Proof for praying to saints

[Realcatholicgk]

I have doubts that it is. I doubt Peter was the first Pope, or the majority of the NT would’ve been written by him - not St. Paul.
** Hi Chris,

You doubt Jesus? How cute is that! You really have to study religion more Chris!

John 1:42, Mark 3:16 ("And to Simon he gave the name “Peter”, “Cephas”, or “Rock”)

Matthew 16:18 (“thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”; cf.

Matthew 7:24-28, (the house built on rock)

John 21:15-17 (“Feed my lambs.”/“Feed my sheep.”) (stated three times)

Luke 10:16 (“He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me; and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me.”)

Luke 22:31-32 (“confirm thy brethren”)

Acts 15:28 (“For it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, …”) (“the Apostles speak with voice of Holy Ghost”)

Matthew 10:2 (“And the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter**,…”) Notice it says that Peter is first.

Matthew 16:19 (“whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven”)

Scripture indeed shows that Peter was given a primary role with respect to the other Apostles: Mark 5:37, Matthew 17:1, Matthew 26:37, Luke 5:3, Matthew 17:27, Luke 22:32, Luke 24:34, and 1 Corinthians 15:5

And of course, St. Paul rebukes Peter on an issue of morality in Galatians.

**But Paul wasn’t the leader! I disagree with a lot that the Pope’s said as do other “'Catholics” Unless He formally speaks infalliably it is just him speaking as a human being. If we believed that every word a Pope ever spoke was infalliable, That would be making a creature some kind of god, which is prohibited. However as the leader of Jesus’ church He can in Matthew 16:19 and declare things that Godl requires “all” Christians to believe to be in communication with Jesus and His church! **

The Pope is supposed to be infallible in issues of morality, **Not true as stated! **and therefore Paul would have no right to rebuke the first Pope in an issue of morality. **
That also is not true at all . Luke 17:3-6 “Take heed to yourselves; if your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him; and if he sins against you seven times in the day, …” You were also told that before. **

That would make him a heritic.

**And in your personal opinion also, what does your foolish and ignorant statements make you Chris?

And as I said before, may our lord and savior provide for you and your family during the coming year! May He bless and protect you. I ask this through Jesus who was born on Christmas day! God Bless!

**

 

[Realcatholicgk]

Is there a saint for prevention of apostacy?

**
Hi Chris,

That would be “Saint Peter of Alexandria” **

 

[Chris_LaRock]

Realcatholicgk:
I understand your knee-jerk reaction as a Catholic is to defend your traditions and teachings, but let’s look at this logically.

The Pope is infallible with respect to moral issues. Peter was behaving like a hypocrit. He ate with the gentiles. The Jewish Christians showed up and Peter shunned the gentiles. Paul rebuked him for this. If Peter was the leader of the Church, Paul had no right to pass judgment on an infallible man.

And again, why did Paul write more New Testament scripture than Peter? It would make more sense for the Pope himself to write scripture than a lesser apostle. Peter was given more authority than Paul, right?

 

[Realcatholicgk]

{B]
The CC is the true church because Jesus made it so. It isn’t a haven for murderers.Our teaching command against it so they find no refuge in our church.
How many murderers are there in the Catholic church?
Is it the only church that has that problem?
Is it because the church is evil or because people are human?

**

Hi Chris,

Yea, since Vatican II that would “appear” to be the case. However unlike Protestants, the dogmas and doctrines of the Church have not changed in 2,000 years and never will! That may really be the reason that it takes so long for the church to decide things. After all, this is about salvation! People, even catholics have said that My beliefs go against the Church. I inform them of their error!
Second Vatican Council was not a doctrinal or dogmatic council but a pastoral council—there were no anathemas issued. But there was in the third article of the decree on ecumenism, that speaks about the divisions among Christians, the “damnable” divisions among Christians, say the council fathers. “Damnable” because they contradict the church’s purpose in the divine dispensation as the sacrament of the unity of all Christians as a sign of the promised unity of mankind, one anathema “implied”. However, I take it to mean that God is, in Christ, through His church attempting to reconcile all christians to himself, and Satan, through Protestantism, is attempting to continue stopping it from happening.

God Bless**

 

[NonCatholic]

Realcatholicgk:

Non, I will pray to the Blessed Mother and ask her to have her son answer your prayers.

Please don’t bother, she can’t hear them.

Can you give even on example from Scripture where anyone prayed to someone other than God?

You spent a lot of time copying and pasting Scripture that had zero reference to the topic/question.

It is interesting that when the Apostles asked how we should pray, Jesus answered with what we refer to as the Lord’s prayer, but should be named the Apostles prayer, which starts “Our Father” and whenever Jesus prayers are recorded He always refers to the Father - being the church that follows the Apostles examples, shouldn’t you be using the model they were given?

 

[NonCatholic]

Realcatholicgk:

However unlike Protestants, the dogmas and doctrines of the Church have not changed in 2,000 years and never will!

Really, not changed in 2000 years? CC doctrines and Dogmas are continuously evolving. For example, the CC use to actually immerse babies in water, which the term Baptizmo, immersion, but in the 1500’s that changed to another non-Biblical form of Baptism, which is the sprinkling of water. Maryology has certainly evolved, and I believe one day she will be officially lifted to the status of deity.

The whole idea of the Pope speaking Ex-cathedra, adds to the dogma and doctrines, then what about the councils that have added. The council of Trent comes to mind where a lot of anathema’s were added.

It must be so difficult to keep and know so much, since the CC has so much to learn and understand; people spend a lifetime getting the blessings of God’s Word. How much more time must be dedicated to learning the Scripture, Dogmas, Catechisms and doctrines, rituals et al I would be so overwhelmed by it all that I would just let others tell me I must do and hope it all works out.

 

[BMSODM]

I understand your knee-jerk reaction as a Catholic is to defend your traditions and teachings, but let’s look at this logically.

And again, why did Paul write more New Testament scripture than Peter? It would make more sense for the Pope himself to write scripture than a lesser apostle. Peter was given more authority than Paul, right?

Blessings Chris on this Holy Day…Remember you can’t have Christmas without having Christ in the Mass…

Even though you keep ignoring my post about leaving the tares with the wheat until God himself reaps and seperates I still love you.

You asked why Paul wrote more then Peter well lets look at an example of why your point doesn’t matter in God’s Ways… We have to go way back but look at Moses and how even though He was the head of the people in the day’s of old he wasn’t the speaker who led the people. It was Aaron his brother who spoke
“And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people”.

We all have different gifts and we are all used in accord to Gods Will and understanding not ours. Paul wrote because He was gifted as such…Also remember in those days it was all oral teachings, so an oral translator would be the same as someone who was a written translator in the days of new…

Again Merry Christ-Mass my brother***

 

[Realcatholicgk]

Really, not changed in 2000 years? CC doctrines and Dogmas are continuously evolving.
**
Hi Non,


You are confusing small “t” Traditions with Large “T” Traditions. traditions always change, How we do things, can change. If a community wanted to baptise by immersion that would be OK. One thing no matter what way is used the baptism would ve valid unlike some Protestant sects that think God works through magic.**

oh For example, the CC use to actually immerse babies in water, which the term Baptizmo, immersion,

Actualy it comes from the word meaning to dye!

but in the 1500’s that changed to another non-Biblical form of Baptism, which is the sprinkling of water.
**
Who actually cares if it is in the Bible? The scriptures are not a blueprint. They are worship documents, tales, stories, Poems, prayers collected by the Jewish and Catholic worshipers to help them understand God. They were later counterfeited and changed, corrupted and false made into some preverted idol in the 1500 by foolish heretics. **

Maryology has certainly evolved, and I believe one day she will be officially lifted to the status of deity.

**The role that Mary played in Salvation has be explored and better understood. Our traditions have changed. She probable will be lifted to the status od deity, if some Protestant sect sees a way to profit by that. The CC will never worship a creature created by God. it just isn’t premitted. Mary is alive and well with Her son in Heaven. She has appeared on earth and has helped to bring people to Her son and stop Satan from stealing more the souls. I actually think that is why God has Protestants so against mary. To protect His real church. **

The whole idea of the Pope speaking Ex-cathedra, adds to the dogma and doctrines, then what about the councils that have added. The council of Trent comes to mind where a lot of anathema’s were added.

**
The Catholic church was formed 2,000 years ago. You are a member of a corrupt, distorted, version using counterfeit versions of scriptures. It is not enough simply to reassert within dying and decadent and often-sidelined christian communities a more vibrant gospel witness. It is not enough merely to oppose the diabolical courses and twistings and turnings of Christian truth, which are all too manifest in all too many Christian communions.

Mere Christianity: One could probably say that C. S. Lewis is the single most effective apologist for the Christian faith in the last 150, perhaps 200, years. But mere Christianity is not enough. Christianity is never “mere.” Christianity is never a minimal but is always a call to the maximal. Catholicity is never directed toward that which we can hold in common and celebrate with one another as christians while avoiding those things that really matter.**

It must be so difficult to keep and know so much, since the CC has so much to learn and understand; people spend a lifetime getting the blessings of God’s Word.

**Actually we have it very easy. The entire Scriptures are read to us and we get to Eat the Body and Drink the Blood of Jesus every time we go to worship. Without Jesus is would be a protestant “gathering” or “social” which aren’t bad but I rather worship God. It is a catholic thing, you might not understand.I understand you guys are big on potlucks etc. That must be in the bible somewhere the way you make that part of your worship services.It must be much worse with beliefs changing every time so one disagrees with the leaders. people elave and start their ouw churh. How cute is that? 61,000 and growing like a cancer on the body of Christ! What the heck is this "non-denominational stuff all about? You guys look so pityful from the inside of the real church. A “new” “improved” Non-denomination church just formed because their other counterfeit congregation didn’t want to allow horses at their services. (I am in Texas) Now these fools hold their service sride their horses into the service and sit on them while praying. I wonlt venture a guess on their communion. Way to go Protestants! One of the gods should like that! **

How much more time must be dedicated to learning the Scripture, Dogmas, Catechisms and doctrines, rituals et al

** Yea, it takes time to be a real christian. Better to do that then making your own mind up and becoming your own little god. I rather understand and follow Jesus as He commanded, than pretend I was infalliable. **

I would be so overwhelmed by it all that I would just let others tell me I must do and hope it all works out.

**Well as a Protestant you could just “borrow” more from the catholic chuch and corrupt and distort it and teach that! Oh, wait, I forgot that is what you guys did! Sorry! **
**

God Bless, and a very Merry Christmas**

 

[Realcatholicgk]

Blessings Chris on this Holy Day…Remember you can’t have Christmas without having Christ in the Mass…

Even though you keep ignoring my post about leaving the tares with the wheat until God himself reaps and seperates I still love you.

You asked why Paul wrote more then Peter well lets look at an example of why your point doesn’t matter in God’s Ways… We have to go way back but look at Moses and how even though He was the head of the people in the day’s of old he wasn’t the speaker who led the people. It was Aaron his brother who spoke
“And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people”.

We all have different gifts and we are all used in accord to Gods Will and understanding not ours. Paul wrote because He was gifted as such…Also remember in those days it was all oral teachings, so an oral translator would be the same as someone who was a written translator in the days of new…

Again Merry Christ-Mass my brother***

** Hi BM,
Paul was a Roman and probably well educated, Peter was a fisherman who probable couldn’t read nor write. Moses had a speech impediment. God doesn’t call the qualified.He qualifies the ones He calls **

Again Merry Christ-Mass my brother***

**
Twas the month before Christmas***

When all through our land,

Not a Christian was praying

Nor taking a stand.

See the PC Police had taken away,

The reason for Christmas - no one could say.

The children were told by their schools not to sing,

About Shepherds and Wise Men and Angels and things.

It might hurt people’s feelings, the teachers would say

• December 25th is just a ‘Holiday’.*

Yet the shoppers were ready with cash, checks and credit

Pushing folks down to the floor just to get it!

CDs from Madonna, an X BOX, an I-pod

*Something was changing, something quite odd! *

Retailers promoted Ramadan and Kwanzaa

In hopes to sell books by Franken & Fonda.

As Targets were hanging their trees upside down

• At Lowe’s the word Christmas - was no where to be found.*

At K-Mart and Staples and Penny’s and Sears

You won’t hear the word Christmas; it won’t touch your ears.

Inclusive, sensitive, Di-ver-si-ty

Are words that were used to intimidate me.

Now Daschle, Now Darden, Now Sharpton, Wolf Blitzen

On Boxer, on Rather, on Kerry, on Clinton!

At the top of the Senate, there arose such a clatter

To eliminate Jesus, in all public matter.

And we spoke not a word, as they took away our faith

• Forbidden to speak of salvation and grace*

The true Gift of Christmas was exchanged and discarded

The reason for the season, stopped before it started.

So as you celebrate ‘Winter Break’ under your ‘Dream Tree’

Sipping your Starbucks, listen to me.

Choose your words carefully, choose what you say

Shout MERRY CHRISTMAS , not Happy Holiday!

Please, all Christians join together and wish everyone you meet during the holidays a MERRY CHRISTMAS

Christ is ‘The Reason’ for the Christ-MASS Season! What a great time to turn from sin and become a Catholic.

 

[NonCatholic]

RealCatholic??:

Who actually cares if it is in the Bible? The scriptures are not a blueprint. They are worship documents, tales, stories, Poems, prayers collected by the Jewish and Catholic worshipers to help them understand God. They were later counterfeited and changed, corrupted and false made into some preverted idol in the 1500 by foolish heretics.

Who cares if it is in the Bible? A Christian!

You have another Gospel…nothing more to be said there.

The Church I attend exposits the Bible verse by verse, we Just finished Mark, after a little over a year and have now started Luke.
We take the Lords Supper very seriously, but we don’t have an alter, since that was abolished at the cross when God rent the temple from top to bottom exposing the Holy of Holies…but then again that was probably one of those foolish tales you spoke of…Blasphemer!

 

[BMSODM]

Who cares if it is in the Bible? A Christian!

You have another Gospel…nothing more to be said there.

The Church I attend exposits the Bible verse by verse, we Just finished Mark, after a little over a year and have now started Luke.
We take the Lords Supper very seriously, but we don’t have an alter, since that was abolished at the cross when God rent the temple from top to bottom exposing the Holy of Holies…but then again that was probably one of those foolish tales you spoke of…Blasphemer!

Blessings a grace unto you***

I think its great that you spend so much time discerning scripture but you have a problem and I speak as a witness to you because I am an ex protestant evangelist. The Binders of the Bible are actually blinders to the fullness of the Gospel. The Bible tells us that in itself;. “All the books in the world could not contain the Word of God”. You see your only getting bits and peices of the Word. Yes the Bible is the infallable Word but remember who put it together. The same ones you condemn are the the ones who put these letters and books together. And even the Bible you have isnt complete. It was changed some 1200 yrs after the fact and continues to change till this day.

The reason most protestants rip apart scripture is because there starving and they pick the bone clean. But what they don’t realize is that there is an ocean of food that Our Lord has left us to feast on. But your caught in a net(Bible) and refuse to leave that net(Bible) because of fear. But its the wrong kind of fear. This fear come from the devil and its crippling you. Trust! Trust! Trust! is the missing factor in this equation. Your being decieved into beleiving your trusting God by staying in the binders of the bible…

As far as the alter comment, please explain the book of revelations? There is a golden alter in Heaven and the Lord is reffered to as being slain at that alter several times. If Jesus was only raised and no longer on the cross then why is He reffered to being slain? if Heaven isnt bound by time then why does the Lamb exist in front of the golden alter, (Slain)?

Remember you cant say Christmas without putting Christ in the Mass…

 

[NonCatholic]

As far as the alter comment, please explain the book of revelations? There is a golden alter in Heaven and the Lord is referred to as being slain at that alter several times. If Jesus was only raised and no longer on the cross then why is He referred to being slain? if Heaven isnt bound by time then why does the Lamb exist in front of the golden alter, (Slain)?

All symbolic…Jesus is at the right hand of God - sitting, not standing, which is significant, since the earthly High Priest could never sit down…too busy, but Christ finished the work and actually sits down at the right hand.

Remember you cant say Christmas without putting Christ in the Mass…

I have no idea what an ex-protestant evangelist is, but probably a good thing you are no longer involved???

Since the faith claims to follow the Apostles teaching, then why is there an altar? Did the Apostles ever mention a sacrifice of Christ on an Alter? We know the answer is no…right! What did Christ mean when He said it was Finished? Did the Apostles preach only Christ crucified?

You have two altars there. And that was the way it was in the temple in the tabernacle of old, you had the brazen altar, and then you had the altar of incense. The brazen altar was basically the altar used to fire the coals to burn the sacrifices for sin. And the altar of incense was where you poured the incense and the fragrance of the incense arose and was emblematic of the prayers of the people.

Typically, the priests would go to the brazen altar and he would take with tongs out of the brazen altar hot, fiery coals and he would put them in the censer which was just a little instrument by which he could transport these flaming coals. He would fill that little censer with the coals and he would take it in to the golden altar, which was the altar of incense, and he would put those coals on the altar of incense mixed with incense and they would rise, the smell of that incense would rise to the nostrils of God, as it were, symbolically speaking of the prayers of the people.

This angel is functioning like an Old Testament priest, he’s standing there at the altar, he’s got the golden censer in his hand. He gets the incense, probably given to him from God since God is the giver in this scene, in order that he might take this incense and the hot coals from that brazen altar, that symbolic brazen altar in the scene that John’s having and they might go into the golden altar and put this down on the golden altar, mingled with all the rest of the prayers of the saints that are already there.

“All the books in the world could not contain the Word of God”

Misquoted: S/B
John 21:25 And there are also many *other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself *would not contain the books that *would be written.

God gave us what we needed in His Word.

 

[guanophore]

A Bishop? Cool. I promise not to be a ‘pawn’ in bad behavior. (chess joke)

These “cafeteria Catholics” take pride in the fact that they are both Catholic and pro-death at the same time. I just think it would make sense to burst their little bubble of arrogance by ousting them officially. The message a lot of us are getting is that one can be an unrepentant sinner, and remain Catholic.

As we have been trying to tell you, Chris, this has already been done. The language of the Church makes it clear that persons who do such things are separated from communion of the Church, and that those who participate in abortion are excommunicated. The act in itself triggers it.

If you are “getting the message” that one can be an unrepentant sinner and still remain Catholic, then it is because you don’t understand what the Church teaches. In fact, I suppose it is technically correct to say that these people are still Catholic. They are lapsed Catholics, fallen Catholics, Catholics not in good standing with the Church, or with God. If they die in this state, the teaching of the Church is that they will go to hell.

If that is the kind of Catholic you think you would like to be, then I guess you will have a lot of company. Personally, I don’t think of cafeteria Catholics as such. I think of them as Protestants, or apostates. To be Catholic means to accept the teaching and authority of the Church.

 

[BMSODM]

Non C*** Blessings**

You asked:
"Since the faith claims to follow the Apostles teaching, then why is there an altar? Did the Apostles ever mention a sacrifice of Christ on an Alter? We know the answer is no…right! "

Again you have your Blinders on (The Binder of the Bible) Look at what the Early Church Fathers say about the Mass;

**“And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place. And the memoirs of the Apostles or the writings of the Prophets are read, as long as time permits. Then, when the reader has ceased, the priest verbally instructs us and exhorts us to imitate these good things. Then we all rise together and pray. And, as we said before, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought.( to the alter) Then, the priest in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability. And the people assent, saying ‘Amen.’ Then, the Eucharist, is distributed to everyone, and everyone participates in that over which thanks has been given. And a portion of it is sent by the deacons to those who are absent.” St. Justin Martyr (“First Apology,” c. 160 A.D.) **

You see its all about the Eucharist. That is the center of the Mass and that is what the center of worship should be about. The thanksgiving of the Body and Blood. His being raised meant nothing without Him being crucified. Him crucified is what redeemed us. Lets read a little outside of your comfort zone…

**“I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire His blood, which is love incorruptible.” St. Ignatius of Antioch (“Epistle to the Romans,” c. 105 A.D.)

“Heretics abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the Flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ.” St. Ignatius of Antioch (“Epistle to the Smyrneans,” c. 105 A.D.)

“Not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by Him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, is both the Flesh and Blood of that incarnated Jesus.” St. Justin Martyr (“First Apology,” c. 150 A.D.)

“If the Lord were from other than the Father (and thus capable of performing miracles), how could He rightly take bread, which is of the same creation as our own, and confess it to be His Body and affirm that the mixture in the cup is His Blood? When, therefore, the mixed cup (wine and water) and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the Body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is nourished by the Body and Blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of Him?” St. Irenaeus (“Against Heresies,” 189 A.D.) **

You see until you understand the Eucharist you can’t ever accept the true teachings of the Church…

Peace unto you***

 

[guanophore]

Prayer for the lost (still living and in sin) and those living godly lives is acceptable worship. Praying for the salvation of another is acceptable worship.

We do not consider intercession worship, which belongs only to God. Intercession is supplicaton - asking for things. An acceptible form of prayer, indeed, but not the same as worship.

If the saints already in Heaven are omniscience and/or omnipresent, then they could hear you prayer, but they are not and cannot hear those prayers. This is why the Holy Spirit is our only intercessor given; and the best one as well.

I agree that this is the one of the ministries of the HS, but it is an error to assume that people must be omniscient or omnipresent to hear and answer the prayers of others.

Acts 16:8-10
9 During the night Paul had a vision: there stood a man of Macedonia pleading with him and saying, “Come over to Macedonia and help us.” 10 When he had seen the vision, we immediately tried to cross over to Macedonia, being convinced that God had called us to proclaim the good news to them.

We will agree that Paul was not omniscient or omnipresent, but we can see clearly that the HS was able to make him party to the prayers of the Macedonians. Paul clearly understood the vision as a prayer and a call from God.

The HS is able to enable anyone He wants to hear the prayers of whoever He wants. This is part of what it means to be a partaker of divine grace.

There exists of no example in the New Testament whereas Jesus, the Apostles, not any disciples prayed to any other than God.

I think we just have a different understanding of “prayer”. Catholics see Mary bringing the concerns of those at the wedding to Jesus for solution as a form of “prayer” (supplication).

Acts 16:15
15 When she and her household were baptized, she urged us, saying, “If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come and stay at my home.” And she prevailed upon us.

We see the actions of Lydia as a form of prayer also. Her methods are similar to those used by the persistent woman:

Luke 18:3-5
3 In that city there was a widow who kept coming to him and saying, ‘Grant me justice against my opponent.’ 4 For a while he refused; but later he said to himself, ‘Though I have no fear of God and no respect for anyone, 5 yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will grant her justice, so that she may not wear me out by continually coming.’

In fact, this form of “prayer” is still used in legal venues today, and if you look at any court papers, they will say “pray the court”. The term prayer is used here as "supplication"or asking the court to grant a request.

In other words praying can be a form of worship, praying to, the object of our prayer, can only be the God-Head, and since we don’t pray as we should, the we have the Holy Spirit to make intersession for us and He alone. Everything outside of this is not practical from a Scriptural stance.

Catholics would see this as an erroneous, or deficient definition of prayer. Actually, the Apostles taught that it was the other way around. Worship (adoration) is a form of prayer, which is to be directed only to God, yet other forms of prayer, the binding of demons, supplication, intercession, praise, etc, are also used. One can practice intercession and not adoration. I can ask you to pray for me (request your intercession) but I am not worshipping you.

Dear Heavenly Father, I pray that you will make my mother’s path straight and protect her as she travels to see us today. I ask this in the name of Jesus.

From your mouth (keyboard?) to God’s ear.

This prayer is a form of intercession.

Father, I praise you and give thanks to for providing a competent doctor, which was able to fix my knee and I praise and thank you for the little pain I have felt…thanks Lord!

Amen! This type of prayer would be considered both praise and thanksgiving.

Father, I pray that will give consideration and extend you hand of grace unto salvation for my neighbors, Guy and Brook.

This is intercession and supplication - no adoration here.

I extend a salvation petition to you Father on behalf of cousin Brian who denies your existence and is living an immoral life; that you may show compassion and mercy on his soul by delivering up His soul and giving to your son for washing and regeneration; I asked and give thanks to you through my Lord Jesus Christ…Amen

Amen again! Your use of the word “petition” here is also important. Petition is an important form of prayer, and sometimes our court documents read “petition the court”. It is asking for a specific action or remedy. It does not assume that the person is divine in order to act, just as th the corrupt judge still acted for the petitioner just to shut her up.

 

[guanophore]

I understand your knee-jerk reaction as a Catholic is to defend your traditions and teachings, but let’s look at this logically.

The Pope is infallible with respect to moral issues.

Sorry Chris, you have misunderstood the Catholic Teaching on the charism of infallibility. It has nothing to do with impeccability.

Peter was behaving like a hypocrit. He ate with the gentiles. The Jewish Christians showed up and Peter shunned the gentiles. Paul rebuked him for this. If Peter was the leader of the Church, Paul had no right to pass judgment on an infallible man.

This is more evidence that you do not understand the charism of infallibility. It does not belong to a “man” but to the Church. The gift is to prevent the Church from teaching error. It means that the Church will not teach error in the area of faith and morals. This is what prevents the Church from passing through the gates of hell, which is what happens when error is taught.

Individuals who depart from the infallible teaching of the Church, as Peter did, are acting hypocritically.

And again, why did Paul write more New Testament scripture than Peter?

Because God wanted him to?

It would make more sense for the Pope himself to write scripture than a lesser apostle. Peter was given more authority than Paul, right?

I agree, but the wisdom of man is foolishness to God. It would have made more sense, using this reasoning, for Jesus to write books, instead of establishing a Church. Why did He do that?

Peter and Paul both had Apostolic authority, as given by Christ. Peter also had a special ministry that Christ gave him in particular, just as Paul had certain gifts that God gave to Him. Falling into “this one was greater than the other one” is a practice that Jesus sharply condemned.

 

[guanophore]

Please don’t bother, she can’t hear them.

You say this with such conviction, NC. How can you know this? Do you think that Moses and Elijah could not “hear” Jesus talking to them during the Transfiguration? Do you deny that the saints can hear whatever God allows them to hear?

Can you explain how Samuel was aware of events on the earth, and able to converse with Saul, other than by the grace of God?

Can you give even on example from Scripture where anyone prayed to someone other than God?

I just gave several of these in another post. I would also like to note that it was Jesus response to Mary at the wedding in Cana that is one of the main testimonies we have for His pleasure in responding to His mother’s requests.

It is interesting that when the Apostles asked how we should pray, Jesus answered with what we refer to as the Lord’s prayer, but should be named the Apostles prayer, which starts “Our Father” and whenever Jesus prayers are recorded He always refers to the Father - being the church that follows the Apostles examples, shouldn’t you be using the model they were given?

Oh, we do! We pray this prayer at least once daily at Divine Liturgy, and persons who use the Liturgy of the Hours or the Rosary, many times.

Really, not changed in 2000 years?

Really! Careful, NC, I think your anti-Catholic hostility might be leaking.

CC doctrines and Dogmas are continuously evolving. For example, the CC use to actually immerse babies in water, which the term Baptizmo, immersion, but in the 1500’s that changed to another non-Biblical form of Baptism, which is the sprinkling of water.

There are a couple errors in this statement. One is that the practice of baptism, while it is different in various places in the world, is just that, a practice. Although it is based on doctrine, the form of baptism does not specify how much water must be used, only that baptism be given in the name of the Father, Son, and HS. I think when you study the early church documents, you will find that these various methods have all been acceptable since the beginning.

Maryology has certainly evolved, and I believe one day she will be officially lifted to the status of deity.

Our understanding of many things has certainly evolved. that is not the same as doctrine evolving. The Church developed the doctrines of the Trinity, and the hypostatic union. These were part of the one divine deposit of faith, but needed to be developed and applied to problems that developed later.

The whole idea of the Pope speaking Ex-cathedra, adds to the dogma and doctrines, then what about the councils that have added. The council of Trent comes to mind where a lot of anathema’s were added.

Anathamas are pastoral pronouncements, and are a reaction to errors that have cropped up later in culture and society. Although they reflect doctrinal beliefs, the doctrine upon which they are based, just as the doctrine behind practice of baptism, has not changed since the beginning.

It must be so difficult to keep and know so much, since the CC has so much to learn and understand; people spend a lifetime getting the blessings of God’s Word. How much more time must be dedicated to learning the Scripture, Dogmas, Catechisms and doctrines, rituals et al I would be so overwhelmed by it all that I would just let others tell me I must do and hope it all works out.

Well, I can see why learning 2000 years of history would be overwhelming. However, I think we can agree that it is very simple to get started on the road with Christ. I agree that one can spend a lifetime learning from Scripture, and Tradition. However, Tradition has not changed any more than Scripture has. The Church teaches that public revelation ceased with the death of the last Apostle. Our understanding of it continues to “evolve”.

 

[jlhargus]

What about the Jews? Didn’t they have dead?

JL: Yes the Jews had dead, but they were not with the Lord. They would have been in either the chamber of Abrahams Bosom or the chamber of torment in Sheol, where all souls went before the ascension of our Lord. Our Lord descended into Sheol=Hebrew, Hades=Greek or Hell=English and preached to the spirits there, when he ascended he took the just into heaven. No one went to heaven before Christ.

 

[guanophore]

Who cares if it is in the Bible? A Christian!

You have another Gospel…nothing more to be said there.

The Church I attend exposits the Bible verse by verse, we Just finished Mark, after a little over a year and have now started Luke.
We take the Lords Supper very seriously, but we don’t have an alter, since that was abolished at the cross when God rent the temple from top to bottom exposing the Holy of Holies…but then again that was probably one of those foolish tales you spoke of…Blasphemer!

NonCatholic, I postulated that you were a troll when you arrived here. You took issue with me, so I offered you an apology if I had misjudged you. Many members gave you detailed answers to your question “how must I be saved” or something to that effect. I noted that you had already posted on another thread that you considered yourself saved, which is why I thought you were just playacting.

Now I see that you are starting to find fault with the Catholic Church. It seems that you are not here to get “catholic answers” after all, but just looking for opportunities to criticise. If you are, as you purport, seriously concerned about the state of your soul, then coming here to criticize the Church founded by Jesus and the members of her is really not going to help your soul. If you are here only for that purpose, then please be advised that CAF is not here as a venue for you to disparage our beliefs.

 

[jlhargus]

And of course, St. Paul rebukes Peter on an issue of morality in Galatians. The Pope is supposed to be infallible in issues of morality, and therefore Paul would have no right to rebuke the first Pope in an issue of morality. That would make him a heritic.

JL: ]Gal 2:11 when Peter came to Antioch I withstood him to his face bacause he was to be blamed 14 when I saw they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all.] Yes Paul withstood Peter’s bad example of respect of persons and it is because of Peter’s leadership and influence in the Church that the others followed his example. Paul felt it necessary to speak out in public to Peter, before them all. It was Peter himself who brought the Gentiles into the Church. Peter was not being a good example, this has nothing to do with infallibility. Popes have been withstood since, sometimes rightly sometimes not. Paul an apostle did the same or worse, but no one takes note of it, [Acts 16:3 Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him and he circumcised him because of the Jews.] Paul had Timothy circumcised, out of respect of persons, the Jews. Yet Paul preached against circumcision. No one ever takes notice Paul’s actions, because it did not seem of any importance, why? Why do you find Peter’s actions more important than Paul’s?