Posted on 08/10/2013 11:50:35 AM PDT by NYer
At a special ceremony on July 6, Pope Francis briefly met with clergy and officials who, over the past two years, have been involved in the diocesan phase of the beatification process of Vietnamese Cardinal Francis Xavier Nguyen Van Thuan.
Cardinal Van Thuan spent 13 years in prison, nine of them in solitary confinement in Hanoi, following his appointment as coadjutor archbishop of Saigon just seven days before South Vietnam fell to the Communist North in 1975.
He was released in 1988 and Pope John Paul II called him to Rome, where he eventually became president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace until his death in 2002.
During the ceremony on Saturday, Pope Francis shared his “joy” over the progress of Van Thuan's rise to the altars – his case will now be taken up by the Vatican's Congregation for the Causes of Saints – and said his “reputation for sainthood” had spread thanks to the witness of the many people who had known him personally.
Many priests and lay Catholics who emigrated from Vietnam to Europe, the Americas and Australia, were among the 500 people who attended the ceremony in Rome, the culmination of a three-day long series of Van Thuan-themed events hosted by the Vatican.
But in a brief speech, as reported by the Vatican press office, the Argentine pontiff didn't mention the word “Vietnam” once.
Francis only praised Van Thuan as a “son of the East.”
This signaled that Van Thuan's beatification process is now entering its most delicate phase, where the fragile diplomatic equilibrium between the Holy See and Vietnam will matter as much as his “heroic virtues” as a Christian and his alleged miracles.
Vietnam and the Vatican have been engaged for years in a cautious rapprochement, which led to a breakthrough with the establishing of diplomatic relations through the Vatican's representative in Singapore, Monsignor Leopoldo Girelli.
But in their most recent bilateral meeting, the Vatican turned up the pressure to take relations to the next stage, by explicitly asking for the establishment “as soon as possible” of a more formal and permanent Vatican diplomatic presence in the country.
This comes as reports of religious freedom violations and harassment of priests and Catholic communities in Vietnam multiply.
Ho Chi Minh City's cardinal warned in a recent interview with ucanews.com not to fully trust the government's words, as its policies on religion “make people feel threatened, doubtful and dissatisfied.”
Thrown into this mix, raising the profile of Cardinal Van Thuan – a political prisoner as well as nephew of South Vietnam's first president, Ngo Dinh Diem – could prove explosive.
While he is well known to older Vietnamese, younger generations know very little about him, thanks to his long imprisonment and exile.
Van Thuan's message of non-violence and reconciliation, as well as his unapologetic defense of his faith, could now prove embarrassing for the government.
Around 65 percent of the 90 million people in Vietnam are under 35, while there are an estimated 7 million Catholics in the country.
But this could change as the beatification process proceeds, according to Father Joachim Hien, an American-Vietnamese priest who works as a liaison between Vietnam's Catholics and the United States’ bishops' conference.
Van Thuan's story, he told ucanews.com, “will be very interesting, especially for young people in Vietnam who are looking for some hope in the future.”
“As a young bishop who brought a message of hope to Vietnam during a time of war, many young people today who start to learn about him can find some hope for their own future, no matter who they are and what religion they belong to."
As more and more young Vietnamese travel and study abroad, they will have better access to information about the late cardinal and “will bring that message home,” he believes.
How Vietnam’s government will react to this is all but certain.
“Still today, unfortunately, [Van Thuan's] writings do not circulate freely,” Father Paul Phan Van Hien, a Vietnamese priest, told the Vatican news agency Fides.
“The government still holds a certain mistrust of this hero of faith. But even non-Catholics ask for his works, which are spread by word of mouth or in person. The government probably fears being 'overshadowed' by the light that emanates from the cardinal.”
According to Joachim Hien, the American-Vietnamese priest, Vietnam's Communist government shouldn't be afraid of Van Thuan.
“I hope they will know him as a man of faith and a man of deep love for Vietnam. He had a strong faith in God and strong faith in the future of Vietnam as a nation,” he said.
In fact, he suggests, the party’s leaders should follow Van Thuan's example “for their own personal growth, and that of their people.”
This is part of the positive engagement the Church is seeking with Vietnam's government.
Vietnam is currently engaged in the revision of its constitution and the Catholic Church has submitted its own proposals. Among them, it has challenged the assumption that the Communist Party is the “guiding force of the state and of society,” and that Marxism-Leninism is its ideological foundation.
“The Church wants to make [the constitution] better. It is challenging the government to take a courageous step, for all the Vietnamese people. The leadership of Vietnam should not be afraid of progress,” Joachim Hien said.
Recorded on the Feast of the Holy Rosary, 7 October 1976, in Phú Khánh prison, during his solitary confinement: "I am happy here, in this cell, where white mushrooms are growing on my sleeping mat, because You are here with me, because You want me to live here with You. I have spoken much in my lifetime: now I speak no more. It's Your turn to speak to me, Jesus; I am listening to You"
Cardinal François Xavier Nguyễn Văn Thuận Foundation - Official Site
Road of Hope - Salt & Light Production has produced a powerful documentary on the remarkable life and imprisonment of Cardinal Van Thuan. His prison cell had a single bulb dangling from the ceiling. The guards would alternate between constant light or total darkness. As he became weaker, he could no longer say an entire prayer. Yet despite the torments inflicted upon him, many were converted, including his guards.
The Road of Hope is a collection of teachings written by an imprisoned Vietnamese archbishop to his people. Francis Xavier Nguyen Van Thuan (1928-2002) was ordained a priest in 1953. Subsequently he served as a pastor, studied canon law in Rome, served as a seminary professor in the archdiocese of Hue, and was consecrated as bishop of Nha Trang in 1967. During the following eight years he took on additional duties that included traveling widely to support peaceful solutions to the Vietnamese conflict and solicit aid for reconstruction. In 1975, after the communist takeover, he was arrested as he journeyed to Saigon for a new assignment as an archbishop.
In the introduction to The Road of Hope Translator John Peter Pham describes the communist persecution of priests and religious who were deported to "re-education camps," as Church property was seized. In March of 1976, Pham writes, the Archbishop was deported to North Vietnam along with 2000 other prisoners. For the next 13 years he was confined to prisons and camps, spending the bulk of that time in isolation. For a period in 1975, Van Thuan was placed under house arrest. "Realizing that this 'respite' would be brief and that the Church, bereft of its shepherds, was facing a period of possibly years of persecution, the Archbishop took up his pen," writes Pham. The plan was to write a few messages to encourage and offer spiritual counsel to his flock. Over time, the messages formed a manuscript, and pages were smuggled to the outside and assembled as 1001 reflections, which were printed clandestinely and disseminated widely despite government efforts to interfere. Van Thuan was eventually able to edit the manuscript himself following his expulsion from Vietnam.
This book has just been reprinted and is once again available for spiritual reflection.
O mighty and eternal God,
Father, Son and Holy Spirit
I offer thanks for giving to the Church
the heroic testimony
of Cardinal Francis Xavier Nguyên Van Thuân.
The suffering he experienced in prison,
which he united with the crucified Christ
and commended to the maternal protection of Mary,
is for the Church and the world
a shining witness of unity and forgiveness,
and of justice and peace.
His loving person and his Episcopal ministry
radiate the light of faith,
the enthusiasm of hope and the warmth of love.
Now, my Lord,
through his intercession
and according to your will,
grant me the grace I am imploring
in the hope that he will soon be elevated
to the honour of sainthood.
Amen.
If Cdl. Van Thuan’s canonization is God’s will, the government of Vietnam can do nothing about it.
There is ONE BIBLICAL path to sainthood and it covers EVERY Christian who has entrusted themselves to Christ’s sacrificial death as payment for their sins. They are called Saints by God.
Anything else is added over the aeons of time through accretion of pagan practices.
The man spent 13 years in jail for Christ and 9 in Solitary.
Please take enough time to honor him for such a profession of faith even if you personally disagree with his theology.
Honoring him and respecting him is different that telling the truth about sainthood.
It is quite possible to do both at the same time.
We do not have to circumvent God’s Holy Scripture to honor someone.
Sounds like where I live.
5.56mm
I’ll say a prayer for you.
Peace.
from your eyes is much different than from a Catholic's eyes. At least with the Catholic method, it is proven.
You way has no proof.
How Many Miracles are Required to Canonize a Saint?
Saints [Catholic, Orthodox, Open]
SAINTHOOD 101: Rules for Becoming a Saint [Catholic Caucus]
The Process of Becoming a Saint (Canonization) [Catholic Caucus]
Pope Lists Criteria for Causes of Canonization
Your way has no proof.
Thank you for faithfully presenting the biblical definition and the truth concerning the term “saint”. EVERYONE who has believed upon the Lord Jesus Christ and accepted Him as their personal savior have been forgiven of ALL their sin; past, present and future through the ONE and only, ALL SUFFICIENT sacrifice of Christ upon the cross of Calvary. As a result believers in Christ have been justified: declared “righteous” by God and treated as such. They have also been made perfect IN CHRIST, and as a direct result of their POSITION IN CHRIST ALONE, and not as a result of any “good works” or any so-called personal “merit” or “sacrifice” which believers have done, God Himself declares ALL believing Christians “Saints”
** EVERYONE who has believed upon the Lord Jesus Christ and accepted Him as their personal savior have been forgiven of ALL their sin; past, present and future through the ONE and only, ALL SUFFICIENT sacrifice of Christ upon the cross of Calvary. **
This is the first time I have seen someone post future sins. How can Christ forgive sins that aren’t committed? To me, this is heresy.
Yes, Christ died for our sins....but I can’t purposely go out and murder someone and expect to be forgiven for a premeditated act.
Thanks be to God that no man or earthly organization, or the vain “traditions of men” have the power or authority to make men “saints” or proclaim them to be such, but God alone, through faith in Christ alone to ALL who believe in Him alone!
The word "saint" literally means "holy," and, in the New Testament, "saint" referred to all who believed in Jesus Christ and followed his teachings. St. Paul often addressed his epistles to "the saints" of a particular city (see, for instance, Ephesians 1:1 and 2 Corinthians 1:1), and the Acts of the Apostles talks about St. Peter going to visit the saints in Lydda (Acts 9:2). The assumption was that those who followed Christ had been so transformed that they were now different from other men and women and, thus, should be considered holy.
Very early on, however, the meaning of the word began to change. As Christianity began to spread, it became clear that some Christians lived lives of extraordinary, or heroic, virtue. While other Christians struggled to live out the gospel of Christ, these people were eminent examples of the moral virtues, and they easily practiced the theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity.
The word "saint" thus became more narrowly applied to such people, who were venerated after their deaths as saints, usually by the members of their local church or the Christians in the region where they lived, because they were familiar with their good deeds. Eventually, the Catholic Church created a process, called "canonization," through which such venerable people could be recognized as saints by all Christians everywhere.
Most of the saints whom we refer to by that title (for instance, St. Elizabeth Ann Seton) have gone through this process of canonization. Others, such as St. Peter and St. Paul, received the title through acclamation, or the universal recognition of their holiness.
Catholics believe that both types of saints (canonized and acclaimed) are already in Heaven, which is why one of the requirements for the canonization process is proof of miracles performed by the possible saint after his death. Canonized saints can be venerated anywhere and prayed to publicly, and their lives are held up to Christians still struggling here on earth as examples to be imitated.
It’s available on amazon. I read a few pages. It’s worth the investment.
I’m thinking of ordering the dvd...
Or repented.
Presumption.
No proof? You don’t consider scripture proof?
The word “saint” comes from the Greek word hagios, which means “consecrated to God, holy, sacred, pious." It is almost always used in the plural, “saints.”
Acts 9:13 But Ananias answered, “Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he has done to your saints at Jerusalem.
Acts 9:32 Now as Peter went here and there among them all, he came down also to the saints who lived at Lydda.
Acts 26:10 And I did so in Jerusalem. I not only locked up many of the saints in prison after receiving authority from the chief priests, but when they were put to death I cast my vote against them.
Romans 12:13 Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to hospitality.
Romans 15:25 But now I go unto Jerusalem to minister unto the saints.
Romans 16:15 Salute Philologus, and Julia, Nereus, and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints which are with them.
Ephesians 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus.
Why do Catholics not believe the very words the Holy Spirit guided to be written?
When they announced they were reprinting the book, I ordered it in May and it arrived 2 weeks ago. As for the DVD, I believe the link posted above to the Salt & Light production is the same one as the DVD. It runs 1 hour. Aimee, you may want to watch the video and then compare it with the DVD description. It’s very moving. The pope invited him to speak about his prison experience before a large delegation at the Vatican. He was too humble but the pope insisted. He described how, while in prison, he asked to cut wood. The guards asked why. He said he wanted to make a cross. They said that was forbidden. He said if they turn their heads, they won’t see. He fashioned the cross and then buried it in a bar of soap that he took with him to the next prison. There, he asked the guards if he could have a piece of electrical wire. They asked if he planned to hang himself. He said, no but if they turn their heads they won’t see. He stripped the wire and fashioned a chain. Once he was released from prison, he put the two together. That is the cross, hanging from the chain, that he is holding in both of the above photos.
**the truth about sainthood**
“from your eyes is much different than from a Catholic’s eyes. At least with the Catholic method, it is proven.”
Actually, I don’t have a way.
All I can do is read God’s declaration in Holy Scripture, calling every single Christian a saint. That is the only “proof” any Christian would need.
There are no miracles required according to God. To add any conditions to that is meaningless, since it distorts God’s declaration.
Matthew 16:19 - for Jesus to give Peter and the apostles, mere human beings, the authority to bind in heaven what they bound on earth requires infallibility. This is a gift of the Holy Spirit and has nothing to do with the holiness of the person receiving the gift.
“I’ll say a prayer for you.”
Thank you.
I’ll say one for you too.
” Very early on, however, the meaning of the word began to change. As Christianity began to spread, it became clear that some Christians lived lives of extraordinary, or heroic, virtue. While other Christians struggled to live out the gospel of Christ, these people were eminent examples of the moral virtues, and they easily practiced the theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity.”
“The word “saint” thus became more narrowly applied to such people, who were venerated after their deaths as saints, usually by the members of their local church or the Christians in the region where they lived, because they were familiar with their good deeds. Eventually, the Catholic Church created a process, called “canonization,” through which such venerable people could be recognized as saints by all Christians everywhere.”
These are very, very general statements.
WHEN did this happen? Is this another one of the accretions that happened after several hundred years of Christianity? Are their references during the 1st 100 years of the Church to this practice, that would prove it was part of the Apostle’s Tradition??
If not, it is simply a man-made tradition.
Keys of the kingdom. A key is a badge of authority (Isa. 22:15, 22; Luke 11:52). “The kingdom of heaven” is not heaven, for no man on earth carries the keys to heaven! (All of the jokes about “St. Peter at the gate” stem from this misunderstanding. They are both unbiblical and in bad taste.) We use keys to open doors. Peter was given the privilege of opening “the door of faith” to the Jews at Pentecost (Acts 2), to the Samaritans (Acts 8:14ff), and to the Gentiles (Acts 10). But the other Apostles shared this authority (Matt. 18:18), and Paul had the privilege of “opening the door of faith” to the Gentiles outside of Palestine (Acts 14:27).Nowhere in this passage, or in the rest of the New Testament, are we told that Peter or his successors had any special position or privilege in the church. Certainly Peter in his two epistles claimed to be nothing more than an Apostle (1 Peter 1:1), an elder (1 Peter 5:1), and a servant of Jesus Christ (2 Peter 1:1).
Binding and loosing. This was a very familiar phrase to the Jews, for their rabbis often spoke of “binding and loosing,” that is, forbidding or permitting. Our Lord’s statement in Matthew 16:19 referred to Peter. But His statement later in Matthew 18:18 included all of the Apostles. As the representatives of their Lord, they would exercise authority according to His Word.
The Greek verbs in Matthew 16:19 are most important. The Expanded Translation by Dr. Kenneth S. Wuest (literal Greek) reads: “And whatever you bind on earth [forbid to be done], shall have been already bound … in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth [permit to be done], shall have already been loosed in heaven.” Jesus did not say that God would obey what they did on earth, but that they should do on earth whatever God had already willed. The church does not get man’s will done in heaven; it obeys God’s will on earth.
Wiersbe, W. W. (1996). The Bible exposition commentary (Mt 16:13). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.
“Featuring interviews with those who knew him best, never before seen family videos, and rare archival footage of Thuan sharing his most revealing insights, Road of Hope offers an unprecedented glimpse into the life of a modern day martyr and saint”
this was one of the descriptions of content
I’m ordering it ...
Presumption."
It is not "presumption" or speculation, it is a biblical fact. Simple question: How many of my sins and your sins along with the sins of all mankind who have ever lived before and since the death, burial and resurrection of Christ were in the past or yet future when the Lord Jesus Christ died nearly 2,000 years ago? The answer is ALL OF THEM. How many of our sins past present and future did the Lord Jesus Christ pay for when He died on the cross of Calvary? Jesus gives the answer to this question Himself. The very last thing He said while hanging on the cross before He gave up his spirit and died was: "It is finished" (John 19:30). The word "finished" (Τετέλεσται )in the Koine, New Testament Greek literally means: "Paid in full". This word was written on bills which had been paid in their entirety with no outstanding payment remaining on the balance. How many of them did He pay for? ALL OF THEM!
The word tetelesthai (“finished”) is in the perfect tense in the Greek. The use of the perfect tense in the word “It is finished” signifies a complete and full payment for the sin of all of mankind throughout all of human history. Jesus paid the sin debt in full once for all time as a direct result of Jesus’ one sacrifice on the cross.
As if that were not sufficient; God the Father demonstrated His total satisfaction with Christ’s one, all-sufficient sacrificial payment for the sin of all of mankind through the act of raising His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ from the dead:
He who was delivered over because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our justification. Romans 4:25(NASB)
God the Father raised Jesus from the dead because God the Father is totally satisfied. The payment for sin has been made and everyone who has and will believe in the Lord Jesus Christ for their salvation have been and are forgiven of ALL of their sins; past, present and future. They are “justified” by God Himself; God declares them righteous and treats them as such. And because the payment for our sin is PERFECT, the believer has been made perfect by God Himself because the believer is IN CHRIST; his salvation is perfect and secure in Christ.:
“FOR BY ONE OFFERING HE HAS PERFECTED FOR ALL TIME THOSE WHO ARE SANCTIFIED.” (Hebrews 10:14 NASB Emphasis added)
That my friend is why all who have believed in Christ are “saints” and forgiven of all of their sins; past, present and future.
As the hymn writer so eloquently said: “Jesus paid it all, all to Him I owe. Sin had left a crimson stain, He washed it white as snow.”
1st century, before the Bible existed. By the year 100 A.D., Christians were honoring other Christians who had died, and asking for their intercession. This practice came from a long-standing tradition in the Jewish faith of honoring prophets and holy people with shrines. The first saints were martyrs, people who had given up their lives for the Faith in the persecution of Christians.
I see. So your belief is:
You are forgiven for sins you have not repented. Anything you do in the future, blasphemy, renouncing Christ.. no repentance, no matter what; God has to forgive you.
Seems you have God in a box in your pocket.
Presumption.
When they excavated St. Peter’s tomb, they found markings reading, “Peter, pray for us.”
The Bones of St. Peter:
http://saintpetersbasilica.org/Necropolis/JW/TheBonesofStPeter-1.htm
“1st century, before the Bible existed.”
Books, Letter and the Hebrew Scriptures existed before 100 ad.
You mention:
1. Canonization of Saints in your earlier post
2. Here, praying to saints for their intercession
I would enjoy reading those writings (references) from before 100ad.
I’ve asked you for #2 before and you couldn’t find any writings before 100 ad. Perhaps you’ve come upon a source.
Thank you.
The Jews managed to "honor" their prophets by killing them. As Christ says in Luke 11:47-51: “Woe to you! For you build the tombs of the prophets, and it was your fathers who killed them. 48 So you are witnesses and approve the deeds of your fathers; because it was they who killed them, and you build their tombs. 49 For this reason also the wisdom of God said, ‘I will send to them prophets and apostles, and some of them they will kill and some they will persecute, 50 so that the blood of all the prophets, shed since the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the house of God; yes, I tell you, it shall be charged against this generation.’”
“I see. So your belief is:
You are forgiven for sins you have not repented. Anything you do in the future, blasphemy, renouncing Christ.. no repentance, no matter what; God has to forgive you.
Seems you have God in a box in your pocket.”
Can you please post how that is their argument? The accepted position of us all, and that of men like Augustine or Ambrose, is that those who are justified (forgiven) are sanctified by the Spirit, thus producing obedience and good works (fruit) as a result of that quickening within their spirit. This is comparable to how heat accompanies light.
What you are describing is someone who is damned, who thinks themselves forgiven and yet do not “shew their faith by their works.” But in so doing, you reveal both you and Salvation as people who are also outside the faith, since neither of you have any trust in Christ’s blood to forgive you for your sins, though you frequently sin as Paul did also, as he described in his 7th chapter of Romans.
If you won’t read the blessed and Holy scriptures, you should at least take the advice of the “Saints” your religion has specially canonized. For example,
“Therefore, says the Pelagian, He foreknew who would be holy and immaculate by the choice of free will, and on that account elected them before the foundation of the world in that same foreknowledge of His in which He foreknew that they would be such. Therefore He elected them, says he, before they existed, predestinating them to be children whom He foreknew to be holy and immaculate. Certainly He did not make them so; nor did He foresee that He would make them so, but that they would be so. Let us, then, look into the words of the apostle and see whether He chose us before the foundation of the world because we were going to be holy and immaculate, or in order that we might be so. Blessed, says he, be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in all spiritual blessing in the heavens in Christ; even as He has chosen us in Himself before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and unspotted. Ephesians 1:3 Not, then, because we were to be so, but that we might be so. Assuredly it is certain,— assuredly it is manifest. Certainly we were to be such for the reason that He has chosen us, predestinating us to be such by His grace. Therefore He blessed us with spiritual blessing in the heavens in Christ Jesus, even as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and immaculate in His sight, in order that we might not in so great a benefit of grace glory concerning the good pleasure of our will. In which, says he, He has shown us favour in His beloved Son,— in which, certainly, His own will, He has shown us favour. Thus, it is said, He has shown us grace by grace, even as it is said, He has made us righteous by righteousness. In whom, he says, we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace, which has abounded to us in all wisdom and prudence; that he might show to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure. In this mystery of His will, He placed the riches of His grace, according to His good pleasure, not according to ours, which could not possibly be good unless He Himself, according to His own good pleasure, should aid it to become so. But when he had said, According to His good pleasure, he added, which He purposed in Him, that is, in His beloved Son, in the dispensation of the fullness of times to restore all things in Christ, which are in heaven, and which are in earth, in Him: in whom also we too have obtained a lot, being predestinated according to His purpose who works all things according to the counsel of His will; that we should be to the praise of His glory.” (Augustine, Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints, Chp. 36.)
“All our good merits are only wrought in us by grace, and -when God crowns our merits, he crowns nothing but his own gifts. (Augustine, Letter 194)
“Have just men, then, no merits? Certainly they have, because they are righteous. But they were not made righteous by merits. For they are made righteous when they are justified, but as the apostle says, they are justified freely by his grace.” (Ibid)
“For who wakes thee to differ, and what has thou that thou hast not received?” (1 Cor. iv. 7). Our merits therefore do not cause us to differ, but grace. For if it be merit, it is a debt; and if it be a debt, it is not gratuitous; and if it be not gratuitous, it is not grace. (Augustine, Sermon 293)
“Therefore let no one boast of his works, because no one can be justified by his works; but he who is just receives it as a gift, because he is justified by the washing of regeneration. It is faith, therefore, which delivers us by the blood of Christ, because blessed is he whose sins are forgiven, and to whom pardon is granted.” (Ambrose, Letter 73)
“All these, therefore, were highly honoured, and made great, not for their own sake, or for their own works, or for the righteousness which they wrought, but through the operation of His will. And we, too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.” (Clement of Rome, 1st Epist. to the Corinthians, ch. 32.)
You continue to defer to scripture but not everything is written down there. This practice is one such example, from their daily experience.
In 2 Macc 15:12-16, the high priest Onias and the prophet Jeremiah were deceased for centuries, and yet interact with the living Judas Maccabeas and pray for the holy people on earth. Similarly, in Baruch 3:4, Baruch asks the Lord to hear the prayers of the dead of Israel. They can intercede on behalf of the people of God.
“They have also been made perfect IN CHRIST, and as a direct result of their POSITION IN CHRIST ALONE, and not as a result of any “good works” or any so-called personal “merit” or “sacrifice” which believers have done...”
Except when those “good works”, “merit” and “sacrifices” are within Christ. That’s what Protestants don’t understand.
“The Jews managed to “honor” their prophets by killing them.”
Since that is not in fact a way of honoring anyone isn’t that a rather deceitful claim?
Unless you are just making this up, you must be basing it on actual evidence. I am asking you to share it
Dear Vlad,
I was responding to the claim that Jews honored the prophets by erecting shrines. I was sharing “the rest of the story” according to The Lord.
“In 2 Macc 15:12-16...”
Certainly written during the InterTestamental period. Still, before Christ’s “gathering”.
What are the sources in Scripture, history, art, etc., that show these practices ever happened among Christians before 100 ad?
Do you have access to any reference like this? If so, I would appreciate the sharing?
Thanks
I understand, but you were wrong.
To me that city’s name will always be Saigon.
Stayed at its “Saigon Star” Hotel, APR 2000.
How about you let them argue their own case ?
I already know you believe is salvation by election, double predestination and so on. And that you argue from authority via Augustine. And that when the argument becomes uncomfortable you're gone.
So we can save time here.
Thank you for your comment
The earliest surviving Christian art is preserved on the walls of tombs belonging to wealthy Christians in the catacombs of Rome. Initially Jesus was represented indirectly by pictogram symbols such as the Ichthys (fish), the peacock, or an anchor (the Labarum or Chi-Rho was a later development). Later personified symbols were used, including Jonah, whose three days in the belly of the whale pre-figured the interval between Christ's death and Resurrection; Daniel in the lion's den; or Orpheus charming the animals.
The most complete ancient prayer to the Blessed Mother historically preserved is the Sub Tuum Praesidium (250 A.D.)
It is also clear from the number of representations of the Blessed Virgin and their locations in the catacombs that the Mother of Jesus was also recognized for her maternal intercession of protection and defense. Her image was present on tombs, as well as on the large central vaults of the catacombs. Clearly, the early Christians dwelling in the catacombs prayed to Mary as intercessor to her Son for special protection and for motherly assistance. As early as the first century to the first half of the second century, Mary's role as Spiritual Mother was recognized and her protective intercession was invoked.
NYer,
I think you are taking quite a leap here, reading back your current beliefs into images.
To respond to your examples...
Christian burial plots in the Catacombs were begun in the second century.
Christian artwork was also circa 2nd century.
The prayer you quote, you identify as 250ad
I’ve had this conversation with you in the past, along with many other roman christians. In the end, it has always ended the same way - though I remain open to evidence that would demonstrate otherwise - there are no New Testament references to either practice, there are no commands in Scripture, there are no examples in Scripture, there are no artworks, secular sourced writings, etc. Nothing before 100 AD.
The conclusion for the objective is that these practices were added - not part of revelation or Apostles Tradition - much later through the accretion of pagan practices. In fact, many so-called Christian practices don’t show up until hundreds of years later - some a thousand years later.
I hold out hope that some day something will turn up, but so far, nothing. You have an open invitation to ping me to whatever you find before 100 AD or so that would lend support as a Christian practice to any of these:
canonization of believers
praying to departed Christians
holy water
vestments
priests
popes
Eucharistic adoration
candles, indulgences, purgatory, alters, fish hats, rosaries, etc.
Thank you for the civil conversation and friendship on FR.
Dear freind, The Bible makes it clear that Christ established the Church as a teaching organization to speak to the world in His name and with His authority. The Church was to teach men whatsoever He had taught - nothing more and nothing less: "All power is given to Me in heaven and earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you" (Matthew 28:18-20). Christ placed on all men the obligation of hearing His Church as they would hear Himself: "He that heareth you, heareth Me" (Luke 10:16); "Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be condemned" (Mark 16:15-16). He promised to be with the Church and guide it until the end of time: "And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world" (Matthew 28:20). He sent the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of infallible truth, upon the Apostles and their successors in order that they might be illumined and assisted in the work of continuing the teaching mission of God's own Son.
Our Lord Himself wrote nothing. He commanded the Apostles not to write but to teach and preach: "Going, therefore, teach all nations" and "preach the Gospel to every creature." Christ's disciples and the Christians were commanded to hear the Church, not to read the still nonexistent or at best incomplete New Testament Scriptures: "He who hears you, hears Me."
The teaching Church was in existence long before a single line of the New Testament was written. The Apostles evangelized different peoples, not by presenting to them a copy of the New Testament which did not as yet exist, but by preaching the Gospel, the oral message of Christ to them. Thousands of men became Christians and adhered to the whole truth of God before they saw or read a single book of the New Testament.
It was the leaders of the existing teaching Church who wrote the books of the New Testament. It was the Church which collected and preserved these books, and distinguished them from spurious books which might have otherwise found their way into the Bible. It was from the Catholic church that the Protestants of the sixteenth century took their Bible and also their belief in its divine inspiration.
How illogical, then, it is for a group to step in fifteen hundred years later, wrest the Bible from its historical and lawful possessor and fosterer, put the Bible in the place of the Church, and pretend to possess a true understanding of the purpose and meaning of the Bible?
The different books of the New Testament were for many centuries scattered in the various Christian communities of the Orient. Being written on papyrus which was fragile and breakable, these books could not be widely circulated and hence were read by a comparatively few groups. It was only in 397 A.D. that the Council of Carthage finally decided which books belong to the Bible, and it was about this time, too, that the books of the Bible were combined into one volume. Yet prior to this, the Church spread rapidly to many lands, converts were received into the Church by the thousands, the faith of the people was so strong that it peopled heaven with countless saints and martyrs.
Before the invention of printing in the sixteenth century, copies of the Bible written by hand were so rare and costly that only the rich could procure them. To own a Bible during this period was to own a fortune, and in many instances the Bible had to be chained in order to prevent its being stolen. Were the poor, then, during all these centuries, without a religious guide and teacher?
Bible Christianity, then, is an invention of the sixteenth century. In the previous centuries it was not only unknown but it was impossible.
“The Church was to teach men whatsoever He had taught - nothing more and nothing less: “
I agree wholeheartedly with this. Unfortunately, in every case mentioned in my earlier post, the roman church is teaching MORE than HE taught. The Church is “to hold forth the Word of Truth.”
“How illogical, then, it is for a group to step in fifteen hundred years later, wrest the Bible from its historical and lawful possessor and fosterer, put the Bible in the place of the Church, and pretend to possess a true understanding of the purpose and meaning of the Bible? “
Actually, history records that God does do this. God can even use an ass to proclaim his message, as in the case of Balaam - when HIS prophets are deaf and wrong and stubborn.
Try to bottle up His Gathering. Try to circumvent His Truth. Nothing shall prevail against his Ekklasia. He is perfectly capable of “removing their lampstand” when He deems them dead. That is entirely His call. They may not even know it.
In history, God’s plan of redemption from the beginning of time, through the hundreds and thousands of years continues on course. If those He calls won’t DO His will, He will work around them. This isn’t illogical, it is history.
May I remind you... “He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him.” Even that did not stop His plan.
Having written all that to respond to your post, it remains that what I posted above about there being nothing to connect those practices to the Gathering He created before 100 AD. The only reasonable conclusion is that many of those practices began hundreds or a thousand years later, as the light dimmed and a works religion evolved, with classes of workers, uniforms, rituals, endless prayers repeated, accretions from paganism, etc.
His Word, which alone is able to make a Christian complete, fails to record any of that.
Meanwhile...
He continues to gather His harvest. It is ripe. If those He hired to do the work in the fields don’t do it, He finds others to carry out His will and reap the harvest for His glory. It is all about Him. Not a denomination. Not a building. Not a person or class of persons. Him. Him alone.
This explains the amazing change happening in South America, Africa, etc.
I wish you every blessing in Him, wherever you worship.
So, you are calling Christ a liar. "And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world" (Matthew 28:20).
His Word, which alone is able to make a Christian complete, fails to record any of that.
Our Lord Himself wrote nothing. He commanded the Apostles not to write but to teach and preach: "Going, therefore, teach all nations" and "preach the Gospel to every creature." Christ's disciples and the Christians were commanded to hear the Church, not to read the still nonexistent or at best incomplete New Testament Scriptures: "He who hears you, hears Me."
He continues to gather His harvest. It is ripe. If those He hired to do the work in the fields don’t do it, He finds others to carry out His will and reap the harvest for His glory. It is all about Him.
Then, you ignore the very scripture you claim to worship.
Thus I aspire to proclaim the gospel not where Christ has already been named, so that I do not build on another's foundation, but as it is written: "Those who have never been told of him shall see, and those who have never heard of him shall understand."
Romans 15:20-21
The Bible nowhere states how many of its books are inspired and why. The basic Protestant article that Scripture is the sole rule of faith is not found on its pages. On whose authority, then, do you accept these doctrines and facts?
Not so much friend...
“So, you are calling Christ a liar. “And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world” (Matthew 28:20).”
... No. He is with His gathering always. Clearly, His Word says some fail, some are removed. He remains.
“He commanded the Apostles not to write but to teach and preach: “Going, therefore, teach all nations” and “preach the Gospel to every creature.””
... Clearly, the Holy Spirit also moved holy men to WRITE, under His inspiration. If God wanted it written, He also wanted it read.
“Christ’s disciples and the Christians were commanded to hear the Church, not to read the still nonexistent or at best incomplete New Testament Scriptures: “He who hears you, hears Me.””
... Actually, the early books and letters were circulated, read, preached and the Hebrew Scriptures existed. Paul commanded Timothy to study to show yourself approved, rightly dividing the Word of Truth. Paul considered those available portions as enough to make Timothy wise to salvation and complete as a man of God. I’m going to side with the Apostle Paul on this point.
” Then, you ignore the very scripture you claim to worship.
... No, I neither ignore the Scriptures, nor worship them.
“The Bible nowhere states how many of its books are inspired and why.”
... It never has - starting before Christ came to earth physically. That has always been God’s method.
“The basic Protestant article that Scripture is the sole rule of faith is not found on its pages.”
... And yet the church fathers recognized that very principle as true. Who told them? Why would they insist on only teaching that which the Holy Scripture records?
... as a sample...
St. Irenaeus of Lyons (+ca.195):
“We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.
(Against Heresies, 3:1.1, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, p. 414.)
St. Athanasius (c.296-373):
“The holy and inspired Scriptures are fully sufficient for the proclamation of the truth.
(Against the Heathen, I:3, quoted in Carl A. Volz, Faith and Practice in the Early Church [Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1983], p. 147.)
St. Cyril of Jerusalem (c.310-386):
“For concerning the divine and holy mysteries of the Faith, not even a casual statement must be delivered without the Holy Scriptures; nor must we be drawn aside by mere plausibility and artifices of speech. Even to me, who tell you these things, give not absolute credence, unless you receive the proof of the things which I announce from the Divine Scriptures. For this salvation which we believe depends not on ingenious reasoning, but on demonstration of the Holy Scriptures.
(Catechetical Lectures, IV:17, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers [Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1983 reprint], Second Series, Vol. VII, p. 23.)
St. Gregory of Nyssa (330-395):
“...we are not entitled to such license, namely, of affirming whatever we please. For we make Sacred Scripture the rule and the norm of every doctrine. Upon that we are obliged to fix our eyes, and we approve only whatever can be brought into harmony with the intent of these writings.
(On the Soul and the Resurrection, quoted in Jaroslav Pelikan, The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971], p. 50.)
St. Gregory of Nyssa:
“Let the inspired Scriptures then be our umpire, and the vote of truth will be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words.
(On the Holy Trinity, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. V, p. 327.)
St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430):
“Let them show their church if they can, not by the speeches and mumblings of the Africans, not by the councils of their bishops, not by the writings of any of their champions, not by fraudulent signs and wonders, because we have been prepared and made cautious also against these things by the Word of the Lord; but [let them show their church] by a command of the Law, by the predictions of the prophets, by songs from the Psalms, by the words of the Shepherd Himself, by the preaching and labors of the evangelists; that is, by all the canonical authorities of the sacred books.
(On the Unity of the Church, 16, quoted in Martin Chemnitz, Examination of the Council of Trent, Part I [Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1971], p. 159.)
St. Augustine of Hippo:
“What more can I teach you, than what we read in the Apostle? For Holy Scripture sets a rule to our teaching, that we dare not “be wise more than it behooves to be wise,” but be wise, as he says, “unto soberness, according as unto each God has allotted the measure of faith.”
(On the Good of Widowhood, 2, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol. III, p. 442. The quotation is from Romans 12:3.)
St. John Chrysostom (c.347-407):
“Let us not therefore carry about the notions of the many, but examine into the facts. For how is it not absurd that in respect to money, indeed, we do not trust to others, but refer to [our own] calculation; but in calculating upon [theological] facts we are lightly drawn aside by the notions of others; and that too, though we possess an exact balance, and square and rule for all things, the declaration of the divine laws? Wherefore I exhort and entreat you all, disregard what this man and that man thinks about these things, and inquire from the Scriptures all these things; and having learned what are the true riches, let us pursue after them that we may obtain also the eternal good things...
(Homily 13 on 2 Corinthians, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol. XII, p. 346.)
St. John Chrysostom:
“Regarding the things I say, I should supply even the proofs, so I will not seem to rely on my own opinions, but rather, prove them with Scripture, so that the matter will remain certain and steadfast.
(Homily 8 On Repentance and the Church, in The Fathers of the Church, Vol. 96, p. 118.)
St. John Chrysostom:
“They say that we are to understand the things concerning Paradise not as they are written but in a different way. But when Scripture wants to teach us something like that, it interprets itself and does not permit the hearer to err. I therefore beg and entreat that we close our eyes to all things and follow the canon of Holy Scripture exactly.
(Homily 13 on Genesis.)
St. John Chrysostom:
“There comes a heathen and says, “I wish to become a Christian, but I know not whom to join: there is much fighting and faction among you, much confusion: which doctrine am I to choose?” How shall we answer him? “Each of you” (says he) “asserts, ‘I speak the truth.’” No doubt: this is in our favor. For if we told you to be persuaded by arguments, you might well be perplexed: but if we bid you believe the Scriptures, and these are simple and true, the decision is easy for you. If any agree with the Scriptures, he is the Christian; if any fight against them, he is far from this rule.
(Homily 33 on the Acts of the Apostles [NPNF 1, 11:210-11; PG 60.243-44])
St. Basil the Great (c.329-379):
“They are charging me with innovation, and base their charge on my confession of three hypostases [persons], and blame me for asserting one Goodness, one Power, one Godhead. In this they are not wide of the truth, for I do so assert. Their complaint is that their custom does not accept this, and that Scripture does not agree. What is my reply? I do not consider it fair that the custom which obtains among them should be regarded as a law and rule of orthodoxy. If custom is to be taken in proof of what is right, then it is certainly competent for me to put forward on my side the custom which obtains here. If they reject this, we are clearly not bound to follow them. Therefore let God-inspired Scripture decide between us; and on whichever side be found doctrines in harmony with the Word of God, in favor of that side will be cast the vote of truth.
(Letter 189 [to Eustathius the physician], 3, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. VIII, p. 229.)
St. Basil the Great:
“What is the mark of a faithful soul? To be in these dispositions of full acceptance on the authority of the words of Scripture, not venturing to reject anything nor making additions. For, if “all that is not of faith is sin” as the Apostle says, and “faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God,” everything outside Holy Scripture, not being of faith, is sin.
(The Morals, in The Fathers of the Church, Vol. 9, p. 204.)
St. Basil the Great:
“We are not content simply because this is the tradition of the Fathers. What is important is that the Fathers followed the meaning of the Scripture.
(On the Holy Spirit, 7:16.)
St. John of Damascus (c.675-c.749):
“It is impossible either to say or fully to understand anything about God beyond what has been divinely proclaimed to us, whether told or revealed, by the sacred declarations of the Old and New Testaments.
(On the Orthodox Faith, I:2, in The Fathers of the Church, Vol. 37.)
... They knew. We should follow suit - instead of making things up hundreds of years later and backfilling it to pretend it is true.
“On whose authority, then, do you accept these doctrines and facts?”””
... Better yet, if Scripture doesn’t teach or confirm something as truth, why would you elevate it into a doctrine?
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.