B
BelFarfalla
Guest
I don’t understand the difficulty you have with the term ‘denomination’. Do you consider it insutling?
- Status
S
Subrosa
Guest
I think a case could be made on the grounds of culture. Rome during Augustus (Emperor during Jesus birth) saw a great increase in construction and arts, statues primary among the arts. Yes, the statues were pagan, but many were figures of leaders including Augustus and different senators.
http://employees.oneonta.edu/farberas/arth/Images/109images/Roman/augustus/augustus_primam.jpg
Augustus Caesar
It was a natural transition for christianity to adopt the culture around them, that which they grew up with, to thier own belief system.
Eventually the statues became more chistian in character - such as this depiction of Jesus, with Peter and Paul on either side, stepping on the head of Uranus.
http://www.ou.edu/class/ahi4263/byzslides/027-2.jpg
Detail of the Sarcophagus of Junius Bassus 359ad (Ps. 110 & Luke 20:42-43 - “The Lord said to My Lord, sit at My right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.”)
Believe it or not, the pagans copied the use of incense from the Jews who had been commanded to use it by God. (Exodus 30) The early christian practice of using incense stems from the Levitical practice and simply has never stopped. (i.e. NOT PAGAN!) thenewliturgicalmovement.blogspot.com/2006/12/on-history-and-use-of-incense.htmlAnd didn’t the pagans use incense in their worship, similar to what the Catholics do at Mass? Is this authorized worship in the manner of; “Thus saith the Lord”, or is this purely a man-made ritual/tradition?
Subrosa
H
hosemonkey
Guest
No fighting, just fact. Theology training does not ordination make. Someone with authority MUST ordain you. No protestants possess that authority because they lack apostolic succession. Not withstanding the fact that yes, most of the Apostles were martyred, they ordained Bishops and priests, who in turn, ordained Bishops and priests in an unbroken line from the Apostles themselves. Trust me when I say that I HAVE done my homework. You are free to have your point of view and I am free to refute it.
S
Subrosa
Guest
Hello!!! Discussion on denomination is another thread, boys. Please re-address!
God bless,
Subrosa
God bless,
Subrosa
S
Steel_Arrow
Guest
Let the games begin Hosemonkey! :extrahappy:
By the way, after Peter, what type of traiining did the other popes have in order to become a pope? I seem to recall that nepotism influenced the selection (popes had children!?) OH! NO!:bigyikes:
I also remember in medieval times, only the rich were able to become priests, because they could read, not so much for their spiritual devotion. Also, Bishops’s positions were bought. A historical fact, you know.
Where was the semiary that the priests of Peter’s time went to? How many years were they in training? I ask this since to be a catholic priest, one must complete 8 years of seminary.
Also, for anyone who is interested, you can learn more about me in tis forum, title: Former Catholics, Please Post Your Story Here I am #144.
By the way, after Peter, what type of traiining did the other popes have in order to become a pope? I seem to recall that nepotism influenced the selection (popes had children!?) OH! NO!:bigyikes:
I also remember in medieval times, only the rich were able to become priests, because they could read, not so much for their spiritual devotion. Also, Bishops’s positions were bought. A historical fact, you know.
Where was the semiary that the priests of Peter’s time went to? How many years were they in training? I ask this since to be a catholic priest, one must complete 8 years of seminary.
Also, for anyone who is interested, you can learn more about me in tis forum, title: Former Catholics, Please Post Your Story Here I am #144.
B
BelFarfalla
Guest
Could you please provide a link to the thread?
C
Claude_Kenneson
Guest
Psalm 150
Praise the LORD.
Praise God in his sanctuary; praise him in his mighty heavens. Praise him for his acts of power; praise him for his surpassing greatness. Praise him with the sounding of the trumpet, praise him with the harp and lyre, praise him with tambourine and dancing, praise him with the strings and flute, praise him with the clash of cymbals, praise him with resounding cymbals. Let everything that has breath praise the LORD. Praise the LORD.
Why would Jesus use a parable involving music and dancing if He was opposed to them? Luke 15:25
Why would the 24 elders and others be allowed harps to be used in worship in heaven, but Christians not be allowed any musical instruments in their churches? See Rev. 5:8; 14:2; 15:2
Paul didn’t seem to have a problem with musical instruments. Why do you? He talks about a gong and a cymbal in 1 Cor. 13:1 and the harp, flute and trumpet in 1 Cor. 14:7-8
Praise the LORD.
Praise God in his sanctuary; praise him in his mighty heavens. Praise him for his acts of power; praise him for his surpassing greatness. Praise him with the sounding of the trumpet, praise him with the harp and lyre, praise him with tambourine and dancing, praise him with the strings and flute, praise him with the clash of cymbals, praise him with resounding cymbals. Let everything that has breath praise the LORD. Praise the LORD.
Why would Jesus use a parable involving music and dancing if He was opposed to them? Luke 15:25
Why would the 24 elders and others be allowed harps to be used in worship in heaven, but Christians not be allowed any musical instruments in their churches? See Rev. 5:8; 14:2; 15:2
Paul didn’t seem to have a problem with musical instruments. Why do you? He talks about a gong and a cymbal in 1 Cor. 13:1 and the harp, flute and trumpet in 1 Cor. 14:7-8
H
hosemonkey
Guest
Ah, a former Catholic. So you really came on this forum to agitate, in spite of your humble protestations of merely seeking knowledge. We have many like you, flying the flag of inquirers and once on board, hauling up the flag of heresy. Shame on you for your dishonesty. I will not debate you, because I find that apostates are the most close-minded of people. That which they once loved, they now despise. Go in peace, I will pray for your soul.
K
KarenNC
Guest
I mean that, for the purposes of this discussion, as I have said, “pagan” is referring to the actual known practices and teachings of the ancient peoples in the Classical world, not the modern interpretations of such or of the Eastern religions such as Buddhism that were not major players in that region at that time. Any similarities between modern Neopagan religions and various forms of Christianity is a totally different discussion. We may currently be connected by this in the modern era, but that does not mean that the ancient cultures referred to in this question were.
The ancient Celts, Greeks, Romans, Gauls, etc did not have a philosophy of “harm none and don’t kill and love everyone because they have the spark of divine within them”-- neither did the Jews. The Greeks, for instance, had more the philosophy of “be courteous but distant until they prove themselves friend or enemy, then, if they prove to be enemies, slay them without mercy.” They worshipped the Gods, but did not seek to “become one with” Them—that would have been hubris, a very grave transgression. One of the Delphic Maxims is “Know thyself.” In other words, know your place in the order of the cosmos, know that you are human with human limitations and that you are not Gods.
The philosophies you are discussing are in the “Neo-” part of Neopaganism. It is important to understand the distinction between what is a modern interpretation and what the evidence bears out about actual teachings and practices of the ancients.
B
BelFarfalla
Guest
At one time priest could be married too. There are actually quite a few married priests in the Catholic Church today. And yes there was a Pope or two who were rather sinful men. Popes are only humans. Humans can and do sin.
Nepotism aside, most if not all Popes had years of study. Most spoke and wrote in both the classical and vulgar languages of the time, had years of study in theology, rhetoric, law and such topics that were normal in education in those days.
Not true. Early on… Like in the 300’s, ordered all monasteries to provide a free education to any young man who asked for it. The monasteries were not allowed to ask his family for any compensation or tuition. For centuries all Catholic education was free for the asking. These young men, many if not most from the poorest of families were given an education up to what we would consider a PHD today. So yes there was tremendous spiritual devotion.
Yes there were some Bishops in the Church who did this. The Pope put together a council to weed out this corruption years before the protestant reformation. This was wrong and it was dealt with.
Do recall that early Christianity and hence Catholicism was based on Judaism which already had a very ancient and rich education system for teaching every Jewish male and those who became Rabbis. Paul was a Rabbi. The other apostles had at least 7 years of formal religious education. They were all very well versed in the OT as all Jewish men were required to be. I am sure that they used the same method of education in which Jesus studied to be a Rabbi. Those who took over from Paul and Peter were well educated men with years of study behind them.
C
Claude_Kenneson
Guest
I think that the following link is very appropriate for this thread/topic.
ralphwoodrow.org/books/pages/babylon-mystery.html
ralphwoodrow.org/books/pages/babylon-mystery.html
S
Subrosa
Guest
We understand the statues to be depictions of the person they represent. We do not pray to the statues themselves, but to the person they represent. The statue is kind of a “stand in.” It is a common way that we humans remember the people who came before us. You know. There are statues and pictues of presidents and guys like Martin Luther King all over the place. Also we have feast days for veterans, presidents and others, just like saints. (Hebrews13:7)In Exodus 20:4 (NKJV) it states; "You shall not make for yourself a carved image----any likeness *of anything *that is in the heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
v.5: “you shall not bow down to them or serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me.”
This sounds to me just what is in a Catholic Church. When there is a statue of Mary, Joseph or anothr saint, and a rack of candles are in front of it, don’t Catholics pay to light a candle, kneel in front of the statue and pray to that image for intercession on their behalf?
Think of it this way - if you were to pick up a picture of a relative that you miss and kiss the picture, would you actually be expressing a memory toward that person or kissing the picture for the pictures sake?
If you answer that you’re expressing a memory toward the person, you’re behaving as a Catholic. If you answer that you like kissing pictures, you’re kinda weird.
In my own experience, I know that when I kiss the crucifix on my rosary, I am expressing my love for Jesus. The crucifix itself is just a piece of metal which means nothing, in and of itself.
God commanded that we do not commit idolatry. We do not worship statues. That is just plain stupid.
We also understand that God at times makes use of His creation in order to accomplish things. For instance, when Moses used his staff to open the waters of the Red Sea, do you honestly believe that it was the stick that did the miracle? NO! It was God using the staff! The Catholic Church has never stopped believing that God works in this way. (Luke 9:43-46, Acts 5:15, 19:11-12)
As far as paying for candles, it is a form of sacrifice. You know, “Pick up your cross and follow me.” Not to mention that IT PAYS FOR THE CANDLE TO BE REPLACED!!!
The lighting of the candle itself is a form of remebrance. The Lord said “I am the light of the world.” and lighting the candle depicts this phrase visually. During pre-electricity days it also provided light.
Hey, Steel Arrow - I see you were once a Catholic. Are you really so in the dark about Catholic practices? All I can say is that you couldn’t have payed attention in CCD. I’ll have to get the Mother Superior over here to have a word with you!
Sub
B
BelFarfalla
Guest
’
The discussion of denominations came up only because I thougth it would be good to know the background of the person I was talking to. His response was that he did not belong to a denomiation but to the church of christ. Sounds like a denomination to me.
Now we know a bit more … an ex-Catholic seems not know much about Catholicism. And a bit, not much, about the church of Christ.
S
Subrosa
Guest
Yeah - ignorance is usually the reason they leave. It’s either because they had bad catechesis or were poor students.
There is a problem for them though. Read Hebrews 6:4-8 and 10:26-29. The writer is speaking about people who once had the truth and have rejected it. This applies specifically to apostates, of which Mr. Arrow is one.
Subrosa
B
BelFarfalla
Guest
I have no problem with people who question be they in or out of the Church. I’ve done a lot of questioning myself. Then I look up and research the answers. This is healthy. A priest once told me that we cannot go to the pearly gates and tell St. Peter that we did what we did because the Church or a priest told us to. Following orders, when the orders are wrong, is no excuse. He told me to question everything and make up my own mind. The funny thing is that the more I question and the more I look for answers, the more I find that I agree with the CC. Through this I have learned to trust the Church on matters of dogma.
What I object to are approaches, like the one used in the first post of this thread that are nothing more than an attempt to spread false hoods and to accuse Catholics and the Church of things we do not do. It’s basically an attack, not seeking to understand.
C
Contarini
Guest
They have no hierarchy above the local church. That is what he’s talking about. Please let’s stop quarreling over definitions. He is making a perfectly meaningful and coherent statement when he denies being part of a denomination. He is, however, part of a tradition, whether he likes it or not!
Edwin
S
Sanctus_Vir
Guest
I’ve had my taste of Pagans and Wiccans. Devil worshipers! I can’t stand them. They think they have proof by using boards to talk to the dead. They call only the demons. It is practiced the same way as Satanic worshipers. I would wish to condemn it all, just to save the lost souls. it’s a sad thing and giant stain on human kind. it gives the earth an evil smirk. Uggggghhhhh!
S
Subrosa
Guest
K
KarenNC
Guest
Guys, I keep trying to point out that this thread has nothing to do with modern Neopagan religions. I will be glad to talk with you about those until the cows come home (as I have proved many times over
) but you need to start another thread for that one.Sanctus Vir, given the number of misconceptions about Neopaganism that you have managed to cram into one paragraph, that might not be a bad idea. For now, you might want to consider the possibility that at age 14 you may not have had the widest experience of spiritually mature Neopagans who are practicing an actual religion rather than posing to try to shock others, look cool or who are basing their actions on reading a single book by Silver Ravenwolf.
S
Steel_Arrow
Guest
I’m not that savvy with computers, but you can do a thread search by typing in “FORMER CATHOLICS”
This will lead to the subject; “Former Catholics, Please Post Your Story Here.”
Mine should be the last entry. :tiphat:
- Status