Posted on 03/04/2007 8:21:23 AM PST by Iscool
I apologize. I did have you confused with someone else for these beliefs.
The use of holy water in the earliest days of the Christian Era is attested by documents of only comparatively late date. The "Apostolic Constitutions", the redaction of which goes back to about the year 400, attribute to the Apostle St. Matthew the precept of using holy water. The letter written under the name of Pope Alexander I, who lived in the second century, is apocryphal and of more recent times; hence the first historical testimony does not go back beyond the fifth century.
Clearly the one who wrote this paragraph does not want to spend any more time in Purgatory for those little "qualified lies" of a church apologist than he has to.
Are you saying that documents written after the fact are lies?
I suppose that would eliminate the entire Old Testament and the Gospels.
Thank You ---
No --- just postfabricated prevarications that even the magisterium is fully cognizant of and yet uses to justify pagan practices in the RCC.
I suppose that would eliminate the entire Old Testament and the Gospels.
The magisterium would like to. Then it could make all the claims it wishes from those postfabricated prevarications without authoritative testimony against them.
Howls of derisive laughter, Bruce...
The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is the One True Church of Jesus Christ, founded by him and promised to keep it going regardless of those opposed to it. We put the Bible together under the guidance of the Holy Spirit; we expended tremendous priestly manpower over the centuries before Gutenberg to hand copy it page by page, bind it, and send it out to the whole world.
I know that it is a common anti Catholic practice to say that we want to get rid of the Bible, but even casual observance puts the lie to that. I would remind all that the Catholic Bibles are whole. Protestant Bibles (including the King James) are normally incomplete.
Defies history...Your bible version was not accepted by God's chosen people, the Jews...If your apocrypha wasn't in the Jewish bible, your Bible could not have been inspired by the Holy Spirit...
The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is the One True Church of Jesus Christ, founded by him and promised to keep it going regardless of those opposed to it.
If you ever figured out the difference between the Kingdom of Heaven and the Kingdom of God, you'd see the error of your ways...Peter was given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, not the Kingdom of God...
But then, you'd have to study the bible without the influence of your church...Unlikely that'd happen...
Who's "Bruce"?
Ping to reference this post later ....
Wow --- incomplete --- without those apocryphal books that even Jerome rejected. That must explain why as late as 1950 the King James Bible, used by Bishop Challoner to revise the Douay Rheims, was still on the Vatican's List of Forbidden Books. The Vatican really has a spuriously skewed standard.
And
If you ever figured out the difference between the Kingdom of Heaven and the Kingdom of God, you'd see the error of your ways...Peter was given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, not the Kingdom of God...
Targum to Zech. xiv. 9 and Ob. 21; "Malkut Shaddai ": 'Alenu; and "Malkut Shamayim": Ber. ii. 2, and elsewhere in Mishnah and Haggadah): Reign or sovereignty of God as contrasted with the kingdom of the worldly powers. The hope that God will be King over all the earth, when all idolatry will be banished, is expressed in prophecy and song (Ex. xv. 18; Zech. xiv. 9; Isa. xxiv. 23, Iii. 7; Micah iv. 7; Ps. xxix. 10), and with special emphasis in the later Psalms (xciii.-xcix.). God's Kingdom is spoken of in Ps. xxii. 29 (A. V. 28), ciii. 19, cxlv. 11-13; Ob. 21; Dan. iii. 33 (A. V. iv. 3); Tobit, xiii. 1; Sibyllines, iii. 47-48, 767; Psalms of Solomon, xvii. 3; Wisdom, x. 10; Assumptio Mosis, x. 1; Song of the Three Holy Children, 33; Enoch, lxxxiv. 2. The words "The Lord shall be King" are translated in the Targum, "The Kingdom of God shall be revealed"; and the ancient liturgy culminates in the prayer that "God may establish His Kingdom speedily" (see 'Alenu; Ḳaddish). The Kingdom of God, however, in order to be established on earth, requires recognition by man; that is, to use the Hasidæan phrase borrowed from Babylonia or Persia, man must "take upon himself the yoke of the Kingdom of God" ("'Ol Malkut Shamayim"; "Heaven" is a synonym of "God"; see Heaven). This the Israelites do daily when reciting the Shema' (Ber. ii. 2); so do the angels when singing their "Thrice Holy" (Hekalot); and in the future "all men shall take upon themselves the yoke of the Kingdom of God when casting away their idols" (Mek., Beshallaḥ, 'Amalek, 2). Accordingly, says the Midrash (Cant. R. ii. 12), "when the Kingdom of Rome has ripened enough to be destroyed, the Kingdom of God will appear."
Upon the Red Sea, Israel first sang the praise of God's Kingdom (Ex. R. and Targ. Yer. to Ex. xv. 19), and at Mount Sinai they accepted the yoke of God's Kingdom (Sifra, Ḳedoshim, xi.), just as Abraham did (Book of Jubilees, xii. 19), makingHim King upon earth (Sifre, Deut. 313); each proselyte, in joining Judaism, "takes upon himself the yoke of God's Kingdom (Tan., Lek Leka, ed. Buber, p. 6). The Hebrew slave who declares his wish to be a slave for life has his ear pierced, because "he casts off the yoke of God's Kingdom to bend to the yoke of another sovereignty" (Tosef., B. Ḳ. vii. 5; Yer. Ḳid. 59b). The yoke of God's Kingdom—the yoke of the Torah—grants freedom from other yokes (Abot iii. 4). Especially was it the principle of one party of the Hasidæans, the Zealots, not to recognize as king any one except God (Josephus, "Ant." xviii. 1, § 1, 6; comp. Philo, "Quod Omnis Probus Liber," §§ 12-13, and the prayer Abinu Malkenu—"Our Father, our King, we have no King except Thee!"
Christian and Jewish Conceptions.
The greater, then, the oppression of the Worldly Kingdom (Rome), the more eager the Jewish people, particularly the pious ones, were for "the Kingdom of Heaven," as they called it, to come speedily. This is the ever-reiterated object of the prayers in the liturgy (Masseket Soferim, xiv. 12; et al.). It was even laid down that no benediction would be effective without reference to the Kingdom (Ber. 12a). It is the approach of this Kingdom of Heaven, in opposition to the Kingdom of Rome, which John the Baptist announced (Matt. iii. 2; comp. Luke i. 71-74, iii. 17). Jesus preached the same Kingdom of God (Matthew has preserved in "Kingdom of Heaven" the rabbinical expression "Malkut Shamayim"), and when he said, "the kingdom of God cometh not by observation [that is, calculation] . . . for, behold, the kingdom of God is among [not within] you" (Luke xvii. 21, Syriac version), he meant, "It does not come through rebellion or by force" (see Jew. Encyc. iv. 51, s.v. Christianity).
When, however, the trend of events led early Christianity to make a decided disavowal of all political expectations antagonistic to Rome, the conception of the Kingdom of God was made an entirely spiritual one, and was identified with the "'olam ha-ba" (= "the world to come"), the spiritual life, in which "there is no eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the holy spirit" (Rom. xiv. 17, Greek; comp. John xviii. 36). Rab speaks of it in the same way: "In the world to come there is neither eating, nor drinking, nor procreation, nor strife; but the righteous sit encrowned and enjoy the splendor of the Shekinah" (Ber. 17a).
The gospel of Matthew stands nearest to Jewish life and the Jewish mode of thinking. It was written for Judæo-Christians and made ample use of an Aramaic original. This is evidenced by the terms: "kingdom of heaven," found exclusively in Matthew, a translation of the Hebrew "malkut shamayim" (= "kingdom of God"); "your heavenly Father," or, "your Father in the heavens" (v. 16, vi. 14, et al.); "son of David" for "the Messiah" (ix. 27, et al.; comp. the rabbinical "ben David"); "the holy city" (iv. 5, xxvii. 53) and "the city of the great King" (v. 35) for "Jeru salem"; "God of Israel" (xv. 31); the oft-repeated phrase "that it might be fulfilled, which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet"; the retention of Judæo-Christian conceptions (v. 17, x. 6, xv. 24); the genealogy of Jesus, based upon specific haggadic views concerning Tamar, Ruth, and Bath-sheba, so drawn as to make the assumption of his Messianic character plausible (i. 1-16); and the assignment of the twelve seats of judgment on the Judgment Day to the Twelve Apostles in representation of the twelve tribes of Israel (xix. 28; Luke xxii. 30). It has embodied Jewish apocalyptic material, in ch. xxiv.-xxv., more extensively than have the other gospels; and in the Sermon on the Mount (v.-vii.) it shows a certain familiarity with rabbinical phraseology.
On the other hand, it manifests a spirit of intense hostility to the Jews in the crucifixion story, to a greater degree than do the other gospels (xxvii. 25). In fact, its late composition is shown by its artificial systematization of the whole story of Jesus: There are seven beatitudes in v. 3-10 (verse 5 is a quotation), and accordingly seven "woes" in xxiii. 13-32 (Luke vi. 21-26 has five beatitudes and four "woes"); seven parables in xiii. 1-52 (comp. the four in Mark iv. 1-34), and the twice-seven generations for each of the three periods of the genealogy of Jesus (i. 1-17). All the miraculous cures narratedin Mark are enlarged upon both as to the number of the persons cured and as to their incidents, so as to adjust them to the Messianic claim (xi. 5; comp. Luke vii. 22; Isa. xxxv. 5; Pesiḳ. R. 42). Somewhat artificial, and in contrast to such genuine legends as those in Luke, are the birth-stories in ch. ii., woven together from Num. xxiv. 17 (referred to the Messiah), Micah v. 1, Isa. lx. 6, and from Moses' childhood story, to which that of Jesus formed a parallel, just as the Law of Mount Sinai was paralleled in the Sermon on the Mount.
Significant is the reference to the established (Judæo-Christian) Church under Peter (xvi. 18; comp. "Petra" ["the rock"] Abraham as foundation of the world [Yalḳ. i. 243; Levy, l.c., s.v. ]), to the secession of which from the Jewish state the story of Peter and the fish seems to allude (xvii. 24-27). On the other hand, the Trinitarian formula (xxviii. 19) and the way the Jews are spoken of (xxviii. 15; so throughout John) betray a very late final composition. But there are other late additions (v. 10, 11, 14; x. 16-39).
Many Christians first think of Peter. Many Jews first think of Abraham. As for me and my house, which is comprised of both Catholics and non-Catholics, our first thought is God:
And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. – Matt 16:17-18
Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness, ye that seek the LORD: look unto the rock [whence] ye are hewn, and to the hole of the pit [whence] ye are digged. Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah [that] bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him. – Isaiah 51:1-2
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01601a.htm says that:
...("Apocrypha") has been employed in various ways by early patristic writers, who have sometimes entirely lost sight of the etymology. Thus it has the connotation "uncanonical" with some of them. St. Jerome evidently applied the term to all quasi-scriptural books which in his estimation lay outside the canon of the Bible, and the Protestant Reformers, following Jerome's catalogue of Old Testament Scriptures -- one which was at once erroneous and singular among the Fathers of the Church -- applied the title Apocrypha to the excess of the Catholic canon of the Old Testament over that of the Jews. Naturally, Catholics refuse to admit such a denomination, and we employ "deuterocanonical" to designate this literature, which non-Catholics conventionally and improperly know as the "Apocrypha".
More Gnosticism from you?
Oh, maybe you do? Do you?
FYI:
Apostolic Constitutions
A fourth-century pseudo-Apostolic collection, in eight books, of independent, though closely related, treatises on Christian discipline , worship, and doctrine, intended to serve as a manual of guidance for the clergy, and to some extent for the laity.
Catholic Encyclopedia - The Apostolic Constitutions are fraudulent.
Sure. No lesser a source than the heretic Martin Luther trimmed the Bible. The Church put it together and somebody else abridged it and you consider it to be complete. Sounds crazy to me. Christians are not supposed to study the Bible without the influence of the Church. Or has that been trimmed out of yours?
Hi Reggie; nice to see you again.
No, not silly.
The position taken appeared to be that BECAUSE the documents were written about events in the past, then they were automatically inaccurate or automatically lies.
LOL. What makes you so sure they weren't Catholic?
From the Protestant perspective, it is heresy to believe men on earth can forgive sins; that there is any head of the church but Jesus Christ; that men should fall to their knees to wooden icons; that men should pray to other men who have died; that earthly relics possess any supernatural powers; that by a simple invocation and raising in height, bread and wine can be transmogrified into the Son of God; that confession should be made to anyone other than God; and that there is any possible mediator between men and God but Jesus Christ.
And the funny thing is, the people who believe these deadly, delusional, anti-Scriptural errors aren't locked up in mental institutions.
Go figure.
::chuckle:: I'm certain that some of them are.
Well, my friend, I think that we will have to continue to agree to disagree on those very points. The Church's teachings are very clear, and with both the Bible and the Catechism online, along with all the other documents on the various Catholic websites (don't forget www.vatican.va), it is very easy to see what they are and where they came from.
You forgot the priest's magic finger.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.