Liberty University

User Profile: by faith

by faith

Member Since: September 27, 2011

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • October 21, 2014 at 11:50am

    Pope Francis is not saying anything new.

    Hate the sin, but Love the sinner

    Nothing changed

  • [2] October 20, 2014 at 6:25pm

    Mass in AD155

    Description of the mass as it was celebrated in his day.

    “All who dwell in the city or country gather in the same place. The memoir of the apostles and the writings of the prophets are read, as much as time permits. When the reader is finished, he who presides over those gathered admonishes and challenges them to imitate these beautiful things. Then we all rise together and offer prayers for ourselves…and for all others, wherever they may be, so that we may be found righteous by our life and actions and faithful to the commandments, so as to obtain eternal salvation. When the prayers are concluded we exchange the kiss [of peace]. Then someone brings bread and a cup of water and wine mixed together to him who presides over the brethren. He takes them and offers praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and for a considerable time he gives thanks that we have been judged worthy of these gifts. When he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all present give voice to an acclamation by saying: Amen.” When he who presides has given thanks and the people have responded, those whom we call deacons give to those present the ‘eucharisted’ bread, wine and water and take them to those who are absent.”
    Quoting Justin Martyr “First Apology” pages: 65-67
    written: 155AD

    Not only is the Catholic Mass a Biblical experience, it was practiced by the Church all the way back to the 1st century.

  • [2] October 20, 2014 at 6:23pm

    And, read this excerpt from early Church Father St. Justin (he wrote this in AD150):
    “On the day called Sunday there is a meeting in one place…the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read as long as time permits. When the reader has finished, the presider in a discourse urges and invites us to the imitation of these noble things. Then we all stand up together and offer prayers. And, as said before, when we have finished the prayer, bread is brought, and wine and water, and the presider similarly sends up prayers and thanksgiving to the best of his ability, and the congregation assents, saying the Amen; the distribution, and reception of the consecrated elements by each one, takes place and they are sent to the absent by the deacons…”
    - St. Justin, First Apology, 67

    This not only depicts the Mass (as we still celebrate it 2000 years later), but that the Mass was celebrated along with the Eucharistic true presence understood and believed by the early Christians (just like St. Paul and the apostles believed it)

    In fact, this letter that depicts the practices of the early Christians and the Tradition of the Church was occurring almost 250 years before the final canon (that is the Bible as we now know it) was formally put together.

  • [2] October 20, 2014 at 6:21pm

    Breaking of the Bread: “Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world…” (cf. John 1:29, 36; cf. Rev 5:6-13; 22:1-3)

    Preparation before Communion: “Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed.” (cf. Luke 7:1-10)

    Concluding Rite:
    Final Blessing (cf. Gen 28:3; Deut 14:29; Num 6:23-27; Ps 29:11)

    Dismissal:
    “Go in the peace of Christ.”
    “The Mass is ended; go in peace.”
    “Go in peace to love and serve the Lord.” (cf. Deut 10:11-13; Judg 18:6; Luke 7:50)
    The term “mass” comes from the latin word missa. It’s the same root word – missia for “missile” (it means to “send forth”). The same way a missile is shot forth, we are sent forth “to love and to serve the Lord”

    For more Scriptures regarding the apostles, the first Bishops, and the early Christians coming together to celebrate the Holy Mass, check out:
    Mt 26:26-30, Mk 14:22-26, Lk 22:14-20, 1 Cor 11:23-34, Acts 2:42, Acts 20:7, 1 Cor 5:7-8, Jude 12

  • [2] October 20, 2014 at 6:19pm

    “Glory and praise to you, Lord Jesus Christ!” (cf. Phil 1:11)

    Profession of Faith:
    “We believe…” (Mark 9:24; John 11:27; cf. John 14:1; 1 John 5:10)

    General Intercessions:
    “We pray to the Lord” – “Lord, hear our prayer”

    Liturgy of the Eucharist:
    Preparation of the Gifts: “Blessed are you, Lord, God of all creation…” (cf. 1 Chron 29:10; Ps 72:18-19; 119:10; Luke 1:68)

    Eucharistic Acclamations:
    “Holy, Holy, Holy Lord, God of power and might…” (Isa 6:3; Rev 4:8)
    “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.” (Ps 118:26; Mark 11:10)

    Words of Institution: “Take, eat, this is my body…” (Mark 14:22-24; Matt 26:26-28; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-25)

    Memorial Acclamations:
    “Christ has died; Christ is risen; Christ will come again.” (cf. 1 Thess 4:14-15; 1 Cor 15:3-23)
    “Dying you destroyed our death, rising you restored our life. Lord Jesus, come in glory.” (cf. 1 Cor 16:22)
    “When we eat this bread and drink this cup, we proclaim your death, Lord Jesus, until you come in glory.” (cf. 1 Cor 11:26)
    “Lord, by your cross and resurrection, you have set us free. You are the Savior of the world.” (cf. Luke 4:42)

    Lord’s Prayer: “Our Father in heaven…” (Matt 6:9-13; cf. Luke 11:2-4; Mark 14:36; Gal 4:6)
    Doxology: “For the kingdom, the power, and the glory are yours…”
    (found only in some biblical manuscripts after Matt 6:13; cf. Rev 4:11; 1 Chron 29:11)

    Greeting of Peace:
    “The peace of the Lord be with you always.” (John 14:27; 16:33; 20:19-20; 20:26)

  • [2] October 20, 2014 at 6:16pm

    Judeo,

    I know you don’t need my help. I happen to have this:

    Quite a few protestants say the Catholic Mass is not biblical.
    But I beg to differ.
    Tell me what do you think

    Introductory Rites:
    Sign of the Cross: “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”
    (see Matt 28:19; cf. John 14:13-14; Acts 2:21)

    Formal Greeting:
    “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ…” (2 Cor 13:14)
    “The grace and peace of God our Father…” (Eph 1:2)
    “The Lord be with you.” (2 Tim 4:22; cf. Matt 1:23; 28:20)
    Rite of Blessing and Sprinkling Holy Water (see Ezek 36:25; cf. Num 8:7a)

    Penitential Rite:
    “I confess to almighty God…” (cf. Lev 5:5; Neh 1:5-9; Dan 9:3-19; James 5:16)
    “Lord, Have Mercy” ( Matt 15:22; 17:15; 20:30-31; cf. Ps 123:3)
    “Glory to God in the highest…” (Luke 2:14; cf. Rev 4:11; 5:11-14)
    Prayers concluded by “Amen” (Neh 8:6; Ps 41:13; Rom 16:27; Heb 13:20-21; Rev 7:16)

    Liturgy of the Word:
    Introductory/Concluding Dialogues:
    “A reading from the book/letter of…”
    “The Word of the Lord” – “Thanks be to God”
    “A reading from the holy Gospel according to…” – “Glory to you, O Lord”
    “The Gospel of the Lord” – “Praise to you, Lord Jesus Christ”

    Acclamations before the Gospel:
    “Alleluia” (many Psalms, esp. Ps 146-150; Rev 19:1-6)
    “Praise to you, Lord Jesus Christ, King of endless glory!” (cf. Ps 24:7-10; 1 Thess 2:12; 2 Tim 4:18)
    “Praise and honor to you, Lord Jesus Christ!” (cf. Dan 4:34, 37; 1 Peter 1:7)

  • [4] October 20, 2014 at 5:27pm

    The Zurich City Council handled this civil disobedience the same way they would have handled an appeal for trash pick up or a new bridge: on January 17, 1525 they held a public debate on the issue.

    The people’s representatives listened to both sides and voted for baby baptism.

    The Council ordered that the “radicals” must no longer meet together, or teach their opinions to others and that all families must baptize their children within eight days or leave Zurich.

    With the deadline running out, the “Anabaptists” must do something.
    Trudging through the wind and snow on that chilly night, January 21, 1525, they gathered at Felix Manz’ house to decide their course of action.

    They talked and worried and prayed. When they rose from their knees, Georg Blaurock had made up his mind. He asked Conrad Grebel to baptize him in the apostolic manner–upon confession of faith.
    Grebel did, and then Blaurock baptized all of the others who were willing.
    By that action, the Anabaptist movement was born.

    “Anabaptist” means “rebaptizer.” It was a name given to them in mockery by their enemies.

    Manz, Blaurock and many other Anabaptist leaders were executed. (Not by Catholics, but by former fellow church members)

    Mennonites, Hutterites, and Amish are the direct offspring of the Anabaptist movement.

    The early Church baptized infants until one man made his final decision.

  • [3] October 20, 2014 at 5:21pm

    Who and When was first to claim no infant baptism?
    January 21, 1525

    When reformers gained control of governments, they replaced the Roman church with reformed churches. At this time, all people—including newborn babies—were expected to belong to the newly reformed churches just as they had belonged to the old (Catholic).
    Newborn babies were baptized into the reformed church and became members simply by being born in their community, much as a person becomes a citizen of the United States by being born there.

    Reformation in Zurich, under Ulrich Zwingli’s Bible-centered teaching.
    The Zurich City Council and most Christians supported his reforms.
    However, when an eager group of Zwingli supporters looked into the Bible, they found what they claimed to be a wide difference between the primitive churches of the first century and the state churches of the sixteenth.

    They became convinced that the church wasn’t intended to include everyone. Rather, it should include only those people who really know and follow Christ. “How could a baby join a church,” they asked, “When it knows nothing but to cry and eat?” These Christians believed that the only true baptism comes when one is old enough to understand its meaning. Among them were Georg Blaurock, Conrad Grebel, and Felix Manz.

    When Grebel’s wife had a baby, the couple decided not to baptize their child although Zurich authorities said they must.
    Other families imitated the Grebels.

  • [4] October 20, 2014 at 5:14pm

    Council of Carthage V
    “Item: It seemed good that whenever there were not found reliable witnesses who could testify that without any doubt they [abandoned children] were baptized and when the children themselves were not, on account of their tender age, able to answer concerning the giving of the sacraments to them, all such children should be baptized without scruple, lest a hesitation should deprive them of the cleansing of the sacraments. This was urged by the [North African] legates, our brethren, since they redeem many such [abandoned children] from the barbarians” (Canon 7 [A.D. 401]).
    Council of Mileum II
    “[W]hoever says that infants fresh from their mothers’ wombs ought not to be baptized, or say that they are indeed baptized unto the remission of sins, but that they draw nothing of the original sin of Adam, which is expiated in the bath of regeneration . . . let him be anathema [excommunicated]. Since what the apostle [Paul] says, ‘Through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so passed to all men, in whom all have sinned’ [Rom. 5:12], must not be understood otherwise than the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it. For on account of this rule of faith even infants, who in themselves thus far have not been able to commit any sin, are therefore truly baptized unto the remission of sins, so that that which they have contracted from generation may be cleansed in them by regeneration” (Canon 3 [A.D. 416]).

  • [4] October 20, 2014 at 5:14pm

    “Cyprian was not issuing a new decree but was keeping to the most solid belief of the Church in order to correct some who thought that infants ought not be baptized before the eighth day after their birth. . . . He agreed with certain of his fellow bishops that a child is able to be duly baptized as soon as he is born” (Letters 166:8:23 [A.D. 412]).

    “By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive . . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians call baptism salvation and the sacrament of Christ’s Body nothing else than life. Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture, too. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration” (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]).

  • [4] October 20, 2014 at 5:13pm

    John Chrysostom
    “You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his [Christ’s] members” (Baptismal Catecheses in Augustine, Against Julian 1:6:21 [A.D. 388]).

    Augustine
    “What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not able to respond” (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]).

    “The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic” (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]).

  • [4] October 20, 2014 at 5:12pm

    “If, in the case of the worst sinners and those who formerly sinned much against God, when afterwards they believe, the remission of their sins is granted and no one is held back from baptism and grace, how much more, then, should an infant not be held back, who, having but recently been born, has done no sin, except that, born of the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of that old death from his first being born. For this very reason does he [an infant] approach more easily to receive the remission of sins: because the sins forgiven him are not his own but those of another” (ibid., 64:5).

    Gregory of Nazianz
    “Do you have an infant child? Allow sin no opportunity; rather, let the infant be sanctified from childhood. From his most tender age let him be consecrated by the Spirit. Do you fear the seal [of baptism] because of the weakness of nature? Oh, what a pusillanimous mother and of how little faith!” (Oration on Holy Baptism 40:7 [A.D. 388]).

    “‘Well enough,’ some will say, ‘for those who ask for baptism, but what do you have to say about those who are still children, and aware neither of loss nor of grace? Shall we baptize them too?’ Certainly [I respond], if there is any pressing danger. Better that they be sanctified unaware, than that they depart unsealed and uninitiated” (ibid., 40:28).

  • [4] October 20, 2014 at 5:10pm

    Origen
    “Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous” (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3 [A.D. 248]).
    “The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit” (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).

    Cyprian of Carthage
    “As to what pertains to the case of infants: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born” (Letters 64:2 [A.D. 253]).

  • [4] October 20, 2014 at 5:09pm

    He was probably baptized by the bishop of Smyrna at that time—Polycarp

    Polycarp was a personal disciple of the apostle John, who had died only a few decades before.

    Irenaeus
    “He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age” (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).
    “‘And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]” (Fragment 34 [A.D. 190]).

    Hippolytus
    “Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them” (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D. 215]).

  • [4] October 20, 2014 at 5:06pm

    Baptism is the Christian equivalent of circumcision, or “the circumcision of Christ”:
    “In him you were also circumcised with . . . the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead” (Col. 2:11–12).

    Thus, like circumcision, baptism can be given to children as well as adults.
    The difference is that circumcision was powerless to save (Gal.5:6,6:15) ,but “baptism . . . now saves you” (1 Pet. 3:21)

    The first explicit evidence of children of believing households being baptized comes from the early Church—where infant baptism was uniformly upheld and regarded as apostolic.
    In fact, the only reported controversy on the subject was a third-century debate whether or not to delay baptism until the eighth day after birth, like its OT equivalent, circumcision!
    (See quotation from Cyprian, compare Leviticus 12:2–3.)

    Consider, too, that Church Fathers raised in Christian homes (such as Irenaeus) would hardly have upheld infant baptism as apostolic if their own baptisms had been deferred until the age of reason.
    For example, infant baptism is assumed in Irenaeus’ writings (since he affirms both that regeneration happens in baptism, and also that Jesus came, so even infants could be regenerated).

    Since he was born in a Christian home in Smyrna around the year 140, this means he was probably baptized around 140.

  • [4] October 20, 2014 at 5:02pm

    Luke 18:15–16 tells us that “they were bringing even infants” to Jesus; and he himself related this to the kingdom of God: “Let the children come to me . . . for to such belongs the kingdom of God.”

    When Baptists speak of “bringing someone to Jesus,” they mean leading him to faith.
    But Jesus says “even infants” can be “brought” to him.
    Even Baptists don’t claim their practice of “dedicating” babies does this.

    The fact is, the Bible gives us no way of bringing anyone to Jesus apart from baptism.

    Thus Peter declared, “Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you and to your children” (Acts 2:38–39).

    The apostolic Church baptized whole “households” (Acts 16:33; 1 Cor. 1:16), a term encompassing children and infants as well as servants. While these texts do not specifically mention—nor exclude—infants, the very use of the term “households” indicates an understanding of the family as a unit.

    Even one believing parent in a household makes the children and even the unbelieving spouse “holy” (1 Cor. 7:14).

    Does this mean unbelieving spouses should be baptized? Of course not.
    The kingdom of God is not theirs; they cannot be “brought to Christ” in their unbelief.
    But infants have no such impediment. The kingdom is theirs, Jesus says, and they should be brought to him; and this means baptism.

  • [4] October 20, 2014 at 4:58pm

    Stay-calm-and-Pray-on
    I don’t want to step on your toes, but this might help explain infant baptism

    Although many Protestant traditions baptize babies;
    Baptists—and “Bible churches” in the Baptist tradition—insist that baptism is only for those who have come to faith.

    Nowhere in the New Testament, they point out, do we read of infants being baptized.

    On the other hand, nowhere do we read of children raised in believing households reaching the age of reason and then being baptized.

    The only explicit baptism accounts in the Bible involve converts from Judaism or paganism. For children of believers there is no explicit mention of baptism — either in infancy or later.

    This poses a problem for Baptists and Bible Christians: On what basis do they require children of believers to be baptized at all?
    Given the silence of the New Testament, why not assume Christian baptism is only for adult converts?

    This, of course, would be contrary to historical Christian practice. But so is rejecting infant baptism.

    There is no doubt that the early Church practiced infant baptism; and no Christian objections to this practice were ever voiced until the Reformation.

    The New Testament itself, while it does not explicitly say when (or whether) believers should have their children baptized, is not silent on the subject.

  • [1] October 20, 2014 at 12:06pm

    Cardinal Newman, was an important figure in the religious history of England in the 19th century.

    At the age of 15, during his last year at school, Newman was converted. Newman “fell under the influence of a definite creed”, and received into his intellect “impressions of dogma, which, through God’s mercy, have never been effaced or obscured”. He became an evangelical Calvinist and held the typical belief that the Pope was Antichrist.

    In his zealous attempt to prove Catholicism wrong, Newman began an in-depth research. The deeper he got into actual history, the more he studied, the more he found the Catholic Church. Not the Church of protestant lies, but the truth of the Catholic Church.

    In February 1846 Newman was accepted into the Church he came to love.

    John Henry Cardinal Newman (1801-1890) was a convert to Catholicism from the Church of England, and one of the great minds of the 19th century. As a Roman Catholic priest he became one of the greatest Catholic apologists in the history of the Church. He was a prolific writer and persuasive preacher.

    That’s what happens when you try to prove the Catholic Church is wrong.
    That’s why anti-Catholics will not do the work

  • [1] October 20, 2014 at 11:51am

    HisJustice

    They can’t read Catholic material.
    Why would they let facts get in the way of a good story.
    They prefer to be “right” and are less interested in the truth

    It’s a “don’t confuse me with the facts, I’ve got my mind made up”

    As Cardinal Newman said: “To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant”

  • [3] October 20, 2014 at 11:47am

    “No where in the gospel does Christ say that we must belong to the Catholic church and follow it’s doctrines to be saved”

    No where in the gospel does Christ say “read my book”

123 To page: Go