Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Christian and Theologically Protestant? Or, sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Fenced Community

Christforums is a Protestant Christian forum, open to Bible-believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene- derived Christian Church. We do not solicit cultists of any kind, including Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Eastern Lightning, Falun Gong, Unification Church, Aum Shinrikyo, Christian Scientists or any other non-Nicene, non-Biblical heresy.
Register now

Christian Fellowship

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
AnnaTherese

Hi New Here and Traditional Catholic...

Recommended Posts

Hello,

 

Just a quick note to introduce myself since I'm new and wanting to ask if Traditional Catholics are welcome to engage in civil discussions and debates?

 

-Anna Therese

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, AnnaTherese said:

Hello,

 

Just a quick note to introduce myself since I'm new and wanting to ask if Traditional Catholics are welcome to engage in civil discussions and debates?

 

-Anna Therese

Anna, per the terms of service 

 We are a "fenced" community for Protestants.

  • Best Answer 1

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
5 hours ago, AnnaTherese said:

Hello,

 

Just a quick note to introduce myself since I'm new and wanting to ask if Traditional Catholics are welcome to engage in civil discussions and debates?

 

-Anna Therese

Hello AnnaTherese,

 

Welcome, but we are as already stated a fenced Protestant community. We are only open to people with a sincere inquire about the Protestant faith or to Protestants (no Catholic apologists).

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
5 hours ago, AnnaTherese said:

Hello,

 

Just a quick note to introduce myself since I'm new and wanting to ask if Traditional Catholics are welcome to engage in civil discussions and debates?

 

-Anna Therese

Hello and welcome

Share this post


Link to post
Staff

Welcome to the forums !

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, davidtaylorjr said:

Anna, per the terms of service 

 We are a "fenced" community for Protestants.

I see. Only Protestants. Okay, thank you.

 

Thanks to everyone else as well for the welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, AnnaTherese said:

I see. Only Protestants. Okay, thank you.

 

Thanks to everyone else as well for the welcome.

We aren't saying you can't be here. We would love to have you if you want to learn about Scripture and ask questions. We just will not allow Catholic doctrine.

  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
1 hour ago, davidtaylorjr said:

We aren't saying you can't be here. We would love to have you if you want to learn about Scripture and ask questions. We just will not allow Catholic doctrine.

Unfortunately, we have been subject to many Catholics in the past that reject Sola Scriptura. The tactics and arguments are too repetitive and the first objective of every Catholic apologist so far is to establish the Catholic church as the sole authority and interpreter.

 

We're open to sincere inquiry of the Protestant faith and to established Protestants which already profess one of the essential pillars or mini creeds Sola Scriptura.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, davidtaylorjr said:

We aren't saying you can't be here. We would love to have you if you want to learn about Scripture and ask questions. We just will not allow Catholic doctrine. 

 

What do you do when you meet a Traditional Catholic in real life? Do the same rules apply offline or do you simply refuse to converse with them on religious topics? Why, and for what purpose? I'm sincerely asking.

 

Can you imagine meeting someone and the topic of religion comes up. The person tell you that they would love to have a conversation but you're not allowed talk about your Protestant doctrines. They tell you that you can ask them about their interpretations of Scripture and ask questions based on their interpretations, but your own beliefs and views are to be set aside.

21 hours ago, William said:

Unfortunately, we have been subject to many Catholics in the past that reject Sola Scriptura. The tactics and arguments are too repetitive and the first objective of every Catholic apologist so far is to establish the Catholic church as the sole authority and interpreter.

 

We're open to sincere inquiry of the Protestant faith and to established Protestants which already profess one of the essential pillars or mini creeds Sola Scriptura.

 

 

 

I have to break the news to you. Every Catholic rejects Sola Scriptura.

 

Would you kindly explain to me what is unreasonable about a Catholic coming into a debate with the premise that the Catholic Church is the sole authority and infallible interpreter of Scripture?

 

 

If I wished to inquire about your particular Protestant sect (one among thousands of warring denominations) then I would do my own research. Frankly, I did not come here to be converted, but to engage in civil conversation and debate on religious issues specifically with those who do not share my faith. This is something I enjoy doing and take a real interest in for a number of reasons. It's too bad this forum does not allow the same kind of easygoing discussions that take place in real life among intelligent, religious-minded people.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
28 minutes ago, AnnaTherese said:

 

What do you do when you meet a Traditional Catholic in real life? Do the same rules apply offline or do you simply refuse to converse with them on religious topics? Why, and for what purpose? I'm sincerely asking.

 

Can you imagine meeting someone and the topic of religion comes up. The person tell you that they would love to have a conversation but you're not allowed talk about your Protestant doctrines. They tell you that you can ask them about their interpretations of Scripture and ask questions based on their interpretations, but your own beliefs and views are to be set aside.

How open should we be to false doctrine and an apostate body? You're seemingly suggesting that all religions are equally valid and worthy of time and consideration.

 

We tend to focus on the Scriptures here on this board. And we are not open to atheism as an example. Seldom do those types of debates involve actually opening up the covers of the Scripture and diving deep to plumb the depths of God's word.

 

Already you're bringing into question "interpretation". As I already suggested the Catholic church must be first established as the sole authority and interpreter by Catholic apologists.

 

 

28 minutes ago, AnnaTherese said:

Would you kindly explain to me what is unreasonable about a Catholic coming into a debate with the premise that the Catholic Church is the sole authority and infallible interpreter of Scripture?

We do not show hospitality to those that preach another doctrine other than Christ crucified. We do not attribute salvation to Mary, the Saints before us, or anyone else including the Catholic church. Otherwise we'd be supporters and partakers of spreading the false doctrines.

 

28 minutes ago, AnnaTherese said:

If I wished to inquire about your particular Protestant sect (one among thousands of warring denominations) then I would do my own research. Frankly, I did not come here to be converted, but to engage in civil conversation and debate on religious issues specifically with those who do not share my faith. This is something I enjoy doing and take a real interest in for a number of reasons. It's too bad this forum does not allow the same kind of easygoing discussions that take place in real life among intelligent, religious-minded people.

I suggest you find another website then. I note that you refer to Protestants as a sect, but it is the Catholic church which is apostate and no longer bears resemblance to the universal catholic church.

 

I acknowledge your religious (man-centered) approach, but we are actually focused on theology (Christ-centered).

 

I do not share your "faith", which I firmly believe is in the wrong object.

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
47 minutes ago, AnnaTherese said:

I have to break the news to you. Every Catholic rejects Sola Scriptura.

Which is why the Catholic church is in SERIOUS error.

 

48 minutes ago, AnnaTherese said:

Would you kindly explain to me what is unreasonable about a Catholic coming into a debate with the premise that the Catholic Church is the sole authority and infallible interpreter of Scripture?

Because it is not Scriptural to say that the Catholic Church is the sole authority. They are in error. They have shown heretical teachings time and time again so why would we even consider them as the sole authority?  Scripture is the final authority, not the church.

 

49 minutes ago, AnnaTherese said:

It's too bad this forum does not allow the same kind of easygoing discussions that take place in real life among intelligent, religious-minded people.

That's not the purpose of this forum.

 

We do not have the same faith, we do not worship the same Jesus. The Catholic church doesn't follow the Bible, it follows its own ways.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

 

https://www.christforums.org/topic/7524-praying-to-mary-is-an-attack-on-the-trinity/?tab=comments#comment-42050

 

 The above is a link which demonstrates that praying to Mary is a terrible sin.

 

 I just sent you a private message with my email if you have anything else to discuss concerning this subject, but I don't want to rehash over and over again something that I have already pointed out.

 

 William,

 It would be okay with me if anyone complains that they want to discuss the Bible and their faith to give them my email but I would first like to know what they would like to discuss - I am not going to deal with things like if people believe they are robots or space aliens. If they are JW's (or other anti-Trinitarians), Mormons, Oneness Pentecostals, Roman Catholics, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, etc, then it would be okay. My occupation usually affords me more free time than many other people have. Not sure how precisely it can be arranged (or if it can be arranged at all?) but the offer is open as you see the Lord lead.

 

Thanks

Faber

  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, davidtaylorjr said:

we do not worship the same Jesus

 Despite what some may think, I believe your above assertion is absolutely correct.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
1 hour ago, AnnaTherese said:

 

What do you do when you meet a Traditional Catholic in real life? Do the same rules apply offline or do you simply refuse to converse with them on religious topics? Why, and for what purpose? I'm sincerely asking.

 

Can you imagine meeting someone and the topic of religion comes up. The person tell you that they would love to have a conversation but you're not allowed talk about your Protestant doctrines. They tell you that you can ask them about their interpretations of Scripture and ask questions based on their interpretations, but your own beliefs and views are to be set aside.

 

I have to break the news to you. Every Catholic rejects Sola Scriptura.

 

Would you kindly explain to me what is unreasonable about a Catholic coming into a debate with the premise that the Catholic Church is the sole authority and infallible interpreter of Scripture?

 

 

If I wished to inquire about your particular Protestant sect (one among thousands of warring denominations) then I would do my own research. Frankly, I did not come here to be converted, but to engage in civil conversation and debate on religious issues specifically with those who do not share my faith. This is something I enjoy doing and take a real interest in for a number of reasons. It's too bad this forum does not allow the same kind of easygoing discussions that take place in real life among intelligent, religious-minded people.

 

 

So we change the word 'sect' to the word 'order' and wow the differences with in the RCC show up. Well over 200 different orders.

Placing  actually anti-scriptural limits . on the RCC priest hood have work out so very well.  

Christians worship The Christ,  not a church 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, AnnaTherese said:

 I have to break the news to you. Every Catholic rejects Sola Scriptura.

 Protestants have no need to have the news broken that catholics reject Scripture Sola or other wise.  

  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Faber said:

 

https://www.christforums.org/topic/7524-praying-to-mary-is-an-attack-on-the-trinity/?tab=comments#comment-42050

 

 The above is a link which demonstrates that praying to Mary is a terrible sin.

 

 I just sent you a private message with my email if you have anything else to discuss concerning this subject, but I don't want to rehash over and over again something that I have already pointed out.

 

 William,

 It would be okay with me if anyone complains that they want to discuss the Bible and their faith to give them my email but I would first like to know what they would like to discuss - I am not going to deal with things like if people believe they are robots or space aliens. If they are JW's (or other anti-Trinitarians), Mormons, Oneness Pentecostals, Roman Catholics, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, etc, then it would be okay. My occupation usually affords me more free time than many other people have. Not sure how precisely it can be arranged (or if it can be arranged at all?) but the offer is open as you see the Lord lead.

 

Thanks

Faber

That's a very generous offer.  

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
9 hours ago, Faber said:

William,

 It would be okay with me if anyone complains that they want to discuss the Bible and their faith to give them my email but I would first like to know what they would like to discuss - I am not going to deal with things like if people believe they are robots or space aliens. If they are JW's (or other anti-Trinitarians), Mormons, Oneness Pentecostals, Roman Catholics, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, etc, then it would be okay. My occupation usually affords me more free time than many other people have. Not sure how precisely it can be arranged (or if it can be arranged at all?) but the offer is open as you see the Lord lead. 

 

Thanks

Faber

@Faber

 

What presents a problem and security issue for our members are other questionable members trying to solicit and phish for information. I really frown upon such approach. Another idea is for you to start a club, and we'd restrict such people to your supervision and moderation in that club as long as those members can refrain from posting on the main board. I think could actually enforce that automatically by instead of banning to restrict a user group to a particular club. As a Premium member you have the option of creating a club and maintaining it. Frankly, none of us if I may speak on staff's behalf want to babysit problematic peoples that cause great harm through false doctrine to the Christian community. 

 

I definitely appreciate your sincere inquire. As a website we've decided to focus on a certain demographic of Christian and serve that particular community. As you can see this thread or run in with a Catholic always results in the same repetitive arguments. Really, we could just create a webpage or automatic email to Catholics which are banned with a page to the Five Solas.

 

Which in itself brings to mind an idea. We are always looking for a good staff member Faber. We could use a Staff News Editor at this time which creates pages for our site blog or we could develop another part of the site which I have yet to introduce. We have the option of creating CF pages which are very similar to Gotquestions.org. If you're interested, here's a first project to consider.

 

The Protestant Five Solas. (Five part mini series)

 

I'd be willing to suggest and expand on what I think each page covering each of the Five Solas should entail (historical context etc).

 

If you're interested Faber, lemme know. I'll run you by Becky and probably in no time you'll be the CF editorial staff member. No doubt you exhibit a strength and depth for Scriptural research papers. We'd love to utilize your talents.

 

God bless,

William

Share this post


Link to post

Greetings in Christ William,

 

 You wrote: As you can see this thread or run in with a Catholic always results in the same repetitive arguments.

 

 I can't argue with that. In fact, when I think of it when I correspond with someone who denies that the Lord Jesus is God and/or the Trinity it virtually always comes down to that and/or they simply refuse to believe how the words of the Bible are properly defined. It quickly descends into absurdity.

 

 Thinking about it further I agree more and more that they should not be allowed. Their arguments have been answered (not just by me) countless times but still they continue on in their heresy no matter what - as the link I supplied about praying to others besides God clearly shows. Frankly speaking, I have gone on other web sites (mostly anti-Trinitarian) and so often my comments are not posted. It's not as if the truth isn't out there for them, it is - they just refuse to see it.

 

 I plan on sending you a private message about the Staff News Editor tomorrow (Sunday). Thank you for the offer. Almost midnight here on the East Coast.

 

Faber

 

 

 

 

 

  • Best Answer 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Topics

    • American Psychological Association Deems 'Traditional Masculinity Harmful'

      The American Psychological Association released a set of guidelines for physicians who work with boys and men where they marked traditional masculinity as “harmful.” View the full article

      in Christian Current Events

    • American Psychological Association Claims ‘Traditional Masculinity’ Is ‘Psychologically Harmful’

      The Story: An influential psychological organization claims that “traditional masculinity” can be psychologically harmful. But in criticizing masculinity they reveal the danger of androgyny. The Background: The American Psychological Association (APA) is the largest professional and scientific organization of psychologists in the United States. The APA possesses a significant influence over the field of psychology through such actions as accrediting college degree programs, overseeing more than 70 professional journals, and hosting professional conferences and meetings. Another way APA wields influence is by providing resources for continuing education (CE). Licensed psychologists are required by their state licensing boards to meet annual mandatory CE requirements, which can often be met by using APA’s resources, such as “CE Corner.” For example, to earn CE credit a psychologist can read an article, complete an online learning exercise, and then take a CE test. In the most recent CE Corner, one of the “learning objectives” states, “After reading this article, CE candidates will be able to: Discuss the research that suggests that aspects of ‘traditional masculinity’ can be ‘psychologically harmful.’” As the article notes, “The main thrust of the subsequent research is that traditional masculinity—marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance, and aggression—is, on the whole, harmful.” APA’s new Guidelines for Psychological Practice With Boys and Men strive to recognize and address these problems in boys and men while remaining sensitive to the field’s androcentric past. Thirteen years in the making, they draw on more than 40 years of research showing that traditional masculinity is psychologically harmful and that socializing boys to suppress their emotions causes damage that echoes both inwardly and outwardly. [. . . ] Gender and sexual minorities, too, must grapple with societal views of masculinity. This is an ever-shifting territory. When Levant and Rabinowitz launched the guideline-drafting process in 2005, only Massachusetts recognized same-sex marriage. Today, transgender issues are at the forefront of the cultural conversation, and there is increased awareness of the diversity of gender identity. “What is gender in the 2010s?” asks Ryon McDermott, PhD, a psychologist at the University of South Alabama who also helped draft the men’s guidelines. “It’s no longer just this male-female binary.” The APA’s Guidelines for Psychological Practice With Boys and Men, released last August, says, “The present document articulates guidelines that enhance gender- and culture-sensitive psychological practice with boys and men from diverse backgrounds in the United States.” However, by “boys and men,” they are referring to gender identification, and not to anything rooted in biology. As the document clarifies, “These guidelines address conflict that cisgender, transgender, and gender-nonconforming individuals may experience due to societal expectations regarding gender roles.” Why It Matters: The APA article has rightly drawn criticism for its pathologizing of “traditional masculinity” (see, for example, David French and Rod Dreher). While this is certainly a valid objection, it can lead us to miss the underlying trend the APA is promoting. In focusing solely on the anti-masculine propaganda we may miss the even more pernicious pro-androgyny agenda. Androgyny often refers to a manner of presentation that mixes masculine and feminine characteristics. Outwardly, this often results in a more gender-neutral appearance. When we think of androgyny today we often associate it with a “unisex” look, made famous by David Bowie in his Ziggy Stardust phase. But androgyny is more than mere fashion. It’s a mixing of characteristics in a way that almost always privileges men. Two years ago, in writing about how transgenderism is about redefining reality, I said: Those who accept the idea that we can ignore biological sex for the mental construct of “gender identity” are endorsing metaphysical subjectivism, the view that “our own mental activity is the only unquestionable fact of our experience.” They are not only disagreeing with those of us who believe reality is created by God, but are attempting to make metaphysical subjectivism the standard that trumps all others in determining norms and ethics. An inevitable result of metaphysical subjectivism is the domination of the strong by the weak and vulnerable. Androgyny gives the appearance of promoting equality and egalitarianism between the sexes. What is really does, though, is to provide men with numerous advantages associated with being female while allowing them to reject any obligations of being a biological male. For example, the “traditional masculine” perspective holds that because of differences in physiology (e.g., men tend to be physically stronger than women because we have, on average, more total muscle mass) men have certain obligations of behavior (e.g., “Never hit a woman.”). But the androgyny of transgenderism, rooted in metaphysical subjectivism, says that since what really matters is our mental activity we can reject biological reality. This allows men to retain their physical advantages in competing against women—even if it leaves women bloodied and broken. It’s why we find “trans women” (i.e., biological men pretending to be women) beating up women in mixed-martial arts (MMA) fights yet never see “trans men” (i.e., biological women pretending to be men) fighting against biological men. We miss the point if we think the objection to “traditional masculinity” by the APA and others is simply about making men more feminine. The indoctrination efforts are also attempts to allow men to reject normative standards of behavior. By co-opting aspects of femininity, androgynous men are able to shirk their “traditional” responsibilities as men. Because these responsibilities were often put in place to protect women, discarding all aspects of traditional masculinity ultimately harms women. As Brian Attebery observes, “To critics of the androgynous vision, the integration of masculine and feminine into a single self is another, sneakier way to eliminate the feminine.” An astute observer of this phenomenon is Camille Paglia. She is an academic who has been studying androgyny for decades. Although she identifies as transgender she says she’s “skeptical about the current transgender wave.” Several years ago she claimed that the explosion of gender identities is a recurring sign of cultural collapse throughout the history of civilization: The movement toward androgyny occurs in late phases of culture, as a civilization starts to unravel. We find this again and again throughout history. . . The people who live in such periods, the late phase of culture—whether it’s the Hellenistic era or whether it’s the Roman Empire or the “mauve decade” of Oscar Wilde in the 1890s or Weimar Germany—people who live in such times feel they are very sophisticated, very cosmopolitan. Homosexuality, heterosexuality, so what, anything goes. From a distance, though, you can see it’s a culture that no longer believes in itself. We don’t need much distance to see the post-Christian culture of the West “no longer believes in itself.” What we need is a plan to counter our androgynous future by showing the world that beauty is found in the binary gender design as male and female (Gen 1:26–28). What we need is a renewed commitment to showing all men and women that their only hope in life and death can be found in our Savior Jesus Christ (Rom. 15:13). View the full article

      in Christian Current Events

    • Women Speak Out about Sexual Abuse by Catholic Nuns

      Following the reveal of sex abuse by hundreds of Catholic priests and clergymen in 2018, women are now speaking out about being sexually abused by nuns. View the full article

      in Christian Current Events

    • Worship of Mary in the Roman Catholic Church

      Dr. Pusey   (From the January 1866 issue of The Sword and the Trowel)   We have summarized the detailed account of the idolatrous worship of Mary by the Papists as exposed in full by Dr. Pusey in his new work. As his statements are not made at random, but are supported by quotations from Romish writers of recognised authority, they will be valuable to those who are met by the crafty denials of Romanists whenever they expose the genuine doctrines of Popish faith. Amid all the mischief which Pusey has done, it is well to note and acknowledge whatever service he may in this case render to truth. The headings of the paragraphs are ours; the quotations are given as they stand.   Blessings said to be obtained through Mary.—"So, then, it is taught in authorized books, that 'it is morally impossible for those to be saved who neglect the devotion to the Blessed Virgin;' that 'it is the will of God that all graces should pass through her hands;' that 'no creature obtained any grace from God, save according to the dispensation of His holy Mother;' that Jesus has, in fact, said, 'no one shall be partaker of My Blood, unless through the intercession of My Mother;' that 'we can only hope to obtain perseverance through her;' that 'God granted all the pardons in the Old Testament absolutely for the reverence and love of this Blessed Virgin;' that 'our salvation is in her hand;' that 'it is impossible for any to be saved, who turns away from her, or is disregarded by her; or to be lost, who turns to her, or is regarded by her;' that 'whom the justice of God saves not, the infinite mercy of Mary saves by her intercession;' that God is 'subject to the command of Mary;' that 'God has resigned into her hands (if one might say so) His omnipotence in the sphere of grace;' that 'it is safer to seek salvation through her than directly from Jesus.'"   Mary worship held up as a cure for trouble.—"F. Faber, in Ms popular books, is always bringing in the devotion to the Blessed Virgin.. He believes that the shortcomings of English Roman Catholics are owing to the inadequacy of their devotion to her. After instancing people's failures in overcoming their faults, want of devotion, unsubmission to God's special Providence for them, feeling domestic troubles almost-incompatible with salvation, and that 'for all these things prayer appears to bring so little remedy,' he asks, 'What is the remedy that is wanted? what is the remedy indicated by God himself? If we may rely on the disclosures of the saints, it is an immense increase of devotion to our Blessed Lady, but remember, nothing short of an immense one. Here, in England, Mary is not half enough preached. Devotion to her is low and thin and poor. It is frightened out of its wits by the sneers of heresy. It is always invoking human respect and carnal prudence, wishing to make Mary so little of a Mary, that Protestants may feel at ease about her. Its ignorance of theology makes it unsubstantial and unworthy. It is not the prominent characteristic of our religion which it ought to be. It has no faith in itself. Hence it is, that Jesus is not loved, that heretics are not converted, that the Church is not exalted; that souls, which might be saints, wither and dwindle; that the sacraments are not rightly frequented, or souls enthusiastically evangelized. Jesus is obscured, because Mary is kept in the background. Thousands of souls perish, because Mary is withheld from them. It is the miserable unworthy shadow which we call our devotion to the Blessed Virgin, that is the cause of all these wants and blights; these evils and omissions and declines. Yet, if we are to believe the revelations of the saints, God is pressing for a greater, wider, a stronger, quite another devotion to His Blessed Mother.'"   The Pope's whole reliance on the Virgin.—In his Encyclical Letter of 1849, Pius IX wrote: "On this hope we chiefly rely, that the most Blessed Virgin—who raised the height of merits above all the choirs of Angels to the throne of the Deity, and by the foot of Virtue 'bruised the serpent's head,' and who, being constituted between Christ and His Church, and, being wholly sweet and full of graces, hath ever delivered the Christian people from calamities of all sorts and from the snares and assaults of all enemies and hath rescued them from destruction, and, commiserating our most sad and most sorrowful vicissitudes and our most severe straits, toils, necessities with that most large feeling of her motherly mind—will, by her most present and most powerful patronage with God, both turn away the scourges of Divine wrath wherewith we are afflicted for our sins, and will allay, dissipate the most turbulent storms of ills, wherewith, to the incredible sorrow of our mind, the Church everywhere is tossed, and will turn our sorrow into joy. For ye know very well, Ven. Brethren, that the whole of our confidence is placed in the most Holy Virgin, since God has placed in Mary the fullness of all good, that accordingly we may know that if there is any hope in us, if any grace, if any salvation, it redounds to us from her, because such is His will Who hath willed that we should have everything through Mary."   Mary blasphemously called Co-Redemptress with our Lord.—"We had heard before, repeatedly, that she was the Mediatrix with the Redeemer; some of us, who do not read Marian books, have heard now for the first time, that she was ever our 'Co-Redemptress.' The evidence lies, not in any insulated passage of a devotional writer (which was alleged in plea for the language of M. Olier), but in formal answers from Archbishops and Bishops to the Pope as to what they desired in regard to the declaration of the Immaculate Conception as an Article of Faith. Thus the Archbishop of Syracuse wrote, 'Since we know certainly that she, in the fulness of time, was Co-redemptress of the human race, together with her Son Jesus Christ our Lord.' From North Italy the Bishop of Asti wrote of 'the dogma of the singular privilege granted by the Divine Redeemer to His pure mother, the Co-redemptress of the world.' In South Italy the Bishop of Gallipoli wrote, 'the human race, whom the Son of God, from her, redeemed; whom, together with Him, she herself co-redeemed.' The Bishop of Cariati prayed the Pope to 'command all the sons of Holy Mother Church and thy own, that no one of them should dare at any time hereafter to suspect as to the Immaculate Conception of their Co-redeemer.' From Sardinia, the Bishop of Alghero wrote, 'It is the common consent of all the faithful, and the common wish and desire of all, that our so beneficent Parent and Co-redeemer should be presented by the Apostolic See with the honour of this most illustrious mystery.' Spain, the Bishop of Almeria justified the attribute by appeal to the service of the Conception. The Church, adapting to the Mother of God in the Office of the Conception that text, 'Let Us make a help like unto Him,' assures us of it. and confirms those most ancient traditions, 'Companion of the Redeemer,' 'Co-Redemptress,' 'Authoress of everlasting salvation.' The Bishops refer to. these as ancient, well-known, traditionary titles, at least in their Churches in North and South Italy, Sicily, Sardinia, Spain."   A Parallel infamously drawn between Jesus and Mary.—"As our Redemption gained its sufficiency and might from Jesus, so, they say, did it gain its beauty and loveliness from the aid of Mary. As we are clothed with the merits of Christ, so also, they say, with the merits of Mary. As Jesus rose again the third day without seeing corruption, so they speak of her Resurrection so as to anticipate corruption, in some three days;' as He was the first-fruits of them that slept, so is she; as He was taken up into heaven in the body so, they say, was she; as He sits at the Right Hand of God, so she at His Right Hand; as He is there our perpetual Intercessor with the Father, so she with Him; as ' no man cometh to the Father.' Jesus saith, 'but by Me;' so 'no man cometh to Jesus', they say, 'but by her;' as He is our High Priest, so she, they say, a Priestess; He, our High Priest, gave us the sacrament of His Body and Blood; so, they say, did she, 'her will conspiring with the will of her Son to the making of the Eucharist, and assenting to her Son so giving and offering Himself for food and drink, since we confess that the sacrifice and gifts, given, to us under the form of bread and wine, are truly hers and appertain unto her. As in the Eucharist He is present and we receive Him, so she, they say, is present an received in that same sacrament. The priest is 'minister of Christ,' and 'minister of Mary.' They seem to assign to her an office, like that of God the Holy Ghost, in dwelling in the soul. They speak of 'souls born not of blood, nor of flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God and Mary;' that 'the Holy Ghost chose to make use of our Blessed Lady to bring His fruitfulness into action by producing in her and by her Jesus Christ in His members;' that 'according to that word, 'the kingdom of God is within you,' in like manner the kingdom of our Blessed Lady is principally in the interior of a man, his soul; that 'when Mary has struck her roots in the soul, she produces there marvels of grace, which she alone can produce, because she alone is the fruitful Virgin, who never has had, and never will have, her equal in purity and fruitfulness.'"   Shameless declaration that Mary is in the Eucharist.—(Oswald.) "'We maintain a (co-)presence of Mary in the Eucharist. This is a necessary inference from our Marian theory, and we shrink back from no consequence.' 'We are much inclined,' he says afterwards, 'to believe an essential co-presence of Mary in her whole person, with body and soul, under the sacred species. Certainly to such a presence in the Eucharist, 1. there is required a glorious mode of being of the Virgin body of the Holy Mother. We are not only justified in holding this as to Mary, but we have well-nigh proved it. 2. The assumption of a bodily presence of Mary in the Eucharist compels self-evidently the assumption of a multi-location (i.e. a contemporaneous presence in different portions of space) of Mary, according to her flesh too. 3. One who would receive this must be ready to admit a compenetration of the Body of Christ and of that of the Virgin in the same portion of space, i.e. under the sacred species.' The writer subsequently explains that 'the "lac virginale" must be looked upon as that of Mary, which is primarily present in the Eucharist, whereto, in further consequence, the whole Christ the Head, the Blessed Virgin is, as also her soul, would be joined.' 'The Blood of the Lord, and the lac of His Virgin Mother, are both present in the sacrament.'"   Mariolotry to swallow up all other devotion.—"'Assuming that, in and under Christ the Head, the Blessed Virgin is, after her Assumption, as it were, the neck of the Church, so that all grace whatever flows to the Body through her, that is, through her prayers, it might be argued, that, for such as have this belief to ask anything of or through her, is identical in sense, but in point of form better, than to ask it directly of Christ, in like manner as to ask anything of or through Christ, is identical in sense, but clearer and fuller in point of form, than to ask it directly of the Father. And hence, it might seem that it would bean improvement, if, reserving only the use of the appointed forms for the making of the Sacraments, and an occasional use of the Lord's Prayer (and this rather from respect to the letter of their outward institution than from any inward.199 necessity or propriety), every prayer, both of individuals and of the Church, were addressed to or through Blessed Mary, a form beginning, 'Our Lady, which art in heaven,' etc., being preferred for general use to the original letter of the Lord's Prayer; and the Psalter, the Te Deum, and all the daily Offices, being used in preference with similar accommodation.'" Horrid ravings of Faber, whose writings are very popular among Papists.--"'There is some portion of the Precious Blood which once was Mary's own blood, and which remains still in our Blessed Lord, incredibly exalted by its union with His Divine Person, yet still the same. This portion of Himself, it is piously believed, has not been allowed to undergo the usual changes of human substance. At this moment, in heaven, He retains something which was once His Mother's, and which is, possibly, visible, as such, to the saints and angels. He vouchsafed at mass to show to S. Ignatius the very part of the Host which had once belonged to the substance of Mary. It may have a distinct and singular beauty in heaven, where, by His compassion, it may one day be our blessed lot to see it and adore it. But with the exception of this portion of it, the Precious Blood was a growing thing,' "&c.   Enough! enough! every one of our readers will cry out, and therefore we stay our hand. Surely "for this cause, God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

      in Soteriology and Reformation Theology

    • California Nuns Accused Of Embezzling As Much As $500K From Catholic School For Gambling

      By Neetu Chandak - Two nuns are accused of embezzling as much as $500,000 from a California Catholic school for gambling and travel expenses. St. James Catholic School’s former principal Sister Mary Margaret Kreuper and former teacher Sister Lana Chang allegedly stole the money over a period of at least a decade, Casino.org reported Saturday. The $500,000 number is representative of the amount possibly stolen in the past six years based on an audit of an account known to Kreuper and Chang. The “long forgotten” church bank account was opened in 1997, auditors said to parents, according to The Beach Reporter. Bank records prior to 2012 do not exist. “We do know that they had a pattern of going on trips, we do know they had a pattern of going to casinos, and the reality is, they used the account as their personal account,” the sisters’ attorney said, according to The Beach Reporter. Charges are not being pressed against the nuns because they expressed remorse, Casino.org reported. “We were an ATM, and people know it and they won’t ask for justice,” parent Jack Alexander said to the Southern California News Group, according to The Beach Reporter. Several parents were upset about the nuns not having charges pressed against the sisters. Some are asking that the money being paid back by the nuns be used to build facilities and for teacher salary increases that were denied under Kreuper’s leadership. Kreuper claimed at the time the school could not afford building certain facilities or pay raises, according to The Beach Reporter. Kreuper retired at the end of the 2017-2018 academic year after being the principal for about 29 years while Chang was a teacher for almost 20 years. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected] California Nuns Accused Of Embezzling As Much As $500K From Catholic School For Gambling is original content from Conservative Daily News - Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust. View the original full article

      in Political Conservative News

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.