A
- Status
A
adrift
Guest
The Intercession of the Saints
Fundamentalists often challenge the Catholic practice of asking saints and angels to pray on our behalf. But the Bible directs us to invoke those in heaven and ask them to pray with us.
Thus, in Psalm 103 we pray, “Bless the Lord, O you his angels, you mighty ones who do his word, hearkening to the voice of his word! Bless the Lord, all his hosts, his ministers that do his will!” (Ps. 103:20–21). And in the opening verses of Psalms 148 we pray, “Praise the Lord! Praise the Lord from the heavens, praise him in the heights! Praise him, all his angels, praise him, all his host!”
Not only do those in heaven pray with us, they also pray for us. In the book of Revelation, John sees that “the twenty-four elders [the leaders of the people of God in heaven] fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints” (Rev. 5:8). Thus the saints in heaven offer to God the prayers of the saints on earth.
Angels do the same thing: “[An] angel came and stood at the altar [in heaven] with a golden censer; and he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God” (Rev. 8:3–4).
Jesus himself warned us not to offend small children, because their guardian angels have guaranteed intercessory access to the Father: “See that you do not despise one of these little ones; for I tell you that in heaven their angels always see the face of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 18:10).
Because he is the only God-man and the Mediator of the New Covenant, Jesus is the only mediator between man and God (1 Tim. 2:5), but this in no way means we cannot or should not ask our fellow Christians to pray with us and for us (1 Tim. 2:1–4). In particular, we should ask the intercession of those Christians in heaven, who have already had their sanctification completed, for “[t]he prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects” (Jas. 5:16).
As the following passages show, the early Church Fathers not only clearly recognized the biblical teaching that those in heaven can and do intercede for us, but they also applied this teaching in their own daily prayer life.
Hermas
“[The Shepherd said:] ‘But those who are weak and slothful in prayer, hesitate to ask anything from the Lord; but the Lord is full of compassion, and gives without fail to all who ask him. But you, [Hermas,] having been strengthened by the holy angel [you saw], and having obtained from him such intercession, and not being slothful, why do not you ask of the Lord understanding, and receive it from him?’” (The Shepherd 3:5:4 [A.D. 80]).
Note the date is 80 A.D. Apostles were alive
Fundamentalists often challenge the Catholic practice of asking saints and angels to pray on our behalf. But the Bible directs us to invoke those in heaven and ask them to pray with us.
Thus, in Psalm 103 we pray, “Bless the Lord, O you his angels, you mighty ones who do his word, hearkening to the voice of his word! Bless the Lord, all his hosts, his ministers that do his will!” (Ps. 103:20–21). And in the opening verses of Psalms 148 we pray, “Praise the Lord! Praise the Lord from the heavens, praise him in the heights! Praise him, all his angels, praise him, all his host!”
Not only do those in heaven pray with us, they also pray for us. In the book of Revelation, John sees that “the twenty-four elders [the leaders of the people of God in heaven] fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints” (Rev. 5:8). Thus the saints in heaven offer to God the prayers of the saints on earth.
Angels do the same thing: “[An] angel came and stood at the altar [in heaven] with a golden censer; and he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God” (Rev. 8:3–4).
Jesus himself warned us not to offend small children, because their guardian angels have guaranteed intercessory access to the Father: “See that you do not despise one of these little ones; for I tell you that in heaven their angels always see the face of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 18:10).
Because he is the only God-man and the Mediator of the New Covenant, Jesus is the only mediator between man and God (1 Tim. 2:5), but this in no way means we cannot or should not ask our fellow Christians to pray with us and for us (1 Tim. 2:1–4). In particular, we should ask the intercession of those Christians in heaven, who have already had their sanctification completed, for “[t]he prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects” (Jas. 5:16).
As the following passages show, the early Church Fathers not only clearly recognized the biblical teaching that those in heaven can and do intercede for us, but they also applied this teaching in their own daily prayer life.
Hermas
“[The Shepherd said:] ‘But those who are weak and slothful in prayer, hesitate to ask anything from the Lord; but the Lord is full of compassion, and gives without fail to all who ask him. But you, [Hermas,] having been strengthened by the holy angel [you saw], and having obtained from him such intercession, and not being slothful, why do not you ask of the Lord understanding, and receive it from him?’” (The Shepherd 3:5:4 [A.D. 80]).
Note the date is 80 A.D. Apostles were alive
A
adrift
Guest
The Real Presence
The doctrine of the Real Presence asserts that in the Holy Eucharist, Jesus is literally and wholly present—body and blood, soul and divinity—under the appearances of bread and wine. Evangelicals and Fundamentalists frequently attack this doctrine as “unbiblical,” but the Bible is forthright in declaring it (cf. 1 Cor. 10:16–17, 11:23–29; and, most forcefully, John 6:32–71).
The early Church Fathers interpreted these passages literally. In summarizing the early Fathers’ teachings on Christ’s Real Presence, renowned Protestant historian of the early Church J. N. D. Kelly, writes: “Eucharistic teaching, it should be understood at the outset, was in general unquestioningly realist, i.e., the consecrated bread and wine were taken to be, and were treated and designated as, the Savior’s body and blood” (Early Christian Doctrines, 440).
The doctrine of the Real Presence asserts that in the Holy Eucharist, Jesus is literally and wholly present—body and blood, soul and divinity—under the appearances of bread and wine. Evangelicals and Fundamentalists frequently attack this doctrine as “unbiblical,” but the Bible is forthright in declaring it (cf. 1 Cor. 10:16–17, 11:23–29; and, most forcefully, John 6:32–71).
The early Church Fathers interpreted these passages literally. In summarizing the early Fathers’ teachings on Christ’s Real Presence, renowned Protestant historian of the early Church J. N. D. Kelly, writes: “Eucharistic teaching, it should be understood at the outset, was in general unquestioningly realist, i.e., the consecrated bread and wine were taken to be, and were treated and designated as, the Savior’s body and blood” (Early Christian Doctrines, 440).
A
adrift
Guest
Peter explained what happens at baptism when he said, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38). But he did not restrict this teaching to adults. He added, “For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him” (2:39). We also read: “Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name” (Acts 22:16). These commands are universal, not restricted to adults. Further, these commands make clear the necessary connection between baptism and salvation, a
connection explicitly stated in 1 Peter 3:21: “Baptism . . . now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”
…But the historic Christian Church has always held that Christ’s law applies to infants as well as adults, for Jesus said that no one can enter heaven unless he has been born again of water and the Holy Spirit (John 3:5). His words can be taken to apply to anyone capable of belonging to his kingdom. He asserted such even for children: “Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 19:14). …Furthermore, Paul notes that baptism has replaced circumcision (Col. 2:11–12). In that passage, he refers to baptism as “the circumcision of Christ” and “the circumcision made without hands.” Of course, usually only infants were circumcised under the Old Law; circumcision of adults was rare, since there were few converts to Judaism. If Paul meant to exclude infants, he would not have chosen circumcision as a parallel for baptism. …we read that Lydia was converted by Paul’s preaching and that “She was baptized, with her household” (Acts 16:15). The Philippian jailer whom Paul and Silas had converted to the faith was baptized that night along with his household. We are told that “the same hour of the night . . . he was baptized, with all his family” (Acts 16:33). And in his greetings to the Corinthians, Paul recalled that, “I did baptize also the household of Stephanas” (1 Cor. 1:16).
In all these cases, whole households or families were baptized. This means more than just the spouse; the children too were included. If the text of Acts referred simply to the Philippian jailer and his wife, then we would read that “he and his wife were baptized,” but we do not. Thus his children must have been baptized as well. The same applies to the other cases of household baptism in Scripture. …None of the Fathers or councils of the Church was claiming that the practice was contrary to Scripture or tradition. They agreed that the practice of baptizing infants was the customary and appropriate practice since the days of the early Church; the only uncertainty seemed to be when—exactly—an infant should be baptized. Further evidence that infant baptism was the accepted practice in the early Church is the fact that if infant baptism had been opposed to the religious practices of the first believers, why do we have no record of early Christian writers condemning it?
But Fundamentalists try to ignore the historical writings from the early Church which clearly indicate the legitimacy of infant baptism.
connection explicitly stated in 1 Peter 3:21: “Baptism . . . now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”
…But the historic Christian Church has always held that Christ’s law applies to infants as well as adults, for Jesus said that no one can enter heaven unless he has been born again of water and the Holy Spirit (John 3:5). His words can be taken to apply to anyone capable of belonging to his kingdom. He asserted such even for children: “Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 19:14). …Furthermore, Paul notes that baptism has replaced circumcision (Col. 2:11–12). In that passage, he refers to baptism as “the circumcision of Christ” and “the circumcision made without hands.” Of course, usually only infants were circumcised under the Old Law; circumcision of adults was rare, since there were few converts to Judaism. If Paul meant to exclude infants, he would not have chosen circumcision as a parallel for baptism. …we read that Lydia was converted by Paul’s preaching and that “She was baptized, with her household” (Acts 16:15). The Philippian jailer whom Paul and Silas had converted to the faith was baptized that night along with his household. We are told that “the same hour of the night . . . he was baptized, with all his family” (Acts 16:33). And in his greetings to the Corinthians, Paul recalled that, “I did baptize also the household of Stephanas” (1 Cor. 1:16).
In all these cases, whole households or families were baptized. This means more than just the spouse; the children too were included. If the text of Acts referred simply to the Philippian jailer and his wife, then we would read that “he and his wife were baptized,” but we do not. Thus his children must have been baptized as well. The same applies to the other cases of household baptism in Scripture. …None of the Fathers or councils of the Church was claiming that the practice was contrary to Scripture or tradition. They agreed that the practice of baptizing infants was the customary and appropriate practice since the days of the early Church; the only uncertainty seemed to be when—exactly—an infant should be baptized. Further evidence that infant baptism was the accepted practice in the early Church is the fact that if infant baptism had been opposed to the religious practices of the first believers, why do we have no record of early Christian writers condemning it?
But Fundamentalists try to ignore the historical writings from the early Church which clearly indicate the legitimacy of infant baptism.
S
Sailka
Guest
Arglaze;4223091 ( 9.) Celibacy came around 300s its unscriptual said:
Clergy Celibacy is Very Scriptural, as is not using Religion for the business of personal Wealth, as too many TV ‘preachers’ do:
Collossians 1:24; Mathew 19: 27-29; Matt 10: 9-10; Deuteronomy 23: 8-10 (Jewish priesthood); Matt 16: 24; John 17: 16; Acts of the Apostles 3: 6; 1 Cor 9: 27; 2 Cor 9: 9; Gall 6: 14; Phill 3: 7, 8, 10, 11
There is also documentation from the 1st 2 Centuries of Bishops orders for those clergy who were married, not to beget children, and not have sex with their spouse, etc. The Bishop’s instructions are cited in the apparently out of print now, awesome ** Unabridged Christianity, Fr Romero, Queenship**
Arglaze, where in the world do you get your invented dates, and ideas that the RCC is men’s ideas. All your ideas and statements are exactly that, and opposite of known history And tradition and Scripture.
Live in Jesus, Arglaze, not own inventions.
Tony
(Know that most of the ‘37,000 Christian Sects’ are less than 150 years old? )
R
RobGentner
Guest
**Pete J and Solo_Scriptura. Boy, the folks on this Thread are “strange” :whacky: to put it nicely. 
You haven’t been on the other threads for awhile, bored? 
I agree they aren’t as interesting as this one appears to be.
My Two cents. :twocents: The Blessed Mother always remained a Virgin. Hint: The RCC calls Her The Blessed Virgin, Mary!
Jesus had no biological brothers ,although his “step” Father Joseph may have had some other children. In the Jewish culture extended family would explain for close relatives being called brothers. I have one biological and over 1.9 million fraternal brothers (Vivat Jesus!) Several times Jesus refers to an apostle as if he was a brother.
**
You haven’t been on the other threads for awhile, bored? I agree they aren’t as interesting as this one appears to be.My Two cents. :twocents: The Blessed Mother always remained a Virgin. Hint: The RCC calls Her The Blessed Virgin, Mary!
Jesus had no biological brothers ,although his “step” Father Joseph may have had some other children. In the Jewish culture extended family would explain for close relatives being called brothers. I have one biological and over 1.9 million fraternal brothers (Vivat Jesus!) Several times Jesus refers to an apostle as if he was a brother.
**
R
RobGentner
Guest
**
I heard on Catholic radio today that the latest statistics show there are currently around :bigyikes: 60,000 :bigyikes: Christian denominations. Only the Catholic Church (all branches) go back 2,000 years to the “beginning”
**
R
RobGentner
Guest
What I understand private interpretation to be as Apostle Peter described it is: men creating their own doctrine not inspired by the Holy Spirit, and with no foundation in the Holy Scriptures.
Well precious, you understand wrong!False religious groups and individuals create their own understand of what the bible teaches based on their desires, Not Gods! . "If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don’t like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself.” – Saint Augustine
When Jesus came in the flesh the Jews had invented a bunch of traditions that had no foundation whatsoever in the Holy Scriptures making the Law and the Testimony void through their traditions.
Which ones were they?
Jesus overcame them and Satan himself by responding with “Thus saith the Word of God”**What verse did you find that at? ** or “it is written” and He quoted from Scripture, not to make himself look smart, but because through the Word of God alone can we find safety. Jesus is our example.He quoted scripture to show that He fullfiled it!
So after Jesus ascended and the apostles died, many doctrines with no foundation on the scripturesstarted to lurk into the Church of God **That would be the entire New Testament, using your logic. ** and that union of church and state that seemed like a good idea, just became a curse.
Things like:
The list goes on and of course the RCC has an unscriptual tradition based explanation for each one of these points. If people chose to believe the Pope or those who invented them are under the protection of the Holy Spirit from being lies, the do so. But don’t expect a Christian who reads and seeks God in the Bible to accept something the Bible doesnt say.It is a book, it is inspired. Remember not to put “Any False Gods” before GOD, It is a book, God is the one you should follow! Not a book that took 5,000 years to be written! Boy some people!:banghead:
- Images of saints,**No cameras makes sense! ** penance and indulgences **They are both there, In old and new testaments.**2. Holy Water (which is ridiculous) **Aren’t you cute!
- Praying to saints is never told to do in the Scriptures and didn’t start till around 240 a.d. (Way after the apostles died, and not a tradition they practiced themselves, or taught others to do) **The bible isn’t infalliable! :bigyikes: **
- Infant baptism around 250 a.d. Which makes no sense, since like John says baptism reqs repentance, which a baby can’t counciously do.**You like to just say things **don’t you? Repentance if you have “sinned”
- Eucharist around 1215 a.d. (way later) being the real flesh and blood of Christ and not just a symbol that Christ gave us to remember Him.**It began with the words “Take and eat…” And we actually “Eat the body of Christ!” **
- Confesionals around 390 a.d.**Peple even confesed to Jesus in the bible, my friend. **
- Purgatory " 593 a.d.** was’t it in 592 a.d.?? No wait, It may have been when God created the earth! **
- The Roman Catholic Church real title didn’t exist till way later sometime between 500-606 a.d.**:coffeeread: **
- Celibacy came around 300s its unscriptual and which Paul predicted would happen in 1 Timothy 4:1-3 in clear words. Which was introduced by the very church that claims to be the Church of Christ.** unscriptural? Hmmm Yet Paul talked about it? OK! :whacky: **
RCCs who teach doctrines with no biblical foundation are no different than anyone who makes a sect. The Word of God (the Law and the Testimony) is the test by which all doctrines are tested. If they speak not according to that, there is no light in them - Isaiah 8:20Few differences, 2000 year old history. The Holy spirit and scripture supporting the Church and its beliefs.
Again if we want to go by age, then we all need to go back to the real mother church, Judaism, which was also founded by Christ.**When did Christ found Judaism? (Only one of the 12 branches of Jewish religion by the way) **
The same claims the RCC makes is what the Jews said to Christians, but God’s Word shows that even something He starts can become corrupt.**And He adjusts them doesn’t He? ** The Catholic church is not exempt, as long as sin exists, its only human.**That is true, we are all siners and fall and fail .*Thank God ***for confession!which I feel sorry you don’t believe in either!l
“Faith is to believe what you do not see; the reward of this faith is to see what you believe.” "Seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand --.Saint Augustine
“Thy Word is a Lamp unto my feet, a Light unto my path” Amen
"and none so blind that can not see!" Amen
R
RobGentner
Guest
Sailka; 4221471:
Vivat Jesus! Jesus Lives!
Rob
4th degree/GK! **
A** small point Brother Tony, that is our fraternal greeting between all knights!:knight1:
Vivat Jesus! Jesus Lives!
Rob
4th degree/GK! **
S
Sailka
Guest
A** small point Brother Tony, that is our fraternal greeting between all knights!:knight1:
Vivat Jesus! Jesus Lives!
Rob
4th degree/GK! **
Code:
LOL. Brother Rob, been a while since I pledged all 4 degrees of KC Knighhood; in a few months; a few details escape :).Fr Henschey (sic) 32 years professor aty a Vatican Seminary agreed that Vivat Jesus means always current tense * Live in Jesus* which may be more profound greeting.
Vivat Jesus :knight2: :knight1: Tony
R
RobGentner
Guest
**Brother Tony, I have been a 4th degree since 1977. The fraternal greeting is Latin, and translates as “Jesus Lives”, the motto of our past Supreme chaplain, the Late Bishop Grecko. I totally agree that when you have Jesus in your heart, you can’t help being happy, and when you are Catholic you are really happy. You are full of the TRUE church and it’s teaching. And you get to join Jesus and His other followers when the priest says “Take this and eat this is my body…” We get transported back to the first celebration and actually get to do as Jesus commanded! ~ How much better could it get?
However we must remember: "We cannot save America alone. Nor can we do it if we start from the assumption that only Catholic organizations work for the kingdom of God. Our country is full of public-minded men. Our new mission is to rebuild a morally united nation. " – The Late Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen. Vivat Jesus !!!The “arguers” here will think we are biological brothers like they do Jesus and his relatives!
Why? Because they “saw” it written that we call each other Brother, and we are Catholic and they take all their knowledge from Catholics. :extrahappy: **
S
sseason
Guest
Amen
R
RobGentner
Guest
Originally Posted by adrift
Worship means that you believe the person is a god.
**
A person without preconceived ideas would not come to a conclusion that it was worship. It is preconceived ideas that see worship. It is also ignorance of what worship is.** **adrift probably would say we “worship” our Mothers because we Kiss them!or maybe something worse! :bigyikes: However adrift is actually correct.
God tells us how to praise and worship Him in His Word. John 4:23 says, “Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks.” In order to worship God in truth, we need to remember that Jesus said “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” So, before you can worship in the way that God desires, you have to develop a relationship with Him through faith in Jesus, His Son.
**Again this is ignorance of what a word means or putting a meaning that is not intended. ****Adrift had the word meaning correct just 'misused it! :whacky: **
**There are many examples in the bible of the word until that if you would apply your meaning would lead to some odd results like with Saul’s daughter. Unless you believe she had children after she died.
Again ignorance of the meaning of first born
Ex 13:2; Nb 3:12 - consecrate first -born that opens womb
Ex 34:20 - first-born among your sons you shall redeem
First born does not indicate other children but rather is a sanctification. That is why Mary and Joseph went to the temple the first born had to be redeemed. Only children were called first born.** **I love it when they try to use “our” books, to prove we are wrong!
S
sseason
Guest
**Our salvation itself comes only from Christ’s death on the cross. We do not worship Mary, we honor her, just as Jesus did. ** We are to immitate Christ. Jesus was sinnless (I’m sure we all agree here) therefore he obeyed the commandment “Honor your father and mother”. Jesus honored Mary, so I shall honor Mary.
Also, God the Father chose Mary to bring Jesus into the world i.e. to bring Jesus to us. So I choose Mary (ask for her intercession) to bring me closer to Jesus. …And also keeping in mind, Mary had free will…she said “yes” to God not knowing her future…not knowing she would witness the brutal death of her son, knowing that He was God.
And as far as the power of asking for her intercession…look to the wedding feast at Cana (John 2;1-4)…the waiters came to Mary and said they had no more wine. Mary told Jesus this and what did he say? " Woman, what is that to me and to thee? My hour is not yet come." But what happens? Jesus performs His first miracle anyway, after Mary told the waiters to “do whatever He tells you”. …I go to Mary and ask for her intercession, I ask for her to pray for my intentions i.e. to bring them to her son. Then Mary leads me to Jesus and I am to obey Him…to…“do whatever He tells me”.
newadvent.org/bible/joh002.htm
R
RobGentner
Guest
**
sseason,
“They”
love bible quotes, don’t forget Mary crowned as queen in heaven in Revelations 12, verses 1-5: " A great and wondrous sign appeared in heaven…" **
S
sseason
Guest
Thanks Rob,**
sseason,
“They”
And thank you for the Bible passage of Revelations…Good one.
I just didn’t feel inclined to discuss that part of the comment. I figured I’d only address one question and keep it simple. But again…thank you, and now it is up for others to read. 
S
Sailka
Guest
Thanks, brother Sir Knight. I still remembered that Vivat is Present tense. My 2 years Latin was Quite a few years ago! Live in Jesus 1500 years ago, now, and til the end of time would Prevent most all problems, except for the Personal focused interpretations of everything.**Brother Tony, I have been a 4th degree since 1977. The fraternal greeting is Latin, and translates as “Jesus Lives”, the motto of our past Supreme chaplain, the Late Bishop Grecko. I totally agree that when you have Jesus in your heart, you can’t help being happy, and when you are Catholic you are really happy. You are full of the TRUE church and it’s teaching. And you get to join Jesus and His other followers when the priest says “Take this and eat this is my body…” We get transported back to the first celebration and actually get to do as Jesus commanded! ~ How much better could it get?
The “arguers” here will think we are biological brothers like they do Jesus and his relatives!
There ARE still public service minded politiscians? Where? Where? Both parties have slipped to out of moral and responsible touch. Am about to begin Definitive National Issues writing, inspired by the Ideal stance of the Catholic Church, Lord. They have always had the best solutions, which have been forgotten. Nation needs reminders!.
Initiated into all 4 degrees Knighthood early 1990’s, after watching the Brains and Humor on EWTN brought me back.
One of best teaching methods is Humor, as Fr Corapi, Mother Angelica before her 2 strokes, and Fr Groeschell show. Same Pope John Paul II the Great!
Cheers. Vivat Jesus
:tiphat: :dancing: :extrahappy: Tony
A
adrift
Guest
I don’t believe anything that you have attributed to me as the following link will show. I said the exact opposite of what you said.
Post
M
mercygate
Guest
“Vivat” is active form, present tense, subjunctive voice. It means “let it live,” “if it should live,” and so forth. “Vivat” is usually translated “Long live” – as in “Vivat Elizabetha Regina!” “Long live Queen Elizabeth!”
- Thanks, brother Sir Knight. I still remembered that Vivat is Present tense. My 2 years Latin was Quite a few years ago! Live in Jesus 1500 years ago, now, and til the end of time would Prevent most all problems, except for the Personal focused interpretations of everything.
There ARE still public service minded politiscians? Where? Where? Both parties have slipped to out of moral and responsible touch. Am about to begin Definitive National Issues writing, inspired by the Ideal stance of the Catholic Church, Lord. They have always had the best solutions, which have been forgotten. Nation needs reminders!.
Vivat Jesus!
- Status