catholicism:
(NOTE: among the anti-catholic vocalists, there's a heck of a lot of plagiarizing. Often, you'll never find the originating source of a given quote, only finding it in anti-catholic writings. Who's copying whom? I dunno... but you'll often be googling yourself in circles if you actually research their quotes and assertions...)
---
Catholic Canon Law Says Catholics Can Kill Protestants
This page pretends to be quoting Canon Law in listing 4 steps used in the purging of Heretics, yet without providing any references. A little googling reveals his source... a 1854 work by the Church of England Young Men's Society. http://books.google.com/books?id=3qYCAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA12&lpg=PA12&dq=IV.+The+last+punishment+is+death+sometimes+by+the+sword,--more+commonly+by+fire.&source=bl&ots=0k8cVOutVT&sig=ELwCE9FlMb3aR482UBlpAwvR7fc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=O2NyVMnUBsebNtTfgaAJ&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=IV.%20The%20last%20punishment%20is%20death%20sometimes%20by%20the%20sword%2C--more%20commonly%20by%20fire.&f=false
But that work doesn't provide any actual Canon Law reference either, just saying "this is the canon law of Rome".
Continued googling reveals an earlier book, 1851, The Papacy; Its History, Dogmas, Genius, and Prospects by a Rev. JA Wylie (protestant) which features the same 4 items. The reference says
"The above Decretals respecting heresy are quoted from the Jus Canonrcuu Digestum et Enucleatum juxta Ordinem Librorum et Titulorum qui in Decretalibus Epistolis Gregor ii IX PM Georgii Adami Struvi pp 359 363 Lipsiae et Jenae 1688
Quinta Compilatio Epistolarum Decretalium Honorii III PM Innocentii Cironii Juris Utriusque Professoris Canonici ac Ecclesiw et Acudcmhe Tolosanm Cancellarii Comp v tit iv cup ip 200 Tolosa 1645"
I'm looking for an English version of those documents...
Here's the Latin Decretals of Gregory IX.
Here's the Catholic encyclopedia on the Body of Canon Law, of which Gregory IX's decretals are an integral part.
Here's a quote which is accredited to Pope Honorius...
"And all heretics, of both sexes and of every name, we damn [I thought that God does this] to perpetual infamy; we declare hostility against them; we account them accursed, and their goods confiscated; nor can they ever enjoy their property, or their children succeed to their inheritance [punishing the children!]; inasmuch as they grievously offend against the Eternal as well as the temporal king [the pope]."
source: Quinta Compilatio Epistolarum Decretalium Honorii III. P.M. Innocentii Cironii, Juris Utriusque Professoris, Canonici ac Ecclesiae, et Academae Tolosannae Cancellarii, Comp. v. tit. iv. cap. i. p. 200; Tolosae, 1645."
Here's the original of the source referenced.
I google-translated phrases from that quote into Latin and searched the referenced document but that quote is not in there. For example, searching for "haereticos" (heretics) turned up two instances, but not in a use like the above "quote".
---
"It is the office of the Papacy to tread under foot kings and emperors." J.H. Ignaz Dollinger, in The Pope and the Council, (London), page 35
In his later years, Dollinger was no friend of the RCC. So, his opinion has no
bearing on official policies/practices/doctrines of the RCC. It's just one man's anti-papist
opinion.
-
"Fear, then, our wrath and the thunders of our vengeance; for Jesus Christ has appointed us [the popes] with his own mouth absolute judges of all men; and kings themselves are submitted to our authority." Pope Nicholas I (858-867 AD)
I could not confirm the legitimacy of this quote. The oldest document I found
this in is A complete history of the popes of Rome By Louis Marie DeCormenin.
It's an anti-Catholic production from 1857. I found no references for the pericope from which this quote comes.
http://www.archive.org/stream/acompletehistor00decogoog#page/n2/mode/2up
But, let's just assume it's authentic. If the popes are indeed successors of Peter and if Peter was indeed appointed King Jesus' vicar on earth, then this quote would be perfectly in line with reality. Popes, then, can judge or detect whether any given man is likely saved or not, by that man's words and deeds. And kings who are Catholic should be obedient to the pope in the same way all other believers should be.
-
"No, the [Catholic] Church will not descend into the tomb. It will survive the Empire . . . At length a second empire will arise, and of this empire the Pope will be the master--more then this, he will be the master of Europe. He will dictate his orders to kings who will obey them"--Andrea Lagarde, The Latin Church in the Middle Ages, 1915, p. vi.
http://www.archive.org/stream/thelatinchurchi200lagauoft#page/n5/mode/2up
The name should be Andre, not Andrea. This quote is from the preface summarizing the temporal rise of power of the RCC, filling the leadership void left by the fallen Roman Empire. European Medieval culture was a fusion of Church and State. It was a Christian society (hence the term Christendom, and the only Christian church at the time was the Catholic Church, headed by the Bishop of Rome), and the Church was a prime influence over Kings because they were Catholic men. It's a natural consequence of Jesus founding a Church (with a visible hierarchical structure) and it's participation in the unfolding events of history.
-
"But Constitutions can be changed, and non-Catholic sects may decline to such a point that the political proscription [ban] of them may become feasible and expedient. What protection would they have against a Catholic state?" -The State and the Church, pp.38,39, by Miller and Ryan, imprimatur of Cardinal Hayes.
http://www.archive.org/stream/statechurch00ryan#page/n5/mode/2up
Another name misspelled, Miller should be Millar. Anyway, this quote doesn't imply that the RCC plans on taking over the world, by changing our Constitution to outlaw all religions but Catholicism. Read the section where this quote is found. It's not talking about the RCC juggernaut domineering a society, it's saying that in a society featuring constitution-assured religious liberty, that constitution can be changed. And if Catholicism were to become the nearly only faith system in that society (ie if most every citizen were to convert to Catholicism), it might make sense to pass rules regulating non-Catholic practices. It goes on to say that this is such a remote probability that no sensible man will worry about it. Read more of the document.
-
[Catholics] must penetrate wherever possible in the administration of civil affairs... all Catholics should do all in their power to cause the constitution of states, and legislation to be modelled on the principles of the true Church." -Encyclical of Leo XIII.
This is just a good idea. All Christians should make Catholic principles the guide of their social interactions and behavior. It means: Love God and love your neighbor. It implies all humans are equal, in the eyes of God, vested with certain inalienable, God-given, natural rights: life, liberty, ownership of property. It implies we should vote for political candidates who are Pro-Life, we are duty-bound to NOT vote for Pro-Choice candidates, and we should strive to amend the Constitution to protect the unborn.
-
superior papal authority and dominion is derived from the law of the Caesars." Lucius Ferraris, in "Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica, Juridica, Moralis, Theologica, Ascetica, Polemica, Rubristica, Historica", Volume V, article on "Papa, Article II", titled "Concerning the extent of Papal dignity, authority, or dominion and infallibility", #19, published in Petit-Montrouge (Paris) by J. P. Migne, 1858 edition.
So far, have not found online English version, so I can't know the context here.
It probably comments on how it was the RCC that filled the leadership void left by the fallen Roman Empire.
-
The appellation of God had been confirmed by Constantine on the Pope, who being God, cannot be judged by man." Pope Nicholas I, quoted in History of the Councils, vol. IX, Dist.: 96, Can 7, "Satis Evidentur Decret Gratian Primer Para", by Labbe and Cossart.
Haven't found this work online, so I can't know the context here, or even veracity of the translation from Latin.
-
"Long ages ago, when Rome through the neglect of the Western emperors was left to the mercy of the barbarous hordes, the Romans turned to one figure for aid and protection, and asked him to rule them; and thus commenced the temporal sovereignty of the popes. And meekly stepping to the throne of Caesar, the vicar of Christ took up the scepter to which the emperors and kings of Europe were to bow in reverence through so many ages."--American Catholic Quarterly Review, April, 1911.
This is just saying how the power vacuum left by the defunct Roman Empire was filled by the only society capable to do so, the RCC.
-
"Out of the ruins of political Rome, arose the great moral Empire in the 'giant form' of the Roman Church."--A.C. Flick, The Rise of the Medieval Church, 1909, p. 150.
ditto.
Quotes relating to Papal ruling power are intended to show the supposed authoritarian and arrogant attitude of the Papacy. However, the context is usually lost when isolating a quote (especially when the quote is unsubstantiated or just fabricated). Papal power in temporal matters is limited but in eccliastical matters he exercises the authority and power of Christ bestowed on the office by Jesus Himself.
Here's a paper on Eccliastical and Temporal Power in Vitoria, Suarez and Ballarmine...
-
"Under the Roman Empire the popes had no temporal powers. But when the Roman Empire had disintegrated and its place had been taken by a number of rude, barbarous kingdoms, the Roman Catholic church not only became independent of the states in religious affairs, but dominated secular affairs as well. At times, under such rulers as Charlemagne (768-814), Otto the Great (936-973), and Henry III (1039-1056), the civil power controlled the church to some extent; but in general, under the weak political system of feudalism, the well-organized, unified, and centralized church, with the pope at its head, was not only independent in ecclesiastical affairs but also controlled civil affairs"--Carl Conrad Eckhardt, The Papacy and World-Affairs, The University of Chicago Press, 1937, P. 1.
ditto.
-
Pope Pius IX, in his "Discorsi" (I., p. 253), said: "The Caesar who now addresses you, and to whom alone are obedience and fidelity due."
not found yet in English...looks like there is a print English version... But, if the pope is indeed the Vicar of Christ, this would be true, in that sense.... Not instead of King Jesus, but in obedience to king Jesus.
-
"Every cleric must obey the Pope, even if he commands what is evil; for no one may judge the Pope." (Innocent III, 1198-1216)
not found anywhere but anti-Catholic "lists". In reality, any act inherently evil cannot be commanded of a cleric or layman by any pope or bishop of the RCC.
-
"There is neither appeal nor recourse against a decision or decree of the Roman Pontiff."
(The Code of Canon Law, 1985, Canons 1404, 1405, and 333, pp. 951, 271)
Makes sense, when the Pope is declaring "infallibly" (Which means he's speaking as the Vicar of Christ to the whole world on matters of faith and morals. ie, A letter to one region or group isn't considered to be protected by this charism.).
But even if it's matters not concerning dogmatic statements but practices or behaviors related to faith & morals, Christians naturally should and must obey the Pope (unless it is something evil in and of itself, or otherwise contradictory to past dogmatic statements). This is because the Church Christ established includes a visible authority aspect. Those leaders guide the pilgrim Church on earth in order to maximize their spiritual growth.
Here's a quote from Lumen Gentium...
This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic authority of the Roman pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra, in such wise, indeed, that his supreme teaching authority be acknowledged with respect and sincere assent be given to decisions made by him. (Lumen Gentium 25)
-
Various historical quotes about "No salvation outside the Church", coupled with later statements that some outside the Church can be saved, are meant to prove dogmatic contradictions and hence disprove the infallibility aspect.
Salvation comes from God through Jesus. Jesus established a Church to spread and protect His Gospel. Due to the fact that God revealed all His truths through that Church (specifically, the Apostles and their hand-picked successors), no salvation, no Gospel, came into the world except that which came through that Church. This doesn't mean one must absolutely profess acceptance of the Roman Catholic Church to be saved. Ultimately it's what's in the heart that matters and only God knows the heart. If one truly accepts Jesus as their Lord and Savior and does his best to obey Him, he will be saved. This is the ultimate purpose of the earthly Church: To bring people to believe in Jesus as their savior in order to be adopted as a child of God, not to merely be a card-carrying member of the organization.
Please read Lumen Gentium from Vatican II. It describes all this and more about the Church Christ built. Also, Karl Adam's book The Spirit of Catholicism.
Related Links:
Another analyzer:
http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2011/02/anti-catholic-lies-and-deceitful.html
I don't know who this guy is but he gives a good rebuttal to similar "quotes":
http://www.geoffhorton.com/PapalClaims.html
John Foxe's Acts and Monuments is a source of some quotes erroneously attributed to a pope.
http://archive.org/details/actsmonumentsofj03foxe
Alexander Hislop The Two Babylons circa 1853
online version: http://www.biblebelievers.com/babylon/00index.htm
Wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two_Babylons
Loraine Boettner Roman Catholicism circa 1962
online version: http://www.worldwithoutend.info/bbc/books/lb-rc/toc.htm
refutation: http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-anti-catholic-bible
Dave Hunt A Woman Rides the Beast circa 1994
pdf online: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fknizky.mahdi.cz%2F128_Dave_Hunt____A_Woman_Rides_The_Beast_The_Roman_Catholic_Church_And_The_Last_Days.pdf&ei=O82gUuPTIIbNkAearYGwCw&usg=AFQjCNErAzIqr6926yDw7COUapKTmfv8xw&bvm=bv.57155469,d.eW0&cad=rja
Refutations: http://www.catholic.com/search/content/dave%20hunt%20a%20woman%20rides%20the%20beast
Additional Quotes added as I encounter them:
"Pope Stephen II sent a forged letter from "St. Peter" to Pepin, King of France, admonishing him to send troops to liberate Italy from the Lombard king, Aistulph, or forget about getting into heaven. Pepin complied with the pope's request. [McCabe, 1939, 156 (McCabe cited theMigne collection of the Latin Fathers, VoL LXXXIX, col, 1004- as the source of the letter, and also noted that the letter had never been translated.)]"
from: http://www.666christiancrimes.com/700%20-%20799.html
Here's Jacques-Paul Migne Patrologia Latina: http://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/patrologia-latina-pl-volumes-available-online/
I haven't seen a translation into English but here's the Latin and the English by Google Translate:
EPISTOLA V.
STEPHANI II AD FRANCOS.
Missa suit sub nomine Petri apostoli et Stephani ad
eosdem pro subsidio contra Longobardos.
Petrus vocatus apostolus a Jesu Christo Dei vivi
Filio, qui ante omnia saecula cum Patre regnans in
unitate Spiritus sancti, in ultimis temporibus pro nostra
omnium salute incarnatus et homo factus, nos
suo redemit pretioso sanguine, per voluntatem paternae
gloriae, quemadmodum per sanctos suos destinavit
prophetas, in Scripturis sanctis, et per me
omnis Dei catholica et aposiolica Romana Ecclesia,
caput omnium Ecclesiarum Dei, Ipsius redemptoris
nostri sanguine supra firmam fundata petram, atque
ejusdem almae Ecclesiae Stephanus praesul, gratia,
pax, et virtus ad eruendam eamdem sanctam Dei
Ecclesiam, et ejus Romanum populum mihi commissum
de manibus persequentium, plenius ministretur
a Domino Deo vestro, vobis viris excellentissimis
Pippino, Carolo, et Carolomanno tribus regibus, atque
sanctissimis episcopis, abbatibus, presbyteris,
vel cunctis religiosis monachis, verum etiam ducibus,
comitibus, et cunctis generalibus exercitibus,
et populo Franciae commorantibus.
Ego Petrus apostolus, dum a Christo Dei vivi Filio
vocatus sum supernae clementiae arbitrio, illuminator
ab ejus potentis totius mundi sum praeordinatus,
ipso Domino Deo nostro confirmante : Ite, docete
omnes gentes, baptizantes eos in nomine Patris
ct Filii, et Spiritus sancti (Matth. 11) ; et iterum :
Accipite Spiritum sanctum ; quorum remiseritis peccata,
remittuntur eis (Joan. xx) ; et mibi suo exiguo
servo et vocato apostolo sigillatim suas commendans
oves ait : Pasce oves meas, paice agnos meos (Joan.
xxi) ; et rursus : Tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram
aedificabo Ecclesiam meam, el portae inferorum non
praevalebunt adversus eam. Et tibi dabo claves regni
caelorum ; qnaecunque ligaveris super terram , erunt
ligata et in coelis ; et quacuvque solveris super terram,
erunt soluta et in caelis (Matth. xvi). Quamobrem omnes
qui meam audientes impleverunt praedicationem,
profecto eredant sua in hoc mundo Dei praeceptione
relaxari peccata, et mundi atque sine macula
in illam progredieniur vitam. Etenim quibus [quia]
illuminatio Spiritus sancti in vestris refulsit praefulgidis
cordibus, vosque amatores effecti estis sanetae
et unicae Trinitatis per susceptum evangelicae praedicationis
verbum, profecto in hac aposlolica Dei.
Google Translate says:
LETTER V.STEPHEN 2 to the French .Under the name of Peter the apostle , and Stephen visited to the Mass they reserve the Lombards .Peter called to be an Apostle of Jesus Christ of the God of the living from the
The Son, Who with the Father before all ages reigning in thethe unity of the Holy Spirit, in these latter times for ourthe salvation of all was incarnate and was made man , wehas redeemed with his precious blood , by the will of the Father'sof glory, through His saints he hath determined the same way asthe prophets, in the holy scriptures , and through meAnd all of God, the Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church,the head of all the Churches of God , the Redeemer of Hisof my blood on the firm foundations of the rock , andStephen bishop of the Church of the glorious grace ,peace, and the power of God's Holy help bring to light the sameThe church, and his Romans, a nation has been committed to meout of the hands of their persecutors , fully servedfrom the Lord your God, you, men of great excellencePepin, Charles, and Carolomanno three kings , andmost holy bishops , abbots , priests,or all the religious monks , but also the leaders and thewere with me, and to all the General of the army ,and the people of France that continue .I, Peter the Apostle , when effected by Christ, the Son of the living GodI have been called celestial mercy the judgment of truth, the lightfrom those of his power of the whole world, I am not pre-ordained ,confirming the very fact the Lord our God : Go, and make disciples ofall nations, baptizing them in the name of the Fatherand of the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 11), and again,Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose soever sins ye remit ,
forgiven (John xx ), and for me its a littleservant and a called apostle look after their own records with thethe sheep said, ' Feed my sheep, paice my lambs (Johnxxi ), and they said again, 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I willI will build my church, the gates of hell shall not Elprevail against it . I will give you the keys of the kingdomof the heavens; qnaecunque thou shalt bind on earth shall bebound also in heaven, and quacuvque shalt loose upon the earth,shall be loosed also in the heavens ( Matt. xvi ). Therefore, all ofI heard that filled preachingHis command of God in this world and certainly eredantto relax sins, and of the world and, without the stain ofit progredieniur life . For these [ because ]the illumination of the Holy Spirit in your splendid shonehearts , you lovers have become the holyundertaken by the preaching of the Gospel and the splitting of the Trinity
the word , it is certainly in this Apostolic of God.
1) Biblical Exegesis: They just disagree in it.
2) Context: Failure to consider the full context in terms of the times and places and events surrounding a given quote, and the quote's context within the document, can lead to misinterpretation. (Just as in Scripture).
3) Some are not historically substantiated. They usually have no reference besides a name and maybe dates of office. These can be traced back to some literary work condemning RCC and that work doesn't have source document references. (ie Louis Marie DeCormenin, Loraine Boettner, Dave Hunt). So, if a quote has no documentary reference it is a gratuitous assertion and therefore can be equally as gratuitously denied authenticity.
I've researched only via internet (out-of-copyright books can be found at openlibrary.org and archive.org ). As such, I could be missing some information. I am open to being referred to print-only documentation, if someone wishes to enlighten me. Loraine Boettner's Roman Catholicism, David Hunt's A Woman Rides the Beast, and Hislop's The Two Babylons, are common sources for many anti-Catholics. Hislop's, especially, being a couple centuries old, seems to be a prime source.
Here's some quotes I have had presented to me to demonstrate the purported un-Biblical nature of Catholicism:
(NOTE: among the anti-catholic vocalists, there's a heck of a lot of plagiarizing. Often, you'll never find the originating source of a given quote, only finding it in anti-catholic writings. Who's copying whom? I dunno... but you'll often be googling yourself in circles if you actually research their quotes and assertions...)
---
Catholic Canon Law Says Catholics Can Kill Protestants
This page pretends to be quoting Canon Law in listing 4 steps used in the purging of Heretics, yet without providing any references. A little googling reveals his source... a 1854 work by the Church of England Young Men's Society. http://books.google.com/books?id=3qYCAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA12&lpg=PA12&dq=IV.+The+last+punishment+is+death+sometimes+by+the+sword,--more+commonly+by+fire.&source=bl&ots=0k8cVOutVT&sig=ELwCE9FlMb3aR482UBlpAwvR7fc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=O2NyVMnUBsebNtTfgaAJ&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=IV.%20The%20last%20punishment%20is%20death%20sometimes%20by%20the%20sword%2C--more%20commonly%20by%20fire.&f=false
But that work doesn't provide any actual Canon Law reference either, just saying "this is the canon law of Rome".
Continued googling reveals an earlier book, 1851, The Papacy; Its History, Dogmas, Genius, and Prospects by a Rev. JA Wylie (protestant) which features the same 4 items. The reference says
"The above Decretals respecting heresy are quoted from the Jus Canonrcuu Digestum et Enucleatum juxta Ordinem Librorum et Titulorum qui in Decretalibus Epistolis Gregor ii IX PM Georgii Adami Struvi pp 359 363 Lipsiae et Jenae 1688
Quinta Compilatio Epistolarum Decretalium Honorii III PM Innocentii Cironii Juris Utriusque Professoris Canonici ac Ecclesiw et Acudcmhe Tolosanm Cancellarii Comp v tit iv cup ip 200 Tolosa 1645"
I'm looking for an English version of those documents...
Here's the Latin Decretals of Gregory IX.
Here's the Catholic encyclopedia on the Body of Canon Law, of which Gregory IX's decretals are an integral part.
Here's a quote which is accredited to Pope Honorius...
"And all heretics, of both sexes and of every name, we damn [I thought that God does this] to perpetual infamy; we declare hostility against them; we account them accursed, and their goods confiscated; nor can they ever enjoy their property, or their children succeed to their inheritance [punishing the children!]; inasmuch as they grievously offend against the Eternal as well as the temporal king [the pope]."
source: Quinta Compilatio Epistolarum Decretalium Honorii III. P.M. Innocentii Cironii, Juris Utriusque Professoris, Canonici ac Ecclesiae, et Academae Tolosannae Cancellarii, Comp. v. tit. iv. cap. i. p. 200; Tolosae, 1645."
Here's the original of the source referenced.
I google-translated phrases from that quote into Latin and searched the referenced document but that quote is not in there. For example, searching for "haereticos" (heretics) turned up two instances, but not in a use like the above "quote".
---
"It is the office of the Papacy to tread under foot kings and emperors." J.H. Ignaz Dollinger, in The Pope and the Council, (London), page 35
In his later years, Dollinger was no friend of the RCC. So, his opinion has no
bearing on official policies/practices/doctrines of the RCC. It's just one man's anti-papist
opinion.
-
"Fear, then, our wrath and the thunders of our vengeance; for Jesus Christ has appointed us [the popes] with his own mouth absolute judges of all men; and kings themselves are submitted to our authority." Pope Nicholas I (858-867 AD)
I could not confirm the legitimacy of this quote. The oldest document I found
this in is A complete history of the popes of Rome By Louis Marie DeCormenin.
It's an anti-Catholic production from 1857. I found no references for the pericope from which this quote comes.
http://www.archive.org/stream/acompletehistor00decogoog#page/n2/mode/2up
But, let's just assume it's authentic. If the popes are indeed successors of Peter and if Peter was indeed appointed King Jesus' vicar on earth, then this quote would be perfectly in line with reality. Popes, then, can judge or detect whether any given man is likely saved or not, by that man's words and deeds. And kings who are Catholic should be obedient to the pope in the same way all other believers should be.
-
"No, the [Catholic] Church will not descend into the tomb. It will survive the Empire . . . At length a second empire will arise, and of this empire the Pope will be the master--more then this, he will be the master of Europe. He will dictate his orders to kings who will obey them"--Andrea Lagarde, The Latin Church in the Middle Ages, 1915, p. vi.
http://www.archive.org/stream/thelatinchurchi200lagauoft#page/n5/mode/2up
The name should be Andre, not Andrea. This quote is from the preface summarizing the temporal rise of power of the RCC, filling the leadership void left by the fallen Roman Empire. European Medieval culture was a fusion of Church and State. It was a Christian society (hence the term Christendom, and the only Christian church at the time was the Catholic Church, headed by the Bishop of Rome), and the Church was a prime influence over Kings because they were Catholic men. It's a natural consequence of Jesus founding a Church (with a visible hierarchical structure) and it's participation in the unfolding events of history.
-
"But Constitutions can be changed, and non-Catholic sects may decline to such a point that the political proscription [ban] of them may become feasible and expedient. What protection would they have against a Catholic state?" -The State and the Church, pp.38,39, by Miller and Ryan, imprimatur of Cardinal Hayes.
http://www.archive.org/stream/statechurch00ryan#page/n5/mode/2up
Another name misspelled, Miller should be Millar. Anyway, this quote doesn't imply that the RCC plans on taking over the world, by changing our Constitution to outlaw all religions but Catholicism. Read the section where this quote is found. It's not talking about the RCC juggernaut domineering a society, it's saying that in a society featuring constitution-assured religious liberty, that constitution can be changed. And if Catholicism were to become the nearly only faith system in that society (ie if most every citizen were to convert to Catholicism), it might make sense to pass rules regulating non-Catholic practices. It goes on to say that this is such a remote probability that no sensible man will worry about it. Read more of the document.
-
[Catholics] must penetrate wherever possible in the administration of civil affairs... all Catholics should do all in their power to cause the constitution of states, and legislation to be modelled on the principles of the true Church." -Encyclical of Leo XIII.
This is just a good idea. All Christians should make Catholic principles the guide of their social interactions and behavior. It means: Love God and love your neighbor. It implies all humans are equal, in the eyes of God, vested with certain inalienable, God-given, natural rights: life, liberty, ownership of property. It implies we should vote for political candidates who are Pro-Life, we are duty-bound to NOT vote for Pro-Choice candidates, and we should strive to amend the Constitution to protect the unborn.
-
superior papal authority and dominion is derived from the law of the Caesars." Lucius Ferraris, in "Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica, Juridica, Moralis, Theologica, Ascetica, Polemica, Rubristica, Historica", Volume V, article on "Papa, Article II", titled "Concerning the extent of Papal dignity, authority, or dominion and infallibility", #19, published in Petit-Montrouge (Paris) by J. P. Migne, 1858 edition.
So far, have not found online English version, so I can't know the context here.
It probably comments on how it was the RCC that filled the leadership void left by the fallen Roman Empire.
-
The appellation of God had been confirmed by Constantine on the Pope, who being God, cannot be judged by man." Pope Nicholas I, quoted in History of the Councils, vol. IX, Dist.: 96, Can 7, "Satis Evidentur Decret Gratian Primer Para", by Labbe and Cossart.
Haven't found this work online, so I can't know the context here, or even veracity of the translation from Latin.
-
"Long ages ago, when Rome through the neglect of the Western emperors was left to the mercy of the barbarous hordes, the Romans turned to one figure for aid and protection, and asked him to rule them; and thus commenced the temporal sovereignty of the popes. And meekly stepping to the throne of Caesar, the vicar of Christ took up the scepter to which the emperors and kings of Europe were to bow in reverence through so many ages."--American Catholic Quarterly Review, April, 1911.
This is just saying how the power vacuum left by the defunct Roman Empire was filled by the only society capable to do so, the RCC.
-
"Out of the ruins of political Rome, arose the great moral Empire in the 'giant form' of the Roman Church."--A.C. Flick, The Rise of the Medieval Church, 1909, p. 150.
ditto.
Quotes relating to Papal ruling power are intended to show the supposed authoritarian and arrogant attitude of the Papacy. However, the context is usually lost when isolating a quote (especially when the quote is unsubstantiated or just fabricated). Papal power in temporal matters is limited but in eccliastical matters he exercises the authority and power of Christ bestowed on the office by Jesus Himself.
Here's a paper on Eccliastical and Temporal Power in Vitoria, Suarez and Ballarmine...
-
"Under the Roman Empire the popes had no temporal powers. But when the Roman Empire had disintegrated and its place had been taken by a number of rude, barbarous kingdoms, the Roman Catholic church not only became independent of the states in religious affairs, but dominated secular affairs as well. At times, under such rulers as Charlemagne (768-814), Otto the Great (936-973), and Henry III (1039-1056), the civil power controlled the church to some extent; but in general, under the weak political system of feudalism, the well-organized, unified, and centralized church, with the pope at its head, was not only independent in ecclesiastical affairs but also controlled civil affairs"--Carl Conrad Eckhardt, The Papacy and World-Affairs, The University of Chicago Press, 1937, P. 1.
ditto.
-
Pope Pius IX, in his "Discorsi" (I., p. 253), said: "The Caesar who now addresses you, and to whom alone are obedience and fidelity due."
not found yet in English...looks like there is a print English version... But, if the pope is indeed the Vicar of Christ, this would be true, in that sense.... Not instead of King Jesus, but in obedience to king Jesus.
-
"Every cleric must obey the Pope, even if he commands what is evil; for no one may judge the Pope." (Innocent III, 1198-1216)
not found anywhere but anti-Catholic "lists". In reality, any act inherently evil cannot be commanded of a cleric or layman by any pope or bishop of the RCC.
-
"There is neither appeal nor recourse against a decision or decree of the Roman Pontiff."
(The Code of Canon Law, 1985, Canons 1404, 1405, and 333, pp. 951, 271)
Makes sense, when the Pope is declaring "infallibly" (Which means he's speaking as the Vicar of Christ to the whole world on matters of faith and morals. ie, A letter to one region or group isn't considered to be protected by this charism.).
But even if it's matters not concerning dogmatic statements but practices or behaviors related to faith & morals, Christians naturally should and must obey the Pope (unless it is something evil in and of itself, or otherwise contradictory to past dogmatic statements). This is because the Church Christ established includes a visible authority aspect. Those leaders guide the pilgrim Church on earth in order to maximize their spiritual growth.
Here's a quote from Lumen Gentium...
This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic authority of the Roman pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra, in such wise, indeed, that his supreme teaching authority be acknowledged with respect and sincere assent be given to decisions made by him. (Lumen Gentium 25)
-
Various historical quotes about "No salvation outside the Church", coupled with later statements that some outside the Church can be saved, are meant to prove dogmatic contradictions and hence disprove the infallibility aspect.
Salvation comes from God through Jesus. Jesus established a Church to spread and protect His Gospel. Due to the fact that God revealed all His truths through that Church (specifically, the Apostles and their hand-picked successors), no salvation, no Gospel, came into the world except that which came through that Church. This doesn't mean one must absolutely profess acceptance of the Roman Catholic Church to be saved. Ultimately it's what's in the heart that matters and only God knows the heart. If one truly accepts Jesus as their Lord and Savior and does his best to obey Him, he will be saved. This is the ultimate purpose of the earthly Church: To bring people to believe in Jesus as their savior in order to be adopted as a child of God, not to merely be a card-carrying member of the organization.
Please read Lumen Gentium from Vatican II. It describes all this and more about the Church Christ built. Also, Karl Adam's book The Spirit of Catholicism.
Related Links:
Another analyzer:
http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2011/02/anti-catholic-lies-and-deceitful.html
I don't know who this guy is but he gives a good rebuttal to similar "quotes":
http://www.geoffhorton.com/PapalClaims.html
John Foxe's Acts and Monuments is a source of some quotes erroneously attributed to a pope.
http://archive.org/details/actsmonumentsofj03foxe
Alexander Hislop The Two Babylons circa 1853
online version: http://www.biblebelievers.com/babylon/00index.htm
Wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two_Babylons
Loraine Boettner Roman Catholicism circa 1962
online version: http://www.worldwithoutend.info/bbc/books/lb-rc/toc.htm
refutation: http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-anti-catholic-bible
Dave Hunt A Woman Rides the Beast circa 1994
pdf online: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fknizky.mahdi.cz%2F128_Dave_Hunt____A_Woman_Rides_The_Beast_The_Roman_Catholic_Church_And_The_Last_Days.pdf&ei=O82gUuPTIIbNkAearYGwCw&usg=AFQjCNErAzIqr6926yDw7COUapKTmfv8xw&bvm=bv.57155469,d.eW0&cad=rja
Refutations: http://www.catholic.com/search/content/dave%20hunt%20a%20woman%20rides%20the%20beast
Additional Quotes added as I encounter them:
"Pope Stephen II sent a forged letter from "St. Peter" to Pepin, King of France, admonishing him to send troops to liberate Italy from the Lombard king, Aistulph, or forget about getting into heaven. Pepin complied with the pope's request. [McCabe, 1939, 156 (McCabe cited theMigne collection of the Latin Fathers, VoL LXXXIX, col, 1004- as the source of the letter, and also noted that the letter had never been translated.)]"
from: http://www.666christiancrimes.com/700%20-%20799.html
Here's Jacques-Paul Migne Patrologia Latina: http://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/patrologia-latina-pl-volumes-available-online/
I haven't seen a translation into English but here's the Latin and the English by Google Translate:
EPISTOLA V.
STEPHANI II AD FRANCOS.
Missa suit sub nomine Petri apostoli et Stephani ad
eosdem pro subsidio contra Longobardos.
Petrus vocatus apostolus a Jesu Christo Dei vivi
Filio, qui ante omnia saecula cum Patre regnans in
unitate Spiritus sancti, in ultimis temporibus pro nostra
omnium salute incarnatus et homo factus, nos
suo redemit pretioso sanguine, per voluntatem paternae
gloriae, quemadmodum per sanctos suos destinavit
prophetas, in Scripturis sanctis, et per me
omnis Dei catholica et aposiolica Romana Ecclesia,
caput omnium Ecclesiarum Dei, Ipsius redemptoris
nostri sanguine supra firmam fundata petram, atque
ejusdem almae Ecclesiae Stephanus praesul, gratia,
pax, et virtus ad eruendam eamdem sanctam Dei
Ecclesiam, et ejus Romanum populum mihi commissum
de manibus persequentium, plenius ministretur
a Domino Deo vestro, vobis viris excellentissimis
Pippino, Carolo, et Carolomanno tribus regibus, atque
sanctissimis episcopis, abbatibus, presbyteris,
vel cunctis religiosis monachis, verum etiam ducibus,
comitibus, et cunctis generalibus exercitibus,
et populo Franciae commorantibus.
Ego Petrus apostolus, dum a Christo Dei vivi Filio
vocatus sum supernae clementiae arbitrio, illuminator
ab ejus potentis totius mundi sum praeordinatus,
ipso Domino Deo nostro confirmante : Ite, docete
omnes gentes, baptizantes eos in nomine Patris
ct Filii, et Spiritus sancti (Matth. 11) ; et iterum :
Accipite Spiritum sanctum ; quorum remiseritis peccata,
remittuntur eis (Joan. xx) ; et mibi suo exiguo
servo et vocato apostolo sigillatim suas commendans
oves ait : Pasce oves meas, paice agnos meos (Joan.
xxi) ; et rursus : Tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram
aedificabo Ecclesiam meam, el portae inferorum non
praevalebunt adversus eam. Et tibi dabo claves regni
caelorum ; qnaecunque ligaveris super terram , erunt
ligata et in coelis ; et quacuvque solveris super terram,
erunt soluta et in caelis (Matth. xvi). Quamobrem omnes
qui meam audientes impleverunt praedicationem,
profecto eredant sua in hoc mundo Dei praeceptione
relaxari peccata, et mundi atque sine macula
in illam progredieniur vitam. Etenim quibus [quia]
illuminatio Spiritus sancti in vestris refulsit praefulgidis
cordibus, vosque amatores effecti estis sanetae
et unicae Trinitatis per susceptum evangelicae praedicationis
verbum, profecto in hac aposlolica Dei.
Google Translate says:
LETTER V.STEPHEN 2 to the French .Under the name of Peter the apostle , and Stephen visited to the Mass they reserve the Lombards .Peter called to be an Apostle of Jesus Christ of the God of the living from the
The Son, Who with the Father before all ages reigning in thethe unity of the Holy Spirit, in these latter times for ourthe salvation of all was incarnate and was made man , wehas redeemed with his precious blood , by the will of the Father'sof glory, through His saints he hath determined the same way asthe prophets, in the holy scriptures , and through meAnd all of God, the Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church,the head of all the Churches of God , the Redeemer of Hisof my blood on the firm foundations of the rock , andStephen bishop of the Church of the glorious grace ,peace, and the power of God's Holy help bring to light the sameThe church, and his Romans, a nation has been committed to meout of the hands of their persecutors , fully servedfrom the Lord your God, you, men of great excellencePepin, Charles, and Carolomanno three kings , andmost holy bishops , abbots , priests,or all the religious monks , but also the leaders and thewere with me, and to all the General of the army ,and the people of France that continue .I, Peter the Apostle , when effected by Christ, the Son of the living GodI have been called celestial mercy the judgment of truth, the lightfrom those of his power of the whole world, I am not pre-ordained ,confirming the very fact the Lord our God : Go, and make disciples ofall nations, baptizing them in the name of the Fatherand of the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 11), and again,Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose soever sins ye remit ,
forgiven (John xx ), and for me its a littleservant and a called apostle look after their own records with thethe sheep said, ' Feed my sheep, paice my lambs (Johnxxi ), and they said again, 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I willI will build my church, the gates of hell shall not Elprevail against it . I will give you the keys of the kingdomof the heavens; qnaecunque thou shalt bind on earth shall bebound also in heaven, and quacuvque shalt loose upon the earth,shall be loosed also in the heavens ( Matt. xvi ). Therefore, all ofI heard that filled preachingHis command of God in this world and certainly eredantto relax sins, and of the world and, without the stain ofit progredieniur life . For these [ because ]the illumination of the Holy Spirit in your splendid shonehearts , you lovers have become the holyundertaken by the preaching of the Gospel and the splitting of the Trinity
the word , it is certainly in this Apostolic of God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)