One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Faith, Religion, Spirituality
What We Learn From the Gratitude of Our Lady
Page <prev 2 of 5 next> last>>
Dec 7, 2018 18:25:32   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
Examples of Jesus’ and the Apostles’ Reliance on Oral Tradition

Matt. 2:23 – the prophecy “He shall be a Nazarene” is oral tradition. It is not found in the Old Testament. This demonstrates that the apostles relied upon oral tradition and taught by oral tradition.

Matt 23:2 – Jesus relies on the oral tradition of acknowledging Moses’ seat of authority (which passed from Moses to Joshua to the Sanhedrin). This is not recorded in the Old Testament.

John 19:26; 20:2; 21:20,24 – knowing that the “beloved disciple” is John is inferred from Scripture, but is also largely oral tradition.

Acts 20:35 – Paul relies on the oral tradition of the apostles for this statement (“it is better to give than to receive”) of Jesus. It is not recorded in the Gospels.

1 Cor. 7:10 – Paul relies on the oral tradition of the apostles to give the charge of Jesus that a wife should not separate from her husband.

1 Cor. 10:4 – Paul relies on the oral tradition of the rock following Moses. It is not recorded in the Old Testament. See Exodus 17:1-17 and Num. 20:2-13.

Eph 5:14 – Paul relies on oral tradition to quote an early Christian hymn – “awake O sleeper rise from the dead and Christ shall give you light.”

Heb. 11:37 – the author of Hebrews relies on the oral tradition of the martyrs being sawed in two. This is not recorded in the Old Testament.

Jude 9 – Jude relies on the oral tradition of the Archangel Michael’s dispute with satan over Moses’ body. This is not found in the Old Testament.

Jude 14-15 – Jude relies on the oral tradition of Enoch’s prophecy which is not recorded in the Old Testament.

Reply
Dec 7, 2018 18:31:31   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
Tradition / Church Fathers

I. The Word of God in Oral Apostolic Tradition

‘If I do not find it in the ancient Scriptures, I will not believe the Gospel; on my saying to them, It is written, they answered me, That remains to be proved. But to me Jesus Christ is in the place of all that is ancient: His cross, and death and resurrection, and the faith which is by Him are undefiled monuments of antiquity…’ Ignatius ofAntioch, Epistle to the Philadelphians 8,2 (c. A.D. 110).

‘Follow the bishop, all of you, as Jesus Christ follows his Father, and the presbyterium as the Apostles. As for the deacons, respect them as the Law of God. Let no one do anything with reference to the Church without the bishop. Only that Eucharist may be regarded as legitimate which is celebrated with the bishop or his delegate presiding. Where the bishop is, there let the community be, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.’ Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Symyrnaens 8 (c. A.D. 110).

‘The apostles at that time first preached the Gospel but later by the will of God, they delivered it to us in the Scriptures, that it might be the foundation and pillar of our faith.’ Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3,1 (inter A.D. 180/199).
‘Since, therefore, the tradition from the apostles does thus exist in the Church, and is permanent among us, let us revert to the Scriptural proof furnished by those apostles who did also write the Gospel, in which they recorded the doctrine regarding God, pointing out that our Lord Jesus Christ is the truth, and that no lie is in Him.’ Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3,5,1 (inter A.D. 180/199).

“Through none others know we the disposition of our salvation, than those through whom the gospel came to us, first heralding it, then by the will of God delivering to us the Scriptures, which were to be the foundation and pillar of our faith…But when, the heretics are Scriptures, as if they were wrong, and unauthoritative, and were variable, and the truth could not be extracted from them by those who were ignorant of Tradition…And when we challenge them in turn what that tradition, which is from the Apostles, which is guarded by the succession of elders in the churches, they oppose themselves to Tradition, saying that they are wiser, not only than those elders, but even than the Apostles. The Tradition of the Apostles, manifested ‘on the contrary’ in the whole world, is open in every Church to all who see the truth…And, since it is a long matter in a work like this to enumerate these successions, we will confute them by pointing to the Tradition of that greatest and most ancient and universally known Church, founded and constituted at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, a tradition which she has had and a faith which she proclaims to all men from those Apostles.’ Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3,1-3 (inter A.D. 180/199).

‘For how should it be if the apostles themselves had not left us their writings? Would it not be necessary to follow the course of the tradition which they handed down to those whom they did commit the Churches?’ Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3, 4:1 (inter A.D. 180/199).
“Wherefore it is incumbent to obey the presbyters who are in the Church…those who, together with the succession of the episcopate, have received the certain gift of truth…” Irenaeus, Against Heresies 26:2 (inter A.D. 180/199).

“In this order, and by this succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the Apostles until now, and handed in truth.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3,3:3 (inter A.D. 180/199).

“Then I have pointed out the truth, and shown the preaching of the Church, which the prophets proclaimed (as I have already demonstrated), but which Christ brought to perfection, and the apostles have handed down, from which the Church, receiving, and throughout all the world alone preserving them in their integrity, has transmitted them to her sons. Then also-having disposed of all questions which the heretics propose to us, and having explained the doctrine of the apostles, and clearly set forth many of those things which were said and done by the Lord in parables…that they may preserve steadfast the faith which they have received, guarded by the Church in its integrity, in order that they be in no way perverted by those who endeavor to teach them false doctrine…” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Preface V (inter A.D. 180/199).

“Now all these [heretics] are of much later date than the bishops to whom the apostles committed to the Churches; which fact I have in the third book taken all pains to demonstrate. It follows, then, as a matter of course, that these aforementioned, since they are blind to the truth, and deviate from the [right] way, will walk in various roads; and therefore the footsteps of their doctrine are scattered here and there without agreement or connection. But the path of those belonging to the Church circumscribes the whole world, as possessing the sure tradition of the Apostles, and gives unto us to see that the faith of all is one and the same …And undoubtedly the preaching of the Church is true and steadfast, in which one and the same way of salvation is shown throughout the whole world…For the Church preaches the truth everywhere…” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Preface V 20, 1 (inter A.D. 180/199).

“Those, therefore, who desert the preaching of the Church, call in question the knowledge of the holy presbyters…It behooves us, therefore, to avoid their doctrines, and take careful heed lest we suffer any injury from them; but to flee to the Church, and be brought up in her bosom, and be nourished with the Lord’s Scriptures.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Preface V 20, 1 (inter A.D. 180/199).

“Wherefore it is incumbent to obey the presbyters who are in the Church, those who as I have shown, possess succession from the apostles; those who, together with the succession of bishops, have received the certain gift of truth, according to the good pleasure of the Father. But [it is also incumbent] to hold in suspicion others who depart from the primitive succession of the succession, and assemble themselves…But those who cleave asunder, and separate the unity of the Church, shall recieve from God the same punishments as Jeroboam did.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 4, 26:2 (inter A.D. 180/199).

“Heretics assent neither to Scripture nor to Tradition.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3,2,1 (inter A.D. 180/199).
“We do not take our scriptural teaching from the parables but we interpret the parables according to our teaching.” Tertullian, Purity 9,1 (c. A.D. 200).
‘Let them show the origins of their churches, let them unroll the list of their bishops, through a succession coming down from the very beginning that their first bishop had his authority and predecessor someone from among the number of Apostles or apostolic men and, further, that he did not stray from the Apostles. In this way the apostolic churches present their earliest records. The church of Smyrna, for example, records that Polycarp was named by John; the Romans, that Clement was ordained by Peter. In just the same way, the other churches show who were made bishops by the Apostles and who transmitted the apostolic seed to them. Let the heretics invent something like that. ‘ Tertullian, The Prescription Against Heretics 32 (c. A.D. 200).

‘But they, safeguarding the true tradition of the blessed teaching, which comes straight from the Apostles Peter, James, John and Paul and transmitted from father to son have come down to us with the help of God to deposit in us those ancestral and apostolic seeds’ Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 1,11 (c. A.D. 205).

‘For us…having grown old in the Scriptures, preserving the Apostolic and ecclesiastical correctness of doctrine, living a life according to the Gospel, is led by the Lord to discover the proofs from the Law and the prophets which he seeks.’ Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 7,104 (c. A.D. 205).
“The Church’s preaching has been handed down through an orderly succession from the Apostles and remains in the Church until the present. That alone is to be believed as the truth which in no way departs from ecclesiastical and apostolic tradition.” Origen, First Principles 1,2 (c. A.D. 230).

Reply
Dec 7, 2018 18:33:10   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
‘It is not by drawing on the Holy Scriptures nor by guarding the tradition of some holy person that the heretics have formulated these doctrines.’ Hippolytus of Rome, Refutation of All Heresies 1, Preface (c. A.D. 230).

‘After all this, they yet in addition, having had a false bishop ordained for them by heretics, dare to set sail, and to carry letters from schismatic and profane persons to the Chair of Peter, and the principle Church, whence the unity of the priesthood took its rise. They fail to reflect that those Romans are the same as those who faith was publicly praised by the apostle, to whom unbelief cannot have access” Cyprian, Letter to Pope Cornelius, Epistle 59:14 (c. A.D. 252).

‘We believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.” Council of Nicea I, Nicene Creed, (A.D. 325). ‘But in learning the Faith and in professing it, acquire and keep that only, which is now delivered to thee by the Church, and which has been built up strongly out of all the Scriptures.’ Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures 5,12 (c. A.D. 347).

‘Learn also diligently, and from the Church, what are the books of the Old Testaments, and what are the books of the New.’ Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures 5,33 (c. A.D. 347).

“Forcing on the divine oracles a misinterpretation according to their own private sense.” Athanasius, Orations 1,37 (c. A.D. 350).

“However here too they (the Arians) introduce their private fictions, and contend that the Son and the Father are not in such wise ‘one,’ or ‘like,’ as the Church preaches, but as they themselves would have it” Athanasius, Orations 3,10 (c. A.D. 350).

“If we now consider the object of that faith which we Christians hold, and using it as a rule, apply ourselves, as the Apostle teaches to the reading of inspired Scripture. For Christ’s enemies, being ignorant of this object, have wandered from the way of truth, and have stumbled on a stone of stumbling, thinking otherwise than they should think.” Athanasius, Orations 3,28 (c. A.D. 350).

“Had Christ enemies thus dwelt on these thoughts, and recognized the ecclesiastical scope and an anchor for the faith, they would not have made shipwreck of the faith…” Athanasius, Orations 3,58 (c. A.D. 350).
“But after him (the devil) and with him are all inventors of unlawful heresies, who indeed refer to the Scriptures, but do not hold such opinions as the saints have handed down, and receiving them as the traditions of men, err, because they do not rightly know them nor their power” Athanasius, Festal Letter 2 (c. A.D. 350).

‘Scarcely, however, did they begin to speak, when they were condemned, and one differed from another; then perceiving the straits in which their heresy lay, they remained dumb, and by their silence confessed the disgrace which came upon their heterodoxy. On this the Bishops, having negatived the terms they had invented, published against them the sound and ecclesiastical faith…

And what is strange indeed, Eusebius of Caesarea in Palestine, who had denied the day before, but afterward subscribed, sent to his Church a letter, saying that this was the Church’s faith and the Tradition of the Fathers.’ Athanasius, De Decretis 3, (c. A.D. 350).

‘Are they not then committing a crime in their very thought to gainsay so great and ecumenical a Council’? Athanasius, De Decretis 4 (c. A.D. 350).
‘For, what our Fathers have delivered, this is truly doctrine; and this is truly the token of doctors, to confess the same thing with each other, and to vary neither from themselves nor from their Fathers…Thus the Greeks, as not witnessing to the same doctrines, but quarreling one with another, have no truth of teaching; but the holy and veritable heralds of truth agree together, and do not differ…preaching the same Word harmoniously.’ Athanasius, De Decretis 4 (c. A.D. 350).

‘…and it is seemingly and most irreligious when Scripture contains such images, to form ideas concerning our Lord from others which are neither in Scripture, nor have any religious bearing. Therefore let them tell us from what teacher or by what tradition they derived these notions concerning the Saviour?…But they seem to me to have a wrong understanding of this passage also; for it has a religious and very orthodox sense, which had they understood, they would not have blasphemed the Lord of glory.’ Athanasius, De Decretis 13 (c. A.D. 350).

‘…and in dizziness about truth, are full set upon accusing the Council, let them tell us what are the Scriptures from what they have learned , or who is the saint by whom they have been taught…’ Athanasius, De Decretis 18 (c. A.D. 350).

‘Must needs hold and intend the decisions of the Council, suitably regarding them to signify the relation of the radiance to the light, and from thence gaining the illustration to the truth.’ Athanasius, De Decretis 20 (c. A.D. 350).

‘Of course, the holy Scriptures, divinely inspired are self-sufficient for the proclamation of the truth. But there are also numerous works composed for this purpose by blessed teachers. The one who reads them will understand the interpretation of the Scriptures and will be able to gain knowledge he desrires.’ Athanasius, Gentes 1 (c. A.D. 350).
‘But the sectaries, who have fallen away from the teaching of the Church, and made shipwreck concerning the faith.’ Athanasius, Gentes 6 (c. A.D. 350).
‘But that the soul is made immortal is a further point in the Church’s teaching which you must know…’ Athanasius, Gentes 33 (c. A.D. 350).

‘But what is also to the point, let us note that the very tradition, teaching, and faith of the Catholic Church from the beginning was preached by the Apostles and preserved by the Fathers. On this the Church was founded; and if anyone departs from this, he neither is, nor any longer ought to be called, a Christian.’ Athanasius, Ad Serapion 1,28 (c. A.D. 350).
“Wherefore keep yourselves all the more untainted by them, and observe the traditions of the Fathers, and chiefly the holy faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, which you have learned from the Scripture, and of which you have often been put in mind by me.” Anthony of Egypt, Vita S. Antoni 89, (c. A.D. 350).

‘We are proving that this view has been transmitted from father to father, but ye, O modern Jews and disciples of Caiaphas, how many fathers can ye assign to your phrases? Not one of the understandings and wise; for all abhor you, but the devil alone; none but he is your father in this apostasy, who both in the beginning sowed you with the seed of this irreligion, and now persuades you to slander the Ecumenical Council, for committing to writing, not your doctrines, but that which from the beginning those who were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word have handed down to us. For the faith which the Council has confessed in writing, that is the faith of the Catholic Church; to assert this, the blessed Fathers so expressed themselves while condemning the Arian heresy…’ Athanasius, De Decretis 27 (c. A.D. 350).

“We are content with the fact that this is not the teaching of the Catholic Church, nor did the Fathers hold this.” Athanasius, Epistles 59 ( A.D. 356).
“But our faith is right, and starts from the teaching of the Apostles and tradition of the fathers, being confirmed both by the NT and the Old.” Athanasius, Epistles 60 (A.D. 356).
‘…For they dissent from each other, and , whereas they have revolted from their Fathers, are not of one and the same mind, but float about with various and discordant changes’ Athanasius, De Synodis 13 (A.D. 359).

‘For it is right and meet thus to feel, and to maintain a good conscience toward the fathers, if we be not spurious children, but have received the traditions from them, and the lessons of religion at their hands.’ Athanasius, De Synodis 47 (A.D. 359).

‘Such then, as we confess and believe, being the sense of the Fathers…’ Athanasius, De Synodis 48 (A.D. 359).
‘…but do you, remaining on the foundation of the Apostles, and holding fast the traditions of the Fathers, pray that now at length all strife and rivalry may cease and the futile questions of the heretics may be condemned…’ Athanasius, De Synodis 54 (A.D. 359).

‘It behooves us not to withdraw from the Creed which we have received…nor to back off from the faith which we have received from through the prophets … or to back-slide from the Gospels. Once laid down, it continues even to this day through the tradition of the Fathers.’ Hilary of Poitiers, Ex. Oper. Hist. Fragment 7,3 (c. A.D. 365).

Reply
 
 
Dec 7, 2018 18:36:16   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
“The confession arrived at Nicea was, we say more, sufficient and enough by itself, for the subversion of all irreligious heresy, and for the security and furtherance of the doctrine of the Church.” Athanasius, Ad Afros 1 (c. A.D. 369).

“But the Word of the Lord which came through the Ecumenical Synod at Nicea, abides forever.” Athanasius, Ad Afros 2 (c. A.D. 369).

“Let us now investigate what are our common conceptions concerning the Spirit, as well those which have been gathered by us from Holy Scripture as well those which have been gathered concerning it as those which we have received from the unwritten tradition of the Fathers.” Basil, Holy Spirit 22 (c. A.D. 370).

“Of the beliefs and practices whether generally accepted or enjoined which are preserved in the Church some we possess derived from written teaching; others we have delivered to us in a mystery by the Apostles by the tradition of the Apostles; and both of these in relation to true religion have the same force.” Basil, Holy Spirit 27 (c. A.D. 370).

“The day would fail me, if I went through the mysteries of the Church which are not in Scripture. I pass by the others, the very confession of faith, in Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, from what written document have we?” Basil, Holy Spirit 67 (c. A.D. 370).

“While the unwritten traditions are so many and their bearing on ‘the mystery of godliness’ is so important, can they refuse us a single word which has come down to us from the Fathers;–which we found, derived from untutored custom, abiding in unperverted churches;–a word for which contributes in no small degree to the completeness of the force of the mystery.” Basil, Holy Spirit 67 (c. A.D. 370).

“In answer to the objection that the doxology in the form ‘with the Spirit’ has no written authority, we maintain that if there is not other instance of that which is unwritten, then this must not be received. But if the great number of our mysteries are admitted into our constitution without written authority, then, in company with many others, let us receive this one.

For I hold it apostolic to abide by the unwritten traditions. ‘I praise you,’ it is said, ‘that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances as I have delivered them to you;’ and ‘Hold fast the traditions which ye have been taught whether by word, or our Epistle.’ One of these traditions is the practice which is now before us, which they who ordained from the beginning, rooted firmly in the churches, delivering it to their successors, and its use through long custom advances pace by pace with time.” Basil, Holy Spirit 71 (c. A.D. 370).

“…and I have not allowed my judgment concerning them to rest wholly with myself, but have followed the decisions given about them by our Fathers.” Basil, Epistles 204,6 (c. A.D. 370).

“…considering myself bound to follow the high authority of such a man and of those who made the rule, and with every desire on my part to win the reward promised peacemakers, did enroll in the lists of communicants all who accepted that creed. The fair thing would be to judge of me, not from one or two who do not walk uprightly in the truth, but from the multitude of bishops throughout the world, connected with me by the grace of the Lord… you may learn that we are all of one mind and of one opinion. Whoso shuns communion with me, it cannot escape your accuracy, cuts himself off from the whole Church.” Basil, Epistles 204,6-7 (c. A.D. 370).

‘Not to accept the voice of the Fathers as being of more authority than their opinion deserves reproof as something filled with pride!’ Basil, Epistle to Canonicas (c. A.D. 370).
‘But for all the divine words, there is no need of allegory to grasp the meaning; what is necessary is study and understanding to know the meaning of each statement. We must have recourse to tradition, for all cannot be received from the divine Scriptures. That is why the holy Apostles handed down certain things in writings but others by traditions. As Paul said:” Just as I handed them on to you.”‘ Ephiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 61, 6 (A.D. 377).

‘Do you demand Scripture proof? You may find it in Acts of the Apostles. And even if it did not rest on the authority of the Scripture the consensus of the whole world in this respect would have the force of command…’ Jerome, Dialogue Luciferians 8 (c. A.D. 379).

‘And let them not flatter you themselves if they think they have Scripture authority sinc the devil himself has quoted Scripture texts…we could all, while preserving in the letter of Scripture, read into it some novel doctrine.’ Jerome, Dialogue Luciferians 28 (c. A.D. 379).

“It suffices for proof of our statement that we have a tradition coming down from the Fathers, an inheritance as it were, by succession from the Apostles through the saints who came after them.” Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius 4:6 (c. A.D. 384).

“…I say, that the Church teaches this in plain language, that the Only-begotten is essentially God, very God of the essence of the very God, how ought one who opposes her decisions to overthrow the preconceived opinion?” Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius 4:6 (c. A.D. 384).

“They, on the other hand, who change their doctrines to this novelty, would need the support of their arguments in abundance, if they were to bring over to their views, not men light as dust, and unstable, but men of weight and steadiness: but so long as their statement is advanced without being established, and without being proved, who is so foolish ad so brutish as to account the teaching of the evangelists and apostles, and of those who successively shone like lights in the churches, of less force than this undemonstrated nonsense.” Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius 4:6 (c. A.D. 384).

“My sheep hear my voice, which I heard from the oracles of God, which I have been taught by the Holy Fathers, which I have taught alike on all occasions, not conforming myself to the opportune, and which I will never cease to teach; in which I was born, and in which I will depart.” Gregory of Nazianzus, Orations 33,15 (c. A.D. 385).

“I desire to learn what is this fashion of innovation in things concerning the Church. But since our faith has been proclaimed, both in writing and without writing, here and in distant parts, in times of danger and of safety, how comes it that some make such attempts, and that others keep silence?” Gregory of Nazianzus, Epistles 101 (c. A.D. 385).

“But if they will not believe the doctrines of the priests, let them believe Christ’s oracles, let them believe the admonitions of angels who say, “For with God nothing is impossible”. Let them believe the Apostles Creed which the Roman Church as always kept undefiled.” Ambrose, Letter to Sircius (c. A.D. 387).

“To be sure, although on this matter, we cannot quote a clear example taken from the canonical Scriptures, at any rate, on this question, we are following the true thought of Scriptures when we observe what has appeared good to the universal Church which the authority of these same Scriptures recommends to you.” Augustine, C. Cresconius I:33 (c. A.D. 390).

‘So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word, or by our epistle of ours’. Hence it is manifest, that they did not deliver all things by Epistle, but many things unwritten, and in like manner both the one and the other are worthy of credit. Therefore let us think the tradition of the Church also worthy of credit. It is a tradition seek no farther.” John Chrysostom, Homilies on Second Thessalonians (c. A.D. 392).

Reply
Dec 7, 2018 18:39:32   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
“We may answer, that what is here written, was sufficient for those who would attend, and that the sacred writers ever addressed themselves to the matter of immediate importance, whatever it might be at that time: it was no object with them to be writers of books: in fact, there are many things which have been delivered by unwritten tradition. Now while all that is contained in this Book is worthy of admiration, so is especially the way the Apostles have of coming down to the wants of their hearers: a condescension suggested by the Spirit who has so ordered it, that the subject on which they chiefly dwell is that pertains to Christ as man. For so it is, that while they discourse so much about Christ, they have spoke little concerning His Godhead: it was mostly of the manhood that they discoursed, and of the Passion, and the Resurrection, and the Ascension.” John Chrysostom, Homilies on Acts 1,1 (c. A.D. 392).

“Not in vain did the Apostles order that remembrance should be made of the dead in the dreadful mysteries” John Chrysostom, Homilies on Philippians 3,4 (c. A.D. 392).
“It is obvious; the faith allows it; the Catholic Church approves; it is true.” Augustine, Sermon 117:6 (c. A.D. 397).

“If therefore, I am going to believe things I do not know about, why should I not believe those things which are accepted by the common consent of learned and unlearned alike and are established by most weighty authority of all peoples?” Augustine, Letter called Fundamentals 14:18 (A.D. 397).

“For in the Catholic Church, not to speak of the purest wisdom, to the knowledge of which a few spiritual men attain in this life, so as to know it, in the scantiest measure, indeed, because they are but men, still without any uncertainty…The consent of peoples and nations keep me in Church, so does her authority, inaugurated by miracles, nourished by hope, enlarged by love, established by age. The succession of priests keeps me, beginning from the very seat of the Apostle Peter, to whom the Lord, after his resurrection, gave it in charge to feed his sheep, down to the present episcopate… For my part, I should not believe the gospel except moved by the authority of the Catholic Church. So when those on whose authority I have consented to believe in the gospel tell me not to believe in Manicheus, how can I but consent?” Augustine, Epistle of Manichaeus 5,6 (A.D. 397).
“The authority of our Scriptures, strengthened by the consent of so may nations, and confirmed by the succession of the Apostles, bishops and councils, is against you.” Augustine, Letter to Faustus 8:5 (c. A.D. 406)

“No sensible person will go contrary to reason, no Christian will contradict the Scriptures, no lover of peace will go against the Church.” Augustine, Trinitas 4,6,10 (c. A.D. 410).
“Wherever this tradition comes from, we must believe that the Church has not believed in vain, even though the express authority of the canonical scriptures is not brought forward for it.” Augustine, Letter 164 to Evodius of Uzalis (A.D. 414).

“Will you, then, so love your error, into which you have fallen through adolescent overconfidence and human weakness, that you will separate yourself from these leaders of Catholic unity and truth, from so many different parts of the world who are in agreement among themselves on so important a question, one in which the essence of the Christian religion involved..?” Augustine, Letter to Juliana 1:7,34 (A.D. 416).

‘When anyone asks one of these heretics who presents arguments: Where are the proofs of your teaching that I should leave behind the world-wide and ancient faith of the Catholic Church? He will jump in before you have finished with the question: “It is written” He follows up immediately with thousands of texts and examples…’ Vincent of Lerins, Commonitory for the Antiquity and Universality of the Catholic Faith 1,26 (A.D. 434).

“Here perhaps, someone may ask: Since the canon of the Scripture is complete and more than sufficient in itself, why is it necessary to add to it the authority of ecclesiastical interpretation? As a matter of fact, [we must answer] Holy Scripture, because of its depth, is not universally accepted in one and the same sense. The same text is interpreted different by different people, so that one may almost gain the impression that it can yield as many different meanings as there are men. Novatian, for example, expounds a passage in one way; Sabellius, in another; Donatus, in another. Arius, and Eunomius, and Macedonius read it differently; so do Photinus, Apollinaris, and Priscillian; in another way, Jovian, Pelagius, and Caelestius; finally still another way, Nestorius. Thus, because of the great distortions caused by various errors, it is, indeed, necessary that the trend of the interpretation of the prophetic and apostolic writings be directed in accordance with the rule of the ecclesiastical and Catholic meaning.” Vincent of Lerins, Commonitory for the Antiquity and Universality of the Catholic Faith 2 (A.D. 434).

‘This teaching has been handed down to us not only by the Apostles and prophets but also by those who have interpreted their writings, Ignatius, Eustathius, Athanasius, Basil, Gregory…and other lights of the world and before them, by the holy Fathers gathered at Nicea whose confession of faith we have kept intact, as the inheritance from a Father, while those who dare to violate their teachings, we call corrupt and enemies of truth.’ Theodoret of Cyrus, Epistles 89 (c. A.D. 436).

‘We confess that (we) hold and declare the faith given from the beginning by the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ to the Holy Apostles, and preached by them in the whole world; which the sacred Fathers confessed and explained, and handed down to the holy churches, and especially (those fathers) who assembled in the four sacred Synods, whom we follow and accept through all things and in all things…judging as at odds with piety all things, indeed, which are not in accord with what has been defined as right faith by the same four holy Councils, we condemn and anathematize.’ Council of Constantinople II (A.D. 553).

‘I have no private opinion, but only agree with the Catholic Church.’ Maximus the Confessor (c. A.D. 638).

‘So, then in expectation of His coming we worship toward the East. But this tradition of the apostles is unwritten. For much that has been handed down to us by tradition is unwritten.’ John Damascus, Orthodox Faith 4,12,16 (c. A.D. 745).

‘Moreover that the Apostles handed down much that was unwritten, Paul, the Apostle of the Gentiles, tells us in these words: “Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which ye have been taught of us, whether by word or epistle” And to the Corinthians he writes, “Now I praise your brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the traditions as I have delivered them to you.’ John Damascus, Orthodox Faith 4,16 (c. A.D. 745).

‘He who does not believe according to the tradition of the Catholic Church is an unbeliever.’ John Damascus, Letter to the Nestorians (c. A.D. 745).

‘If anyone rejects all ecclesiastical tradition either written or not written…let him be anathema.’ Council of Nicea II, (A.D. 787).

Reply
Dec 8, 2018 01:37:09   #
jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho
 
SATAN'S LIE FALSE TEACHINGS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=154&topic=77

One unique feature of Catholicism is the role and status assigned to Mary. The official pronouncements of the Catholic Church are forthright and unreserved in declaring her to be the “mother of God,” and in sanctioning the offering of worship to her and assigning to her an intercessory role (see Miller, 2004). Catholics insist that Mary is deserving of respect that surpasses other fleshly mothers, in the same way that a person has greater respect for his or her own fleshly mother. But the New Testament does not make this analogy. While a person’s own fleshly mother certainly deserves more respect than that given to other mothers, Mary is not the fleshly mother of humanity (cf. Genesis 3:20). She is not deserving of any more respect than any other mother. A child views his own mother as the mother—because she bore him. But Mary did not give birth to anyone living today. She is no more the mother than any other mother.

The Catholic Church confuses Mary’s physical motherhood (which is taught in Scripture—earning for her the surpassing respect of her physical children, including Jesus’ respect for her) with an alleged spiritual motherhood—about which the Bible says nothing. Indeed, to embrace the Catholic view of Mary would require one to repudiate Jesus’ own view of His fleshly mother. This view is accentuated in two separate incidents that occurred while Jesus was on Earth.

On one occasion when Jesus was imparting spiritual teaching to a crowd, Mary arrived with her other children and sought to speak to Him:

While He was still talking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers stood outside, seeking to speak with Him. Then one said to Him, “Look, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak with You.” But He answered and said to the one who told Him, “Who is My mother and who are My brothers? And He stretched out His hand toward His disciples and said, “Here are My mother and My brothers! For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother” (Matthew 12:46-50, emp. added).

Observe that while Jesus was not being disrespectful to His physical mother, he was contradicting the very aspect of Mary’s status that is advocated by Catholic dogma. Jesus clarified that while His fleshly mother certainly was deserving of respect (cf. Luke 2:51; Ephesians 6:1-3), nevertheless, Mary was secondary to His higher, spiritual concerns. Those who were attending to the assimilation of the spiritual principles that Jesus was imparting were held up by Him as transcending the physical/blood ties associated with mere human relatives.

Mark’s account of this incident (3:31-35) is preceded by Jesus’ family (identified in vss. 31-32 as his mother and brothers) questioning His sanity (3:20-21). The Catholic translation (NAB) renders the verses: “He came home. Again (the) crowd gathered, making it impossible for them even to eat. When his relatives heard of this they set out to seize him, for they said, ‘He is out of his mind.’ ” The critical notes that accompany the text of the Catholic Bible make the following comment on these verses: “There were those even among the relatives of Jesus who disbelieved and regarded Jesus as out of his mind (21). Against this background, Jesus is informed of the arrival of his mother and brothers [and sisters] (32)” (1987, p. 1121, italics in orig., emp. added).

The other incident in the life of Jesus that illustrates His true assessment of His physical mother occurred as He responded to His critics. Some accused Him of casting out demons by the power of Beelzebub, while others tested Him by challenging Him to produce a sign from heaven. Knowing their thoughts, Jesus gave His usual masterful rebuttal. “And it happened, as He spoke these things, that a certain woman from the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, ‘Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts which nursed You!’ ” (Luke 11:27). This unnamed woman in the crowd likely did not intend to accentuate the person of Mary, but simply was expressing her wish that she could have produced such a fine son herself, thereby fulfilling the prophecy of Luke 1:48.

Nevertheless, her statement expresses the viewpoint of the Catholic Church in its veneration of Mary. If this attitude and emphasis were proper, one would have expected Jesus to give a response that confirmed, bolstered, and sanctioned her declaration. One would have expected that Jesus would have said something to the effect that—

Yes, you are right. The one who bore Me and nursed Me is the “most holy Mother of God” who will be “honored with special reverence” by the Church throughout the centuries, “venerated under the title of ‘God-bearer,’ ” and the faithful will “pour forth persevering prayer to the Mother of God and Mother of men,” venerate “images of Christ, the Blessed Virgin, and the saints.”

Why would one expect Jesus to have made comments along these lines? Because the portions of this imaginary response that are in quotes are taken directly from the official pronouncements of the Catholic Church at Vatican II (Abbott, 1966, pp. 94-96).

Did Jesus give a response to the woman that in any way resembled these sentiments? Absolutely not! To the contrary, He declared: “More than that, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it!” (Luke 11:28). Instead of “more than that,” the NAB renders it “rather” (cf. ASV, NIV, RSV)—further underscoring the contrast He was making. The NASB makes the Greek even more vivid: “On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it.” As University of Cambridge Greek professor C.F.D. Moule noted, menoun in Luke 11:28 functions as “an introduction to a new statement correcting or modifying a foregoing statement” (1977, p. 163, emp. added). Nicoll was inclined to agree: “Correction probably was uppermost in Christ’s thoughts. Under the appearance of approval the woman was taught that she was mistaken in thinking that merely to be the mother of an illustrious son constituted felicity” (n.d., 1:550, emp. added). Dana and Mantey also agree: “In Lk. 11:28...the expression contains both contrast and emphasis, with the significance of in fact, rather” (1927, p. 261, italics in orig., emp. added). In essence, Jesus was contradicting the woman and pointing her to the correct focus and object of commendation: not the physical mother of Jesus, but those who obey God’s Word.

THE PRIMARY PASSAGE
The premiere passage of Scripture that is offered to sustain the view that Mary was assigned a special role in the practice of the Christian religion is the statement that Jesus made from the cross:

Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother, and His mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold your son!” Then He said to the disciple, “Behold your mother!” And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home (John 19:25-27, emp. added).

The fact that Jesus was referring strictly to the physical care for his earthly mother after His death—and not to an alleged spiritual role that Mary was to fill in Christ’s religion—is evident from the context. Jesus spoke the directive to John—not to everyone else present on that occasion, let alone to everyone since. Jesus simply was turning the care of His fleshly mother over to John, since her husband was already deceased and her other children were likely still unbelievers (Mark 3:21; John 7:5). The very verse that refers to this oral utterance of Jesus regarding care of His fleshly mother contains proof of its intended meaning: “And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home” (John 19:27).

Consider the following three observations: First, Jesus did not entrust the care of His mother to Peter! But if Peter were the first pope, Jesus surely would have linked Mary to Peter in order to establish her official spiritual status for all time. Second, Jesus did not arrange to have Mary circulated to the homes of all of the disciples, but only to John’s home. Jesus knew that the “disciple whom Jesus loved” would see to it that she received adequate care in His absence. Third, John took her to “his own home,” i.e., he was attending to her physical needs! He did not take her to any “Holy Shrine of the Blessed Virgin,” or to any other location that would have confirmed a unique role. Indeed, absolutely nothing in this verse leads the objective reader to think that Jesus was assigning a significance or role to Mary that the Catholic Church has since assigned her—“the Mother of us all”!

Interestingly, if when Jesus said to John, “Behold your mother!,” He intended to call for the veneration of Mary, then the immediately preceding statement directed to Mary pertaining to John, “Woman, behold your son!” (John 19:26), would necessitate the veneration of John by both Mary and everyone since!

The fact of the matter is that the Bible makes no provision for worship, adoration, or veneration to be directed to Mary. The Bible forbids offering praise to any human being. All praise, worship, and adoration belongs to God alone (Matthew 4:10; Acts 10:25-26; 14:14-15; Revelation 19:10; 22:9). To extend veneration to other humans ought to be as horrifying to us as it was to Paul and Barnabas (Acts 14:14-15). Indeed, when Herod accepted such veneration, he was struck dead by God and eaten with worms (Acts 12:23).

Reply
Dec 8, 2018 01:45:43   #
jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho
 
HAIL MARY! HAIL SATAN!

http://jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Roman%20Catholicism/hail_mary_hail_satan.htm

Reply
 
 
Dec 8, 2018 03:45:10   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
Jack,

The only rebuttal to your Protestant nonsense.

By the way this is a Straw-Man Fallacy, my God you are a simpleton are deranged and religiously ignorant . . .


Show the Dam Url link and web page address so I can respond and debunk your anti-Catholic compost horse-manure and to this satanic diatribe rhetoric, and Protestant Hypocritical Truth's . . .

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address
Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address



jack sequim wa wrote:
SATAN'S LIE FALSE TEACHINGS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=154&topic=77

One unique feature of Catholicism is the role and status assigned to Mary. The official pronouncements of the Catholic Church are forthright and unreserved in declaring her to be the “mother of God,” and in sanctioning the offering of worship to her and assigning to her an intercessory role (see Miller, 2004). Catholics insist that Mary is deserving of respect that surpasses other fleshly mothers, in the same way that a person has greater respect for his or her own fleshly mother. But the New Testament does not make this analogy. While a person’s own fleshly mother certainly deserves more respect than that given to other mothers, Mary is not the fleshly mother of humanity (cf. Genesis 3:20). She is not deserving of any more respect than any other mother. A child views his own mother as the mother—because she bore him. But Mary did not give birth to anyone living today. She is no more the mother than any other mother.

The Catholic Church confuses Mary’s physical motherhood (which is taught in Scripture—earning for her the surpassing respect of her physical children, including Jesus’ respect for her) with an alleged spiritual motherhood—about which the Bible says nothing. Indeed, to embrace the Catholic view of Mary would require one to repudiate Jesus’ own view of His fleshly mother. This view is accentuated in two separate incidents that occurred while Jesus was on Earth.

On one occasion when Jesus was imparting spiritual teaching to a crowd, Mary arrived with her other children and sought to speak to Him:

While He was still talking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers stood outside, seeking to speak with Him. Then one said to Him, “Look, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak with You.” But He answered and said to the one who told Him, “Who is My mother and who are My brothers? And He stretched out His hand toward His disciples and said, “Here are My mother and My brothers! For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother” (Matthew 12:46-50, emp. added).

Observe that while Jesus was not being disrespectful to His physical mother, he was contradicting the very aspect of Mary’s status that is advocated by Catholic dogma. Jesus clarified that while His fleshly mother certainly was deserving of respect (cf. Luke 2:51; Ephesians 6:1-3), nevertheless, Mary was secondary to His higher, spiritual concerns. Those who were attending to the assimilation of the spiritual principles that Jesus was imparting were held up by Him as transcending the physical/blood ties associated with mere human relatives.

Mark’s account of this incident (3:31-35) is preceded by Jesus’ family (identified in vss. 31-32 as his mother and brothers) questioning His sanity (3:20-21). The Catholic translation (NAB) renders the verses: “He came home. Again (the) crowd gathered, making it impossible for them even to eat. When his relatives heard of this they set out to seize him, for they said, ‘He is out of his mind.’ ” The critical notes that accompany the text of the Catholic Bible make the following comment on these verses: “There were those even among the relatives of Jesus who disbelieved and regarded Jesus as out of his mind (21). Against this background, Jesus is informed of the arrival of his mother and brothers [and sisters] (32)” (1987, p. 1121, italics in orig., emp. added).

The other incident in the life of Jesus that illustrates His true assessment of His physical mother occurred as He responded to His critics. Some accused Him of casting out demons by the power of Beelzebub, while others tested Him by challenging Him to produce a sign from heaven. Knowing their thoughts, Jesus gave His usual masterful rebuttal. “And it happened, as He spoke these things, that a certain woman from the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, ‘Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts which nursed You!’ ” (Luke 11:27). This unnamed woman in the crowd likely did not intend to accentuate the person of Mary, but simply was expressing her wish that she could have produced such a fine son herself, thereby fulfilling the prophecy of Luke 1:48.

Nevertheless, her statement expresses the viewpoint of the Catholic Church in its veneration of Mary. If this attitude and emphasis were proper, one would have expected Jesus to give a response that confirmed, bolstered, and sanctioned her declaration. One would have expected that Jesus would have said something to the effect that—

Yes, you are right. The one who bore Me and nursed Me is the “most holy Mother of God” who will be “honored with special reverence” by the Church throughout the centuries, “venerated under the title of ‘God-bearer,’ ” and the faithful will “pour forth persevering prayer to the Mother of God and Mother of men,” venerate “images of Christ, the Blessed Virgin, and the saints.”

Why would one expect Jesus to have made comments along these lines? Because the portions of this imaginary response that are in quotes are taken directly from the official pronouncements of the Catholic Church at Vatican II (Abbott, 1966, pp. 94-96).

Did Jesus give a response to the woman that in any way resembled these sentiments? Absolutely not! To the contrary, He declared: “More than that, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it!” (Luke 11:28). Instead of “more than that,” the NAB renders it “rather” (cf. ASV, NIV, RSV)—further underscoring the contrast He was making. The NASB makes the Greek even more vivid: “On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it.” As University of Cambridge Greek professor C.F.D. Moule noted, menoun in Luke 11:28 functions as “an introduction to a new statement correcting or modifying a foregoing statement” (1977, p. 163, emp. added). Nicoll was inclined to agree: “Correction probably was uppermost in Christ’s thoughts. Under the appearance of approval the woman was taught that she was mistaken in thinking that merely to be the mother of an illustrious son constituted felicity” (n.d., 1:550, emp. added). Dana and Mantey also agree: “In Lk. 11:28...the expression contains both contrast and emphasis, with the significance of in fact, rather” (1927, p. 261, italics in orig., emp. added). In essence, Jesus was contradicting the woman and pointing her to the correct focus and object of commendation: not the physical mother of Jesus, but those who obey God’s Word.

THE PRIMARY PASSAGE
The premiere passage of Scripture that is offered to sustain the view that Mary was assigned a special role in the practice of the Christian religion is the statement that Jesus made from the cross:

Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother, and His mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold your son!” Then He said to the disciple, “Behold your mother!” And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home (John 19:25-27, emp. added).

The fact that Jesus was referring strictly to the physical care for his earthly mother after His death—and not to an alleged spiritual role that Mary was to fill in Christ’s religion—is evident from the context. Jesus spoke the directive to John—not to everyone else present on that occasion, let alone to everyone since. Jesus simply was turning the care of His fleshly mother over to John, since her husband was already deceased and her other children were likely still unbelievers (Mark 3:21; John 7:5). The very verse that refers to this oral utterance of Jesus regarding care of His fleshly mother contains proof of its intended meaning: “And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home” (John 19:27).

Consider the following three observations: First, Jesus did not entrust the care of His mother to Peter! But if Peter were the first pope, Jesus surely would have linked Mary to Peter in order to establish her official spiritual status for all time. Second, Jesus did not arrange to have Mary circulated to the homes of all of the disciples, but only to John’s home. Jesus knew that the “disciple whom Jesus loved” would see to it that she received adequate care in His absence. Third, John took her to “his own home,” i.e., he was attending to her physical needs! He did not take her to any “Holy Shrine of the Blessed Virgin,” or to any other location that would have confirmed a unique role. Indeed, absolutely nothing in this verse leads the objective reader to think that Jesus was assigning a significance or role to Mary that the Catholic Church has since assigned her—“the Mother of us all”!

Interestingly, if when Jesus said to John, “Behold your mother!,” He intended to call for the veneration of Mary, then the immediately preceding statement directed to Mary pertaining to John, “Woman, behold your son!” (John 19:26), would necessitate the veneration of John by both Mary and everyone since!

The fact of the matter is that the Bible makes no provision for worship, adoration, or veneration to be directed to Mary. The Bible forbids offering praise to any human being. All praise, worship, and adoration belongs to God alone (Matthew 4:10; Acts 10:25-26; 14:14-15; Revelation 19:10; 22:9). To extend veneration to other humans ought to be as horrifying to us as it was to Paul and Barnabas (Acts 14:14-15). Indeed, when Herod accepted such veneration, he was struck dead by God and eaten with worms (Acts 12:23).
SATAN'S LIE FALSE TEACHINGS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC ... (show quote)

Reply
Dec 8, 2018 03:52:00   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
On the Mother of God.

Can't you get this through your thick neanderthal Protestant head and walnut sized brain.

Catholics ("Venerate and Honor") the Mother of Our Lord, Mary, regarded as the First Saint of the Catholic Church.

Mary is the only person in the Bible who was graced by God, to be bestowed the title "Hail Full of Grace" by an Arch-Angel . . . Gabriel in the event we know as the Annunciation

Mary is a Christian role model.

Hail Mary: Kecharitomene, A Unique Word for a Unique Lady, the translation 'Full of Grace' does not go far enough.

χαῖρε, κεχαριτωμένη, ὁ κύριος μετὰ σοῦ.
Chaire, kecharitōmenē, ho kyrios meta sou!
Hail, "Full of Grace," the Lord is with you!

St. Jerome's translation known as the Vulgate, it is Ave, gratia plena.


Again I say to your misconceived lying Protestant delusional pea-sized brain.

Catholics do not worship Mary as a God . . . Got it Zemirah, for the zillionth time.

Stop making things up, in your pin-head protestant world.


Have a nice day . . . one of the "5 horse-men and horse-woman of the Protestant apocalypse."


Now why does Mary the Mother of God, not appear to Protestants ?

She must not care for your insults at he, I bet she is going to probably speak to her son, The Son Of God.

You've had it now Jack, and are probably on your way to Satan home team, hope you find one of Dante's furnace rooms comfortable.


Doc110







Reply
Dec 8, 2018 04:22:28   #
jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho
 
Doc110 wrote:
Jack,

The only rebuttal to your Protestant nonsense.

By the way this is a Straw-Man Fallacy, my God you are a simpleton are deranged and religiously ignorant . . .


Show the Dam Url link and web page address so I can respond and debunk your anti-Catholic compost horse-manure and to this satanic diatribe rhetoric, and Protestant Hypocritical Truth's . . .

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address
Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address

Post the Url link and web page address
Jack, br br The only rebuttal to your Protestant ... (show quote)




Readers of your post will now be able to know the truth of the satanic Roman Catholic church.

They will see the link I posted and your insults, your feeble attempt to refute, empty and angry.

Reply
Dec 8, 2018 04:27:10   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
Admit it Jack your a protestant horses ass you’re a syocophant stooge.

Producing lies and distortions.

Jack what is your Religious Protestant faith ?

And what is wrong with your Protestant deranged brain.

Post the URL links you coward


jack sequim wa wrote:
Readers of your post will now be able to know the truth of the satanic Roman Catholic church.

They will see the link I posted and your insults, your feeble attempt to refute, empty and angry.

Reply
 
 
Dec 8, 2018 09:13:29   #
Rose42
 
Quote:
Now why does Mary the Mother of God, not appear to Protestants ?


Because they'd recognize it for what it is - a demon not Mary.

Christ NEVER taught oral tradition was on par with scripture and certainly NEVER taught it was above scripture.

Reply
Dec 8, 2018 17:37:52   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
BLESSED VIRGIN WAS FILLED WITH GOD'S GRACE
Pope John Paul II
General Audience given 8 May 1996.
1. In the account of the Annunciation, the first word of the Angel's greeting, "Rejoice", is an invitation to joy which recalls the oracles of the Old Testament addressed to the "daughter of Zion". We pointed this out in our previous catecheses and also explained the reasons for this invitation: God's presence among his people, the coming of the messianic king and maternal fruitfulness. These reasons are fulfilled in Mary.

The Angel Gabriel, addressing the Virgin of Nazareth after the greeting, chaire, "Rejoice", calls her Kecharitomene, "full of grace". The words of the Greek text, chaire and Kecharitomene, are deeply interconnected: Mary is invited to rejoice primarily because God loves her and has filled her with grace in view of her divine motherhood!

The Church's faith and the experience of the saints teach us that grace is a source of joy, and that true joy comes from God. In Mary, as in Christians, the divine gift produces deep joy.

2. Kecharitomene: this term addressed to Mary seems to be the proper way to describe the woman destined to become the mother of Jesus. Lumen gentium appropriately recalls this when it affirms: "The Virgin of Nazareth is hailed by the heralding angel, by divine command, as 'full of grace'" (Lumen gentium, n. 56).

The fact that the heavenly messenger addresses her in this way enhances the value of the angelic greeting: it is a manifestation of God's mysterious saving plan in Mary's regard. As I wrote in the Encyclical Redemptoris Mater: "'The fullness of grace' indicates all the supernatural munificence from which Mary benefits by being chosen and destined to be the Mother of Christ" (n 9).

God granted Mary the fullness of grace

"Full of grace" is the name Mary possesses in the eyes of God. Indeed, the angel, according to the Evangelist Luke's account, uses this expression even before he speaks the name "Mary", and thus emphasizes the predominant aspect which the Lord perceived in the Virgin of Nazareth's personality.

The expression "Full of grace" is the translation of the Greek word Kecharitomene, which is a passive participle. Therefore to render more exactly the nuance of the Greek word one should not say merely "full of grace", but "made full of grace", or even "filled with grace", which would clearly indicate that this was a gift given by God to the Blessed Virgin. This term, in the form of a perfect participle, enhances the image of a perfect and lasting grace which implies fullness. The same verb, in the sense of "to bestow grace", is used in the Letter to the Ephesians to indicate the abundance of grace granted to us by the Father in his beloved Son (Eph 1:6), and which Mary receives as the first fruits of Redemption (cf. Redemptoris Mater, n. 10).

3. In the Virgin's case, God's action certainly seems surprising. Mary has no human claim to receiving the announcement of the Messiah's coming. She is not the high priest, official representative of the Hebrew religion, nor even a man, but a young woman without any influence in the society of her time. In addition, she is a native of Nazareth, a village which is never mentioned in the Old Testament. It must not have enjoyed a good reputation, as Nathanael's question, recorded in John's Gospel makes clear: "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" (Jn 1:46).

The extraordinary and gratuitous nature of God's intervention becomes even clearer in comparison with Luke's text which recounts what happened to Zechariah. The latter's priestly status is highlighted as well as his exemplary life which make him and his wife Elizabeth models of Old Testament righteousness: they walked "blameless in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord" (Lk 1:6)

But we are not informed of Mary's origins either: the expression "of the house of David" (Lk 1:27) in fact refers only to Joseph. No mention is made then of Mary's behaviour. With this literary choice, Luke stresses that everything in Mary derives from a sovereign grace. All that is granted to her is not due to any claim of merit, but only to God's free and gratuitous choice.

God's mercy reaches the highest degree in Mary

4. In so doing, the Evangelist does not of course intend to downplay the outstanding personal value of the Blessed Virgin. Rather, he wishes to present Mary as the pure fruit of God's goodwill: he has so taken possession of her as to make her, according to the title used by the Angel, "full of grace". The abundance of grace itself is the basis of Mary's hidden spiritual richness.

In the Old Testament, Yahweh expresses the superabundance of his love in many ways and on many occasions. At the dawn of the New Testament, the gratuitousness of God's mercy reaches the highest degree in Mary. In her, God's predilection, shown to the chosen people and in particular to the humble and the poor, reaches its culmination.

Nourished by the Word of the Lord and the experience of the saints, the Church urges believers to keep their gaze fixed on the Mother of the Redeemer and to consider themselves, like her, loved by God. She invites them to share Our Lady's humility and poverty, so that, after her example and through her intercession, they may persevere in the grace of God who sanctifies and transforms hearts.

Reply
Dec 8, 2018 18:34:38   #
Rose42
 
John Paul II's opinion is irrelevant to Christians. After all, he blasphemed the Holy Spirit and attacked God and Christ by elevating Mary to a status she was never given.

Reply
Dec 8, 2018 20:23:16   #
jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho
 
Doc110 wrote:
BLESSED VIRGIN WAS FILLED WITH GOD'S GRACE
Pope John Paul II
General Audience given 8 May 1996.
1. In the account of the Annunciation, the first word of the Angel's greeting, "Rejoice", is an invitation to joy which recalls the oracles of the Old Testament addressed to the "daughter of Zion". We pointed this out in our previous catecheses and also explained the reasons for this invitation: God's presence among his people, the coming of the messianic king and maternal fruitfulness. These reasons are fulfilled in Mary.

The Angel Gabriel, addressing the Virgin of Nazareth after the greeting, chaire, "Rejoice", calls her Kecharitomene, "full of grace". The words of the Greek text, chaire and Kecharitomene, are deeply interconnected: Mary is invited to rejoice primarily because God loves her and has filled her with grace in view of her divine motherhood!

The Church's faith and the experience of the saints teach us that grace is a source of joy, and that true joy comes from God. In Mary, as in Christians, the divine gift produces deep joy.

2. Kecharitomene: this term addressed to Mary seems to be the proper way to describe the woman destined to become the mother of Jesus. Lumen gentium appropriately recalls this when it affirms: "The Virgin of Nazareth is hailed by the heralding angel, by divine command, as 'full of grace'" (Lumen gentium, n. 56).

The fact that the heavenly messenger addresses her in this way enhances the value of the angelic greeting: it is a manifestation of God's mysterious saving plan in Mary's regard. As I wrote in the Encyclical Redemptoris Mater: "'The fullness of grace' indicates all the supernatural munificence from which Mary benefits by being chosen and destined to be the Mother of Christ" (n 9).

God granted Mary the fullness of grace

"Full of grace" is the name Mary possesses in the eyes of God. Indeed, the angel, according to the Evangelist Luke's account, uses this expression even before he speaks the name "Mary", and thus emphasizes the predominant aspect which the Lord perceived in the Virgin of Nazareth's personality.

The expression "Full of grace" is the translation of the Greek word Kecharitomene, which is a passive participle. Therefore to render more exactly the nuance of the Greek word one should not say merely "full of grace", but "made full of grace", or even "filled with grace", which would clearly indicate that this was a gift given by God to the Blessed Virgin. This term, in the form of a perfect participle, enhances the image of a perfect and lasting grace which implies fullness. The same verb, in the sense of "to bestow grace", is used in the Letter to the Ephesians to indicate the abundance of grace granted to us by the Father in his beloved Son (Eph 1:6), and which Mary receives as the first fruits of Redemption (cf. Redemptoris Mater, n. 10).

3. In the Virgin's case, God's action certainly seems surprising. Mary has no human claim to receiving the announcement of the Messiah's coming. She is not the high priest, official representative of the Hebrew religion, nor even a man, but a young woman without any influence in the society of her time. In addition, she is a native of Nazareth, a village which is never mentioned in the Old Testament. It must not have enjoyed a good reputation, as Nathanael's question, recorded in John's Gospel makes clear: "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" (Jn 1:46).

The extraordinary and gratuitous nature of God's intervention becomes even clearer in comparison with Luke's text which recounts what happened to Zechariah. The latter's priestly status is highlighted as well as his exemplary life which make him and his wife Elizabeth models of Old Testament righteousness: they walked "blameless in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord" (Lk 1:6)

But we are not informed of Mary's origins either: the expression "of the house of David" (Lk 1:27) in fact refers only to Joseph. No mention is made then of Mary's behaviour. With this literary choice, Luke stresses that everything in Mary derives from a sovereign grace. All that is granted to her is not due to any claim of merit, but only to God's free and gratuitous choice.

God's mercy reaches the highest degree in Mary

4. In so doing, the Evangelist does not of course intend to downplay the outstanding personal value of the Blessed Virgin. Rather, he wishes to present Mary as the pure fruit of God's goodwill: he has so taken possession of her as to make her, according to the title used by the Angel, "full of grace". The abundance of grace itself is the basis of Mary's hidden spiritual richness.

In the Old Testament, Yahweh expresses the superabundance of his love in many ways and on many occasions. At the dawn of the New Testament, the gratuitousness of God's mercy reaches the highest degree in Mary. In her, God's predilection, shown to the chosen people and in particular to the humble and the poor, reaches its culmination.

Nourished by the Word of the Lord and the experience of the saints, the Church urges believers to keep their gaze fixed on the Mother of the Redeemer and to consider themselves, like her, loved by God. She invites them to share Our Lady's humility and poverty, so that, after her example and through her intercession, they may persevere in the grace of God who sanctifies and transforms hearts.
BLESSED VIRGIN WAS FILLED WITH GOD'S GRACE br Pope... (show quote)




Visions of Mary are demons posing as an angel of light.
Its Satan's counterfeit Roman Catholic church that cannot use the Bible to make his counterfeit but used man and created traditions, hide the word of God until recently and now his counterfeit church is being revealed with membership dropping, dropping, dropping.

The truth of God's word is freeing Catholics from the bondage of false teachings and salvation they cannot receive in demonic teachings.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 5 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Faith, Religion, Spirituality
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.