Differing opinions regarding salvation, Mary, and the word "save. Are there?

[francisdesales]

Who suggested anything remotely close to what you're saying here ?

I asked a simple question about how a Christian is not just as honored as Mary was because of their having Christ in them ?

Any answer for that ?

A Christian who has Christ abiding in them "mimics" Mary in the first place. She is the first disciple of Christ, not only chronologically, but first of place and honor. She best represents "the woman" of Scriptures as it speaks of the Church, such as in Revelation 12. Christianity has always had a special place in its heart for Mary, the Mother of God. She specifically is known as the Second Eve and numerous titles, as she best reflects what we are to become, not what we already are.

Regards

 

[Eventide]

A Christian who has Christ abiding in them "mimics" Mary in the first place.

I would agree that Mary is a wonderous picture and type of all NT believers... because that is the pattern revealed in the NT, believing the message from above and then God births Christ in you, our hope of glory.

Being an example doesn't make her any more blessed than any other Christian who also has Christ in their earthen vessel.. it doesn't get any more blessed than that, and every true born again Christian has been blessed with all spiritual blessings in Christ Jesus.

She is the first disciple of Christ, not only chronologically, but first of place and honor.

What scripture are you basing this upon ?

She best represents "the woman" of Scriptures as it speaks of the Church, such as in Revelation 12.

The woman of Revelation 12 is Israel, and it pertains to the future "things which shall be hereafter" when Israel will become born again as a nation and then provided for through the great tribulation, or time of Jacob's trouble. The scriptures show us that this is Israel, and there's nothing about Mary in the context of Rev 12, but rather Israel.

It's difficult for those who ignore the mystery pertaining to Israel to understand this, because as Paul says, they become wise in their own conceits etc... claiming ridiculously unscriptural things, things like their assembly being the one true church etc.. it simply shows that there is no spiritual understanding of the body of Christ which is His church.

Christianity has always had a special place in its heart for Mary, the Mother of God. She specifically is known as the Second Eve and numerous titles, as she best reflects what we are to become, not what we already are.

We shall be like CHRIST, not like Mary... I hope that your hope is not to become like Mary, but rather like the Lord Jesus Christ, the one who alone is good..

Maybe the Lord was mistaken when He said that there are NONE good but one, and that is God ?

 

[Scotth1960]

Another gentleman who doesn't know what "co-redemptrix" means... The term does not deny that Jesus is the One Lord and Redeemer.



An Ecumenical Council has solemnly defined that Purgatory exists, since NOTHING unclean shall enter heaven. We both know that councils are infallible when proclaiming dogma. A number of Eastern Fathers admit to believing the idea, so it is part of the Apostolic Tradition (that the East refuses to uphold while in schism).

Regards

Dear francisdesales, Florence is not recognized as an ecumenical council by the whole Church. It is not an ecumenical council. It's ecumenicity depends upon the alleged authority of the pope of Rome over the ecumenical councils. It does not agree with the Council of Chalcedon whose canons forbid composing another faith. Purgatory after death is heterodoxy. People who are being saved undergo purgation in this life, if they are being saved. After the Franks ruined the Western Christendom, people followed the influence of a division from the Eastern Roman Empire, and this led to an over-reliance of Roman popes on the protection of Charlemagne and other Franks. And thus the popes began adopting Charlemagne's (from Augustine of Hippo and a few other "speculators" in Toledo, Spain in 589 AD) doctrine of Filioque. In Erie PA
Scott Harrington

 

[francisdesales]

Dear francisdesales, Florence is not recognized as an ecumenical council by the whole Church.

The entire Catholic Church recognizes the Council of Florence as Ecumenical. That you or a few stubborn Greeks disagree is inconsequential to the fact that they have no power to overthrow a Counciliar declaration. Do you think Arius agreed with Nicea??? Of course schismatics don't agree with Councils, Scott. You can cry until the cows come home, but Florence is an infallible Council convoked by the Catholic Church.

What is interesting, in this case, is that even the Greeks showed up and agreed with what was said. The Schism would have been over. Unfortunately, some Greek lay people think they know more than their bishops... Is this not a prime example of pride?

It is not an ecumenical council. It's ecumenicity depends upon the alleged authority of the pope of Rome over the ecumenical councils.

Robber council of Ephesus. That's all I need to say to prove that the East saw the Pope in a manner similiar to what the Church now claims but is now too stubborn to admit it...

It does not agree with the Council of Chalcedon whose canons forbid composing another faith.

It is not "another faith", it is the same. Just like an acorn becomes an oak tree. The mustard seed is now a great "bush".

Purgatory after death is heterodoxy. People who are being saved undergo purgation in this life, if they are being saved.

Clearly, the East also understands that men do not always die completely purged from sin. And since NOTHING impure shall enter heaven, where does that purgation become completed?

After the Franks ruined the Western Christendom,

 

[whitney]

Ah, apparently, I must address these stock issues yet again. Amazing how often, considering that Catholic issues are not supposed to be spoken of here at the Apologetics site.

It is amazing, isn't it. Catholics can start threads about Catholicism but the rest of us can not. Interesting.

I fail to see this as a problem. We are all saints in one manner of speaking. But the term has another meaning, as well. It refers to those canonized saints in heaven, those the Church recognizes are already with God in heaven and held up as examples for those still working out their salvation here on earth.

There is only one kind of saint, those believing in Christ. The problem lies in the criteria one must meet to become a saint, when the Bible clearly teaches we are ALL saints and there is only one word for saint and it is "hagios", there are not 2 kinds of saints - only ONE. Jesus ONLY prayed to His Father, not to a bunch of dead people.

Original Word: ἅγιος, ία, ον
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: hagios
Phonetic Spelling: (hag'-ee-os)
Short Definition: set apart, holy, sacred
Definition: set apart by (or for) God, holy, sacred.

The point of Jesus' warning here is that a person is not to speak a formula over and over thinking that they can control God if they say something so many times. Sort of like a faith-healer who must get someone to repeat "yes I believe" 127 times before he is healed. Only then, can it happen. Formulas cannot conjure up a certain response from God. The rosary is a meditative prayer, the beads merely mark time while we reflect.

We shouldn't change something set in black and white to fit our denominational beliefs, Francis. How much more simpler could God have gotten? You may not say repetitive prayers, but many Catholics DO.

Matthew 6:7-8 7 And in praying use not vain repetitions, as the Gentiles do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. Be not therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.

apparently, Paul or John didn't get the memo, if we are to interpret that literally...

Matthew 23:9 And call no man your father on the earth: for one is your Father, even he who is in heaven.

Being the "one mediator" does not mean that the priest cannot participate in the priestly role of forgiving sins. God forgives sins through the visible priest.

Yes, through our High Priest, Jesus Christ and ONLY through Him.

I have a strong feeling that you do not know what Jesus was addressing in Mark 7 when He was speaking about "traditions of men".

Yes, I do, Catholic doctrine.

It is quite sad how many people hate the Church and are so confused on what it actually teaches.

No, what is quit sad, is what the Catholic Church teaches has very little to do with what is actually in the Word of God..

 

[francisdesales]

It is amazing, isn't it. Catholics can start threads about Catholicism but the rest of us can not. Interesting.

Where? Not on this forum...

As to the rest of your polemic post, I think we'll have to wait for our discussion on the debate forum, which apparently will be argumentative, given your recent postings. I had initially hoped that you would be open to at least hearing our point of view and then judge accordingly, rather than your regurgitating the Jack Chick party line...

Regards

 

[Scotth1960]

Where? Not on this forum...

As to the rest of your polemic post, I think we'll have to wait for our discussion on the debate forum, which apparently will be argumentative, given your recent postings. I had initially hoped that you would be open to at least hearing our point of view and then judge accordingly, rather than your regurgitating the Jack Chick party line...

Regards

Dear francisedesales, There is disagreement with Roman Catholicism that has nothing to do with Jack Chick. That is a straw man, ISTM. I don't know much about Jack Chick, but I find his approach to anything unconvincing. In Erie PA Scott H.

 

[francisdesales]

Dear francisedesales, There is disagreement with Roman Catholicism that has nothing to do with Jack Chick. That is a straw man, ISTM. I don't know much about Jack Chick, but I find his approach to anything unconvincing. In Erie PA Scott H.

Yea, me neither... The "disagreement" is based upon the same old tired arguments that come from Jack Chick. I think they send a lot of pastors to this "school", because one could simply read a bit about Catholicism and find out these "questions" are easily answered.

Regards

 

[whitney]

Where? Not on this forum...

As to the rest of your polemic post, I think we'll have to wait for our discussion on the debate forum, which apparently will be argumentative, given your recent postings. I had initially hoped that you would be open to at least hearing our point of view and then judge accordingly, rather than your regurgitating the Jack Chick party line...

Regards

You are replying to something I stated as a fact, Francis. It's a fact about this forum! Scott starts at least 10 Catholicism threads on a daily basis.

Yes, I am passionate about certain things, just as you are about Catholicism. God made people with passion.

I'm not going to argue you with in 1 on 1, we have an agreement.

I have no idea who Jack Chick is.

 

[francisdesales]

You are replying to something I stated as a fact, Francis. It's a fact about this forum! Scott starts at least 10 Catholicism threads on a daily basis.

Fact, huh???

Whitney, I'll say this as nicely as I can...

Scott is not Catholic, and anyone reading his posts would quickly discover that...

I am hoping that you consider thinking about my posts before responding so quickly with the intent of arguing.

Regards

 

[westtexas]

Oh, and happy birthday to eternal life to St. Francis de Sales.

Pray for us.

I'm off-topic but I take it St. Francis passed away on today's date????
Westtexas

 

[whitney]

Fact, huh???

Whitney, I'll say this as nicely as I can...

Scott is not Catholic, and anyone reading his posts would quickly discover that...

I am hoping that you consider thinking about my posts before responding so quickly with the intent of arguing.

Regards

The ONLY posts I have read of his are; claiming Mary was a virgin when she died, infants should be baptized, he uses some orthodox writings which include names of Saints and he insists on using anything else but the Bible to prove his doctrine. Other than that, not sure, but those sounds like Catholic doctrine.

***I've read his threads and besides not being a Catholic, I have no idea what he is.

 

[francisdesales]

I'm off-topic but I take it St. Francis passed away on today's date????
Westtexas

That is correct, we celebrate a particular saint's entrance into eternal life on the day of their earthly death. The only earthly birthdays we celebrate are Jesus, Mary, and John the Baptist.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

The ONLY posts I have read of his are; claiming Mary was a virgin when she died, infants should be baptized, he uses some orthodox writings which include names of Saints and he insists on using anything else but the Bible to prove his doctrine. Other than that, not sure, but those sounds like Catholic doctrine.

***I've read his threads and besides not being a Catholic, I have no idea what he is.

Catholics didn't start those threads. Scott is apparently a Protestant who desires to be a Greek Orthodox but has yet to enter into that community. Why he has chosen to write so much about "Catholic" topics is because most of them are also Greek Orthodox topics. Recall that Orthdoxy was part of Catholicism during the first millenium. If you note the majority of his posts are pejorative viz a viz the papacy, Filioque, purgatory or some other Catholic doctrine that the Orthodox do not hold to, at least now. They once did.

Regards

 

[whitney]

Catholics didn't start those threads. Scott is apparently a Protestant who desires to be a Greek Orthodox but has yet to enter into that community. Why he has chosen to write so much about "Catholic" topics is because most of them are also Greek Orthodox topics. Recall that Orthdoxy was part of Catholicism during the first millenium. If you note the majority of his posts are pejorative viz a viz the papacy, Filioque, purgatory or some other Catholic doctrine that the Orthodox do not hold to, at least now. They once did.

Regards

Are you a professor of theology? Just curious because it seems most Catholics do not know this much about their history.
Thanks for the information, btw.

 

[francisdesales]

Are you a professor of theology? Just curious because it seems most Catholics do not know this much about their history.
Thanks for the information, btw.

No, I happen to take my faith seriously. I would be what you call a "revert". I also teach as a volunteer to people who want to fully enter the Church (RCIA), but I am not a professor.

Happy to help.

Regards

 

[Scotth1960]

Catholics didn't start those threads. Scott is apparently a Protestant who desires to be a Greek Orthodox but has yet to enter into that community. Why he has chosen to write so much about "Catholic" topics is because most of them are also Greek Orthodox topics. Recall that Orthdoxy was part of Catholicism during the first millenium. If you note the majority of his posts are pejorative viz a viz the papacy, Filioque, purgatory or some other Catholic doctrine that the Orthodox do not hold to, at least now. They once did.

Regards

Dear francisdesales, I need to be aware I have much left to do. I am not yet Orthodox. I am still a person that is coming from a Lutheran background. Having said that, even though not having received more sacraments (though I have made confession) of baptism, chrismation, eucharist, it is still possible for a non-Orthodox to be objective and sympathetic to what the Orthodox Church teaches. Catholicism was a part of Orthodoxy for 1054, is the truth. The popes of Rome, most of them, were Orthodox Christians. Orthodox Catholic Christians. Their catholicity was uncontested, for they did not invent strange doctrines like Filioque and purgatory and indulgences and the immaculate conception of Mary.
My posts are not pejorative of the papacy per se, but only of the false and illegitimate doctrine of Vatican I on alleged papal supremacy, authority over all, and infallibility (inability to teach false doctrine). What is good for the popes should have been good for St. Peter, and yet St. Peter had to be corrected by St. Paul. Clearly, St. Peter was only human, the popes of Rome are only human, and all Christians are only human. There can be no completely infallible teacher among Christians. Christ does not make us into gods or angels, but merely saved human beings. Saved by Christ's mercy only. Francisdesales, you are sadly mistaken. Orthodox did not at any time hold to destinctively papal doctrines, which you call "Catholic", in defiance of the proper usage of the word "catholic". The Greek Fathers are unanimous in their monopatrism, and their usage of the word "through" the Son, does not equate to Fililioquism. They unanimously knew and understood that there is a difference between Christ's SENDING the Spirit from the Father in time, and from the Spirit PROCEEDING from the Father in eternity. Every time a supporter of Rome in its schism from all truth (John 16:!3) that the Spirit teaches, the popes of Rome follow CHARLEMAGNE. And Charlemagne is long dead but his legacy of illiteracy and ignorance in this matter remains. It was Charlemagne WHO INSISTED that the Greek Orthodox Church had OMMITTED the Filioque from the original Creed of Constantinople of 381 AD!
Sheer ignorance. The Creed was in Greek and could never have included a Latin word like FILIOQUE, nor did it include Greek word "kai Huiou" (or however you spell / say "and the Son" in Greek!)! In Erie PA Scott Harrington

 

[francisdesales]

Dear francisdesales, I need to be aware I have much left to do. I am not yet Orthodox. I am still a person that is coming from a Lutheran background.

I am happy that you are coming closer to the fullness of the truth in the Catholic Church. The Orthodox is a good bridge between Protestantism and the Apostolic faith - with the caveat of the attitude that is easily attained from reading Orthodox propaganda and ignoring the implications that I have already laid out.

Having said that, even though not having received more sacraments (though I have made confession) of baptism, chrismation, eucharist, it is still possible for a non-Orthodox to be objective and sympathetic to what the Orthodox Church teaches. Catholicism was a part of Orthodoxy for 1054, is the truth.

You are not objective on this subject. Nor was the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church ever called "Orthodoxy". It was simply called "Catholic". Meaning the "whole of the parts" and "universal". The Church of Christ includes Orthodoxy only where she retains her CATHOLIC faith, such as the Trinity and Marian doctrines. Naturally, Orthodoxy is much closer to the Truth than your Lutheran background.

The popes of Rome, most of them, were Orthodox Christians.

"Orthodox" to mean "not heterodox". It doesn't mean "Greek". The Greek Orthodox Church is a national church. By definition, the Catholic Church is universal and world-wide.

Orthodox Catholic Christians. Their catholicity was uncontested, for they did not invent strange doctrines like Filioque and purgatory and indulgences and the immaculate conception of Mary.

Scott, I would suggest you read some websites that give a different point of view, utilizing EASTERN Fathers. On Purgatory, the Filioque, on the Immaculate Conception of Mary. ALL are part of the Tradition of the Church, as much a part of her teachings as the Trinity and the dual will of Jesus Christ.

My posts are not pejorative of the papacy per se,

Per sec, they are... Scott, they are pejorative when you constantly bring up the subject when it has nothing to do with the topic. It would be like me saying something to this effect (for illustrative purposes):

Aaron Rodgers is a great QB for the Green Bay Packers. His performance against the Bears last week, though, left something to be desired. And Scott's mother is a false teacher of the faith...She was talking about there only being 7 Councils. How could anyone trust her now, spouting off such lies?

Did you see that interview with Obama last night? Did you notice how he changes "spending" to "investment"? Are these Democrats ever going to learn? And Scott's father is a lazy good for nothing... How someone could call him Christian, he most certainly is from the Greek Orthodox Church...

The weather was nice last night. No wind, full moon, crisp and clear. Unlike the Eastern Orthodox who are mired in their ancient traditions that have little bearing on life in the real world. How someone could follow that false religion is beyond me. It's no wonder the Franks rolled over Constantinople, they were double-dealing with the Muslims and the West.


Scott, this is what you have done since you got here. And you say such things are not "pejorative"? Who are you trying to kid??? Clearly, before you become a true member of the Orthodox Church, I would suggest that you re-examine your attitude.


Regards

 

[Scotth1960]

I am happy that you are coming closer to the fullness of the truth in the Catholic Church. The Orthodox is a good bridge between Protestantism and the Apostolic faith - with the caveat of the attitude that is easily attained from reading Orthodox propaganda and ignoring the implications that I have already laid out.



You are not objective on this subject. Nor was the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church ever called "Orthodoxy". It was simply called "Catholic". Meaning the "whole of the parts" and "universal". The Church of Christ includes Orthodoxy only where she retains her CATHOLIC faith, such as the Trinity and Marian doctrines. Naturally, Orthodoxy is much closer to the Truth than your Lutheran background.




"Orthodox" to mean "not heterodox". It doesn't mean "Greek". The Greek Orthodox Church is a national church. By definition, the Catholic Church is universal and world-wide.



Scott, I would suggest you read some websites that give a different point of view, utilizing EASTERN Fathers. On Purgatory, the Filioque, on the Immaculate Conception of Mary. ALL are part of the Tradition of the Church, as much a part of her teachings as the Trinity and the dual will of Jesus Christ.



Per sec, they are... Scott, they are pejorative when you constantly bring up the subject when it has nothing to do with the topic. It would be like me saying something to this effect (for illustrative purposes):

Aaron Rodgers is a great QB for the Green Bay Packers. His performance against the Bears last week, though, left something to be desired. And Scott's mother is a false teacher of the faith...She was talking about there only being 7 Councils. How could anyone trust her now, spouting off such lies?

Did you see that interview with Obama last night? Did you notice how he changes "spending" to "investment"? Are these Democrats ever going to learn? And Scott's father is a lazy good for nothing... How someone could call him Christian, he most certainly is from the Greek Orthodox Church...

The weather was nice last night. No wind, full moon, crisp and clear. Unlike the Eastern Orthodox who are mired in their ancient traditions that have little bearing on life in the real world. How someone could follow that false religion is beyond me. It's no wonder the Franks rolled over Constantinople, they were double-dealing with the Muslims and the West.


Scott, this is what you have done since you got here. And you say such things are not "pejorative"? Who are you trying to kid??? Clearly, before you become a true member of the Orthodox Church, I would suggest that you re-examine your attitude.


Regards

I will do my best to be charitable. I will do my best understand Vatican I. Do you understand the false implications of such outlandish implications of Pius IX? Outrageous. What about the Old Catholics. I am out of here for now. You haven't convinced me that the Catholic Church hasn't changed drastically since the first 1.054 years. Papal infallibility didn't develop as a doctrine until 1,870 years AFTER Christ. There can be no vicar of Christ on earth but the Holy Spirit (John 16:13), no "other Paraclete" but God Himself. The papal claims go way too far for one man. Orthodoxy has nothing like a pope, to its credit. In Erie PA Scott Harrington

 

[Hardcastle]

The papal claims go way too far for one man. Orthodoxy has nothing like a pope, to its credit.

LOL - aren't your just the pot calling the kettle back? Doesn't the Patriarch of Constantinople do his best to be a mini-pope? Two wrongs - the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Romish Pope - do not make a right - right?