Who makes sinners into saints?

[thereselittleflower]

3 hours ago, Thallasa said:

I rarely agree with you ,but praying to angels, is Pagan and was not part of the original Irish Church founded by Saint Patrick . I must look further to see where it began, but my guess is 'contamination ' ,by Rome when they forced the Irish Church into the Roman one , by political force .

I know there  are people in the RCC who never pray to saints or angels, because my own family never did .

When I saw on a Catholic website the prayer to Michael for the first time two years ago, I was shocked ,truly shocked .The accusation of paganism is not a false one ,but there seems no one in the hierarchy who is capable of  bringing about the cleansing neccessary ,so it will be God Himself who will have to do it .

 

 

Thallasa I find that hard to believe - He was born at the end of the 4th century, and served God in the 5th century.   He was

• a Latin-speaking Roman noble,
• grandson of a Catholic priest,
• son of a minor official of the Roman empire,

He

• had repeated private revelations,
• practiced penance,
• spent two decades as a monk,
• was ordained a priest, 
• sent to serve on the papal mission to Ireland,
• was then ordained bishop by a papal representative,
• had his fidelity to Catholic teaching specially confirmed by Pope Leo the Great.  
• described himself as a Catholic,  
• drew up a list of canons for the Irish church orders that any dispute not resolved on a local level was to be forwarded to Rome for decision.

 

[hmbld]

8 minutes ago, thereselittleflower said:

Thallasa I find that hard to believe - He was born at the end of the 4th century, and served God in the 5th century.   He was

• a Latin-speaking Roman noble,
• grandson of a Catholic priest,
• son of a minor official of the Roman empire,

He

• had repeated private revelations,
• practiced penance,
• spent two decades as a monk,
• was ordained a priest, 
• sent to serve on the papal mission to Ireland,
• was then ordained bishop by a papal representative,
• had his fidelity to Catholic teaching specially confirmed by Pope Leo the Great.  
• described himself as a Catholic,  
• drew up a list of canons for the Irish church orders that any dispute not resolved on a local level was to be forwarded to Rome for decision.

 

What does any of that prove regarding whether an individual prayed to angels or not?  Or why should anyone care if he did pray to angels, the question is clearly answered in scripture.  We pray directly to God alone.  So one can choose, to obey scripture, or argue word meanings and choose to follow a false teaching.  

[thereselittleflower]

   

24 minutes ago, hmbld said:

What does any of that prove regarding whether an individual prayed to angels or not?  Or why should anyone care if he did pray to angels, the question is clearly answered in scripture.  We pray directly to God alone.  So one can choose, to obey scripture, or argue word meanings and choose to follow a false teaching.  

Such prayers were part of Catholicism and the Mass at the time of St Patrick, and St Patrick was fully Catholic.

[hmbld]

1 minute ago, thereselittleflower said:

   

Such prayers were part of Catholicism and the Mass at the time of St Patrick, and St Patrick was fully Catholic.

Does it matter?  Could anyone be "fully Catholic" and yet understand what pagan practices are?  The example given was Thallasa and her family never prayed to saints or angels, and was shocked to read these "prayers".  

[thereselittleflower]

5 minutes ago, hmbld said:

Does it matter?  Could anyone be "fully Catholic" and yet understand what pagan practices are?  The example given was Thallasa and her family never prayed to saints or angels, and was shocked to read these "prayers".  

The vast majority of cradle Catholics alive today have had a very poor understanding of their faith and its history regardless of what they claim.  I am not surprised by anything actually.    That such prayer were part of the mass during the time of St Patrick and St Patrick was faithful to all of the Catholic Church's teachings. This means such prayers would have been part of the Mass he was taught and celebrated.  So I find such claims to the contrary very hard to believe.  There is no evidence he did anything other than what all priests and bishops did when celebrating the Mass.

 

 

[hmbld]

3 minutes ago, thereselittleflower said:

The vast majority of cradle Catholics alive today have had a very poor understanding of their faith and its history regardless of what they claim.  I am not surprised by anything actually.    That such prayer were part of the mass during the time of St Patrick and St Patrick was faithful to all of the Catholic Church's teachings. This means such prayers would have been part of the Mass he was taught and celebrated.  So I find such claims to the contrary very hard to believe.  There is no evidence he did anything other than what all priests and bishops did when celebrating the Mass.

 

 

Even though I find this off topic, if there was no evidence St Patrick did anything other than pray to dead people or angels, then does that mean there is evidence that he did?  I know little of st patrick, and whether he followed scripture or a false teaching is not important, what is important is what do we do?  Follow scripture or a false teaching?

[Guest Thallasa]

46 minutes ago, thereselittleflower said:

Thallasa I find that hard to believe - He was born at the end of the 4th century, and served God in the 5th century.   He was

• a Latin-speaking Roman noble,
• grandson of a Catholic priest,
• son of a minor official of the Roman empire,

He

• had repeated private revelations,
• practiced penance,
• spent two decades as a monk,
• was ordained a priest, 
• sent to serve on the papal mission to Ireland,
• was then ordained bishop by a papal representative,
• had his fidelity to Catholic teaching specially confirmed by Pope Leo the Great.  
• described himself as a Catholic,  
• drew up a list of canons for the Irish church orders that any dispute not resolved on a local level was to be forwarded to Rome for decision.

 

Well you do know of course that the Irish Church was pretty independent of Rome until Adrian 1V asked Henry 11 to invade Ireland in 1166 to bring her in line with the Roman church .Yes in order to bring the people , good simple christians into line with pope Gregories so called reforms , they had to find a warrier king to destroy those who opposed  him .

They were also then forced to pay 'tithes' to Rome . When I think how painful our history has been, and it all began with this popes 'Lauderbilt' 'bull' .  

As for prayers to Michael, it was a late invention by pope Leo in 1886  . To this day Irish Catholics in the west of Ireland in particular ,have no time  for Rome , hate it even .  Their idea of being a christian has nothing to do with the Vatican ,and never has been , and would be appalled at the idea of praying to an angel . These people would be counted as  Roman catholics , but are they really ?

 

[Willa]

Back to the OP, I find it interesting that Paul frequently addresses his books to the saints who are in ____.   Ephesus, Colossae, etc.  He does not do so to the Galatians where people were deserting the faith and returning to Judism and being saved by works.  Nor does he do this when addressing the Corinthians, a church full of such tolarance that the toleratated gross sin in their midst.  Instead He addresses those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus, CALLED (to be) SAINTS, with all who in every place call on the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:  Some translations read CALLED SAINTS since the words "to be" were added by translators.  He does the same when addressing the Romans.  

So I have to wonder if this was a name others give to most believers just as followers of Jesus were first called Christians in Antioch.  We all were sanctified by God when we were born again.  He set us apart to be holy to Himself, like He had set apart the Levites.  But Romans 12 instructs us to in turn present out bodìes as living sacrifices to God.  We are also told to not be conformed to this world, but to be transformed by the renewing of our minds and, in Ephesians 5, that Christ sanctifies and cleanses the church by the washing of water by the word.  So we renew our minds and cleanse them by reading God's Word, and we dedicate ourselves wholly to God in response to what He has done for us.  This continued fellowship with God and the resulting changes in our lives are what would cause others to call us holy ones.  We are separated from the world and noticeaby so.  We become men and women of prayer and of humble loving service to God and others.  So God sanctifies us, sets us apart,  but we also respond by presenting ourselves to Him and continuing to adhere to Him.  This causes others to call us holy.  Sometimes they call us more holy than thou--hopefully not so much because of our attitudes but because of their conviction by the Holy Spirit when they see the changes in our lives.  Most often the world hates us as they hated Jesus.  But sometimes this life change draws people to God as we continue to demonstrate His love for them in spite of ridicule and persecution.  

[Ezra]

1 hour ago, Willa said:

Back to the OP, I find it interesting that Paul frequently addresses his books to the saints who are in ____.   Ephesus, Colossae, etc.  He does not do so to the Galatians where people were deserting the faith and returning to Judism and being saved by works.  Nor does he do this when addressing the Corinthians, a church full of such tolarance that the toleratated gross sin in their midst.

Actually the saints at Corinth are addressed as saints (1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 1:1) and to the Galatians "grace and peace" from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (Gal 1:3), which is only valid for saints.  

As far as the apostles were concerned, the terms "saints" and "brethren" were interchangeable. It is God who makes saints by the gift of the Holy Spirit, not some man or some church declaring one to be a saint and another a nonentity.

Was Mother Teresa a saint already? Only God knows. She was definitely a dedicated Roman Catholic serving the most needy in India. She was evidently also committed to "true devotion to the blessed Virgin Mary". http://www.motherteresa.org/rosary/L_M/2.html

http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/mary-s-light-in-mother-teresa-s-dark-night

But to now come along and say that because she accomplished some miracles she is fit to be called a saint has no scriptural authority.

[thereselittleflower]

On 12/20/2015 at 0:38 PM, Thallasa said:

Well you do know of course that the Irish Church was pretty independent of Rome until Adrian 1V asked Henry 11 to invade Ireland in 1166 to bring her in line with the Roman church .Yes in order to bring the people , good simple christians into line with pope Gregories so called reforms , they had to find a warrier king to destroy those who opposed  him .

They were also then forced to pay 'tithes' to Rome . When I think how painful our history has been, and it all began with this popes 'Lauderbilt' 'bull' .  

As for prayers to Michael, it was a late invention by pope Leo in 1886  . To this day Irish Catholics in the west of Ireland in particular ,have no time  for Rome , hate it even .  Their idea of being a christian has nothing to do with the Vatican ,and never has been , and would be appalled at the idea of praying to an angel . These people would be counted as  Roman catholics , but are they really ?

 

Interesting.