Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 13.7K
- General Category 10.8K
- General Announcements 184
- Faith Issues 3.4K
- Coptic Orthodox Church 2.5K
- Personal Issues 1.4K
- Prayer Requests 423
- Random Issues 1.8K
- Introductions 294
- Non-Orthodox Inquiries 232
- Youth Corner 606
- Hymns 2.5K
- Hymns Discussion 2.5K
- Technicial Difficulties 367
- Technical Topics 367
The Catholic church
Hi everyone,
I am new here, and yes I am a Catholic. I have read some of your threads about Catholicism and have seen much inaccurate information bieng Spread about The Catholic church. But before I do that i would like to ask you a question:
I have heard many of you say that the Catholic church has become "protestantized"
how many of you Think this?
Before the church became protestantized what was your view of Her?
God Bless,
Sam
I am new here, and yes I am a Catholic. I have read some of your threads about Catholicism and have seen much inaccurate information bieng Spread about The Catholic church. But before I do that i would like to ask you a question:
I have heard many of you say that the Catholic church has become "protestantized"
how many of you Think this?
Before the church became protestantized what was your view of Her?
God Bless,
Sam
Comments
just don't forget that we were ONE APOSTELIC CHURCH. but than the people's opinions has becamean issue and thatn the church split. and we as orthodox are trying to do everything we can to try to compine the churchs again one day. but i think with the catholics it's impossible.
and one more thing, what does the name tu es Petrus mean
I am currently living in toronto and many of my friends are catholic, and even they agree with me that the Catholic church threw away most of its traditions, Western catholic churches that is.
There are alot of things which have no meaning in your church anymore... for instance... the blood is not given to the whole congregation, and sometimes white wine is used. Ordinary people give out communion. The sacrament of confession is practised once a year by the faithful. The priest faces the congregation, and not God, when he prays.
The mass has been greatly shortened to a 1 hour services which involves more choir singing than prayers by the priest.
Then there is the theological aspects but I wont get into that, I'm focusing on practical aspects.
By saying the catholic church became protestantized i think it was meant that the church no longer has the tradition, or life that it once did (when the church was one, holy and apostolic.)
Please pray for me always,
Believer in God
the Blood of Christ has never been given to the congregation in the Roman church. Yes i agree the church has become protestanized. I come from a group of "traditionalist" catholics who only go to the ancient latin mass or we go to Eastern rite liturgy. I would love to go to a coptic Catholic Liturgy. If you are familiar with any ecumenical Councils after the schism, my group accepts the 2nd vatican council, but ignore it because of its ambiguity and focus on ecumenicism, the modern world, the destruction of the mass, etc.
God Bless,
Sam
being different does not mean deviation.
traditinal way of praying in holy mass still exists in some catholic churches including regular confession,communion (body &the blood) for every one.
catholics allow all christians to practice their rituals and live ,co-operate pray for everyone.
the historical curses between these two churches are in its way to reconcile (by the leaders)
we need to stop picking and start self control to live in peace with our savior and our brothers every where
thank you
pray for me ithe one who does not deserve
sam
they keep the main parts ,same prayers during the mass
the presence of the church in the west made it subjected to a lot of criticism (free world)
I am orthodox
our church had been changed the last 14 centuries
we have added a lot of hymms, glorifications & new prayers and these are acceptable and spirituals.
let us express our love to church,pray for unity (but keep the characters of each individual regional church
may God help every one to be a living part in the church
The difference between a true orthodox ecumenist and a false ecumenist is one of fundamentals and integrity. It is the no compromise attitude when it comes to truth, for a true orthodox ecumenist cannot overlook the differences for the sake of a cheap group hug mentality. This does not contradict love, for the only love a chriostian can give to the world is the truth: unaltered, unchanged and straight forward.
That being said however, the role of the Church, any Church is of a mother. Loving, nurtutring, teaching, guiding, correcting, all in the same way that a mother loves her children. My problem with the Catholic Church is not with how it has supposedly become "protestanized", or how it claims superiority when the focus should be on unification, or even all the changes that have been made that are supposedly free from fault because their pope declared it. My issue is what it's doing to it's children. I live in the U.S. so maybe I'm viewing the worse side of the situation, but their is no faith. Forget that full grown adults don't know Abraham is, don't know the story of Joseph, have only read the Bible when told or forced, all that can be taught but not without the seed of faith, still only a seed. Now please let it be known that I don't consider myself a very educated person on these types of matters, this is all opinionated and as such is probably biased. However, where is the depth, how do you justify the changes, how can you possibly acknowledge a change made in 1854 as Holy Tradition (Immaculate Conception?)
I'm sorry if I offended anybody, I didn't intend to. Many of my friends are strong Catholics and I go to a Catholic School, so I don't have any kind of hatred, God forbid. I just thought I'd put in my thoughts.
yes many Catholics are very ignorant of scripture. This is indeed bad, and has to go along with the crisis in the church Today.
here is some info about the Immaculate Conception:
Immaculate Conception
THE DOCTRINE
In the Constitution Ineffabilis Deus of 8 December, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary "in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin."
"The Blessed Virgin Mary . . ." The subject of this immunity from original sin is the person of Mary at the moment of the creation of her soul and its infusion into her body.
". . .in the first instance of her conception . . ." The term conception does not mean the active or generative conception by her parents. Her body was formed in the womb of the mother, and the father had the usual share in its formation. The question does not concern the immaculateness of the generative activity of her parents. Neither does it concern the passive conception absolutely and simply (conceptio seminis carnis, inchoata), which, according to the order of nature, precedes the infusion of the rational soul. The person is truly conceived when the soul is created and infused into the body. Mary was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin at the first moment of her animation, and sanctifying grace was given to her before sin could have taken effect in her soul.
". . .was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin. . ." The formal active essence of original sin was not removed from her soul, as it is removed from others by baptism; it was excluded, it never was in her soul. Simultaneously with the exclusion of sin. The state of original sanctity, innocence, and justice, as opposed to original sin, was conferred upon her, by which gift every stain and fault, all depraved emotions, passions, and debilities, essentially pertaining to original sin, were excluded. But she was not made exempt from the temporal penalties of Adam -- from sorrow, bodily infirmities, and death.
". . .by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race." The immunity from original sin was given to Mary by a singular exemption from a universal law through the same merits of Christ, by which other men are cleansed from sin by baptism. Mary needed the redeeming Saviour to obtain this exemption, and to be delivered from the universal necessity and debt (debitum) of being subject to original sin. The person of Mary, in consequence of her origin from Adam, should have been subject to sin, but, being the new Eve who was to be the mother of the new Adam, she was, by the eternal counsel of God and by the merits of Christ, withdrawn from the general law of original sin. Her redemption was the very masterpiece of Christ's redeeming wisdom. He is a greater redeemer who pays the debt that it may not be incurred than he who pays after it has fallen on the debtor.
Such is the meaning of the term "Immaculate Conception."
PROOF FROM SCRIPTURE
Genesis 3:15
No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture. But the first scriptural passage which contains the promise of the redemption, mentions also the Mother of the Redeemer. The sentence against the first parents was accompanied by the Earliest Gospel (Proto-evangelium), which put enmity between the serpent and the woman: "and I will put enmity between thee and the woman and her seed; she (he) shall crush thy head and thou shalt lie in wait for her (his) heel" (Genesis 3:15). The translation "she" of the Vulgate is interpretative; it originated after the fourth century, and cannot be defended critically. The conqueror from the seed of the woman, who should crush the serpent's head, is Christ; the woman at enmity with the serpent is Mary. God puts enmity between her and Satan in the same manner and measure, as there is enmity between Christ and the seed of the serpent. Mary was ever to be in that exalted state of soul which the serpent had destroyed in man, i.e. in sanctifying grace. Only the continual union of Mary with grace explains sufficiently the enmity between her and Satan. The Proto-evangelium, therefore, in the original text contains a direct promise of the Redeemer, and in conjunction therewith the manifestation of the masterpiece of His Redemption, the perfect preservation of His virginal Mother from original sin.
Luke 1:28
The salutation of the angel Gabriel -- chaire kecharitomene, Hail, full of grace (Luke 1:28) indicates a unique abundance of grace, a supernatural, godlike state of soul, which finds its explanation only in the Immaculate Conception of Mary. But the term kecharitomene (full of grace) serves only as an illustration, not as a proof of the dogma.
Other texts
From the texts Proverbs 8 and Ecclesiasticus 24 (which exalt the Wisdom of God and which in the liturgy are applied to Mary, the most beautiful work of God's Wisdom), or from the Canticle of Canticles (4:7, "Thou art all fair, O my love, and there is not a spot in thee"), no theological conclusion can be drawn. These passages, applied to the Mother of God, may be readily understood by those who know the privilege of Mary, but do not avail to prove the doctrine dogmatically, and are therefore omitted from the Constitution "Ineffabilis Deus". For the theologian it is a matter of conscience not to take an extreme position by applying to a creature texts which might imply the prerogatives of God.
PROOF FROM TRADITION
In regard to the sinlessness of Mary the older Fathers are very cautious: some of them even seem to have been in error on this matter.
* Origen, although he ascribed to Mary high spiritual prerogatives, thought that, at the time of Christ's passion, the sword of disbelief pierced Mary's soul; that she was struck by the poniard of doubt; and that for her sins also Christ died (Origen, "In Luc. hom. xvii").
* In the same manner St. Basil writes in the fourth century: he sees in the sword, of which Simeon speaks, the doubt which pierced Mary's soul (Epistle 259).
* St. Chrysostom accuses her of ambition, and of putting herself forward unduly when she sought to speak to Jesus at Capharnaum (Matthew 12:46; Chrysostom, Hom. xliv; cf. also "In Matt.", hom. 4).
But these stray private opinions merely serve to show that theology is a progressive science. If we were to attempt to set forth the full doctrine of the Fathers on the sanctity of the Blessed Virgin, which includes particularly the implicit belief in the immaculateness of her conception, we should be forced to transcribe a multitude of passages. In the testimony of the Fathers two points are insisted upon: her absolute purity and her position as the second Eve (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:22).
Mary as the second Eve
This celebrated comparison between Eve, while yet immaculate and incorrupt -- that is to say, not subject to original sin -- and the Blessed Virgin is developed by:
* Justin (Dialog. cum Tryphone, 100),
* Irenaeus (Contra Haereses, III, xxii, 4),
* Tertullian (De carne Christi, xvii),
* Julius Firm cus Maternus (De errore profan. relig xxvi),
* Cyril of Jerusalem (Catecheses, xii, 29),
* Epiphanius (Hæres., lxxviii, 18),
* Theodotus of Ancyra (Or. in S. Deip n. 11), and
* Sedulius (Carmen paschale, II, 28).
The absolute purity of Mary
Patristic writings on Mary's purity abound.
* The Fathers call Mary the tabernacle exempt from defilement and corruption (Hippolytus, "Ontt. in illud, Dominus pascit me");
* Origen calls her worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, most complete sanctity, perfect justice, neither deceived by the persuasion of the serpent, nor infected with his poisonous breathings ("Hom. i in diversa");
* Ambrose says she is incorrupt, a virgin immune through grace from every stain of sin ("Sermo xxii in Ps. cxviii);
* Maximum of Turin calls her a dwelling fit for Christ, not because of her habit of body, but because of original grace ("Nom. viii de Natali Domini");
* Theodotus of Ancyra terms her a virgin innocent, without spot, void of culpability, holy in body and in soul, a lily springing among thorns, untaught the ills of Eve nor was there any communion in her of light with darkness, and, when not yet born, she was consecrated to God ("Orat. in S. Dei Genitr.").
* In refuting Pelagius St. Augustine declares that all the just have truly known of sin "except the Holy Virgin Mary, of whom, for the honour of the Lord, I will have no question whatever where sin is concerned" (De naturâ et gratiâ 36).
* Mary was pledged to Christ (Peter Chrysologus, "Sermo cxl de Annunt. B.M.V.");
* it is evident and notorious that she was pure from eternity, exempt from every defect (Typicon S. Sabae);
* she was formed without any stain (St. Proclus, "Laudatio in S. Dei Gen. ort.", I, 3);
* she was created in a condition more sublime and glorious than all other natures (Theodorus of Jerusalem in Mansi, XII, 1140);
* when the Virgin Mother of God was to be born of Anne, nature did not dare to anticipate the germ of grace, but remained devoid of fruit (John Damascene, "Hom. i in B. V. Nativ.", ii).
* The Syrian Fathers never tire of extolling the sinlessness of Mary. St. Ephraem considers no terms of eulogy too high to describe the excellence of Mary's grace and sanctity: "Most holy Lady, Mother of God, alone most pure in soul and body, alone exceeding all perfection of purity ...., alone made in thy entirety the home of all the graces of the Most Holy Spirit, and hence exceeding beyond all compare even the angelic virtues in purity and sanctity of soul and body . . . . my Lady most holy, all-pure, all-immaculate, all-stainless, all-undefiled, all-incorrupt, all-inviolate spotless robe of Him Who clothes Himself with light as with a garment . ... flower unfading, purple woven by God, alone most immaculate" ("Precationes ad Deiparam" in Opp. Graec. Lat., III, 524-37).
* To St. Ephraem she was as innocent as Eve before her fall, a virgin most estranged from every stain of sin, more holy than the Seraphim, the sealed fountain of the Holy Ghost, the pure seed of God, ever in body and in mind intact and immaculate ("Carmina Nisibena").
* Jacob of Sarug says that "the very fact that God has elected her proves that none was ever holier than Mary; if any stain had disfigured her soul, if any other virgin had been purer and holier, God would have selected her and rejected Mary". It seems, however, that Jacob of Sarug, if he had any clear idea of the doctrine of sin, held that Mary was perfectly pure from original sin ("the sentence against Adam and Eve") at the Annunciation.
St. John Damascene (Or. i Nativ. Deip., n. 2) esteems the supernatural influence of God at the generation of Mary to be so comprehensive that he extends it also to her parents. He says of them that, during the generation, they were filled and purified by the Holy Ghost, and freed from sexual concupiscence. Consequently according to the Damascene, even the human element of her origin, the material of which she was formed, was pure and holy. This opinion of an immaculate active generation and the sanctity of the "conceptio carnis" was taken up by some Western authors; it was put forward by Petrus Comestor in his treatise against St. Bernard and by others. Some writers even taught that Mary was born of a virgin and that she was conceived in a miraculous manner when Joachim and Anne met at the golden gate of the temple (Trombelli, "Mari SS. Vita", Sect. V, ii, 8; Summa aurea, II, 948. Cf. also the "Revelations" of Catherine Emmerich which contain the entire apocryphal legend of the miraculous conception of Mary.
From this summary it appears that the belief in Mary's immunity from sin in her conception was prevalent amongst the Fathers, especially those of the Greek Church. The rhetorical character, however, of many of these and similar passages prevents us from laying too much stress on them, and interpreting them in a strictly literal sense. The Greek Fathers never formally or explicitly discussed the question of the Immaculate Conception.
The Conception of St. John the Baptist
A comparison with the conception of Christ and that of St. John may serve to light both on the dogma and on the reasons which led the Greeks to celebrate at an early date the Feast of the Conception of Mary.
* The conception of the Mother of God was beyond all comparison more noble than that of St. John the Baptist, whilst it was immeasurably beneath that of her Divine Son.
* The soul of the precursor was not preserved immaculate at its union with the body, but was sanctified either shortly after conception from a previous state of sin, or through the presence of Jesus at the Visitation.
* Our Lord, being conceived by the Holy Ghost, was, by virtue of his miraculous conception, ipso facto free from the taint of original sin.
Of these three conceptions the Church celebrates feasts. The Orientals have a Feast of the Conception of St. John the Baptist (23 September), which dates back to the fifth century, is thus older than the Feast of the Conception of Mary, and, during the Middle Ages, was kept also by many Western dioceses on 24 September. The Conception of Mary is celebrated by the Latins on 8 December; by the Orientals on 9 December; the Conception of Christ has its feast in the universal calendar on 25 March. In celebrating the feast of Mary's Conception the Greeks of old did not consider the theological distinction of the active and the passive conceptions, which was indeed unknown to them. They did not think it absurd to celebrate a conception which was not immaculate, as we see from the Feast of the Conception of St. John. They solemnized the Conception of Mary, perhaps because, according to the "Proto-evangelium" of St. James, it was preceded by miraculous events (the apparition of an angel to Joachim, etc.), similar to those which preceded the conception of St. John, and that of our Lord Himself. Their object was less the purity of the conception than the holiness and heavenly mission of the person conceived. In the Office of 9 December, however, Mary, from the time of her conception, is called beautiful, pure, holy, just, etc., terms never used in the Office of 23 September (sc. of St. John the Baptist). The analogy of St. John's sanctification may have given rise to the Feast of the Conception of Mary. If it was necessary that the precursor of the Lord should be so pure and "filled with the Holy Ghost" even from his mother's womb, such a purity was assuredly not less befitting His Mother. The moment of St. John's sanctification is by later writers thought to be the Visitation ("the infant leaped in her womb"), but the angel's words (Luke 1:15) seem to indicate a sanctification at the conception. This would render the origin of Mary more similar to that of John. And if the Conception of John had its feast, why not that of Mary?
PROOF FROM REASON
There is an incongruity in the supposition that the flesh, from which the flesh of the Son of God was to be formed, should ever have belonged to one who was the slave of that arch-enemy, whose power He came on earth to destroy. Hence the axiom of Pseudo-Anselmus (Eadmer) developed by Duns Scotus, Decuit, potuit, ergo fecit, it was becoming that the Mother of the Redeemer should have been free from the power of sin and from the first moment of her existence; God could give her this privilege, therefore He gave it to her. Again it is remarked that a peculiar privilege was granted to the prophet Jeremiah and to St. John the Baptist. They were sanctified in their mother's womb, because by their preaching they had a special share in the work of preparing the way for Christ. Consequently some much higher prerogative is due to Mary. (A treatise of P. Marchant, claiming for St. Joseph also the privilege of St. John, was placed on the Index in 1833.) Scotus says that "the perfect Mediator must, in some one case, have done the work of mediation most perfectly, which would not be unless there was some one person at least, in whose regard the wrath of God was anticipated and not merely appeased."
I would like to ask you couple of questions:
1- Why all the Pontiffs who were before Pope Pius 1X, 1854, had not reached that conclusion about the Holy Theotokos? Were they fallible, God forbid, !!!!!!!!
2- Was the Almighty God not aware, May it Never Be, of the great error that the whole Catholic Church believe until 1854 AD !!!!!!
you seem very enthused about this topic from all your explenation marks lol.
first you have a minunderstanding about papal infallibility: the Pope is only infallibile when he teachs definitly on faith and morals, that is defines a Dogma. The idea that the Blessed Virgin Mary was concieved without sin has been around since biblical times. Many Catholics believed it. It was the truth. It was also not a definded Dogma until 1854. Meaning before 1854 if you didn't believe it well, it was wrong but there was no sin, because the church did not define it as Dogma. After 1854 if you did not believe it you were Anathema and a heretic.
Dogma develops. Truth is always truth. It was just undefiended and it was optinonal for Catholics to believe, because it was not Dogma.
God Bless,
Sam
Quoted from the Coptic Orthodox book: "Youth Concerns Questions & Answers" by H.G Bishop Moussa
When discussing the Immaculate Conception, an implicit reference may be found in the angel’s greeting to Mary. The angel Gabriel said, "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you" (Luke 1:28). The phrase "full of grace" is a translation of the Greek word kecharitomene. It therefore expresses a characteristic quality of Mary.
The traditional translation, "full of grace," is better than the one found in many recent versions of the New Testament, which give something along the lines of "highly favored daughter." Mary was indeed a highly favored daughter of God, but the Greek implies more than that (and it never mentions the word for "daughter"). The grace given to Mary is at once permanent and of a unique kind. Kecharitomene is a perfect passive participle of charitoo, meaning "to fill or endow with grace." Since this term is in the perfect tense, it indicates that Mary was graced in the past but with continuing effects in the present. So, the grace Mary enjoyed was not a result of the angel’s visit. In fact, Catholics hold, it extended over the whole of her life, from conception onward. She was in a state of sanctifying grace from the first moment of her existence.
Mary, too, required a Savior. Like all other descendants of Adam, she was subject to the necessity of contracting original sin. But by a special intervention of God, undertaken at the instant she was conceived, she was preserved from the stain of original sin and its consequences. She was therefore redeemed by the grace of Christ, but in a special way—by anticipation.
Consider an analogy: Suppose a man falls into a deep pit, and someone reaches down to pull him out. The man has been "saved" from the pit. Now imagine a woman walking along, and she too is about to topple into the pit, but at the very moment that she is to fall in, someone holds her back and prevents her. She too has been saved from the pit, but in an even better way: She was not simply taken out of the pit, she was prevented from getting stained by the mud in the first place. This is the illustration Christians have used for a thousand years to explain how Mary was saved by Christ. By receiving Christ’s grace at her conception, she had his grace applied to her before she was able to become mired in original sin and its stain.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that she was "redeemed in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son" (CCC 492). She has more reason to call God her Savior than we do, because he saved her in an even more glorious manner!
But what about Romans 3:23, "all have sinned"? Have all people committed actual sins? Consider a child below the age of reason. By definition he can’t sin, since sinning requires the ability to reason and the ability to intend to sin. This is indicated by Paul later in the letter to the Romans when he speaks of the time when Jacob and Esau were unborn babies as a time when they "had done nothing either good or bad" (Rom. 9:11).
We also know of another very prominent exception to the rule: Jesus (Heb. 4:15). So if Paul’s statement in Romans 3 includes an exception for the New Adam (Jesus), one may argue that an exception for the New Eve (Mary) can also be made.
Paul’s comment seems to have one of two meanings. It might be that it refers not to absolutely everyone, but just to the mass of mankind (which means young children and other special cases, like Jesus and Mary, would be excluded without having to be singled out). If not that, then it would mean that everyone, without exception, is subject to original sin, which is true for a young child, for the unborn, even for Mary—but she, though due to be subject to it, was preserved by God from it and its stain.
The objection is also raised that if Mary were without sin, she would be equal to God. In the beginning, God created Adam, Eve, and the angels without sin, but none were equal to God. Most of the angels never sinned, and all souls in heaven are without sin. This does not detract from the glory of God, but manifests it by the work he has done in sanctifying his creation. Sinning does not make one human. On the contrary, it is when man is without sin that he is most fully what God intends him to be.
The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was officially defined by Pope Pius IX in 1854. When Fundamentalists claim that the doctrine was "invented" at this time, they misunderstand both the history of dogmas and what prompts the Church to issue, from time to time, definitive pronouncements regarding faith or morals. They are under the impression that no doctrine is believed until the pope or an ecumenical council issues a formal statement about it.
Actually, doctrines are defined formally only when there is a controversy that needs to be cleared up or when the magisterium (the Church in its office as teacher; cf. Matt. 28:18–20; 1 Tim. 3:15, 4:11) thinks the faithful can be helped by particular emphasis being drawn to some already-existing belief. The definition of the Immaculate Conception was prompted by the latter motive; it did not come about because there were widespread doubts about the doctrine. In fact, the Vatican was deluged with requests from people desiring the doctrine to be officially proclaimed. Pope Pius IX, who was highly devoted to the Blessed Virgin, hoped the definition would inspire others in their devotion to her.
please read this
why would god chose a sinner to harbor his most precious vessel?
10 And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples.
11 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?
12 But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.
13 But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. -Matthew 9: 10-13
If you could ask that question, then you can also say why did Jesus come in the form of a human being, a sinner, and lower himself to our level?
Why would god chose a sinner to harbor his most precious vessel? Basically because he came to call sinners to repentence.
Please forgive me and pray for me,
Godhelpme3691
pleases listen to this sermons. it's a bible study about one of Zecharaiah's visions.
(http://tasbeha.org/mp3/Sermons/Fr._Abraam_Sleman/2005/Book_of_Zechariah.html) the name is "07 - A Woman in a Basket" start from the min 22
and here are the notes for it
http://classes.saintmark.com/file.php/9/Notes/08_Seventh_Vision_Woman_in_A_Basket.pdf
check out from slide 39 of 66 "preserved from the stain of original sin and its consequences." but i thought you said she was made SINLESS not preserved from sin.
I hav begun to read an article which began with some views on this - www.orthodoxpress.org/parish/river_of_fire It certainly grabbed my attention!!!!
Wishin all a very happy new year by the way!!! Its been a while since i been in touch
God Bless
Ger
pleases listen to this sermons. it's a bible study about one of Zecharaiah's visions.
(http://tasbeha.org/mp3/Sermons/Fr._Abraam_Sleman/2005/Book_of_Zechariah.html) the name is "07 - A Woman in a Basket" start from the min 22
and here are the notes for it
http://classes.saintmark.com/file.php/9/Notes/08_Seventh_Vision_Woman_in_A_Basket.pdf
check out from slide 39 of 66 "preserved from the stain of original sin and its consequences." but i thought you said she was made SINLESS not preserved from sin.
Hi guys!
Bieng preserved from original sin as mary was makes her not a slave to sim. She was made sinless by bieng preserved from sin.
I really would like to start moving on to the Authority of the Pope, the Primacy of Peter, and the Holy see of Peter.
sam
what about st mary being full of grace.
pleaseeeeeeee"
look at this
Quote:
When discussing the Immaculate Conception, an implicit reference may be found in the angel’s greeting to Mary. The angel Gabriel said, "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you" (Luke 1:28). The phrase "full of grace" is a translation of the Greek word kecharitomene. It therefore expresses a characteristic quality of Mary.
and yes, she was full of grace but Jesus Himself was the person who brought us truth and grace.
pleases listen to this sermons. it's a bible study about one of Zecharaiah's visions.
(http://tasbeha.org/mp3/Sermons/Fr._Abraam_Sleman/2005/Book_of_Zechariah.html) the name is "07 - A Woman in a Basket" start from the min 22
and here are the notes for it
http://classes.saintmark.com/file.php/9/Notes/08_Seventh_Vision_Woman_in_A_Basket.pdf
check out from slide 39 of 66
sam
I know that the Catholic Church believes that the Holy Scriptures is the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, I hope I am right.
So let’s examine some of the writing of St. Paul and ironically they are from the Book of Romans
As it is written: "There is none righteous, no, not one; There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God. They have all turned aside; They have together become unprofitable; There is none who does good, no, not one.' " (Romans 3:10-12)
“ For all have sinned an have fallen short of the glory of God “ Roman 3:23
“ Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned. “ Romans 5:12
“ Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men.” Romans 5:18
“ For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.” 1 Cor. 15:23
Now you agree with me that St. Paul, who had ascended to the third heaven and had seen things which he could not described by world language, understood the subject of salvation much better than all of us and indeed much better than the Pontiffs of the Catholic Church.
He chose the word “ ALL “ in all his writing by the inspiration of the Spirit of God, he could have had made an exception for the Holy Virgin St. Mary.
"But what about Romans 3:23, "all have sinned"? Have all people committed actual sins? Consider a child below the age of reason. By definition he can’t sin, since sinning requires the ability to reason and the ability to intend to sin. This is indicated by Paul later in the letter to the Romans when he speaks of the time when Jacob and Esau were unborn babies as a time when they "had done nothing either good or bad" (Rom. 9:11).
We also know of another very prominent exception to the rule: Jesus (Heb. 4:15). So if Paul’s statement in Romans 3 includes an exception for the New Adam (Jesus), one may argue that an exception for the New Eve (Mary) can also be made.
Paul’s comment seems to have one of two meanings. It might be that it refers not to absolutely everyone, but just to the mass of mankind (which means young children and other special cases, like Jesus and Mary, would be excluded without having to be singled out). If not that, then it would mean that everyone, without exception, is subject to original sin, which is true for a young child, for the unborn, even for Mary—but she, though due to be subject to it, was preserved by God from it and its stain."
-Catholic answers
in a sense, you have started to liken her to our Lord Jesus Christ.
and you said st mary is also described.
and like Safaa mentions that st paul uses the word ALL men, and St. Mary was still counted as one of men. and what you're is opposite that and now you will get into another discussion which would be about Jesus Christ being born of one that is not of men. no church would accept that.