/CATHOLICISM/ general

[Anonymous No.13245537]

Thread #8

Ask questions, recommend books, discuss, anything related to the Gospels, the OT, the Church, her history and her teachings, but keep it text-based as this is /lit/. (As in, this is not the place to discuss Palestrina, or the siege of Damascus, or corruption under the Borgias, etc.).

Skeptics, non-believers, other Christians and religious groups, perennialists, pagans, all are welcome, but let's at least attempt to keep the discussion reasonably civil and elevated.

Remember to pray the rosary.

>Overbin
http://pastebin.com/NVcvpAEP
Containing all further pastebin links.

>The Basics of Christianity,
http://pastebin.com/H06aCfNe
This one I highly recommend to people wanting to relearn the faith, learn of Catholicism, or simply learn Christianity better.

>The Papacy and Church Authority
http://pastebin.com/Gq0Rf4TL

>The Communion and Intercession of Saints
http://pastebin.com/ATQnpVfe

>Sacred Tradition and its Connection to Scripture
http://pastebin.com/LnCungNW

>The Problem of Evil and the Problem of Hell
http://pastebin.com/ZU01sygz

>Galileo, Giodano Bruno, and Wycliffe
http://pastebin.com/TXRv3hHG

>Why Mary is called "Queen of Heaven".
http://pastebin.com/n7Enk9aP

>The "Whore of Babylon"
http://pastebin.com/dQGrKhZu

>The Origin of the Hail Mary
http://pastebin.com/7ibTzYiD

>Scripture on Christian Unity
http://pastebin.com/ZFhcHLTC

>For the Community: Tales of Love
http://pastebin.com/Qt3RUsXA

>For the Community: The Beauty of Creation
http://pastebin.com/VKGZEvXK

[Anonymous No.13245542]

>>13245537
Blessings be upon you for this thread, brother.

[Anonymous No.13245596]

>>13245542
Thank you, I pray this thread and subsequent post will lead any and as many anons as possible closer to Christ, Our Blessed Lord. :)

Going to add some prayers.

Our Father, Who art in heaven,
Hallowed be Thy Name.
Thy Kingdom come.
Thy Will be done, on earth as it is in Heaven. Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those who trespass against us.
And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil. Amen.

Hail Mary,
Full of Grace,
The Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou among women,
and blessed is the fruit
of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary,
Mother of God,
pray for us sinners now,
and at the hour of our death.
Amen.

Glory be to the Father,
and to the Son,
and to the Holy Spirit.
As it was in the beginning,
is now,
and ever shall be,
world without end.
Amen.

St. Michael the Archangel,
defend us in battle.
Be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the Devil.
May God rebuke him, we humbly pray,
and do thou,
O Prince of the heavenly hosts,
by the power of God,
thrust into hell Satan,
and all the evil spirits,
who prowl about the world
seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.

Angel of God,
my guardian dear,
To whom God's love
commits me here,
Ever this day,
be at my side,
To light and guard,
Rule and guide.
Amen.

[Anonymous No.13245700]

well my thread is dead so I'll post it here:
>So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
>And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Why was evolution so controversial and why were retards so upset at the idea that Adam and Eve weren't the first humans that incest spawned the rest of humanity? The Bible literally explains the transition from homo heidelbergensis to homo sapiens before anybody even knew what that was.

I know this is tangentially related to Catholicism specifically because it embraced evolution as of John Paul II.

[Anonymous No.13245706]

>>13245596
>>13245542
kek what a LARP
are we gonna rp and talk about what spells we're going to cast next? what demons we're going to defeat?

[Anonymous No.13245743]

>>13245706
We might talk about the demons part, yes.

[Anonymous No.13245788]

>>13245706
I can assure friend, this is no larp. God is real, Jesus is real, the Catholic Church is His Church, Hell is also real although many clergy don't like talking about Hell these days because it's not "nice".

[Anonymous No.13245802]

>>13245788
>I can assure friend, this is no larp. God is real, Jesus is real, the Catholic Church is His Church, Hell is also real although many clergy don't like talking about Hell these days because it's not "nice".

[Anonymous No.13245820]

>>13245802
>Fedora is now catholic
????

[Anonymous No.13245854]

I don't know what the point of these threads are without any group reads. Somebody schedule a few chapters of Dracula every day and let's talk about it, or maybe some other book. I only mention Dracula because it's an easy read filled with Catholic symbolism and it has a lot to say about the nature of sin.

[Anonymous No.13245855]

>>13245802
Sorry, friend, but atheist can never turn the fedora meme on the religious. It's a permanent fixture of the atheist community.

[Anonymous No.13245894]

>>13245854
Yes, I fear these threads might get banned if we as Catholics and even non-Catholics don't discus literature and writings relating to the faith enough. Currently i'm reading 'Treasure in Clay' By Fulton Sheen and as so far so good, it's very readable and easy to grasp so even a total pleb like me can enjoy the act of reading. In one of the chapters he seems to receive a pretty extensive education that probably no longer exist today.

[Anonymous No.13245931]

>>13245894
Sheen was a holy man and that his beatification has been dragged out for so long is a tragedy.

[Anonymous No.13245955]

>>13245820
Christians are the fedoras on this website now

[Anonymous No.13245962]

>>13245955
>>13245802
>atheists are still butthurt by the fedora meme five years later
Wew

[Anonymous No.13245964]

>>13245931
He's already a Saint in my book. I don't care if it's taking too long for his canonization, I believe he's already in Heaven. If he isn't there then what hope do any of us have? Also I'm not sure where I heard or read it from but Mother, now Saint Teresa of Calcutta loved that book and carried it with her where ever she went.

[Anonymous No.13245972]

>>13245962
I'm not an atheist. Not sure what I am at to be honest.

[Anonymous No.13245987]

>>13245955
cope atheist
>>13245894
I've been very interested in Orthodox literature as of late, I started "The Ancient Path" by Fr. Spyridon and it is incredibly insightful. What experience do you guys have with Ortho lit? And for any Eastern brothers on here, do you ever read anything by western saints/church leaders?

[Anonymous No.13245998]

>>13245955
cringe

[Anonymous No.13246008]

What version of the "Sayings of the Desert Fathers" should I read?

[Anonymous No.13246019]

>>13245987
One day I want to purchase the Orthodox Study Bible mainly for the study notes, and the translation. and it does look beautiful so there's that as well. I also mean to get into Fr. Seraphim Rose books in the future, I watch a lecture of his and he seemed to be a wise, holy man. Beyond that, I don't about Orthodox literature.

[Anonymous No.13246201]

>>13245820
>>13245855
>>13245955
>>13245962
the fedora meme was actually insulting traditionalist fedoras on dating websites
it wasn't originally about athiesm
if anything it insulted cringe religious people who wanted a traditional gf

[Anonymous No.13246366]

Just ordered a copy of the Sayings of the Desert Fathers. What am I in for?

[Anonymous No.13246411]

>words that scare protestants
I'll start:
Transubstantiation

[Anonymous No.13246415]

>>13246366
certain things that the desert fathers said

[Anonymous No.13246490]

>>13246411
Hail Mary, full of grace....

[Anonymous No.13246521]

If anyone is looking for a good introduction to what Catholics believe about demons I rec this book. Quick read and very informative.

[Anonymous No.13246535]

Is Malachi Martin based? I'm 20 and have no brain.

[Anonymous No.13246548]

>>13246535
people thought he was, but then he turned out not to be

[Anonymous No.13246554]

>>13246548
How so? I watched Firing Line and he was a guest on there, but I have zero context for who he is because of previously mentioned points. His talks were nice.

[Anonymous No.13246579]

Vocation discussion.
Those interested in priesthood or becoming a monk, nun, friar, or other forms of consecrated life feel free to reply. The Church is one of the few institutions left that treats you like a human rather than a resume.
I'm not an authority on anything nor am I in one so I personally won't have much if any advice for anyone. Just nice to have a central comment in a thread like this for people to go back to.

[Anonymous No.13246600]

>>13246554
I think most complaints about him have been about his involvement in Vatican 2. I can' remember exactly what his involvement was, and I'm no Vat 2 expert. Maybe someone else can answer.

[Anonymous No.13246629]

>>13246579
I'd do it in a heartbeat if I weren't the only child of a family that seeks a heir

[Anonymous No.13246641]

>>13246579
I'm actually going into seminary this fall. Are you a seminarian/novitiate anon, or just considering it ?

[Anonymous No.13246649]

Do Catholics like country gospel?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWJ4N3JsLQg

[Anonymous No.13246655]

>>13246649
I certainly do. Some of the only non-degenerate music the United States has ever produced

[Anonymous No.13246656]

>>13245931
I’ve read a few news articles about this but I can’t seem to figure out why this is being held up. Anyone know the story with this?

[Anonymous No.13246659]

>>13246579
I haven't read much on the subject, but I plan to become a deacon when I retire.

[Anonymous No.13246666]

>>13246656
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2017/03/06/the-contentious-case-of-fulton-sheens-corpse/

[Anonymous No.13246671]

>>13246579
>>13246641
>I'm not an authority on anything nor am I in one
Don't know how I didn't see that on first read, sorry

[Anonymous No.13246683]

>>13246649
I was going to make a snarky comment, but every day I lose more and more the conviction to harp on the loss of tradition, magnificence, beauty, and expertise of art, not only in the church, but in the secular world as well.

So here, just take this and learn of what once was.
https://youtu.be/QJIwFO9A1f8

[Anonymous No.13246739]

>>13246683
I think that is beautiful too but we don't have stuff like that where I am from anon, being from different traditions.

Do you not find this is beautiful too?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY7awWLdY3U

[Anonymous No.13246862]

>>13246739
I mean, it's complicated. I probably sound pretentious, (sorry if I do, I don't mean to be), but music is my profession and passion. The history of western music began with and is tied heart to heart with the church. It has always been integral in and outside the mass. Of course, it was not always smooth sailing, with much discussion and disagreement as to what it should actually be and sound like, but it was meant to elevate the mass. Even medieval hymns are way more complex than one might think and were sung by highly trained musicians of the time.
But things changed forever when the reformation happened. One of Luther's goal was to make music simple and to be easily sung and understood by the congregation.
Here is one of his compositions:
https://youtu.be/uI7QMtXBLgY
Centuries of advancements were thrown out the window in an instance.
What Luther caused was an embrace of the mediocre, which is where I think a lot of problems stem from. The Catholic church had to respond to this type of music by simplifying it's own music through the years and gradually lost the desire for challenging pieces of music, and then Vatican 2 completely destroyed it.

I don't think what you posted sounds bad. I would even say that I kind of like it. I just think the mass deserves better. And to be fair the music I posted was composed for a huge celebration in a and this type of music was not heard every week, especially outside of royal courts. Bach would later compose similar works of similar scope.
In short I fear that mass has become increasingly mundane and simple. Instead of a huge celebration and a deeply religious and serious event where we look towards the transcendent divine, it will simply become an obligation.

That is a very brief overview, and is much, much, much more complicated than I could ever hope to explain. Music is just one aspect.

[Anonymous No.13246949]

I want to look at porn so bad. It's only been three days. Fucking hell

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.13246961]

>>13245537
>>13245542
Blessing and love upon you both

[Anonymous No.13246965]

>>13246862
>I just think the mass deserves better.
Haha. I would never suggest that something like I posted be played at a Catholic service. I just wanted to see if Catholics liked it.

I understand wanting to preserve your music tradition. When I was a kid we listened to bluegrass gospel in church and sung hymns. As a baptist I enjoyed those things and believed they glorified God. Now everything played sounds no different from secular pop music.

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.13246966]

>>13246739
based Life is Strange poster

[Anonymous No.13246991]

>>13246949
Look at pictures and sacred Images of Mary like Our Lady of Guadalupe which does not come from this world. Look at pictures of woman saints, some of the most beautiful women to ever lived were saints. Mary and the women saints are what peak womanhood looks like. I used to have a big problem with porn and even instagram photos and it wont be a change over night but meditate and simply looking at peak womanhood daily and they will slowly change you (I hope).

[Anonymous No.13246992]

>>13246991

[Anonymous No.13246995]

Man I LOVE this book!!

[Anonymous No.13246998]

>>13246992

[Anonymous No.13247006]

>>13246998
wow, she cute

[Anonymous No.13247008]

there was an anon who asked for a prayer in a thread about 3 book recs for conversion. Didn't respond in time but I wish he knew I've been praying for him.

[Anonymous No.13247010]

>>13246995
pope francis recommended it. care to give a quick summary?

[Anonymous No.13247020]

>>13247006
Indeed, she is. But women don't need to be saints to display peak womanhood.

[Anonymous No.13247049]

>>13247020
Personally I think St. Bernadette was also one of the most beautiful of the saints. Witnesses say whenever she saw the Virgin at the Grotto of Lourdes her face would miraculously become radiant and even more beautiful than she already was, her incorruptible body is also beautiful.

[Anonymous No.13247059]

>>13247049

[Anonymous No.13247188]

What are the most well attested miracles/signs? I'm interested in reading about some.

[Anonymous No.13247200]

>>13247188
shroud of turin. check the eucharistic miracles (lanciano's, buenos aires')

[Anonymous No.13247245]

>>13247188
I'd say the Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe, as I've said earlier it is not an image of this world. It was not 'painted' by an artist, there's no paint, there's no under sketch so even if it was painted it required masterful skill that not even Da Vinci or Michelangelo could accomplish without making an error. The 'tilma' or cloak the Image rest on is made out of agave cactus fiber that has a lifespan of roughly 30 years and yet the tilma has survived 500 years, attempts to recreate the tilma by skeptics have all failed including all attempts by skeptics to disprove the veracity of the Image.

Here's some videos that do a better job of explaining it than I could

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ds7nD_QNeKA&t=1s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JB3j_KZWjqI&t=1s

[Anonymous No.13247253]

>>13247188
If you have the time you might be interested in listening to this talk exploring some miracles including Eucharistic miracles, and some lesser know ones like pic related which is ancient hardened blood of a saint which liquefies the same time every year at precisely the same time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEXsfQOa4jg

[Anonymous No.13247374]

>>13247253
I find these relics to cheapen the faith. Some are truly authentic but the sheer number of said relics, variety without even the slightest documentation is concerning. It seems they took off sometime in the it 1800s.

[Anonymous No.13247414]

Why should I believe in Catholicism over just believing in Christ?

[Anonymous No.13247544]

>>13247414
The other faith communities do not teach the same things that Christ and his immediate successors taught.

[Anonymous No.13247577]

>>13247544
Wow I'm a Catholic now. This is about as broadly speaking as you can get.

[Anonymous No.13247671]

Why did the catholic church decide to allow forgeries into the biblical canon?

[Anonymous No.13247676]

>>13247544
Oh wow Catholics are apocalypticists?

[Anonymous No.13247845]

>>13245537
>>Why Mary is called "Queen of Heaven".
If it's an exaggerated title what does "The Coronation of Mary as Queen of Heaven and Earth" refer to? (Bottom right)

[Anonymous No.13247870]

>>13247845
God cucking Joseph I assume

[Anonymous No.13247879]

>The holy spirit is totally not a human invention guys!!!1

[Anonymous No.13247895]

>>13247879
The Holy Spirit (the first thing in the heavens), which is God's essence, is also the first object and source of all things. It is the first object in heaven, but first of all in the earth. This principle is also found in God's Word when it says, 'The heavens and everything in them are by their power produced: but first of all the spirit and the soul are produced'; thus it was that Adam, before God, created himself and all those who should be his descendants.

"The first principle in Heaven is God (Exodus 12:10); the second principle is His Essence (Psalm 1:9); the third principle is the substance of nature that resides within the body (Exodus 20:9); the fourth principle is His essence which exists solely as a force from the Creator and is therefore distinct from his substance in heaven, (Romans 8:3; 1 Corinthians 15:13); the fifth principle is the cause of creation which produces all things, that is, God, the Son, the Holy Spirit, the Holy Ghost, and all the angels who are His creation.

[Anonymous No.13247918]

>>13247895
Heavenly spooked

[Anonymous No.13247981]

>>13247414
If you believe in Christ, you ought to follow the church he established. Makes sense no?

[Anonymous No.13247990]

>>13247981
Okay yes that does make sense. But what basis do you think Jesus established his church? What parts of the New Testament is that specifically said?

[Anonymous No.13247991]

>>13246949
Pray your rosary anon

[Anonymous No.13248006]

>>13247990
Theres the classic Matt. 16:18, where Christ says He will build His church upon Peter. and then again in Matthew, just two chapters later, verses 15-17, where Christ says for Christians in dispute with one another, if the dispute goes for too long, to go to the church to have it settled. Then from Acts, we gather that this church operates on apostolic succession (can't think of the specific verse atm)

[Anonymous No.13248013]

>>13248006
Well shit that's pretty weak to base Catholicism off of. How can you not overcompensate on such a weak premise?

[Anonymous No.13248024]

>>13248013
You asked only for the scriptural basis. From there, literally just look at history. The original church and teachings established by the apostles and the Church fathers has only been continued on through Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy.

[Anonymous No.13248087]

>>13247845
Can someone answer this

[Anonymous No.13248111]

>>13245820
Fedora is neckbeard autistic incel. Those people are all becoming Catholic now instead of atheist

[Anonymous No.13248138]

>>13248111
This.
Athiesm is very normie now, TradCaths are the new obnoxious pseuds

[Anonymous No.13248167]

>>13248087
It's 8:00AM on the east coast, relax. I don't know what this talk about exaggerated titles is. Mary is the queen of heaven for the same reason the mothers of the king were always given the title of queen in the Davidic kingdom. The coronation is literally a crowning or the bestowing of the title after her bodily assumption into heaven.

[Anonymous No.13248214]

I think part of the reason traditionalist-minded Catholic discourse can be so annoying is that with the Church forced out of public life we really don't get a chance to perform our faith in a fulfilling, satisfying way. It's tempting to talk to people online with dumb tryhard trad "Peace be upon you, brother, and many blessings!" tone and diction when in reality as I'm sure everyone who does it knows that's not how anyone talks IRL in even in traditional Catholic communities, even among clergy, because there really aren't many other casual, non-liturgical opportunities to visibly outpour devotion and accord the Church respect other than e.g. referring to Her as "She" and according Her proper-noun status in your orthography.

Nevertheless it's incredibly dumb and you very, very seldom see it in serious Catholic academic communities where the faith is lived out fully and wholly (e.g., the [Dominican] friaries and organization chaplaincies I've been around as a lay person, Catholic theology departments at universities, etc.). It certainly bears considering that the satisfaction we feel from wearing our faith like an accessory when we e.g. avoid eating meat on Fridays, or do penitential fasting, or perform traditional piety like bowing the head when you hear the Holy Name, or mention of the Trinity, etc., can just as easily be sources of personal pride and self-satisfaction as they can be rightly oriented deference to God and His Church.

Definitely something to think about as far as evangelism goes, i.e. how to be visible and open and pious without being incredibly annoying and performative about it. What are other people's thoughts on this? Maintaining the Church as distinctly counter-cultural while staying attuned enough to the current moment to enact the incisive and very difficult social praxis that Christ calls us to.

[Anonymous No.13248224]

>>13247845
Mary is the Queen Mother of Christ. Her "Queenship" of Heaven is her queenship of the apostles, the saints, the Church, and the world, by virtue of her motherhood of the King of all those things. By according dignity to Mary--and according her a tremendous amount of it, since by her position she deserves more than we could ever possibly give, despite still being (like us) absolutely nothing without/compared to the glory of God--we accord dignity to Christ the King by saying "We acknowledge Your Mother as queen precisely because we acknowledge You as King."

[Anonymous No.13248266]

>>13246579
just about to submit an application...

[Anonymous No.13249069]

bump

[قاسم !!Q8buEI7kZvM No.13249121]

The Church Fathers opposed icon veneration

https://calvinistinternational.com/2013/04/30/the-patristic-critique-of-icons/

[Anonymous No.13249134]

Can someone explain the transfiguration?

[Anonymous No.13249219]

>>13249121
This is some top tier protestant history. He quoted the Synod of Elvira as saying ""Pictures are not to be placed in churches, so that they do not become objects of worship and adoration." but literally the very next sentence says "And the abhorrence was the more intense because art as it then existed was pagan." This is not a condemnation of all pictures in church, but pagan worship.

In the early Church the making and veneration of icons was well established long before the canon of the Bible was determined. Icons were flat panel paintings depicting holy subjects such as Jesus, Mary, saints, angels, or the cross. Over time they were cast in metal, carved in stone, embroidered on cloth, painted on wood, and done in mosaic or fresco work. Icons painted on wood were the most popular medium in the earliest period. Christian paintings and art can be viewed today in the early catacomb churches, such as the churches of Domitilla and San Callisto in Rome.

The issue of images was hotly debated in the eighth century because of the opposition to images by Byzantine Imperial authority. The influence of Islam contributed to this hostility toward images. This conflict is known as the iconoclastic controversy. The Council of Nicaea in 787 settled the matter against those who opposed images, the iconoclasts.

At the time of the Reformation, Zwingli and Calvin rejected the use and veneration of images. Luther took a different position, so statues and crucifixes are used in Lutheran churches. In July 1993 in Helsinki, a joint Lutheran-Orthodox statement reaffirmed the Ecumenical Councils’ decisions on the nature of Christ and the veneration of images. In part this declaration read:

“Lutherans, however, rejected the iconoclasm of the 16th century [opposition of Calvin and Zwingli], and affirmed the distinction between adoration due to the Triune God alone and all other forms of veneration … Lutherans and Orthodox are in agreement that the Second Council of Nicaea confirms the Christological teaching of the earlier councils and in setting forth the role of images (icons) in the lives of the faithful reaffirms the reality of the incarnation of the eternal Word of God, when it states: ‘The more frequently, Christ, Mary, the mother of God, and the saints are seen, the more are those who see them drawn to remember and long for those who serve as models, and to pay these icons the tribute of salutation and respectful veneration. Certainly this is not the full adoration in accordance with our faith, which is properly paid only to the divine nature.’”

[Anonymous No.13249282]

>>13246201
>Rewriting history
Miss me with that nonsense

[Anonymous No.13249411]

>tfw always feel like I'm larping when I'm at Catholic church
>never been a good person
>it's extremely tough for me to pray
>can't ever stick to my principles when it goes against what I want to do

[Anonymous No.13249639]

What's the consensus on SSPX?

[Anonymous No.13249648]

>>13246008
Get the Benedicta Ward translation.

[Anonymous No.13249654]

>>13248266
For what if you don't mind?

[Anonymous No.13249666]

best books of the bible to read? i mean the most culturally significant or the best reads for a first time through, not going to read the whole thing right now.

[Anonymous No.13249668]

>>13249411
pray for faith and humility until you receive it

[Anonymous No.13249679]

>>13249639
> The Society of Saint Pius X is merely a collection of friends and acquaintances, each with a different perspective, who want to make the world, in the words of Fr. Michael J. Heimbry, better.
>To learn what that looks like, the Society is currently on its second birthday. (It took us just over six months to set up!) The Society was founded when, at an international conference in Brussels (called the International Conference on the Causes of War and Terror), Fr. Michael J. Heimbry, a Franciscan minister in Russia, joined representatives of more than one hundred countries in their quest to determine which of us could do the most. With the help of friends from abroad, such as Fr. Fridrik van de Vaan from Finland, Fr. David D. Schlesinger (United Kingdom), Fr. Peter Farrand (Austria), Fr. George W. Vollmer (France), Fr. Eamonn McCabe (Ireland), Fr. Stephen D. Kielby (New Zealand), and Fr. Richard Lehner (The Netherlands), the Society's initial mission was to establish the consensus of a global network of experts in the field of information security.
What's wrong with it?

[Anonymous No.13249689]

>>13249666
the four gospels
job
psalms
revelations
then read everything else, but I'd recommend getting an annotated bible with references so that when the NT refers to something in the OT you can go back and read that.

[قاسم !!Q8buEI7kZvM No.13249696]

>>13249219
>but literally the very next sentence says "And the abhorrence was the more intense because art as it then existed was pagan." This is not a condemnation of all pictures in church
The next sentance is not a part of the canon, the canon prohibits pictures, it doesn't say anything about pagan pictures specifically, you are "begging the question"

You do not engage with the article at all (you just say it was common, but so were a lot of condemned things), you just cite some early modern theologians

[Anonymous No.13249700]

>>13249679
Weren't they excommunicated for a while?

[Anonymous No.13249710]

>>13249666
Simply read the Gospels, it's just four books and they don't take long with Mark being the shortest of the bunch. After that then read Acts, follow up with Romans and then the rest of the NT.

[Anonymous No.13249783]

>>13249700
I don't think so

[Anonymous No.13249804]

>>13249783
>Tensions between the society and the Holy See reached their height in 1988, when Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated four bishops without the Apostolic Mandate and against a personal warning by Pope John Paul II, known as the Écône consecrations,[2] resulting in Rome issuing a declaration of excommunication against the bishops who consecrated or were consecrated.[3] Though the priestly fraternity denied that the bishops incurred any penalty, claiming canon law in their defense, the declared excommunication of the surviving bishops was at their request removed in January 2009 with a hope expressed that all members of the society would quickly return to full communion.[4]

[Anonymous No.13249821]

>>13249689
>>13249710
not them
is there a good reading order for OT, NT and apocrypha?

[Anonymous No.13249845]

>>13249804
>The Pope later rescinded the excommunication, saying it was an accident. The archbishop later retracted the statement, suggesting a "muddled understanding" of his actions, according to the New York Times.
>"I have been accused of not being faithful and of having an irresponsible opinion," said Francis. "I will be judged by the work I have done and not by any opinions I may have had before now. If those opinions are not true, what I am saying is that I need to repent."

[Anonymous No.13249864]

>>13249121
Tertullian and Calvin are both great examples of how doing theology can turn into a form of idolatry itself, in which God is re-created in Man's image. Tertullian even went so far as to refuse artists from the catechumenate. He was a fanatic and eventually a heretic who went on to attack the Church on all sorts of ridiculous matters. He's clearly on the outside looking in here.

The Council of Elvira's (which is obscure as shit anyway lol) prohibition on images was practical and not doctrinal, fearing that pagan converts would start getting funny ideas, and even more to the point is that nobody ever obeyed it and it was never reiterated. And further, nearly the entirety of the canons are conduct reforms and have no theological substance.

Gregory the Great? Please, just because he is against the worship of icons does not mean he is against their veneration. When he was elected, his papal procession carried an image of Mary through the streets which can still be seen in Rome today. His witness was much used in the Council of Nicaea in favor of veneration.

The anecdote of Epiphanius is suspect and has been since it first appeared around the time of the Council of Nicaea. Many minds, both ancient and modern, see grounds to condemn it as a forgery.

It's not much when you add it up.

[Anonymous No.13249963]

>>13249821
Not really but there's this helpful reading plan from the Coming Home Network where you can read whole Bible in a year. It includes reading the Catechism as well but even if you don't have the Catechism you can still follow this reading plan.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AZxxgvPqu4maz-YwSFRSprhqPP1Ov3M2BSpxET7z4R0/edit#gid=0

[Anonymous No.13250039]

>>13248006
In Matthew 16:18 Jesus is making a play on words. "And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." In Greek "Petros" the name given to him by Jesus is like a pebble. the word he uses for rock "petra", is more like a large rock or ledge. Jesus is saying that Peter's name means pebble, but that he is going to establish his church on a more solid foundation, which is of course Him, which is evident in other passages like Isaiah 28:16 and 1 Corinthians 10:4. The context of that part of Matthew 16 is Peter saying that Jesus is the Son of God. Many considered him a great man, but Peter confessed him as a Deity. It was on Jesus, the Son of God, not a single man, or "pebble", that the church was to be built. Peter himself doesn't say he is the foundation of the church, he points to Jesus in 1 Peter 2:4-8.

Apostolic succession isn't solid. The replacement of Judas in Acts 1 was done to fulfill the Scriptures, it even says so in verse 20. Right after the reason for his replacement, it gives the requirements for the replacement: someone who was with them from the baptism of John until the day he was taken up. How many people today fulfill that?

[Anonymous No.13250067]

>>13249963
Thanks. I won't read the Catechism for now as I'm not even Christian, but maybe some day.

[Anonymous No.13250105]

>>13250039
You're making a very critical mistake when you talk pebbles and little rocks. Jesus was not speaking Greek, but Aramaic. In Aramaic there is only one word that could be used for "rock" and it's "kephas" and there would be no distinction between a big or small rock. Matthew used two different words in his gospel because he was writing in Greek so he didn't have much of a choice. "Petra" would be proper when talking about a foundation stone but it isn't a proper name for a man since it's a feminine noun. Matthew used the masculine "petros" instead to render the name "Kephas."

Jesus confirmed Peter alone in an office as the first of the Apostles. He intended it to be a permanent office transmitted to Peter's successors because Jesus' kingdom will last until the end of time. This office of shepherding the Church is passed on through the sacred office of the bishops. Therefore, the church teaches that "the bishops have by divine institution take place of the apostles as pastors of the Church, in such a way's that whoever listens to them is listening to Christ and whoever despises them despises Christ and him who sent Christ.

Peter's succession is already intimated when Jesus connected the promise of the keys he will give to Peter with the prime ministerial office in David's kingdom in Isaiah 22. Jesus affirmed that Peter will be given the dynastic office of chief shepherd in Jesus' kingdom.

Apostolic succession is also clearly evident when Peter determined that a successor must be chosen to fill the place vacated by Judas' betrayal and suicide:

Brethren, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David, concerning Judas who was guide to those who arrested Jesus. For he was numbered among us and was allotted his share of this ministry ... For it is written in the book of Psalms, 'Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it'; and, 'His office let another take" (Acts 1:16-17, 20).

Apostolic succession is evident in the first missionary journey of Paul and Barnabas. They "appointed elders [bishops and priests] for them in every church, with prayers and fasting, they committed them to the Lord in whom they believe" (Acts 14:23).

1/2

[Anonymous No.13250108]

>>13247200
>>13247253
>tfw Francis himself personally witnessed a Eucharistic miracle when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires

[Anonymous No.13250110]

>>13250105
>>13250039
In his second letter to Timothy St. Paul laid out the generational program for apostolic succession that was practiced by the Apostles and their successors, and is continued to the present time: "You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus, and what you [Timothy was a second generation of Christians] have heard from me [Paul was of the first generation] before many witnesses entrust to the faithful men [the third generation] who will be able to teach others [the fourth generation] also (2 Tim 2:1-2).

By the end of the second century, apostolic succession was understood as the sure indicator of orthodoxy. St. Irenaeus of Lions, writing against the Gnostics around the year 180, affirmed "the tradition of the Apostles," was safeguarded in the unbroken line of succession of those men who were instituted bishops by the Apostles, and their successors. He placed the greatest importance on the successors of St. Peter in Rome.

[Anonymous No.13250154]

>>13247253
>In 2010, Giuseppe Geraci, a professor in the Department of Molecular Biology at Naples's Frederick II University, conducted an experiment on a vial containing old blood—a relic dating back to the 18th century from the Eremo di Camaldoli near Arezzo in Tuscany—having the same characteristics of the blood of St. Januarius.[35] Prof. Geraci showed that the Camaldoli relic also contains blood that can change its solid-liquid phase by shaking.[36] He further reproduced the phenomenon with his own blood stored in the same conditions as the Camaldoli relic. He stated that, "There is no univocal scientific fact that explains why these changes take place. It is not enough to attribute to the movement the ability to dissolve the blood, the liquid contained in the Treasure case changes state for reasons still to be identified." [37] He ultimately argued that "there's blood, no miracle".[36]

[Anonymous No.13250157]

>>13245537
>http://pastebin.com/Gq0Rf4TL
This Pastebin contains an error, John Chrysostom was not patriarch of Antioch, but was rather the Archbishop of Constantinople, he was ordained as a deacon at Antioch.

[Anonymous No.13250163]

what are your thoughts on The Young Pope?

[Anonymous No.13250210]

>>13250154
The thing is though is that the Bishop of Naples and Pope Francis don't shake the relic, they just hold it still and the blood liquifies.

>>13250157
Gotcha. I just copied those Pastebins from a thread I bookmarked a while back so I can make the OP a bit more substantial. Thanks for pointing out the error.

[Anonymous No.13250289]

>>13250105
That is a good point, I did not think about the Aramaic -> Greek aspect. Could you please address the other scriptures that point to Jesus as the foundation and head of the church? I don't see why we need a second head if Jesus is our one and only High Priest.

What Peter says in Acts 1 contradicts your point. He said it was to fulfill the Scripture, emphasis on the word fulfill. And even the requirements to fulfill the Scripture and replace Judas could only be fulfilled by 2 out of the 120( minus the eleven who were already apostles) disciples that were there. A perpetual popehood or priesthood is impossible based on the qualifications in Acts 1:21-22.

As for Acts 14 and 2 Timothy, they do assert an establishment of local leadership and keeping the movement alive, since apostasy is can always be a generation away, but to use them in the context of apostolic succession seems like assuming the point you are trying to prove.

[Anonymous No.13250342]

I think it's funny that Catholics are the ones who typically have to defend themselves from protestant prosecution re: tradition and succession, or everything for that matter, considering that protestants are the ones who, after 1500 years, came along and said that everybody up until then had been horribly mistaken. I mean what kind of shit is that? I assume it's just their rebellious and antagonizing nature, or that they constantly need to revalidate their beliefs to themselves over and over again. They seem relentless with their interrogation sometimes, and yet I rarely see Catholics return the favor and put them on trial––possibly because the protestant's defense is invariably the same litany of bible verses with a side of trite rationalization and who needs to hear that again. Idk maybe I'm just making this all up.

t. neutral observer

[Anonymous No.13250417]

>>13250342
And it's always on their terms, too. They demand you to produce meticulous scriptural evidence that supports your claim, as if the Apostles and Fathers and History are just for nothing. They are like the lunatics Chesterton describes in Orthodoxy, who have an algorithm that spits out an oversimple explanation for every feature of reality. They literally turned Holy Scripture into an algorithm, bros. It's funny tho because they all get different answers lmao.

Are there books that speculate on the mindset of these people? Is this the power of ideology? Can they not see how absurd this is? I'm fascinated.

[Anonymous No.13250432]

>>13250417
2 Timothy 3:16-17 "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work."

Are you trying to diminish the important of the Bible? Why should I trust human tradition over the Word of God?

[Anonymous No.13250447]

>>13250432
Here comes Bible-worshipper in all of his glory

[Anonymous No.13250482]

>>13250447
I am only asking if flawed, human writing should even be put on the same level of trust and credibility as the Bible?

[Anonymous No.13250515]

>>13250342
>and yet I rarely see Catholics return the favor and put them on trial
The thing with protestants is that it's actually very easy to go after them on things like sola scriptura and the canon of the bible. It can be fun to watch them fumble around trying to justify their position or explain certain contradictions but it becomes boring after a while. It's even less fun doing it on 4chan because they'll usually just disappear or start talking nonsense.

[Anonymous No.13250532]

>>13250515
>Evangelism, Mormonism, Lutherans and other cucked ones, Twenty-thousand American denominations

What's wrong with Protestants? Especially American ones.

[Anonymous No.13250539]

>>13250447
The Bible is our book not theirs, our bishops under the guidance of the Holy Spirit guided them to put the Scriptures together into one volume and we read the Bible everyday during Mass in the Lectionary. Although you're right in that they're "Bible-worshipers" at least a lot of them are but not all, we should still have familiarity the Bible.

1 Peter 3:15
15 but in your hearts reverence Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence;

[Anonymous No.13250557]

>>13250432
No, not at all. And there is a lot in that verse that you aren't considering. And I could produce 10 other verses that suggest the opposite. Why go through this dance? This is exactly the problem. This isn't unity, it's contention. This is you eating from the tree of Gnosis, interpreting right and wrong with your lone experience and reason.

And is that really what it is? It appears to me that you are just making a new tradition––a tradition of one. Should you trust yourself since you are only human? If the Fathers were not guided by the Spirit concerning Tradition, maybe they were not guided when assembling the Bible. Did Christ come here to establish a Church or did he come to establish a Book?

Anyways you're proving my point, naturally, throwing a verse and then proceeding to ask /me/ to defend tradition over personal interpretation, putting /me/ on trial with your response. I don't even have skin in the game lol. It just doesn't make any sense in the context of Christianity the way I see it. You guys look completely foreign when I contemplate the spirit of Christianity.

[Anonymous No.13250607]

Guys, for once can we rejoice in the essential truths that we all believe?

[Anonymous No.13250638]

>>13250557
No, you're right I went in a bit too harsh with the questions, I'm sorry, it was not my intention for it to come off like that. I don't trust my own judgement, I try to keep the core values of the Bible in focus and do not at all scorn the importance of the church. I try my best to be humble and ask for advice from mature Christians in my church and do my part to keep the family spirit of it prevalent. We cannot expect to bring people to Jesus on our own, it is simply impossible and arrogant to believe that. I feel like the nature of this site doesn't do much to encourage the spirit of Christianity.

[Anonymous No.13250670]

>>13247671
Probably because of what Paul said:
"Though the more abundantly I love you, the less I be loved. But be it so: ... nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile." (2 Cor. 12:15-16)
"For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?" (Rom. 3:7)

Paul is the greatest liar in the history of any religion, because he was real and not an old tale. He says:
"God shows personal favoritism to no man" (Galatians 2:6-10)
Yet the Bible shows us how wrong he is:
"And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women" (Luke 1:28)
"A good man obtaineth favour of the Lord: but a man of wicked devices will he condemn." (Proverbs 12:2)
"“Because he loves me,” says the Lord, “I will rescue him;
I will protect him, for he acknowledges my name.”" (Psalm 91:14-15)

Paul says this:
“For he himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of division between us, having abolished in his flesh the enmity, that is the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in himself one new man from the two thus making peace,” (Ephesians 2:14-15)
"“Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.”" (Galatians 3:24)
Yet Jesus himself says this:
“DO NOT think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I did NOT come to destroy but to fulfill”
“For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law ...till all (Matthew 5:17-18)

Paul says:
“For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself’”. (Galatians 5:14)
Yet Jesus says:
"Then one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question, testing him, and saying, “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?” Yeshua said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these TWO commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets." (Matthews 22:35-40)
Apparently, for Paul, the FIRST and GREATEST commandment, that is, to love God with all one's heart, is not as important as the second.

Paul says:
“But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter…” (Galatians 2:7)
Yet Jesus says:
"And he said to them, “Go into all the world and preach THE gospel to EVERY creature.” (Mark 16:15)

And that is why they allow forgeries into the biblical canon, anon. Because they take advice from a liar.

[Anonymous No.13250710]

Share the history books you’re reading! Rate, rec and what not

[Anonymous No.13250729]

>>13250163
I thoroughly enjoyed it but it either doesn't appeal to people or people misunderstand it.
>too much of a religious show with positive religious themes for atheists
>too edgy and critical of Catholicism for most Catholics
>retards think Lenny was a good guy who was "making the church great again" as opposed to the antihero he was obviously set up as
>that conversation about abortion will trigger Catholics out of watching the show if the bisexual threesome scene didn't already

[Anonymous No.13250736]

>>13250638
It's no big deal. I was just diary posting my thought and contributing nothing. One love. Tell Elder Dan at the Second Congregational Church of Reformed Universal Baptists I said hello.

[Anonymous No.13250738]

>>13250670
Wait, so prots are taking Paul seriously now? In the past months i've been noticing a lot of anti-Paul post even go as far as saying there's a difference between "Jesus Christianity" and "Pauline Christianity". This is why fewer and fewer people are taking Protestantism seriously. The only thing prots can agree on is that their own individual interpenetration is the correct one.

[Anonymous No.13250755]

>>13250670
Oh God. How do we fix this problem of Paul? These are big contradictions.

[Anonymous No.13250760]

>>13250738
Apparently, only prots shit on Paul, going by your post. Which is a lie, given that I'm not even Christian.

[Anonymous No.13250771]

>>13250736
I don't know a Dan, and it's the Church of Christ ;)

[Anonymous No.13250824]

>>13250771
Well, I had a 1 in 30,000 chance of getting it right. Gets harder by the day I tell you what.

[Anonymous No.13250825]

>>13250710
I have 'A Concise History of the Catholic Church' by Thomas Bokenkotter and 'Timeless' by Steve Weidenkopf. Although I've only dipped my toes into both books since i'm still reading 'Treasure in Clay' by Fulton Sheen (still going strong, Sheen's book is filled with so much wisdom) but both history books seem pretty good and very readable and one line in Weidenkopf's book stuck out to me in the introduction.

>Part of our Catholic identity invokes using the proper terms learning Church history. As an example, the term "Christianity" is an unhistorical, post-Reformation term that "connotes an opinion or a theory; a point of view; an idea." The Catholic faith is none of those things, as Catholics are not attached to an idea or a philosophy but to a Person (Christ) and to a thing (the Church). Additionally, "Christianity" implies a multiplicity of ways of living the Faith - that is, "Catholic Christianity", "Protestant Christianity" - but there is only one Church that contains the fullness of Christ's revelation, authority, and grace. Therefore, the term "Christianity" is not used in this book, rather, "the Faith" is utilized in accordance with the historical understanding of the Church.

[Anonymous No.13250849]

>>13250729
I didn't even realize that is what happened. I just looked away and fast forwarded slightly.

[Anonymous No.13250882]

>>13250824
The fact that it is so really troubles me. I wish there was a way we could all agree on the basics and not get bogged down by the nonessential nuances

[Anonymous No.13250929]

>>13247981
But he didn't necessarily found the Catholic church. Catholic church became a thing only after various groups convened at nycenea or something like that.
Others sects trace themselves back to before the Catholic church became a thing

[Anonymous No.13250961]

>>13245537
didn't know this was contra-Protestant apologetics thread

dude, don't be like a generic RCIA program
we have a tradition that does not and should not take on the ontological status of being a mere retort to Protestants and Modernists

[Anonymous No.13250966]

>>13250929
tell that to St. Ignatius of Antioch who spoke of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the primacy of the Church of Rome, Church hierarchy of bishops, priests, and deacons, and Church unity between the episcopates

[Anonymous No.13250998]

>>13250929
Frankly, none of those sects aside from the few with actual apostolic succession make a lick of sense. The church fathers, long before Nicaea, show a remarkable consistency with the church afterwards. The idea that the Catholic church was founded only there is remarkably idiotic. Where is the continuity to the early Christians in any protestant sect? Or must they presume that they just managed to get the bible right and no one else in the intervening millennia did?
>>13250432
"Scripture" here was not the compiled new testament. It did not then exist until much later. Scripture there refers to the laws on the Jewish people and the moral commandments of Christianity.
>>13250289
Were those qualifications particular to that appointing or a universal thing? The text doesn't clearly support your point that they must have been with Jesus since His baptism except insofar as it would be preferable in that early church. It also makes much of the importance of the bishops' role.

"On this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it". Quibblings about the wording of "rock" aside, Jesus definitely founds a church and not a book. This is only backed up in the context of the rest of the work- He leaves the apostles to spread the Gospel, not gospels to make disciples.
We even see the spreading of this church through the acts of the apostles, under apostolic authority, and resolving doctrinal issues in councils of the bishops. The Bible was a set of works proclaimed by said church as divinely inspired, it was not something given by Christ Himself.

[Anonymous No.13250999]

On a unrelated note in really happy no one has decided to rape Gene Wolfe's Book of the New Sun series But its probably only a matter of time before they get to it

[Anonymous No.13251017]

>>13250999
>80's fiction written for teens

[Anonymous No.13251023]

For reference, I'm a prot getting ready to start RCIA. I notice among many along the more trad catholic orientation have a tendency to dismiss the salvation of non-catholic christians (orthodox and protestants) as practically impossible. I'm aware of the doctrine of extra ecclesia nulla salus and its development in recent times, particularly at the second vatican council. however, as one who wasn't raised in catholicism but instead a very vibrant baptist community full of very christlike people (who were much better examples of christian living than most catholics I ever met), I have a pretty hard time giving that despair much credence. what are your thoughts on the salvation of non-catholics, or I guess even non-christians in general? or to put it more generally, the line between actual ignorance and willful rebellion?

[Anonymous No.13251095]

>>13251023
Trad cats can be annoying but they do have good intentions in trying to keep the traditions. The modern Church teaches that people of good will 'can' be saved because as I've heard it before "God's grace is not exclusive to the sacraments" or something like that. A lot of trad cats hate the theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar for this reason and his adherents like Bishop Barron, who attracted me to the Faith in the first place. I'm a simple layman, I don't know who's right or wrong when it comes to this issue but I still believe the CC is still the true Church with our Eastern Orthodox brothers being our close brothers and it's possible we can have full reunion in the future. I think some prots have a good chance of being saved like C.S. Lewis. I like on his quotes that goes something like "I hope when I die the demons in Hell rejoice that i'm no longer on Earth to fight them".

[Anonymous No.13251134]

>>13251023
>however, as one who wasn't raised in catholicism but instead a very vibrant baptist community full of very christlike people (who were much better examples of christian living than most catholics I ever met), I have a pretty hard time giving that despair much credence

How can someone attending the wedding feast in Heaven if they deny the Bride of the Bridegroom and His mother?

I think there's a reasonable hope that Protestants could have a deathbed conversion and that God would administer grace extra-sacraments. But it is not reasonable to say "the Protestants who know what the fullness of the Catholic faith is and still deny it, can still go to Heaven." If you know what the full Body of Christ is, yet you deny parts of Him, you reject all of Him. It's the logic of mortal sin and grace; you cannot go to Heaven if you have an unforgiven mortal sin (denying Christ established a Church, when you fully understand that concept or denying that Mary is the Mother of God, when you fully understand that concept). It would be a sort of begging of the question to say "if they really did know Catholicism, they would've been Catholic." That's not a particularly valid objection.

Extra Ecclesia Nulla Salus is saying that grace can only come through the Church. ie) a Protestant is not saved by virtue of being Protestant or a Muslim by virtue of being Muslim.

I hope this helps and congratulations on getting ready to start RCIA! Be careful with the "trads" on here and Twitter. They espouse mediocrity, low comprehension, and LARP. But also beware of unfaithful Catholics that you will typically encounter irl. Not telling you to be a based centrists, but know how to live in the world, not of it (Catholics in name only); this also means don't pretend to live outside of the world (trads), but baptize it (being a normal, faithful, orthodox Catholic).

[Anonymous No.13251140]

>>13251023
Only the most extreme forms of universal salvation has been condemned. There's all sorts of acceptable views because salvation hasn't been strictly defined, or at there's some room for interpretation. Everyone who is saved is saved through the Church, but this doesn't necessarily mean that everyone has to be a baptized Catholic to be saved. There are exceptions for "virtuous pagans" who had no knowledge of the Church or maybe wasn't educated enough to make an informed decision. There's also a "baptism of desire" which means people who are in the process of converting can be saved if they die before their conversion. What exactly it means for somebody to be a "virtuous pagan" or somebody in the process of conversion is also up for debate.

The fact is we just don't know and we can't know because we're not God, meaning we don't see all ends. I believe He's reasonable though.

[Anonymous No.13251169]

damn seems like almost everyone is going to hell

[Anonymous No.13251203]

>>13250998
>Where is the continuity to the early Christians in any protestant sect?
Baptists have such a line. I can not recall the different names, but it does go back to the time Jesus was here.

[Anonymous No.13251212]

>>13251095
I'm by no means espousing universal salvation, or even going as far as bishop barron (although I do like some of his videos), I'm merely saying I have a hard time believing something like "the majority of sincere protestant christians will not be saved."
>>13251134
I'm fully aware of the implications of EENS (that those who are not catholic are saved through the church, not because of their non-catholic faith), you're missing the point. I'm also aware of the statement that he who knows the fullness of truth resides in the catholic church and rejects it cannot be saved. This is also not my point. My point is that many of the trad variety seem to believe that no one could have any possible good reason for not becoming catholic. I personally was not, but I know some fundie baptist types who were raised to believe the "whore of babylon" trope about the catholic church and whatnot. can they really be blamed for not being able to escape that bubble? perhaps, but I'm not as eager to make that judgment as some. or those who simply are raised in their own particular tradition and are never exposed to the claims of the catholic church, can they be blamed for not spontaneously seeking it out and converting? again, the issue is not the exact mechanics of salvation but rather the onus on people to proactively seek the catholic church and the penalty for failing to arrive at it despite the sincerity of their searching. I believe that those who earnestly seek God will find him, and it's rather arbitrary to say "maybe they receive special grace and become catholic on their deathbed."
>>13251140
perhaps it's my protestant background that wants a clear divide, but it brings me great pain when I hear the eternal fate of so many so dear to me who are the best representations of christ that I know dismissed as likely on their way to hell because they wound up in the wrong church. thankfully the church does not make that pronouncement, just a particular sect in it. I also think God is gracious, loving and reasonable, so I try not to worry too much.

[Anonymous No.13251231]

>>13251203
you're probably thinking of the Waldensians, whose claims are suspect and aren't a good parallel to modern-day protestants anyway. the unavoidable fact is that protestant doctrine and practice is absolutely unprecedented prior to the 16th century, any cursory study of church history will show this. I'm the guy about to start RCIA, start reading the Didache, the letters of Ignatius, Justin Martyr's Apology, and Irenaeus' Against Heresies. they'll really change the way you look at things.

[Anonymous No.13251248]

I have heard that ascension to Heaven in Catholicism requires achieving forgiveness from the church as well as the Lord.
If this is indeed what is believed, how do men (men make up the body of the church) have the power to forgive when Jesus said no man can come to the father but by him?

[Anonymous No.13251249]

>>13250882
Everybody did have the same Faith for quite a long time until there was a revolt. The answer is obvious, no?

The Church is the greatest unifying force civilization has ever seen, and She still stands today, ancient and full of eternal youth. The proudest royal houses have all vanished, but the line of Supreme Pontiffs remains unbroken, reaching back to the time when Christ walked the earth. What other institution is left standing that carries the mind back so far? What is this immortality? I wonder myself what the source of this strong life is, yet I struggle with skepticism. If I can ever bring myself to come to believe in Christ, it would be a no-brainer for me. She is the place where, when people profess "I believe", they are really saying "I pledge myself to what We believe". It is not 30,000, but one––the mystical Body of Christ. One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism, One Mass, all the world over.

If it really troubles you, give Catholicism an open exploration. Seek out its beauty and its wonder, for Knowledge does not come to us by details, but in flashes of light from heaven. Don't scrutinize the fine print of Law, but pour over the verses of Her poets. Direct your gaze to the holy lives of Her saints and see His grace in abundance made manifest. Go to the Holy Mass and get on your knees while Her children's prayers rise to the heavens, ushered up by frankincense and spires. See how it is all a continuation of the Incarnation and rejoice, knowing that it was all put here for you, that you may cherish it deeply. And when it is most pleasing, you may remember that it is merely a taste of the infinite splendor of His glory. Allow God to seduce you.

It pains me that I do not have your faith. If I did, I would crawl over broken glass daily to receive Him into my body and soul. I have never seen something so beautiful.

[Anonymous No.13251284]

>>13251231
>Waldensians
No, it was Montanists or montainins or something like that

[Anonymous No.13251311]

>>13251284
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montanism
an early heresy. at least skim the wikipedia article first.

[Anonymous No.13251333]

>>13251311
>heresy
According to Who? The Catholic church? Not exactly an impartial judge in this case

[Anonymous No.13251337]

>>13251169
sad to our human ears attached to passing relationships, but possibly true. your real soulmates will be with you in heaven.

[Anonymous No.13251348]

>>13251333
what are you saying man, do you want some Pastor Jim 2nd century condemnation of Montanism?

[Anonymous No.13251352]

>>13251248
Christ works through the mediators of men, the priest?

[Anonymous No.13251364]

>>13251248
>prots still don't know how John 20:23 fits into their theology

"Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained."

[Anonymous No.13251428]

>>13251352
Indeed he does. He works through men to spread his word, build and expand his church, etc. But does man have the power to wash away your sins? If he did, why would the Lord have sacrificed himself?

>>13251364
>apostles are the priests of today
How so if they were not there for Jesus baptism?

[Anonymous No.13251435]

>>13251337
>your real soulmates will be with you in heaven.
yeah haha
nah i'll be with my friends and family in hell

[Anonymous No.13251483]

>>13250039
>Protties think Christ spoke greek because the New Testament is in greek
That's actually amazing

[Anonymous No.13251619]

>ἤγαγον τὴν ὄνον kαὶ τὸν πῶλον kαὶ ἐπέθηkαν ἐπάνω αὐτῶν τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτῶν kαὶ ἐπεkάθισεν ἐπάνω αὐτῶν

Was Matthew retarded?

[Anonymous No.13251631]

>>13251619
he didn't write a gospel at least

[Anonymous No.13251657]

>>13251619
short answer: yes
long answer: yes

Matthew was so bad at greek it hurts. He would fit right in at /lit/.

[Anonymous No.13251842]

>>13251212
Well, the majority of Catholics won't necessarily be saved either. Narrow road and all that.
>>13251203
Do you have any sourcing on that? I've seen some chick tract-tier material talking about a hidden church through the ages, but if you have anything more credible than conspiracy theories I'd be interested.
>>13251212
If raised with the "whore of babylon" stuff unquestioningly.... it does take a lack of charity towards Catholics not to rethink it, especially on meeting Catholics. But even as a trad I'd agree that there can be good reason not to convert to Catholicism, particularly when Catholicism and people that can explain it reasonably are a minority. Those that love fellow man and seek the true and good will find Him, but in such situations I really think Francis' "Who are we to judge?" applies well.

[Anonymous No.13251882]

Do you go to confession?

[Anonymous No.13251893]

>>13251882
no

[Anonymous No.13251925]

What do you think of the recent change to the Our Father?

[Anonymous No.13251949]

>>13251882
Went last week. I'm a revert so I've only been twice, the first being two weeks ago. The first time I went I was really nervous before being called I was even having trouble breathing. I was about to confess so many sins including witchcraft! I'll never forget too what the priest said in his Spanish accent speaking in English, "you have a lot of sins", that I really did. Although I've confessed I'm still hesitant to take the Eucharist, I never even done my First Communion but I want to taking Him soon.

[Anonymous No.13251959]

>>13246666
So New York essentially reneged on handing over his body. Why would the Vatican or the pope not get involved in this? What “work” did the other diocese do to have him beatified? This seems very dumb, seeing him on YouTube is what has got me into the RCIA it’s very sad.
Also
>nice quads

[Anonymous No.13251976]

>>13245596
Thanks for these. I am interested in adding prayer into my life. It's hard not to contempt these prayers though, but rather to use them. I understand faith should take precedence, but I feel as though something else should be coupled with a prayer other than rote words. Thoughts?

[Anonymous No.13251994]

>>13251842
I don't really buy the "only a tiny amount will be saved" line either. admittedly it may be just my selfish logic at work, but I don't see it as in God's character to create humanity only to have the vast majority be damned for eternity. none of the priests I've talked to have taken such a bleak view, theirs seems to be "most of the people in the pews trying their best and they'll make it, to varying share in the beatific vision." I just can't make myself believe that God would make salvation so difficult to reach. but again, that could just be my selfishness talking.

[Anonymous No.13251996]

>>13251976
absolutely, spend some time in front of the Blessed Sacrament at a church, and just adore the Lord in addition to the rote prayers - of course you can also enter into some contemplative prayer at home on your own if that's a tough thing for you to do.

[Anonymous No.13252013]

>>13251428
yes, see John 20:23, as quoted above earlier.

also, do you think that Jesus gave that quote as a one time thing, never to be spoken of again or passed down? Do you similarly think that the spiritual gifts were one timers, only the Apostles got sick powers to forgive and preach and prophesy etc., and that then all these things were lost in the Catholic dark ages? To the contrary, it was the Catholic Church that preserved the forgiving and retaining of sins, through priests succeeding the apostles and acting -in persona christi-, just like the Apostles themselves did

[Anonymous No.13252040]

>>13251996
thanks.

[Anonymous No.13252102]

>>13251994
There's definitely room for an optimistic take, following the odd almost-dualism of teachings against each extreme. But we can't forget "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it."
The saints were concerned enough with their own salvation to have me worried about mine.

[Anonymous No.13252119]

>>13252102
But I should add that we should share in God's mercy when dealing with others, as in our ignorance it is better to assume the best of others, and the overscrupulous should be comforted that they are.

[Anonymous No.13252135]

does anyone else not really care about going to hell?
seems like you have to be super autist not to end up there
so fuck it, may as well relax and enjoy my time

[Anonymous No.13252152]

Salvation is from the jews

HAHAHA jk, was raised catholic but couldn't care less about it

[Anonymous No.13252180]

>>13251882
pretty much every single week and sometimes twice a week...

[Anonymous No.13252260]

Why the fuck are priests celibate? Didn't God make woman because he saw that man should not be alone? So how can you expect priests to not be degenerate when you deprive them of what is natural

[Anonymous No.13252315]

>>13252260
Not all priests are celibate. In the Eastern Catholic Churches within the universal Catholic Church, there are married diocesan priests. Many of the apostles were married. It was not a universal requirement for priests to be celibate until the middle ages. I think celibacy is very good to focus one's mind on God and the Church so as to better serve the community, however, I think times have changed as well. I am as Traditionally Catholic as anyone, but I would welcome clerical marriage. No longer are Catholic families having large amounts of kids with one of two men going into the priesthood. Now its usually one or two kids which creates an awkward family dynamic. Additionally, the Church is in desperate need of priests, especially in certain rural areas, and it is a major turn off for people to not be able to marry. However, once again, perhaps this is good to separate the wheat from the chaff so to speak. I'm not sure. It is a complicated matter but a Byzantine Catholic married Priest I know has a very nice large family that seems to be doing him well.

[Anonymous No.13252322]

>>13252180
Ironically, that sort of obsessiveness in going to Confession more than once a week is a sort of spiritual error in of itself. Not a sin so to speak, but you aren't internalizing the meaning of the faith and the new law if you are spiritually paralyzed by your conscious. Confession is to help us. If you have mortal sins you are confessing that often, then you probably should fix those before confessing something you know you are just going to do again.

[Anonymous No.13252325]

His yoke is easy and his burden is light, bros. There are only two commandments at the end of the day. If you fall off the path, humble yourselves and get back on it. Ask forgiveness with a contrite heart and it is forgiven. Christ will pull you back up and dust you off. If the sheep returns after having run off, the Shepard always welcomes him back home.

[Anonymous No.13252339]

>>13252322
thats how i feel too, but every priest has told me the exact opposite of that. i've taken long breaks from confession to try and fix some shit, but not going to confession just makes it harder and they told me not to do that when i explained what i did and why.

[Anonymous No.13252341]

>>13252260
Practising abstinence doesn't make someone become a homosexual or pedo if that's what you're implying. That's ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.13252347]

>>13245537
Anyone have any ideas about steps we can take to undermine the Protestant agenda?

[Anonymous No.13252362]

>>13252260
Priest are married to the Church and their 'children' are their flock of their parish. For a Bishop their 'children' are the the priest they ordain.

>>13252315
You realize that even the Eastern Orthodox stress priestly celibacy as well? In their tradition an Orthodox Bishop cannot be married, if an Orthodox priest gets married he can never become a bishop and all priest all called to become bishops, getting married is a sacrifice in their priesthood. Also i'm not sure if every Orthodox monetary is like this but at least in Mt. Athos every priest there, and there hundreds if not a thousand are all celibate as women are strictly forbidden from entering the mountain.

I have no doubt that you're a tradcat but you should dig deeper into the Deposit of Faith because plenty of great saints and theologians have defended priestly celibacy. I attend Novus Ordo and even I think priest should be celibate, I don't think I think a priest seriously if he was married unless he converted from Anglicanism or Orthodoxy and was allowed to keep his marriage.

[Anonymous No.13252378]

>>13252347
i lose my shit whenever i see catholics saying that protestants are "brothers in christ" and shit like that. the best thing imo to do is to adamantly express your hatred for protestantism whenever it comes. if people don't understand the distinction between the two, they won't understand that protestantism is evil.

[Anonymous No.13252401]

>>13252378
Amen. Protestantism is a road to atheism.

[Anonymous No.13252409]

>>13252180
>>13252322
i do not know how people confess so often. a friend of mine also confesses weekly. my last confession was 1 month ago and ive been chaste ever since. am i not doing the examination of conscience well enough? afaik ive not commited any mortal sin since the last confession and my biggest fear is taking the communion without really being in the state of grace, but it's said that would require knowledge of a unconfessed mortal sin, which i dont have. the thing is: >
if saints confessed regularly how could i not?
im nowhere near sainthood, so it could be my examination of conscience is faulty.

but if you really commit mortal sins you should keep confessing as much as necessary. from personal experience sin leads to sin so one should never stay in the state of mortal sin long enough.

[Anonymous No.13252428]

>>13252135
this is inane, if you actually believed hell existed you would fear it - accept that you just have no belief

Noone here is man enough to seriously be ok with the idea of their own eternal damnation

[Anonymous No.13252431]

>>13252378
You’re of a like mind I see. Get in touch at [e-mail] if you’re interested in working behind the scenes against the Prots.

[Anonymous No.13252439]

>>13252431
>working behind the scenes against the Prots.
Based

[Anonymous No.13252440]

>>13252180
don't feel too bad bro, back when masturbation was a tougher thing for me to kick I would go every other day, keep confessing and praying - if it means anything I'm praying daily for you and all the other anons here

[Anonymous No.13252443]

>>13252347
by pointing out how their anti-catholicism was aligned with evil forces such as freemasonry and other revolutionary movements.

[Anonymous No.13252444]

>>13252347
Pray first and foremost and live a life of prayer. That includes attending Mass as much as possible aside from days of obligation. Spend time with Our Lord through the Blessed Sacrament. Wear sacramental's like a scapular or a crucifix. You need to have Christ in your life because if you don't then you'll evangelize yourself, your ego instead of Christ and people will be able to see that. Without Christ you cannot accomplish anything.

Study the Bible. The Bible is our book, we should become more familiar with it than prots who idolize it a KJV Bible is actually God.

Study, read, listen, and watch apologetic's. subscribe to Catholic Answers and read apologetic manuals. Take down come prot misconceptions like "call no man father" or "ya'll worship Mary".

[Anonymous No.13252454]

Drive carefully, the life you save may be your own.

[Anonymous No.13252456]

>>13252439
You’re welcome as well. Any concerned catholic here is encouraged to get in touch. I wanna work with you guys to make the world more trad.

[Anonymous No.13252457]

>>13252409
when you're fucked up in the head and people have treated you like shit your whole life, its pretty easy to recognize when you treat people like shit in turn because you're trying so hard to not be like those people. i've always thought that if i weren't so fucked up, i would have no idea what to confess about.
>>13252440
thanks bro

[Anonymous No.13252460]

>>13252409
It's good spiritual hygiene to go once every two weeks I find - every sin and imperfection sullies you, who are a temple of Christ - do some cleaning in your temple every other week and you'll feel better, and if you have a good priest you'll be able to carry some new aspirations through that time till the next confession and see how you've been doing - basically the long form of one of St. Ignatius' daily excercises

[Anonymous No.13252466]

>>13239863
>>13244468
it might not have been valid as the bishop himself expressed his concern since bolsonaro left the ceremony before the consacration due to protestant pressure etc

[Anonymous No.13252512]

Is G.K. Chesterton's view of Christianity typical of Catholics? I find the way he sees things so compelling

[Anonymous No.13252526]

>>13252512
no. if you go into catholicism looking for a bunch of based trads, you will only be disappointed and may fall into apostasy.

[Anonymous No.13252564]

anyone else hate how gay /christian/ is? its nothing but soibois and people LARPing as saints and if you make any kind of joke you get banned.

[Anonymous No.13252581]

>>13252526
There is a new wave coming. And some of us are working hard to strengthen that wave. [e-mail] if interested.

[Anonymous No.13252585]

>>13252581
i already emailed you and you doidn't email me back ;_;

[Anonymous No.13252592]

>>13252585
I did a few minutes ago, friend. That is, if your name starts with J. If not, we didn’t receive it and please try again.

[Anonymous No.13252710]

>>13252512
That kind of joyous attitude isn't rare among saints (reading Francis Assissi, Newman, the accounts of Joan of Arc, Thomas More there seems a common aspect of joy and love of beauty), though is a bit of a rarity among Christians in general. I try to emulate that kind of awed optimism and humor when I can, though.
Though as the man himself said, the saints are more distinct in their holiness than sinners in their depravity.

[Anonymous No.13252722]

ortho here to remind you all youve strayed from the true faith

[Anonymous No.13252826]

>>13252722
>strawman the entire Catholic faith
no wonder you guys don't have any coherent theologians

[Anonymous No.13252880]

Why the earliest scriptures of the gospel of mark end at 16:8 but later ones ends at 16:20?

[Anonymous No.13252884]

Who are the best Christian writers to read from the 1st and 2nd centuries?

[Anonymous No.13252893]

>>13252884
Ever hear of Paul of Tarsus?

[Anonymous No.13252901]

>>13252893
He's pretty good, but I've read all his stuff already.

[Anonymous No.13252930]

>>13252722
>Vladimir Putin

[Anonymous No.13252963]

Why did Jesus curse the fig tree? Whenever I try to imagine it all I can see is him looking like a fucking retard yelling at a tree

[Anonymous No.13253129]

>>13250738
>taking paul seriously

I don't know how anyone can take paul seriously given half of "his" epistles are literally not even his. Like holy shit theres literal fan fiction that you guys treat as sacred scripture its fucking embarrassing.

[Anonymous No.13253651]

>NO NO NO YOU CAN'T REJECT PAUL YOU JUST CAN'T OKAY?!?!?!

[Anonymous No.13253685]

>>13252428
nah i'm just not that much of a hedonist
the yoke of christianity isn't worth it

[Anonymous No.13253694]

>>13252526
This. God, 100% this.

There's a funny story about the bishops of the Church in Europe in the 1810s, when Napoleon was at the height of his power. They were objecting to his treatment of the Catholic Church on some matter or another, and Napoleon angrily blurted out, "My dear bishops, don't you know that I have the power to destroy the Catholic Church?"

And, after this, the bishops looked at each other knowingly, and they then said to him: "My dear Emperor, we, the bishops, have been trying to destroy the Catholic Church for 1800 years. We have not succeeded, and neither will you."

Over and over we Catholics confront wicked people in the clergy and the hierarchy. Over and over we are forced to deal with corruption from bishops, archbishops, and cardinals.

But we persevere, because we believe that the power of God pushes through despite all these things, and because every time somebody's tried to break off and form a "purer" Church has ended in disaster, and because there's too much evidence on the side of Catholicism. Our Church is repeatedly a huge fucking mess. But, nonetheless, strangely and mysteriously, the Will of God is done through it. It's kind of weird and strange. The whole system seems to be a complete disaster, and yet it functions, and souls are saved, and baptisms are made, and the Eucharist is delivered, over and over, for 2000 years now, without end, without ceasing. And the saints rise up through the Church, and remind us all why it's worth saving, why it's a great and beautiful thing, hopefully.

[Anonymous No.13253702]

Who are the most based saints?

[Anonymous No.13253707]

>>13253702
most of them are bugmen cucks

[Anonymous No.13253711]

>>13253707
In what way?

[Anonymous No.13253712]

Reminder that a new trad wave is coming. LGBT will soon cease to exist after we show them that they are degenerates.

[Anonymous No.13253722]

Which translation should I read out of: NIV, NASB, NKJV

[Anonymous No.13253726]

>>13253722
KJV is protestant garbage, likely written by Satan himself. Read Douay Rheims.

[Anonymous No.13253731]

>>13253726
Those are the only three I have a physical copy of available to me right now

[Anonymous No.13253733]

>>13253731
So you willingly accept Satan into your life? Fuck you.

[Anonymous No.13253736]

>>13253733
You're literally discouraging someone from reading the Bible, Satan

[Anonymous No.13253755]

>>13253736
>KJV
>the bible
Kek. Go welcome more faggots and whores into your church proddy.

[Anonymous No.13253758]

>>13253755
There were two other translations mentioned and it was also the NKJV not KJV. You are truly a demon sent to lead the flock astray and divide them

[Anonymous No.13253817]

>>13253755
It is not the healthy that need a doctor

[Anonymous No.13253826]

>>13253817
>hurr we should welcome unrepentant LGBT degenerate cucks into the church
Fuck off boomer. A new trad wave is coming.

[Anonymous No.13253832]

>>13253826
>t. pharisee

[Anonymous No.13253842]

>>13253832
this is the degenerate future you want.

[Anonymous No.13254630]

>>13253685
what you are saying, logically, is that a finite effort is worth less than avoiding an infinite punishment - which just goes to show that you don't actually believe in Eternal Damnation or in God. stop larping and either accept your agnosticism or start over completely and try to find some faith.

"I know thy works, that thou art neither cold, nor hot. I would thou wert cold, or hot. But because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold, not hot, I will begin to vomit thee out of my mouth. Because thou sayest: I am rich, and made wealthy, and have need of nothing: and knowest not, that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked.

[Anonymous No.13254638]

>>13252880
St. Justin the Martyr died in the 2nd century and has great writings
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/index.html

[Anonymous No.13254687]

>>13253817
There's a difference between going to a doctor and asking him to help make you well, and going to a doctor and adamantly telling him there's nothing wrong with you and that if he doesn't like it then he's a bigot.

[Anonymous No.13254693]

>>13252581
>There is a new wave coming.
This isn't true.

[Anonymous No.13254719]

>>13254693
There's always a new wave coming to erode away at the shore, the church has remained standing for quite a few now.

[Anonymous No.13254732]

>>13254719
The fact that you just assume everything will be okay is one of the reasons that it won't be.

[Anonymous No.13254745]

>>13254687
I think this doctor is schizophrenic

[Anonymous No.13254754]

>>13254630
im going to hell either way

[Anonymous No.13254852]

>>13254732
Those who believe the Church will survive also believe it's through their actions aided by the grace of God. It's not some kind of passive philosophy, it's a call to duty.

[Anonymous No.13254872]

>>13254852
What are you personally doing to fulfill your duty in ensuring the survival of the Church?

[Anonymous No.13254907]

>>13254872
I'm trying to convert people to the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church by posting on an anime image board. Obviously.
More seriously? Not as much as I should be. Partaking in the sacraments, trying to become holy, trying to exemplify the Church's teachings when I can, too-rare works of charity.

[Anonymous No.13255041]

>>13252013
Why was the forgiving and retaining of sins the only thing retained by the priesthood? Or are there other miraculous gifts around today in the priesthood?

[Anonymous No.13255043]

/lit/ related ––

Readings at Mass:
>Acts 25:13-21
Festus consults King Agrippa about Paul's detainment.

>Psalm 102(103):1-2,11-12,19-20
"As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us."

>John 21:15-19
Christ confirms His earlier mandate to Peter. And it was upon Simon alone that Jesus, after His Resurrection, bestowed the jurisdiction of Chief Pastor and Ruler over all His fold, by the words: "Feed my lambs. Feed my sheep."

May we have a blessed day, and may all of us remember that we are going to die.

[Anonymous No.13255051]

>>13255041
It's not, the also have the traditional priestly duty of offering sacrifice, making the one sacrifice on the cross present again in the Mass. "Do this in memory of me"

[Anonymous No.13255068]

>>13255051
Oh, what do you mean by priestly duty? that sounds like more of a Jewish thing

[Anonymous No.13255089]

>>13247845
>>13248087
in the OT the mother of the King was considered to be the Queen. That's where it comes from. As the Davidic kingship is the foreshadowing of the Christ's Kingship.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gebirah

[Anonymous No.13255116]

>>13245894
A reminder that Fulton Sheen was based and biritual.

[Anonymous No.13255118]

>>13255089
Meanwhile...
John 2:2 And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage.
3 And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.
4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.

[Anonymous No.13255133]

>>13255118
Matthew Henry on said verse:
>Thirdly, It is a standing testimony against that idolatry which he foresaw his church would in after-ages sink into, in giving undue honours to the virgin Mary, a crime which the Roman catholics, as they call themselves, are notoriously guilty of, when they call her the queen of heaven, the salvation of the world, their mediatrix, their life and hope; not only depending upon her merit and intercession, but beseeching her to command her Son to do them good: Monstra te esse matrem—Show that thou art his mother. Jussu matris impera salvatori—Lay thy maternal commands on the Saviour. Does he not here expressly say, when a miracle was to be wrought, even in the days of his humiliation, and his mother did but tacitly hint an intercession, Woman, what have I to do with thee? This was plainly designed either to prevent or aggravate such gross idolatry, such horrid blasphemy. The Son of God is appointed our Advocate with the Father; but the mother of our Lord was never designed to be our advocate with the Son.

[Anonymous No.13255147]

>>13255118
>Meanwhile...
Just like Solomon with his mother, he didn't refuse her request. So what's your point? There's no "meanwhile" lmao

[Anonymous No.13255149]

>>13246629
The needs of heaven are far greater than those of your family. ""If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters--yes, even their own life--such a person cannot be my disciple." Consider if God is calling you to something else.

[Anonymous No.13255154]

>>13255147
>>13255133

[Anonymous No.13255157]

>>13255133
>>13255154
>all this poor rationalization and cope
26 When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!

27 Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother!

[Anonymous No.13255174]

>>13255157
> The confidence he reposed in the beloved disciple. It is to him he says, Behold thy mother, that is, I recommend her to thy care, be thou as a son to her to guide her (Isa. li. 18); and forsake her not when she is old, Prov. xxiii. 22. Now, [1.] This was an honour put upon John, and a testimony both to his prudence and to his fidelity. If he who knows all things had not known that John loved him, he would not have made him his mother's guardian. It is a great honour to be employed for Christ, and to be entrusted with any of his interest in the world. But, [2.] It would be a care and some charge to John; but he cheerfully accepted it, and took her to his own home, not objecting the trouble nor expense, nor his obligations to his own family, nor the ill-will he might contract by it. Note, Those that truly love Christ, and are beloved of him, will be glad of an opportunity to do any service to him or his. Nicephoras's Eccl. Hist. lib. 2 cap. 3, saith that the virgin Mary lived with John at Jerusalem eleven years, and then died. Others, that she lived to remove with him to Ephesus.

[Anonymous No.13255180]

>>13255154
>>13255174
41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:

42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.

43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

44 For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.

45 And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord.

>scriptural proof of Mary's intercession
>scriptural proof that she is the Mother of Our Lord! She literally acts as conduit for graces from her Son given to Elizabeth and her child
>scriptural proof Christ told us to consider her our Mother


>protestants: "uh, let me post this rambling evangelical pastor rationalizing on and on, writing essays about his cope for not accepting what the Bible says"
lmao

[Anonymous No.13255195]

>>13255133
>>13255174
How can anyone take Anglicans seriously......How the hell can Anglicans take themselves seriously?

[Anonymous No.13255211]

>>13255180
>scriptural proof of Mary's intercession
That isn't an example of what is being referred to when Mary is said to "intercede" for us.
>scriptural proof that she is the Mother of Our Lord!
Did I dispute this?
>She literally acts as conduit for graces from her Son given to Elizabeth and her child
He's literally inside of her body. You're reading so much into this it's absurd.
>scriptural proof Christ told us to consider her our Mother
That isn't present in the text.

[Anonymous No.13255228]

>>13255211
>That isn't an example of what is being referred to when Mary is said to "intercede" for us.
Of course it is. If you read the verse, it is her salutation that makes the baby leap from her womb. She is the one acting as intercessor for the graces
>when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:
>when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary,
>For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.
>For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation
This is an example of Mary being mediatrix of graces.
>Did I dispute this?
Lol don't try to play dumb, anon-kun
>He's literally inside of her body. You're reading so much into this it's absurd.
I am literally reading the Bible, while you are reading some dude telling you how to read a verse that is incredibly simple and (incredibly enough) aligns perfectly with Catholic theology when read in its simple unmitigated words.
>That isn't present in the text.
>43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
>the mother of my Lord
>the mother of my Lord
>the mother of my Lord
> mother of my Lord
>mother
>of
>my
>Lord

[Anonymous No.13255269]

>>13255180
>accusing someone of rationalizing and reading too into it
>Jesus making sure Mary is taken care of in her old age applies to everyone everywhere because that is tradition

[Anonymous No.13255290]

>>13255269
>>Jesus making sure Mary is taken care of in her old age applies to everyone everywhere because that is tradition
uh but that's not the only occurrence, and not where the verse "mother of my Lord" comes from anon. That's Elizabeth who's saying it.
>43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
>mother of my Lord
>mother
>of
>my
>Lord
By refusing to give her that title, you either claim that she is not Christ's mother, or you claim Christ isn't your Lord. Whichever you choose, you also reject Christ in the process.

[Anonymous No.13255345]

>>13255290
I'm not referring to the verse "mother of my Lord", I'm referring to the one that you says implies that we should all consider her our mother. I am not denying her that title or implying any disrepect. She was very special and chosen for a unique purpose, but she was a normal sinner like me and you and is not a goddess.I believe that she should be respected and admired for her faith and trust in God.

[Anonymous No.13255370]

>>13255345
>mary was a sinner
okay, so then you also believe that either a) jesus was also a sinner because he inherited Mary's fallen nature, or b) jesus was not human.

[Anonymous No.13255387]

>>13255345
>'m referring to the one that you says implies that we should all consider her our mother.
How can you be a Christian and not have her as your mother? Are you not part of the body of Christ? Do you think you can be one with Christ without loving his mother?
>.I believe that she should be respected and admired for her faith and trust in God.
You don't respect people as much as you want, you respect them as much as they deserve. And you are not doing that.

[Anonymous No.13255409]

Don't forget to subscribe to my patreon so you can hear me ramble about the troubles of the church just like I did yesterday. Also buy my book that I wrote last night. And subscribe to my youtube channel. yay trads unite! I also have a paypal. One day we'll get those dirty bastards in the Vatican, and in specific parts of the United States! but hopefully not tomorrow or my income will dry up.

[Anonymous No.13255435]

>>13255409
based!

[Anonymous No.13255501]

>>13255370
Well that is a totally different conversation on original sin. That passage in Romans 5 is admittedly very hard to understand but getting the concept of "original sin" from it does not gel well with the rest of the Bible. When Adam introduced sin, it resulted in two deaths for him, physical death, since he was banished from Eden which had the Tree of Life, and spiritual death , because sin separates us from God spiritually(Romans 2:8, Isaiah 59:1-2). The consequences that apply to us from Adam is not the guilt of his sin, but the consequence of eating the fruit, which is physical death, since God said that is what would happen if he ate the fruit.

Ezekiel 18:20 dispels the whole theory of inherited guilt! If the President made decisions that brought the country into war, we would most likely not be responsible for his decision, but we would still suffer the consequences from his decision.

>>13255387
I am a Christian that has Mary as a sister in Christ. Did I say that she doesn't deserve respect? Did I say that people are free to respect her as much as they want? There is no denying that she was a righteous woman and it is incredible to see how she trusted God with her life and reputation completely and loved Him immensely, but the way the Catholic Church exalts her is frankly idolatrous

[Anonymous No.13255677]

>>13255501
>I am a Christian that has Mary as a sister in Christ
How can you have the same Father as Christ, but not his same mother, and claim you are one with him? Your paranoia of idolatry is just misplaced.
>Did I say that she doesn't deserve respect? Did I say that people are free to respect her as much as they want?
You are not giving her the respect Christ awarded her, which is the only thing that matters.
>the way the Catholic Church exalts her is frankly idolatrous
It's not up to you to decide that, it is up to the Church lol
Veneration is not only biblical, especially when referring to the Virgin Mary, but it's also deeply rooted in Christian tradition. Whether you like it or not lol
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub_tuum_praesidium

[Anonymous No.13255687]

>>13255501

[Anonymous No.13255732]

>>13255677
She is Jesus' physical mother, not his spiritual mother and not mine either. How is it paranoia when the Church claims that she was sinless and a perpetual virgin? How is that not exalting her to a place reserved only for Jesus Christ? If she was sinless then did she not also fulfill the law? Does that not diminish the significant and impossible feat that Jesus lived out a life without sin? I am giving her respect as a strong woman in the faith. I cannot personally think of a passage where Christ awarded her respect, it would be helpful if you could clarify that.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say with the last part. Are you saying that the Church is the only entity that can accuse itself? That seems a bit backwards if I am understanding you correctly. All I can say is there is a difference between veneration and idolatry, and Catholicism seems to blur that line substantially

[Anonymous No.13255757]

Not that other anon but even the first 'reformers' venerated and upheld the significance of the B.V.M which should tell anti-Marian's something.

>Thank, God, we're Bible worshipers and not Mary worshipers XD
I've actually heard retorts like this.

[Anonymous No.13255769]

>>13255732
>How is it paranoia when the Church claims that she was sinless and a perpetual virgin?
All those things were given to her by Christ, so acknowledging it doesn't mean thinking she is a goddess.
>How is that not exalting her to a place reserved only for Jesus Christ?
Who are you to decide that, when Christ himself gave her that place? Do you think you know better than him?
> If she was sinless then did she not also fulfill the law?
She was sinless due to Christ fulfilling the law, just like us
> I am giving her respect as a strong woman in the faith. I cannot personally think of a passage where Christ awarded her respect, it would be helpful if you could clarify that.
You've already been given plenty of them
> Are you saying that the Church is the only entity that can accuse itself?
The Church decides what is Dogma and what isn't. The Church decides if something offends God or not. Considering that all these dogmas are scriptural (as shown) and rooted in tradition there isn't really anything you can say against them except your own prejudice and irrational bias.
>All I can say is there is a difference between veneration and idolatry, and Catholicism seems to blur that line substantially
No it doesn't, that is your own speculation. You think that the gifts Christ gave to his mother were sacrilegious. Do you realize how offensive to Him that must be?

[Anonymous No.13255810]

I remember reading a couple of random pages from Church Fathers and running immediately into proof that evangelical paranoia about idolatry is unwarranted.
If I actually went through the Church Fathers I could probably find a million of these proofs that "call no man father" doesn't mean what protestants think it means.

[Anonymous No.13255821]

>>13255810

[Anonymous No.13255826]

>>13255821

[Anonymous No.13255851]

>>13255810
When a protestant converts to a Catholic it's usually because they started reading church history.

[Anonymous No.13255856]

>>13255769
You didn't present us a passage where Christ awarded her respect

[Anonymous No.13255859]

>>13255757
where did protestantism go wrong?

[Anonymous No.13255870]

>>13255856
at this point I feel like you're just b8ing so let's end it here, I got things to do

[Anonymous No.13255874]

>>13255870
I'm not that same anon

[Anonymous No.13255891]

>>13255870
Funny how Catholics always have somewhere else to be when they run out of answers

[Anonymous No.13255901]

What are High Church Anglicans? Are they closer to Catholicism than usual proddies?

[Anonymous No.13255928]

>>13254754
this isn't a calvinist thread, if you want to be a fatalist go complain to the protties

[Anonymous No.13256034]

>>13255928
judging by this thread pretty much everyone is gonna go to hell
even if you abstain from sinning, you'll get chucked in hell if you did so to prevent getting chucked in hell

[Anonymous No.13256274]

>>13255769
Where does it say these things were given to her by Christ? You seem to be putting emphasis on that, please let me know, I am honestly asking, I want to know what biblical context I am not seeing that elevates her to this standard.
>She was sinless due to Christ fulfilling the law, just like us
The Church claims that she did not *commit* any sins, which would make her different and not like us.
>You've already been given plenty of them
Again, I don't see where Christ gives her this exaltation.
>The Church decides what is Dogma and what isn't. The Church decides if something offends God or not. Considering that all these dogmas are scriptural (as shown) and rooted in tradition there isn't really anything you can say against them except your own prejudice and irrational bias.
I am trying to stay impartial to the context of the Bible, tradition would mean nothing if it was unbiblical. I really am not trying to tear down the Catholic Church, I respect its longstanding history, but when tradition starts to veer away form its biblical basis and is influenced more and more by human reasoning it gets problematic. I understand the concept of dogma being scripturally based, which is why I want to know where the traditions come from. I'm not part of a denomination, if there is something I should be doing I want to know what.
>No it doesn't, that is your own speculation. You think that the gifts Christ gave to his mother were sacrilegious. Do you realize how offensive to Him that must be?
At this point you are just assuming the point you are trying to prove and trying to turn it on me as if you've already proved the point

[Anonymous No.13256396]

>>13256274
to turn that question around on you, where is sola scriptura found in scripture? where is the verse that says “any doctrine must be solely based in the scriptural canon.” ? what’s more, the canon was compiled by the church. if you don’t accept the authority of the church, why would you accept the authority of the scriptures it judged to be authoritative? I know this is a radical paradigm shift but once you realize sola scriptura is self-defeating the rest all falls into place

[Anonymous No.13256432]

>>13256396
You seem to be misinterpreting each post. He's asking where the idea comes from. It either comes from scripture or it doesn't, and if it doesn't come from scripture then where?

[Anonymous No.13256476]

>>13256396
I never said the church was misguided from the start. I have faith that the scriptures were compiled under the guidance of the Holy Spirit for the church to have all it needed to love God and follow Christ in any period of time. I do not accept the authority of the Church today, after several centuries of apostasy.

A passage comes to mind about your first point. Matthew 15:7-9: "You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: 'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'" That first part of Matthew 15 addresses this a bit actually. 2 Peter 1:3 also suggests that God has given us everything that we need in the spiritual realm, I hope that helps explain why I believe Scripture should be held higher than tradition.

I really want to emphasis that I mean no disrespect or want to tarnish the Catholic Church by any means, Much of the tradition is very interesting and inspires faith for me

[Anonymous No.13256850]

>>13256034
>if I deserve to go to hell I'll go to hell
correct
giving up hope, for either yourself or for any individual person, is a grave error even given this. Despair is a true mortal sin. Avoid despair.

[Anonymous No.13256912]

>>13255757
damn these are some ugly ass niggers.

[Anonymous No.13256916]

>>13256850
even if i had hope i'd still end up in hell

[Anonymous No.13256941]

>>13256476
Honestly there are some Church doctrines that draw more from Tradition than from Scripture. It's not even a problem. At the very least, they are all implied or hinted at. There are no doctrines that are "unbiblical", or that contradict Scripture. They all are in perfect harmony and in support of each other. Imo the other anon was maybe misleading here, as the doctrines of perpetual virginity and the Assumption certainly fall under this category, as do the canon of Scripture, infant Baptism, and Sunday as the Lord's Day.

[Anonymous No.13257027]

>>13256476
Quick question: Why do you consider the Church of recent centuries to be "apostate" when Marian doctrines are as old as the canonization of the Bible? Why is the Church during that period any less "apostate" when Church Fathers and saints emphasized The Blessed Virgin Mary?

[OP No.13257051]

>>13245537
What do you guys think of Sedevacantism

[Anonymous No.13257061]

>>13257051
Sorry I forgot to change my name from another thread not actually op

[Anonymous No.13257107]

>>13257051
cringe and schismaticpilled

[Anonymous No.13257138]

>>13257051
There are people right now that still thinks that Francis is a legitimate Pope?

[Anonymous No.13257152]

>>13257138
he's a bugman faggotloving cuck, but apparently it's not redpilled to be a sede

[Anonymous No.13257173]

>>13257051
>Catholic
>Sedevacantist bull

Pick one

[Anonymous No.13257212]

>>13249654
Society of Jesus

[Anonymous No.13257228]

>>13257051
It's for autistic teenagers mostly.

I remember a trad cath austrian lady, she was definitely autistic and very neurotic, her marriage didnt work out either, she was incredibly unhappy. This is what happens when you think God isn't loving.

[Anonymous No.13257257]

Where's the q source

[Anonymous No.13257304]

>>13257152
The Church has been flawed in some way for most of its history yet it's always survived. It's the oldest institution in the world and people continue to be saved. The current situation is temporary.

[Anonymous No.13257451]

>>13245855
>>13245962
You kike worshiping Christniggers get the rope but the atheist community was unironically devastated, past the point of recovery, by pictures of fedoras. That really speaks volumes about how useless and irrelevant atheism is, in the grand scheme of things.

[Anonymous No.13257464]

>>13257451
I think it was the "Faces of Atheism" thread as a whole that brought about the destruction of the r/atheism crowd

[Anonymous No.13258206]

New thread

>>13258204

See you there!