Split: Another Marian Debate

[maryj]

But if the Magisterium of the Catholic Church is infallibly led by the Holy Spirit in its interpretation, then if that interpretation differs from your interpretation, wouldn’t it be prudent to give way to the Catholic interpretation, if it is truly led by the Holy Spirit?

When you say as a Protestant that the Catholic Church has a tendency to make scripture say what it does not say, I read this to say, that it does not match your interpretation of scripture, and you think that your interpretation is correct, therefore the catholic interpretation is wrong.
You know in the Bible, there are several old testament passages which Jesus, the Apostles and Paul interpret, which I read and think, Hey this is not what that passage is saying, but I submit to their authority to interpret the old testament.

Ah true word of wisdom:clapping: . Isn’t it hard to just obey sometimes when we really think our way is the right way. As I’ve grown, and left my parents and had my own children to raise, and sent them off to college, I’ve learned that the words my husband I guided them with were actually listened to even though at the time, boy did they think they were correct and we knew nothing. God Bless and Happy New Year one and all.

 

[hoosierdaddy]

But if the Magisterium of the Catholic Church is infallibly led by the Holy Spirit in its interpretation, then if that interpretation differs from your interpretation, wouldn’t it be prudent to give way to the Catholic interpretation, if it is truly led by the Holy Spirit?

When you say as a Protestant that the Catholic Church has a tendency to make scripture say what it does not say, I read this to say, that it does not match your interpretation of scripture, and you think that your interpretation is correct, therefore the catholic interpretation is wrong.
You know in the Bible, there are several old testament passages which Jesus, the Apostles and Paul interpret, which I read and think, Hey this is not what that passage is saying, but I submit to their authority to interpret the old testament.

But it’s not only the Magisterium that is lead by the Holy Spirit. To believe that opens you up to religious cult domination and you will have no choice but to submit to it. We can all be lead by the Holy Spirit and interpret the Bible properly, and at the same time not be at risk of falling under religious cult domination.

I may interpret something incorrectly in the Bible but that doesn’t mean I will automatically accept that the Catholic Magisterium interprets it correctly. They could be just as wrong as I am.

We should submit to what Jesus and the Apostles say. They have far more credibility and authority than the “magisterium” of today because there is no such thing as apostolic succession and the magisterium can make mistakes in interpretation as much as any of us can.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

there is no such thing as apostolic succession

Ahem. In your opinion.

Since my Bible quite correctly points out the issue of apostolic succession (“if you forgive their sins they are forgiven; if you hold them bound they are held bound. . .”, “feed my lambs. . .feed my sheep”, etc.) and since Sacred Tradition likewise notes it. . .

I’ll go along with the totality of the Holy Spirit’s guidance and not with the “private interpretation of Scripture” which St. Peter warned us against.

God bless.

 

[hoosierdaddy]

Ahem. In your opinion.

Since my Bible quite correctly points out the issue of apostolic succession (“if you forgive their sins they are forgiven; if you hold them bound they are held bound. . .”, “feed my lambs. . .feed my sheep”, etc.) and since Sacred Tradition likewise notes it. . .

I’ll go along with the totality of the Holy Spirit’s guidance and not with the “private interpretation of Scripture” which St. Peter warned us against.

God bless.

Ahem, that’s “your” opinion.

There is no apostolic succession. In order to be an apostle one had to see Jesus Christ, or know someone who did. Your Pope fails on both counts. The things you allude to in your post are a) completely misinterpreted and b) feeding sheep is a command given to pastors, teachers and elders throughout the church age…seeing as apostles are no longer around. According to Scripture. God bless you too.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Ahem, that’s “your” opinion.

There is no apostolic succession. In order to be an apostle one had to see Jesus Christ, or know someone who did. Your Pope fails on both counts. The things you allude to in your post are a) completely misinterpreted and b) feeding sheep is a command given to pastors, teachers and elders throughout the church age…seeing as apostles are no longer around. According to Scripture. God bless you too.

There is Apostolic Succession:

Catholics got it and Orthodox got it.

Scripture supports it.

I. Ordained Leaders Share in Jesus’ Ministry and Authority

Matt. 10:1,40 - Jesus declares to His apostles, “he who receives you, receives Me, and he who rejects you, rejects Me and the One who sent Me.” Jesus freely gives His authority to the apostles in order for them to effectively convert the world.

Matt. 16:19; 18:18 - the apostles are given Christ’s authority to make visible decisions on earth that will be ratified in heaven. God raises up humanity in Christ by exalting his chosen leaders and endowing them with the authority and grace they need to bring about the conversion of all. Without a central authority in the Church, there would be chaos (as there is in Protestantism).

Luke 9:1; 10:19 - Jesus gives the apostles authority over the natural and the supernatural (diseases, demons, serpents, and scorpions).

Luke 10:16 - Jesus tells His apostles, “he who hears you, hears Me.” When we hear the bishops’ teaching on the faith, we hear Christ Himself.

Luke 22:29 - the Father gives the kingdom to the Son, and the Son gives the kingdom to the apostles. The gift is transferred from the Father to the Son to the apostles.

Num 16:28 - the Father’s authority is transferred to Moses. Moses does not speak on his own. This is a real transfer of authority.

John 5:30 - similarly, Jesus as man does nothing of His own authority, but He acts under the authority of the Father.

John 7:16-17 - Jesus as man states that His authority is not His own, but from God. He will transfer this authority to other men.

John 8:28 - Jesus says He does nothing on His own authority. Similarly, the apostles will do nothing on their own authority. Their authority comes from God.

John 12:49 - The father’s authority is transferred to the Son. The Son does not speak on his own. This is a transfer of divine authority.

John 13:20 - Jesus says, “he who receives anyone who I send, receives Me.” He who receives the apostles, receives Christ Himself. He who rejects the apostles and their successors, rejects Christ.

John 14:10 - Jesus says the Word He speaks is not His own authority, but from the Father. The gift is from the Father to Jesus to the apostles.

John 16:14-15 - what the Father has, the Son has, and the Son gives it to the apostles. The authority is not lessened or mitigated.

John 17:18; 20:21 - as the Father sends the Son, the Son sends the apostles. The apostles have divinely appointed authority.

Acts 20:28 - the apostles are shepherds and guardians appointed by the Holy Spirit / 1 Peter 2:25 - Jesus is the Shepherd and Guardian. The apostles, by the power of the Spirit, share Christ’s ministry and authority.

Jer. 23:1-8; Ezek. 34:1-10 - the shepherds must shepherd the sheep, or they will be held accountable by God.

Eph. 2:20 - the Christian faith is built upon the foundation of the apostles. The word “foundation” proves that it does not die with apostles, but carries on through succession.

Eph. 2:20; Rev. 21:9,14 - the words “household,” “Bride of the Lamb,” the “new Jerusalem” are all metaphors for the Church whose foundation is the apostles.

 

[Mannyfit75]

I. Authority is Transferred by the Sacrament of Ordination

Acts 1:15-26 - the first thing Peter does after Jesus ascends into heaven is implement apostolic succession. Matthias is ordained with full apostolic authority. Only the Catholic Church can demonstrate an unbroken apostolic lineage to the apostles in union with Peter through the sacrament of ordination and thereby claim to teach with Christ’s own authority.

Acts 1:20 - a successor of Judas is chosen. The authority of his office (his “bishopric”) is respected notwithstanding his egregious sin. The necessity to have apostolic succession in order for the Church to survive was understood by all. God never said, “I’ll give you leaders with authority for about 400 years, but after the Bible is compiled, you are all on your own.”

Acts 1:22 - literally, “one must be ordained” to be a witness with us of His resurrection. Apostolic ordination is required in order to teach with Christ’s authority.

Acts 6:6 - apostolic authority is transferred through the laying on of hands (ordination). This authority has transferred beyond the original twelve apostles as the Church has grown.

Acts 9:17-19 - even Paul, who was directly chosen by Christ, only becomes a minister after the laying on of hands by a bishop. This is a powerful proof-text for the necessity of sacramental ordination in order to be a legitimate successor of the apostles.

Acts 13:3 - apostolic authority is transferred through the laying on of hands (ordination). This authority must come from a Catholic bishop.

Acts 14:23 - the apostles and newly-ordained men appointed elders to have authority throughout the Church.

Acts 15:22-27 - preachers of the Word must be sent by the bishops in union with the Church. We must trace this authority to the apostles.

2 Cor. 1:21-22 - Paul writes that God has commissioned certain men and sealed them with the Holy Spirit as a guarantee.

Col 1:25 - Paul calls his position a divine “office.” An office has successors. It does not terminate at death. Or it’s not an office. See also Heb. 7:23 – an office continues with another successor after the previous office-holder’s death.

1 Tim. 3:1 - Paul uses the word “episcopoi” (bishop) which requires an office. Everyone understood that Paul’s use of episcopoi and office meant it would carry on after his death by those who would succeed him.

1 Tim. 4:14 - again, apostolic authority is transferred through the laying on of hands (ordination).

1 Tim. 5:22 - Paul urges Timothy to be careful in laying on the hands (ordaining others). The gift of authority is a reality and cannot be used indiscriminately.

2 Tim. 1:6 - Paul again reminds Timothy the unique gift of God that he received through the laying on of hands.

2 Tim. 4:1-6 - at end of Paul’s life, Paul charges Timothy with the office of his ministry . We must trace true apostolic lineage back to a Catholic bishop.

2 Tim. 2:2 - this verse shows God’s intention is to transfer authority to successors (here, Paul to Timothy to 3rd to 4th generation). It goes beyond the death of the apostles.

Titus 1:5; Luke 10:1 - the elders of the Church are appointed and hold authority. God has His children participate in Christ’s work.

1 John 4:6 - whoever knows God listens to us (the bishops and the successors to the apostles). This is the way we discern truth and error (not just by reading the Bible and interpreting it for ourselves).

Exodus 18:25-26 - Moses appoints various heads over the people of God. We see a hierarchy, a transfer of authority and succession.

Exodus 40:15 - the physical anointing shows that God intended a perpetual priesthood with an identifiable unbroken succession.

Numbers 3:3 - the sons of Aaron were formally “anointed” priests in “ordination” to minister in the priests’ “office.”

Numbers 16:40 - shows God’s intention of unbroken succession within His kingdom on earth. Unless a priest was ordained by Aaron and his descendants, he had no authority.

Numbers 27:18-20 - shows God’s intention that, through the “laying on of hands,” one is commissioned and has authority.

Deut. 34:9 - Moses laid hands upon Joshua, and because of this, Joshua was obeyed as successor, full of the spirit of wisdom.

Sirach 45:15 - Moses ordains Aaron and anoints him with oil. There is a transfer of authority through formal ordination.

 

[Mannyfit75]

III. Jesus Wants Us to Obey Apostolic Authority

Acts 5:13 - the people acknowledged the apostles’ special authority and did not dare take it upon themselves.

Acts 15:6,24; 16:4 - the teaching authority is granted to the apostles and their successors. This teaching authority must be traced to the original apostles, or the authority is not sanctioned by Christ.

Rom. 15:16 – Paul says he is a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in the priestly service of the gospel of God, so that the offering of the Gentiles may be acceptable. This refers to the ministerial priesthood of the ordained which is distinguishable from the universal priesthood of the laity. Notice the Gentiles are the “sacrifice” and Paul does the “offering.”

1 Cor. 5:3-5; 16:22; 1 Tim. 1:20; Gal 1:8; Matt 18:17 – these verses show the authority of the elders to excommunicate / anathemize (“deliver to satan”).

2 Cor. 2:17 - Paul says the elders are not just random peddlers of God’s word. They are actually commissioned by God. It is not self-appointed authority.

2 Cor. 3:6 – Paul says that certain men have been qualified by God to be ministers of a New Covenant. This refers to the ministerial priesthood of Christ handed down the ages through sacramental ordination.

2 Cor. 5:20 - Paul says we are “ambassadors” for Christ. This means that the apostles and their successors share an actual participation in Christ’s mission, which includes healing, forgiving sins, and confecting the sacraments.

2 Cor. 10:6 – in reference to the ordained, Paul says that they are ready to punish every disobedience. The Church has the authority excommunicate those who disobey her.

2 Cor. 10:8 - Paul acknowledges his authority over God’s people which the Lord gave to build up the Church.

1 Thess. 5:12-13 - Paul charges the members of the Church to respect those who have authority over them.

2 Thess. 3:14 - Paul says if a person does not obey what he has provided in his letter, have nothing to do with him.

1 Tim. 5:17 - Paul charges the members of the Church to honor the appointed elders (“priests”) of the Church.

Titus 2:15 - Paul charges Timothy to exhort and reprove with all authority, which he received by the laying on of hands.

Heb. 12:9 – in the context of spiritual discipline, the author says we have had earthly fathers (referring to the ordained leaders) to discipline us and we respected them.

Heb. 13:7,17 - Paul charges the members of the Church to remember and obey their leaders who have authority over their souls.

1 Peter 2:18 - Peter charges the servants to be submissive to their masters whether kind and gentle or overbearing.

1 Peter 5:5; Jude 8 - Peter and Jude charge the members of the Church to be subject to their elders.

2 Peter 2:10 - Peter warns the faithful about despising authority. He is referring to the apostolic authority granted to them by Christ.

3 John 9 - John points out that Diotrephes does not acknowledge John’s apostolic authority and declares that this is evil.

Deut. 17:10-13 - the Lord commands His faithful Israel to obey the priests that He puts in charge, and do to all that they direct and instruct. The Lord warns that those who do not obey His priests shall die.

Num. 16:1-35 - Korah incited a “protestant” rebellion against God’s chosen Moses in an effort to confuse the distinction between the ministerial and universal offices of priesthood, and Korah and his followers perished. (This effort to blind the distinctions between the priests and the laity is still pursued by dissidents today.)

Sirach 7:29-30 - with all your soul fear the Lord and honor His priests, love your Maker and do not forsake His ministers. God is not threatened by the authority He gives His children! God, as our Loving Father, invites us to participate in His plan of salvation with His Son Jesus. Without authority in the Church, there is error, chaos and confusion.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Tradition / Church Fathers / History
I. The Church Has Apostolic Succession

“And thus preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the first-fruits [of their labours], having first proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons of those who should afterwards believe. Nor was this any new thing, since indeed many ages before it was written concerning bishops and deacons. For thus saith the Scripture a certain place, ‘I will appoint their bishops s in righteousness, and their deacons in faith.’… Our apostles also knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, and there would be strife on account of the office of the episcopate. For this reason, therefore, inasmuch as they had obtained a perfect fore-knowledge of this, they appointed those [ministers] already mentioned, and afterwards gave instructions, that when these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed them in their ministry…For our sin will not be small, if we eject from the episcopate those who have blamelessly and holily fulfilled its duties.” Pope Clement, Epistle to Corinthians, 42, 44 (A.D. 98).

“For what is the bishop but one who beyond all others possesses all power and authority, so far as it is possible for a man to possess it, who according to his ability has been made an imitator of the Christ off God? And what is the presbytery but a sacred assembly, the counselors and assessors of the bishop? And what are the deacons but imitators of the angelic powers, fulfilling a pure and blameless ministry unto him, as…Anencletus and Clement to Peter?” Ignatius, To the Trallians, 7 (A.D. 110).

“Hegesippus in the five books of Memoirs which have come down to us has left a most complete record of his own views. In them he states that on a journey to Rome he met a great many bishops, and that he received the same doctrine from all. It is fitting to hear what he says after making some remarks about the epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. His words are as follows: ‘And the church of Corinth continued in the true faith until Primus was bishop in Corinth. I conversed with them on my way to Rome, and abode with the Corinthians many days, during which we were mutually refreshed in the true doctrine. And when I had come to Rome I remained a there until Anicetus, whose deacon was Eleutherus. And Anicetus was succeeded by Soter, and he by Eleutherus. In every succession, and in every city that is held which is preached by the law and the prophets and the Lord.’” Hegesippus, Memoirs, fragment in Eusebius Ecclesiatical History, 4:22 (A.D. 180).

“True knowledge is [that which consists in] the doctrine of the apostles, and the ancient constitution of the Church throughout all the world, and the distinctive manifestation of the body of Christ according to the successions of the bishops, by which they have handed down that Church which exists in every place, and has come even unto us, being guarded and preserved without any forging of Scriptures, by a very complete system of doctrine, and neither receiving addition nor [suffering] curtailment [in the truths which she believes]; and [it consists in] reading [the word of God] without falsification, and a lawful and diligent exposition in harmony with the Scriptures, both without danger and without blasphemy; and [above all, it consists in] the pre-eminent gift of love, which is more precious than knowledge, more glorious than prophecy, and which excels all the other gifts [of God].” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 4:33:8 (A.D. 180).

 

[Mannyfit75]

“But if there be any (heresies) which are bold enough to plant themselves in the midst Of the apostolic age, that they may thereby seem to have been handed down by the apostles, because they existed in the time of the apostles, we can say: Let them produce the original records of their churches; let them unfold the roll of their bishops, running down in due succession from the beginning in such a manner that [that first bishop of theirs] bishop shall be able to show for his ordainer and predecessor some one of the apostles or of apostolic men,–a man, moreover, who continued steadfast with the apostles. …To this test, therefore will they be submitted for proof by those churches, who, although they derive not their founder from apostles or apostolic men (as being of much later date, for they are in fact being founded daily), yet, since they agree in the same faith, they are accounted as not less apostolic because they are akin in doctrine…Then let all the heresies, when challenged to these two tests by our apostolic church, offer their proof of how they deem themselves to be apostolic. But in truth they neither are so, nor are they able to prove themselves to be what they are not. Nor are they admitted to peaceful relations and communion by such churches as are in any way connected with apostles, inasmuch as they are in no sense themselves apostolic because of their diversity as to the mysteries of the faith.” Tertullian, Prescription against the Heretics, 33 (A.D. 200).

“And that you may still be more confident, that repenting thus truly there remains for you a sure hope of salvation, listen to a tale? Which is not a tale but a narrative, handed down and committed to the custody of memory, about the Apostle John. For when, on the tyrant’s death, he returned to Ephesus from the isle of Patmos, he went away, being invited, to the contiguous territories of the nations, here to appoint bishops, there to set in order whole Churches, there to ordain such as were marked out by the Spirit.” Clement of Alexandria, Who is the rich man that shall be save?, 42 (A.D. 210).

“We are not to credit these men, nor go out from the first and the ecclesiastical tradition; nor to believe otherwise than as the churches of God have by succession transmitted to us.” Origen, Commentary on Matthew (post A.D. 244).

“Our Lord, whose precepts and admonitions we ought to observe, describing the honour of a bishop and the order of His Church, speaks in the Gospel, and says to Peter: ‘I say unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.’ Thence, through the changes of times and successions, the ordering of bishops and the plan of the Church flow onwards; so that the Church is founded upon the bishops, and every act of the Church is controlled by these same rulers.” Cyprian, To the Lapsed, 1 (A.D. 250).

 

[Mannyfit75]

“Therefore the power of remitting sins was given to the apostles, and to the churches which they, sent by Christ, established, and to the bishops who succeeded to them by vicarious ordination.” Firmilian, To Cyprian, Epistle 75[74]:16 (A.D. 256).

“It is my purpose to write an account of the successions of the holy apostles, as well as of the times which have elapsed from the days of our Saviour to our own; and to relate the many important events which are said to have occurred in the history of the Church; and to mention those who have governed and presided over the Church in the most prominent parishes, and those who in each generation have proclaimed the divine word either orally or in writing… When Nero was in the eighth year of his reign, Annianus succeeded Mark the evangelist in the administration of the parish of Alexandria…Linus …was Peter’s successor in the episcopate of the church there…Clement also, who was appointed third bishop of the church at Rome.” Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History,1:1,2:24, (A.D. 325).

“Lo! In these three successions, as in a mystery and a figure … Under the three pastors,–there were manifold shepherds” Ephraem, Nisbene Hymns, The Bishops of Nisibis (Jacob, Babu, Valgesh), 13,14 (A.D. 350).

“[W]hile before your election you lived to yourself, after it, you live for your flock. And before you had received the grace of the episcopate, no one knew you; but after you became one, the laity expect you to bring them food, namely instruction from the Scriptures … For if all were of the same mind as your present advisers, how would you have become a Christian, since there would be no bishops? Or if our successors are to inherit this state of mind, how will the Churches be able to hold together?” Athanasius, To Dracontius, Epistle 49 (A.D. 355).

 

[Mannyfit75]

** II. Authority is Transferred by the Sacrament of Ordination
**

“Since therefore I have, in the persons before mentioned, beheld the whole multitude of you in faith and love, I exhort you to study to do all things with a divine harmony, while your bishop presides in the place of God, and your presbyters in the place of the assembly of the apostles, along with your deacons, who are most dear to me, and are entrusted with the ministry of Jesus Christ, who was with the Father before the beginning of time, and in the end was revealed…Let nothing exist among you that may divide you ; but be ye united with your bishop, and those that preside over you, as a type and evidence of your immortality.” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Magnesians, 6 (c. A.D. 110).

“For, since ye are subject to the bishop as to Jesus Christ, ye appear to me to live not after the manner of men, but according to Jesus Christ, who died for us, in order, by believing in His death, ye may escape from death. It is therefore necessary that, as ye indeed do, so without the bishop ye should do nothing, but should also be subject to the presbytery, as to the apostle of Jesus Christ, who is our hope, in whom, if we live, we shall [at last] be found. It is fitting also that the deacons, as being [the ministers] of the mysteries of Jesus Christ, should in every respect be pleasing to all. For they are not ministers of meat and drink, but servants of the Church of God. They are bound, therefore, to avoid all grounds of accusation [against them], as they would do fire.” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Trallians, 2 (c. A.D. 110).

“And do ye also reverence your bishop as Christ Himself, according as the blessed apostles have enjoined you. He that is within the altar is pure, wherefore also he is obedient to the bishop and presbyters: but he that is without is one that does anything apart from the bishop, the presbyters, and the deacons. Such a person is defiled in his conscience, and is worse than an infidel. For what is the bishop but one who beyond all others possesses all power and authority, so far as it is possible for a man to possess it, who according to his ability has been made an imitator of the Christ Of God? And what is the presbytery but a sacred assembly, the counselors and assessors of the bishop? And what are the deacons but imitators of the angelic powers, fulfilling a pure and blameless ministry unto him, as the holy Stephen did to the blessed James, Timothy and Linus to Paul, Anencletus and Clement to Peter? He, therefore, that will not yield obedience to such, must needs be one utterly without God, an impious man who despises Christ, and depreciates His appointments.” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Trallians, 7 (c. A.D. 110).

 

[Mannyfit75]

As I posted above, Apostolic Succession is not an opinion. It’s historically supported, and it is supported by Scripture.

I think the best way describe Apostolic Sucession is to compare it to the succession of President we have since 1786. There is a succession of elected officials.

Likewise, the Church have apostolic succession. If there was no such thing as Apostolic Succession, there would be no Bible, and it would splinter. If the generation of the Apostles ended, without apostolic sucession, there would be no bishops. Christianity would not last.

Jesus said, “I will be with you until the End of Time.” So its specifically clear that Apostolic Succession is a must. The OT had the Levite priest from on generation to the next. How can Jesus be with us, if there was no succession? How would the preaching of Jesus Christ continue on to the new world?

There would be no Christianity. Christianity would be dead without Apostolic Successions. Protestants need to realized that Apostolic Succession is a fact. Read your history books.

 

[maryj]

Go manny, go manny, true apologetics, great job. I only have one thing to add, Jesus said" I will be with you until the end of time" (by the way, “until” doesn’t mean that at the end of time He will cease to be with us!!! Just a point.) that also means that He is with us now in the most Blessed Sacrament, the Holy Eucharist. He is with us always, praise God! He never left us, even in death.

 

[hoosierdaddy]

Go manny, go manny, true apologetics, great job. I only have one thing to add, Jesus said" I will be with you until the end of time" (by the way, “until” doesn’t mean that at the end of time He will cease to be with us!!! Just a point.) that also means that He is with us now in the most Blessed Sacrament, the Holy Eucharist. He is with us always, praise God! He never left us, even in death.

Haha, you can cheer him on for trying to show up the big bad Protestant.

Manny, I’ll have to read all that tomorrow. That’s a lot to read but I want to thank you for taking the time to post it. Though there may be apostolic authority today, it doesn’t prove that the Catholic leaders are that authority or that they can never make mistakes. Jesus Himself will hold teachers to a higher standard and judge those who teach falsehood very severely.

P.S. “til the end of time” would be true. Time will end and then we will enter eternity. So God will be with us til the end of time, and on into eternity.

Anyways…Mary, Mary…back to the topic…

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Hoosierdaddy, God bless and enjoy the reading. You’re not a “big bad Protestant”, you’re a dear brother in Christ and we welcome you.

 

[hoosierdaddy]

Hoosierdaddy, God bless and enjoy the reading. You’re not a “big bad Protestant”, you’re a dear brother in Christ and we welcome you.

Thank you. God bless you too.

 

[Needanswers]

What assurance do I have that the Catholic Church has never erred? Can’t Matthew 16:18-19 be interpreted as meaning that the truth of God will never be stamped out. That there might be periods of darkness and confusion, but the Gospel will never completely disappear?

I can accept the possibility of the Assumption, but the Immaculate Conception and Mary as Mediatrix of all graces is very difficult to accept. Several church fathers attributed sins, especially minor ones, to Mary. Origen and Tertullian imputed the sin of unbelief on Mary. Basil and Hesychios of Jerusalem interpreted the sword of Simeon as the doubt Mary experienced because of the Cross. Saint John Chrysostom accuses her of vainglory. How can saints and/or learned men not be aware of any apostolic tradition that claimed Mary was sinless or immaculately conceived and attribute sins to her?

What solid basis do we have to claim that all graces must past through Mary’s hands first before reaching us? What basis do we have to say that Mary offered her son at Calvary? How do we know what she was thinking that moment? All of this sounds extremely speculative to me and not sound doctrine.

Thanks

 

[rr1213]

What assurance do I have that the Catholic Church has never erred? Can’t Matthew 16:18-19 be interpreted as meaning that the truth of God will never be stamped out. That there might be periods of darkness and confusion, but the Gospel will never completely disappear?

I can accept the possibility of the Assumption, but the Immaculate Conception and Mary as Mediatrix of all graces is very difficult to accept. Several church fathers attributed sins, especially minor ones, to Mary. Origen and Tertullian imputed the sin of unbelief on Mary. Basil and Hesychios of Jerusalem interpreted the sword of Simeon as the doubt Mary experienced because of the Cross. Saint John Chrysostom accuses her of vainglory. How can saints and/or learned men not be aware of any apostolic tradition that claimed Mary was sinless or immaculately conceived and attribute sins to her?

What solid basis do we have to claim that all graces must past through Mary’s hands first before reaching us? What basis do we have to say that Mary offered her son at Calvary? How do we know what she was thinking that moment? All of this sounds extremely speculative to me and not sound doctrine.

Thanks

Exactly.

 

[maryj]

Haha, you can cheer him on for trying to show up the big bad Protestant.

Manny, I’ll have to read all that tomorrow. That’s a lot to read but I want to thank you for taking the time to post it. Though there may be apostolic authority today, it doesn’t prove that the Catholic leaders are that authority or that they can never make mistakes. Jesus Himself will hold teachers to a higher standard and judge those who teach falsehood very severely.

P.S. “til the end of time” would be true. Time will end and then we will enter eternity. So God will be with us til the end of time, and on into eternity.

Anyways…Mary, Mary…back to the topic…

I don’t know if your big, bad or protestant! I do know that showing you up (in your words!) was not what I was getting at. Manny showed true apologetic style, he is one great apologist, so you go manny, And your right…back to topic. I apologize if I insulted you, please forgive me.

 

[maryj]

What assurance do I have that the Catholic Church has never erred? Can’t Matthew 16:18-19 be interpreted as meaning that the truth of God will never be stamped out. That there might be periods of darkness and confusion, but the Gospel will never completely disappear?

I can accept the possibility of the Assumption, but the Immaculate Conception and Mary as Mediatrix of all graces is very difficult to accept. Several church fathers attributed sins, especially minor ones, to Mary. Origen and Tertullian imputed the sin of unbelief on Mary. Basil and Hesychios of Jerusalem interpreted the sword of Simeon as the doubt Mary experienced because of the Cross. Saint John Chrysostom accuses her of vainglory. How can saints and/or learned men not be aware of any apostolic tradition that claimed Mary was sinless or immaculately conceived and attribute sins to her?

What solid basis do we have to claim that all graces must past through Mary’s hands first before reaching us? What basis do we have to say that Mary offered her son at Calvary? How do we know what she was thinking that moment? All of this sounds extremely speculative to me and not sound doctrine.

Thanks

How about this. scriptual evidence for Mary’s sinlessness.
Genesis 3:15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel.(NAB)
so this is God speaking to the serpent after the fall of Adam.The womans offspring who will strike(crush) the head of the serpent(defeat him) is acknowledge by all Christians to be Jesus christ.The enmity, OPPOSITION, between the woman and the serpent is the same enmity that exsists between Jesus and the serpent. the devil never ensnared Jesus in sin as he did adam and eve. Therefore, the woman, the mother of Jesus, would also never be ensnared by sin, as she is at total enmity with the serpent.This woman must be Mary, it cannot be eve, who embraced the devil and turned away from God. Also Eve did not give birth to Jesus, Mary did.Now if the Blessed virgin were destitute of grace for even the briefest moment, there could not have been enmity (complete opposition) between her and the serpent. lest we forget that grace is diminished by every sin.Jesus deffinately crushed Satan’s head on Calvary. All four Evangelists record that Calvary means “skull-place” Satan intended to strike Jesus a lethal blow on the cross, but it proved to be a minor wound(“you strike at His heel”). Satan suffered the mortal wound(“He will strike at your head”) as Jesus destroyed the power of sin and death. Dying you destroyed our death; rising you restored our life…Who was at Christ’s side on Calvary? Mary. What does Jesus call her? “Woman”. Mary is the New Eve, she is the “woman” of Genesis 3:15, the “woman” of John 19 at the foot of the cross, and the “woman” of Revelation 12 who, with her son Jesus, fights against Satan till the end. From Genesis through Revelation.