tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post5830936856507343698..comments2024-03-21T04:02:46.799-07:00Comments on Little Catholic Bubble: Protestants: It's time to come backLeila@LittleCatholicBubblehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comBlogger100125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-64129034959336967362017-04-22T06:17:18.775-07:002017-04-22T06:17:18.775-07:00I am happy to say that I and my DH came home last ...I am happy to say that I and my DH came home last Easter!!! Hallelujah!! And I just found your fantastic blog and will ad it to my blogroll. /Maria swedish mother of five (#6) in the womb (Please pray for my 4 oldest protestant children that they also finds their way HOME!!! makenahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09071012411245835169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-81131976738675224362015-12-01T10:39:26.086-07:002015-12-01T10:39:26.086-07:00Unknown, If God used man "as a tool" to ...Unknown, If God used man "as a tool" to determine what would be included in the Holy Bible, did He give those men actual authority? If so, what kind of authority? And how did the faithful know who had the authority? Thanks!Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-89179102081521843152015-12-01T10:20:29.389-07:002015-12-01T10:20:29.389-07:00Lillian, but the Bible says that we are justified ...Lillian, but the Bible says that we are justified by our works and not by faith alone (James is explicit, no matter how people, including Luther who hated that book, wish it were otherwise). So, "faith alone" cannot possibly be Biblical. Works <b>and</b> faith, both of which are only possible through God's grace, now <i>that</i> is biblical! There is not a good work we can do without God's grace. But works are still works and they are necessary in our salvation. You can't reduce it down to an either/or. It's a both/and. Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-7559909542669879782015-11-16T13:38:00.828-07:002015-11-16T13:38:00.828-07:00If you believe in Sola Gratia, then you must belie...If you believe in Sola Gratia, then you must believe in Sola Fide, b/c what is grace if not a salvation through faith and not works. This is the entire backbone of the reformation. You cannot have one without the other. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04118236138980391459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-52543609138555279132015-11-16T13:31:44.572-07:002015-11-16T13:31:44.572-07:00The holy spirit shaped the scriptures, using man a...The holy spirit shaped the scriptures, using man as a tool to determine which would be included in the holy Bible. Your answer is typical Catholic. non answer which attempts to excuse the Catholic Church's reliance on the 'tradition of the church' over the holy word of God. No thank you. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04118236138980391459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-50590444726144280602015-04-12T11:39:11.259-07:002015-04-12T11:39:11.259-07:00...continuing...
My take on the matter is: That k......continuing...<br /><br />My take on the matter is: That kind of system is the kind of unworkable mess a human being would come up with. But God would not come up with that kind of system. If Jesus came up with THAT, then Jesus is Not God. But He is God. So that cannot be how He intended that the True Church be identified, or correct doctrine defended.<br /><br />Now it turns out that this is exactly the kind of basis upon which the Eastern Orthodox, the Oriental Orthodox, etc., separate from Catholics and from one another. "We are separated from Church Q because Church Q entered into heresy when they did not accept the Council of N." (Or, "when they accepted the False Council of N...")<br /><br />It's a little different between the Eastern Orthodox and the Catholics because of certain doctrines (e.g. the filioque) where you can't point to a particular Council where both parties showed up to have it out, which one party later rejected. But whenever that was the basis for schism, the principle of "We're The Real Church Because We Have The Right Doctrine" is still in use. And it's just as circular.<br /><br />I recently had a brief dialogue with an E.O. priest about this, in fact. "How do you resolve doctrinal disputes?" I asked. He said. "through councils."<br /><br />To which I replied, "And how do you resolve disputes about which councils were binding, and which were invalid?" And he replied, "Well, sometimes the bishops and council fathers are right, and sometimes they're wrong. If they're wrong, then over time the Holy Spirit leads the faithful laypersons and especially the monastics, to reject the council, and eventually the bishops follow suit. So sometimes the bishops correct the laity and monastics, and sometimes the laity and monastics correct the bishops."<br /><br />To which I said, "Well, what if one group or the other refuses to be corrected?" He said, "Well, ultimately they'd be in schism from the Church."<br /><br />The dialogue more-or-less ended there, but you can see what the obvious next question would be: "Well, someone would be in schism, sure, but how can anyone know which of the two sides went into schism, and which is still the real Church?"<br /><br />You can't. Not under that Ecclesial Principle.<br /><br />So if a person were looking for the Real Church and started looking at one of the Orthodox groups, that would be the problem. There'd be no way to know which one to join, except through circular reasoning and question-begging. It would be unresolvable, really.<br /><br />Whereas the Catholic understanding of the Magisterium actually WORKS, through time: The Council is valid if approved by the Pope, because the matter cannot be "appealed" any higher: The Al Bayith has "locked," and no other shall "unlock," just like it says in Isaiah 22.R.C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/03679435933685771007noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-47544756770713574372015-04-12T11:37:35.268-07:002015-04-12T11:37:35.268-07:00Bob:
Glad it was helpful.
This also might help e...Bob:<br /><br />Glad it was helpful.<br /><br />This also might help evaluate the Eastern Orthodox: Ask what distinguishes them from the Oriental Orthodox, the Assyrian Church of the East, or any other Orthodox-esque groups.<br /><br />These other groups split away from Christian unity at earlier points than the Eastern Orthodox did. The usual pattern was something like this:<br /><br />1. Group-Of-Bishops A follows Prominent Bishop A1 in teaching Doctrine X;<br />2. Group-Of-Bishops B follows Prominent Bishop B1 in teaching Doctrine Y;<br />3. Doctrine X conflicts with Doctrine Y;<br />4. Group A denounces B1 as a heretic and Group B denounces A1 as a heretic;<br />5. a Council is announced to resolve who's right;<br />6. the Council is held;<br />7. the Council finds in favor of Doctrine X, rejects Doctrine Y, and calls on Group B (especially Prominent Bishop B1) to recant Y and embrace X, or be removed from their sees;<br />8. some members of Group B recant Y and embrace X, and remain in The Church;<br />9. others members of Group B -- who initially showed up at the Council hoping to be vindicated, remember -- come up with some reason why the council is invalid. They say that only people who believe Doctrine Y are in The True Church, and people who believe Doctrine X are heretics. They go start their own churches.<br /><br />So, you get Nestorian Churches, and Monophysite Churches and/or Miaphysite Churches, that way.<br /><br />Now, note how the new churches in step 9 derive their claim to be The True Church:<br /><br />They don't base their claim on any visible, objective, and unique sign of unity (e.g. communion with a particular see), but on the invisible or subjective or non-unique sign of Having The Right Doctrine in the AX-BY debate.<br /><br />Please don't misunderstand that last paragraph. I'm not saying that there's no such thing as objective truth, that all truth is subjective, or any such damned nonsense.<br /><br />I'm saying that you can objectively prove which bishops are in communion with a particular bishop: Just look it up or ask. But judging on Who Is Right about a deep, technical point of theology is much less objectively resolvable!<br /><br />The question of who Has The Right Doctrine in the AX-BY debate cannot be known apart from first Finding The True Church and asking The Church to judge the matter as in Matthew 18...which is circular reasoning. IF IT WERE TRUE that the only way to know who is in the True Church is by FIRST deciding who is right about AX-BY, you would have to first pick your position on AX-BY without any help from the True Church, and then you'd have to ask the Church that agreed with your position what the true doctrine is in the AX-BY debate! (But of course, your own individual judgment is fallible, so you could never be sure you had consulted the right Church...and consequently, your question remains unresolved!)<br /><br />Lots of circular reasoning, no? A total dog's breakfast, isn't it?<br /><br />...continued...R.C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/03679435933685771007noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-36939454492827034632015-01-09T09:28:41.372-07:002015-01-09T09:28:41.372-07:00RC, Thanks for this post. I have been looking for ...RC, Thanks for this post. I have been looking for a good explanation of why the Orthodox are in schism and not us. This is great. I also like #3. Never looked at it like that. Beautiful.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12662710190119106375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-62603185698095235022014-10-25T05:34:15.728-07:002014-10-25T05:34:15.728-07:00...finally, concluding...
ITEM #3: What does the......finally, concluding...<br /><br /><br />ITEM #3: What does the Church lack, in practice?<br /><br />Ay, there's the rub.<br /><br />You see, the Devil did a really nasty number on Christ's Church, when he talked the Eastern Orthodox stewards (with their deep mysticism and monastic traditions and beautiful liturgy) into schisming away from the Al-Bayith. Much of the richness of Christ's Church is lost to the Catholic Church because this "lung" is no longer oxygenating the whole body.<br /><br />And the Devil did an even nastier number when he talked Luther and Calvin and others into setting up alternative ecclesial communities in the 1500's, each of which (for lack of the unity and judicial finality that the Al-Bayith provides) has further splintered into thousands of yet-smaller groups. Each group has its speciality: Sometimes it's a great choral tradition. Sometimes it's openness to the fire of the Holy Spirit. Sometimes it's door-to-door evangelism. Sometimes it's great preaching. Sometimes it's effectively catechizing kids.<br /><br />But the problem is that, whenever one of these offshoot groups becomes really excellent at its speciality, it naturally draws to itself all the Christians who're most talented/gifted in that area.<br /><br />No wonder, then, that Catholics are mostly deprived of good hymn-singing: They all went to Anglican and Baptist and AME churches, where the hymn-singing is awesome. No wonder there aren't so many Charismatic Catholics; they all went to the Pentecostal Holiness groups and Assemblies of God groups. No wonder Catholics stink at door-to-door evangelism; all the Christians who're most comfortable at that wound up in churches which specialize in it. And so on.<br /><br />So what does the Catholic Church lack in practice?<br /><br />In practice, it lacks many of the strengths that it WOULD have, if only the Kingdom of God wasn't divided!<br /><br />For there are Charismatic Catholics, of course. But possibly not anywhere near you. There are great hymn-writers and parishes where the whole congregation can sing them in four-part SATB...but I bet you haven't ever seen it at your local parish. There are parishes with beautiful liturgy...but I bet you've attended a few too many Clown Masses with Felt Banners. There are Catholic priests and deacons who can preach, but I bet you've seen more who could barely be heard or understood and to whom it was brutally difficult to maintain close attention. You can even see it in praise-and-worship music: The rest of the Christian world is full of hundreds of Darlene Zschechs and Chris Tomlins and Michael W. Smiths and Todd Fields and whoever, and Catholics have...Matt Maher. (And, yes, a few others with profound talent, but the numbers are far fewer.)<br /><br />Catholics have doctrinal purity and stability because Jesus set up His Kingdom that way.<br /><br />And those who've left the Church inevitably divide again and again, for lack of the office that Jesus intended to doctrinally unify His flock.<br /><br />But they take with them many of the gifts and talents which Jesus intended to provide OTHER EXCELLENCES in the Church.<br /><br />Correct doctrine is, without a doubt, most important. "The Truth Shall Set You Free." Jesus told His apostles to go into all the word making disciples, "teaching them whatsoever I have commanded you." Whatsoever. Every last little detail.<br /><br />But dang, what a great witness it would be if the Excellences of the other groups came back into unity with the whole, such that Excellence in all these areas, not merely doctrine, was the common experience of all Christians!<br /><br />In practice, the Catholic Church does lack that.<br /><br />That's because, dear Protestant brother or sister, she lacks YOU.<br /><br />Give the Kingdom of God a helping hand, will you?R.C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/03679435933685771007noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-1263113356180056862014-10-25T05:33:36.420-07:002014-10-25T05:33:36.420-07:00...continuing...
So, what does the Catholic Churc......continuing...<br /><br />So, what does the Catholic Church have, uniquely?<br /><br />Doctrinal correctness and certainty and stability, that's what.<br /><br />Without the Al-Bayith (which we today call the "Successor of Peter" or the "Pope") Christianity can't resolve doctrinal disputes, and thus splits into factions favoring different opinions. But with the Al-Bayith, the whole household may be held together, like a tent held up by that single tent-peg driven in a secure place, or like a house built on a Rock.<br /><br />There will never be priestesses in the Church, or gay "marriages," or merely-symbolic communion services, or the treating of second marriages as valid rather than adulterous. Not in ten thousand years will it happen. A Catholic who teaches his kids what the Catholic Church teaches today knows, and knows that he knows, that his great-great-grandkids, if they are still Catholic and still pay attention to the actual teachings of the Church, will be taught the same faith.<br /><br />ITEM #2: What does the Church lack, in theory?<br /><br />Nothing, in theory.<br /><br />Whether it's Charismatic Christianity, or Fully-Taught Catechesis, or Good Youth Programs, or Good Local Fellowship With Believers, or Good Preaching, or Good Worship Music, or Beautiful Liturgy, or Evangelical Zeal...ALL of these things exist in the Catholic Church....somewhere or other.<br /><br />Yeah. Somewhere or other. Not, y'know, necessarily at any parish within driving distance of your house, maybe. But perhaps at some parish in an adjacent state!<br /><br />In theory, all of these things may be found in the Church, in the sense that they are known to exist somewhere, even if they are not near you. (Not everyone lives on-campus in Steubenville!)<br /><br />...continued...R.C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/03679435933685771007noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-785019639207666732014-10-25T05:32:28.891-07:002014-10-25T05:32:28.891-07:00..continuing...
Jesus first (in Matthew 16) re-es.....continuing...<br /><br />Jesus first (in Matthew 16) re-establishes the office of the Al-Bayith, making Peter both the Chief Steward under the King, and the Assistant to the High Priest under the High Priest (who is Jesus Himself). The "keys to the kingdom" are the New Covenant fulfillment of the prophetic "type" or "foreshadowing" described in Isaiah 22, the "keys of the house of David," and also of the "keys of the Temple Gates" which were held by the Al-Bayith in his role as security director for the Temple Precinct.<br /><br />And then, once the Al-Bayith is in place, Jesus explains (in Matthew 18) that the other apostles and their successors will also be stewards, having authority to bind and loose in the Kingdom of Heaven.<br /><br />(Guys, if something is confusing or disputed in the New Testament, look to the Old Testament to find the answer! The problem with people giving other anachronistic interpretations of Matthew 16 and 18 -- saying that binding & loosing refers merely to exorcism, for example -- is not that they aren't well-intentioned. It's that they aren't well-catechized first-century Jews, steeped in the Old Testament.)<br /><br />So: What does the Catholic Church have, uniquely?<br /><br />Well, the stewards are not unique to the Catholic Church, since they exist wherever the Apostolic Succession is preserved; e.g. among the Eastern Orthodox.<br /><br />But...!<br /><br />The chief steward, the Al-Bayith, is only in the Catholic Church. That means that, until the Lord returns, the Catholic Church is the only place where conflicting opinions between two stewards can be resolved.<br /><br />Among the Eastern Orthodox, if one bishop or patriarch were to become an Arian heretic (as actually happened in history) and another opposed him, what would happen? Each would claim he was preaching true Christianity, and that the other was in error. Each would claim (correctly) that the True Church cannot preach error in faith or morals. Each would therefore claim that he and those in agreement with him were the True Church, and that the other party was in schism. Whichever camp had the most "pull" with secular rulers would try to have the other guys forcibly deposed from their stewardships and exiled from their dioceses.<br /><br />But Jesus provided not only restored stewardship offices, but a restored Chief Steward / Head-of-House office to resolve this very problem. Disputes can be appealed to the Al-Bayith, and what he binds or looses cannot be loosed or bound by any other steward: His is the court of final appeal. "Roma locuta, causa finita est": When the Al-Bayith has spoken, the matter is settled.<br /><br />In this fashion, the Al-Bayith becomes a firm foundation for maintaining the unity of the Church. The True Church does infallibly teach true doctrine -- but her doctrinal teaching is not firmly "settled" until it has been appealed up to the highest court and ratified by the Al Bayith. If two bishops call one another heretics, the bishop who is the successor of Peter will sort it out. And after THAT happens? The True Church is the church consisting of bishops in Apostolic Succession who remain in communion with the Successor of Peter.<br /><br />Thus is Isaiah 22 prophetically fulfilled: The Al-Bayith is a "tent peg driven into a firm place," holding the whole tent (read: "household/dynasty") of David together. He is like a "father" to the people of (the New) Jerusalem. He has the Keys of the Kingdom, and a robe of office and a sash of office and a seat/throne of stewardly authority, and what he binds, none other shall loose, and what he looses, none other shall bind. If a particular Al Bayith is faithless in some way (as Shebna was in Isaiah 22) then God will see to it that he dies and a more faithful successor (like Eliakim son of Hilkiah) takes his place. (Which is why we Christians today should persist patiently in faith, even if we live during the reign of a Borgia pope!)<br /><br />...continued...R.C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/03679435933685771007noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-61424481578623019432014-10-25T05:31:16.447-07:002014-10-25T05:31:16.447-07:00THREE THINGS TO ADDRESS:
1. What does the Catholi...THREE THINGS TO ADDRESS:<br /><br />1. What does the Catholic Church have, uniquely?<br /><br />2. And, what does she lack, in theory?<br /><br />3. And what does she lack, in practice?<br /><br />ITEM #1: What does the Catholic Church have, uniquely?<br /><br />Because devotion to Jesus Christ in the Eucharist is so central to the faith, one is tempted to say, "the Eucharist." But the Eastern Orthodox have the Eucharist also. Churches which preserved a valid ordination into the Apostolic Succession with a correct sacramental theology of the Eucharist can confect the sacrament validly. So this is not what is unique to the Catholic Church.<br /><br />And, the Catholic Church has Stewards of the Kingdom, but, again, so does any church whose bishops are in the Apostolic Succession. In the Davidic Kingdom there were always many stewards who could bind and loose, whose offices had successors when the current occupant died. So, too, the Messianic Kingdom of the Son of David: And just as the Old Testament stewards' authority to prohibit & permit was called "binding and loosing," so too the Messianic stewards' authority to prohibit and permit was called "binding and loosing."<br /><br />But the Davidic King always had one particular steward called the Al-Bayith ("Head of House"), who was not merely a secular figure but also a religious one, because he was both the Steward and the Assistant to the High Priest, and was in charge of security and administration of both the Temple and the Royal Palace. Like any stewardly office, his office was also an office with successors: When one died, a new officeholder was appointed. But his office was unique in that it had authority, in the king's name and on the king's behalf, to override decisions made by other stewards.<br /><br />Consequently, if two kingdom stewards disagreed on kingdom policy, the Al-Bayith could step in and ensure unity in the king's name by rendering a final decision. And what the Al-Bayith "bound" no other steward could "loose," and what he "loosed" no other steward could "bind": When the Al-Bayith had spoken, the matter was settled.<br /><br />That was the institutional practice of the House of David (i.e., the Davidic Dynasty). All first century Jews knew this, as they waited for the restoration of the kingdom with the coming of the Messiah.<br /><br />No wonder, then, that the Gospel of Matthew, whose audience primary was the Jews, would emphasize Jesus' re-institution of the stewardly offices and the office of the Al-Bayith, to show that the Messiah had come and was re-establishing the Kingdom!<br /><br />For that, of course, is the meaning of Matthew 16 and 18.<br /><br />...continued...R.C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/03679435933685771007noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-54286345222211117042014-04-25T15:46:12.068-07:002014-04-25T15:46:12.068-07:00Jim, welcome! Let me ask you, do you think that wh...Jim, welcome! Let me ask you, do you think that when Elizabeth called Mary "the Mother of my Lord" (Luke 1:43) that she was speaking heresy? What does "Lord" mean? What would it have meant to Elizabeth? Lord is God. Jesus is God. There is no heresy there, even if others who do not understand Catholicism believe that there is heresy. We can't change our teachings on things like the Eucharist, the sacraments, the priesthood, the Trinity, the Incarnation, simply because they might (no, will!) be misunderstood or disbelieved by some. You'd agree, correct? Remember, we Catholics understand that "Mother of God" implies "Mother of God Incarnate". And the whole controversy was settled when the heresy of Nestorian was put down by the Council of Ephesus in 431 AD. I hope you are not one to subscribe to that heresy. <br /><br />As for the Book of Revelation: Do you know that not only is it read in the Mass, but it <i>is describing the Heavenly liturgy</i>? Read it with the Church (and as the Fathers did), not as folks decided to interpret it independently of the Church some 1,500 years after the fact. I highly recommend Scott Hahn's <i>The Lamb's Supper</i> if you want to understand the context and meaning of the Book of Revelation. You will be amazed and surprised. Glorious!<br /><br />As for purgatory, even C.S. Lewis understood and believed it as a non-Catholic. It is logical and it is justice. Here is a very simple explanation which includes the biblical:<br /><br />http://littlecatholicbubble.blogspot.com/2012/12/purgatory-is.html<br /><br />And base question: Where do you think that the Scriptures came from? On whose authority did they come to you, and shouldn't that authority (which is pretty serious if God brought the Holy Bible to you through it) be the one to heed when considering its interpretation? Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-22544157385987447852014-04-17T21:46:26.964-07:002014-04-17T21:46:26.964-07:00I am a practicing Catholic. However, without hesi...I am a practicing Catholic. However, without hesitation I will say that I have an evangelical Christian mentality. The Catholic Church can do so much for itself, without compromising any integrity whatsoever, by adding an emphasis on things such as Bible study and aggressively tackling real-world situations based upon the tenets of the Faith. I don't see it done nearly enough. <br /><br />When it comes to the subject of Mary, and why Catholic treatment of Mary is such a lightning rod for Protestants, it pays to have the mindset that I have. I understand where the Protestants are coming from. And while Catholics can talk about the difference between "veneration" and "worship" until we are blue in the face, it's not going to dispel the myth that exists about what we really do.<br /><br />Unfortunately, when it comes to the misconception of the Catholic treatment of Mary, much of the blame falls squarely upon the Catholic Council of Trent itself. Permit me to explain this. The first half of the "Hail Mary" consists of two separate greetings to Mary within Luke's gospel, one from the angel Gabriel and one from Elizabeth. Are you aware that EVEN Martin Luther, the founder of the entire Protestant reformation, advocated the use of "Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed are you and blessed is the fruit of thy womb Jesus" as a sign of devotion to the Mother of our Savior? Luther had no objection whatsoever to the importance of Mary's role in Christianity; she was specifically chosen by God to bring our Lord and Savior to life, as even though God could have made Jesus just materialize out of thin air (for anything is possible with God), He correctly decided not to take that route.<br /><br />No, the issue stems from the phrase "Mother of God" in referring to Mary in the second half of the prayer (Protestants call this a tradition of man, as it was a creation of the Council of Trent and no such language appears anywhere in the Bible.) Worse, to a Protestant, this wording is a first-rate heresy. While Christians believe that Jesus Christ was God in human form, the use of the word "God" is not seen as proper when one is referring to Jesus. Think about it. Do you talk to somebody (in the course of normal conversation) and say that "God died on the cross and rose from the dead to pay the price for our sins?" NO!! <br /><br />"God" = The almighty, the Father, the Creator of Heaven, Earth, and all life, the Omnipotent and Omniscient and Omnipresent One.<br />"Jesus"/"Christ"/"Jesus Christ" = The Son of God, God made man, The Savior of the World, the Crucified and Risen Lord.<br /><br />So, when a Protestant hears a Catholic reciting the "Hail Mary" and hears Mary being referred to as the "Mother of God," what is he or she going to think? Are you saying that Mary, a human being who was born sometime around 20 B.C., is the mother of the All-Powerful being who created everything, including the entire human race? To "worship" somebody or something means to put that person or thing on a pedestal. As a logical person, I agree that saying Mary was the mother of our Creator is putting her on one major, big-time pedestal, and therefore it is a case of worship. (By the way, if you were to refer to Mary as the Mother of Yahweh {God} in the Jewish world, you would have been stoned to death for blasphemy within a matter of minutes! So a Protestant objecting to this is hardly radical.)<br /><br />If only the Council of Trent had used "Mother of Christ" or "Mother of the Lord," instead of "Mother of God," I submit that we wouldn't have this major schism between the Catholics and Protestants (at least on the doctrine of Mary, they still don't comprehend Purgatory, and I don't think the Catholic Church does a very good job explaining what Purgatory is, either). Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14178939717133018606noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-47676527267650387582014-04-17T20:51:34.531-07:002014-04-17T20:51:34.531-07:00There is something I want to offer as a thought bu...There is something I want to offer as a thought but before I do, I want to disclose that I am a Catholic who has developed an evangelical-esque mentality and attitude. The on fire for Christ approach that evangelicals have is something I find appealing, and it's something that I don't see on display within the Catholic world. That's something I wish the Catholic Church did a better job with; more Bible study. For example, Revelation is an important book of the Bible, otherwise it wouldn't be there. But for an every Sunday/every Holy Day of Obligation Catholic, Revelation barely exists, except for one reading on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception. How are we supposed to grasp something which is barely mentioned? How are we to even know its importance? Then in the world around us, seemingly everybody is talking about how every world event was foretold in this book. People claim that 9/11 was in Revelation, that Barack Obama is in Revelation, that Pope Francis is in Revelation, that the Russian takeover of Crimea is in Revelation. But Catholics aren't versed in Revelation because the Catholic Church practically ignores its existence. Further, I give to my parish. But not all of my giving is to my parish. I give to "Christian" charities as well, because unlike with my parish, I know exactly what my gift is being used for with these charities. These charities specifically use gifts from people to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, comfort the sick, etc., the things Jesus commanded us to do for others. That's more meaningful to me than a paint job, or an electric bill, or someone's salary. <br /><br />Now for the point I want to make. My claim is that the human leaders of the Catholic Church who created our Hail Mary prayer didn't do the Church any favors. The first half of the prayer is taken directly from a pair of scripture passages in Luke. Nobody has an issue with that. The issue that gets Protestants riled up is referring to Mary as "Mother of God." Yes, I know that Jesus Christ was God in human form. Any Christian knows that. BUT, I don't profess that "God was crucified on a cross and rose from the dead to pay for our sins." The word "God" is used to refer to the Father, the creator of Heaven, Earth, and all living things. "Jesus Christ" is the Son of God, God in flesh, God in human form, our savior who died on the cross, etc. <br /><br />If the Hail Mary were written to say "Holy Mary, Mother of Christ..." then I don't think the false opinion that we Catholics "worship Mary" would be shouted from the rooftops by Protestants everywhere. Worship can be defined as putting someone or something on a pedestal. The honest reason why Protestants think we worship Mary is because this prayer calls her the mother of God (translated in the human mind to mean the Creator). You want to talk about putting her on a pedestal? You want to talk about a heresy? You want to talk about something which doesn't even make sense? They say we worship a woman whose life was at the time of Jesus' life as though she was the mother of the omnipotent deity who created everything, including humans! God (the Creator) was not born to a human being. Jesus was.<br /><br />Just because I (as a Catholic) don't worship Mary, that doesn't mean I don't understand how somebody else can get the impression that I (we) do. And I apologize if this offends any of my Catholic brethren, but when I say the Hail Mary, sometimes I will use the words "Mother of Christ" rather than "Mother of God."Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14178939717133018606noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-66058057078776588842013-09-27T11:27:29.922-07:002013-09-27T11:27:29.922-07:00Catholics venerate Mary as St. Mary, just as they ...Catholics venerate Mary as St. Mary, just as they venerate all saints. Many churches are called after St. Mary. How can any intelligent person call her anything else? Surely it's as simple as that!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-71216264161441860082013-06-24T13:19:08.981-07:002013-06-24T13:19:08.981-07:00I have sent this to my favorite Protestant who is ...I have sent this to my favorite Protestant who is a far better Christian than I am and spend a great deal of time and effort evangelising on the internet. I have spent much time in prayer for him, please remember him in yours.Lepantohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02487748842744745860noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-63175687210867192162012-11-27T12:20:31.099-07:002012-11-27T12:20:31.099-07:00I totally agree with what you have said and you ar...I totally agree with what you have said and you are most insightful.Cheryl Parkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02363750638215448090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-34095708572684022352012-11-11T21:53:35.401-07:002012-11-11T21:53:35.401-07:00Very well written. I've seen you have come und...Very well written. I've seen you have come under a bit of fire for speaking such words but do not fear, they maligned and rejected Jesus too, so is it any wonder they will malign and reject the Church which is His body?<br /><br />Keep up the good work and may God bless you.Rachel M. Gohlmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13972993153075842439noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-37818438916792393552012-10-30T17:28:20.500-07:002012-10-30T17:28:20.500-07:00As for sola scriptura,there is no place in the Bib...As for sola scriptura,there is no place in the Bible that says the Bible is the sole authority. In fact the Bible plainly states that the CHURCH is the pillar of our faith, NOT the Bible.<br />"If I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth." 1 Tim 3;15.The apostles and St. Paul did not go around with a bible in their hands. Rather they passed on what they had heard (the oral tradition).<br />Our knowledge of scripture (we go through the Bible every 3 years by attending Churcg every Sunday) is the same because it has been handed down through the centuries by the Magesterium ( the pope, cardinals, bishops, priest and deacons). Unlike many Protestant denominations that tell their congregation that anyone can understand the Bible. Then when someone says to the minister ,No it doesn't mean that at all". So what happens. They start their own church and their own doctrines. Then someone in that congregation disagrees and BINGO they go and start a new church. That is why we have over 35,000 different denominations. <br />Many of the ministers who come home to the Catholic Church said I can know say this is what this chapter in the Bible means and I know all Catholics believe the same. Try watching EWTN TV on Monday at 8 pm EST and you will see how many Protestant ministers are coming into the Catholic faith.<br />Listen to what they have to say . I pray that God will open your heart and your eyes. God bless.Marcyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06814947435215701162noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-36501573558949296492012-07-28T00:34:07.778-07:002012-07-28T00:34:07.778-07:00Jackie, hello! Of course, as you know, we Catholic...Jackie, hello! Of course, as you know, we Catholics would say that you split from us. :) How do we unify? As we always have: Under the successor of St. Peter, the head of the Church. The recent popes (namely Blessed John Paul the Great) worked tirelessly on his end to heal the schism. There is a lot of hostility and resistance still from the Orthodox, but God can work a miracle and unite us again! My own parents are part of the Melkite Catholic Church. Fully Eastern, and yet united with all Catholics under the Pope. As you said, nothing is impossible with God. Let us pray!Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-73555951928913008272012-07-27T09:10:13.647-07:002012-07-27T09:10:13.647-07:00You say "Come Home." I love the call to ...You say "Come Home." I love the call to our brothers and sisters to come back into unity. We are all the body of Christ and the divisions can be solved through prayer. One thing that has been on my heart is that the Catholic church originally split from the apostolic ways in Orthodoxy. Can we call you home? What would it take to mend the schisms? Because my God can handle the impossible.jackiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01366127112438829473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-5764782873129365032012-07-27T09:04:02.344-07:002012-07-27T09:04:02.344-07:00You say "Come Home." I love the call to ...You say "Come Home." I love the call to unify our churches. Keep our brothers and sisters knowing that we, together, make the body of Christ. One thing that has been on my heart is that the Catholic denomination broke from Orthodoxy. Can we call you to come home too? What would it take? I know Christ can handle the impossible.jackiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01366127112438829473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-47045889649012880782012-03-01T07:48:50.205-07:002012-03-01T07:48:50.205-07:00Wonderful post. I am on my way home now and I pray...Wonderful post. I am on my way home now and I pray everyday that my Protestant friends will follow suit. I am overjoyed by the fact that I am now part of a Church (or will be at the Easter Vigil) that defends what she teaches and does not back down, even in the midst of intense cultural clashes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-76120121882469464772011-09-13T08:43:39.055-07:002011-09-13T08:43:39.055-07:00Roxy, beautiful!! <3Roxy, beautiful!! <3Karahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08057654080632377742noreply@blogger.com