Jump to content

Patrick Miron

Junior Member
  • Content count

    134
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

16 Good

1 Follower

About Patrick Miron

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Patrick Miron

    I'm A Roman Catholic

    http://www.agapebiblestudy.com/documents/The Significance of Numbers in Scripture.htm Terrific question; thanks for asking. The answer is even more complex; more profound than the question {IMO}. Several points ought to be considered: 1. Time does not exist for God; everything is always “present” to Him 2. Times in the bible are very often metaphorical {making a point; not necessarily specific to that number’s common understanding today; hence numbers often of themselves are a sort of “story”; and the may be approximate 3. Biblical numbers often have a Jewish rooted Old Testament understanding of their own; I’ll use the number “3” for my example; from the agapebiblestudy/ numbers site Agape Bible Study on the number #3 THREE: In sacred Scripture the number three represents that which is solid, real, substantial, and something in its completeness. This number usually indicates something of importance or significance in God's plan of salvation by identifying an important event in Salvation History. This number operates as a "sign-post" in Scripture study for the reader to "pay attention" to the significance of the next event. In the Old Testament: It is the first of the 4 perfect numbers which are 3 (divine perfection); 7 (spiritual perfection); 10 (ordinal perfection); and 12 (governmental perfection). The earth was separated from the waters on the 3rd day [Genesis 1:9-13] There were three Patriarchs of the children of Israel: Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob/Israel There are three verses in the Priestly Blessing in which the Tetragrammaton, YHWH, God's holy covenant name, appears three times [Numbers 6:24-26]. Three times the angelic Seraphim cry "Holy, Holy, Holy" [Isaiah 6:3 and Revelation 4:8]. After the Great Flood mankind descended from the three sons of Noah: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. [Genesis 10:1-32] Three "men" announced to Abraham that his barren wife would bear a son [Genesis 18:14]. Abraham was commanded to sacrifice his son after a three-day journey to Mt. Moriah [Genesis 22:1-4]. Baby Moses was hidden by his mother for three months [Exodus 2:1] and the adult Moses requests of Pharaoh that he let Moses take his people on a three-day journey into the wilderness to offer sacrifice to their God [Exodus 3:18]. There were three divisions of the desert Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem: the Outer Court, the Holy Place, and the Holy of Holies [Exodus 27:9; 26:1-30, 35-37; 31-34; 38:9-20; 21-31; 40:1-33; 1 Kings 6: 1-37]. God is mentioned three times in the Shema, the Old Covenant profession of faith [Deuteronomy 6:4] and three times in the priestly blessing [Numbers 6:24-26]. The three attributes of God mentioned in Exodus 33:18-19 are hen, rachum, and hesed (gracious, compassionate /merciful, and loving kindness). Of the seven annual Holy Feasts of the Sinai Covenant, three are "pilgrim feasts" in which every man 13 years or older must present himself before God at His Sanctuary and later at the Temple in Jerusalem. This command is repeated three time in scripture [Exodus 23:14-17; 34:18-23; Deuteronomy 16:16] Jonah spent three days in the belly of the great fish [Jonah 2:1]; Jonah took three days to journey across the city of Nineveh [Jonah 3:3] In the New Testament: Jesus' ministry lasted three years, covering three Passovers [John 2:13; 6:4; 11:55-12:1]. Mary stayed with Elizabeth about three months [Luke 1:56] Jesus was missing for three days when He was 12 years old [Luke 2:46] Jesus took Peter, James, and John up on the Mt. of Transfiguration [Matthew 17] Jesus arose from the dead on the third day.[Genesis 1:9-13] Saul was blinded for three days [Acts 9:9] The theological virtues are faith, hope and charity [1 Corinthians 13:13] The heavenly Jerusalem has three gates on each of its four sides [Revelation 21:13] Christians saw three as symbolic of the Trinity, the triune nature of God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Three is also recognized as the number of the Holy Spirit. In Addition: There are three divisions of time: past, present, and future There three persons in grammar Thought, word, and deed complete the sum of human capacity Douay Commentary: Mt 12:41 40 "Three days"... Not complete days and nights; but part of three days, and three nights taken according to the way that the Hebrews counted their days and nights, viz., from evening to evening. Catholic Biblical commentary But no sign, &c. This perverse nation of the Jews asks of me a sign from Heaven, but I will not give it a sign, except a sign from the earth, that is, from the deep. I will not grant to the Jews any other sign than what I formerly promised, when I said, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it up;” but He spake of the temple of His body (S. John ii. 19, 21). (He meant the sign of the Resurrection, which is the sign of the prophet Jonah, because it was prefigured by Jonah.) For this Jonah clearly showed, who I am, why I died, why I am crucified, in respect of which they are offended; in truth that I am Messiah, the Tamer of Death and Sin, the Saviour of the World, and the Lord of Heaven and Earth. …. You will ask, how Christ was three days and nights in the sepulchre and Limbus: for He was there only on Friday and Saturday nights, and rose at day-break on Sunday? 1. Alcuin (L. de. Divinis 0ff. sec. de. Cœna. Dom.) gathers from this place that Christ lay in the tomb three whole days and nights, or 72 hours, and consequently rose again at the end of Easter Monday. But this is certainly a mistake. The constant tradition of the church is that Christ rose on the Lord’s day. 2. Greg. Nyssen (Orat. 1 &. 2 de Resurrec.) computes these three days to begin on Thursday. He is of opinion, that when on the evening of that day Christ instituted the Eucharist, He offered Himself to God under the species of bread and wine by means of the unbloody sacrifice. The soul of Christ was separated from the body, but that this was done in a secret and invisible manner, and that then the soul of Christ went down to Hades, and that thus He pre-accomplished His death, which the Jews were visibly to bring about on the following day upon the cross. But this, too, is an error. For there is really in the Eucharist the soul of the Living Christ, that is to say, in His body and blood contained under the species of bread and wine. It is there, I say, not indeed by virtue of the words of consecration, but by natural concomitance. For in the Eucharist there is Living Christ, with His Soul, even as He is outside the Eucharist. Thus the Council of Trent defines (Sess. 13, sec. 2). It would have been otherwise if any of the Apostles had consecrated the Eucharist during the triduum of the Passion. For then the Body and Blood of Christ would have been in it separated from His Soul, for in this manner they were in Christ Himself now buried. For Christ was then dead, not alive. I say then, that the expression three days and three nights is here only a periphrasis and description of a natural day. The two integral parts of such a day are day and night, or light and darkness. Christ makes use of this periphrasis because Jonah, His antetype, did the same. (Jonah i. 17.) We must not understand that these days are three artificial days as opposed to nights, as if during three days, in which the sun is above the horizon, Christ lay in the tomb; for this was not the case. You must consider these three natural days to be not whole days but parts of days, namely, the latter part of Friday; when Christ being taken down from the Cross, was laid in the sepulchre, the whole of Saturday, and part of the Lord’s day. For although the Hebrews reckoned their civil days from one sun-rise to another, like the Chaldeans and the Persians (Beda de ration. temp.), yet they computed their sacred days, such as the Passover, from evening to evening. Thus S. Jerome, Theophyl., Euthym., and S. Aug. and commentators, passim, explain the meaning of these three days. Hence Christ is constantly spoken of as rising on the third day, or after three days, without any mention of nights. But in this place, according to this computation, there were but two nights in which Christ lay in the tomb, viz. Friday and Saturday nights, and yet three nights are expressly mentioned. Others therefore answer more fully and plainly; that these three days and nights are reckoned according to the Roman computation. For the Romans were at that time, masters of Judea, and had introduced their own methods of computing time in civil affairs. The Romans reckoned from midnight to midnight, as Christians do in their fasts and festivals. (See Macrob. L. 1. Saturni c. Gell. L. 3. c. 2. Pliny. L. 2. c. 77. and others). According to this reckoning it is clear Christ remained in the tomb during a part of three days and three nights. He was buried on Friday before sunset; and was in the tomb until the midnight of that day. After that He was in the tomb during the entire day and night of the Sabbath; and from the midnight of Sunday for about six hours until that dawning of the Lord’s Day on which He arose. For the Passover was at that time about the equinox, when the days and nights are equal, each being about twelve hours long. But the Soul of Christ, immediately when He expired upon the Cross at the ninth hour, i.e., at three o’clock in the afternoon, descended into Limbus, and there remained with the Fathers until the dawn of Easter Day. Now that the Jews made use of the Roman method of computing time may be learnt as well from other things, as because they borrowed the four watches of the night from the practice in use among the Roman armies. (See Matt. xiv. 25 and elsewhere.) Different nations had different methods of reckoning the beginning of the day. Thanks for asking, I hope this clarifies it for you. God Bless, Patrick
  2. Patrick Miron

    I'm A Roman Catholic

    OK if you say so, GOD's in the conversion business, I'm not. Thanks for sharing, May God guide our life- paths Patrick
  3. Patrick Miron

    I'm A Roman Catholic

    Who did Jesus build His Church on??. [1] If you take out, “Thou art Peter”, You will see what Jesus actually said, Matt 16: 16--19. it reads like this. V16, Peter Thou art the Christ, The Son of the living God. V17, Jesus Blessed art thou Simom Bar Jona for flesh and blood has not revealed it to thee, But My Father which is in heaven, [2] V18, And upon this rock, [The revelation that Jesus is the Christ], I will build My Church: and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [3] V19, And I will give thee, [The Church] the keys of the Kingdom of heaven: And whatsoever thou [The Church] shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou [The Church] shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. [4] Matt 18: 17--18 Proves that Jesus gave the keys to His Church, And NOT to Peter. [5] Eph 2: 20, Proves The Church is built on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets [Plural]. Not one Apostle, Such as Peter, [Singular]. [6] If we put Thou art Peter back in, Jesus Christ said Thou art Peter, “Aramaic,'kepha, [Cephas, A stone, Jn 1: 42] Greek, Petros” a stone or small rock that is easily moved or shaken, [7]And on this Rock ' (Jesus, referring to the revelation Himself) “Aramaic, Shua, Greek Petra” [A massive Rock, a firm foundation] I will build my church." This explains why "petros" and "petra" were used in Greek instead of both "petros" or both "petra". In the Greek, There are persons, numbers, verbs and subjects, and they have to agree to build a doctrine. So look at this, Peter, is the subject, and the 3rd person, and singular in number. [8]Rock, is the subject and the 2nd person and Plural in number. And the Persons & Numbers, have to agree, But we can see that Peter and the Rock don’t agree in person or number. So there is no way that Jesus could have built His Church on Peter…FACT. [9] The Bible, Greek and Aramaic, ALL prove it. [10] As for Jn 17: 17--20, It proves the Catholic wrong, because Jesus says it for all those who believe. V18, Is a clear sign that Jesus it talking about born again Christians, Because we are just like Jesus, God does miracles and healings through us, [11]And unlike Catholics, Christians teach the same things that Jesus and the Bible teaches REPLY: Mt 16:15-19 [15] Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am? [16] Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. [17]And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. [18]And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon {YOU] this rock I will build MY CHURCH (**}, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give TO THEE the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever YOU shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever YOU shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.” [1] IN THESE 4 PASSAGES THERE ARE 8 DIRECT or INDIRECT {you; these} References to Peter; directly and exclusively. Also note the “MY Church” singular. {**} as every “church” is self- identified by its set of Faith beliefs, we CAN know that Christ was following his OT choice of Just ”ONE Chosen people” Exo. 6:7 On WHAT authority do you claim to be able to take our “Peter”? He is identified in these few passages 8 times. [2] V18, And upon this rock, [The revelation that Jesus is the Christ], I will build My Church: and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it… Friend your ADDING to the Gospel: there is no debate; no question that Jesus IS THE CHRIST in these verses; that issue has long been settled. What Jesus is doing {HAS DONE} here is to make known that He is founding a new religion, a new Faith and a Church {also new};pagans had there Temples; Jews the Synagogues; NOW Jesus with His New set of Faith beliefs {Eph 4:5; Mt 28:19-20} is founding and establishing His Church {singular as identified by his and its one true faith. Srrong’s Concordance of the GREEK for “rock” 2786. Kephas kay-fas' of Chaldee origin (compare 3710); the Rock; Cephas (i.e. Kepha), a surname of Peter:--Cephas [3] So my friend; just HOW can a church “bind and loose?”….the Church is an establishment; NOT “a Person”. ….So you’re WAY out of biblical context here. Secondly the “thee” PETER is metioned 8 times in these few passages. Thirdly: Strong’s Greek Lexicon for “Peter” Result of search for "Peter": 2786. Kephas kay-fas' of Chaldee origin (compare 3710); the Rock; Cephas (i.e. Kepha), a surname of Peter:--Cephas. 4074. Petros pet'-ros apparently a primary word; a (piece of) rock (larger than 3037); as a name, Petrus, an apostle:--Peter, rock. Compare 2786. [4] Having already proven you wrong; I ask again: HOW can a “church” handle the keys? .... Though you are inadvertently correct as ALL Salvation is {at times mysteriously} through the RCC [5] Eph. 2: [20] Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone: Firstly disproves your claims about “the church being given the keys Secondly it confirms that Christ DID establish just One True set of Faith Beliefs {Eph 4:5} Thirdly is confirmation that it is the Apostles {led by Peter}, who alone and exclusively are to trach HIS new Faith {Mt 28:19-20} [6] I have shared above the GREEK for BOTH “rock” and “Peter.” And as you know Jesus spoke Aramaic NOT Greek, and the perm for Peter is translated as “ROCK”. Donald A. Carson III Baptist and Professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Seminary (two quotations from different works) “Although it is true that petros and petra can mean “stone” and “rock” respectively in earlier Greek, the distinction is largely confined to poetry. Moreover the underlying Aramaic is in this case unquestionable; and most probably kepha was used in both clauses (“you are kepha” and “on this kepha”), since the word was used both for a name and for a “rock”. The Peshitta (written in Syriac, a language cognate with Aramaic) makes no distinction between the words in the two clauses. The Greek makes the distinction between petros and petra simply because it is trying to preserve the pun, and in Greek the feminine petra could not very well serve as a masculine name.” [7] John Peter Lange German Protestant scholar The Saviour, no doubt, used in both clauses the Aramaic word kepha (hence the Greek Kephas applied to Simon, John i.42; comp. 1 Cor. i.12; iii.22; ix.5; Gal. ii.9), which means rock and is used both as a proper and a common noun.... The proper translation then would be: “Thou art Rock, and upon this rock”, etc. John 21: 14-17 {NOTE THIS IS THE FINAL CHAPTER OF JOHNS GOSPEL [14] This is now the third time that Jesus was manifested to his disciples, after he was risen from the dead.[15] When therefore they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter: Simon son of John, lovest thou me more than these? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs.[16] He saith to him again: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs. [17] He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep. [8] I can understand your absolute need to hold YOUR position; but you reaching impossible conclusions[9] Boloney: That friend is your wrongly skewed opinion: Here is a SITE for 50 Peter FIRST from the Bible: I’m sharing the 1st 15 In addition to this information; you ought to check out this site: http://www.biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/a87.htm 50 NEW TESTAMENT PROOFS FOR PETRINE PRIMACY AND THE PAPACY The Catholic doctrine of the papacy is biblically-based, and is derived from the evident primacy of St. Peter among the apostles. Like all Christian doctrines, it has undergone development through the centuries, but it hasn't departed from the essential components already existing in the leadership and prerogatives of St. Peter. These were given to him by our Lord Jesus Christ, acknowledged by his contemporaries, and accepted by the early Church. The biblical Petrine data is quite strong, and is inescapably compelling by virtue of its cumulative weight. This is especially made clear with the assistance of biblical commentaries. The evidence of Holy Scripture (RSV) follows: 1. Matthew 16:18: "And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church; and the powers of death shall not prevail against it." The rock (Greek, petra) referred to here is St. Peter himself, not his faith or Jesus Christ. Christ appears here not as the foundation, but as the architect who "builds." The Church is built, not on confessions, but on confessors - living men (see, e.g., 1 Pet 2:5). Today, the overwhelming consensus of the great majority of all biblical scholars and commentators is in favor of the traditional Catholic understanding. Here St. Peter is spoken of as the foundation-stone of the Church, making him head and superior of the family of God (i.e., the seed of the doctrine of the papacy). Moreover, Rock embodies a metaphor applied to him by Christ in a sense analogous to the suffering and despised Messiah (1 Pet 2:4-8; cf. Mt 21:42).Without a solid foundation a house falls. St. Peter is the foundation, but not founder of the Church, administrator, but not Lord of the Church. The Good Shepherd (John 10:11) gives us other shepherds as well (Eph 4:11). 2. Matthew 16:19 "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . ." The "power of the keys" has to do with ecclesiastical discipline and administrative authority with regard to the requirements of the faith, as in Isaiah 22:22 (cf. Is 9:6; Job 12:14; Rev 3:7). From this power flows the use of censures, excommunication, absolution, baptismal discipline, the imposition of penances, and legislative powers. In the Old Testament a steward, or prime minister is a man who is "over a house" (Gen 41:40; 43:19; 44:4; 1 Ki 4:6; 16:9; 18:3; 2 Ki 10:5; 15:5; 18:18; Is 22:15,20-21). 3. Matthew 16:19 ". . . whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." "Binding" and "loosing" were technical rabbinical terms, which meant to "forbid" and "permit" with reference to the interpretation of the law, and secondarily to "condemn" or "place under the ban" or "acquit." Thus, St. Peter and the popes are given the authority to determine the rules for doctrine and life, by virtue of revelation and the Spirit's leading (Jn 16:13), and to demand obedience from the Church. "Binding and loosing" represent the legislative and judicial powers of the papacy and the bishops (Mt 18:17-18; Jn 20:23). St. Peter, however, is the only apostle who receives these powers by name and in the singular, making him preeminent. 4. Peter's name occurs first in all lists of apostles (Mt 10:2; Mk 3:16; Lk 6:14; Acts 1:13). Matthew even calls him the "first" (10:2). Judas Iscariot is invariably mentioned last. 5. Peter is almost without exception named first whenever he appears with anyone else. In one (only?) example to the contrary, Galatians 2:9, where he ("Cephas") is listed after James and before John, he is clearly preeminent in the entire context (e.g., 1:18-19; 2:7-8). 6. Peter alone among the apostles receives a new name, Rock, solemnly conferred (Jn 1:42; Mt 16:18). 7. Likewise, Peter is regarded by Jesus as the Chief Shepherd after Himself (Jn 21:15-17), singularly by name, and over the universal Church, even though others have a similar but subordinate role (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet 5:2). 8. Peter alone among the apostles is mentioned by name as having been prayed for by Jesus Christ in order that his "faith may not fail" (Lk 22:32). 9. Peter alone among the apostles is exhorted by Jesus to "strengthen your brethren" (Lk 22:32). 10. Peter first confesses Christ's divinity (Mt 16:16). 11. Peter alone is told that he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation (Mt 16:17). 12. Peter is regarded by the Jews (Acts 4:1-13) as the leader and spokesman of Christianity. 13. Peter is regarded by the common people in the same way (Acts 2:37-41; 5:15). 14. Jesus Christ uniquely associates Himself and Peter in the miracle of the tribute-money (Mt 17:24-27). 15. Christ teaches from Peter's boat, and the miraculous catch of fish follows (Lk 5:1-11): perhaps a metaphor for the pope as a "fisher of men" (cf. Mt 4:19). [10] John 17:17-20 when correctly READ and understood for your edification. “ As for Jn 17: 17--20, It proves the Catholic wrong, because Jesus says it for all those who believe. V18, Is a clear sign that Jesus it talking about born again Christians, Because we are just like Jesus, God does miracles and healings through us,” end quotes First of all this was AUTHORED by the end of the 1st Century: John could not have anticipated the Protestant revolution of the 16th Century. The Bible is a Catholic BOOK; and the NT was written by Catholics and directly and at the time exclusively FOR Fellow Catholics [17] Sanctify THEM {the Apostles in MY} truth. Thy word is truth.[18] As thou hast SENT ME into the world, I also have SENT THEM into the world. [19] And FOR THEM {ONLY; DIRECTLY AND EXCLUSIVELY} do I sanctify myself, that THEY also may be sanctified in {my} truth. [20] And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me; Reading what it literally is saying: This is direct and exclusively to and for the CC He had established. Jesus HERE is giving Himself Personally as the warranty of HIS RCC Teaching His truths without error on ALL matters of Faith and Moral beliefs. … No other faith or church can claim to have JESUS as the Personal warranty of their teachings and beliefs except for today’s Catholic Church. [11] Jesus: I AM the Way, THE TRUTH {singular} and the Life…. Which I guess explains why there are thousands of DIFFERING Protestant chueches each with its own set of Faith beliefs. ….If the RCC is not the One True Faith and Church then which ONE is and based on what evidence? God Bless you, Patrick
  4. Patrick Miron

    I'm A Roman Catholic

    So let's give your expertise a dry run here: Give me your understanding of either: Mt. 16: 15-19 and OR John 17:17-20 May God guide our path, Patrick
  5. Patrick Miron

    I'm A Roman Catholic

    A couple of later reflections my friend, Joe Please research "where did the bible come from"; After all; five of the NT authors were Apostles; Peter, John, James, Paul and Matthew; are you going to deny that THEY are Catholics too? The Church continues to teach that the RCC is NECESSARY for everyone salvation Catechism: 780 The Church in this world is the sacrament of salvation, the sign and the instrument of the communion of God and men 846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body: Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it. 847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation. End Quotes Joe I hope this clarifies that issue for you? God Bless you, Patrick
  6. Patrick Miron

    I'm A Roman Catholic

    I'd like to respond; but am missing the point that your trying make here and what is the evidence for your claim. Provide the evidence and I'll comment on it. As for the Bible being a Catholic book; if as you suggest its not; then WHO are we to credit for it? May God guide our paths, Patrick
  7. Patrick Miron

    I'm A Roman Catholic

    Thanks but no thanks, your not seeking truth, only a forum to display your brilliance. May GOD guide our paths, Patrick
  8. Patrick Miron

    I'm A Roman Catholic

    I'm nearly speechless here, What I can share is once again this Pope has taken upon himself to {attempt to} do the IMPOSSIBLE; that is to rewrite Defined Catholic Doctrine; which not even the Pope is able to do.... And once again it is worded in a duplicitous manner using WORDS easily interpreted in multiple ways. The article I share below sums up what IS the unchangeable, long taught position of the RCC. Sadly. many, the PRESS certainly included is not knowledgeable about the RCC , and what a Defined Doctrine demands. {the POPE OUGHT TO BE!}, and so some will accept this a a NEW doctrine; when in fact it is but another attempt by this Pope to rewrite history, the bible and DEFINED Catholic Doctrine; which is an impossibility. Thanks for asking, Patrcik Popes change to Catechism contradicts natural law and the deposit of Faith https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/pope-francis-change-to-catechism-contradicts-natural-law-and-the-deposit-of?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com&utm_campaign=e884ed5f81-Daily%20Headlines%20-%20U.S._COPY_306&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_12387f0e3e-e884ed5f81-401456345 PETER KWASNIEWSKI Catechism Of The Catholic Church, Catholic, Death Penalty, Pope Francis August 2, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – In the boldest and most reckless move to date in a pontificate that was already out of control and sowing confusion on a massive scale, the Vatican has announced Pope Francis’s substitution, in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, of a new doctrine on capital punishment. Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magisteriu m of the Church for 2,000 years have upheld the intrinsic legitimacy of the death penalty for grave crimes against the common good of Church or State. There had never been any doubt in the minds of anyone on this subject. It was not a point of contention in the Schism between East and West, or in the Reformation and Counter-Reformation, or in the period of the Enlightenment—in short, it was one of those rare subjects on which agreement could be found not only within the Church, but with nearly everyone. The reason is simple: according to the natural law and Scripture alike, the rulers of a State, acting as representatives of divine justice and as custodians of the common good, may exercise an authority over life and death that they do not possess as private persons. In other words, it is God, always God, who has the right of life and death, and if the State shares in His divine authority, it has, at least in principle, the authority to end the life of a criminal. That the State does share in divine authority is the constant dogmatic teaching of the Church, found most explicitly (and repeatedly) in the Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII. Lest there be any doubts on this matter, Edward Feser and Joseph Bessette published a comprehensive overview of the subject: By Man Shall His Blood Be Shed: A Catholic Defense of Capital Punishment(San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2017). In this hard-hitting book, Feser and Bessette present the natural law arguments in favor of capital punishment, furnish a veritable catalogue of citations from Scripture, Fathers and Doctors of the Church, and Popes that uphold its legitimacy, and mount a critique of the logical fallacies and doctrinal contradictions—be they those of American bishops, or even of the Bishop of Rome—who attempt to wiggle out of this unanimous witness of faith and reason. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, like Feser and Bessette’s book, frequently quotes authoritative witnesses to Catholic doctrine from a period of 2,000 years (and more, if we add Old Testament references). It is hardly surprising, on the other hand, that the new Catechism text imposed by Francis cites but one source: a speech that Francis himself gave to participants in a meeting of the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the New Evangelization on 11 October 2017. Francis, creating doctrine ex nihilo, has only himself to cite. Some may say that Francis is not being revolutionary here, since Pope John Paul II was also opposed to capital punishment. But there is a crucial difference. John Paul II never questioned the admissibility of the death penalty as such; indeed, he could not have done so, because there is no way to reject this penalty without repudiating the foundations of Catholic Social Teaching. Instead, John Paul II recommended favoring the approach of detention, clemency, and rehabilitation. About such prudential issues, Christians and Catholics can indeed disagree with one another, presenting various arguments pro and con. The matter at hand could not be more grave. If Pope Francis is right, only one conclusion follows: “the Church was wrong in a major issue literally of life and death,” as a blogger wrote this morning: If such a certain doctrine of the Church (of the possibility of the death penalty at least in some situations), affirmed by Christ Himself in Scripture—when, confronted by Pilate who affirmed his right to inflict capital punishment, told him, “You would have no authority over Me if it were not given to you from above,” affirming that it is a power granted to the State in its authority, even if, as all governmental powers, it can be exercised illegitimately and unjustly—can be changed, then anything can be changed. A “development” of doctrine may bring about anything: from the end of the “intrinsic[ally] disordered” nature of homosexuality to the priestly ordination of women, from the possibility of contraception in “some” cases to the acceptance of the Lutheran understanding of the Real Presence in the Eucharist as a possible interpretation of what the Church has always believed—and so on. With this move, Pope Francis has shown himself to be openly heretical on a point of major importance, teaching a pure and simple novelty—“the boldness of a personal opinion becoming a completely new and unprecedented ‘teaching’ of the Church,” as Rorate Caeli stated. “The current Pope has far exceeded his authority: his authority is to guard and protect the doctrine that was received from Christ and the Apostles, not to alter it according to his personal views.” Francis may be banking on an assumption—false at least for the United States—that most Catholics are already (more or less) opposed to the death penalty, and therefore, that it is an obvious place to commence the official program of “renovating” the Church’s morality, while not ruffling too many feathers. He sees that if this change to the Catechism is accepted, it will be relatively easy to proceed to the other issues mentioned above: a change in the Catechism on homosexuality, a change on contraception, a change on conditions for admission to Holy Communion, a change on women’s ordination, and so forth. Whether Francis is a formal heretic—that is, fully aware that what he is teaching on capital punishment is contrary to Catholic doctrine, and proves pertinacious in maintaining his position in spite of rebuke—is a matter to be adjudicated by the College of Cardinals. No doubt exists, however, that orthodox bishops of the Catholic Church must oppose this doctrinal error and refuse to use the altered edition of the Catechism or any catechetical materials based on it. May St. Alphonsus Liguori, patron saint of moral theologians, whose feast is celebrated on August 1st and August 2nd, intercede for the Pope and for the entire Catholic Church, that the Lord in His mercy may quickly end this period of doctrinal chaos. END QUOTES Peter Kwasniewski holds a B.A. in Liberal Arts from Thomas Aquinas College in California and an M.A. and Ph.D. in Philosophy from The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. After teaching at the International Theological Institute in Austria and for the Franciscan University of Steubenville’s Austrian Program, he joined the founding team of Wyoming Catholic College in Lander, Wyoming, where he taught theology, philosophy, music, and art history, and directed the Choir and Schola. He now works as a freelance author, public speaker, editor, publisher, and composer. Kwasniewski is a board member and scholar of The Aquinas Institute for the Study of Sacred Doctrine, which is publishing the Opera Omnia of the Angelic Doctor, a Fellow of the Albertus Magnus Center for Scholastic Studies, and a Senior Fellow of the St. Paul Center. He has published over 750 articles on Thomistic thought, sacramental and liturgical theology, the history and aesthetics of music, and the social doctrine of the Church.
  9. Patrick Miron

    I'm A Roman Catholic

    OK, I'll take you up on that on the condition that we each have to PROVE with evidence our points objectively. Fair enough? God Bless you, Patrick
  10. Patrick Miron

    I'm A Roman Catholic

    Hi Patrick, thanks for answering. [1] So have you always been a Catholic? I can see where it's hard to leave a church where you might have gone all of your life since you are older. [2] But I think some Catholics these years realize a lot of Catholic teachings are not in the Bible. [3] They believe in Jesus as their Savior but don't follow the rituals or other [4] unScriptural things...but maybe because of their age, they stay in the church. [5] I do like a reverent worship service like your church usually has. [6] But when one has simple faith in Christ as Savior and tries to walk with Jesus in daily life, [7] there is no need for alot of extra teachings or rituals that are not in the Bible. [8] May I ask what part of the USA you are from? [9] Here in Los Angeles, I think some Catholics are born again and don't go by the rituals as much as other parts of the USA. [10] They are more accepting of non-Catholics, too. [1] Yes; I was born into the RCC as an infant; and have 12 years of good Catholic Education. Left the church for a time when I was in the USAF as none of the bases had a Catholic Priest, and I didn’t have a car to go off base. About 30+ years ago I became very involved in Catholic Life; studied for about 3 intensive years to prove my beliefs; and became a Marian Catechist; a Lay Apostolate approved by Rome to teach, share, and when necessary defend our Catholic Faith. [2] John 20: 30-31 “ [30] Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book. [31] But these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God: and that believing, you may have life in his name” John 21: 24-25 “ [24] This is that disciple who giveth testimony of these things, and hath written these things; and we know that his testimony is true. [25] But there are also many other things which Jesus did; which, if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written. Friend; the bible is a Catholic birthed book. It was Catholics that choose. Guided by the Holy Spirit, the 46 OT books, and it was Catholics {5 of whom were Catholic Apostles} who authored the NT 27 books. The Bible was fully authored by the end of the 1st Century; so there was a prolonged period that the Catholic Church that Jesus had just founded, and established was without the bible as a BOOK. Certainly some of the letters were copied and shared; but the Bible’s “Canon” {list of approved books} was not set until around the end of the 4th Century. Despite this handicap the new Catholic Church grew at an enormous rate, fertilized by the blood of countless Catholic Martyrs. As for difficulty of leaving; it has nothing to do with being born into the RCC; for ME, its having taken the time and making the serious effort to PROVE our beliefs and practices are in fact the one True Church and Faith that Jesus Christ desired and Personally established. Which I can prove both Biblically and historically. We HAVE Jesus Himself in Person in the Most Holy Eucharist ;{ testified to by 5 separate bible authors}, and we have forgiveness of our sins GOD’S specified way {John 20:19-23}, and the graces flowing through them, so WHY should any informed Catholic leave all that? [3] One of the least comprehended, biblically evidenced realities obut the RCC is the Power and authority granted to it by Jesus Personally, directly and exclusively: here’s the short list. Mt. 10: 1-4 [1] And having called his twelve disciples together, he gave THEM power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of diseases, and all manner of infirmities. [2] And the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, [3] James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the publican, and James the son of Alpheus, and Thaddeus, [4] Simon the Cananean, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him. [5] These twelve Jesus sent: commanding THEM, saying: Go ye not into the way of the Gentiles, and into the city of the Samaritans enter ye not…..” Mt. 16: 18-19 “ [18]And I say TO THEE That thou art Peter; and upon {YOU PETER} this rock I will build MY CHURCH {singular}, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to THEE {all of the} the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever YOU shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever YOU shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven” .. The necessary Power and the Authority of being the sole-holder of ALL of the keys to heaven’s gate simply is not grasped outside of the Bible and the CC. … the Church is “organic:; meaning by intent She {the RCC} is to GROW and adapt {without changing Her Defined Doctrines} to the present times.} John 17: 17-20 “ [17] Sanctify THEM in {MY} truth. Thy word is truth. [18] As thou hast SENT ME into the world,I ALSO HAVE SENT THEM sent them into the world. [19] And for THEM do I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth. [20] And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me” This is perhaps the most missed and misunderstood teaching in the entire bible! … Here Jesus Himself Personally gives Himself as the warranty of the HIS Catholic Church {alone, directly, & exclusively} having the fullness of His truths and, ALONE being able to share them with the world. … No other church, no other faith can make this claim and evidence it. Mt. 28: 18-20 {Douay Bible} “ [18] And Jesus coming, spoke to themTHEM, teach YE all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [20] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded YOU: and behold I am with YOU all days, even to the consummation of the world. DOUAY EXPLANATION: [18] "All power": See here the warrant and commission of the apostles and their successors, the bishops and pastors of Christ's church. He received from his Father all power in heaven and in earth: and in virtue of this power, he sends them (even as his Father sent him, St. John 20. 21) to teach and disciple, not one, but all nations; and instruct them in all truths: and that he may assist them effectually in the execution of this commission, he promises to be with them, not for three or four hundred years only, but all days, even to the consummation of the world. How then could the Catholic Church ever go astray; having always with her pastors, as is here promised, Christ himself, who is the way, the truth, and the life. St. John 14.” Eph. 4: 3-6 “ [3] Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. [4] One body and one Spirit; as you are called in one hope of your calling. [5] One Lord, one faith, one baptism. [6] One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all.” [4] As evidenced earlier; not everything was ever intended to be in the bible. … Catholics choose to remain in the Church that Jesus Founded because HE FOUNDED IT; and remains literally In-It in Catholic Holy Communion [5] The Catholic Mass, done correctly {reverently} is always God centered Divine Worship. Mass is NOT about “us”; it’s ALL about God. …there ought NOT be ANY effort to please those in attendance. That is secondary. [6] It is critically important to WALK with Jesus; but rightly understood this means to Know Him and the Do and believe ALL that HE actually teaches through His Catholic Church; the only Church protected by Jesus Personally. [7] The Bible is a book of the RCC. As to rituals; read the book of Exodus. [8] Sure: Currently we live in Northwestern Ohio. We moved back here just over a year ago after 14 years in Florida, to be closer to our Great Grandkids. [9] When I was still working I spent a week in LA on business. It is definitely a different culture than is the Midwest. Ya’ll are far more, dare I say Liberal and Progressive than we are. …. Me, I’m far more comfortable being where I am. [10] Yes, LA is very much a “go along to get along” culture. But is that what Jesus really expects from each of us? I’ve enjoyed our dialog. May God guide our Life paths, Patrick
  11. Patrick Miron

    I'm A Roman Catholic

  12. Patrick Miron

    I'm A Roman Catholic

    Hmmmm Mt 28: 18-20 {Douay Bible} [18] And Jesus coming, spoke to THEM, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. [19] Going therefore, teach YE all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [20] Teaching them to observe ALL THINGS whatsoever I have commanded YOU: and behold I am with YOU all days, even to the consummation of the world. DOUAY EXPLANATION:[18] "All power": See here the warrant and commission of the apostles and their successors, the bishops and pastors of Christ's church. He received from his Father all power in heaven and in earth: and in virtue of this power, he sends them (even as his Father sent him, St. John 20. 21) to teach and disciple, not one, but all nations; and instruct them in all truths: and that he may assist them effectually in the execution of this commission, he promises to be with them, not for three or four hundred years only, but all days, even to the consummation of the world. How then could the Catholic Church ever go astray; having always with her pastors, as is here promised, Christ himself, who is the way, the truth, and the life. St. John 14. And then there is also the authority and Godly Power of the Key's entrusted directly and exclusively to the RCC and bu absolute Peters successors {compare Mt 10: 1-8 to the above passage} God Bless you friend, Patrick
  13. Patrick Miron

    I'm A Roman Catholic

    Nope, I'm not a priest and I'll be 74 later this month hmmmmm, doesn't the Bible have something to say about OBEYING Traditions? Or doesn't that count? God Bless, Patrcik
  14. Patrick Miron

    I'm A Roman Catholic

    Pope Boniface VIII said “We declare, assert, define and pronounce to be subject to the Roman Pontiff is to every creature altogether necessary for salvation… I have the authority of the King of Kings. I am all in all, and above all, so that God Himself and I, the Vicar of Christ, have but one consistory, and I am able to do almost all that God can do. What therefore, can you make of me but God?” Pope Francis implies that “Allah” and the God of the Bible are the same. Blessings...... JoeCanada quoted one of your posts in a topic. “The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth.” (Source: Pope Pius V, quoted in Barclay, Cities Petrus Bertanous Chapter XXVII: 218.) Note: The above blasphemous words are coming from a sainted pope of Rome!” [1] Then, as evidence there is a quote from the gloss by French canonist Petrus Bertrandus (Peter Bertrand 1280-1349) for the last sentence of Unam Sanctam [published in Corpus Juris Canonici, Extravagantes Communes, book I, title 8, chapter I., (De majoritate et obedientia), which begins at column 202], Bull of Pope Boniface VIII promulgated November 18, 1302: [Contrarium videtur.] Christus commissit summo Pontifici vices suas, (ut habetur Matth. 16. cap. et 24. q I. quodcumque.) Sed Christo data erat omnis potestas in caelo et in terra (Matth. 28.) ergo summus Pontifex qui est ejus vicarius habebit hanc potestatem. extra de translat. cap. quanto. (See column 212.) Christ entrusted his office to the chief Pontiff; (Mat 16:18, Mat 24:45) but all power in heaven and in earth had been given to Christ; (Mat. 28:18) therefore the chief Pontiff, who is his vicar, will have this power. (Translation source) [Extravagantes, Decretal. Greg. IX. de Transl. lib. i. tit. 7. c. 3. 'Quanto personam,' Pope Innocent III.] [2a] Is the Pope God? Please really clarify kung nagbago na ito o hindi pa. tonton PExer December 2012 in REALM OF THOUGHT "All names which in the Scriptures are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope." On the Authority of the Councils, book 2, chapter 17 "The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth." Pope Pius V, quoted in Barclay, Chapter XXVII, p. 218, "Cities Petrus Bertanous" "The Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth...by divine right the Pope has supreme and full power in faith, in morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true vicar, the head of the entire church, the father and teacher of all Christians. He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils; the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God himself on earth." Quoted in the New York Catechism. [2b] These words are written in the Roman Canon Law 1685: "To believe that our Lord God the Pope has not the power to decree as he is decreed, is to be deemed heretical." Father A. Pereira says: "It is quite certain that Popes have never approved or rejected this title 'Lord God the Pope,' for the passage in the gloss referred to appears in the edition of the Canon Law published in Rome in 1580 by Gregory XIII." Writers on the Canon Law say, "The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in heaven and earth." Barclay Cap. XXVII, p. 218. Cities Petrus Bertrandus, Pius V. - Cardinal Cusa supports his statement. Pope Nicholas I declared: "the appellation of God had been confirmed by Constantine on the Pope, who, being God, cannot be judged by man." Labb IX Dist.: 96 Can. 7, Satis evidentur, Decret Gratian Primer Para [3] "The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh." Catholic National, July 1895 {INSERTED} See SITES at the bottom of this of document "Our Lord God the Pope"...not: Part 1 NOTA BENE: I might get a bit emotional and sharp-tongued in in the following article, so excuse me in advance if my words become too acerbic. If there is one thing, one argument that some anti-Catholics use that would irk me, it's their trying to prove the "Pope is God" by showing various quotes from (supposedly) Catholic works which show a Pope or a Cleric proclaiming that the Pope is equivalent to and is God Himself under the flesh.I know a few will say, "Come on, these guys have their proof and even provide citations for them! How can you refute these?" I answer that: While these people may have done a commendable job of trying to provide citations for a statement (a plus point in my book), providing citations is not enough in many cases. I believe that one must also show the statement in question in context (cherry-picking one phrase and interpreting it removed from its context is just intolerable, IMHO), show other related works (if possible) that corroborate the statement, and always provide correct citations.If the Church teaches that the Pope is God in human form, then why doesn't a statement similar to that one appear in the Catechism, where just about all things that Catholics believe in are written? And be better sure that if there is any evidence to the contrary, that it is published in the official Catechism and not in local ones. Now, let's first adress three of these supposed 'quotes', shall we? 1.) These words are written in the Roman Canon Law 1685: "To believethat our Lord God the Pope has not the power to decree as he is decreed, is tobe deemed heretical."Father A. Pereira says: "It is quite certain that Popes have neverapproved or rejected this title 'Lord God the Pope,' for the passage in thegloss referred to appears in the edition of the Canon Law published in Rome in1580 by Gregory XIII." Quite believable, this one, isn't it? Yet the problem with this quote is: 1.) Pope Gregory XIII's Canon Law was published in 1582, not 1580 (though this is just a minor quibble). 2.) António Pereira de Figueiredo (1761-1797) was a priest in Lisbon who published many works, including a translation of the Bible and a work entitled Tentativa Theologica (first published in 1766; it is in this work where this quote supposedly appears), in which he attacked the Papal predominancy in Portugal. The work was then translated in Latin, Spanish and Italian and sparked a controversy; eventually because of this, Pereira was excommunicated. There is some information about Pereira in this (Spanish) work entitled Historia de los Heterodoxos Españoles (History of heterodox Spaniards?) VII, chapter 2. If someone knows Spanish and can translate this chapter for me, please contact me or post in the comment box. 3.) All that Fr. Pereira he says is that the passage in the gloss referred to (in other words, the passage that is referred to in the gloss) appears in the Canon Law edition. He does not say that the gloss itself appears in this edition of the Canon Law (and it doesn't). So, suppose someone were to write a false statement in relation to another written work anywhere, would that affect the truth or otherwise the referenced written work itself? Now, let's move on: 2.) "The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh."-Catholic National, July 1895 Frs. Leslie Rumble and Charles M. Carty already answered this question in volume 2 of their Radio Replies (which were actually transcripts of a 1930's radio program hosted by them), so I would defer to them here: 2-310. Pope Pius X made the blasphemous claim that he was "Jesus Christ hidden under the veil of the flesh. Does the Pope speak? It is Jesus Christ who speaks." REPLY: A Protestant paper, the "Church Review," in England, October 3, 1895, charges Cardinal Sarto, Archbishop of Venice, with having uttered those words at Venice. Cardinal Sarto was elected Pope in 1903. But as soon as the charge was made in 1895 that Cardinal Sarto had said those words, inquiries were sent from England to Venice, and Cardinal Sarto produced the manuscript of his discourse. And this is what he actually did say:"The Pope REPRESENTS Jesus Christ Himself, and therefore is a loving father. The life of the Pope is a holocaust of love for the human family. His word is love; love, his weapon; love, the answer he gives to all who hate him; love, his flag, that is, the Cross, which signed the greatest triumph on Earth and in Heaven." 1.) The quote is said to have appeared from an English Protestant publication (October 3, 1895), not a Catholic one. As an aside, that quote had also appeared earlier from another Protestant magazine entitled Evangelical Christendom in January 1 of that year. 2.) The actual words of Cardinal Sarto (later Pope Pius X; he only became Pope in 1903) says that the Pope represents Jesus Christ, not that he is Jesus Christ, as this misquote (and those who use them) loves to say. 3.) I haven't been able to find anything about Catholic National. There is however, a Catholic publication which have the names National Catholic Register which is the oldest Catholic newspaper in the United States; however, this publication was begun in 1927. Can someone at least show me proof that there was a 19th-century publication entitled Catholic National, and that the quote appeared in there? UPDATE (2014/08/24): I just found a rather interesting link that may be pertinent to the discussion. (Oh, and this one.) Given how ephemeral Internet pages can be I'll just quote the thing in full. This by the way is from the British Catholic paper The Tablet (nowadays rather infamous for its liberal stance), back when it was not so infamous (January 18th, 1896; p. 20) ;): "Please forgive my bad English, and, with best regards, I remain, yours sincerely, "MARINO TOMMATES. [2] "We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty" Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894 Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae The Reunion of Christendom Pope Leo XIII – 1894 But since We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty,[**} Who will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the Truth, and now that Our advanced age and the bitterness of anxious cares urge Us on towards the end common to every mortal, We feel drawn to follow the example of Our Redeemer and Master, Jesus Christ, Who, when about to return to Heaven, implored of God, His Father, in earnest Prayer, that His Disciples and followers should be of one mind and of one heart: I pray . . . that they all may be one, as Thou Father in Me, and I in Thee: that they also may be one in Us. And as this Divine Prayer and Supplication does not include only the souls who then believed in Jesus Christ, but also every one of those who were henceforth to believe in Him, this Prayer holds out to Us no indifferent reason for confidently expressing Our hopes, and for making all possible endeavors in order that the men of every race and clime should be called and moved to embrace the Unity of Divine Faith. The special missions sent by Kings and Princes, the many Pilgrimages, the letters We received so full of affectionate feeling, the Sacred Services–everything clearly brought out the fact that all Catholics are of one mind and of one heart in their veneration for the Apostolic See. And this was all the more pleasing and agreeable to Us, that it is entirely in conformity with Our intent and with Our endeavors. For, indeed, well acquainted with Our times, and mindful of the duties of Our Ministry, We have constantly sought during the whole course of Our Pontificate and striven, as far as it was possible, by teaching and action, to bind every Nation and people more closely to Us, and make manifest everywhere the salutary influence of the See of Rome. Therefore, do We most earnestly offer thanks in the first place to the goodness of God, by whose help and bounty We have been preserved to attain Our great age; and then, next, to all the Princes and Rulers, to the Bishops and Clergy, and to as many as have co-operated by such repeated tokens of Piety and Reverence to Honor Our Character and Office, while affording Us personally such seasonable consolation. A great deal, however, has been wanting to the entire fullness of that consolation. Amidst these very manifestations of public joy and Reverence Our thoughts went out towards the immense multitude of those who are strangers to the gladness that filled all Catholic hearts: some because they lie in absolute ignorance of the Gospel; others because they dissent from the Catholic belief, though they bear the name of Christians Pressed on to Our intent by Charity, that hastens fastest there where the need is greatest, We direct Our first thoughts to those most unfortunate of all nations who have never received the light of the Gospel, or who, after having possessed it, have lost it through neglect or the vicissitudes of time: Hence do they ignore God, and live in the depths of error. Now, as all salvation comes from Jesus Christ–for there is no other Name under Heaven given to men whereby we must be saved–Our ardent desire is that the most Holy Name of Jesus should rapidly pervade and fill every land. And here, indeed, is a duty which the Church, faithful to the Divine Mission entrusted to her, has never neglected. What has been the object of her labors for more than nineteen centuries? Is there any other work she has undertaken with greater zeal and constancy than that of bringing the nations of the earth to the Truth and Principles of Christianity? Today, as ever, by Our Authority, the Heralds of the Gospel constantly cross the seas to reach the farthest corners of the earth; and We Pray God daily that in His goodness He may deign to increase the number of His Ministers who are really worthy of this Apostolate, and who are ready to Sacrifice their convenience, their health, and their very life, if need be, in order to extend the frontiers of the Kingdom of Christ. Do Thou, above all, O Savior and Father of mankind, Christ Jesus, hasten and do not delay to bring about what Thou didst once promise to do–that when lifted up from the earth Thou wouldst draw all things to Thyself. Come, then, at last, and manifest Thyself to the immense multitude of souls who have not felt, as yet, the ineffable Blessings which Thou hast earned for men with Thy Blood; rouse those who are sitting in darkness and in the shadow of death, that, enlightened by the rays of Thy Wisdom and Virtue, in Thee and by Thee “they may be made perfect in one.” As We consider the Mystery of this Unity We see before Us all the countries which have long since passed, by the Mercy of God, from timeworn error to the wisdom of the Gospel. Nor could We, indeed, recall anything more pleasing or better calculated to extol the work of Divine Providence that the memory of the days of yore, when the Faith that had come down from Heaven was looked upon as the common inheritance of one and all; when civilized nations, separated by distance, character and habits, in spite of frequent disagreements and warfare on other points, were united by Christian Faith in all that concerned Religion. The recollection of that time causes Us to regret all the more deeply that as the ages rolled by the waves of suspicion and hatred arose, and great and flourishing nations were dragged away, in an evil hour, from the bosom of the Roman Church. In spite of that, however, We trust in the Mercy of God’s Almighty Power, in Him Who alone can fix the hour of His benefits and Who has Power to incline man’s will as He pleases; and We turn to those same nations, exhorting and beseeching them with Fatherly love to put an end to their dissensions and return again to Unity First of all, then, We cast an affectionate look upon the East,{THE FGREAT “EASTERN SCHISM TOOK PLACE IN 1054 AD} from whence in the beginning came forth the salvation of the world. Yes, and the yearning desire of Our heart bids us conceive and hope that the day is not far distant when the Eastern Churches, so illustrious in their ancient faith and glorious past, will return to the fold they have abandoned. We hope it all the more, that the distance separating them from Us is not so great: nay, with some few exceptions, we agree so entirely on other heads that, in defense of the Catholic Faith, we often have recourse to reasons and testimony borrowed from the teaching, the Rites, and Customs of the East. END of the parts quoted. Please note: I did read the entire document; and thee only reference that comes EVEN close to the slanderous claim was the opening remarks which I have highlighted; and which by reading of the balance of the Document are easily refuted and denied. “But since We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty”[**} Knowing that this is heavily a Sola Scriptura web-site; I share the following support evidence of and FOR this articulated position as being solidly BIBLICAL. King James Version w/ Apocrypha Matthew 10:1-8 1 And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave THEM power against unclean spirits, to cast them out , and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease.2 Now the names of the twelve {Catholic} apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;3 Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus;4 Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.5 These twelve Jesus sent forth , and commanded them, saying , Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.7 And as ye go , preach , saying , The kingdom of heaven is at hand .8 Heal the sick , cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received , freely give .” Mt. 16: 18-19 King James Version w/ Apocrypha Matthew 16:18-19 18 And I say also unto THEE, That THOU art Peter, and upon {YOU PETER} this rock I will build MY CHURCH {singular} ; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.19 And I will give unto THEE {all of the } the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever THOU shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever THOU shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” King James Version w/ Apocrypha John 17:17-20 17 Sanctify THEM through thy truth: thy word is truth.18 As THOU hast sent ME into the world, even so have I also sent THEM into the world.19 And for THEIR SAKE I sanctify MYSELF, that THEY ALSO might be sanctified through the {MY} truth.20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through THEIR WORDS” {What THIS is literally teaching is: THAT JESUS HERE GIVES HIMSELF AS THE PERSONAL WARRANTY OF HIS RCC BEING ABLE AND FULLY GUARDED, GUIDED AND PROTECTED BY HIMSELF PERSONALLY FOR THEM {ONLY AND ALONE} TEACHING HIS TRUTHS….” No other church or faith can make THIS CLAIM and evidence it. King James Version w/ Apocrypha Matthew 28:18-20 18 And Jesus came and spake unto THEM {ONLY} , saying , All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.19 Go YE {DIRECT, SINGULAR AND EXCLUSIVELY} therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded YOU: and, lo , I am with YOU always even unto the end of the world. Amen.” QUOTE: “Roman Catholic Canon Law stipulates through Pope Innocent III that the Roman pontiff is "the vicegerent upon earth, not a mere man, but of a very God;" and in a gloss on the passage it is explained that this is because he is the vicegerent of Christ, who is "very God and very man." Decretales Domini Gregorii translatione Episcoporum, (on the transference of Bishops), title 7, chapter 3; Corpus Juris Canonice (2nd Leipzig ed., 1881), col. 99; (Paris, 1612), tom. 2, Devretales, col. 205 Roman Catholic Canon Law stipulates through Pope Innocent III that the Roman pontiff is "the vicegerent upon earth, not a mere man, but of a very God;" and in a gloss on the passage it is explained that this is because he is the vicegerent of Christ, who is "very God and very man." Decretales Domini Gregorii translatione Episcoporum, (on the transference of Bishops), title 7, chapter 3; Corpus Juris Canonice (2nd Leipzig ed., 1881), col. 99; (Paris, 1612), tom. 2, Devretales, col. 205” EQ {Webster’s definition} Vicegerent: noun 1. a person exercising delegated power on behalf of a sovereign or ruler. a person regarded as an earthly representative of God or a god, especially the Pope” NEXT ISSUE [4] Pope Francis implies that “Allah” and the God of the Bible are the same. “I then greet and cordially thank you all, dear friends belonging to other religious traditions; first of all the Muslims, who worship the one God, living and merciful, and call upon Him in prayer, and all of you” Blessings...... A new video has just been released in which Pope Francis very clearly expresses his belief that all of the major religions are different paths to the same 'God'. He says that while people from various global faiths may be, "seeking 'God' or meeting 'God' in different ways" that it is important to keep in mind that "we are all children of 'God'." This is the most recent example that shows that the Pope has completely abandoned any notion that a relationship with 'God' is available only through Jesus Christ “Pope Francis’ Calls for Collaboration With World’s Religions, Those Who ‘Meet God in Different Ways’ “ ROME — In his first-ever video declaring his “prayer intentions,” the Roman Catholic leader Jorge Bergoglio, also known as Pope Francis, called for dialogue and collaboration among those of the various world religions on Tuesday, asserting that they are simply “seeking or meeting God in different ways.” “Most of the planet’s inhabitants declare themselves believers,” he states in the production released on the Feast of Epiphany. “This should lead to dialogue among religions. We should not stop praying for it and collaborating with those who think differently.” Francis contends that all the religions of the world simply represent mankind’s diversity in seeking God. He says that despite the differing beliefs, everyone is a child of the same God. “Many think differently, feel differently, seeking God or meeting God in different ways,” he states. “In this crowd, in this range of religions, there is only one certainty that we have for all: we are all children of God.” Friend, as an INFORMED and fully practicing RC, I puzzle at a number of different things said to be the teachings of Pope Francis. I can only share the following; like me and YOU, he too, is entitled to HIS OWN opinions; which is ALL that they ARE, if they appear {or even if they do} contradict Sacred Traditions, and DEFINED Doctrine. Undoubtedly we ARE living in truly historic times under this Pontific. Whether he misspoke; or is expressing in {in-ignorance; new to the Position entrusted to him} exuberance, His OWN personal views; not even a reigning POPE has the authority or the Power to rewrite the bible, {which BTW is a Catholic book}, the Catechism, Canon Law, or Defined Doctrine. The Roman Catholic Ordinary Magisterium exist as a counter-balance to the extremely rare possibility of Faith and or Moral TEACHING-error. Friend Joe, Taking the TIME to actually uncover THEE Truth, is a far surer way to heaven then what you seem to have chosen to share. Joe, I’ll be 74 in a few weeks, I have neither the time nor the patience to research each and every one of these salacious accusations, some dating back more than 1,000YEARS, and so I chose what the most slanderous ones for your edification. … By the way, I also found a Protestant-site where it looked like all of them were listed; possibly making your task much easier than was mine. I do hope and pray that you have your reasons for abandoning Christ One True Faith and Church handy in time for “the Judgment.” Choosing to leave Jesus IN PERSON in the Most Holy Eucharist; and abandoning Sacramental Confession; the ONLY God approved, taught by Jesus way for sin forgiveness {1 John 5:16-17 & John 20:19-23}… Joe, I don’t know the real reason you left Christ Catholic Church; but what the reason; its insufficient and puts your Soul at risk. The Catholic Church is some 2,000 years old; and today has in excess of 1 BILLION self-proclaimed “Catholics”; some of whom are In NAME Only. With this long history and the number of Catholics; there ARE going to be some serious sinners in our history; but I suspect that the list you provided is an invented-spurious, duplicitous ungrounded attack on the RCC, as an effort to somehow{as it cannot be done Biblically or logically}, prove or justify your Protestant faith. The Catholic Church Herself, emulates Christ and cannot sin; however the members of the RCC can and sadly do. Being a Catholic does not make one immune to Satan’s attacks; quite the opposite we have always been the BULLSEYE on Satan’s target of Souls to attack. Joe. I’ll be praying for you Prayers and Blessings, Patrick
  15. Patrick Miron

    I'm A Roman Catholic

    As a Christian IF we were asked: “WHAT is the most important Religious “holiday”, what would be the most popular response? Christmas Thanksgiving {Yes I have heard it so described} Easter Or something else. It would not shock me to see “Christmas”; the birthday of Jesus, win this Straw poll. Certainly, Christmas was the start of very many good things. Indeed it was the necessary start to the GREATEST good thing Jesus did for all humanity. Non-Catholic Christians tend to understand the terms ”salvation” & “redemption” to be interchangeable; meaning the very same thing. But they are not, and do not. Quote: REDEMPTION. The salvation of humanity by Jesus Christ. Literally, to redeem means to free or buy back. Humanity was held captive in that it was enslaved by sin. Since the devil overcame human beings by inducing them to sin, they were said to be in bondage to the devil. Moreover, the human race was held captive as to a debt of punishment, to the payment of which it was bound by divine justice. On all these counts, the Passion of Christ was sufficient and superabundant satisfaction for human guilt and the consequent debt of punishment. His Passion was a kind of price or ransom that paid the cost of freeing humanity from both obligations. Christ rendered satisfaction, not by giving money, but by spending what was of the highest value. He gave himself, and therefore his Passion is called humanity's Redemption. (Etym. Latin redemptio, a buying back, ransoming, redemption.) EQ Father Hardon’s Catholic Dictionary Quote: SALVATION. In biblical language the deliverance from straitened circumstances or oppression by some evil to a state of freedom and security. As sin is the greatest evil, salvation is mainly liberation from sin and its consequences. This can be deliverance by way of preservation, or by offering the means for being delivered, or by removing the oppressive evil or difficulty, or by rewarding the effort spent in co-operating with grace in order to be delivered. {Each applying to individuals conditionally.} All four aspects of salvation are found in the Scriptures and are taught by the {Catholic} Church. (Etym. Latin salvare, to save. EQ Father Hardon’s Catholic Dictionary Often a Catholic religious definition of terms will differ from other definitions; but the two words used above, are defined by Webster as: Definition of redemption for English Language Learners. : the act of making something better or more acceptable. : the act of exchanging something for money, an award, etc. Christianity : the act of saving people from sin and evil : the fact of being saved from sin or evil In Christianity Salvation: the act of saving someone from sin or evil : the state of being saved from sin or evil: something that saves someone or something from danger or a difficult situation. NOTE the difference: “Redemption” is literally for EVERYONE; while “Salvation” is individualized. By now you’re asking “what the heck does this have to do with my question?” The ANSWER is everything. Christ Birth was to take into account both needs, both realities. But his Death and Resurrection were the most signifient because they applied to ALL of humanity; past, present and future; while His Birth was to be critical- evidence also to humanity as INDIVIDUALS; as the Savior of all who would “pay the price of Salvation;” but NOT to all humanity. What Christ as “Redeemer” to ALL humanity means is this: When Adam failed God, failed Eve {his wife} and failed all of humanity; among many other God-imposed penalties, was to kick Adam {and Eve} out of the Garden of Paradise {heaven}; LOCK Heaven’s gate and deny anyone and everyone access to heaven UNTIL EASTER> …. And Christ Resurrection from the DEAD {into NEW life}; which is what Easter Sunday {the day of the SON} represents. Because Jesus died in his physical BODY, and then rose from the DEAD; we to have the ability, the Hope and the Faith of our own resurrection into life-eternal; and NOW that Jesus’s Own Resurrection ULOCKED the gate of heaven; making conditionally possible ALL of humanities potential to choose for ourselves ETERNAL Heaven or eternal Hell. OUR CHOICE, we celebrate that Heaven is NOW a possibility; where before Christ Resurrection Heaven’s Gate was LOCKED. Matthew 28: 1-10 The resurrection of Christ. His commission to his disciples. [1] And in the end of the sabbath, when it began to dawn towards the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalen and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre. [2] And behold there was a great earthquake. For an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and coming, rolled back the stone, and sat upon it. [3] And his countenance was as lightning, and his raiment as snow. [4] And for fear of him, the guards were struck with terror, and became as dead men. [5] And the angel answering, said to the women: Fear not you; for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. [6] He is not here, for he is risen, as he said. Come, and see the place where the Lord was laid. [7] And going quickly, tell ye his disciples that he is risen: and behold he will go before you into Galilee; there you shall see him. Lo, I have foretold it to you. [8] And they went out quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy, running to tell his disciples. [9] And behold Jesus met them, saying: All hail. But they came up and took hold of his feet, and adored him. [10] Then Jesus said to them: Fear not. Go, tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, there they shall see me.” Genesis 3: 23-24 {God LOCKS OUT HEAVEN} [23] “And the Lord God sent him out of the paradise of pleasure, to till the earth from which he was taken. [24] And he cast out Adam; and placed before the paradise of pleasure Cherubims, and a flaming sword, turning every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.” So friend Easter Sunday, because of the Resurrection of Jesus from the Dead; on Sun {SON} day, the most important Feast Day of the Christian Faith, because NOW Heaven was a possibility for ALL humanity. Thanks for asking, Patrick
×