Even though I have a few pieces on the Catholic Church, a friend and former Catholic, more in the shape and form of respected Alberto Rivera has been writing more on Catholicism from personal experience and more.
On his facebook page today, he writes on September 8, a supposed birthday of Mary, mother of Jesus.
Read on............
Ttomorrow September 8 Will be the traditional birthday of Mary the mother of Jesus in the flesh, Roman Catholics have told me that they only pray to Mary to "get closer to Jesus" and that in their devotion to Mary, they are getting closer to Jesus.
However looking at the Rosary, the 12 noon prayer and 6:00 prayer, they are ALL devoted to Mary. As a former Roman Catholic, I remembered kissing the picture of Mary whenever I passed an exam or was a sincere Marian devotee.
I prayed three Hail Marys before going to bed, I asked Mary to intercede for me, I prayed the Rosary, I was a keen observer of the Marian miracles to the point people asked me if I wanted to become a Roman Catholic priest. In devotion to Mary, many attributes that are to Jesus alone are given to Mary like "Queen of Heaven", "Help of Christians", "Ark of the Covenant", "Conceived without Sin", "Queen of Nations" and the titles of the Father are given to her like "Holy Mother".
That is utter blasphemy and unfortunately Roman Catholics do a poor job convincing me that they don't worship Mary when their actions prove they do.
From the pages of a Roman Catholic book called "The Children's Bible" the commentary in itself is really trash. I received that book when I was still a young Roman Catholic, getting ready for my Communion and I was about to be promised into the Jesuit seminary. Several times, the books misrepresent the story like the Wedding at Cana or the people praising Jesus' mother IGNORING the rest of Scripture. Or you may want to include Jesus' last statements for Mary and John. Now it's time to take each and every situation in the light of Scripture. If you are a Roman Catholic, sorry I cannot soften my message for you because I love people and I want them to know the Biblical truth not just take one verse and forget the rest but with verse by verse expository of the truth.
I am writing this for the salvation of your souls. Marian devotees before prepare a shock in this. Marian devotion does not bring a person any closer to Christ. In fact, it is bringing them far away from Christ making them want to pass through Mary before they can through Jesus.
But Jesus invited people to come to Him directly in every place of His public invitation. In John 2:1-11, according to Roman Catholics this was the very first act of intercession that Mary did of people to Jesus.
But listen if they really consider Mary's statement, please note that Jesus then called Mary as "woman" here and NOT "mother". Obviously this was to protect her. Mary in this story when she said in John 2:5 saying, "Do whatever He tells you." it can be seen that Mary wanted people to understand she could not mediate between them and Jesus. I wonder if Roman Catholics even bother to read the passage carefully noticing Mary's ONLY command of "Do whatever He tells you." Yet they still insist that this was the first intercession.
Mary gave no other command but to tell people to do only whatever Jesus told them to do. The heart of Christ's ministry was DOING what Christ tells us to do. Christ in the Scripture in the ministry stated no role for Mary in salvation. He invited sinners to Himself. The dogmas of Mary in Catholicism are fictitious, not harmonious with the Bible. Obviously here, no devotion to Mary was ever done except her only command fulfilled, "Do whatever He tells you." After that, Mary gave no more other command nor did she invite people to herself.
In truth, it actually drifts people away from Christ, not bring them closer to Him whenever they have their devotion to Mary. How in the world can a doctrine that says people must pass through Mary bring people to Christ? Christ invited people directly to Him. When He called Matthew, He didn't have His mother with Him. Zaccheus invited Christ ALONE to His house.
When Saul was converted He only saw the risen Lord Jesus. Everything in the Scripture is clear go to Jesus Christ directly. There are no "ladders to Jesus", they MUST enter the Door (John 10). In truth when I was still a Roman Catholic, I spent much of my time having Marian devotions only to find out how far I was from Jesus and not getting any closer.
Worse, when I started reading the bible by its context, I was shocked at the truth of Scripture the more I read the Bible cover to cover that people went to Jesus.
In fact, the only way to get closer to Christ is by devotion to Him and Him alone and not through anyone, people must go to Christ alone as the only Way to the Father. Nowhere in Acts is Mary preached, no after the Day of Pentecost, Mary falls silent and only the Name of Jesus preached. Sad to say, many Roman Catholics still insist I hate Mary because I don't agree with their unscriptural teachings.
From Paul Ancy on his facebook wall
Over here, we have serious talks. We seek to defend the elect from obstructive thoughts and processes. We do this bearing in mind the very nature of the Gospel as was passed on to us by the Apostles
Saturday 7 September 2019
Friday 6 September 2019
The Early Church Fathers
The early church fathers fall into three basic categories: apostolic fathers, ante-Nicene church fathers, and post-Nicene church fathers.
The apostolic church fathers were the ones like Clement of Rome who were contemporaries of the apostles and were probably taught by them, carrying on the tradition and teaching of the apostles themselves.
The apostolic church fathers were the ones like Clement of Rome who were contemporaries of the apostles and were probably taught by them, carrying on the tradition and teaching of the apostles themselves.
Linus, mentioned in 2 Timothy 4:21, became the bishop of Rome, and Clement took over from Linus. Both Linus and Clement of Rome, therefore, are considered apostolic fathers.
However, there appear to be no writings of Linus that have survived, while many of the writings of Clement of Rome survived.
The apostolic fathers would have largely passed from the scene by the beginning of the second century, except for those few who might have been disciples of John, such as Polycarp. The tradition is that the apostle John died in Ephesus around A.D. 98.
The ante-Nicene fathers were those who came after the apostolic fathers and before the Council of Nicea in A.D. 325. Such individuals as Irenaeus, Ignatius, and Justin Martyr are ante-Nicene fathers.
The post-Nicene church fathers are those who came after the Council of Nicea in A.D. 325. These are such noted men as Augustine, bishop of Hippo, who is often called the father of the [Roman Catholic] Church because of his great work in Church doctrine; Chrysostom, called the “golden-mouthed” for his excellent oratorical skills; and Eusebius, who wrote a history of the church from the birth of Jesus to A.D. 324, one year before the Council of Nicea.
He is included in the post-Nicene era since he did not write his history until after the Council of Nicea was held. Other post-Nicene fathers were Jerome, who translated the Greek New Testament into the Latin Vulgate, and Ambrose, who was largely responsible for Augustine’s conversion to Christianity.
So, what did the early church fathers believe? The apostolic fathers were very concerned about the proclamation of the gospel being just as the apostles themselves proclaimed it.
They were not interested in formulating theological doctrine, for the gospel they had learned from the apostles was quite sufficient for them.
The apostolic fathers were as zealous as the apostles themselves in rooting out and exposing any false doctrine that cropped up in the early church. The orthodoxy of the message was preserved by the apostolic fathers' desire to stay true to the gospel taught to them by the apostles.
The ante-Nicene fathers also tried to stay true to the gospel, but they had an additional worry. Now there were several spurious writings claiming to have the same weight as the established writings of Paul, Peter, and Luke. The reason for these spurious documents was evident.
If the body of Christ could be persuaded to receive a false document, then error would creep into the church. So the ante-Nicene fathers spent a lot of their time defending the Christian faith from false doctrine, and this led to the beginnings of the formation of accepted church doctrine.
The post-Nicene fathers carried out the mission of defending the gospel against all kinds of heresies, so more and more the post-Nicene fathers grew interested in methods of defending the gospel and less interested in transmitting the gospel in a true and pure form. Thus, they began to slowly fall away from the orthodoxy that was the hallmark of the apostolic fathers. This was the age of the theologian and endless discussions on secondary topics.
The early church fathers are an example to us of what it means to follow Christ and defend the truth. None of the early church fathers were perfect, just as none of us are perfect.
Some of the early church fathers held beliefs that most Christians today consider to be incorrect. What eventually developed into Roman Catholic theology had its roots in the writings of the post-Nicene fathers.
While we can gain knowledge and insight by studying the early church fathers, ultimately our faith must be in the Word of God, not in the writings of early Christian leaders. Only God’s Word is the infallible guide for faith and practice.
Recommended Resource: Christianity Through the Centuries by Earle Cairns
However, there appear to be no writings of Linus that have survived, while many of the writings of Clement of Rome survived.
The apostolic fathers would have largely passed from the scene by the beginning of the second century, except for those few who might have been disciples of John, such as Polycarp. The tradition is that the apostle John died in Ephesus around A.D. 98.
The ante-Nicene fathers were those who came after the apostolic fathers and before the Council of Nicea in A.D. 325. Such individuals as Irenaeus, Ignatius, and Justin Martyr are ante-Nicene fathers.
The post-Nicene church fathers are those who came after the Council of Nicea in A.D. 325. These are such noted men as Augustine, bishop of Hippo, who is often called the father of the [Roman Catholic] Church because of his great work in Church doctrine; Chrysostom, called the “golden-mouthed” for his excellent oratorical skills; and Eusebius, who wrote a history of the church from the birth of Jesus to A.D. 324, one year before the Council of Nicea.
He is included in the post-Nicene era since he did not write his history until after the Council of Nicea was held. Other post-Nicene fathers were Jerome, who translated the Greek New Testament into the Latin Vulgate, and Ambrose, who was largely responsible for Augustine’s conversion to Christianity.
So, what did the early church fathers believe? The apostolic fathers were very concerned about the proclamation of the gospel being just as the apostles themselves proclaimed it.
They were not interested in formulating theological doctrine, for the gospel they had learned from the apostles was quite sufficient for them.
The apostolic fathers were as zealous as the apostles themselves in rooting out and exposing any false doctrine that cropped up in the early church. The orthodoxy of the message was preserved by the apostolic fathers' desire to stay true to the gospel taught to them by the apostles.
The ante-Nicene fathers also tried to stay true to the gospel, but they had an additional worry. Now there were several spurious writings claiming to have the same weight as the established writings of Paul, Peter, and Luke. The reason for these spurious documents was evident.
If the body of Christ could be persuaded to receive a false document, then error would creep into the church. So the ante-Nicene fathers spent a lot of their time defending the Christian faith from false doctrine, and this led to the beginnings of the formation of accepted church doctrine.
The post-Nicene fathers carried out the mission of defending the gospel against all kinds of heresies, so more and more the post-Nicene fathers grew interested in methods of defending the gospel and less interested in transmitting the gospel in a true and pure form. Thus, they began to slowly fall away from the orthodoxy that was the hallmark of the apostolic fathers. This was the age of the theologian and endless discussions on secondary topics.
The early church fathers are an example to us of what it means to follow Christ and defend the truth. None of the early church fathers were perfect, just as none of us are perfect.
Some of the early church fathers held beliefs that most Christians today consider to be incorrect. What eventually developed into Roman Catholic theology had its roots in the writings of the post-Nicene fathers.
While we can gain knowledge and insight by studying the early church fathers, ultimately our faith must be in the Word of God, not in the writings of early Christian leaders. Only God’s Word is the infallible guide for faith and practice.
Recommended Resource: Christianity Through the Centuries by Earle Cairns
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)