Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies.
Locked on 06/15/2007 1:02:32 PM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:

Locked at poster’s request



Skip to comments.

The ABSOLUTE Primacy of Christ
Irish-Catholic and Dangerous ^ | April 12, 2007 | Danny Garland, Jr.

Posted on 06/13/2007 4:39:26 AM PDT by fr maximilian mary

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-174 next last
To: 1000 silverlings
unscriptual as well as theologically un-Christian

I'm fully with you on this. That being the case, why do folks continue with the misnomer that the RCC is a Christian church? We make no such accommodation for the Mormons or Jehovah Witnesses.

Alas, the RCC is not alone in this position. Consider certain Protestant churches that merit the same consideration. First to mind is the Episcopal denomination.

How far away from the narrow path of Truth can someone wander before he is on a different road?

101 posted on 06/14/2007 1:29:11 PM PDT by pjr12345 (O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Romans 7:24)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: pjr12345

I really don’t know. They should just come out and admit what they are up to. The Popes all say it right out don’t they? The Truth will set them free. Then the people who want to worship Christ can form their own church and those who want to worship Mary and the saints can go have theirs. It seems so logical, rather than all this angst and double-talk they got going on


102 posted on 06/14/2007 1:34:54 PM PDT by 1000 silverlings (Matthew 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: 1000 silverlings; pjr12345; Dr. Eckleburg; fr maximilian mary; Danny Garland Jr.
To assert that He must be sacrificed forever is unscriptual as well as theologically un-Christian

Agreed; that is both unscriptural and un-Christian, and the Catholic Church is glad to agree with you.

Both the original poster and the author of the article have asked you to cease bashing false assumptions of the Catholic Church and to return to discussing the article. I too am going to ask you to please stop threadjacking and return to discussing the article, or to leave the thread.

103 posted on 06/14/2007 1:40:57 PM PDT by GCC Catholic (Pray for your priests and seminarians...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Danny Garland Jr.

“Mary takes part in the offering by consenting to the immolation of her Son.”

How does Mary consent to the “immolation” of her son when His death is not revealed until well into His ministry and then, it is revealed to the disciples? When it was told to her that she would conceive all that was revealed was that Jesus would be King.


104 posted on 06/14/2007 1:49:46 PM PDT by blue-duncan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: GCC Catholic; 1000 silverlings; pjr12345; fortheDeclaration; HarleyD; ears_to_hear; P-Marlowe; ...
I too am going to ask you to please stop threadjacking and return to discussing the article, or to leave the thread.

The justification of the elect by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ would appear to be germane to a thread entitled, "The Primacy of Christ."

As illustrated on this thread, the RCC asserts the "Primacy of Christ" is somehow dependent on Mary, too, since some RC posters have stated here that Mary is indeed a "co-redemtrix."

Perhaps a better title for this thread would be "The Primacy of Christ and Mary and the Magisterium and Tradition and Doctrine and Dogma and the Mass."

105 posted on 06/14/2007 1:51:00 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: GCC Catholic; fr maximilian mary; Danny Garland Jr.

Woe doggie(ma)! As far as I can tell, every statement put forth is based upon well-supported RCC teachings (doctrine, dogma and/or tradition), and attested by RCC Freepers.

If you disagree with what has been posted, you need to check with your priest. Or perhaps you ought to consider converting to Christianity.


106 posted on 06/14/2007 1:52:20 PM PDT by pjr12345 (O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Romans 7:24)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

It has not been illustrated or even suggested by Catholics on this thread that the Primacy of Christ is in any way dependant on Mary!

Once again, you fail to understand what the title “Co-redemptrix” means. I have explained it above. It does not in any way mean that the primacy of Christ is dependant on Our Lady. As I said before, all privileges of Mary come from Christ.

God Bless.


107 posted on 06/14/2007 2:34:26 PM PDT by Danny Garland Jr. (Ad Jesum per Mariam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Danny Garland Jr.
You said in Post 107: all privileges of Mary come from Christ. You said in Post 95: Mary takes part in the offering by consenting to the immolation of her Son

Which came first, Danny boy, the chicken or the egg?

108 posted on 06/14/2007 2:39:40 PM PDT by pjr12345 (O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Romans 7:24)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: GCC Catholic; 1000 silverlings; pjr12345; Dr. Eckleburg; fr maximilian mary; Danny Garland Jr.

Here the Council of Trent interposed with a definition of faith (Sess. XXII, can. iii): “If any one saith, that the Mass is only a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving. . . but not a propitiatory sacrifice; or, that it profits only the recipient, and that it ought not to be offered for the living and the dead for sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities; let him be anathema” (Denzinger, n. 950)
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10006a.htm


109 posted on 06/14/2007 2:43:09 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (We must beat the Democrats or the country will be ruined! - Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Danny Garland Jr.; blue-duncan; 1000 silverlings; pjr12345; OLD REGGIE; Quix; HarleyD; ...
It has not been illustrated or even suggested by Catholics on this thread that the Primacy of Christ is in any way dependant on Mary!

Once again, you fail to understand what the title "Co-redemptrix" means. I have explained it above. It does not in any way mean that the primacy of Christ is dependant on Our Lady.

I will refer you to your own statement and blue-duncan's questioning of that statement in your post #104...

DANNY: "Mary takes part in the offering by consenting to the immolation of her Son."

BLUE-DUNCAN: How does Mary consent to the "immolation" of her son when His death is not revealed until well into His ministry and then, it is revealed to the disciples? When it was told to her that she would conceive all that was revealed was that Jesus would be King.

104 posted on 06/14/2007 1:49:46 PM PDT by blue-duncan

So you see, your own statement makes Mary's consent "a taking part in the offering.

Indeed, by your own words it would appear without "Mary's consent" Christ could not have been sacrificed for your sins and mine, and God's plan of salvation would be nixed before it left the gate.

The RCC's problem, one among many, is the term "co-redemptrix," a designation loaded with error, blasphemy and deceit. Mary does not redeem anyone, nor does she facilitate our redemption. She has nothing to do with our salvation. Zilch. May God help those who believe this lie to run from it.

110 posted on 06/14/2007 3:23:12 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration
I meant to bump you to post 110, ftd.

And thanks for that excellent find from Trent, that ever-present goodie-bag for we who have been anathematized.

111 posted on 06/14/2007 3:27:01 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration
Yes... the canon states that the Mass is a propitiatory sacrifice, and it is explained (elsewhere than the canon), that the Mass is a re-presentation (note: NOT "representation") of the Sacrifice of Calvary by Christ through the priest acting in persona Christi.

One Priest (Christ) and one Sacrifice that is both once and eternal.

NOW, THAT SAID: This has nothing to do with the original post. Please quit threadjacking.

112 posted on 06/14/2007 3:44:00 PM PDT by GCC Catholic (Pray for your priests and seminarians...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
Peace of the Lord be with you.

Since no one wants to talk about Jesus, let's talk about Mary (at the bidding of non-Catholics to boot!). My question is this--is Mary just used by God as an incubator? Is she just like a plastic cup to be used and thrown away, or rather crushed on Calvary?

God could have formed the New Adam from the dust of the earth, as He did the first Adam. But He did not. Why? Perhaps God, who is love, freely chose to include Mary as part of His plan?

This is a far cry from "Mary worship". She is not the Word made flesh; she is not the Redeemer. She is the New Eve who cooperates with and subordinate to Christ who alone is the great High Priest and Redeemer.

at the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven, on earth, and under the earth, and every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father.Amen!!!

113 posted on 06/14/2007 3:48:18 PM PDT by fr maximilian mary ("Imitate Jesus, love Mary as your Mother." Mother Teresa of Calcutta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

“She has nothing to do with our salvation.”

Oh, really? Who was it then that gave the Incarnate Christ his body? Who was it who said “Yes” to the angel and accepted the reponsibility of being the Mother of God?

Mary takes part in the offering of Christ because Christ willed it. He didn’t need Mary to become Incarnate, yet He chose her to be His Mother and to participate in the act of redemption. Christ could have been sacrificed for our sins without Mary, but He chose to have Mary involved.

To answer Blue-Duncan, see Luke 2:34-35 and also see the Crucifixion accounts where Mary is at the foot of the Cross praying for her Son and Luke 2:34-35 is fulfilled. Mary pondered in her heart the things told to her while Christ was still a child. If Mary didn’t have an idea of what was to be expected of her from the Angel, her “fiat” would not have been valid.

Once again, this post isn’t about Mary. It is about the primacy of Christ. It would be nice to start talking about that instead of misrepresenting the teachings of the Church on Mary.

God Bless.


114 posted on 06/14/2007 3:48:47 PM PDT by Danny Garland Jr. (Ad Jesum per Mariam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Danny Garland Jr.
It appears that the Holy Spirit was working on the same insight in both of us at the same time--within seconds!

"And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, and cried out with a loud voice saying, 'Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb!'" (Luke 1:42).

Come Holy Spirit!

115 posted on 06/14/2007 3:54:10 PM PDT by fr maximilian mary ("Imitate Jesus, love Mary as your Mother." Mother Teresa of Calcutta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: fr maximilian mary; Danny Garland Jr.; ArrogantBustard

Help me out here, are you trying to say that Jesus did not come to save sinners? St. Paul says “This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.” (1 Timothy 1:15)


116 posted on 06/14/2007 3:56:24 PM PDT by koinonia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: pjr12345
As far as I can tell, every statement put forth is based upon well-supported RCC teachings (doctrine, dogma and/or tradition), and attested by RCC Freepers.

Then you are highly misinformed.

Things mentioned by Protestant FReepers on this thread that are erroneous (this list is not exhaustive):

...The people “join with Mary”, so they’re all God now and every mass they take the Lord and offer Him up. It’s black arts, baby...

...Yes, Mary has the power, Jesus is “the sacrificial victim”, ie powerless...

...So now we have the RCC asserting Mary sacrificed Jesus rather than God Almighty sacrificed Jesus....

...My thoughts exactly. Not only is she the mother of God, she is God. They should just admit it...

Those are just a few of the ones that I noticed. The Church doesn't teach any of these things that other FReepers have claimed it does. To your credit, none of those erroneous statements aren't yours. Now... if you're interested in discussing the post, please discuss the post. Otherwise, please let everyone else discuss the post.

117 posted on 06/14/2007 4:10:11 PM PDT by GCC Catholic (Pray for your priests and seminarians...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

The Doctor is IN.


118 posted on 06/14/2007 4:36:53 PM PDT by pjr12345 (O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Romans 7:24)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Danny Garland Jr.
Oh, really? Who was it then that gave the Incarnate Christ his body? Who was it who said “Yes” to the angel and accepted the reponsibility of being the Mother of God?

By your logic, we should hunt down the mother of Saddam Hussein and execute her, too.

119 posted on 06/14/2007 4:39:21 PM PDT by pjr12345 (O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Romans 7:24)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: GCC Catholic

I couldn’t find the error. Based upon the fundamental positions of the RCC, all this follows. Logic dictates.


120 posted on 06/14/2007 4:43:02 PM PDT by pjr12345 (O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Romans 7:24)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: fr maximilian mary

Good title.

And now, how about the absolute primacy of Christ being thoroughly observed by His Bride?


121 posted on 06/14/2007 4:44:20 PM PDT by unspun (What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pjr12345

Apparently I can’t follow your logic, and so we’re both wasting each others’ time.

Have a good evening. God Bless.


122 posted on 06/14/2007 4:46:48 PM PDT by GCC Catholic (Pray for your priests and seminarians...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: GCC Catholic; 1000 silverlings; pjr12345; Dr. Eckleburg; fr maximilian mary; Danny Garland Jr.
I too am going to ask you to please stop threadjacking and return to discussing the article, or to leave the thread.

The article is merely a jumping off point for a discussion. Nobody can control where it goes from there. And you certainly don't have the authority to control the discussion. This is your first post on this thread.

If you don't like how it has progressed, then make like a tree and leave.

123 posted on 06/14/2007 4:55:59 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
I realize that I have no authority. That is why I asked, and didn't demand. Nor did I ping the RM. Nor did I ping you.

However, you are ignoring that the poster and the article's author have both asked to return to the thread's topic.

124 posted on 06/14/2007 5:00:42 PM PDT by GCC Catholic (Pray for your priests and seminarians...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: GCC Catholic; 1000 silverlings; pjr12345; Dr. Eckleburg; fr maximilian mary; Danny Garland Jr.
I realize that I have no authority. That is why I asked, and didn't demand. Nor did I ping the RM. Nor did I ping you. However, you are ignoring that the poster and the article's author have both asked to return to the thread's topic.

You accused a freeper of threadjacking. You asked him to leave. You were out of line. Unless the thread is listed as a "Caucus" thread, the thread is free to go wherever God or the RM allows it to go.

In this particular case there is a side issue which has arisen given the fact that the poster and the author both have a hidden agenda which has been uncovered. They are actively campaigning for Mary to be dogmatically declared "co-Redemtrix" with Christ. The current discussion is a cross-over between the Primacy of Christ and the effort to elevate Mary's role in redemption to a co-equal status with Christ.

So if you don't like it, then you should leave instead of asking those who are participating in the discussion to leave.

If the author and the original poster do not like the way the thread ended up, then they can contact the religion moderator and have the thread removed.

125 posted on 06/14/2007 5:10:50 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

Ping to 122. I’m finished with this thread, as it is no longer edifying to me, and I highly doubt it can be edifying to anyone else.


126 posted on 06/14/2007 5:21:00 PM PDT by GCC Catholic (Pray for your priests and seminarians...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: koinonia; Danny Garland Jr.; ArrogantBustard; GCC Catholic; unspun

I’ll have to be quick, but Bl. John Duns Scotus and what is called the Franciscan thesis of the absolute primacy of Christ does not deny that Jesus Christ came to redeem sinners. The position of the absolute primacy of Christ maintains that Jesus is the Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last, the beginning and the end of all creation even if Adam had not sinned. Because of sin He came as Redeemer; but that was not the primary, let alone exclusive reason for His coming. Hope that helps.

unspun—I’m not sure exactly what you are getting at? But I’ll take a shot at responding. Jesus Christ must reign in the Church, His Bride, as the Head and should reign in the hearts of all. His is the primacy, and none other.

God bless you all...


127 posted on 06/14/2007 5:27:04 PM PDT by fr maximilian mary ("Imitate Jesus, love Mary as your Mother." Mother Teresa of Calcutta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: fr maximilian mary
unspun—I’m not sure exactly what you are getting at? But I’ll take a shot at responding. Jesus Christ must reign in the Church, His Bride, as the Head and should reign in the hearts of all. His is the primacy, and none other.

Indeed. And may that be in practice, uneclipsed whatsoever, as well as in belief.

128 posted on 06/14/2007 5:29:41 PM PDT by unspun (What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: GCC Catholic

Logic:

IF Mary is God’s Mother, THEN Mary must BE God(des). Ergo God is not God.

IF Mary gave her permission to allow Christ to become the atoning sacrifice for the sins of men, THEN Mary could have withheld that permission. Ergo Mary is Redeemer, not Christ.

IF one venerates Mary, THEN one worships something other than God. Ergo one is an idol worshipper.

IF the Bible says Black and a person says White, THEN the person is a false teacher. Ergo the RCC is filled with false teachers.

IF one reads the Bible, and one studies extra-biblical teachings, THEN one must “choose this day who you will serve”. Ergo those choosing the Bible have hope in Truth, those choosing something else do not.


129 posted on 06/14/2007 7:10:45 PM PDT by pjr12345 (O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Romans 7:24)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: GCC Catholic; Danny Garland Jr.; Dr. Eckleburg; P-Marlowe; HarleyD; GoLightly; fortheDeclaration
Lol. The article that is the point of this thread is some garbled little essay on excuse me, the primacy of Christ. I take the primacy to mean putting Christ first in all things. Unfortunately, it becomes rather schizophrenic when we own up that it's not the primacy of Christ where the Catholic church's focus is. In the article, the author says

Consequently, this is the view I hold. It also has implications for the Blessed Virgin as well

He brings in the blessed virgin, he opened the doorin the discussion, so just let us discuss how she affects the primacy of Christ. Let the author defend his work. I think you also have to have a badge if you are the thread police.

130 posted on 06/14/2007 7:23:27 PM PDT by 1000 silverlings (Matthew 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: fr maximilian mary
Mary is not the "new Eve". There is no new Eve. Christ is the first in His new creation;

1 Corinthians 15:22

For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

Mary has zip, nada, to do either with Christ or with us.

131 posted on 06/14/2007 7:37:56 PM PDT by 1000 silverlings (Matthew 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: 1000 silverlings; pjr12345

Pings to 122 and 125. I’m done discussing this with either of you. Please don’t ping me again concerning this thread.


132 posted on 06/14/2007 7:56:02 PM PDT by GCC Catholic (Pray for your priests and seminarians...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Danny Garland Jr.; Dr. Eckleburg

“see the Crucifixion accounts where Mary is at the foot of the Cross praying for her Son”

There is absolutely no scripture to support your statement that Mary is praying at the foot of the cross. Mary is listed as a spectator to the crucifixion along with many women followers of Jesus.

Luke 2:34-35, “And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against; (Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also,) that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.”

There is nothing in that scripture that would lead a teenager, as Mary was, to believe Jesus would be crucified for the sins of the people. Jews were looking for a political messiah, a king, not a suffering savior. Even the disciples who were with Him during His ministry, up to the end did not understand He had to die. What Mary was told by shepherds and angels was that she would bare a King. That’s what she pondered for that’s all that was told to her.

What Gabriel announced to Mary was that she would conceive and bear a Son, the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy. He did not ask if she wanted the job, he said she would conceive. It was a fact, determined before the foundation of the world that she would conceive. Her only question was how it was going to be accomplished and when that was explained to her, she was satisfied.

“If Mary didn’t have an idea of what was to be expected of her from the Angel, her “fiat” would not have been valid.”

The only thing Mary understood from the angel was that she would bear a man child, the Son of God, that was her “fiat”, her decree.


133 posted on 06/14/2007 8:09:18 PM PDT by blue-duncan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration; Dr. Eckleburg; P-Marlowe; blue-duncan
From the writings of Pope Pius xii, at this website:

http://www.fisheaters.com/mediatordei.html

Participating in mass is necessary for salvation. Christ did not finish His work on Calvary, humans must do it for Him. The mass is just another work in order to be saved

77. This purchase, however, does not immediately have its full effect; since Christ, after redeeming the world at the lavish cost of His own blood, still must come into complete possession of the souls of men. Wherefore, that the redemption and salvation of each person and of future generations unto the end of time may be effectively accomplished, and be acceptable to God, it is necessary that-men should individually come into vital contact with the sacrifice of the cross, so that the merits, which flow from it, should be imparted to them. In a certain sense it can be said that on Calvary Christ built a font of purification and salvation which He filled with the blood He shed; but if men do not bathe in it and there wash away the stains of their iniquities, they can never be purified and saved.

134 posted on 06/14/2007 8:36:27 PM PDT by 1000 silverlings (Matthew 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: 1000 silverlings
Please don’t twist things that I say. It is quite clear that I said the primacy of Christ affects Mary, not that Mary affects the primacy of Christ.

It would do well for the people on this thread to actually read what is written instead of twisting it to say things that were not said in the first place and then attacking the misrepresentation.

135 posted on 06/14/2007 9:02:34 PM PDT by Danny Garland Jr. (Ad Jesum per Mariam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Danny Garland Jr.
We don’t offer Christ up at Mass, Christ offers Himself up continuously at the Mass through the priests who represent Him and who are empowered by Him.

Well I have just read Pius xii on the subject and it's his opinion that you do. Mary has power over Christ and offers up the divine victim. The church participates in the offering.

For a thread on the "primacy" of Christ, there appears to be little support for your view. All I come away with, after reading the topics, and then doing research, is that it appears in Catholic theology that Christ has little power, why He couldn't even save anyone atthe cross apparently, other than those who were physically there at the time. Now, all down thru the ages, one must be at a re-enactment of this event in orderto be saved.

And deny it if you must, but Mary is the one represented with the power. If Christ was who He said He was, and did what He came to do, then His work was accomplished, and He is resurrected to glory. If He did not do what He came to do, then He was an imposter. Which is it?

136 posted on 06/14/2007 9:04:09 PM PDT by 1000 silverlings (Matthew 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Danny Garland Jr.
You wrote and I quoted It also has implications for the Blessed Virgin as well

It's your thread, tell us

137 posted on 06/14/2007 9:06:57 PM PDT by 1000 silverlings (Matthew 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: GCC Catholic
Yes... the canon states that the Mass is a propitiatory sacrifice, and it is explained (elsewhere than the canon), that the Mass is a re-presentation (note: NOT "representation") of the Sacrifice of Calvary by Christ through the priest acting in persona Christi. One Priest (Christ) and one Sacrifice that is both once and eternal.

If a Priest can duplicate what Christ did on the Cross and offer a non-bloody sacrifice in Christ's place, it removes the preemience of Christ.

Sorry that you have a hard time understanding that.

NOW, THAT SAID: This has nothing to do with the original post. Please quit threadjacking.

So, no one is hijacking the thread.

The Roman Catholic Church places its priests (performing the Mass) and Mary on the same level with Christ, making Christ less then preeminent.

138 posted on 06/15/2007 4:00:21 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (We must beat the Democrats or the country will be ruined! - Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration
If a Priest can duplicate what Christ did on the Cross and offer a non-bloody sacrifice in Christ's place, it removes the preemience of Christ.

I understand that perfectly fine, and if that were what was happening, I'd have as much trouble with it as you do. Acting "in the person of Christ" is not the same as being able to do what Christ did on the Cross, nor is it offering anything "in Christ's place."

Now, as I've told the others in 122, 125, and 132, please do not ping me concerning this thread again.

139 posted on 06/15/2007 4:35:13 AM PDT by GCC Catholic (Pray for your priests and seminarians...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Danny Garland Jr.; fr maximilian mary
Thus the Sacred Heart of Jesus is the first created being willed by God and was done so for all eternity and the Sacred Heart is predestined to the height of Glory. The Sacred Heart is the goal of all creation.

Just who and what is this "Sacred Heart"??? Where do you find that in scripture??? Isn't it true that the worship of this "Sacred Heart" came out of fringe cults of Catholic mystics, and was propagated primarily by the Jesuits.

If we take your statement literally, then are we to assume that you believe that this Jesuit Jesus or the "Sacred Heart" of this Jesuit Jesus is predestined, according to you, to the height of Glory???

140 posted on 06/15/2007 4:39:49 AM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: All
I understand that perfectly fine, and if that were what was happening, I'd have as much trouble with it as you do. Acting "in the person of Christ" is not the same as being able to do what Christ did on the Cross, nor is it offering anything "in Christ's place."

Since this poster does not want to be posted to again, I will post the reply to all.

The Priest is duplicating the work of Christ in a non-bloody way.

Thus, Christ's work on the Cross was not a complete one and the Mass completes it.

The Mass is part of the Propitiation process and as is necessary as was Christ's death on the Cross.

That is exactly what Trent said was happening.

Roman Catholics hate to admit what their church teaches.

141 posted on 06/15/2007 5:15:54 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (We must beat the Democrats or the country will be ruined! - Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration

Across the centuries enough gobbetty gook has been authored to allow the RCC to defend any position it chooses. They’ve amassed so much extra-biblical writings from their “fathers”, dogma, doctrine, and catechisms that they can move their “beliefs” in any direction they wish and still claim “Tradition”.

The defenders of the RCC use the wealth of words available to them to beat back critics. For every detractor pointing an accusatory finger, they produce a dozen texts in defense. All the while, RCC teachers feed the flock with the doctrines of the day.

On forums like this, one often finds defenders of the RCC arguing contradicting positions; and all parties are able to provide tomes of “evidence” from their church that supports their claims. The relativistic nature of their extra-biblical Authorities allow, even encourage, such slipperiness.

Give me the Bible, and keep your man-made relativism!


142 posted on 06/15/2007 6:23:21 AM PDT by pjr12345 (I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord! Romans 7:25)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: 1000 silverlings
Mary is not the "New Eve".

That's your opinion. But those closest historically to Christ and the Apostles say she is.

St. Justin Martyr (d. ) writes: "We know that He, before all creatures, proceeded from the Father by His power and will,. ..and by means of the Virgin became man, that by what way the disobedience arising from the serpent had its beginning, by that way also it might have an undoing. For Eve, being a virgin and undefiled, conceiving the word that was from the serpent, brought forth disobedience and death; but the Virgin Mary, taking faith and joy, when the Angel told her the good tidings, that the Spirit of the Lord should come upon her and the power of the Highest overshadow her, and therefore the Holy One that was born of her was Son of God, answered, 'Be it to me according to Thy word.'" (Tryph. 100)

As I noted earlier St. Irenaeus (d. 202) calls Mary the New Eve, stating that she became the "cause of salvation, both to herself and the whole human race... the knot of Eve's disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. For what the virgin Eve had bound fast through unbelief, this did the virgin Mary set free through faith." (Against Heresies, 3:22:4). He wrote that around 188 A.D.

Cardinal John Henry Newman sums it up nicely: "She co-operated in our salvation not merely by the descent of the Holy Ghost upon her body, but by specific holy acts, the effect of the Holy Ghost within her soul; that, as Eve forfeited privileges by sin, so Mary earned privileges by the fruits of grace; that, as Eve was disobedient and unbelieving, so Mary was obedient and believing; that, as Eve was a cause of ruin to all, Mary was a cause of salvation to all; that as Eve made room for Adam's fall, so Mary made room for our Lord's reparation of it; and thus, whereas the free gift was not as the offence, but much greater, it follows that, as Eve co-operated in effecting a great evil, Mary co-operated in effecting a much greater good.

I'll take the traditional interpretation of Scripture over Protestant private interpretation any day.

Christ's word to the Apostles:"But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your mind whatever I have said to you." The Apostles and their successors have been and continue to be guided, as Jesus promised, by the Holy Spirit.

143 posted on 06/15/2007 6:28:31 AM PDT by fr maximilian mary ("Imitate Jesus, love Mary as your Mother." Mother Teresa of Calcutta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
Peace of the Lord be with you!

When Danny uses the term Sacred Heart of Jesus, he is referring to the created nature (not just the heart) of Jesus Christ. The Sacred Humanity (created--body & soul) was predestined by God from all eternity to be united with Him in the Person of the Word through the Incarnation. Blessed John Duns Scotus never uses the term "Sacred Heart", although if understood correctly there is nothing contrary to Scotus thesis in using this term. The key point for Scotus is that the Incarnation was not occasioned by sin but part of God's eternal plan even if Adam had not sinned. When God creates (before sin or any consideration of sin) He already sees the Word made flesh as the Alpha and Omega.

Just a brief explanation on the Sacred Heart devotion: Devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus is a devotion to the physical heart of Jesus, the God-Man, which is adorable (latria) by virtue of the hypostatic union (the Heart of Christ is united to the Divine Person of the Word, and therefore is adorable); it is a devotion to that which is symbolized by the heart, namely, the interior, moral center of the person—hence, devotion to the burning love of Jesus towards God in His sacred humanity and His burning love for men in both His sacred humanity and divinity; ultimately, it is a devotion to the Person of the Word who has assumed our human nature.

Hope that helps. God bless...

144 posted on 06/15/2007 6:37:22 AM PDT by fr maximilian mary ("Imitate Jesus, love Mary as your Mother." Mother Teresa of Calcutta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: fr maximilian mary; Uncle Chip
the term Sacred Heart of Jesus

All professions create their own vocabulary. While a certain amount of exact communication occurs with the promulgation of words, it also serves to separate the "ins" from the "outs", and to stroke the egos of those with the greatest specialized vocabulary. Throw in a few phrases from a dead language, and you've got yourself the makings of an elite class willing to dictate their mandates to the sheeple.

145 posted on 06/15/2007 6:56:25 AM PDT by pjr12345 (I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord! Romans 7:25)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration; 1000 silverlings; Dr. Eckleburg; blue-duncan; pjr12345; P-Marlowe
May the Lord give you His peace!

Thank you all for joining in. I'm the one who posted this thread, not Danny Garland Jr.; I'm also the one who did not declare it a caucus since I had hoped there could be some discussion of the primary motive of the Incarnation.

There have been a lot of false statements about the Catholic Church. What you all claim we believe and what we, as Catholics, actually believe are clearly not the same. No Pope, no Saint, no Catholic, no Christian would ever claim that Mary is a goddess. That would be blasphemy. So please stop saying that we worship Mary as God or hold her as equal to Christ. We don't and never will.

We do differ from you in terms of why God chose to have a mother when He came into this world and what her subordinate role is. You maintain that she was just an incubator used by God and to be disposed of and, so it seems, even despised once He was done using her. But that is not the Gospel.

The Gospel says that Mary "has found grace with God" calling her "fully graced" (kecharitomene in Greek) (Lk. 1:28,31).

Scripture says that Elizabeth, filled with the Holy Spirit, exclaimed, "Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And how have I deserved that the mother of my Lord should come to me?...Blessed is she who has believed, because the things promised her by the Lord shall be accomplished."

The Holy Bible, the Word of God, says that henceforth all generations shall call Mary blessed.(Lk. 1:48).

The Gospel of St. Matthew tells us that the wise men, "entering the house, they found the child with Mary his mother, and falling down they worshipped him." (Mt. 2:11).

And when we go to Calvary, who do we find. Scripture says, "Now there were standing by the cross of Jesus his mother and ..."(Jn.19:25).

And at Pentecost, who is there in the upper room with the Apostles and disciples? Scripture says that in that room "Mary, the mother of Jesus" was present. (Acts 1:14).

At the very least all Christians must honor Mary as a model disciple of Christ, one to be imitated. As the Mother of Christ, in whom we have been incorporated as part of His Mystical Body, she is our Mother too. She is Mother of the whole Christ, head and members. We are her children whom she loved.

Mary is my spiritual Mother. I love her dearly. And she, of all Christians, has taught me to know, love and follow Jesus Christ, the King of kings and Lord of lords wherever He leadeth me. Mary says, "Do whatever he tells you." (Jn. 2:5).

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth]; by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man; he suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven; he was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered, and was buried, and the third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. from thence he shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

146 posted on 06/15/2007 7:07:54 AM PDT by fr maximilian mary ("Imitate Jesus, love Mary as your Mother." Mother Teresa of Calcutta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: fr maximilian mary
No Pope, no Saint, no Catholic, no Christian would ever claim that Mary is a goddess. That would be blasphemy.

The words stop short, but the deeds continue. Action speaks louder than words.

God chose to have a mother when He came into this world

God does not have a mother. It is an impossibility. The MAN, Jesus, had a mother. It is a distinct difference. The RCC takes the fully God, fully Human reality of Jesus and intentionally blurs the boundary so as to elevate the status of Mary.

You maintain that she was just an incubator used by God and to be disposed of and, so it seems, even despised once He was done using her.

Could you point out a single post on this thread where this assertion is even inferred?

At the very least all Christians must honor Mary as a model disciple of Christ, one to be imitated.

I was with you through your comments regarding Mary up until this point. This is where we part company. Calling Mary "blessed" and "honoring" her are distinctly different. Imitating her? How so? The Bible offers very little information about her. What shall we imitate, our assumption about what she "must" have been? Be imitators of Christ.

His Mystical Body

Nothing "mystical" about it. When the Holy Spirit added me to the Church, I became part of the body of Christ.

she is our Mother too

Do I need to send her a card on Mother's Day? Is she going to start harping on me for not calling often enough? No sirree; she's the mother of the human, Jesus, and his siblings. And it might be argued that she became John's adpoted mother at the cross. That's it.

She is Mother of the whole Christ, head and members. We are her children whom she loved.

The inevitable, logical conclusion of this assertion is that she MUST be divine - a goddess. While the RCC will not use the word, the description is of Mary the goddess. Why not simply 'fess up and acknowledge your own logic?

147 posted on 06/15/2007 7:50:46 AM PDT by pjr12345 (I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord! Romans 7:25)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: fr maximilian mary
When Danny uses the term Sacred Heart of Jesus, he is referring to the created nature (not just the heart) of Jesus Christ. The Sacred Humanity (created--body & soul) was predestined by God from all eternity to be united with Him in the Person of the Word through the Incarnation.

But fr mary, the body that Jesus has now is not the human body that came at His Incarnation through Mary, but the spiritual body that came at His Resurrection through His Heavenly Father. Isn't that right???

148 posted on 06/15/2007 8:06:02 AM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: fr maximilian mary; fortheDeclaration
The Gospel says that Mary "has found grace with God" calling her "fully graced" (kecharitomene in Greek) (Lk. 1:28,31).

Paul in the Epistles says the same thing to the Ephesian Church [1:6]. So does that mean that those in that Church were immaculately conceived, perpetually virgin, and assumecd bodily into heaven???

Scripture says that Elizabeth, filled with the Holy Spirit, exclaimed, "Blessed art thou among women"

Right ---- among women ---- not among men. Jesus said that of those born of woman, there has not risen a greater than John the Baptist? So was he immaculately conceived and assumed bodily into heaven???

"Blessed is she who has believed, because the things promised her by the Lord shall be accomplished."

Right, "she who has believed" not "she who was imaginatively conceived without sin".

The Holy Bible, the Word of God, says that henceforth all generations shall call Mary blessed.(Lk. 1:48).

Right but where does it say that those generations will call her "Mother of God, the Queen of Heaven, Queen Mother of All, and Our Lady of Everything from Here to Eternity"????

The Gospel of St. Matthew tells us that the wise men, "entering the house, they found the child with Mary his mother, and falling down they worshipped him." (Mt. 2:11).

Right --- "they worshipped him" not her.

And when we go to Calvary, who do we find. Scripture says, "Now there were standing by the cross of Jesus his mother and ..."(Jn.19:25).

And Mary Magdalene, and Salome, et al. Does that make them Queen of something too???

At the very least all Christians must honor Mary as a model disciple of Christ, one to be imitated.Why As the Mother of Christ, in whom we have been incorporated as part of His Mystical Body, she is our Mother too. She is Mother of the whole Christ, head and members. We are her children whom she loved. Mary is my spiritual Mother.

She may be the Mother of the Catholic Church but she is not the mother of those who know and believe their bibles. Paul tells us: "But Jerusalem which is above is the mother of us all." --- not Mary of Catholic mythology.

Mary says, "Do whatever he tells you." (Jn. 2:5).

Then why don't Mariologists do what Jesus told them from that point forward??? Why do they ignore both her words and His???

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth]; by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man; he suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven; he was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered, and was buried, and the third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. from thence he shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

Where does it say anything in that confession about Mary's immaculate conception, perpetual virginity, assumption into heaven, her scapulas, visions, promises, myths, and/or the necessity of being part of a church that propagates such things. You and all Catholics need to return to the above confession, the scriptures underlying it, start taking its words seriously, and dump all that Mariolatry fantasy before it is too late.

149 posted on 06/15/2007 9:14:16 AM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: pjr12345

Pjr12345,
By any chance are you a Nestorian?


150 posted on 06/15/2007 9:20:06 AM PDT by Danny Garland Jr. (Ad Jesum per Mariam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-174 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson