Needed, (by some), Additions to the Good News of Christ.

[Petro]

michael,

Here is another two outlandish claims quote;

 "The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth."

Pope Pius V, quoted in Barclay, Chapter XXVII, p. 218, "Cities Petrus Bertanous".


     “...We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty..."

Pope Leo XIII, in Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae (The Reunion of Christendom), Encyclical promulgated on June 20, 1894.

http://www.users.qwest.net/~slrorer/ReunionOfChristendom.htm

Are these true claims of the RC.

Petro

[Petro]

michael,

Aside from teaching Mary was a perpetual virgin (which she wasn't) the RC teaches she is and intermediary and dispenses salvation, it matters little whether the catechism teaches it or not the preleates do.

Here is a site for you:

Http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/pope0256au.htm

Of course you will yell foul, anti-catholic sites,

My response is yea sure..

From Pope Leo XIII's  Enclyclical

Pope Leo XIII - Octobri Mense - On the Rosary - 22 September 1891

4. But since the salvation of our race was accomplished by the mystery of the Cross, and since the Church, dispenser of that salvation after the triumph of Christ, was founded upon earth and instituted, Providence established a new order for a new people. The consideration of the Divine counsels is united to the great sentiment of religion. The Eternal Son of God, about to take upon Him our nature for the saving and ennobling of man, and about to consummate thus a mystical union between Himself and all mankind, did not accomplish His design without adding there the free consent of the elect Mother, who represented in some sort all human kind, according to the illustrious and just opinion of St. Thomas, who says that the Annunciation was effected with the consent of the Virgin standing in the place of humanity.[5] With equal truth may it be also affirmed that, by the will of God, Mary is the intermediary through whom is distributed unto us this immense treasure of mercies gathered by God, for mercy and truth were created by Jesus Christ.[6] Thus as no man goeth to the Father but by the Son, so no man goeth to Christ but by His Mother. How great are the goodness and mercy revealed in this design of God! What a correspondence with the frailty of man! We believe in the infinite goodness of the Most High, and we rejoice in it; we believe also in His justice and we fear it. We adore the beloved Savior, lavish of His blood and of His life; we dread the inexorable Judge. Thus do those whose actions have disturbed their consciences need an intercessor mighty in favor with God, merciful enough not to reject the cause of the desperate, merciful enough to lift up again towards hope in the divine mercy the afflicted and the broken down. Mary is this glorious intermediary; she is the mighty Mother of the Almighty; but—what is still sweeter—she is gentle, extreme in tenderness, of a limitless loving-kindness. As such God gave her to us. Having chosen her for the Mother of His only begotten Son, He taught her all a mother's feeling that breathes nothing but pardon and love. Such Christ desired she should be, for He consented to be subject to Mary and to obey her as a son a mother. Such He proclaimed her from the cross when he entrusted to her care and love the whole of the race of man in the person of His disciple John. Such, finally, she proves herself by her courage in gathering in the heritage of the enormous labors of her Son, and in accepting the charge of her maternal duties towards us all.

Your assignment is to find the words emboldened, and then prove this is not written on a catholic website, or not believed by the faithfull.

If this is not RC teaching, why is it being spoken of matter of fact like by the pope??

It matters very little if this written in th catechism, the catechism like tradition is only one source of teaching against another.

What pope Leo XIII said in this encyclical is blasphemous in as much to what the Word God teaches.

You deny this...


Petro

PS  If you don't like that website, look at this one;

http://www.catholicism.org/pages/octobri.htm

Same thing...??

[Petro]

michael


Here is another Catholic website, which teaches the same thing, that Mary is an intermediary, and intercessor, and even make the claim she is able to restrain judgement from God, since she can do what she wills with God

Imagine that!!!


MARY IS SO TENDER AN ADVOCATE THAT SHE DOES NOT REFUSE TO DEFEND THE CAUSE EVEN OF THE MOST MISERABLE.

Http://www.fatima.org/library/cr15pg08.html

"Oh, with what efficacy and love," says St. Bernard, "does this good advocate interest Herself in the affair of our salvation!"

St. Bonaventure, considering the affection and zeal with which Mary intercedes for us with the divine Majesty, in order that our Lord may pardon us our sins, help us with His grace, free us from dangers, and relieve us our wants, says, addressing the Blessed Virgin, in the words of an ancient writer: "We know that we have as it were but One solicitous in heaven for us, and Thou art this one, so greatly does Thy solicitude for us exceed that of all the saints." That is, "O Lady, it is true that all the saints desire our salvation, and pray for us; but the love, the tenderness that Thou showest us in heaven, in obtaining for us by Thy prayers so many mercies from God, obliges us to acknowledge that in heaven we have but one advocate, and that is Thyself; and that Thou alone art truly loving and solicitous for our welfare."

Truly unfortunate should we poor sinners be, had we not this great advocate, who is so powerful and compassionate, and at the same time "so prudent and wise, that the Judge, Her Son," says Richard of St. Laurence, "cannot condemn the guilty who are defended by Her."

And therefore St. John Geometra salutes Her, saying, "Hail, O court, for putting an end to litigation." For all causes defended by this most wise advocate are gained.
"But," continues the same saint, "should any one fear to go to the feet of this most sweet advocate, who has nothing in Her of severity, nothing terrible, but who is all courteous, amiable and benign, he would indeed be offering an insult to the tender compassion of Mary. And he adds, "Read, and read again, as often as you please, all that is said of Her in the Gospels, and if you can find the least trait of severity recorded of Her, then fear to approach Her. But no, this you can never find; and therefore go to Her with a joyful heart, and She will save you by Her intercession.

"Be comforted then, O you who fear," will I say with St. Thomas of Villanova: "breathe freely and take courage, O wretched sinners; this great Virgin, who is the Mother of your God and judge, is also the advocate of the whole human race; fit for this office, for She can do what She wills with God; most wise, for She knows all the means of appeasing Him; universal, for She welcomes all, and refuses to defend no one."


There all sorts of sites that spew this nonsense...

Mary is not God, yet she possess power over god, to read these claims.

How in the world do you square these teachings up,  michael??

Please, don't say, they are not teachings, it makes you out to be a person who doesn't live in reality, or totally ignorant of what your religion teaches.

Petro

[sincereheart]

Is it just me? It's starting to sound like the government.
'Official' teachings vs 'Unofficial' (but accepted) teachings.  

[ollie]

Michael,

What does the following highlighted areas in the quote below mean?

It is a quote from the Vatican's website, under "Congregations" and "Evangelization of the People".

Having to do with the  Roman church and evangelization:

"Moreover, today, at the beginning of the 21st century, the Catholic Church sets out anew with confidence to travel a new stretch of the road on her journey to meet the world since there is still a long way to go and the road to be traveled is beset with difficulties. It is a way that is full of mystery and fascinating, full of snares but safe, because Our Lady, Star of Evangelization, is her traveling companion."

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cevang/documents/rc_con_cevang_doc_20030221_press-conf-mission_en.html



Is this saying that the church of Rome's "lady, star of evangelization" keeps the church safe on the church's journey to evangelize the people of the world?

Who is such a lady and why would she have this power to keep the church safe? Who authorized this power?
Why is not God through His Christ enough for the safety of the church?

Why must this "lady be added to keep the church safe? Why is such needed?

[michael_legna]

You really should address the refernce and prove this is not so.

Petro you really have no understanding of fairness, decorum or debating principals if you think it is my burden to prove whether your sources are reliable or not.  What nonsense!  If I offer a quote from Hitler saying you eat worms, it is not up to you to prove that quote is from a lying, unreliable source.  It would be up to me to verify the claim through an impartial source that could be relied upon.  So the ball is still in your court.  

I find it amusing that you have the entire Catechism at your disposal and you can't find anything to attack in it, prefering instead to use straw man attacks in the form of quotes of questionable origin.  There is no possible way these quotes can be defended until I have access to the context in which they were made in.  

I have had to defend point after point of your attacks as you move again and again trying to find even one issue where you are right.  All the while you sit back immune to questions since your denomination doesn't have the courage to place their doctrines in writing.  We have been over this before and I told you that I would not respond to these issues unless you could substantiate them in the Catechism, as it is the Official teaching of the RCC and I feel no need to defend opinions or statements that fall out side of that statement of faith just for your amusement.

As you can see, Every quote below shows you the refenrence, where you can find the excat quote, yet you are fixed on the the sight providing the reliable information.

I have a pretty good library but even I don't have access to these books and documents.  If they are so easy to get then you should provide them instead of relying on some reader digest type of condensed attack of Catholicism.

Can you refute this is not written, by whom  the reference sources state they are written by??

It is not my responsibility to verify your sources for you.

Quit blowing smoke,

Requiring fairness is not blowing smoke.

As you can see I have several people asking legitmate questions based on legitimate concerns over differences in scriptural interpretations or based on quotes from legitimate sources; so until you can provide something of substance I will only correct you in your understanding when you post your errors and will not put out the effort to support it other than on my own word and far deeper understanding of the Church than you have.  After all that is more effort than you are putting out.

[Petro]

You really should address the refernce and prove this is not so.

Petro you really have no understanding of fairness, decorum or debating principals ..................

michael,

There is nothing to debate, since the Bible teaches nothing of this sort, ultimately it boils down to mans teachings being elevated to and taught as doctrines of God.

Jesus warned against such things;

Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
8  This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
9  But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.  Mat 15:7-9

There is nothing to debate, as for decorum, it should only be observed when valid points or questions arise, since these are false assertions and not valid neither decorum, nor debate should be given consideration, after all we are not discussing the stock market but the issues of life on which hang in the balance the souls of men.

........if you think it is my burden to prove whether your sources are reliable or not.  What nonsense!  If I offer a quote from Hitler saying you eat worms, it is not up to you to prove that quote is from a lying, unreliable source.  It would be up to me to verify the claim through an impartial source that could be relied upon.  So the ball is still in your court.

So, where is your reliable sources, that proves these statements I have given you, claimed by catholicism are false, you have dismissed what I have given you as ture statements approved and accepted by the rome, which you deny.

Examine yourself, and use your own spoken of standard to refute the evidence I have presented that demands a verdict.

Your responses thus far have been insufficient and not acceptable to claim anti catholic bias to every clear piece of evidence presented which proves what is taught at the highest levels of this insttitution.

It is clear to me you simply do not accept what is taught, or are simply ignorant of it.

Which is it??  

Be Honest..

You have got to face reality, sooner or later.

You can't teach Christians because it is the Holy Spirit which teaches the children of God.




Petro

[michael_legna]

There is nothing to debate, as for decorum, it should only be observed when valid points or questions arise, since these are false assertions and not valid neither decorum, nor debate should be given consideration, after all we are not discussing the stock market but the issues of life on which hang in the balance the souls of men.

We are pursuing the truth of the matter, or at least I am, and that means that there are rules of acceptable evidence and behavior so one side doesn't appear to win the argument unfairly.  Thus when one side does appear to have shown their position to be correct it is not just due to some misuse of phoney facts.

So, where is your reliable sources, that proves these statements I have given you, claimed by catholicism are false, you have dismissed what I have given you as ture statements approved and accepted by the rome, which you deny.

Petro are you really this ignorant of how to discuss things intelligently?  I don't have to provide sources to dispute something that has never even been properly supported in the first place.  It would be like me asking you where are your sources to show you don't eat worms?  Come on pay attention and think through these concepts or get someone to teach you how to honestly and fairly debate a topic.

Examine yourself, and use your own spoken of standard to refute the evidence I have presented that demands a verdict.

I would if you had presented any evidence to this point.  as far as examining myself I have and I know that the Church does not teach that the Pope is God, never has and never will.  If you have quotes that appear to say so they are either phony, or taken out of context, or misunderstood due to the era they were written in when a more flowery form of speech was used and the writers of that time never intended them to mean what they appear to mean in our day.

The arrogance you maintain by claiming to know the teaching of my Church better than I do when I have read the entire Catechism and you admit you have not is amazing.  Pride goeth before the fall Petro.

[Petro]

There is nothing to debate, as for decorum, it should only be observed when valid points or questions arise, since these are false assertions and not valid neither decorum, nor debate should be given consideration, after all we are not discussing the stock market but the issues of life on which hang in the balance the souls of men.

We are pursuing the truth of the matter, or at least I am, and that means that there are rules of acceptable evidence and behavior so one side doesn't appear to win the argument unfairly.  Thus when one side does appear to have shown their position to be correct it is not just due to some misuse of phoney facts.

So, where is your reliable sources, that proves these statements I have given you, claimed by catholicism are false, you have dismissed what I have given you as ture statements approved and accepted by the rome, which you deny.

Petro are you really this ignorant of how to discuss things intelligently?  I don't have to provide sources to dispute something that has never even been properly supported in the first place.  It would be like me asking you where are your sources to show you don't eat worms?  Come on pay attention and think through these concepts or get someone to teach you how to honestly and fairly debate a topic.

Examine yourself, and use your own spoken of standard to refute the evidence I have presented that demands a verdict.

I would if you had presented any evidence to this point.  as far as examining myself I have and I know that the Church does not teach that the Pope is God, never has and never will.  If you have quotes that appear to say so they are either phony, or taken out of context, or misunderstood due to the era they were written in when a more flowery form of speech was used and the writers of that time never intended them to mean what they appear to mean in our day.

The arrogance you maintain by claiming to know the teaching of my Church better than I do when I have read the entire Catechism and you admit you have not is amazing.  Pride goeth before the fall Petro.

michael,

If you would at least acknowledge the truth of what is taught in your institutions highest levels, there would be something to discuss further, but clearly you won't even admit this is so, you are unteachable, I can see this clearly.

Your lofty heady logical conclusions, which amount to the wisdom of this world have taken you into bondage, you have no free will being incontinent.

It is also clear,  you are not honest, this is where I get off, allow me to shake the dust off the soles of my shoes herein, let your own blood be upon your own head, I am free from it..

Petro

[michael_legna]

If you would at least acknowledge the truth of what is taught in your institutions highest levels, there would be something to discuss further, but clearly you won't even admit this is so, you are unteachable, I can see this clearly.

You mistake your finding a couple of quotes from questionable sources taken out of context as representing what the Church teaches at it's highest levels when you show yourself not to understand even the rudimentary issues of the Church's doctrine.

Your lofty heady logical conclusions, which amount to the wisdom of this world have taken you into bondage, you have no free will being incontinent.

It is also clear,  you are not honest, this is where I get off, allow me to shake the dust off the soles of my shoes herein, let your own blood be upon your own head, I am free from it..

Get off?  If you are being true to your own doctrine, you have to admit that you were never on!  

Since we have no free will you could not have been expecting anything from this discussion.  But since you obviously did expect to change my mind it is clear you don't even believe your own doctrine, that we have no free will.   Petro stop being hypocritical and abandon a doctrine you know in your heart cannot be true.

[michael_legna]

Michael,

What does the following highlighted areas in the quote below mean?

It is a quote from the Vatican's website, under "Congregations" and "Evangelization of the People".

Having to do with the  Roman church and evangelization:

"Moreover, today, at the beginning of the 21st century, the Catholic Church sets out anew with confidence to travel a new stretch of the road on her journey to meet the world since there is still a long way to go and the road to be traveled is beset with difficulties. It is a way that is full of mystery and fascinating, full of snares but safe, because Our Lady, Star of Evangelization, is her traveling companion."

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cevang/documents/rc_con_cevang_doc_20030221_press-conf-mission_en.html



Is this saying that the church of Rome's "lady, star of evangelization" keeps the church safe on the church's journey to evangelize the people of the world?

Who is such a lady and why would she have this power to keep the church safe? Who authorized this power?
Why is not God through His Christ enough for the safety of the church?

Why must this "lady be added to keep the church safe? Why is such needed?

In general terms it means the the RCC acknowledges the fact that God continues to use the Saints of the Church after death as vessels of honor.  That He can act through them to assist and guide and protect those on earth.  Similarly to the way He uses and will use Michael, the Prince of the Angels and protector of the Israelites.

The Lady is the Virgin Mary and the Church is saying that it believes God has choosen her to come with messages and guidance to help us in these troubled times.

If you accept the RCC concept of the communion of saints this statement does not seem to be at all of concern.  It is merely God acting through His Church.  God can do things anyway He wants because He is all powerful.  Why did He choose to do things this way?  I don't know.

[ollie]

Michael,

What does the following highlighted areas in the quote below mean?

It is a quote from the Vatican's website, under "Congregations" and "Evangelization of the People".

Having to do with the  Roman church and evangelization:

"Moreover, today, at the beginning of the 21st century, the Catholic Church sets out anew with confidence to travel a new stretch of the road on her journey to meet the world since there is still a long way to go and the road to be traveled is beset with difficulties. It is a way that is full of mystery and fascinating, full of snares but safe, because Our Lady, Star of Evangelization, is her traveling companion."

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cevang/documents/rc_con_cevang_doc_20030221_press-conf-mission_en.html



Is this saying that the church of Rome's "lady, star of evangelization" keeps the church safe on the church's journey to evangelize the people of the world?

Who is such a lady and why would she have this power to keep the church safe? Who authorized this power?
Why is not God through His Christ enough for the safety of the church?

Why must this "lady be added to keep the church safe? Why is such needed?

In general terms it means the the RCC acknowledges the fact that God continues to use the Saints of the Church after death as vessels of honor.  That He can act through them to assist and guide and protect those on earth.  Similarly to the way He uses and will use Michael, the Prince of the Angels and protector of the Israelites.

The Lady is the Virgin Mary and the Church is saying that it believes God has choosen her to come with messages and guidance to help us in these troubled times.

If you accept the RCC concept of the communion of saints this statement does not seem to be at all of concern.  It is merely God acting through His Church.  God can do things anyway He wants because He is all powerful.  Why did He choose to do things this way?  I don't know.

Interesting thoughts, Michael.

It is very difficult for me to corrolate it to God's purpose and plan or
put other saints equal to or in the same capacity as God and His Christ.

Thanks,
 Ollie