Posted on 01/10/2011 10:41:33 AM PST by NYer
You get that from the text ... how, exactly?
The point of the scene was to put Jesus in the presence of the Law (Moses) and the Prophets (Elijah) personified, to show that he fulfills them both. Nothing about any censure of Peter is mentioned, AFAIK.
The church in heaven is just as much the Body of Christ as the church on earth is, and there's one body (one faith, one baptism, etc.), not two.
What you're saying amounts to proposing that death cuts off the bonds of charity that bind some members of the Body to other members. We think that, in a fight between death and the Body of Christ, the Body of Christ wins. We have pretty good grounds for believing that, starting with a certain empty tomb on a certain Sunday morning, 2000 years ago.
God elevated Christ above the other figures when he declared Jesus His Son.
Thanks, NYer, for this interesting post. It was interesting to read about how someone innocent, without an agenda, viewed her various experiences with many types of Christians. A child just soaks up impressions.
Her instincts told her something was wrong; she was looking for bedrock that didn’t change (just as God does not change). She finally found it— but it was sad to read that so many threw obstacles in her way. How many Christians feel the tug to the Church and fight it because they’ve been taught that the Church is evil? It reminded me of how the Apostles, who did believe in Christ, tried to keep the little children from getting closer to Him.
That’s how I see other Christians who work overtime trying to discredit Christ’s own beloved Church: they are believers but they are preventing God’s children from having a truly close relationship with Christ. They are keeping those children from touching Christ, and having Him touch them, through the Eucharist. They are obstacles, holding the innocent back from Christ because they think they know best what that relationship should be like.
Christ said no. He wanted to touch the children physically and hold them close. All signs in the Gospels point to Christ’s habit of using the tangible physical elements of this world to reach us. He could have created out of thin air, but He used the homely things of this world to help us SEE. He touched, He healed, He used mud and spit, He laid hands, He raised, He used bread and fish and wine. The Eucharist is just another, and the greatest, tangible way to touch us and hold us close. And the most amazing gift of all is that He set the tangible embrace on Earth for all eternity by instituting the Holy Eucharist. We consume Him and love for Him consumes us.
It’s no accident that His first and last miracles involved a banquet with wine. One was a wedding banquet where He chose to publicly enter into a New Covenant with us; the other was a Passover banquet where He sealed the New Covenant and gave us eternal, continual salvation in complete unity with Him.
Catholicism is the most beautiful, unified, whole fabric, incredible religion there is. (But, of course; look who started the Church!)
....That’s how I see other Christians who work overtime trying to discredit Christ’s own beloved Church: they are believers but they are preventing God’s children from having a truly close relationship with Christ. They are keeping those children from touching Christ, and having Him touch them, through the Eucharist. They are obstacles, holding the innocent back from Christ because they think they know best what that relationship should be like.
And thank you, Melian, for pinging just me to your post and the thread. It's clear that someone has an agenda, otherwise they would have labelled Denice Bossert as a former Wesleyan Methodist too, instead of just a former Presbyterian. Your convert showed great theological depth in commenting that (all) Wesleyans kneel in prayer, talk often about holiness and sanctification, and attend camp (revival) meetings in the summer - and (all) Presbyterians don't. It's very interesting that her Wesleyan pastor father only baptised adults in a river, instead of infants at a font. It's even more interesting that he never taught his congregation, let alone his own daughter, the Lord’s Prayer or the Apostle’s Creed until he became a Presbyterian.
Nope, no agenda here. Presbyterians bad, Catholics good, Wesleyans get a complete pass and a poorly educated girl gets 15 minutes of fame on cable TV for saying so. Move along, citizens.
Calling a new convert an idiot and then someone else coming along to excuse it, by pointing fingers at those who object, says so much more about the name caller and excuser than it does of those who object, your nice laundry list put aside. Now speaking of your laundry list, if you can find the word “idiot” used anywhere then post it. You said it. You do your own leg work and prove it. Fair enough?
IF we accept your premise that this poorly educated Christian doesn’t know what she is talking about when it comes to her former faith tradition and has an agenda, THEN we would also have to accept that poorly educated former Catholics who don’t know what they are talking about when it comes to their former faith tradition also have an agenda.
That’s just logic.
I thought our convert showed tremendous insight. She was obviously introspective from her earliest youth and cared deeply about having a real relationship with God. It was a long, thoughtful journey. She continued to persevere and found the Truth. Smart cookie. Glad to have her.
That wasn't my premise. But you go right on and keep trying if you want.
“And thank you, Melian, for pinging just me to your post and the thread.”
I’m not sure what you mean there. You had already posted on this thread (#16) and I also posted the same comment to NYer.
It’s just that I think about you and your faith journey, Alex Murphy, and pray for you.
Wow. That's a mighty big - and awfully convenient - list of links.
“That wasn’t my premise. “
But it was. A premise is a proposition upon which an argument is based or from which a conclusion is drawn. Your premise was that she was a poorly educated Christian with an agenda and you argued that premise with the example that she did not know the Lord’s Prayer.
And I do agree that it was odd she didn’t know it. It just goes to show you what the splintering of the Church gets you: Christian’s who don’t even know the Lord’s Prayer (thought it’s in Scripture) who think the Catholic Church is unscriptural.
Peter was not directly rebuked....remember what the voice of the Father said “this is my beloved son, LISTEN to HIM!”
Here the Father was clearly announcing that Christ’s authority was above yet in fullfillment of the laws of the prophets. Peter was speaking in reverential awe and humility, despite his ignorance. God was simply clarifying the lines of spiritual authority starting from himself, then thru the Son Jesus Christ.
“Listen to him!”
indeed.....
You: But it was....Your premise was that she was a poorly educated Christian with an agenda and you argued that premise with the example that she did not know the Lord’s Prayer.
Oh, I'm sorry. The next time I want to know what I meant by a post, I'll be sure to ask you first.
Do you know the difference between wesleyans and presbyterians ?
I do not believe this “story” sorry
However, as it relates to the discussion, Peter's attempt to revere the "dead in faith" was to no avail.
God did not entertain it; the point of the story was that God was re-affirming the superiority of the Son and the attempt to recognize the status of Moses and Elijah was rejected. This should not be cited as an example whereby the dead in faith should be communicated with by the living as so many catholics do...quite the opposite.
The year I was born, my older sister was being Confirmed. Unbeknownst to Mama, Daddy had been going through 'Instructions' with the Associate Pastor, and he surprised her by being Confirmed on the same day as my sister. Mama always said he was an even better Catholic than she was, because he studied, and made the choice as a adult, having grown up in a different faith tradition.
She did ask God directly, but then asked Mary for a sign, since it was ABOUT Mary that she had doubts. I’ve never understood why folks get so worked up about asking for Intercession from Mary, or the Saints, after all, they’re a heck of a lot closer to God than I am!
Thank you for the post and ping. My step-father was born into a Lutheran family but his family did not attend church or raise him in the faith. When he married my catholic mother, he promised to raise me in the catholic faith. He would occasionally attend mass with us and drove me to activities at my catholic schools. He was always supportive. Both my parents are now in their late 70s. My father, despite all the exposure, remains an agnostic. My daily prayer is that he will be baptized before he leaves this life.
I have been told time and time again that catholics don't pray to Mary.Obviously I've been misinformed.
Yes, you have been misinformed. We Catholics most certainly pray to the saints, including Mary. The problem though is not that we pray, but that others are offended by this. This is due to ignorance and a deprivation of true worship, which makes people conflate actions like prayer and singing into worship. While prayer can be worship, it is also possible for it to be otherwise. The word 'prayer' means to implore, beseech or beg. That is all. It doesn't mean to worship or adore or to ask in a way only befitting to God, or any other such thing. It doesn't even have anything to do with whether the person being asked is alive or not.
Speak the speach, I pray you, as I pronounced it to you...Hamlet
Is Hamlet worshiping the player? Is Shakespeare ignorant about English? Is Shakespeare suggesting that the player is dead, or worse yet, that he is God? Of course not. To pray is to ask earnestly, beg, plead, implore, and so on. If churches today still retained the true Eucharistic worship our Lord gave us, wherein we were able to participate in the offering of the High Priest himself, people would stop going around pretending that singing a song about somebody is worship, or talking to them is worship, or drawing a picture of them is worship. The paranoia that all of these things is worship is simply evidence that there are many people out there who are not doing very much by way of true worship of the Lord, and so in turn just try to make out that everybody else are engaged in idolatry.
Yes, we pray to the saints and the Blessed Virgin Mary. If some Catholic out there says otherwise they are confused.
The answer I got was the image of “the torn temple veil”. and the verses that say we have “an advocate with the Father which is Christ Jesus” and to “go boldly before the throne of grace”.
I don’t understand why some Catholics “get so worked up about” having to speak directly to God in Jesus name and laying their petitions directly at the throne of Grace. God doesn’t want to bite us!
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.