C'mon Dave - Galileo might have argued the point. I guess we have little to share then.
Baptists don't have to have their services in Latin, nor do Catholics. We have been having Masses in the vernacular since 1970 or so
Yeah I got the Baptist part - duh - I disagree though as to the latin masses - they can still be found today - How does that enrich the poor Christ sought?
But strictly speaking, the language used to praise God is not nearly as important as the desire to do so.
Say wha ? - I'd be more inclined to agree with my congregation by understanding the language, lest the chance of heretical teachings is reduced. ...like bumps on a pickle
Education is and was always done in the vernacular.
Yeah - I got that part - Im ex Cath remember ?
What is it about the Church having a leader who can "declare bound what is bound in Heaven" bothers you?
I have problems with a system that venerates a mortal man to a point where he is termed "infallible". Read the books Dave - there were plenty o nasty Popes.
Mary is not worshipped. We worship God the Father when we offer the only perfect sacrifice of Christ to Him. Singing and teaching about a saint does not mean we worship her.
- we differ here
And, before we even start, please identify what "co-redeemer" means and what your objection to it is.
There is one redeemer - Christ
My objection is anything else is blasphemy & undermines the trinity (or "trilogy" as my college roomate called it).
Too often its the Father, Son, Holy Ghost and Mary.
And if thats the case, the divinity of Christ is being consciously undermined.
Why would I follow a faith that didn't have the answers?
- Uh -'cause you equate the ritualism to faithfulness?
as for the whole co-redeemer thing - Attend any Sunday and you will hear intercessory prayers to her -
why her and not Jesus?
Becky
C'mon Dave - Galileo might have argued the point. I guess we have little to share then.
Most people have a very superficial understanding of the Galileo situation. He was not incarcerated because he disagreed with a Church dogma about the Sun. Astronomy is not an area covered by infallibility regardless.
Baptists don't have to have their services in Latin, nor do Catholics. We have been having Masses in the vernacular since 1970 or so
Yeah I got the Baptist part - duh - I disagree though as to the latin masses - they can still be found today - How does that enrich the poor Christ sought?
How does celebrating Mass in Latin de-rich the poor? For that matter how does a Baptist service in English enrich the poor?
But strictly speaking, the language used to praise God is not nearly as important as the desire to do so.
Say wha ? - I'd be more inclined to agree with my congregation by understanding the language, lest the chance of heretical teachings is reduced. ...like bumps on a pickle
So, it is the chance of heretical teaching that bothers you? You do realize that priests do not ad lib during the Mass? Do you also realize that the Mass is an offering to God, a time to worship? Those attending Mass are there to worship God, not necessarily to sit and listen to a preacher.
You act as if those attending Latin Mass have no idea of what is being said and sung. This is insulting. First of all, educated Catholics understand what the parts of the Mass are all about. Secondly, the Missal contains a side-by-side translation into English, so even the newecomer can follow along.
What is it that makes you believe that my singing "O come let us adore Him" is good but singing "Venite Adoremus" is bad?
Education is and was always done in the vernacular.
Yeah - I got that part - Im ex Cath remember ?
Then let it sink in. Your biggest objection to a Latin Mass is that heretical teaching may seep in, in a language you don't understand. Well, you just admitted that you understand that teaching is done in the vernacular. This includes the Scripture readings and the sermon during Mass, as well as outside instruction given to children and converts.
Honestly, some Protestants act like they think that schoolchildren were lectured to in Latin by a priest and they had no idea what was being said. I see that you know better, but many don't.
What is it about the Church having a leader who can "declare bound what is bound in Heaven" bothers you?
I have problems with a system that venerates a mortal man to a point where he is termed "infallible". Read the books Dave - there were plenty o nasty Popes.
Define "infallible." Contrast that with "impeccible." We do not teach that Popes are without sin. This is a common misconception and I would think you would know better.
And, before we even start, please identify what "co-redeemer" means and what your objection to it is.
There is one redeemer - Christ
I asked you to define "co-redeemer." You have failed. Shall I rail about some teaching of yours without even having the faintest idea of how to define it? Wouldn't that make me ignorant?
SD
Disagree with the CC if you want, but don't tell lies about it.