If No One Is Pope, Everyone is Pope – A Homily for the 21st Sunday of the Year

Archdiocese of Washington ^ | 8/23/2014 | Msgr. Charles Pope

[roamer_1]

"Under great stress?" Is that a euphemism for holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.? Surely Elisha was a prophet who was just then receiving a double portion of the Holy Spirit.

He was also being separated from his mentor and friend.

Moses our Rabbi/Teacher. Interesting.

If Judah really believed that, they would follow Moshe, and not their tradition.

[CTrent1564]

Same here, hope your college football team does well this week, unless they are playing mine.

[daniel1212]

See my earlier post. Nothing has changed since the last one I posted to you.

Indeed. Regardless of the evidence, only what Rome says is correct for you, and thus Scripture must be compelled to support it, or disallowed from being contrary it, while the weight of its testimony is not the basis for veracity of RC teaching, despite RC attempts to enlist it in her service.

You continue to operate out a basis for determination of Truth that would require 1st souls to submit to the judgments of the magisterium who were the historical stewards of Divine revelation.

[daniel1212]

Do you not agree that Mary was given Grace by God before the coming of CHrist, or do you reject the Gospel passage as recorded by Saint Luke. Highly or Most Favored is an english translation that is dynamic equivalent to the most literal meaning which is endowed with Grace and because she was endowed by God’s Grace, she was truly free,

And believers are also said to be charitoō, graced, "highly favored - RC "full of grace" (Eph. 1:6) as being in Christ, and called to service for Him.

Mary is called "full of grace" by Catholics, yet the Scriptures do not say she was "full of grace," as "charitoo" in Lk. 1:28, is never used for "full" elsewhere, but Lk. 1:28 simply says “Hail [chairō=rejoice, greeting, etc.] grace [chairō, denoting to be graced, favored, enriched with grace as in Eph.1:6. .

Much more technical here:

Here’s the text IN GREEK:

καὶ εἰσελθὼν πρὸς αὐτὴν εἶπεν Χαῖρε, κεχαριτωμένη, ὁ κύριος μετὰ σοῦ.

κεχαριτωμένη, is the pf. pass. ptcp. of χαριτόω (charitoō). It is the single Greek word kexaritomena and means highly favored, make accepted, make graceful, etc. REPEATED: It is a passive participle derived from charitoō. It does not mean "full of grace" or ‘completely filled with grace’ which is "plaras karitos" (plaras = full and karitos = Grace) in the Greek....

In contrast, the only one (though in some mss Stephen, in Acts 6:8) said to be full of grace is the Lord Jesus, "full ("plērēs) of grace (charis) and truth," using "plērēs," which denotes "full" 17 other places in the NT.

However, seeking to compel Scripture to support her tradition of men, Lk, 1:28 was wrongly rendered "full of grace" in the DRB, rather than "highly favored" or similar, as in Rome's current official New American Bible, “Hail, favored one!" (http://usccb.org/bible/luke/1) Yet the DRB translates Eph. 1:6 as "in which he hath graced us."

Moreover, while Mary is highly blessed among women, and is to be honored according to what is written, this does not translate in the type of supererogation of praise seen in Catholicism, in which humble Mary is made into an almost almighty demigoddess to whom "Jesus owes His Precious Blood" to,

whose [Mary] merits we are saved by,

who "had to suffer, as He did, all the consequences of sin,"

and "was elevated to a certain equality with the Heavenly Father,"

even so that “sometimes salvation is quicker if we remember Mary's name then if we invoked the name of the Lord Jesus,"

for indeed saints have "but one advocate," and that is Mary, who "alone art truly loving and solicitous for our salvation,"

and whose power now "is all but unlimited,"

for indeed she "seems to have the same power as God,"

"surpassing in power all the angels and saints in Heaven,"

so that "the Holy Spirit acts only by the Most Blessed Virgin, his Spouse."

Moreover, "there is no grace which Mary cannot dispose of as her own, which is not given to her for this purpose,"

and who has "authority over the angels and the blessed in heaven,"

including "assigning to saints the thrones made vacant by the apostate angels,"

whom the good angels "unceasingly call out to," greeting her "countless times each day with 'Hail, Mary,' while prostrating themselves before her, begging her as a favour to honour them with one of her requests,"

and who (obviously) cannot "be honored to excess,"

and who is (obviously) the glory of Catholic people, whose "honor and dignity surpass the whole of creation." Sources .

Yet as i have said before, one would have a hard time in Bible times explaining kneeling before a statue and praising the entity it represented in the unseen world, and as having Divine powers and glory, and making offerings and beseeching such for Heavenly help, directly accessed by mental prayer.

Moses, put down those rocks! I was only engaging in hyper dulia, not adoring her. Can't you tell the difference?

More .

[daniel1212]

True. An honorific would be some stately addition to a name done routinely as a matter of expectation. There is some literature that reflects this using abba, but I am at work and haven’t had a decent opportunity to check primary sources.

For all pastors to be formally called "father" by all then they would have to be spiritual fathers of them, which is not true any more than that all Mormon "elders" re my elder, and requiring they be called what they are not is not right in either case, nor that they are distinctively "priests." But cults are their own authority.

[Elsie]

There many other things to do in life besides sit on a screen and debate Catholic vs. protestant theology.

Oh?

You're leaving us for a while?

[Elsie]

I had to take 3 breaths during the reading of that sentence.

There sure are a lot of links in that chain that depend on the others to be strong to support the assertion.

Bottom line: Mary received NOTHING more than any other human; else you say that GOD IS a respecter of persons.

[Elsie]

Well I think the Catholic Tradition is pretty clear that the orthodox hermaneutical principle is to interpret the entire Sacred Scripture in light of the person of Christ.

The postscript of Paul's letters should have told each of the churches that he wrote to, to be SURE to read every other thing he'd written to other guys; to be able to understand the thing they were reading at that moment - to be able to understand the things that were confusing in it alone.

[Elsie]

Who you callin’ GOOD?

[Elsie]

It’s a fact; that this season; just like the last one; overall, all of the college teams will have a 50% average winning season.

[Elsie]

Mary is called "full of grace" by Catholics, yet...

We Prots are told we are full of something, too; but where's the evidence?

[HarleyD]

And, of course, the questions about Mary remain unanswered.

Of course. :O)

[HarleyD]

Mary...was endowed with God’s Grace before the Coming of Christ. Stop and think about that. How is that you me and everyone else receives God’s Grace...Mary ...received Grace in a special way due to God’s favor towards Her.

And you have precisely argued what EVERY Reformer has ever argued. The problem is that you are ONLY applying this to Mary as if she was an exception. Reformers says that Mary was not an exception. God imparts this grace exactly the same way to everyone who is saved, by showing favor to us. And this favor isn't merited. It isn't because we are "liked" any more than anyone else or that we're swell people. It is simply because God chose to show us favor; just the way He did with Mary. Why is a mystery.

Luk 1:46-49 And Mary said, "My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, for he has looked on the humble estate of his servant. For behold, from now on all generations will call me blessed; for he who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is his name.

This is the joy of all Christians and the truth of our salvation. It is God who has done great things for every believer.

[caww]

In this manner, therefore, pray: Our ‘Father’ in heaven, hallowed be Your name. .....Matthew 6:9

English “father” was vader in Dutch,... fader in early German,... vater in later German,... and fader in Middle English.... And all those words were built on Latin pater, which was very close to Greek pater. ...But all those Western spellings were a radical departure from Aramaic, the language Jesus spoke. He would have pronounced “father” as abba, derived from Hebrew ab.

In fact,.... Jesus’ use of “father” represented a major shift in how the Hebrews used the term — almost exclusively to refer to human fathers..... God was rarely called Father by the Jews (Isaiah 63:16; 64:8; Jeremiah 31:9; Malachi 2:10),.... but Jesus called God “Father” (Abba — Matthew 11:26) ....and taught His disciples to do the same (Matthew 6:9)....

.... But this was not the formal, Victorian “father” of the English language..... This was the abba of the Hebrew family unit — the “papa” or “daddy” used by children the world over today (Mark 14:36).... Jesus introduced a new way to relate to God — a familial way of fondness and closeness.

However you view and address your earthly father, feel free to address your heavenly Father the way Jesus did — as Abba Father.

(from David Jeremiah’s Daily Devotional)

[metmom]

[CTrent1564]

daniel212:

Again, see earlier post and you never delt with the question I posed ,which was not posed you to start with. Among the human beings I have little tolerance for are Muslim fanatics, militant secularist, JW and the like and ex Catholics with an axe to grind. Go grind your axe somewhere else.

[CTrent1564]

Except Saint Jerome, who new Greek better than you Mr Internet self professed ex Catholic theologian and he indeed translated the passage as “Ava Maria plena gratia”. So did Jerome not understand the nuances of the style of Greek that the NT was written in and it took Protestants, and in particular, American protestants 1,600 years to figure it out.

And again, you miss the point, Mary received God’s Grace before the Incarnation, the passage in Eph 1:6 is being written some 25 years after Christ passion and resurrection, which is precisely the point I was making. God did, in a special way, provide Grace to Mary before Christ became incarnate and died and rose from the dead, for all the NT you site, those individuals received God’s Grace after Christ paschal mystery. That is a distinction that you miss and don’t want to deal with.

[CTrent1564]

metmom:

I don’t listen to ignorant people, you are correct.

[CTrent1564]

Again, I don’t care what your views or on the matter. You elevate yourself to sole interpreter of scripture. Again, the Catena Aurea Commentary put together by Saint Thomas Aquinas is the most extensive Patristic Commentary of the Bible in the History of Holy Mother Church. It is a line by Line commentary of the Gospels. With respect to Luke 1:28, the commentary of the Patristics on this passage is supportive of the Catholic position

http://dhspriory.org/thomas/english/CALuke.htm

Futhermore, as other Catholic sources note [Navarre Commentary, Ignatius Commentary included in the RSC Catholic version], the passage in Luke 1:28 is the only place in the entire Bible where an angel addressed someone by a title rather than personal expression. As the Ignatius commentary notes, 2 considerations help fully clarify the meaning of the “full of grace” translation you see in many Catholic Bibles which is:

1)Saint Jerome, the greatest biblical scholar of the Church [so fluent in Hebrew, Latin and Greek that even Saint Augustine admired his biblical translation skills] translated the passage as such. While this translation is “fundamentally adequate”, it lacks the depth of the Greek original.

As the Ignatius Commentary further notes, Saint Luke could have translated the passage as pleres Charitos, as he did in Acts 6:6 with respect to Saint Stephen yet he used a different expression in Luke 1:28 for Mary [kecharitomene] that is more revealing than the other rendering as it indicates God has already Graced Mary previous to this point, making her a vessel who has been and is now filled with Divine Life.

(2) Alternative translations like “favored one” or “highly favored” are possible but inadequate. Because of the unparalleled role that Mary accepts at this turning point of salvation history, the best translation is the most exhalted one as God endowed Mary with an abundance of Grace to prepare her for the sacred vocation of Divine motherhood and to make her a sterling example of Christian holiness and faith and obedience to God’s will

Saint Augustine, Saint Ambrose and Saint Augustine’s commentaries linked earlier, support the Catholic Position. The 16th century protestant rebels support your view. I will stay with Augustine, Jerome and Ambrose’s view, you can have Calvin, Zwingli and Knox, etc.

[Springfield Reformer]

I don’t care what your views or on the matter

No one was ever in a better position to say that than Jesus.  Yet He never did.  Why do you suppose that is?

Anyway, interesting citation you provided.  I found the section on Luke 1:28 rather weak, there being only a bare handful of sources cited, and none of those draw from the Biblical text any argument to support an immaculate conception. Frankly, this is not surprising, because even Aquinas knew that the sanctification of Mary from the womb, though he believed it himself, could NOT be defended from Scripture:

Nothing is handed down in the canonical Scriptures concerning the sanctification of the Blessed Mary as to her being sanctified in the womb; indeed, they do not even mention her birth.

See Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Third Part, Question 27, Article 1

I also found the passage from Augustine too short and cryptic to give me a clue where he was really coming from, so I looked for fuller discussions and found this, in which he clearly states the only person ever born without sin was Jesus, a doctrine that could be preached from any Baptist pulpit:

The same holy man also, in his Exposition of Isaiah, speaking of Christ, says: “Therefore as man He was tried in all things, and in the likeness of men He endured all things; but as born of the Spirit, He was free from sin. For every man is a liar, and no one but God alone is without sin. It is therefore an observed and settled fact, that no man born of a man and a woman, that is, by means of their bodily union, is seen to be free from sin. Whosoever, indeed, is free from sin, is free also from a conception and birth of this kind.” Moreover, when expounding the Gospel according to Luke, he says: “It was no cohabitation with a husband which opened the secrets of the Virgin’s womb; rather was it the Holy Ghost which infused immaculate seed into her unviolated womb. For the Lord Jesus alone of those who are born of woman is holy, inasmuch as He experienced not the contact of earthly corruption, by reason of the novelty of His immaculate birth; nay, He repelled it by His heavenly majesty.”

See Augustine, Of the Grace of Christ and of Original Sin, Book II, Chapter 41

As for the text of Luke 1:28, I know you don't care for Protestant views, but what are we to do?  The text doesn't say "full of grace." Grace is favor.  Favor is grace.  But in Ephesians 1:6, that same word, that save favor or grace, is applied equally to all who believe in Jesus. So whatever it is, it's not unique to Mary. It's for all believers. These are lexical facts, as much as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west.  Do you wish us to lie against our consciences?  Of course not. And we couldn't do that anyway. We read the text and it says what is says. Sometimes we like what Scripture says, and sometimes we think, as sinful humans, that something different should have been said. But God the Holy Spirit chose these words.  What choice do we have but to simply believe and accept what He has said?  

Because of the unparalleled role that Mary accepts at this turning point of salvation history, the best translation is the most exhalted one

Please do not take offense at this, but I have to point this out.  That is a circular argument.  You are concluding, in advance, that the text supports your position, therefore the "best" translation is the one that supports the conclusion you've already chosen though other means, patristics, tradition, what your priest told you, whatever.  That's not how you do Biblical translation. If you want to know what it means to be your own pope, that is the very example of it, predetermining a conclusion then insisting the inspired text conform to that conclusion.

These are the words of God.  This is holy ground. It demands respect. We cannot come to this ground and tell God what to say.  Instead we must sit and respectfully listen to the words He has given us as He gave them to us.  It is what He says about Mary that we should listen to.  There is nothing wrong with learning from godly teachers gifted with wisdom. But we are all fallible, all vulnerable to the temptations of pride and haste that produce errors in understanding, errors in judgment. But the word of God is God-breathed. It is without error, just as Christ is without sin. It is God's lamp, given to light our path. We cannot do better that to follow that light wherever it leads us.

John 17:17  Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

Peace,

SR