Intergenerational Sin/curses/forgiveness

[MatureMomG]

I think I am understanding most of the points/opinions presented. I don’t feel attacked or belittled, I find the discussion interesting and educational.

 

[vames]

I don’t feel attacked or belittled, I find the discussion interesting and educational.

That’s great Please be assured that none of us has any intention to judge, attack or belittle you.

 

[Cathoholic]

Yet again vames none of your points discount the concept of intergenerational sin effects but you do have more mischaracterizations of my points.

This:

So the question is, what factored into this (why did this guy do that, and what can this woman do to mitigate the hurtful effects of this guy’s sin)?

Was merely meant to show:

1. People’s sins can effect innocent people.
2. The victimized are left asking themselves, “Now that I have been victimized, what can I do to mitigate the effects of it?”

LIKEWISE:

If someone is victimized via intergenerational sin which incidentally, YOU AFFIRM exists vames (but you would merely say it has all natural causes), the person victimized by this intergenerational sin

LIKEWISE:

1. Is going to know they were victimized by someone else’s sin
2. And this victimized person or persons are left asking themselves, “Now that I have been victimized, what can I do to mitigate the effects of it?”

Now do you really believe that demons come like docile puppies . . .

I never said demons come like “docile puppies” vames.

I think your argument is weak. I think that’s why you can’t seem to address the issue.

Regardless of HOW demons come when conjurers make their company with them, they do come.

The question is, do these demons hassle just the person conjuring them up? Even if so, is there any spiritual “nuclear fallout” to those around this guy because of this guy even if they are “natural”.

Do these demons in the “spritual neighborhood” now brought on, also possibly hassle other people in this guy’s household?

So if a teenager plays with an ouija board today, his unborn (yet) children, grandchildren, grand-grand-grandchildren and their families are already doomed to suffer from a generational curse?

This is also a mischaracterization vames.

There are people who dabble in the occult who don’t have “evident” effects. There are others that DO have evident effects. There are those that dabble in the occult that DO have generational patterns of “issues”.

The question is “WHY” these issues occur vames.

Your answer is basically, “natural means and ONLY natural means”.

And I am saying you have provided no evidence for that assertion with Ezekiel 18 or John 9:1-3 or any other point you’ve made.

First, cancer is treated by medical doctors, not by spiritual healers.

Another mischaracterization of my point vames.

My point was: “Let’s assume for a moment vames is correct and all causes of suffering for a victimized person is ALL natural (no preternatural aspects), what do you do?

You can still pray, even for someone who DOES have a purely natural illness be it a given cancer or whatever.

So even if the causes of harm for someone who is intergenerationally depressed, irritable, despairing, alcohol addicted, pornography addicted, or whatever, is . . . . .

Natural in cause ONLY . . . instead of . . .
Natural in cause AND preternatural

PRAYER is helpful. That’s my point.

. . . . classic appeal of the paranormal TV shows. Sensationalism and fearmongering always sell. . . .

Again. Good grief vames. I have no idea what you are talking about (with regards to my posts).

The reference to exorcisms and Cardinal Ratzinger are fine vames. Yet we are NOT talking about demonic possession here.

Cardinal Ratzinger’s Current Norms that you cited says (among other things)

Point 1 says nobody can carry out exorcisms unless appointed by the Bishop. I agree.

Point 2 follows that the laity cannot perform exorcisms. I agree.

And point 3 merely concerns “those who lack the required power attempt to lead assemblies in which prayers are employed to obtain liberation from demons”.

None of this does away with the concept that intergenerational sin effects exist vames. As a matter of fact the same letter that you cited goes on to state. . . .

Of course, the enunciation of these norms should not stop the faithful of Christ from praying, as Jesus taught us, that they may be freed from evil (cf. Mt 6:13). Moreover, Pastors should take this opportunity to remember what the tradition of the Church teaches about the function properly assigned to the intercession of the Most Blessed Virgin Mary, the Apostles and the Saints, even in the spiritual battle of Christians against the evil spirits.

If you are going to apply point 1, 2, and 3 to intergenerational sin effects, you have to also include the concluding statement which explicitly discusses:

Of course, the enunciation of these norms should not stop the faithful of Christ from praying, as Jesus taught us, that they may be freed from evil (cf. Mt 6:13) . . . . even in the spiritual battle of Christians against the evil spirits.

. . . the old formula of exorcism against Satan and the fallen angels referenced in the document contained zero allusions to generational sins, curses and healings.

Yet another mischaracterization vames. Nobody is talking about exorcism and “possessed” people here (except you). You statement is pointless concerning this issue.

You have not made your case vames. Nothing you have said here argues against the existence of the effects of intergenerational sin. NOTHING.

But again my point is your citation of Ezekiel 18 and John 9 were and remain irrelevant (concerning this issue).

You either don’t understand the issue, or you are willing to keep ignoring it and attacking straw men (WHY you would do this I don’t know. I will assume no malice on your part and you keep attacking straw men just out of you not understanding the issue).

I’ll deal with the Matthew 12 aspect in the next post.

 

[BluesPicker]

Quotes from “ON FAMILY-TREE HEALING” By Fr. James Manjackal MSFS

The book of Isaiah speaks of a curse that devours the earth, “The earth is polluted because of its inhabitants who have transgressed the laws, violated statutes, broken the ancient covenant. Therefore a curse devours the earth and its inhabitants pay for their guilt” (Is 24: 5-6). And the New Testament very clearly says “Cursed be everyone who does not persevere in doing all the things written in the book of the law” (Gal 3: 10); and in the following words we read, “That Jesus Christ ransomed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse” (Gal 3: 30). As the Catholic ministers have the duty of administering forgiveness and reconciliations to the believers with the authority and power given to them by Jesus Christ through the Church, they have the equal duty and obligation to break the curses and the evil consequences which follow the non observances of the commandments.

We don’t inherit the sin weight of our forefathers but we suffer from the effects of their sin.

You are doing the works of your father (referring to Satan)……you belong to your father, the devil, and you willingly carry out your fathers desires” (Jn 8: 41, 44). The Jews had the “tradition” of killing the prophets, so the spirit of murder was passed on to generations, to which Jesus was referring here.

In fact the Catholic teaching on original sin and the removal of its consequence by Christian baptism is in itself is a confirmation of the theory that the evil effect of sin can be transferred into generations and that it can be removed by sacraments and prayers. If we are still affected by the sin of the first parents of the first family on earth, how much more will the sins of our ancestors in our families, to whom we have a very close blood relation, affect our lives negatively! I do agree that the sacraments have great power to break curses and to take away the negative consequences of all sins committed by our ancestors, and we who are in the ministry of healing instruct the believers to take recourse to sacraments, prayers, penance and sacrifices in the Church to obtain healing and liberation. In fact through the ministry of healing we are bringing the believers to a deeper experience of the power of the Sacraments in the Church especially the Sacrament of reconciliation and the Holy Eucharist.

---

How in the world can you speak about inter-generational curses and not address families that have sold themselves by pacts with Satan and/or consecrations to Satan, etc.?

Vames is correct in pointing out that one may go overboard with healing the family tree. By this I mean baptizing the dead and other types of rituals that approach ancestor worship. It is not the sin that is passed down but the effects of sin.

   Our sins are forgiven in sacramental confession; but we have to pay retribution for them.   In the same way baptism removes the stain of  Original Sin but we still live in a fallen world and we have to strive and toil to overcome the effects of  Original Sin.

   If a person would see the effects of abortion, particularly legalized abortion  they would be fighting this tooth and nail.

The reason I posted the canons of the old 1917 Code of Canon Law is because I attached a book written by a disciple of St, Kolbe in 1944. Therein lies a good description of the theology concerning deliverance. It was posted as a series of articles in the Immaculata from May 1973 to December 1973. You want Catholic Tradition there it is written by a Franciscan abbot, a religious Ordinary on par with a diocesan Bishop within his monastery.

One Saint said that if the demons of the air were visible they would blot out the sun. So attempting to make fun of Fr. Amorth by saying “he sees demons around every tree” is not a good approach to criticize him.

Dr. Edward Peter's critic of  Fr. Amorth just shows ignorance and the sad state  of some of our seminaries. His bold arguments about Fr. Amorth can be easily defeated if one investigates and studies the theology of the Church.  Fr. Amorth was ordained in 1956 or 1955.  He knew Padre Pio and wrote a biography of him.  Fr. Amorth is the senior Vatican exorcist and we know very little about him or his publications other then a few interviews.   I think he has 3 books published in English.  If anyone reads about the masonic lodge  Propaganda Due aka   P2  and their exploits that bankrupted or nearly so the country of Italy then you can get an idea of the magnitude this disbanded masonic lodge evil doings.

  Concerning the cremation of Catholics someone wrote (I believe hastily) that the Pope was wrong and the moderator gave them a severe reprimand.  Fr. Amorth's view on Freemasonry reflects the teachings of  Pope Leo XIII, you know the Pope barely a soul pays attention to his writings and instructions. Take up the view Pope Leo XIII has on masonry and you are branded a nut job.  Well, there are young Catholics who are following this Pope and many older Catholics also.

I seriously doubt that anyone of Fr. Amorth’s detractors could beat him in a debate. I am a Catholic Traditionalist in the sense of the historical reality of the Catholic Tradition. You know the Roman Catholic Church that is one Big Deliverance Ministry. The one that individuals are baptized into beginning with “Do you renounce Satan, all his works and pomp.”

BP

 

[Cathoholic]

Matthew 12:43-45 is talking about the effects an “unclean spirit” on “a man” (v. 43).

MATTHEW 12:43-45 43 “When the unclean spirit has gone out of a man, he passes through waterless places seeking rest, but he finds none. 44 Then he says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when he comes he finds it empty, swept, and put in order. 45 Then he goes and brings with him seven other spirits more evil than himself, and they enter and dwell there; and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. So shall it be also with this evil generation.”

In Matthew 12:43-45 there is an individual sense concerning “a man”. But there is also a spiritual (corporate) sense (“house” or “this generation”) to Matthew 12:43-45.

Matthew 12:43-45 has multiple layers of meaning (literal [for those people Jesus was talking to], allegorical [the “House” of Israel or their forefathers], moral [for me], and anagogical [a meaning concerning the destiny for all mankind, especially Christians] see CCC 114-117).

In an allegorical sense, these verses concern the “House” or “oikos” of Israel.

I’ll focus on mostly the allegorical as that would concern the forefathers of the Pharisees here.

The unclean spirit in an allegorical sense went out from our spiritual forefathers (the Israelites) when they received the law through Moses.

So although Matthew 12 refers to “a man”, it also refers to the forefathers of Israel.

The Pharisees were given much good from God through their fathers.

Unfortunately the Pharisees were also given bad examples and teachings from their **“tree” **or their “fathers” too.

These bad forefather teachings and bad examples came from these fathers’ own personal temptations and subsequent sins (we concur on this “personal sin” aspect).

And these bad teachings and examples had adverse effects upon the Pharisees of Jesus’ day (you would agree with that, but qualify it as “all natural” effects I think).

Yet once you admit the bad teachings/examples of our spiritual forefathers came from their own personal sin . . .

. . . . . yet ALSO admit that the forefathers of the Pharisees own personal sins at least in some part was from them yielding to their own personal temptations (from not only the devil, but the flesh and from the world). . . .

. . . . you are in some way affirming the intergenerational effects passed on from the sin and bad examples of their fathers.

That is WHY Jesus refers to these Pharisees as “fruit” and the Pharisees fathers as the “tree” vames. Earlier in verses leading up to Matthew 12:43 Jesus also tells the Pharisees they are offspring or “brood” of “vipers”.

MATTHEW 12:33-35 33 "Either make the tree good, and its fruit good; or make the tree bad, and its fruit bad; for the tree is known by its fruit. 34 You brood of vipers! how can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. 35 The good man out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil man out of his evil treasure brings forth evil.

Earlier the Pharisees were trying to pin a demonic label upon Jesus erroneously saying Jesus casts out demons by their power.

MATTHEW 12:24 24 But when the Pharisees heard it they said, “It is only by Be-elzebul, the prince of demons, that this man casts out demons.”

But Jesus turns the charge they made against Him in Matthew 12:24 around on them as we just saw in Matthew 12:33-35.

Jesus is in effect telling them they see the good works from Him. You Pharisees know these good fruits cannot come of evil. Evil cannot come of good and good cannot come of evil.

Jesus contrasts the kingdom of God (which has “come upon you”) as opposed to Satan’s kingdom (or “his kingdom” which it is actually what the people opposing Jesus are part of here).

MATTHEW 12:26-28 26 and if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? 27 And if I cast out demons by Be-elzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges. 28 But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.

Notice in the context of all of this there is a:

• Brood (or offspring) of vipers (or Satan)
• Kingdom of Satan (“his kingdom” v. 26)
• Bad fruit from a bad “tree”.

MATTHEW 12:33 33 "Either make the tree good, and its fruit good; or make the tree bad, and its fruit bad; for the tree is known by its fruit.

The Pharisees sick spiritual parentage helped bring about an evil mind of the Pharisees vames.

The Pharisees had a habit of speaking and boasting of their parentage (i.e. Abraham) so Jesus makes it clear they are not the spiritual offspring of a good tree but the spiritual offspring of a bad tree (their forefathers).

A bad “tree” bears “bad fruit”.

When the fathers sin, the EFFECTS of these sins injures the "house” (“they [unclean spirits] enter and dwell there”). There is partially a preternatural aspect to this injury.

The Pharisees were not sinning in being injured from their fathers, but they were culpable in following their evil ways that they were taught by their fathers.

But the sin that they learned from their fathers (the tree) had effects on them (the fruit). Not sin per se but a new level of temptation to sin which they gave in to.

This is in part an example of intergenerational sin effects, and part of the reason why we need grace.

Hopefully this helps vames.

God bless.

Cathoholic

 

[vames]

Our sins are forgiven in sacramental confession; but we have to pay retribution for them. In the same way baptism removes the stain of Original Sin but we still live in a fallen world and we have to strive and toil to overcome the effects of Original Sin.

You know very well that the discussion is about EARTHLY punishments, not about the retribution in the afterlife (hell, purgatory) or about the NATURAL consequences of sins. Are you saying that after our sins are forgiven in sacramental confession, God punishes us by sending disasters and illnesses and then God punishes us again in the afterlife? If this is your view of God’s justice, please go to the Vatican site and read every papal message issued for the World Day of the Sick or in solidarity with the victims of any natural disaster, war, injustice and human abuse. Then come back and tell me again about “retribution” and false parallels between the post-Fall world and personal bad luck. The post-Fall world is not hell on earth and we are taught to recognize God in the beauty and harmony of nature and in human love and compassion. We don’t see our world as a continuous punishment for the Original Sin. When we see a blind man we don’t see his blindness as a retribution for what his parents or ancestors did.

Pope Leo XIII condemned freemasonry because its adepts fought against the power of the Church and the papacy. His encyclical on freemasonry nowhere says that freemasons are possessed by the devil and must be exorcized. If you allude to the Leonine Prayers, they were introduced for historical reasons and then eliminated by the Vatican when those reasons became obsolete. I don’t see the point of talking about Propaganda Due, which was a just an ordinary mafia with philosophical pretensions. Just as we don’t assume that a grandson of a murderer is possessed by demons, we can’t assume that a a grandson of a freemason is possessed by demons.

About Fr Amorth - I trust his critics because IMO they have a point. He lost me when he said that an unnecessary exorcism never hurt anybody, in a context where he criticized the new rite of exorcism issued by the Vatican that instructed priests to perform an exorcism only when they are certain of the presence of the devil, IOW only after a careful medical examination and after having studied all the personal circumstances of the person. This was incredibly irresponsible for him to say. Just think about a mentally ill person who suddenly hears that inside him or her is a devil and a priest commands the devil to get out of him or her.

About the book you linked - Let me be skeptical about anyone who says “Those who seek information from fortune tellers and ouija boards, or cures from spiritualists, often become possessed” and “Exorcisms should be used often, and whenever they are needed. When the permission is necessary, it should be obtained, and Ecclesiastical Superiors are not free to say yes or no”, when the Church says that demonic possession is extremely rare.

No, the Roman Catholic Church is not “one Big Deliverance Ministry” as you say. This is a deliverance ministry. Show me the catechism or the Vatican document that proposes the concept of “deliverance ministry” and instructs laypeople how to expell devils right and left. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that each one is responsible for his/her sins and that God’s love, mercy and grace expressed in the sacraments is greater than any sin. Besides, the Church discourages laypeople from excessive curiosity and interest in the demonic, precisely because she is aware that reading books after books about exorcism can lead anyone to assume that humans are hopeless puppets in the hands of the devil and that possession is as common as common cold. A faith based on fearing devils instead of following God is a very sad faith.

 

[vames]

If someone is victimized via intergenerational sin which incidentally, YOU AFFIRM exists vames (but you would merely say it has all natural causes), the person victimized by this intergenerational sin

LIKEWISE:

1. Is going to know they were victimized by someone else’s sin
2. And this victimized person or persons are left asking themselves, “Now that I have been victimized, what can I do to mitigate the effects of it?”

I said that any sin has natural effects: some effects are short-lived, others can transcend generations. This is obviously not what you understand by intergenerational sins and curses. It’s one thing to notice the natural effects of sins and totally another thing to imagine preternatural effects that can be remedied only by specialized “healers”. I can’t believe that you offer the example of a rape to “prove” that people’s sins can affect innocent people and then to claim this is an argument that intergenerational sins exist.

What evidence do you provide for the existence of intergenerational curses? When you assume that demons behave in such a dumb, mechanical way (using an ouija board → demons come running like in a story about Pavlovian conditioning → demons remain there and obsessively haunt the family for another 20-200-2000 years), what makes you believe such a thing? If you assert something that is against the evidence of how the natural world works and against the normal way the Church sees personal responsibility regarding one’s sins (see again the answer of Fr Serpa), the burden of proof is on you to convince others, not on others to disprove you.

And speaking of strawmen, let’s not confuse things. Anyone can pray for the healing of a sick person without assuming or suspecting God’s transgenerational punishment or a curse due to an ancestor who dabbled in the occult. Praying to God isn’t conditioned by the belief in demonic influences, let alone demonic influences that transcend generations and haunt houses like in a Hollywood movie.

About Cardinal Ratzinger’s norms - again, let’s not confuse things: when we pray the Lord’s Prayer every day and say “deliver us from evil”, we don’t assume we are possessed or oppressed by a devil and we don’t assume we suffer from intergenerational curses. Cardinal Ratzinger referenced the Lord’s Prayer precisely to suggest that protecting oneself against evil spirits doesn’t necessitate special deliverance ministries - rather, it can be done just by reciting the most common prayer that Jesus taught us.

Nobody is talking about exorcism and “possessed” people here, except me? Again, let’s not confuse things: when one talks about evil spirits haunting a man or a family, a demonic influence is assumed, regardless if we call it possession, oppression or infestation. It’s not honest to say: Card Ratzinger was talking only about possession, so nothing of what he says applies to what a deliverance ministry does.

Of course you are free to claim that even Ezekiel 18 and John 9 and Matthew 12 support your theory of intergenerational curses. You can interpret the entire Bible according to your preferences. Take Ezekiel: “The parents have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge’? As I live, says the Lord God, this proverb shall no more be used by you in Israel”. Why not discard the obvious meaning and suppose God commanded that this proverb shall be used instead by other nations? See, it’s easy…

The next task is to use the Bible to “prove” that these hypothetical intergenerational curses can be broken only by special deliverance ministries created for this purpose. I have never heard a pope or a priest promoting such a concept. Not even once. You’d think that if the occurence of such curses was alarming, Pope Benedict or Pope Francis would have addressed it and this new theory would have become part of basic Catholic doctrine and catechism. Or at least that the CDF or Pope Benedict would have issued new norms instead of those from 1984. But it didn’t happen.

 

[Cathoholic]

Vames. This is the second time you have mis-stated what I have said concerning the rape victim (and so this will be the second time I correct you).

I can’t believe that you offer the example of a rape to “prove” that people’s sins can affect innocent people and then to claim this is an argument that intergenerational sins exist.

The rape example was merely to show the principle that innocent people suffer from other people’s sins. Not to “prove” the existence of intergenerational sin vames.

Once you admit this concept that innocent people suffer from other people’s sins, then you can begin to apply this concept to other areas.

Innocent people can and do have effects from guilty perpetrators.

Once you admit this, without trying to get it to say something I am not saying and never said, (“claim this is an argument that “proves”] intergenerational sins exist”) I can go further in depth.

So:

I can’t believe that you offer the example of a rape to “prove” . . . is an argument that intergenerational sins exist.

I can’t believe it either vames. And the reason I can’t believe it, is because I didn’t make this argument.

It is sad we cannot have a real discussion here as vames keeps accusing people of saying things nobody is saying and spending potentially useful discussion time “beating up these positions” that he has invented.

Attacking straw men is not persuasive vames. You did this regarding other areas too. I’ll just look at one more of your several mischaracterizations.

vames also said (bold and underline mine):

Of course you are free to claim that even Ezekiel 18 and John 9 and Matthew 12 support your theory of intergenerational curses.

Go back and re-read my posts vames (I invite others to do so too–they are right below).

See if vames is treating my points fairly or if he (hopefully accidentally) is obfuscating what I said.

See if I ever said Ezekiel 18 and John 9 “support” my “theory of intergenerational curses.”

I don’t know if this is a reading comprehension issue for you vames or if you know you are purposefully misrepresenting me . . . . . but a misrepresentation it is.

Here is what I said about Ezekiel 18 and John 9 (and WHEN you misrepresent me again vames, I’ll call you on it again).

**To Readers of this thread ask yourself **if I ever said . . . .

A. Ezekiel 18 and John 9 support the concept of intergenerational sin (the vames accusation).

Of course you are free to claim that even Ezekiel 18 and John 9 and Matthew 12 support your theory of intergenerational curses.

OR

B. Ezekiel 18 and John 9, do not negate the concept of intergenerational sin (what I am saying I said).

Any honest reading, will conclude the answer is “B”.
Any honest reading will affirm “A” is just plain wrong.

I have included quotes for readers who easily want to decide for themselves (I invite you to look them over) . . . .

When we can get past this type of shenanigans vames, we can have a real discussion.

Until then, we’ll have to watch vames sumo-wrestle with his own straw man arguments.

Here is what I really said about Ezekiel 18 and John 9:1-3 . . . .

Post 19

My point was and is, Ezekiel 18 and John 9:1-3 does not contradict the concept of intergenerational sin effects and the questions and issues raised by people about this topic are good questions and deserve a fair discussion.

Post 14

I think the concept does exist though and I will be glad to discuss that issue, but so far all that I have said is that John 9:1-3 and Ezekiel 18 do NOT do away with the concept of intergenerational sin. . . . . As I said, John 9:1-3 (and Ezekiel 18) in no way discounts the concept of the existence of intergenerational sin. Again I stand by that.

Post 10

My point in my post was John 9:1-3 does not refute the concept of intergenerational sin effects. Nor does Ezekiel chapter 18. . . . . . And I stand by my assertion. John 9:1-3 and Ezekiel 18 does not negate the concept of intergenerational sin effects.

Post 7

vames. All that John 9:1-3 shows is that THIS man was not blind because of sins from his parents sins and that THIS man was not blind because of the effect of his own sins.
JOHN 9:1-3 1 As he passed by, he saw a man blind from his birth. 2 And his disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” 3 Jesus answered, "It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be made manifest in him.

Blindness in THIS man is NOT from

• His parents sin

• His own sin

But this set of verses does NOT show that there are NEVER any effects from sin in anyone from . . . .

• Their parents sins

• Their own sins

Ezekiel 18 merely shows that there is no accountability from sins of parents at their judgment.

Ezekiel 18 also shows that there is no advantage at your judgment from the righteousness of parents.

Ezekiel 18 does NOT show (nor does John 9:1-3) that there are no EFFECTS from sins or righteousness of your parents.

It is very sad that we cannot even have the discussion because vames is trying to have people say things they are not saying (so we can never seem to get to the real issues).

Now vames, you can show us why Matthew 12 is not associated with at least some preternatural aspects.

 

[vames]

Once you admit this concept that innocent people suffer from other people’s sins, then you can begin to apply this concept to other areas.

Innocent people suffer the natural effects of other people’s sins (as shown by the example of the raped woman) => we can begin to theorize about intergenerational curses? What kind of logic is this?

B. Ezekiel 18 and John 9, do not negate the concept of intergenerational sin (what I am saying I said). [/INDENT]

I asked you what positive evidence do you have that intergenerational curses exist. To prove the existence of something it’s not enough to say “there are verses in the Bible that don’t negate my interpretation”. I hope there’s at least one person who can understand that when I said “you are free to claim that *even *Ezekiel 18 and John 9 and Matthew 12 support your theory of intergenerational curses. You can interpret the entire Bible according to your preferences” I didn’t claim you actually did that. I only made a hypothetical scenario, a reduction to the absurd, precisely to show that when one already has a theory, he can interpret any verse to make it appear *compatible *with his theory. If I believe the earth is flat, I can say in all sincerity that Ezekiel 18 or Matthew 12 don’t negate my theory. But if I want to actually *prove *that the earth is flat, I need 1) at least a verse or a chapter where my theory is clearly affirmed; 2) that the whole context of the NT and of Jesus’ message supports my theory; 3) that the Catholic doctrine supports my theory; 4) that there is enough empirical evidence of my theory in real-life situations.

Now vames, you can show us why Matthew 12 is not associated with at least some preternatural aspects.

I don’t have to show you anything. I already wrote about it (post #20) and I cited what my own Catholic bible lists as a reference for Mt 12.

 

[Cathoholic]

Matthew 12:43-45 has multiple layers of meaning (literal [for those people Jesus was talking to], allegorical [the “House” of Israel or their forefathers], moral [for me], and anagogical [a meaning concerning the destiny for all mankind, especially Christians] see CCC 114-117).

MATTHEW 12:33-35, 43-45 33 "Either make the tree good, and its fruit good; or make the tree bad, and its fruit bad; for the tree is known by its fruit. 34 You brood of vipers! how can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. 35 The good man out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil man out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. . . . . 43 “When the unclean spirit has gone out of a man, he passes through waterless places seeking rest, but he finds none. 44 Then he says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when he comes he finds it empty, swept, and put in order. 45 Then he goes and brings with him seven other spirits more evil than himself, and they enter and dwell there; and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. So shall it be also with this evil generation.”

vames. You said (concerning the context of Matthew 12:43-45):

The only interpretation of Mt 12 that I know is that Jesus rebukes the scribes and Pharisees who suspected him of using demonic powers and asked for signs. He cautions them that 1) it’s not enough to be righteous like a Pharisee to be holy - they needed to recognize Jesus as the Son of God and to become “filled” with His presence . . . .

This is the literal sense vames and I concur with much of this.

But there is more vames. Some of the “more” you did get as well . . . .

1. . . . For us, it means that we as Christians are held to a higher standard than anybody else. My own bible lists 2 Peter 2:20 as relevant reference for this passage and 2 Peter 2:20 is clearly about the sins and bad habits of each of us.

This is part of the moral (“me”) and an anagogical sense (“each of us”) and is also true vames.

But there is another layer of meaning here in Matthew 12:43-45 too that you completely ignored. You ignored the allegorical sense.

And we know an allegorical sense can be applied here.

That’s why Jesus uses the word “tree” and “offspring” (or “brood”) and oikos or “house” (root for household) in this contextual backdrop.

An allegorical sense shows that Jesus is referring to the patrimony of the Pharisees.

In an allegorical sense, these verses concern the “House” or “oikos” of Israel.

If that’s the case (and it is), the unclean spirit went out from the Israelites when they were given the law vames.

The demonic influences after Israel was given the law went out to “dry places.”

Then these demonic influences soon came back to the house of Israel. That’s what Jesus is alluding to here allegorically vames.

And the Pharisees were influenced by their own forefathers vames. That’s WHY Jesus calls them “brood” of vipers.

The Pharisees make boast of their forefathers, yet Jesus assigns them a parentage not of Abraham (and the proverbial hall of fame), but of the forefathers who did not listen to God (the proverbial hall of shame).

The Pharisees being from corrupt trees, cannot bring forth good fruit vames.

That’s what Jesus is alluding to in Matthew 12:43-45 in an allegorical sense vames.

Once you can admit an allegorical sense, you will see Jesus is talking about the forefathers of the Pharisees (their example) and how the Pharisees themselves are following their example (which was influenced in part by “unclean spirits”).

When you see the allegorical aspect, ask yourself about the “unclean spirits” Jesus talks about, as well as the “tree”, and the “house” and the “fruit” that Jesus mentions.

 

[vames]

When you see the allegorical aspect, ask yourself about the “unclean spirits” Jesus talks about, as well as the “tree”, and the “house” and the “fruit” that Jesus mentions.

When you hear “demon” and understand “demon”, this is literal meaning. When you hear “demon” and understand “sin/temptation/weakness”, this is spiritual meaning. When you hear “the unclean spirit brings along seven other spirits more evil than itself” and understand a real haunted house, this is literal meaning. When you hear the same phrase and understand “you, the scribes and Pharisees, are more guilty than the pagans of Nineveh, because you have heard the message of the Son of God and refused to listen”, this is allegorical meaning. When you hear the same phrase and understand “if one is only pharisaically righteous instead of becoming receptive to the message of Jesus and filled with the spirit of God’s love, you can’t become holy”, this is moral meaning. When you hear the same phrase and understand “the ones who are privileged to hear the message of Jesus are held to a higher standard than anybody else”, this is anagogical meaning. As 2 Peter puts it, “20 For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overpowered, the last state has become worse for them than the first. 21 For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than, after knowing it, to turn back from the holy commandment that was passed on to them”.

Jesus keeps talking about “this generation” precisely because He emphasizes her own responsibility: “by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned”. Their bad words and deeds are the fruit of their own hardened hearts. I don’t see any bad inheritance from their forefathers: on the contrary, Jonah and Solomon are explicitly seen as good and worthy, only that Jesus is greater than them.

So keep it simple and make sure to consider the whole context: Mt 12 is not terribly difficult to interpret. I mean it’s not one of the passages that leave us scratching our heads and speculating a lot. And please, stop trying to make me guilty for daring not to agree with your interpretation. I didn’t invent the interpretation of Mt 12 that I talked about. I didn’t invent my adnotated bible. But I subscribe to that interpretation because I find it the most logical one and the most close to the spirit of Jesus’ whole message.

 

[Cathoholic]

please, stop trying to make me guilty for daring not to agree with your interpretation.

Actually vames I didn’t try to make you feel “guilty”. I tried to agree with you where I could.

This is what I said:

This is the literal sense vames and I concur with much of this. . . .

But there is more vames. Some of the “more” you did get as well . . . .

This is part of the moral (“me”) and an anagogical sense (“each of us”) and is also true vames.

Doesn’t sound like guilt induction to me vames. As I actually said, I am not trying to get you to believe ANY of this vames.

But I will point out that there are more aspects here. Aspects you are missing. And by the way, you don’t have to feel guilty about not believing this “more” either vames (“house”, “tree”, “fruit”, “unclean spirits”).

I am not trying to get you to believe any of it. But I do. I believe all of it.

When you hear the same phrase and understand “you, the scribes and Pharisees, are more guilty than the pagans of Nineveh, because you have heard the message of the Son of God and refused to listen”, this is allegorical meaning.

You are right here too vames. They HAVE heard the message of the Son of God and refused to listen and thus have increased culpability.

I agree with all of this. But that’s only part of it. There are more verses and more aspects vames.

And ALSO they HAVE heard the message of the proverbial hall of fame—the good fathers and refused to listen to them.

on the contrary, Jonah and Solomon are explicitly seen as good and worthy, only that Jesus is greater than them.

And I am glad you implied potential intergenerational blessing effects being passed down here too vames (Jonah and Solomon as you said are, “seen as good”— Jonah and Solomon have set a good example [in some ways] and this too has potential good effects on future generations).

Sometimes people talk about intergenerational sin effects but neglect to talk about intergenerational benediction effects (these are spiritual goods from the communion of saints or the treasury of merit and even this has a preternatural aspect to it) and how much stronger this is. I am glad you brought this up and seem to affirm this concept.

But the Pharisees have ALSO heard the message of the proverbial hall of shame too—their bad forefathers—and these are people the Pharisees DID listen too. (Forefathers like King Ahaz of Judah who attacked Israel upon consulting with demons and offering child sacrifices to those demons which incidentally had “effects” on those children that died—another example of intergenerational sin effects with a preternatural element to it).

This following in some of the rotten footsteps of their forefathers is why the context concerns “oikos” or “house”, “tree” and “fruit”, and these are all mentioned with an explicit preternatural aspect to this too “evil spirit(s)”.

And Jesus applies this all to the Pharisees of his day (including the Pharisees “tree” and “house”).

vames said:

So keep it simple and make sure to consider the whole context: Mt 12 is not terribly difficult to interpret.

Actually I though I had considered the “whole” context vames.

vames replied:

I don’t see any bad inheritance from their forefathers

That’s fine vames. I do.

Others have too.

ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM So you being corrupt trees cannot bring forth good fruit. I do not wonder then that you thus speak, for you are ill nourished of ill parentage, and have an evil mind. . . . . He calls them generation of vipers, because they made boast of their forefathers; in order therefore to cut off this their pride, He shuts them out of the race of Abraham, assigning them a parentage corresponding to their characters.

ST. JEROME So the context of the passage may not shift about loosely and vaguely, and be like unmeaning speeches, but may be consistent with itself from first to last. The unclean spirit then went out from the Jews when they received the Law; and being cast out of the Jews, he walked through the wilderness of the Gentiles; as it follows, He walks through dry places seeking rest.

• In affirming these Pharisee forefathers examples and the effect it had on the Pharisees, I am not denying these Pharisees also had effects directly from their own sin in and of themselves.
• I am not saying the Pharisees were responsible or accountable for the sins of their forefathers.
• And I am not denying these teachings have meaning for us today.

So please don’t mischaracterize me and say that is what I am saying—I am not saying any of that.

But there are effects from the forefathers of the Pharisees some of which had preternatural aspects (idol worship), and there were far reaching effects from this vames, both in bad example (associated with preternatural aspects, not divorced from it) and lives lost (again associated with preternatural aspects).

That is part of what the final judgment will reveal someday vames (the furthest consequences the good each person has done or failed to do during his earthly life—and there ARE far reaching consequences vames).

CCC 1039a In the presence of Christ, who is Truth itself, the truth of each man’s relationship with God will be laid bare.626 The Last Judgment will reveal even to its furthest consequences the good each person has done or failed to do during his earthly life . . . .

 

[vames]

But I will point out that there are more aspects here. Aspects you are missing.

Any individual, tribe or nation has among its ancestors good and bad people, remarkable generations and disappointing generations. Any individual, tribe or nation tends to deny the worst ancestors and to emphasize the importance of their best ancestors instead - sometimes even to boast about them, especially when the present achievements of the individual etc. are not so great. The Pharisees were in this latter situation, boasting about their noble genealogy - the race of Abraham. This pride has blinded them and has made them despise and reject Jesus (and not only Jesus, but other tribes too). So Jesus suggests that their behavior hasn’t anything to do with the merit of Abraham, Jonah or Solomon and if they have to find any ancestors to match their real situation, these ancestors must have been the worst of the Jews. “If it talks like a duck, it must be a duck, even if the duck pretends it is a swan, because a duck can’t talk like a swan.” This is what St John Chrysostom says.

So if we want to use the concept of “intergenerational blessing/curse”, it’s easy to see that the Pharisees wrongly assumed the existence of a “blessing effect” from Abraham, Jonah or Solomon, because any potential blessing was nullified by their own bad words and deeds. As Jesus said, “by *your *words you will be justified, and by *your *words you will be condemned” = not by the merit of your best ancestors.

I don’t know what the quote from St Jerome is supposed to demonstrate here. St Jerome simply wanted to oppose those who have hypothesized that the casting out/returning of the unclean spirit refers to heretics or to men in general, so he offers his own hypothesis - that the passage refers strictly to the Jewish people. It was a not so nice way of saying that, at the end of the day, the unclean spirit must return to the Jewish people, because the Gentiles are not a “place” where an unclean spirit can find its rest.

But there are effects from the forefathers of the Pharisees some of which had preternatural aspects (idol worship), and there were far reaching effects from this vames, both in bad example (associated with preternatural aspects, not divorced from it) and lives lost (again associated with preternatural aspects).

To say that idol worship implies preternatural effects on the worshippers or on their descendants is to believe that idols correspond to real spiritual beings. But none of us believes that the golden calf was anything else than a piece of metal.

We know for sure there’s only one God, but the ancient peoples of the OT weren’t so sure. When pagan tribes worshipped the sun, a bull or a feathered serpent, this reflected their understanding of the divine, because they didn’t have yet a notion of a monotheistic God. The history of religions shows the transition from animal worship and polytheism to henotheism and then monotheism; this transition is reflected in some parts of the OT from the angle of writers who weren’t so convinced yet that there is only one God. So to say “there are effects from the forefathers of the Pharisees some of which had preternatural aspects (idol worship)” can be true only if we assume a polytheistic or henotheistic perspective.

That is part of what the final judgment will reveal someday vames (the furthest consequences the good each person has done or failed to do during his earthly life—and there ARE far reaching consequences vames).

CCC 1039a In the presence of Christ, who is Truth itself, the truth of each man’s relationship with God will be laid bare.626 The Last Judgment will reveal even to its furthest consequences the good each person has done or failed to do during his earthly life . . . .

A just God doesn’t punish people for the unintentional and unforeseen effects of what they do. As we all know, nobody can calculate and anticipate all the possible direct and indirect consequences of his actions: this would mean omniscience. And there are a lot of bad things that parents and authorities do with the best of intentions for their children or communities. A man who has freely chosen to become an atheist can be firmly convinced that it’s in the best interest of his child to raise him as an atheist. A king or president or religious leader of the past could have been firmly convinced that he did God’s will and defended his people by repressing his opponents and conquering other countries. So “the furthest consequences” from the CCC cannot be interpreted as in “as long as any possible consequences may still persist, regardless of the intentions and degree of knowledge of that person”.

 

[Cathoholic]

Pretty good post vames. Better discussion. More light and less heat.

You said:

As Jesus said, “by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned” = not by the merit of your best ancestors.

vames. I concur. But nobody here is saying the Pharisees are “justified” or “condemned” on account of the merit of their ancestors OK?

All that I am pointing out is that there were influences of their ancestors (their “tree”) in Matthew chapter 12.

So far “influences” are no problem for the Pharisees in and of themselves.

But then the Pharisees “sponged up” some of these bad “influences” from their “tree” (that IS an issue). The Pharisees willfully made the sins of their ancestors their own. And this is even in the context of “unclean spirit(s)”.

And these guys are the “fruit” of that “tree” (which is WHY St. John Chrysostom can say the Pharisees are: “ill nourished of ill parentage” and St. Jerome sees the “tree” went back at least all the way back to Mount Sinai “when they received the Law”).

Perhaps the Pharisees “sponged up” some of these bad influences by mere bad example yes.

But to do so already admits some EFFECTS of intergenerational sin (by bad example) upon the “house” or “oikos”.

And if those forefathers were involved in any way with pagan practices (and many of them were), then there is at least an element of a preternatural aspect to it.

Here is the syllogism I am trying to make:

Major premise: Demons influenced the “tree” (Pharisees forefathers).

Minor premise: The “tree” (Pharisees forefathers) influenced the “fruit” (Pharisees).

Conclusion: So at least indirectly the demons had some influence upon the “fruit”.

These scandals by the forefathers had effects upon the people. And the fact that the Pharisees are perpetuating sin by their bad example even brings a curse upon themselves.

And the Pharisees behavior sends a bad example (here are some of those “effects” again) for their bodily offspring (their kids) as well as their spiritual offspring at the Temple that they had an obligation to appropriately teach by their office yet did not do so.

CCC 2285 Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized. It prompted our Lord to utter this curse: "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea."86 Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others. Jesus reproaches the scribes and Pharisees on this account: he likens them to wolves in sheep’s clothing.87

(bold CCC mine)

Now let’s look at the idolatry issue in a little more detail.

 

[Cathoholic]

vames. You said.

But none of us believes that the golden calf was anything else than a piece of metal.

I agree with this too vames. Yet it still involves demons.

All idols ARE mere pieces of stone or metal or whatever. Yet even so, the offering made to them is to demons and not God.

1st CORINTHIANS 8:4b, 10:19-20a 4b we know that “an idol has no real existence,” and that “there is no God but one.” . . . . 19 What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20 No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God.

(bold mine)

But we can’t conclude there are no “effects” from idolatry just because the idols themselves are pieces of metal.

Just a common sense example: If a guy’s palm reader or “spirit guide” or whatever tells him to dump his wife and kids because he will find happiness with another woman . . . . . and if he does this . . . . .

Are there any EFFECTS upon the children that dad dumped? Of course there are.

This is already affirming EFFECTS of intergenerational sin.

How “far” or how many generations will these effects touch if dad does this? I don’t know.

I would suggest God intervenes to make it quite brief (only three or four generations for the most part if Exodus 20 means what I think it means).

I would also suggest God intervenes concerning the good works done in grace too. God proverbially bolsters up the good.

**
EXODUS 20:5-6 5b** I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.

Regarding what I said about consequences and the “ripple effect” of those sins (or the good ripple effect of the good works):

Cathoholic:

That is part of what the final judgment will reveal someday vames (the furthest consequences the good each person has done or failed to do during his earthly life—and there ARE far reaching consequences vames).

Then I cited CCC 1039 (bold and ul mine).

CCC 1039a In the presence of Christ, who is Truth itself, the truth of each man’s relationship with God will be laid bare.626 The Last Judgment will reveal even to its furthest consequences the good each person has done or failed to do during his earthly life . . . .

Vames, you said in response:

As we all know, nobody can calculate and anticipate all the possible direct and indirect consequences of his actions: this would mean omniscience.

I agree they cannot do this. But I am not arguing that people “can calculate and anticipate all the possible direct and indirect consequences of his actions”.

I am saying that we will be held to account for all the effects of our sins some day and we will be shown WHY we will be held accountable.

If there were no intergenerational effects to your sins vames (and my sins), this would be pointless for God to show us the effects of our sins (or good works) upon others “even to its furthest consequences” at the end of time.

You said:

A just God doesn’t punish people for the unintentional and unforeseen effects of what they do.

Why would being held accountable “for every careless word (we) utter” transgress justice?

Vames. You already quoted: “by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned”. Those words you quoted come from . . .

MATTHEW 12:36-37 36 I tell you, on the day of judgment men will render account for every careless word they utter; 37 for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned."

We must render account for it all vames. That is part of the reason for the General Judgment.

Again there are GOOD effects that emanate from our lives too (assuming we are in a state of grace).

ROMAN CATECHISM Reasons For General Judgment

It is necessary to show why, besides the particular judgment of each individual, a general one should also be passed upon all men.

Those who depart this life sometimes leave behind them children who imitate their conduct, dependents, followers and others who admire and advocate their example, language and actions. Now by all these circumstances the rewards or punishments of the dead must needs be increased, since the good or bad influence of example, affecting as it does the conduct of many, is to terminate only with the end of the world. . . . .

(bold and ul Roman Catechism and Sacred Scripture mine)

 

[TheHolyTrinity]

There are two aspects of sin. Original Sin and Personal Sin. Generational Healing is specific to personal sin of our past ancestors. Generational Healing is not for original sin of Adam and Eve, baptism.

We are not morally responsible for the Fall of Adam, Our Lord assured us through Baptism that the Original Sins will be washed away. Our Lord did create us as an interdependent race so that we can/do suffer spiritually and bodily from the sins of others.

404 How did the sin of Adam become the sin of all his descendants? The whole human race is in Adam “as one body of one man”.293 By this “unity of the human race” all men are implicated in Adam’s sin, as all are implicated in Christ’s justice. Still, the transmission of original sin is a mystery that we cannot fully understand. But we do know by Revelation that Adam had received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature. By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state.294 It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” - a state and not an act.

405 Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

407 The doctrine of original sin, closely connected with that of redemption by Christ, provides lucid discernment of man’s situation and activity in the world. By our first parents’ sin, the devil has acquired a certain domination over man, even though man remains free. Original sin entails “captivity under the power of him who thenceforth had the power of death, that is, the devil”. Ignorance of the fact that man has a wounded nature inclined to evil gives rise to serious errors in the areas of education, politics, social action and morals.

408 The consequences of original sin and of all men’s personal sins put the world as a whole in the sinful condition aptly described in St. John’s expression, “the sin of the world”. This expression can also refer to the negative influence exerted on people by communal situations and social structures that are the fruit of men’s sins.

409 This dramatic situation of “the whole world [which] is in the power of the evil one” makes man’s life a battle

Generational Healing is not about putting blame onto past generations who have committed sins that are affecting ones live today, it is about the moral duty each person has to Our Lord to put right past wrongs so that we can heal and be closer to Our Lord. Our Lord gave us free will and Our Lord has also permitted us to misuse that freedom and interdependence, with all its tragic results. Generational Healing takes time to resolve, it is not a quick fix.

In Exodus 20:5 states that Our Lord: “visits the sins of the parents on their children to the third and fourth generation”

Healing for the past is certainly an aspect of the Church’s ministry of healing prayer today. Important also to include in your prayers not just recent loved members who have passed away. To began from your parents family line and going all the way back to when Jesus died on the cross for our sins, I often will pray through all the generations back to Adam and Eve.

God Bless
THT

 

[Cathoholic]

Prayer - **NEEDS and DEEDS for Me & Thee & HPP & C **

TheHolyTrinity Good suggestion here:

Important also to include in your prayers not just recent loved members who have passed away.

I have derived a mnemonic that I will share with you and anyone else interested about prayer for all of those in my life.

**
NEEDS and DEEDS for Me & Thee & HPP & C**

What does this mean? I’ll get to that in a moment but I want to first preface my comments with the fact that yes I pray for the whole world (especially in my Divine Mercy Chaplet) daily as I am sure you do too.

(Yes I do other daily prayers too—such as prayers of Adoration, contrition, and thanksgiving.)

I just don’t want readers to read, “NEEDS and DEEDS for Me & Thee & HPP & C” and come away scandalized thinking because I pray for these items I am ignoring other prayer (such as prayer of adoration, etc.). I’m not. On public forums people can come away with some bizarre conclusions if you don’t make yourself pretty clear. Sometimes even if you do try to make yourself clear peculiar conclusions can be derived.

Fr. Altier (some of his talks can be heard here and here and here) frequently urges among other things, the “ACTS” prayer mnemonic (a different but common prayer mnemonic ACTS = Adoration, Contrition for our sins, Thanksgiving, and then Supplication). I recommend that too.

I have even urged my kids (even when they were little kids) to pray for their future spouses even if they don’t know who they are. I told them if they become Priests, their spouse will be the Church, if nuns their spouse will be Jesus and their prayers will not be “wasted”.

I was thinking of all the people I pray for in an especial manner and that of course is the people that God has put into my life. The closer they are to me, the more I feel like I am called to be praying for them.

Here is a little mnemonic that I can see when praying for the people God has put in my life (yes I pray for many other specific intentions too—this is just part of my daily prayer routine but I thought I’d share the mnemonic in case anyone else finds it useful).

NEEDS and DEEDS for Me & Thee & HPP & C

OK. What does all of this mean?

The What
The “Needs and deeds” aspect of prayer is pretty self-explanatory.

The Who
Me – Is also fairly obvious
Thee – Is all the people God has put directly in my life (this includes you folks hare at CAF).
H – Horizontal family (My spouse, my immediate family such as my children [who will soon be prayed for again], my mom and dad, and my brothers and sisters and their families, my in-laws and their families–my wife terms this “our big family”).
P – Patrimony (My parents, grandparents, etc. who are alive and the souls of all such all the way back who have passed on too)
P – Progeny (My children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, etc. etc. yes even though in many cases they are not even conceived much less born yet. God knows who they will be as God is outside of time (Incidentally, I am NOT advocating the pre-existing souls error of Origen—that is erroneous and condemned)

The What AND Who
C – C of course is The Church. The Church that Jesus founded. The Catholic Church.

So in a nutshell this mnemonic for intergenerational grace I pray for is (and yes some of these people get prayed for on multiple occasions–that’s OK too and yes I broaden my “Horizontal family” definition beyond what some would).

**
NEEDS and DEEDS for Me & Thee & HPP & C**

Maybe some will find this mnemonic useful for them, others, mere trivia.

 

[MatureMomG]

Clever, I like it. Thanks.

 

[BluesPicker]

vames:
Vames,

     Having a bad hair day or maybe a bit of undigested pork?   Why does it not surprise me when you admit you don't know what Church documents allow lay ministries of deliverance? 

     L'Obsservatore Ramano is a Church/Vatican publication and this citation concerns the way a lay person can by his Bishop be conferred public faculties to say public solemn exorcism in seemingly contradiction of  the Law.

" While the ministry of exorcist is not preserved as a common institution of the Latin Church by Pope Paul VI’s reform of the discipline of the first tonsure, minor orders and subdiaconate promulgated Aug. 15 1972, it can be estabilished as a formal instituion in particular regions by episcopal conferences with the permission of the Holy See. In such cases the ministry would be conferred on laymen, Regardless of that, however public, simple exercisms will continuse to be performed by bishops, priests and deacons, who are their proper minsters in virtue of their Holy Orders. Bishops will continue to authorize priests and possibly deacons to perform public exorcisms of po possessed persons when needed. Presumably, a bishop could give permission to a lay exorcist to perform public exorcisms where episcopal conferences have formally established the ministry of exorcist. Cf. L’Osservatore Romano, Eng. ed, 9/21/72 p. 9-Ed."

Requests for back-copies or archive material may be sent by post to:
L’Osservatore Romano Archives, 00120 Vatican City
via fax: (+39)06.69883675,
or via e-mail: archivio@ossrom.va

  If a lay person can be conferred faculties to say a public exorcism then why does a lay ministry of deliverance bother you?   

  There was one person who listened and reacted as he listened to Fr. Amorth's discontent over the New Rite of Exorcism.  His name is now Blessed John Paul II and he allowed priests the option of choosing between the New Rite and the Old Rite of Exorcism.  Also, he allowed priests to use the traditional priestly rites of Blessings in lieu of the New Book of Blessings that seems to have done away with  constitutive blessing and reducing every prayer and action to an invocative blessing.

  Now I am certain that if you respond it will be something unique.  The Cure de Ars defined possession in a different manner and sense than "living puppets of the devil":

"The Devil only Tempts those Souls that wish to Abandon Sin, and those that are in a State of Grace. The others belong to him; he has no need to Tempt them. The Greatest of all Evils is not to be Tempted, because there are then grounds for Believing, that the Devil looks upon us, as his Property (Property or Possessions). Saint John Vianney

     The part in Red Font are my words.  I hope sincerely that you can elucidate   on matters and not use ad hominems, strawmans & shifting ground.  I actually hold to much of what you say because it is true; but that doesn't touch on generational anythings, blessings or curses, not the examples you provided.  Examples that I for one never implied or said and surely not by Fr. Amorth.

Peace,
BP
PS:: I love THT’s and Cathoholic’s Posts.

 

[BluesPicker]

Vames,

     L'Obsservatore Ramano is a Church/Vatican publication and this citation concerns the way a lay person can by his Bishop be conferred public faculties to say public solemn exorcism in seemingly contradiction of  the Law.

" While the ministry of exorcist is not preserved as a common institution of the Latin Church by Pope Paul VI’s reform of the discipline of the first tonsure, minor orders and subdiaconate promulgated Aug. 15 1972, it can be estabilished as a formal instituion in particular regions by episcopal conferences with the permission of the Holy See. In such cases the ministry would be conferred on laymen, Regardless of that, however public, simple exercisms will continuse to be performed by bishops, priests and deacons, who are their proper minsters in virtue of their Holy Orders. Bishops will continue to authorize priests and possibly deacons to perform public exorcisms of po possessed persons when needed. Presumably, a bishop could give permission to a lay exorcist to perform public exorcisms where episcopal conferences have formally established the ministry of exorcist. Cf. L’Osservatore Romano, Eng. ed, 9/21/72 p. 9-Ed."

Requests for back-copies or archive material may be sent by post to:
L’Osservatore Romano Archives, 00120 Vatican City
via fax: (+39)06.69883675,
or via e-mail: archivio@ossrom.va
.

 Troubled,  I feared this may confuse some.  I know of a man who is an ExtraOrdinary Minister of the Eucharist.  He lives in what we call a 3rd World country but the presence of the Catholic Church in this mountainous country dominants the whole region not just this country.   Several times a month by pack mule this man leaves his young wife and children to bring the Eucharist to remote little villages populated sparsely yet these are little outposts of the Church.   This man in correspondence mentioned something about praying over possessed people.  Belief me,  I  don't think that lay people should pray directly or by any means where the person  under any sort of spiritual attack can hear even invocations asking Jesus Christ to free this person i.e. deliverance prayers.  Much less on a regular basis do so and not over those who maybe  possessed.  Oh,  this person said that he had his Bishop's permission.   

   In these regions this man traveled to by pack mule where pagan strongholds that resisted Christianity.  Even today, there are indications that this pagan religion which here was a form of animism that had human sacrifices and sacrifices of animals.  St. Paul in his letters writes of elemental spirits and they are associated with animism, the false belief basically that spirits animate the forces of nature. These elemental spirits are nothing but fallen angels.  They are the ones every pagan country with the exception of  Israel the Hebrews of the OT.   Satan & his apostates want people to worship them and influenced the minds of the pagans.  They influenced people to create images like the golden calf  in Exodus.  They influenced people to sacrifice their children in returned from some type of imagined reward.  Anyway up in these remote villages superstition still persist and people may revert back into practicing false occult rituals.  And just as in Christ's own time many people up there are possessed.   There is an unseen spiritual battle going on and the playground is the souls of those people.  There are forces that have a hold on these people in the form of persistent superstitions associated with their ancestor's traditions of paganism. 

 There is an unwritten Law that governs all written Laws.  It is the Law of Love that Christ instituted, taught and lived by.   This Law unites the 3 theological Virtues of  Faith, Hope & Charity.  Jesus Christ  was accused of breaking the Law by the Pharisees when He acted out of compassion, mercy and charity to cast demons out on the Sabbath.   Our Bishops are never hemmed in by the Law in their pastoral mission to minister to the People of God and the Law of Love dominates our Catholic Church.    The Catholic Church is a Supernatural Organism and our Bishops can act with permission of the Vatican in episcopal conference.  Our Church adheres perfectly with Holy Scriptures. 

I hope you all would pray for the ExtraOrdinary  Eucharistic minister his initials are RSC.

The sole reason why Christ became Man was precisely to deliver us from this domination of Satan, to conquer him and his kingdom, and to establish on earth the Kingdom of God. Even though Christ, by His passion and death has conquered Satan, and the ultimate destruction of his kingdom is certain, the Evil One is still allowed to roam about the world with a certain freedom to tempt souls. And if he lost the battle in his encounter with Christ, he has not lost any of his superhuman powers - his intelligence far superior to that of man . . . his cleverness . . . his hatred and envy of man, and his desire for our eternal damnation. As Saint Peter warns in his Epistle:

"Your adversary the Devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. Resist him, firm in your faith, realizing that the brotherhood of believers is undergoing the same suffering throughout the world." (5:8) 

  The Church is one big deliverance ministry par excellence.

  I am certain my position is full of error.   I apologize to Vames for writing about the hair day and indigestion.   I actually believe almost everything that Vames writes of.

Pax Christi,
BP