Page 1 of 3
A question about Catholics that could anger someone....
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:22 pm
by Destroyer2000
I've often heard, but I'm not sure whether it is true or not. Do Catholics worship Mary and the Saints?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:28 pm
by martinloyola
nope,
(and I'm not offended, in fact I rather encourage questions, ignorance is often Christianity's worst enemy when it comes to being a unified Body of Christ)
we honor them just as you do someone on their birthday or have special respect for your parents, "honor your father and mother"
We consider them a part of the christian family as they are already in full communion with God and consider them as rolemodels, (not to replace Christ) but to encourage us in our faithwalk
we pray to them, not because they have special power of their own, but only as you would ask some living christians in a prayer request, "pray without ceasing" and pray for one another, so to, we ask those already in heaven to pray for us
if anyone says that Catholics worship Mary or the saints, immediately correct them!!!! (with all the love of Jesus
) if they try to prove it, they're wrong cause that is obviously incorrect "Thou shalt have no other 'gods' (or focuses of worship, my paraphrase) before me."
Catholic devotion to Mary can often be misconstrued as "worship", however this is either from abuses from cultural sources or from people who get 'overzealous',
despite this, Mary is still very important and we consider her to be our greatest human advocate (excluding Jesus, in other words of all humanity she is the woman referenced to in Genesis whose "seed" would trample the serpant's head as Jesus did the son of David; yes, all those lineages really do matter as Genesis is the first direct reference to Jesus' mission on earth. it is also the first reference to Mary, "the new Eve") you Catholics out there correct me if I'm wrong
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:33 pm
by Destroyer2000
Ah. I never believed that Catholics were really wrong, because everyone from a few decades after Jesus' death to whever Baptists and Methodists and the rest came around would be in Hell, as they were all Catholics. All English people, and most all European people, were Catholics in the Middle Ages.
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:40 pm
by Shao Feng-Li
according to the Vatican The RCC is in great biblical error
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:40 pm
by martinloyola
thank you for understanding and yes, I agree with you on that one, "since Jesus to the first Protestants, everyone was a Catholic" obviously you can't really understand Christianity without knowing whose hands its come down to you through, whether or not you respect or believe those people were right are right etc.
just as you must understand Judaism or the Bible won't make much real sense in parts p.s. I edited the first post read plz
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:42 pm
by martinloyola
ummm what's RCC?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:44 pm
by Fsiphskilm
Whoa, The admin and mods say "no-no" about discussing things like that...
It's a good question but Catholics say one thing and non-Catholics say another. It's never ending.
My prediction is that this thread's going to get locked
*puts down $50 bucks on table*
If you really want to know you can PM technomancer(catholic) about it and then try PMing someone non-catholic to get both sides of the story. I won't say anything else.
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:45 pm
by Shao Feng-Li
martinloyola wrote:ummm what's RCC?
roman Catholic church
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:46 pm
by shooraijin
Yes, it most definitely *will* get locked if this gets out of hand. Tread carefully.
That means you as well, Ruroken.
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:46 pm
by martinloyola
like duh!!!!! sometimes I'm such an idgit, it really amazes me it does,
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:46 pm
by Technomancer
RCC = Roman Catholic Church in most contexts, although Ruroken's usage seems rather strange.
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:55 pm
by Shao Feng-Li
so is anyone gonna answer me?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:58 pm
by Destroyer2000
They say don't discuss this sort of thing? Hm...never knew that. Oh well, I think most people here can control themselves.
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:58 pm
by martinloyola
probably not since this isnot really the place for such a discussion, as Volt said(you can pm me if wish) Theology web is where this needs to go...
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 8:00 pm
by Destroyer2000
What is the Roman Catholic Church? Is there more than one form of the Catholic Church?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 8:10 pm
by Technomancer
Destroyer2000 wrote:What is the Roman Catholic Church? Is there more than one form of the Catholic Church?
Yes and No. The Catholic church is united on the principal theological issues, but there are different rites within the church (ie. how mass is said). The Latin (Roman) rite is the most common, but there are eastern rites that are similar to the Eastern Orthodox services. So there are Byznatine, Chaldean, etc.
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 8:19 pm
by Destroyer2000
Ah...mass is like a church service, isn't it?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 8:29 pm
by CDLviking
Yes. I'll also add that all the different Rites of the Catholic Church are united under the Pope. The Eastern Orthodox Churches are similar to them, but do not recognize the authority of the papacy.
I think as long as we keep it civil there's no reason to close it, but I leave that decision to the mods.
Ruroken: I'll be glad to answer your question as soon as you ask one. So far you haven't asked anything.
anyone who wants to go and get answers from a great group of online Catholics can go to Onerock.com. There's a thread for it in the link section.
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:14 pm
by Ingemar
Ruroken wrote:according to the Vatican The RCC is in great biblical error
Do you have any text to substantiate that claim?
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 6:32 am
by JediSonic
yes, ruroken.. do tell
[note to everyone: I am a catholic and have discussed this topic with ruroken before via PMs. Apparently she still has questions]
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 10:14 am
by kaji
Interesting. I must admit, that I really know little of Catholicism.
Can I participate in a little Q and A?
Why do many Catholic churches feature stutues of saints? It seams like such a "worldly" thing to do. Were not the saints simply living their lives to Glorify God? Should not any recognition be given to God?
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 11:26 am
by Shao Feng-Li
Just curious, if roman catholosism is Christ approved, then why did John Knox reform scotland from Roman catholosism to Christianity?
Chapter 19
The Waldensians
Introduction
On the Late Massacre in Piedmont Avenge O Lord thy slaughter'd Saints, whose bones
Lie scatter'd on the Alpine mountains cold,
Ev'n them who kept thy truth so pure of old
When all our Fathers worship't Stocks and Stones,
Forget not: in thy book record their groanes
Who were thy Sheep and in their antient Fold
Slayn by the bloody Piemontese that roll'd
Mother with Infant down the Rocks. Their moans
The Vales redoubl'd to the Hills, and they
To Heav'n. Their martyr'd blood and ashes sow
O're all th'
Italian fields where still doth sway
The triple Tyrant [the pope]: that from these may grow
A hunder'd-fold, who having learnt thy way
Early may fly the
Babylonian wo.
http://www.prca.org/books/portraits/walden.htm
anyway, ive read from documents written by roman catholics that claim that the RCC is the Mother of the bible, yet its claims to be biult upon it. whats up with that?
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 11:47 am
by Lunis
martinloyola wrote: but to encourage us in our faithwalk
we pray to them, not because they have special power of their own, but only as you would ask some living christians in a prayer request, "pray without ceasing" and pray for one another, so to, we ask those already in heaven to pray for us
Despite what it may seem, this question I'm about to ask is an honest one. I just want to know what you think
. I am a Christian the goes to the a "Church of Christ" (That's what its called, but we don't call ourselves Church of Christians.
Ah nevermind. We just call ourselves Christians).
So maritnloyola, you pray to them like asking a fellow Christian to pray for you? So that means you ask them to pray to God for your sick family member (as an example)? And, well, how do they hear you? I know God can listen to prayers because He is omnipotent. So does God give them a special power to hear prayers, too? If that is not what you mean, then can anyone in heaven hear prayers, and you can pray to, say, your dead friend (as another example) and talk to them? I'm just a little confused on that part.
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 12:44 pm
by Technomancer
Ruroken wrote:Just curious, if roman catholosism is Christ approved, then why did John Knox reform scotland from Roman catholosism to Christianity?
anyway, ive read from documents written by roman catholics that claim that the RCC is the Mother of the bible, yet its claims to be biult upon it. whats up with that?
John Knox brought the reformation to Scotland, but that is not the end of the story. For a long time afterwards Catholics in Scotland were brutally persecuted for their faith (as they were in England under Queen Elizabeth), something that only ended in the late 18th century. There is, I should point out a reason why so many Catholic Scots emigrated to Upper Canada and Nova Scotia during the 1790's.
Did you have anything useful to say by bringing up the Waldenses? Yes, Catholics have at times done terrible things to other Christian sects, but so have the Protestants. Regurgitating past atrocites like so much stale bile is a pointless, tit-for-tat exercise and one whose destination is all too clearly exposed in places like Northern Ireland or the Balkans.
As far as the bible goes, there is a long story behind that, but suffice it to say that our canon of Scripture was set in the late fourth century by the Councils of Carthage and Hippo (this canon BTW included the deuteros), and confirmed by the pope of the time. In this regards the Church claims a measure of credit not only for setting the canon, but for preserving the teachings that allowed the councils to discern what was scripture and what wasn't.
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 12:54 pm
by The Grammarian
Ruroken wrote:Just curious, if roman catholosism is Christ approved, then why did John Knox reform scotland from Roman catholosism to Christianity?
Chapter 19
The Waldensians
Introduction On the Late Massacre in Piedmont Avenge O Lord thy slaughter'd Saints, whose bones
Lie scatter'd on the Alpine mountains cold,
Ev'n them who kept thy truth so pure of old
When all our Fathers worship't Stocks and Stones,
Forget not: in thy book record their groanes
Who were thy Sheep and in their antient Fold
Slayn by the bloody Piemontese that roll'd
Mother with Infant down the Rocks. Their moans
The Vales redoubl'd to the Hills, and they
To Heav'n. Their martyr'd blood and ashes sow
O're all th'
Italian fields where still doth sway
The triple Tyrant [the pope]: that from these may grow
A hunder'd-fold, who having learnt thy way
Early may fly the
Babylonian wo.
http://www.prca.org/books/portraits/walden.htmanyway, ive read from documents written by roman catholics that claim that the RCC is the Mother of the bible, yet its claims to be biult upon it. whats up with that?
A couple of points. John Knox reformed Scotland to Presbyterianism from Catholicism because he believed 1) that the Catholic episcopal form of government was wrong, and 2) he was a Calvinist, unlike Catholics, who are not.
Second, the poem you quote there? That's John Milton, an Anglican Puritan who was Arminian as well. Why exactly do you quote him?
Third, yes, Romanism does seem to have a bit of a circular argument going in saying that it determined canon, but canon supports its claims about the papacy and other matters of doctrine.
As far as it goes, Technomancer, "official" canon may have been determined in the fourth century and included the deuterocanon, but if I remember correctly, the deuterocanon was not given as central a place in doctrinal formation until the Council of Trent. Also, we have canonical lists that go back to the second century that match up nearly to what was determined later "officially" (minus the deuterocanon), specifically the Alexandrian list, as I recall.
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 1:02 pm
by Technomancer
No, the church councils of the time explicitly listed the deuterocanon as scripture, as did all subsequent councils (there were several before Trent). What Trent did was two-fold 1)Affirm the integrity of the Canon, and 2)Officially close debate on the matter. It is worth noting that all bibles made in the west prior to this time include the deuterocanon as scripture. It is also worth noting that the Eastern churches include these books as scripture, despite their having long since split with Rome.
Please refrain from the word "Romanism" BTW; this discussion is flammable enough without such language.
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 1:07 pm
by DrNic
Ah. I never believed that Catholics were really wrong, because everyone from a few decades after Jesus' death to whever Baptists and Methodists and the rest came around would be in Hell, as they were all Catholics. All English people, and most all European people, were Catholics in the Middle Ages.
Actually, I've heard that most people in the middle ages probably DID go to hell seeing as the laying on of hands was abolished, speaking in tongues was forgotten, the bible was made so that it could only be read in latin (not by common people) and you had to pay monks to recieve prayer and get a place in heaven (which I really dont agree with)
I'm not saying this is what the catholic church is like now because 1.) A lot has changed since the middle ages, I mean it was a few hundred years ago after all and 2.) I don't know much about catholicism (did i just make that word up?) and I'm pretty sure its as good as any other denomination.
I just thought I'd point this out as its something we learnt about a while back in the morning meeting. If anyone knows better please PM me or summit because I like to be corrected where I am wrong. Thanx ^_^
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 1:08 pm
by skynes
Regurgitating past atrocites like so much stale bile is a pointless, tit-for-tat exercise and one whose destination is all too clearly exposed in places like Northern Ireland or the Balkans.
Just to let you know the N Ireland situation is a bit different than most ppl think.
It's not Christian Protestants fighting against Christian Catholics but non-Christians fighting non-Christians.
It's a gang war. The terms Protestant and Catholic are simply labels.
---------------
The original 1611 KJV had all the Catholic books in it (sorry I don't what they're called, Apocrypha or something, prolly wrong)
I have a question.
When King Saul went to that witch to call Samuel's soul. Samuel turned and asked Saul "Why have you disturbed my rest?" or something like that. Why would dead saints n stuff still pray? If they're supposed to be resting?
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 1:09 pm
by Shao Feng-Li
Second, the poem you quote there? That's John Milton, an Anglican Puritan who was Arminian as well. Why exactly do you quote him?
it called the pope a tyrant.
ive often heard of something called "purgatory"
an intermediate state after death for expiatory purification; specifically : a place or state of punishment wherein according to Roman Catholic doctrine the souls of those who die in God's grace may make satisfaction for past sins and so become fit for heaven
surely this is purely a lie. ive also heard that you're to "ask the Virgin for forgiveness." I'm sure none of you ask some lady named Mary for giveness.
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 1:17 pm
by skynes
surely this is purely a lie.
a lie that it doesn't exist? Or that Catholics dont believe that? sorry u just confused me a bit.
I've heard about purgatory a few times from Catholics. that noone is righteous enough to get to heaven even when saved, we all gotta be cleansed before we can get in