S
sterryfamily
Guest
The term “Roman Catholic” was first used by Protestants to disparage the Church.
- Status
S
sterryfamily
Guest
**justasking4 **said, “Was not eating meat on Fridays during lent, Stations of the cross and saying the rosary SACRED TRADITIONS?”
What does this tell you?
I asked it to read what the CCC says about Sacred Tradition. Any bets as to whether it did?
Just as a help, here it is:
*Article 2
THE TRANSMISSION OF DIVINE REVELATION
74 God “desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth”: that is, of Christ Jesus. Christ must be proclaimed to all nations and individuals, so that this revelation may reach to the ends of the earth:
God graciously arranged that the things he had once revealed for the salvation of all peoples should remain in their entirety, throughout the ages, and be transmitted to all generations.
I. The Apostolic Tradition
75 “Christ the Lord, in whom the entire Revelation of the most high God is summed up, commanded the apostles to preach the Gospel, which had been promised beforehand by the prophets, and which he fulfilled in his own person and promulgated with his own lips. In preaching the Gospel, they were to communicate the gifts of God to all men. This Gospel was to be the source of all saving truth and moral discipline.”
In the apostolic preaching. . .
76 In keeping with the Lord’s command, the Gospel was handed on in two ways:
77 “In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority.” Indeed, “the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time.”
78 This living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit, is called Tradition, since it is distinct from Sacred Scripture, though closely connected to it. Through Tradition, “the Church, in her doctrine, life and worship, perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes.” “The sayings of the holy Fathers are a witness to the life-giving presence of this Tradition, showing how its riches are poured out in the practice and life of the Church, in her belief and her prayer.”
79 The Father’s self-communication made through his Word in the Holy Spirit, remains present and active in the Church: “God, who spoke in the past, continues to converse with the Spouse of his beloved Son. and the Holy Spirit, through whom the living voice of the Gospel rings out in the Church - and through her in the world - leads believers to the full truth, and makes the Word of Christ dwell in them in all its richness.”
II. The Relationship Between Tradition and Sacred Scripture
One common source. . .
80 “Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal.” Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own “always, to the close of the age”.
. . . two distinct modes of transmission
81 “Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit.”
“and [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching.”
82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, “does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honoured with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.”*
Continued…
What does this tell you?
I asked it to read what the CCC says about Sacred Tradition. Any bets as to whether it did?
Just as a help, here it is:
*Article 2
THE TRANSMISSION OF DIVINE REVELATION
74 God “desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth”: that is, of Christ Jesus. Christ must be proclaimed to all nations and individuals, so that this revelation may reach to the ends of the earth:
God graciously arranged that the things he had once revealed for the salvation of all peoples should remain in their entirety, throughout the ages, and be transmitted to all generations.
I. The Apostolic Tradition
75 “Christ the Lord, in whom the entire Revelation of the most high God is summed up, commanded the apostles to preach the Gospel, which had been promised beforehand by the prophets, and which he fulfilled in his own person and promulgated with his own lips. In preaching the Gospel, they were to communicate the gifts of God to all men. This Gospel was to be the source of all saving truth and moral discipline.”
In the apostolic preaching. . .
76 In keeping with the Lord’s command, the Gospel was handed on in two ways:
- orally “by the apostles who handed on, by the spoken word of their preaching, by the example they gave, by the institutions they established, what they themselves had received - whether from the lips of Christ, from his way of life and his works, or whether they had learned it at the prompting of the Holy Spirit”;
- in writing “by those apostles and other men associated with the apostles who, under the inspiration of the same Holy Spirit, committed the message of salvation to writing”.
77 “In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority.” Indeed, “the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time.”
78 This living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit, is called Tradition, since it is distinct from Sacred Scripture, though closely connected to it. Through Tradition, “the Church, in her doctrine, life and worship, perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes.” “The sayings of the holy Fathers are a witness to the life-giving presence of this Tradition, showing how its riches are poured out in the practice and life of the Church, in her belief and her prayer.”
79 The Father’s self-communication made through his Word in the Holy Spirit, remains present and active in the Church: “God, who spoke in the past, continues to converse with the Spouse of his beloved Son. and the Holy Spirit, through whom the living voice of the Gospel rings out in the Church - and through her in the world - leads believers to the full truth, and makes the Word of Christ dwell in them in all its richness.”
II. The Relationship Between Tradition and Sacred Scripture
One common source. . .
80 “Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal.” Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own “always, to the close of the age”.
. . . two distinct modes of transmission
81 “Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit.”
“and [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching.”
82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, “does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honoured with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.”*
Continued…
S
sterryfamily
Guest
Continued…
*Apostolic Tradition and ecclesial traditions
83 The Tradition here in question comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from Jesus’ teaching and example and what they learned from the Holy Spirit. the first generation of Christians did not yet have a written New Testament, and the New Testament itself demonstrates the process of living Tradition.
Tradition is to be distinguished from the various theological, disciplinary, liturgical or devotional traditions, born in the local churches over time. These are the particular forms, adapted to different places and times, in which the great Tradition is expressed. In the light of Tradition, these traditions can be retained, modified or even abandoned under the guidance of the Church’s Magisterium.*
Of course, it goes on from there. Here is a link vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM to the CCC for any who are sincerely interested in knowing what Christ’s Church teaches about Sacred Tradition, or anything else.
Then there are those who just want to help spread falsehoods…
*Apostolic Tradition and ecclesial traditions
83 The Tradition here in question comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from Jesus’ teaching and example and what they learned from the Holy Spirit. the first generation of Christians did not yet have a written New Testament, and the New Testament itself demonstrates the process of living Tradition.
Tradition is to be distinguished from the various theological, disciplinary, liturgical or devotional traditions, born in the local churches over time. These are the particular forms, adapted to different places and times, in which the great Tradition is expressed. In the light of Tradition, these traditions can be retained, modified or even abandoned under the guidance of the Church’s Magisterium.*
Of course, it goes on from there. Here is a link vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM to the CCC for any who are sincerely interested in knowing what Christ’s Church teaches about Sacred Tradition, or anything else.
Then there are those who just want to help spread falsehoods…
E
Elizabeth2
Guest
Would anyone be interested in discussing the Immaculate Conception of Mary. How that doctrine grew up in the Church. I think it was defined in the 1800’s, but does anyone know any definite details? This year is the 150th Anniversary of the apparitions of Mary at Lourdes in France, where she declared to Bernadette that she is the Immaculate Conception. The official Lourdes 150th anniversary celebration site is:
lourdes2008.com/index_en.html
I just have a broad understanding that in the early years of the Church, the Church was mainly concerned with establishing the central truths of the faith, and refuting errors and over time proclaimed doctrines like the Immaculate Conception as the other truths had been established. (name removed by moderator)ut anyone??
lourdes2008.com/index_en.html
I just have a broad understanding that in the early years of the Church, the Church was mainly concerned with establishing the central truths of the faith, and refuting errors and over time proclaimed doctrines like the Immaculate Conception as the other truths had been established. (name removed by moderator)ut anyone??
A
alanjeddy
Guest
Since God in His omnipotence is pure truth and sinless how is there any possibility that the Word incarnate could be born in a womb that was impure? Jesus and the apostles must have known this. When it was taught through Sacred Tradition i don’t know. Don’t believe it is Scriptual? Very good question.
A
alanjeddy
Guest
In the constitution Ineffablis Deus " God Ineffable" of 8 december 1854 Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary in the first instance of her conception by a secular privilege and grace, granted by God in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin.
E
Elizabeth2
Guest
Thannks for the two previous posts. I keep forgetting my own advice to justasking4 in one of my previous posts. I went to the Catholic Catechism and found what it says there. in 491 and 492 it speaks about the Immaculate Conception.
491 says:
"Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, “full of grace” through God, was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854: The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.
492:
"The “splendor of an entirely unique holiness” by which Mary is “enriched from the first instant of her conception” comes wholly from Christ: she is “redeemed, in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son.” The Father blessed Mary more than any other created person “in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” and chose her “in Christ before the foundation of the world, to be holy and blameless before him in love.”
There’s also the following paragraph about her personal sinlessness: paragraph 493
“The Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God “the All-Holy” (Panagia) and celebrate her as “free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature.” By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long”.
There’s a whole section on Mary in the CCC and it’s good for meditation…she is our Mother in the order of grace:
968
"Her role in relation to the Church and to all humanity goes still further. “In a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope and burning charity in the Savior’s work of restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace”.
The Catechism of the Church is a real treasure
491 says:
"Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, “full of grace” through God, was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854: The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.
492:
"The “splendor of an entirely unique holiness” by which Mary is “enriched from the first instant of her conception” comes wholly from Christ: she is “redeemed, in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son.” The Father blessed Mary more than any other created person “in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” and chose her “in Christ before the foundation of the world, to be holy and blameless before him in love.”
There’s also the following paragraph about her personal sinlessness: paragraph 493
“The Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God “the All-Holy” (Panagia) and celebrate her as “free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature.” By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long”.
There’s a whole section on Mary in the CCC and it’s good for meditation…she is our Mother in the order of grace:
968
"Her role in relation to the Church and to all humanity goes still further. “In a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope and burning charity in the Savior’s work of restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace”.
The Catechism of the Church is a real treasure
J
justasking4
Guest
Since the Scriptures never mention Mary’s birth, being without sin all her life etc and yet catholic teachings say she was, is this an example of Sacred Tradition?
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
You have been told a million times that Scripture is borne from Sacred Tradition. Sacred Tradition is what was practiced by the Apostles and their eyewitnesses. The Church came first, then Scripture.
*John 21:24-25
It is this disciple who testifies to these things and has written them, 14 and we know that his testimony is true.
25
There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written. *
The mass, the Trinity, worship on Sunday, confession.
J
justasking4
Guest
If the church came before the scriptures what of the OT? They predate the church.
Can we then add Mary’s supposed immaculate conception, never sinned and assumption to the list of Sacred Traditions?
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
To which OT books are you referring? Pre 90 AD or post 90 AD? Jewish or Christian? What about the NT? The first Gospel, Mark was not written until approx 65 AD. What about the gospel of Thomas, Protoevangelium of James? How was it decided which writings were inspired, and which were merely historical?
newadvent.org/fathers/0847.htm
Yup :yup:
Immaculate, never sinned:
The angel Gabriel said, “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you” (Luke 1:28). The phrase “full of grace” is a translation of the Greek word chaire kecharitomene. Hail, full of grace indicates a unique abundance of grace, a supernatural, godlike state of soul, which finds its explanation only in the Immaculate Conception of Mary.
Assumption:
Enoch and Elijah were assumed, why not the mother of God?
Mary was assumed or taken up into heaven by God. She didn’t do it under her own power. In an age where all sorts of claims were made to relics and bones of saints, as well as so and so died here, why has no one ever made claim to any of Mary’s remains or where she is buried?
Read about the frescoes found in the Catacombs, the beliefs and practices of the early Christians. Since I am not the answer man (girl), I’m sure you could look this up yourself.
But I know all this evidence has already been presented to you, because I am a lurker. I’m somebody new at whom you can throw all your protestant denials of the truth of the Catholic Church. But your false repetitions in light of the truths that have been repeatedly supplied to you, show you have not made any attempt at understanding.
When you’ve read the history, you’ll know what the CC is talking about.
God Bless, Holy Spirit brought you to CAF.
G
guanophore
Guest
Asking that question is part of the foil, the ruse. If he can get a conversation started around it, he can try to steer it toward Sola Scriptura, and pursuade Catholics to abandon these “traditions of men” by which they are led into more and more false doctrine. It must work sometimes, because he keeps using the method.
G
guanophore
Guest
Actually, it did not. The Jews did not have a canon that was agreed upon. In fact, the Saduccees only accepted the “books of Moses” (Torah). This is part of the reason they rejected so much doctrine like the resurrection, angels, and doctrines that were accepted by the Pharisees, who accepted Moses, the Prophets and the psalms.
Making a “stuff to debunk” list?
L
LittleDeb
Guest
Good job here! It is amazing how many Protestants do not understand what it means to be FULL of grace. Like there is room for sin when one is FULL of grace?
And further, St. John (or one of his followers) speaks in Revelation of seeing the Ark of the Covenant in heaven. Reading this part without Sola Scriptura goggles we can know that it is discussing the birth of the Savior coming from the new Eve. Since Mary lived with John until the end of her days he would have known what happened to her. Mary is mentioned quite a bit in Revelation. John says, “the Ark” was in heaven, not her spirit alone, but her whole body. The Ark is her body. Her spirit didn’t carry the Christ, her body did.
Again, it is amazing how many Protestants think this passage means that he saw an Old Testament box floating about in heaven. Sometimes I have this nearly uncontrollable urge to ask them, “Exactly how does a box go about accepting Jesus Christ as its personal Lord and Savior thereby becoming a saved box?”
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
I agree with you on the ruse, I’ve seen it countless times. I disagree that it works, because if anything, it forces me, and lurkers to look up what I don’t know enough about, and thus walk away more sure of my trust in the Truth of the CC. Also, I believe this ruse has brought in converts. I can’t remember who, but someone (could it be Tef?) a while back on another thread said his primary purpose for originally coming to CAF was to rouse up the Catholics and he ended up converting.
J
justasking4
Guest
Would you happen to have the source for this? This is the first i have seen this. My sources tell me the Jews as a whole accepted the entire protestant OT. They rejected the apocryphal books in part because they do not claim to be written by a prophet and there was no predictive prophecy in them.
What i’m trying to understand is the exact nature of Sacred Tradition and tradition. To do that, i need to know exactly what these Sacred Traditions are.
J
justasking4
Guest
J
justasking4
Guest
The 39 books of the OT without the apocrypha.
Mark is not part of the OT
Rejected. Is it not true that the some of the Marian claims are based on the Protoevangelium of James which is a false book and condemned by the church?
i have answered that elsewhere. No need to go into it here.
Is it not true that part of the claims of the immaculate conception is that she was without sin all her life? If so, how do you get that out of the definition above if it says absolutely nothing about it i.e. being without sin all of life?
The question is did He and what is the evidence that He did.
Since there are no facts for this assertion from scripture and a unverifiable historical claim that is quite late all you have is speculation.
Again, i could make the same claim about all kinds of people in the Scriptures in which we don’t have any evidence where they were buried either. Should i assume they to were assumed into heaven? Would you accept that?
All this tells me is what someone drew on a wall. It may have been the belief of this person but that does not mean its true.
The evidence given has not been compelling. I suspect a lot of catholics when challenged to look at the evidence find it extremely troubling.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
Wow, I never put together that Mary lived with John for the rest of her days together with the John that wrote Revelation. No wonder he writes so much about the Queen of Heaven and Mary!!
I never knew how Protestants interpreted this passage, and often wondered, because it so clearly is Mary.
Thanks for your insight!
J
justasking4
Guest
Not sure i understand you. Are you saying you don’t accept everything your church teaches?
So to be a true catholic that person must believe and accept everything the church teaches. Is this correct?
Does this mean that in the future your church could come to a deeper understanding on some issue and it could evenually become SACRED TRADITION?
What is your defintion of the Deposit of Faith?
- Status