Pope Francis greets the faithful at the May 8 General Audience (Credit: CNA / Stephen Driscoll)
Posted on 09/07/2013 3:49:35 PM PDT by NYer
.- In his daily homily on Saturday, Pope Francis reflected on the question of authentic Christianity and rejected the practice of focusing more on devotions than on Christ himself.
Jesus is “the center” of faith, said the Pope. “A commandment is valid if it comes from Jesus: I do this because the Lord wants me to do this. But if I am a Christian without Christ, I do this and I don’t know why I have to do it,” he said to the congregation at the Vatican’s Casa Santa Marta on September 7.
Like the Pharisees, he said, there are some people who “make so many commandments the center of their religiosity.”
Others who have a false sense of religiosity “only seek devotions” or “things that are a little uncommon, a little special, that go back to private revelations,” noted Pope Francis.
“If your devotions bring you to Christ, that works. But if you remain there, something’s wrong,” he explained.
“If Jesus is not at the center, there will be many other things,” so that people become “Christians without Christ.”
Remembering that Jesus is the center of faith “regenerates us, grounds us.”
Pope Francis further explained the mark of a true “Christian with Christ.”
“The rule is simple: only that which brings you to Jesus is valid, and only that is valid that comes from Jesus. Jesus is the center, the Lord, as He Himself says.”
Christians can avoid false religiosity by adoring Jesus as “the Lord, the only Lord.”
“If you aren’t able to adore Jesus, you’re missing something,” warned Pope Francis.
The sign of a true “Christian with Christ” is one who does “that which comes from Jesus” and that which leads to Jesus.
Such adoration bears true fruit in the life of a Christian, encouraged the Pope.
He said that Jesus also gives “the grace of loving Him so much, of following Him, of going along the path that He has shown us.”
A “Christian with Christ” has the courage to proclaim Jesus as Lord.
Pope Francis exhorted Catholics not to focus on false piety, but rather evangelize and “take the Gospel!”
No, the KJV was translated from the original manuscripts and can be checked against them. BTW It's the only one that was. So that fact makes the rest of your post moot.
“It still holds true that a strict word translation is NOT an interpretation.”
Sure it is. Think of Exodus 3:14. How about Isaiah 7:14?
Which is right? The RSV (a Protestant Bible): http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+7%3A14&version=RSV
Or the NKJV (another Protestant Bible): http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+7%3A14&version=NKJV
1 Peter 1:12 Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.
Sorry, no teaching by the church there. Are you just determined to be proven in error? Once again, it shows the angels were amazed that God expanded the plan of salvation to the Gentiles.
“You haven’t heard?”
Oh, yes, I heard.
“The veil was rent at Christ’s death on the cross. No more priests other than the priesthood of believers. No more sacrifice due to the once for all perfect sacrifice of Christ.”
Actually Christ extends His priesthood to all the baptized, but He also has a select priesthood too. It was that way in ancient Israel. Israel was a nation with a select priesthood and a priestly nation at the same time.
Priests in the New Testament
The II Vatican Council (cf. LG 28 and PO 2) based its doctrinal explanations about the priesthood of the New Testament on the concept of “consecration and mission” which the Lord Jesus claims for himself according to John 10:36:
«Yet to someone whom the Father has consecrated and sent into the world you say, “You are blaspheming” because I said “I am son of God!” ».
Consecration, sanctification (”agiazo”): “Christ” comes from the Greek translation of the Hebrew expression “Messiah” which means “anointed”. It does not become the proper name of Jesus, if not because he fulfills perfectly the divine mission for which he stands. In fact, in Israel those were anointed in the name of God who were consecrated to him for a mission, which he had entrusted them. This was the case with the kings (cf 1 Sam 9:16; 10:1; 16:1.12-13; 1 Kings 1:39), priests (Ez 29:7; Lv 8:12) and in rare cases with prophets (1 Kings 19:16). Therefore, the Messiah had to be the event “par excellence” as the Lord would have sent him to definitely establish his kingdom (cf Sal 2:2; At 4:26-27). The Messiah had to be anointed through the Spirit of the Lord (cf. Is 11:2) simultaneously as king and as priest (cf. Zc 4:14; 6:13), but also as prophet (cf Is 61:1; Lc 4:16-21). Jesus has fulfilled the messianic hope of Israel in his threefold function of priest, prophet and king (CCC 436); cf. The angel who proclaimed the birth of Jesus to shepherds at the birth of the Messiah promised to Israel (cf. Lc 2:11), his conception as “holy” (Lc 1:35) in the virginal womb of Mary. Joseph was called by God to “take Mary as his wife”; she was pregnant, “having conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit” (Mt 1:21), so that Jesus, “called Christ” would be born of the wife of Joseph in the messianic line of David (Mt Mt 1:16; cf Rm 1:3; 2 Tim 2:8; Ap 22:16).
Mission (”apostello”) is an “apostolate”. “The messianic consecration of Jesus shows his divine mission. On the other hand, it is what his own name indicates, because Christ’s name means the one who has anointed and he who himself has been anointed. The one who has anointed is the Father, the anointed one was the Son and He anointed in the Holy Spirit who is the anointing ( Saint Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus haereses 3, 18, 3). His eternal messianic consecration was revealed during the time of his life on earth in the moment of baptism by John, when God “consecrated him in the Holy Spirit and in power” (At 10:38), “so that he should become known to Israel” (John 1:31) as its Messiah. His deeds and his words will reveal him as “the holy one of God” (Mc 1:24; John 6:69; At 3:14). (CCC 438)
Such consecration-mission assures that in the New Testament there remains a unique “high priest according the order of Melchisedek” (Heb 5:10; 6:20), “holy, innocent, immaculate” (Heb 10:14), who “by a unique offer has made perfect forever those who are sanctified” (Heb 10:14), by the unique sacrifice of his cross (cf CCC 1545).
“Made perfect” (teleioo) is a word with profound significance: it means at the same time to perfect, fulfill and consecrate-sanctify, translating a Hebrew word which used to mean the anointing of priests of the old covenant and the consecration of the temple; it’s the last word of Jesus on the cross: “It is fulfilled” (John 19:30).
(Among the Fathers, already Theophill underlined the priestly dimension of “consecration” in John 10:36: sanctificavit eum, hoc est sanxit sacrificari pro mundo. In quo ostendit se non esse deum sicut ceteri; nam salvum facere mundum, divinum opus est, non autem hominis deificati per gratiam).
Therefore, Jesus has a special anointing by the Holy Spirit (cf Mt 3:16; Lc 4:18; At 4:27; 10:38) in which he allows his whole mystical body to participate: in him all christians become a “holy and royal priesthood to offer offerings to God through Jesus Christ and to proclaim the miracles of who has called them from darkness into his wonderful light (cf 1 Pt 2:5.9). As highpriest and mediator he has made of the Church “a kingdom of priests for God his Father” (Ap 1:6; cf Ap 5:9-10). These texts are the bases for the doctrine of the “common priesthood”.
But with the intention of forming the christians into one body, in which “all members do not have the same function” (Rm 12:4), on the evening of his Resurrection, he sent especially the Apostles, in the same way he was sent by the Father (cf John 20:21); from here originates the doctrine of the “special mandate” of the hierarchy in the Church.
“Then, through the Apostles themselves, he made their successors, the bishops, sharers in his consecration and mission, duly entrusted in varying subordinate degree the office of ministry (according the formula of the II Vatican Council, LG 28 and PO 2); the doctrine of the apostolic succession is a historical fact that is found only in the Catholic Church and in the Orthodox Church; it enables to recognize in each ordained minister someone who is inserted in a chain of transmission - uninterrupted since the days of the Apostles - through the gesture of the imposition of hands, by a spiritual gift which enables him to act in the name of Christ the head. No one could pretend to take the place of Christ who had abolished all the sacrifices and who has become the only High Priest. This is the reason why this gift is considered as initiated by Christ himself and why it has become part of the sacraments of the New Covenant.
- The Apostles handed on in their writings and by their spoken word (cf 2 Thess 2:15) everything what they had received from the Word of God made flesh.
“Give the things you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses to trustworthy persons who are capable of teaching also others” (2 Tim 2:2).
- Such mission of “maintaining the deposit” (1Tim 6:20; 2 Tim 1:14) must be exercised by the successors of the Apostles who have been charged through the imposition of hands ( 1 Tim 4:14; 2 Tim 1:6; 1 Tim 5:22). Those who are responsible bear the title of “vigilants” (in Greek “episcopi”, from which the word “bishop” comes) or “elder” (in Greek “presbiteri”). Also the letters of Saint James (5:14) and of Saint Peter (1 Pet 5:1-14) testify to the existence of “presbyters” as heads of the communities.
As a matter of fact, all this shows us a time very near to Christ: summer of the year 56 for the letter of James and approximately the year 58 for 1 Tim. The Acts of the Apostles speak twice about the rite of the imposition of hands (Acts 6:6 and 13:3; cf also 14:23), testifying to the presence of “presbyters” at Ephesus in the year 58 (At 20:17). They were also called “episcopi” (Acts 20:28). The letter of 1 Peter used the letters to Titus and to Timothy; the letter itself made reference to the letter to the Hebrews which was written before the destruction of the temple in the year 70. Therefore it seems that the writings which speak about “presbyters” were redacted exactly when James, Paul and Peter were still alive.
Such scriptural approach to consecration and mission which was put into new light by the II Vatican Council clarifies simultaneously the exercise of the ministry: the apostolic minister, if we consider well the doctrine of the New Testament and especially the letters of Paul, puts together in harmony two concepts of the priesthood, of “presbyters” which sometimes were opposed to one another: in effect, the true apostolate and the true adoration of the Father are strictly combined and permanently connected in such a way that these two aspects of the life of priests cannot exist one without the other. Saint Paul himself declares that when he proclaims the gospel he directs to God an act of adoration: when he praises him “among the gentiles” he sings “to the glory of his name” (cf Rom 15:9) (cf Introduction to the Decree Presbyterorum Ordinis).
Such an approach clarifies simultaneously one of the fundamental duties of those who participate according to this special modality of the priesthood and of the mandate of Christ: if the imposition of hands offers to those who receive it a “spiritual gift” which enables them to exercise their mission, it is their duty “to keep alive the gift the Lord has placed in you” (1 Tim 4:14; 2 Tim 1:6) through ongoing formation (cf Exhort. Pastores dabo vobis 70).
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cclergy/documents/rc_con_cclergy_doc_24111998_pnewt_en.html
“Once again, it shows the angels were amazed that God expanded the plan of salvation to the Gentiles.”
Which was carried out by the Catholic Church - which taught the angels.
I have never heard such rubbish or twisting of the Bible verses as this. You really don’t know what you are reading, do you? Are you just reading what Catholic literature tells you about this? The angels obviously have an interest in the Gospel and its preaching but to say they are taught by your manmade institution is beyond belief!
Repetition does not make a falsehood truth.
Hence, Pope Francis’s rejection of false religiosity, Elsie.
“I have never heard such rubbish or twisting of the Bible verses as this.”
I guess you never looked at many Protestant threads then? I twisted no scriptures by the way. Ephesians 3:10 says what it says.
“Repetition does not make a falsehood truth.”
Nor does it make a truth a falsehood.
Eph. 3:10 does indeed say what it says. Which IS, that the church might know the manifold wisdom of God. The church which IS, the Church the Body of Christ. A living, breathing organism made up of believers in the finished work of Christ, located IN THE HEAVENLIES. NOT a building of “faithful” located here on earth.
ROTFLMAO!!!
Thank you for your scholarly reply, boatbums. However, the point seems to be that no one knows why Luther wrote what he did or if he actually did have an encounter with the devil. But that is what Luther wrote.
If he was just attempting to strengthen his followers’ stance, how odd to use the devil’s approval to strengthen support for your argument.
Are you agreeing that Luther did write the devil spoke out against the Mass, Mary, and the saints while disagreeing that he wrote the devil supported his idea of faith alone?
If so, I think my point is still valid. But I did not know that there was any confusion about what Luther’s motives were for writing what he did. I thought everyone just accepted that Luther had written this. Again, I’m not sure second guessing his motives changes the odd fact that he did write it in support of his new, man-made concept of church, but I do thank you for the clarification and for the amount of effort in your response.
I’m sure Lucifer loves the continual exponential division of the Protestant religion. Divide and conquer.
“But don’t you feel kind of lonely, empty, after he has passed thru your system???”
No, Iscool, I don’t. In fact, I feel like a cleansing, warming wind has filled my lungs. I feel peace and gratitude and glory.
Well let’s look at that.
Isaiah 7:14
his name will call A son and bear child A virgin Behold A sign Himself
’ă•ḏō•nāy yit•tên lā•ḵên ’êl. im•mā•nū
the Lord will give Therefore Immanuel
Isaiah 7:14 (King James Version)
Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.
I did mention that the King James Version was translated directly from the original didn’t I? I also mentioned the fact that checking the original text is rather helpful. The Revised Standard Version was translated from the Codex Sinaiticus which is much later around the fourth century.
I found it interesting that you compared the English versions for the Protestants but try to impugn the Protestants by claiming you read in the Latin. Once again. I find your duplicity a little troublesome.
Show from New Testament scripture that Christ taught we should carry forward the Old Testament priesthood and had “a select priesthood too”. Book, Chapter and Verse please.
The rest of your post was a neat cut and paste but only proves that Jesus is our ONLY High Priest and there is no other “select priesthood” other then believers in the New Testament teaching.
I comprehend, boatbums. I was just responding to a sentiment expressed by an objective reader who was horrified by what non-Catholics are writing on this thread. He did not express any problem with what Catholics were writing.
Seems he found a big difference between the posts of the two groups. Perhaps there are a thousand silent readers who never post who feel as he did?
I would assert to you that one doesn’t have to make it personal to take a stand; you just have to say that the sarcastic or hate-filled posts of “Christians” make you sad or uncomfortable or disgusted or doubtful of their brand of spirituality or, simply, embarrassed for them. That’s what I think when I read their petty posts: they’ve embarrassed themselves, whether they know it or not. I would be embarrassed to be lumped in among their number.
One can speak out publicly against something in general terms. One can take a stand for civility and brotherly love without naming names. I don’t see much of even that kind of courage from Protestants on these threads. Someone who wants to take a stand can also simply shun the haters by refusing to respond to their baiting posts or when they are pinged. See my tagline.
I can take it because I am a very happy and satisfied Catholic; I’m just pointing out the disconnect between saying one is a Christian and then spewing hate. Apparently others see it too. I’ve just decided not to ignore it anymore and to label it for what it is.
Most importantly, I have always found your posts to me to be thoughtful and respectful. I thank you for that.
I’m no longer going round that may pole with you. Honest readers of scripture with the guidance of the Holy Spirit understand the Catholic Church did not teach angels.
I couldn’t agree more, Revolting cat!
“Which IS, that the church might know the manifold wisdom of God.”
There’s no “might” about what the Church knows. The “might” is about the “now”: “so that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known through the church”.
“A living, breathing organism made up of believers in the finished work of Christ, located IN THE HEAVENLIES.”
So, you’re saying the Church is only in Heaven?
“NOT a building of “faithful” located here on earth.”
I didn’t say the Church was a building. It most certainly is not a Protestant sect in any case.
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.