PDA

View Full Version : The Catholic Corner



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

dhandhandhan
2nd Feb 2012, 20:34
"ang sa akin naman..verification lang po...are we n0t all catholic? But n0t roman but a Filipino?" tama? Hehe thankz..so i'm proud to say that i'm a filipino catholic...

Godbless",j

unleash97
3rd Feb 2012, 08:31
"ang sa akin naman..verification lang po...are we n0t all catholic? But n0t roman but a Filipino?" tama? Hehe thankz..so i'm proud to say that i'm a filipino catholic...

Godbless",j

(---pwede rin yan, but technically we are "filipino roman catholic", yung "roman" dyan dont necessarily denote one's citizenship but rather our affiliation or communion with the bishop of rome, the successor of st. peter, the pope.
it serves also as a distinction kasi dito sa pinas me independent catholic church na hindi in communion with the pope.

Diego_99
3rd Feb 2012, 09:27
Good job to these people like unleash97, Diego_99 and others :clap:

They are not lazy exploring the stories behind the bible. They have this desire of knowing the facts and truth.

I encountered many people, specially other religious groups (I attended/joined many of them) like they knew all about the bible, every explanations from the bible, verses from the bible.. Its like bragging themselves they were well-verse in the bible (like sila daw ang tama) yet they didn't even knew the basic like the original languages used in the bible and the first author of the bible. :rofl:

Most of them were repeating what their pastors/ministers said.. They didn't even question/wonder if all they said was true.. It was much better in classroom where we can question and correct our teachers specially if he/she was wrong.



Salamat din po, pati kay sir winmail at sir unleash. :)

dhandhandhan
3rd Feb 2012, 10:58
(---pwede rin yan, but technically we are "filipino roman catholic", yung "roman" dyan dont necessarily denote one's citizenship but rather our affiliation or communion with the bishop of rome, the successor of st. peter, the pope.
it serves also as a distinction kasi dito sa pinas me independent catholic church na hindi in communion with the pope.

ah..okie..thankz i respect that..nyway i'm a believer..i already baptize & repent and recieve the Holy Spirit..w/c makes me a b0rn again..,so Godbless nalng po..

Diego_99
3rd Feb 2012, 14:21
Magandang hapon po, :)



You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)
St. Margaret Clitherow (1556 – 25 March 1586)
is "pressed" to death.


Daan lang po ako ngayon at mag-iwan na rin po ako ng mga links, may kaugnayan po ito sa Inquisition na mayroong thread dito, pero imbes na po dun ko ipost dito na lang po since dito naman po ako palagi nag-popost. Ito po yung mga links:



The Protestant Inquisition "Reformation" (You can see links before reply)

The "Holy" or "Bloody" Spanish Inquisition (You can see links before reply)

The Holy Inquisition: Myth or Reality (You can see links before reply) by Marian Horvat, Ph.D., in Medieval History

The Inquisition (You can see links before reply)

The Protestant Reformation in England (You can see links before reply) by William Cobbett

Letters on the Spanish inquisition (You can see links before reply=onepage&q=Protestant%20Inquisition&f=false) by The Count Joseph Marie Maistre with notes by John Fletcher, D.D., W. Hughes, 1838, Harvard University.

On the Spanish Inquisition (You can see links before reply) (a non-Catholic Christian apologetics source)

A critical and historical review of Fox's Book of martyrs shewing the inaccuracies, falsehoods and misrepresentations in that work of deception (You can see links before reply/n7/mode/2up) by William Eusebius Andrews, John Foxe, Oxford University.

Torture and Punishment as a Problem in Catholic Moral Theology: Part I. The Witness of Sacred Scripture (You can see links before reply) & Part II. The Witness of Tradition and Magisterium (You can see links before reply) by Brian W. Harrison (Editor: Msgr. John F. McCarthy, J.C.D., S.T.D.; Associate Editor: Rev. Brian W. Harrison, O.S., M.A., S.T.D.)

Protestant Inquisition: The English Reformation (You can see links before reply)

Dave Hunt and the Spanish Inquisition (You can see links before reply)

A New Look At the Spanish Inquisition (You can see links before reply) by Edward O'Brien

The Inquisition & the Church (You can see links before reply)

Historical revision of the Inquisition (You can see links before reply_and_t orture) (Isang artikulo mula sa Wikipedia)

The Truth about the Spanish Inquisition (You can see links before reply) by Prof. Thomas Madden

The Spanish Inquisition: Historical Association studies (You can see links before reply en&hl=en&sa=X&ei=pV8rT-vjN5C6iAfHg8XCDg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=The%20Spanish%20Inquisition%20%281965%29%20by%20 Henry%20Kamen&f=false) by Helen Rawlings, Wiley-Blackwell, 2006. (Neutral)

Beyond the Myth of The Inquisition: Ours Is "The Golden Age" (You can see links before reply) by Fr. Brian Van Hove, SJ



Sa susunod nalang po yung iba. Sana po nakatulong. ;)



P.S.

Nga po pala sir winmail pwede mo pong basahin itong mga ito para po makatulong po sa pakikipag-talakayan nyo po sa Inquisition sa isang thread dito.

hadeyah
3rd Feb 2012, 17:23
(---sinong me sabi na dapat direct ang dasal sa Dyos? bakit si st. paul bids christians to pray for him kung kelangan lagi direct ang dasal sa Dyos?)

Tanong lang po

yung tinatawag po ba na pag ro-rosary dasal din po ba yun?

yeoh_8
3rd Feb 2012, 17:24
You can see links before reply 6916848_n.jpg

winmail
3rd Feb 2012, 18:26
Magandang hapon po, :)



You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)
St. Margaret Clitherow (1556 – 25 March 1586)
is "pressed" to death.


Daan lang po ako ngayon at mag-iwan na rin po ako ng mga links, may kaugnayan po ito sa Inquisition na mayroong thread dito, pero imbes na po dun ko ipost dito na lang po since dito naman po ako palagi nag-popost. Ito po yung mga links:



The Protestant Inquisition "Reformation" (You can see links before reply)

The "Holy" or "Bloody" Spanish Inquisition (You can see links before reply)

The Holy Inquisition: Myth or Reality (You can see links before reply) by Marian Horvat, Ph.D., in Medieval History

The Inquisition (You can see links before reply)

The Protestant Reformation in England (You can see links before reply) by William Cobbett

Letters on the Spanish inquisition (You can see links before reply=onepage&q=Protestant%20Inquisition&f=false) by The Count Joseph Marie Maistre with notes by John Fletcher, D.D., W. Hughes, 1838, Harvard University.

On the Spanish Inquisition (You can see links before reply) (a non-Catholic Christian apologetics source)

A critical and historical review of Fox's Book of martyrs shewing the inaccuracies, falsehoods and misrepresentations in that work of deception (You can see links before reply/n7/mode/2up) by William Eusebius Andrews, John Foxe, Oxford University.

Torture and Punishment as a Problem in Catholic Moral Theology: Part I. The Witness of Sacred Scripture (You can see links before reply) & Part II. The Witness of Tradition and Magisterium (You can see links before reply) by Brian W. Harrison (Editor: Msgr. John F. McCarthy, J.C.D., S.T.D.; Associate Editor: Rev. Brian W. Harrison, O.S., M.A., S.T.D.)

Protestant Inquisition: The English Reformation (You can see links before reply)

Dave Hunt and the Spanish Inquisition (You can see links before reply)

A New Look At the Spanish Inquisition (You can see links before reply) by Edward O'Brien

The Inquisition & the Church (You can see links before reply)

Historical revision of the Inquisition (You can see links before reply_and_t orture) (Isang artikulo mula sa Wikipedia)

The Truth about the Spanish Inquisition (You can see links before reply) by Prof. Thomas Madden

The Spanish Inquisition: Historical Association studies (You can see links before reply en&hl=en&sa=X&ei=pV8rT-vjN5C6iAfHg8XCDg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=The%20Spanish%20Inquisition%20%281965%29%20by%20 Henry%20Kamen&f=false) by Helen Rawlings, Wiley-Blackwell, 2006. (Neutral)

Beyond the Myth of The Inquisition: Ours Is "The Golden Age" (You can see links before reply) by Fr. Brian Van Hove, SJ



Sa susunod nalang po yung iba. Sana po nakatulong. ;)



P.S.

Nga po pala sir winmail pwede mo pong basahin itong mga ito para po makatulong po sa pakikipag-talakayan nyo po sa Inquisition sa isang thread dito.

Salamat sa po sa post hiramin ko to. mas-malinaw ang explanation dito
God bless!

unleash97
3rd Feb 2012, 23:30
Tanong lang po

yung tinatawag po ba na pag ro-rosary dasal din po ba yun?

(---yes, it is a prayer, what we call meditative prayer; by praying the holy rosary we meditate or contemplate the life of Christ and Mary para makakuha ng magandang example at mapalalim ang faith.

unleash97
3rd Feb 2012, 23:39
You can see links before reply 6916848_n.jpg

(---hmmn, so yung nakaluhod sumasamba dun sa nakatayo? alam mo ba kung ano ginagawa nila? the bishop in there obviously is ordaining the man in the priesthood by the laying of hands, tnt
if this is how you fallaciously interpret things, how much more the scriptures? tnt

yeoh_8
4th Feb 2012, 00:46
(---hmmn, so yung nakaluhod sumasamba dun sa nakatayo? alam mo ba kung ano ginagawa nila? the bishop in there obviously is ordaining the man in the priesthood by the laying of hands, tnt
if this is how you fallaciously interpret things, how much more the scriptures? tnt

ang nakalagay sa biblia eh AS IS, kung sabi wag mo silang luluhuran eh BAWAL luhuran, bakit di niyo gawin ng nakatayo? kase nga, binabalewala niyo yung sinasabi ng biblia, parang ganito, HUWAG GAGAWA NG LARAWANG INANYUAN, pag gawa pa lang eh bawal na pero ano ginagawa niyo?, just being realistic.

chijay
4th Feb 2012, 02:14
bagong argument nanaman?...

consistent sa pag bukas ng bagong argumento, pag na sagot. hanap nanaman ng bagong argumento? wala ng katapusan to. bat di na lang magkanya kanya, may mga sariling threads naman ang bawat religion.

Deeper09
4th Feb 2012, 03:40
Natural lang naman na magkarun ng bagong argumento sa thread nato, diba ginawa ito "para sa me mga katanungan hingil sa katolikong pananampalataya" kaya pag nasagot pede na uli magtanung na maaaring simulan ng argumento :lol::lol::lol:

Bumibisibisita lang hehe...

kazel0729
4th Feb 2012, 09:07
You can see links before reply 6916848_n.jpg


(---hmmn, so yung nakaluhod sumasamba dun sa nakatayo? alam mo ba kung ano ginagawa nila? the bishop in there obviously is ordaining the man in the priesthood by the laying of hands, tnt
if this is how you fallaciously interpret things, how much more the scriptures? tnt

Nakaluhod po siya sa harap ng altar.. Hindi naman siya directly lumuluhod sa bishop.. You judge directly by what you saw without even wondering what really happens. It's like what they said, "Don't judge the book by its cover", "Don't judge the story by its title".

Matthew 7:1-3

1 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?

At isa pa, mali ba talaga ang lahat ng uri sa pagluhod? Depende po yan, wag lang po generalized. Paano na yung mga lalaki na mag-propose ng kasal, lumuhod sila sa gf nila sabay bigay ng ring at sabi na "will you marry me?". Nagkasala din ba sila?

chijay
4th Feb 2012, 10:10
Natural lang naman na magkarun ng bagong argumento sa thread nato, diba ginawa ito "para sa me mga katanungan hingil sa katolikong pananampalataya" kaya pag nasagot pede na uli magtanung na maaaring simulan ng argumento :lol::lol::lol:

Bumibisibisita lang hehe...

kaso iba yung " katanungan hingil sa katolikong pananampalataya" sa "kinukwestyon ang pananampalataya".


Makipagdebate o makipagsagutan sa ibang members na may ibang paniniwala.
Kung may makita tayong post o thread na iba sa paniniwala natin, huwag na po tayong mag-reply don. Mag-reply lamang po tayo dun sa mga post na sumasang-ayon tayo.

Sa madaling salita...
MIND YOUR OWN RELIGION!

mabuhay na lang tayo ng mapayapa.

winmail
4th Feb 2012, 10:58
Alam mo @deeper9 ilan beses na po namin sinagot yan dito ewan ko ba kay Yeoh_8 ayaw mag backread?

wala naman sinabi dyan na sumamba... kaya lang naman pinag-bawalan ni ST. Peter yun lumuhod sa kanya kasi may balak-talagang sumamba yun tao sa kanya

hadeyah
4th Feb 2012, 11:16
(---yes, it is a prayer, what we call meditative prayer; by praying the holy rosary we meditate or contemplate the life of Christ and Mary para makakuha ng magandang example at mapalalim ang faith.

salamat po sa sagot...




bakit daw po yun paulit ulit?
Hindi daw po ba nakukulitan ang pinagsasabihan or pinagdarasalan kung
eto ay paulit-ulit

-wala po akong balak makipag debate,nahahanap lang po ng mga kasagutan

hadeyah
4th Feb 2012, 11:21
:thanks:
Alam mo @deeper9 ilan beses na po namin sinagot yan dito ewan ko ba kay Yeoh_8 ayaw mag backread?

wala naman sinabi dyan na sumamba... kaya lang naman pinag-bawalan ni ST. Peter yun lumuhod sa kanya kasi may balak-talagang sumamba yun tao sa kanya



:thanks: para dito

winmail
4th Feb 2012, 11:50
salamat po sa sagot...




bakit daw po yun paulit ulit?
Hindi daw po ba nakukulitan ang pinagsasabihan or pinagdarasalan kung
eto ay paulit-ulit

-wala po akong balak makipag debate,nahahanap lang po ng mga kasagutan

yun po bang nakasulat sa Mateo 6:7 kung babasahin mo sya sa greek ito yun lalabas βατταλογήσητε, "battalogēsēte"

βατταλογήσητε, "battalogēsēte" na ang ibig-sabihin ay babbling

at hindi repetition... ang original na nakasulat kundi Babbling

ito ang nakasulat sa NIV version na Bible

Matthew 6:7
New International Version (NIV)
7 And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words.

hadeyah
4th Feb 2012, 16:04
yun po bang nakasulat sa Mateo 6:7 kung babasahin mo sya sa greek ito yun lalabas βατταλογήσητε, "battalogēsēte"

βατταλογήσητε, "battalogēsēte" na ang ibig-sabihin ay babbling

at hindi repetition... ang original na nakasulat kundi Babbling

ito ang nakasulat sa NIV version na Bible

Matthew 6:7
New International Version (NIV)
7 And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words.



bakit po pag sa tagalog eto nakasulat

Mateo 6:7
At sa pananalangin ninyo ay huwag ninyong gamitin ang walang kabuluhang paulitulit, na gaya ng ginagawa ng mga Gentil: sapagka't iniisip nilang dahil sa kanilang maraming kasasalita ay didinggin sila

Mateo6:7 (You can see links before reply)

winmail
4th Feb 2012, 16:32
bakit po pag sa tagalog eto nakasulat

Mateo 6:7
At sa pananalangin ninyo ay huwag ninyong gamitin ang walang kabuluhang paulitulit, na gaya ng ginagawa ng mga Gentil: sapagka't iniisip nilang dahil sa kanilang maraming kasasalita ay didinggin sila

Mateo6:7 (You can see links before reply)

ang dapat pong batayan natin ay yun original na greek version hindi yun salin lang sa tagalog pero sige..

sagutin ko narin po. ang sabi po dyan ay yun walang kabulihan na paulit-ulit. ang prayer po ng rosary ay may kabuluhan dahil mga recitation ng passage sa Bible ang binabanggit


1. OUR FATHER [Mateo 6:9-13]

2. HAIL MARY [Lucas 1:28/ 1:38]

3. THE CREED

Kung passage po ba sa Bible may kabuluhan po ba yun?

example

Tulad ng Psalmo 136 kung saan paulit-ulit na sinasabi "For His love endures forever."

yan po.

yeoh_8
4th Feb 2012, 18:28
You can see links before reply 2586376_n.jpg


Sapagka’t pinalitan nila ang katotohanan ng Dios ng kasinungalingan, at sila’y nagsisamba at nangaglingkod sa nilalang kay sa Lumalang, na siyang pinupuri magpakailan man. Siya nawa. ROMA 1:25

yeoh_8
4th Feb 2012, 18:32
You can see links before reply 33150_n.jpg

kung wala sa biblia, ni ang salitang ROSARIO, wag ituro, para di lumabas na aral ng tao at mawalan ng saysay ang pagsamba.

unleash97
4th Feb 2012, 21:55
ang nakalagay sa biblia eh AS IS, kung sabi wag mo silang luluhuran eh BAWAL luhuran, bakit di niyo gawin ng nakatayo? kase nga, binabalewala niyo yung sinasabi ng biblia, parang ganito, HUWAG GAGAWA NG LARAWANG INANYUAN, pag gawa pa lang eh bawal na pero ano ginagawa niyo?, just being realistic.

hmmn, katangahan naman, common sense tells us, na gawing literal lahat ng sinasabi ng biblia, na lahat ng pagluhod ay pagsamba, am i right? tnt :lol:

unleash97
4th Feb 2012, 21:57
Natural lang naman na magkarun ng bagong argumento sa thread nato, diba ginawa ito "para sa me mga katanungan hingil sa katolikong pananampalataya" kaya pag nasagot pede na uli magtanung na maaaring simulan ng argumento :lol::lol::lol:

Bumibisibisita lang hehe...

well, you're right somehow, pero minsan parang nagiging ridiculous na ang mga tanong, tnt :noidea:

unleash97
4th Feb 2012, 22:07
salamat po sa sagot...




bakit daw po yun paulit ulit?
Hindi daw po ba nakukulitan ang pinagsasabihan or pinagdarasalan kung
eto ay paulit-ulit

-wala po akong balak makipag debate,nahahanap lang po ng mga kasagutan

i dont really think that God acts like humans and gets bored and irritated by our prayers, tnt.
in fact, yung mga seraphims ay mas malala kasi they praise God day and night without pause -hindi ba natotorete ang Dyos, para silang sirang plaka, tnt :lol:
pero even as a frail human, hindi ako nagsasawa sa pag-a-i love you ng gf ko, or otherwise kung magsawa ako that only means i no longer love her.
hence, if God ever find our repetitive prayers a nuissance, that might be the end of the world, tnt :lol:

unleash97
4th Feb 2012, 22:11
yun po bang nakasulat sa Mateo 6:7 kung babasahin mo sya sa greek ito yun lalabas βατταλογήσητε, "battalogēsēte"

βατταλογήσητε, "battalogēsēte" na ang ibig-sabihin ay babbling

at hindi repetition... ang original na nakasulat kundi Babbling

ito ang nakasulat sa NIV version na Bible

Matthew 6:7
New International Version (NIV)
7 And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words.


bakit po pag sa tagalog eto nakasulat

Mateo 6:7
At sa pananalangin ninyo ay huwag ninyong gamitin ang walang kabuluhang paulitulit, na gaya ng ginagawa ng mga Gentil: sapagka't iniisip nilang dahil sa kanilang maraming kasasalita ay didinggin sila

Mateo6:7 (You can see links before reply)

ang basihan dyan ay yung original language, hindi ang translation lang, tnt :clap:

unleash97
4th Feb 2012, 22:15
You can see links before reply 2586376_n.jpg


Sapagka’t pinalitan nila ang katotohanan ng Dios ng kasinungalingan, at sila’y nagsisamba at nangaglingkod sa nilalang kay sa Lumalang, na siyang pinupuri magpakailan man. Siya nawa. ROMA 1:25

God's deity, the divine Godhead, ay hindi pwedeng ibigay sa finite creatures, BUT the honor that is due to the saints rebounds to the glory of God :thumbsup:

unleash97
4th Feb 2012, 22:20
You can see links before reply 33150_n.jpg

kung wala sa biblia, ni ang salitang ROSARIO, wag ituro, para di lumabas na aral ng tao at mawalan ng saysay ang pagsamba.

the problem with this claim is that the word of God has not only been transmitted through writings but foremost and primarily through oral preachings.
tanungin kita, did st. paul regard his epistles as "scriptures"? :slap:

unleash97
4th Feb 2012, 22:43
St. Ignatius of Antioch
You can see links before reply
Called Theophorus (ho Theophoros); born in Syria, around the year 50; died at Rome between 98 and 117.
More than one of the earliest ecclesiastical writers have given credence, though apparently without good reason, to the legend that Ignatius was the child whom the Savior took up in His arms, as described in Mark 9:35. It is also believed, and with great probability, that, with his friend Polycarp, he was among the auditors of the Apostle St. John. If we include St. Peter, Ignatius was the third Bishop of Antioch and the immediate successor of Evodius (Eusebius, Church History II.3.22). Theodoret ("Dial. Immutab.", I, iv, 33a, Paris, 1642) is the authority for the statement that St. Peter appointed Ignatius to the See of Antioch. St. John Chrysostom lays special emphasis on the honor conferred upon the martyr in receiving his episcopal consecration at the hands of the Apostles themselves ("Hom. in St. Ig.", IV. 587). Natalis Alexander quotes Theodoret to the same effect (III, xii, art. xvi, p. 53).
All the sterling qualities of ideal pastor and a true soldier of Christ were possessed by the Bishop of Antioch in a preeminent degree. Accordingly, when the storm of the persecution of Domitian broke in its full fury upon the Christians of Syria, it found their faithful leader prepared and watchful. He was unremitting in his vigilance and tireless in his efforts to inspire hope and to strengthen the weaklings of his flock against the terrors of the persecution. The restoration of peace, though it was short-lived, greatly comforted him. But it was not for himself that he rejoiced, as the one great and ever-present wish of his chivalrous soul was that he might receive the fullness of Christian discipleship through the medium of martyrdom. His desire was not to remain long unsatisfied. Associated with the writings of St. Ignatius is a work called "Martyrium Ignatii", which purports to be an account by eyewitnesses of the martyrdom of St. Ignatius and the acts leading up to it. In this work, which such competent Protestant critics as Pearson and Ussher regard as genuine, the full history of that eventful journey from Syria to Rome is faithfully recorded for the edification of the Church of Antioch. It is certainly very ancient and is reputed to have been written by Philo, deacon of Tarsus, and Rheus Agathopus, a Syrian, who accompanied Ignatius to Rome. It is generally admitted, even by those who regarded it as authentic, that this work has been greatly interpolated. Its most reliable form is that found in the "Martyrium Colbertinum" which closes the mixed recension and is so called because its oldest witness is the tenth-century Codex Colbertinus.
According to these Acts, in the ninth year of his reign, Trajan, flushed with victory over the Scythians and Dacians, sought to perfect the universality of his dominion by a species of religious conquest. He decreed, therefore, that the Christians should unite with their pagan neighbors in the worship of the gods. A general persecution was threatened, and death was named as the penalty for all who refused to offer the prescribed sacrifice. Instantly alert to the danger that threatened, Ignatius availed himself of all the means within his reach to thwart the purpose of the emperor. The success of his zealous efforts did not long remain hidden from the Church's persecutors. He was soon arrested and led before Trajan, who was then sojourning in Antioch. Accused by the emperor himself of violating the imperial edict, and of inciting others to like transgressions, Ignatius valiantly bore witness to the faith of Christ. If we may believe the account given in the "Martyrium", his bearing before Trajan was characterized by inspired eloquence, sublime courage, and even a spirit of exultation. Incapable of appreciating the motives that animated him, the emperor ordered him to be put in chains and taken to Rome, there to become the food of wild beasts and a spectacle for the people.
That the trials of this journey to Rome were great we gather from his letter to the Romans (par. 5): "From Syria even to Rome I fight with wild beasts, by land and sea, by night and by day, being bound amidst ten leopards, even a company of soldiers, who only grow worse when they are kindly treated." Despite all this, his journey was a kind of triumph. News of his fate, his destination, and his probable itinerary had gone swiftly before. At several places along the road his fellow-Christians greeted him with words of comfort and reverential homage. It is probable that he embarked on his way to Rome at Seleucia, in Syria, the nearest port to Antioch, for either Tarsus in Cilicia, or Attalia in Pamphylia, and thence, as we gather from his letters, he journeyed overland through Asia Minor. At Laodicea, on the River Lycus, where a choice of routes presented itself, his guards selected the more northerly, which brought the prospective martyr through Philadelphia and Sardis, and finally to Smyrna, where Polycarp, his fellow-disciple in the school of St. John, was bishop. The stay at Smyrna, which was a protracted one, gave the representatives of the various Christian communities in Asia Minor an opportunity of greeting the illustrious prisoner, and offering him the homage of the Churches they represented. From the congregations of Ephesus, Magnesia, and Tralles, deputations came to comfort him. To each of these Christian communities he addressed letters from Smyrna, exhorting them to obedience to their respective bishops, and warning them to avoid the contamination of heresy. These, letters are redolent with the spirit of Christian charity, apostolic zeal, and pastoral solicitude. While still there he wrote also to the Christians of Rome, begging them to do nothing to deprive him of the opportunity of martyrdom.
From Smyrna his captors took him to Troas, from which place he dispatched letters to the Christians of Philadelphia and Smyrna, and to Polycarp. Besides these letters, Ignatius had intended to address others to the Christian communities of Asia Minor, inviting them to give public expression to their sympathy with the brethren in Antioch, but the altered plans of his guards, necessitating a hurried departure, from Troas, defeated his purpose, and he was obliged to content himself with delegating this office to his friend Polycarp. At Troas they took ship for Neapolis. From this place their journey led them overland through Macedonia and Illyria. The next port of embarkation was probably Dyrrhachium (Durazzo). Whether having arrived at the shores of the Adriatic, he completed his journey by land or sea, it is impossible to determine. Not long after his arrival in Rome he won his long-coveted crown of martyrdom in the Flavian amphitheater. The relics of the holy martyr were borne back to Antioch by the deacon Philo of Cilicia, and Rheus Agathopus, a Syrian, and were interred outside the gates not far from the beautiful suburb of Daphne. They were afterwards removed by the Emperor Theodosius II to the Tychaeum, or Temple of Fortune which was then converted into a Christian church under the patronage of the martyr whose relics it sheltered. In 637 they were translated to St. Clement's at Rome, where they now rest. The Church celebrates the feast of St. Ignatius on 1 February.
The character of St. Ignatius, as deduced from his own and the extant writings of his contemporaries, is that of a true athlete of Christ. The triple honor of apostle, bishop, and martyr was well merited by this energetic soldier of the Faith. An enthusiastic devotion to duty, a passionate love of sacrifice, and an utter fearlessness in the defense of Christian truth, were his chief characteristics. Zeal for the spiritual well-being of those under his charge breathes from every line of his writings. Ever vigilant lest they be infected by the rampant heresies of those early days; praying for them, that their faith and courage may not be wanting in the hour of persecution; constantly exhorting them to unfailing obedience to their bishops; teaching them all Catholic truth; eagerly sighing for the crown of martyrdom, that his own blood may fructify in added graces in the souls of his flock, he proves himself in every sense a true, pastor of souls, the good shepherd that lays down his life for his sheep.
Collections
The oldest collection of the writings of St. Ignatius known to have existed was that made use of by the historian Eusebius in the first half of the fourth century, but which unfortunately is no longer extant. It was made up of the seven letters written by Ignatius whilst on his way to Rome; These letters were addressed to the Christians of
Ephesus;
Magnesia;
Tralles;
Rome;
Philadelphia;
Smyrna; and to Polycarp.
We find these seven mentioned not only by Eusebius (Church History III.36) but also by St. Jerome (De viris illust., c. xvi). Of later collections of Ignatian letters which have been preserved, the oldest is known as the "long recension". This collection, the author of which is unknown, dates from the latter part of the fourth century. It contains the seven genuine and six spurious letters, but even the genuine epistles were greatly interpolated to lend weight to the personal views of its author. For this reason they are incapable of bearing witness to the original form. The spurious letters in this recension are those that purport to be from Ignatius
to Mary of Cassobola (Pros Marian Kassoboliten);
to the Tarsians (Pros tous en tarso);
to the Philippians (Pros Philippesious);
to the Antiochenes (Pros Antiocheis);
to Hero a deacon of Antioch (Pros Erona diakonon Antiocheias). Associated with the foregoing is
a letter from Mary of Cassobola to Ignatius.
It is extremely probable that the interpolation of the genuine, the addition of the spurious letters, and the union of both in the long recension was the work of an Apollinarist of Syria or Egypt, who wrote towards the beginning of the fifth century. Funk identifies him with the compiler of the Apostolic Constitutions, which came out of Syria in the early part of the same century. Subsequently there was added to this collection a panegyric on St. Ignatius entitled, "Laus Heronis". Though in the original it was probably written in Greek, it is now extant only in Latin and Coptic texts. There is also a third recension, designated by Funk as the "mixed collection". The time of its origin can be only vaguely determined as being between that of the collection known to Eusebius and the long recension. Besides the seven genuine letters of Ignatius in their original form, it also contains the six spurious ones, with the exception of that to the Philippians.
In this collection is also to be found the "Martyrium Colbertinum". The Greek original of this recension is contained in a single codex, the famous Mediceo-Laurentianus manuscript at Florence. This codex is incomplete, wanting the letter to the Romans, which, however, is to be found associated with the "Martyrium Colbertinum" in the Codex Colbertinus, at Paris. The mixed collection is regarded as the most reliable of all in determining what was the authentic text of the genuine Ignatian letters. There is also an ancient Latin version which is an unusually exact rendering of the Greek. Critics are generally inclined to look upon this version as a translation of some Greek manuscript of the same type as that of the Medicean Codex. This version owes its discovery to Archbishop Ussher, of Ireland, who found it in two manuscripts in English libraries and published it in 1644. It was the work of Robert Grosseteste, a Franciscan friar and Bishop of Lincoln (c. 1250). The original Syriac version has come down to us in its entirety only in an Armenian translation. It also contains the seven genuine and six spurious letters. This collection in the original Syriac would be invaluable in determining the exact text of Ignatius, were it in existence, for the reason that it could not have been later than the fourth or fifth century. The deficiencies of the Armenian version are in part supplied by the abridged recension in the original Syriac. This abridgment contains the three genuine letters to the Ephesians, the Romans, and to Polycarp. The manuscript was discovered by Cureton in a collection of Syriac manuscripts obtained in 1843 from the monastery of St. Mary Deipara in the Desert of Nitria. Also there are three letters extant only in Latin. Two of the three purport to be from Ignatius to St. John the Apostle, and one to the Blessed Virgin, with her reply to the same. These are probably of Western origin, dating no further back than the twelfth century.
The controversy
At intervals during the last several centuries a warm controversy has been carried on by patrologists concerning the authenticity of the Ignatian letters. Each particular recension has had its apologists and its opponents. Each has been favored to the exclusion of all the others, and all, in turn, have been collectively rejected, especially by the coreligionists of Calvin. The reformer himself, in language as violent as it is uncritical (Institutes, 1-3), repudiates in globo the letters which so completely discredit his own peculiar views on ecclesiastical government. The convincing evidence which the letters bear to the Divine origin of Catholic doctrine is not conducive to predisposing non-Catholic critics in their favor, in fact, it has added not a little to the heat of the controversy. In general, Catholic and Anglican scholars are ranged on the side of the letters written to the Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, Romans, Philadelphians, Smyrniots, and to Polycarp; whilst Presbyterians, as a rule, and perhaps a priori, repudiate everything claiming Ignatian authorship.
The two letters to the Apostle St. John and the one to the Blessed Virgin, which exist only in Latin, are unanimously admitted to be spurious. The great body of critics who acknowledge the authenticity of the Ignatian letters restrict their approval to those mentioned by Eusebius and St. Jerome. The six others are not defended by any of the early Fathers. The majority of those who acknowledge the Ignatian authorship of the seven letters do so conditionally, rejecting what they consider the obvious interpolations in these letters. In 1623, whilst the controversy was at its height, Vedelius gave expression to this latter opinion by publishing at Geneva an edition of the Ignatian letters in which the seven genuine letters are set apart from the five spurious. In the genuine letters he indicated what was regarded as interpolations. The reformer Dallaeus, at Geneva, in 1666, published a work entitled "De scriptis quae sub Dionysii Areop. et Ignatii Antioch. nominibus circumferuntur", in which (lib. II) he called into question the authenticity of all seven letters. To this the Anglican Pearson replied spiritedly in a work called "Vindiciae epistolarum S. Ignatii", published at Cambridge, 1672. So convincing were the arguments adduced in this scholarly work that for two hundred years the controversy remained closed in favor of the genuineness of the seven letters. The discussion was reopened by Cureton's discovery (1843) of the abridged Syriac version, containing the letters of Ignatius to the Ephesians, Romans, and to Polycarp. In a work entitled "Vindiciae Ignatianae" London, 1846), he defended the position that only the letters contained in his abridged Syriac recension, and in the form therein contained, were genuine, and that all others were interpolated or forged outright. This position was vigorously combated by several British and German critics, including the Catholics Denzinger and Hefele, who successfully defended the genuineness of the entire seven epistles. It is now generally admitted that Cureton's Syriac version is only an abbreviation of the original.
While it can hardly be said that there is at present any unanimous agreement on the subject, the best modern criticism favors the authenticity of the seven letters mentioned by Eusebius. Even such eminent non-Catholic critics as Zahn, Lightfoot, and Harnack hold this view. Perhaps the best evidence of their authenticity is to be found in the letter of Polycarp to the Philippians, which mentions each of them by name. As an intimate friend of Ignatius, Polycarp, writing shortly after the martyr's death, bears contemporaneous witness to the authenticity of these letters, unless, indeed, that of Polycarp itself be regarded as interpolated or forged. When, furthermore, we take into consideration the passage of Irenaeus (Adv. Haer., V, xxviii, 4) found in the original Greek in Eusebius (Church History III.36), in which he refers to the letter to the Romans. (iv, I) in the following words: "Just as one of our brethren said, condemned to the wild beasts in martyrdom for his faith", the evidence of authenticity becomes compelling. The romance of Lucian of Samosata, "De morte peregrini", written in 167, bears incontestable evidence that the writer was not only familiar with the Ignatian letters, but even made use of them. Harnack, who was not always so minded, describes these proofs as "testimony as strong to the genuineness of the epistles as any that can be conceived of" (Expositor, ser. 3, III, p. 11).
Contents of the letters
It is scarcely possible to exaggerate the importance of the testimony which the Ignatian letters offer to the dogmatic character of Apostolic Christianity. The martyred Bishop of Antioch constitutes a most important link between the Apostles and the Fathers of the early Church. Receiving from the Apostles themselves, whose auditor he was, not only the substance of revelation, but also their own inspired interpretation of it; dwelling, as it were, at the very fountain-head of Gospel truth, his testimony must necessarily carry with it the greatest weight and demand the most serious consideration. Cardinal Newman did not exaggerate the matter when he said ("The Theology of the Seven Epistles of St. Ignatius", in "Historical Sketches", I, London, 1890) that "the whole system of Catholic doctrine may be discovered, at least in outline, not to say in parts filled up, in the course of his seven epistles". Among the many Catholic doctrines to be found in the letters are the following:
the Church was Divinely established as a visible society, the salvation of souls is its end, and those who separate themselves from it cut themselves off from God (Philadelphians 3)
the hierarchy of the Church was instituted by Christ (Introduction to Philadelphians; Ephesians 6)
the threefold character of the hierarchy (Magnesians 6)
the order of the episcopacy superior by Divine authority to that of the priesthood (Magnesians 6 and 13; Smyrnæans 8; Trallians 3)
the unity of the Church (Trallians 6; Philadelphians 3; Magnesians 13)
the holiness of the Church (Smyrnæans, Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians and Romans)
the catholicity of the Church (Smyrnæans 8); the infallibility of the Church (Philadelphians 3; Ephesians 16-17)
the doctrine of the Eucharist (Smyrnæans 8), which word we find for the first time applied to the Blessed Sacrament, just as in Smyrnæans 8, we meet for the first time the phrase "Catholic Church", used to designate all Christians
the Incarnation (Ephesians 18); the supernatural virtue of virginity, already much esteemed and made the subject of a vow (Polycarp 5)
the religious character of matrimony (Polycarp 5)
the value of united prayer (Ephesians 13)
the primacy of the See of Rome (Introduction to Romans 13)
He denounces in principle the Protestant doctrine of private judgment in matters of religion (Philadelphians 3), The heresy against which he chiefly inveighs is Docetism.

unleash97
4th Feb 2012, 23:15
St. Polycarp
You can see links before reply
Martyr (A.D. 69-155).
Our chief sources of information concerning St. Polycarp are: (1) the Epistles of St. Ignatius; (2) St. Polycarp's own Epistle to the Philippians; (3) sundry passages in St. Irenæus; (4) the Letter of the Smyrnaeans recounting the martyrdom of St. Polycarp.
The epistles of St. Ignatius
Four out of the seven genuine epistles of St. Ignatius were written from Smyrna. In two of these — Magnesians and Ephesians — he speaks of Polycarp. The seventh Epistle was addressed to Polycarp. It contains little or nothing of historical interest in connexion with St. Polycarp. In the opening words St. Ignatius gives glory to God "that it hath been vouchsafed to me to see thy face". It seems hardly safe to infer, with Pearson and Lightfoot, from these words that the two had never met before.
The epistle of St. Polycarp to the Philippians
The Epistle of St. Polycarp was a reply to one from the Philippians, in which they had asked St. Polycarp to address them some words of exhortation; to forward by his own messenger a letter addressed by them to the Church of Antioch; and to send them any epistles of St. Ignatius which he might have. The second request should be noted. St. Ignatius had asked the Churches of Smyrna and Philadelphia to send a messenger to congratulate the Church of Antioch on the restoration of peace; presumably, therefore, when at Philippi, he gave similar instructions to the Philippians. This is one of the many respects in which there is such complete harmony between the situations revealed in the Epistles of St. Ignatius and the Epistle of St. Polycarp, that it is hardly possible to impugn the genuineness of the former without in some way trying to destroy the credit of the latter, which happens to be one of the best attested documents of antiquity. In consequence some extremists, anti-episcopalians in the seventeenth century, and members of the Tübingen School in the nineteenth, boldly rejected the Epistle of Polycarp. Others tried to make out that the passages which told most in favour of the Ignatian epistles were interpolations.
These theories possess no interest now that the genuineness of the Ignatian epistles has practically ceased to be questioned. The only point raised which had any show of plausibility (it was sometimes used against the genuineness, and sometimes against the early date of St. Polycarp's Epistle) was based on a passage in which it might at first sight seem that Marcion was denounced: "For every one who does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is antichrist; and whosoever does not confess the testimony of the cross, is a devil, and whosoever perverteth the oracles of the Lord (to serve) his own lusts, and saith there is neither resurrection nor judgment, this man is a first-born of Satan." St. Polycarp wrote his epistle before he had heard of St. Ignatius' martyrdom. Now, supposing the passage just quoted to have been aimed at Marcion (whom, on one occasion, as we shall presently see, St. Polycarp called to his face "the first-born of Satan"), the choice lies between rejecting the epistle as spurious on account of the anachronism, or bringing down its date, and the date of St. Ignatius' martyrdom to A.D. 130-140 when Marcion was prominent. Harnack seems at one time to have adopted the latter alternative; but he now admits that there need be no reference to Marcion at all in the passage in question (Chronologie, I, 387-8). Lightfoot thought a negative could be proved. Marcion, according to him, cannot be referred to because nothing is said about his characteristic errors, e.g., the distinction between the God of the Old and the God of the New Testament; and because the antinomianism ascribed to "the first-born of Satan" is inapplicable to the austere Marcion (Lightfoot, St. Ignatius and St. Polycarp, I, 585; all references to Lightfoot (L), unless otherwise stated, will be to this work).
When Lightfoot wrote it was necessary to vindicate the authenticity of the Ignatian epistles and that of St. Polycarp. If the former were forgeries, the latter, which supports — it might almost be said presupposes — them, must be a forgery from the same hand. But a comparison between Ignatius and Polycarp shows that this is an impossible hypothesis. The former lays every stress upon episcopacy, the latter does not even mention it. The former is full of emphatic declarations of the doctrine of the Incarnation, the two natures of Christ, etc. In the latter these matters are hardly touched upon. "The divergence between the two writers as regards Scriptural quotations is equally remarkable. Though the seven Ignatian letters are many times longer than Polycarp's Epistle, the quotations in the latter are incomparably more numerous, as well as more precise, than in the former. The obligations to the New Testament are wholly different in character in the two cases. The Ignatian letters do, indeed, show a considerable knowledge of the writings included in our Canon of the New Testament; but this knowledge betrays itself in casual words and phrases, stray metaphors, epigrammatic adaptations, and isolated coincidences of thought ... On the other hand in Polycarp's Epistle sentence after sentence is frequently made up of passages from the Evangelical and Apostolic writings ... But this divergence forms only part of a broader and still more decisive contrast, affecting the whole style and character of the two writings. The profuseness of quotations in Polycarp's Epistle arises from a want of originality ... On the other hand the letters of Ignatius have a marked individuality. Of all early Christian writings they are pre-eminent in this respect" (op. cit., 595-97).
Various passages in St. Irenaeus
In St. Irenæus, Polycarp comes before us preeminently as a link with the past. Irenaeus mentions him four times: (a) in connection with Papias; (b) in his letter to Florinus; (c) in his letter to Pope Victor; (d) at the end of the celebrated appeal to the potior principalitas of the Roman Church.
In connection with Papias
From Against Heresies V.33, we learn that Papias was "a hearer of John, and a companion of Polycarp".
In his letter to Florinus
Florinus was a Roman presbyter who lapsed into heresy. St. Irenæus wrote him a letter of remonstrance (a long extract from which is preserved by Eusebius, Church History V.20), in which he recalled their common recollections of Polycarp. "These opinions ... Florinus are not of sound judgment ... I saw thee when I was still a boy in Lower Asia in company with Polycarp, while thou wast faring prosperously in the royal court, and endeavouring to stand well with him. For I distinctly remember the incidents of that time better than events of recent occurrence ... I can describe the very place in which the Blessed Polycarp used to sit when he discoursed ... his personal appearance ... and how he would describe his intercourse with John and with the rest who had seen the Lord, and how he would relate their words ... I can testify in the sight of God, that if the blessed and apostolic elder had heard anything of this kind, he would have cried out, and stopped his ears, and said after his wont, 'O good God, for what times hast thou kept me that I should endure such things?' ... This can be shown from the letters which he wrote to the neighbouring Churches for their confirmation etc.". Lightfoot (op. cit., 448) will not fix the date of the time when St. Irenæus and Florinus were fellow-pupils of St. Polycarp more definitely than somewhere between 135 and 150. There are in fact no data to go upon.
In his letter to Pope Victor
The visit of St. Polycarp to Rome is described by St. Irenæus in a letter to Pope Victor written under the following circumstances. The Asiatic Christians differed from the rest of the Church in their manner of observing Easter. While the other Churches kept the feast on a Sunday, the Asiatics celebrated it on the 14th of Nisan, whatever day of the week this might fall on. Pope Victor tried to establish uniformity, and when the Asiatic Churches refused to comply, excommunicated them. St. Irenæus remonstrated with him in a letter, part of which is preserved by Eusebius (Church History V.24), in which he particularly contrasted the moderation displayed in regard to Polycarp by Pope Anicetus with the conduct of Victor. "Among these (Victor's predecessors) were the presbyters before Soter. They neither observed it (14th Nisan) themselves, nor did they permit those after them to do so. And yet, though not observing it, they were none the less at peace with those who came to them from the parishes in which it was observed. . . And when the blessed Polycarp was at Rome in the time of Anicetus, and they disagreed a little about other things, they immediately made peace with one another, not caring to quarrel over this matter. For neither could Anicetus persuade Polycarp ... nor Polycarp Anicetus . . . But though matters were in this shape, they communed together, and Anicetus conceded the administration of the Eucharist in the Church to Polycarp, manifestly as a mark of respect. And they parted from each other in peace", etc.
There is a difficulty connected with this visit of Polycarp to Rome. According to the Chronicle of Eusebius in St. Jerome's version (the Armenian version is quite untrustworthy) the date of Anicetus' accession was A.D. 156-57. Now the probable date of St. Polycarp's martyrdom is February, 155. The fact of the visit to Rome is too well attested to be called into question. We must, therefore, either give up the date of martyrdom, or suppose that Eusebius post-dated by a year or two the accession of Anicetus. There is nothing unreasonable in this latter hypothesis, in view of the uncertainty which so generally prevails in chronological matters (for the date of the accession of Anicetus see Lightfoot, "St. Clement I", 343).
In his famous passage on the Roman Church
We now come to the passage in St. Irenæus (Adv. Haer., III,3) which brings out in fullest relief St. Polycarp's position as a link with the past. Just as St. John's long life lengthened out the Apostolic Age, so did the four score and six years of Polycarp extend the sub-Apostolic Age, during which it was possible to learn by word of mouth what the Apostles taught from those who had been their hearers. In Rome the Apostolic Age ended about A.D. 67 with the martyrdom of St. Peter and St. Paul, and the sub-Apostolic Age about a quarter of a century later when St. Clement, "who had seen the blessed Apostles", died. In Asia the Apostolic Age lingered on till St. John died about A.D. 100; and the sub-Apostolic Age till 155, when St. Polycarp was martyred. In the third book of his treatise "Against Heresies", St. Irenæus makes his celebrated appeal to the "successions" of the bishops in all the Churches. He is arguing against heretics who professed to have a kind of esoteric tradition derived from the Apostles. To whom, demands St. Irenæus, would the Apostles be more likely to commit hidden mysteries than to the bishops to whom they entrusted their churches? In order then to know what the Apostles taught, we must have recourse to the "successions" of bishops throughout the world. But as time and space would fail if we tried to enumerate them all one by one, let the Roman Church speak for the rest. Their agreement with her is a manifest fact by reason of the position which she holds among them ("for with this Church on account of its potior principalitas the whole Church, that is, the faithful from every quarter, must needs agree", etc.).
Then follows the list of the Roman bishops down to Eleutherius, the twelfth from the Apostles, the ninth from Clement, "who had both seen and conversed with the blessed Apostles". From the Roman Church, representing all the churches, the writer then passes on to two Churches, that of Smyrna, in which, in the person of Polycarp, the sub-Apostolic Age had been carried down to a time still within living memory, and the Church of Ephesus, where, in the person of St. John, the Apostolic Age had been prolonged till "the time of Trajan". Of Polycarp he says, "he was not only taught by the Apostles, and lived in familiar intercourse with many that had seen Christ, but also received his appointment in Asia from the Apostles as Bishop in the Church of Smyrna". He then goes on to speak of his own personal acquaintance with Polycarp, his martyrdom, and his visit to Rome, where he converted many heretics. He then continues, "there are those who heard him tell how John, the disciple of the Lord, when he went to take a bath in Ephesus, and saw Cerinthus within, rushed away from the room without bathing, with the words 'Let us flee lest the room should fall in, for Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within'. Yea, and Polycarp himself, also, when on one occasion Marcion confronted him and said 'Recognise us', replied, 'Ay, ay, I recognise the first-born of Satan' ".
The Smyrnaean letter describing St. Polycarp's martyrdom
Polycarp's martyrdom is described in a letter from the Church of Smyrna, to the Church of Philomelium "and to all the brotherhoods of the holy and universal Church", etc. The letter begins with an account of the persecution and the heroism of the martyrs. Conspicuous among them was one Germanicus, who encouraged the rest, and when exposed to the wild beasts, incited them to slay him. His death stirred the fury of the multitude, and the cry was raised "Away with the atheists; let search be made for Polycarp". But there was one Quintus, who of his own accord had given himself up to the persecutors. When he saw the wild beasts he lost heart and apostatized. "Wherefore", comment the writers of the epistle, "we praise not those who deliver themselves up, since the Gospel does not so teach us". Polycarp was persuaded by his friends to leave the city and conceal himself in a farm-house. Here he spent his time in prayer, "and while praying he falleth into a trance three days before his apprehension; and he saw his pillow burning with fire. And he turned and said unto those that were with him, 'it must needs be that I shall be burned alive'". When his pursuers were on his track he went to another farm-house. Finding him gone they put two slave boys to the torture, and one of them betrayed his place of concealment. Herod, head of the police, sent a body of men to arrest him on Friday evening. Escape was still possible, but the old man refused to flee, saying, "the will of God be done". He came down to meet his pursuers, conversed affably with them, and ordered food to be set before them. While they were eating he prayed, "remembering all, high and low, who at any time had come in his way, and the Catholic Church throughout the world". Then he was led away.
Herod and Herod's father, Nicetas, met him and took him into their carriage, where they tried to prevail upon him to save his life. Finding they could not persuade him, they pushed him out of the carriage with such haste that he bruised his shin. He followed on foot till they came to the Stadium, where a great crowd had assembled, having heard the news of his apprehension. "As Polycarp entered into the Stadium a voice came to him from heaven: 'Be strong, Polycarp, and play the man'. And no one saw the speaker, but those of our people who were present heard the voice." It was to the proconsul, when he urged him to curse Christ, that Polycarp made his celebrated reply: "Fourscore and six years have I served Him, and he has done me no harm. How then can I curse my King that saved me." When the proconsul had done with the prisoner it was too late to throw him to the beasts, for the sports were closed. It was decided, therefore, to burn him alive. The crowd took it upon itself to collect fuel, "the Jews more especially assisting in this with zeal, as is their wont" (cf. the Martyrdom of Pionius). The fire, "like the sail of a vessel filled by the wind, made a wall round the body" of the martyr, leaving it unscathed. The executioner was ordered to stab him, thereupon, "there came forth a quantity of blood so that it extinguished the fire". (The story of the dove issuing from the body probably arose out of a textual corruption. See Lightfoot, Funk, Zahn. It may also have been an interpolation by the pseudo-Pionius.)
The officials, urged thereto by the Jews, burned the body lest the Christians "should abandon the worship of the Crucified One, and begin to worship this man". The bones of the martyr were collected by the Christians, and interred in a suitable place. "Now the blessed Polycarp was martyred on the second day of the month of Kanthicus, on the seventh day before the Kalends of March, on a great Sabbath at the eighth hour. He was apprehended by Herodes ... in the proconsulship of Statius Quadratus etc." This subscription gives the following facts: the martyrdom took place on a Saturday which fell on 23 February. Now there are two possible years for this, 155 and 166. The choice depends upon which of the two Quadratus was proconsul of Asia. By means of the chronological data supplied by the rhetorician Aelius Aristides in certain autobiographical details which he furnishes, Waddington who is followed by Lightfoot ("St. Ignatius and St. Polycarp", I, 646 sq.), arrived at the conclusion that Quadratus was proconsul in 154-55 (the proconsul's year of office began in May). Schmid, a full account of whose system will be found in Harnack's "Chronologie", arguing from the same data, came to the conclusion that Quadratus' proconsulship fell in 165-66.
For some time it seemed as if Schmid's system was likely to prevail, but it has failed on two points:
Aristides tells us that he was born when Jupiter was in Leo. This happened both in 117 and 129. Schmid's system requires the later of these two dates, but the date has been found to be impossible. Aristides was fifty-three years and six months old when a certain Macrinus was governor of Asia. "Now Egger (in the Austrian 'Jahreshefte', Nov., 1906) has published an inscription recording the career of Macrinus, which was erected to him while he was governing Asia, and he pointed out that as the birth of Aristides was either in 117 or 129, the government of Macrinus must have been either in 170-171, or 182-183, and he has shown that the later date is impossible". (Ramsay in "The Expository Times", Jan., 1907.)
Aristides mentions a Julianus who was proconsul of Asia nine years before Quadratus. Now there was a Claudius Julianus, who is proved by epigraphic and numismatic evidence to have been proconsul of Asia in 145. Schmid produced a Salvius Julianus who was consul in 148 and might, therefore, have been the Proconsul of Asia named by Aristides. But an inscription discovered in Africa giving the whole career of Salvius Julianus disposes of Schmid's hypothesis. The result of the new evidence is that Salvius Julianus never governed Asia, for he was proconsul of Africa, and it was not permitted that the same person should hold both of these high offices. The rule is well known; and the objection is final and insurmountable (Ramsay, "Expos. Times", Feb., 1904. Ramsay refers to an article by Mommsen, "Savigny Zeitschrift fur Rechtgeschichte", xxiii, 54). Schmid's system, therefore, disappears, and Waddington's, in spite of some very real difficulties (Quadratus' proconsulship shows a tendency to slip a year out of place), is in possession. The possibility of course remains that the subscription was tampered with by a later hand. But 155 must be approximately correct if St. Polycarp was appointed bishop by St. John.

unleash97
4th Feb 2012, 23:29
St. John the Beloved Disciple
You can see links before reply
John the Apostle was the son of Zebedee and the (probably younger) brother of James, son of Zebedee (Saint James the Greater). Tradition, based on Sacred Scripture, considers Salome their mother. Zebedee and his sons fished in the Lake of Genesareth. James and John first were disciples of Saint John the Baptist. Jesus then called Saint Andrew, Saint Peter, and these two sons of Zebedee to follow Him. James and John did so and thus rank high among the Twelve Apostles of Jesus. John and James both held prominent positions among the Apostles. Jesus referred to the pair collectively as "Boanerges" (translated "sons of thunder") [Mk 3:17].
Peter, James and John were the only witnesses of the raising of Daughter of Jairus [Mk 5:37].
John and his brother James wanted to call down fire on a Samaritan town, but Jesus rebuked them [Lk 9:51-6].
Peter, James, and John also witnessed the Transfiguration[Mt 17:1].
Jesus sent only John and Peter into the city to make the preparation for the final Passover meal (the Last Supper). [Lk 22:8][6] At the meal itself, the "disciple whom Jesus loved" sat next to Jesus and leaned onto His chest. Tradition identifies this disciple as Saint John[Jn 13:23-25].
Peter, James, and John also witnessed the Agony in Gethsemane more closely than the other Apostles did [Mt 26:37]. After the arrest of Jesus, Peter and the "other disciple" (according to Sacred Tradition, John) followed Him into the palace of the high-priest [Jn 18:15]. John, alone among the Apostles, remained near Jesus at the foot of the cross on Calvary alongside myrrhbearers and numerous other women; following the instruction of Jesus from the Cross, John took Mary, the mother of Jesus, into his care as the last legacy of Jesus [Jn 19:25-27].
After Jesus’ Ascension and the descent of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost, John, together with Peter, took a prominent part in the founding and guidance of the church. He is with Peter at the healing of the lame man in the Temple.[Ac 3:1 et seq.] With Peter he is also thrown into prison.[Acts 4:3] He is also with Peter visiting the newly converted in Samaria.[Acts 8:14]
John survived James by more than half a century after James became the first Apostle to die a martyr's death.
There is no positive information in the Bible (or elsewhere) concerning the duration of this activity in Judea. Apparently, John in common with the other Apostles remained some 12 years in this first field of labor, until the persecution of Herod Agrippa I led to the scattering of the Apostles through the various provinces of the Roman Empire. [cf. Ac 12:1-17] It does not appear improbable that John then went for the first time into Asia Minor . In any case a messianic community was already in existence at Ephesus before Paul's first labors there (cf. "the brethren"),[Acts 18:27][citation needed] in addition to Priscilla and Aquila. Such a sojourn by John in Asia in this first period was neither long nor uninterrupted. He returned with the other disciples to Jerusalem for the Apostolic Council (about AD 51). Paul, in opposing his enemies in Galatia, recalls that John explicitly along with Peter and James the Just were referred to as "pillars of the church" and refers to the recognition that his Apostolic preaching of a gospel free from Jewish Law received from these three, the most prominent men of the messianic community at Jerusalem.[Gal 2:9]
Of the other New Testament writings, it is only from the three Letters of John and the Book of Revelation that anything further might be learned about John, if we assume that he was the author of these books. From the Letters and Revelation we may suppose that John belonged to the multitude of personal eyewitnesses of the life and work of Jesus (cf. especially 1 Jn 1:1-5; 4:14), that he had lived for a long time in Asia Minor, was thoroughly acquainted with the conditions existing in the various messianic communities there, and that he had a position of authority recognized by all messianic communities as leader of this part of the church. Moreover, the Book of Revelation says that its author was on the island of Patmos "for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus", when he was honored with the vision contained in Revelation.[Rev. 1:9]
Though most scholars agree in placing the Gospel of John somewhere between AD 65 and 85,[8] John A.T. Robinson proposes an initial edition by 50–55 and then a final edition by 65 due to narrative similarities with Paul.[9]:pp.284,307 Other critical scholars are of the opinion that John was composed in stages (probably two or three).[10]:p.43
Until the 19th century, the authorship of the Gospel of John had universally been attributed to the Apostle John. However, critical scholars since then have had their doubts. The Gospel does not make that attribution. Instead, authorship is internally credited to the disciple whom Jesus loved ("ο μαθητης ον ηγαπα ο Ιησους") in John 20:2. The term the Beloved Disciple ("ον εφιλει ο Ιησους") is used five times in the Gospel of John to indicate authorship.[11] John 21:24 claims that the Gospel of John is based on the written testimony of the "Beloved Disciple".
Roman Catholic tradition states that after the Assumption, John went to Ephesus and from there wrote the three epistles traditionally attributed to him. John was allegedly banished by the Roman authorities to the Greek island of Patmos, where some believe that he wrote the Book of Revelation. According to Tertullian (in The Prescription of Heretics) John was banished (presumably to Patmos) after being plunged into boiling oil in Rome and suffering nothing from it. It is said that all in the entire Colosseum audience were converted to Christianity upon witnessing this miracle. This event would have occurred during the reign of Domitian, a Roman emperor who was known for his persecution of Christians in the late 1st century.
When John was aged, he trained Polycarp who later became Bishop of Smyrna. This was important because Polycarp was able to carry John's message to future generations. Polycarp taught Irenaeus, and passed on to him stories about John. In Against Heresies, Irenaeus relates how Polycarp told a story of“ John, the disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving Cerinthus within, rushed out of the bath-house without bathing, exclaiming, "Let us fly, lest even the bath-house fall down, because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within."[12] ”
It is traditionally believed that John survived his contemporary apostles and lived to an extreme old age, dying naturally at Ephesus in about AD 100.[13] John's traditional tomb is thought to be located at Selçuk, a small town in the vicinity of Ephesus.
In art, John as the presumed author of the Gospel is often depicted with an eagle, which symbolizes the height he rose to in the first chapter of his gospel. In Orthodox icons, he is often depicted looking up into heaven and dictating his Gospel (or the Book of Revelation) to his disciple, traditionally named Prochorus.

Diego_99
4th Feb 2012, 23:45
bakit po pag sa tagalog eto nakasulat

Mateo 6:7
At sa pananalangin ninyo ay huwag ninyong gamitin ang walang kabuluhang paulitulit, na gaya ng ginagawa ng mga Gentil: sapagka't iniisip nilang dahil sa kanilang maraming kasasalita ay didinggin sila

Mateo6:7 (You can see links before reply)



Magandang gabi po :)


Salamat po sir hadeyah sa tanong.


Tungkol po sa katanungan po na ito, mas pinapaboran ko po ang salin ng Douay-Rheims ng mē battalogēsēte na speak not much kaysa vain repetitions, pero posible rin po na tama ang salin na babble, kung base po yung text sa Aramaic ܡܦܩܩܝܢ. Sa totoo lang po, mali ang saling vain repetitions. At lahat nung source[s] na pinagkuhanan ng mga Protestante, e.g. Ovid, Suidas, Terence, Eramus, etc. ay mas pinapaboran ang naging salin sa Douay-Rheims. Kahit sila (Protestante)[1] man din po ay aminado na hindi po ito ang orihinal na bersyon, ayon nga sa kilalang Protestant scholar na si Joseph Alexander (The Gospel According to Matthew Explained, p. 170), “Use not vain repetitions is a paraphrase and gloss but not a version, giving probably the sense but not the form of the original (…).” Yung mga sinabi pong etymological source[s] ng batta mula sa modernong Greek lexicon ngayon, e.g. nakuha daw ito sa pangalan ng Haring si Battus (tignan ang Rawlinson, The History of Herodotus, p. 106, para sa paliwanag), maging kay Battus the Poet (tignan ang Ovid, Met. ii. 688, &c.; Anton. Lib. 22, para sa sinasabing pinanggalingan daw nito, ayon kay Erasmus) ay hindi po ganun angkop sa totoong kahulugan nito. Nga po pala, makikita rin po ang sinasabi kong ito sa isang salin ng Bibliya ng Protestante na tugma sa salin sa Douay-Rheims


"But in preiynge nyle ze speke moche as hethen men don, for thei gessen that thei be herd in her moche speche."
- Matthew 6:7, Wycliffe (A.D. 1380)

Kung mapapansin mo po magkaparehas ang kahulugan ng salitang battalogia at polulogia dahil parehas lang po ang nais tukuyin nito at ito nga po'y speak [not] much. Ang ugat po ng salitang battalogēsēte ay battalogeo( verbal at nominal form) na nanggaling sa salitang ‘batta’ na ang ibig sabihin ay ‘much’, at sa ‘logeo' (from logia meaning word) na ang katumbas sa salitang Ingles ay to speak.[2] Habang ang salitang polulogia (a corresponding noun) ay nanggaling naman sa salitang ‘polu’ (kung saan nakuha natin ang salitang ‘poly’ = ‘many’ o ‘much’; hal. polytheism, much married, polygamy, many colored) at logia.

Ngayon, ang isa po sa magiging tanong dito ay kung ano po ba ang ibig sabihin po ng vain repetitions para sa mga Protestante? Dahil sa kung tutuosin po ay kahit sila-sila po'y hindi magkasundo sa kung ano po sa tekstong ito ang hinatulan ng Panginoon.[3] Isa rin po sa dapat natin tandaan na hindi po hiwalay ang teksto ng Mt 6:7 sa buong konteksto ng Mt 6 na kung saan ang tinutukoy ay mga Impokrito.[4] Kung titignan po natin ito sa may ganitong pananaw mas titibay po ang ebidensya na kasama parin po ito sa konteksto na tumutukoy sa mga Impokrito, sa kadahilanan kung atin po itong susuriin simula vss. 2-6 at vss. 16-18 sila po ang binanggit ni Cristo.

Bilang reperensya naman po na hindi kinundena ang repetitions (o ang pag-ulit-ulit) sa Bibliya narito po ang ilang halimbawa:



(1) Ang mga Seraphim ay nag-sisipag-awitan ng “Holy, Holy, Holy the Lord God of host…” (Is 6:3; cf. Rv 4:8) ng walang tigil, araw at gabi.

(2) Ang paggamit ni JesuCristo sa himno na tinatawag na hallel magnum, na nag-uumpisa sa Psalm 115 at nagtatapos sa Psalm 118; kung saan sa unang apat na berso ang parehas na salita’y madalas ginagamit.

(3) Sa Psalm 119, makailang ulit sinambit ni King David ang mga katagang ito: “Teach me, O Lord, thy statutes, ordinances, commandments, judgments, the way of thy statutes.”

(4) Sa Psalm 107, apat na beses ginamit ang mga salitang ito, “Oh that men would praise the Lord for His goodness.” (ver. 8, 15, 21, 31)

(5) Sa Psalm 136 [135], ang naturang mga salita, “For His steadfast love endures forever,” ay ginamit ng dalawampu’t-anim na beses.

(6) Sa awit ng mga awit (Canticle) ng tatlong bata, mababasa ang mga salitang ‘Blessed the Lord’ ay inulit ng mahigit kumulang tatlongpu’t-dalawang beses. (Da 3:51-90)

(7) Ang panalangin ni JesuCristo sa Getsemani (Mt 26:39, 42, 44; Mk 14:39)

(8) Sa awit ng mga awit 13, mababasa ang salitang ‘The Lord is his name!’ na inulit ng tatlong beses sa Amos 4 (vv. 5, 9)


*Adisyonal na reperensya


• Eph 1:16; Co 1:9; 4:12; I Th 1:2; II Th 1:11; II Ti 1:3 (Paulit-ulit na binabanggit ang iisang tao sa Intersasyon)
• Rm 1:9-10; 12:12: Phil 4:1 (pagdarasal at pagpapasalamat, at pagbanggit ng ibang Simbahan sa kanyang {San Pablo} panalangin ng tuloy-tuloy [incessantly])
• Ne 1:4-6; Ps 141:5 (Ang paggamit ng singular ‘prayer’ sa halip na ‘prayers’ ay nagpapahiwatig na ang panalangin ay iisa lamang at ito’y makailang ulit sinasambit)
• Ps 34:1; 35:28; 71:6; 33:9; 113:3 (Ang pagpupugay o pagbibigay papuri sa Diyos ay patuloy na gagawin magpakailanman)
• I Th 5:17 (manalangin ng walang tigil)

At bago ko po makalimutan, mayroon pong salin sa Tagalog na katulad ng sinasabi ko po. Base po ito sa salin ng Protestante at hindi po yung sa Catholic edition, ;)


“Sa pananalangin ninyo’y huwag kayong gagamit ng napakaraming salita, gaya ng mga Hentil. Ang akala nila’y pakikinggan sila ng Diyos dahil sa dami ng kanilang salita.”
- Mateo 6:7, TPV NT (1995)


____________

1 Ayon sa Protestant scholar na si Tholuck, “… the large majority of the translations take battalogia in the sense of [I]πολυλογια….. Almost all the commentators also restrict the meaning to much speaking in prayer.” (Tholuck, p. 310)
2 W. E. Vine, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (4 vols. in 1; Westwood: Fleming H. Revell, 1966), III, 281. (Protestant source)
3 Ayon po dito [mga sipi mula sa Protestante] ang hinatulan daw po ng panginoon ay ang mismong repetitions:


Ayon kay Rosenmuller: “Do not repeat the same words often. BATTA means to say the same thing very often.”

Ayon kay Grotius: “To repeat the word (Ecclus. 7:15) is the same thing that is here called BATTA.”

Ayon kay Beza: “In praying do not babble the same thing as the heathen.”

Ayon kay Gualperious: “BATTA means to often repeat the same word.”

Ayon sa Vincent's Word Studies “... to repeat the same formula many times...”

Habang dito [mga sipi mula sa Protestante] naman po ay iba naman ang hinatulan,


Ayon kay Cook: “The precept is not directed against the frequent repetition of earnest prayer. Our Lord's own example sanctions the use of long and repeated prayers.”

Muli, ayon kay Cook: “The precept is not against the frequent repetition of earnest prayer, but against the superstitious repetition of a form in the hope of being better heard by God, which is the point of Elijah's taunt, etc.”

Mula sa Gray, Bib. Museum in margin: “It is not repetition but vain repetition, empty of heart and devoid of hope that is here rebuked.”

Ayon sa Geneva Study Bible: “Long prayers are not condemned, but vain, needless, and superstitious ones.”

Ayon sa People's New Testament: “What is forbidden is not much praying, nor praying in the same words (the Lord did both), but making the number of prayers, length of prayers, or time spent in praying, a point of observance and of merit.”

Sino po kaya sa kanila ang tama? :)

4 Ayon sa Protestant scholar na si Tholuck, hindi daw dapat isipin na ang talata sa Mateo 6:7, 8, ay hiwalay sa konteksto ng Mateo 23:14, kung saan ang paggamit ng mahabang panalangin ay naging gawi na ng mga mapagkunwaring Pariseo para isipin ng mga taong makakakita na sila’y banal. (Tignan ang Introduction, p. 26, sa kanyang Commentary on the Sermon on the Mount, salin ni Lundin Brown); Sa Codex Vaticanus, ang tinutukoy sa Mateo 6:7 ay υποκριται ('hypocrites') imbes na εθνικοι ('gentiles') na ginamit naman sa Codex Sinaiticus. Kung susuriin mabuti ang kabuan ng Mateo 6, makikita na simula sa vv. 2-6 at vv. 16-18 ang tinutukoy ni Hesus ay ang mga Impokrito, tangin sa vv. 7-15 lamang ito naiba.

unleash97
4th Feb 2012, 23:57
St. Peter, the Rock of Ages
You can see links before reply
His original name was Shimon or Simeon, Simon in modern English. He was later given the name Peter, a name derived from "cephas", Syriac or Aramaic for "rock", which became Greek: Πέτρος, also meaning "rock". He is also known as Simon Peter, Cephas (Greek: Κηφᾶς) and Kepha (Hebrew: כיפא‎). Both Cephas and Kepha also mean rock. Petros became "Petrus" in Latin, from which are derived the English and German "Peter", the French "Pierre", the Italian "Pietro", the Spanish and Portuguese "Pedro", and the Russian "Piotr.
Activity and death in Rome; burial place
It is an indisputably established historical fact that St. Peter laboured in Rome during the last portion of his life, and there ended his earthly course by martyrdom. As to the duration of his Apostolic activity in the Roman capital, the continuity or otherwise of his residence there, the details and success of his labours, and the chronology of his arrival and death, all these questions are uncertain, and can be solved only on hypotheses more or less well-founded. The essential fact is that Peter died at Rome: this constitutes the historical foundation of the claim of the Bishops of Rome to the Apostolic Primacy of Peter.
St. Peter's residence and death in Rome are established beyond contention as historical facts by a series of distinct testimonies extending from the end of the first to the end of the second centuries, and issuing from several lands.
That the manner, and therefore the place of his death, must have been known in widely extended Christian circles at the end of the first century is clear from the remark introduced into the Gospel of St. John concerning Christ's prophecy that Peter was bound to Him and would be led whither he would not — "And this he said, signifying by what death he should glorify God" (John 21:18-19, see above). Such a remark presupposes in the readers of the Fourth Gospel a knowledge of the death of Peter.
St. Peter's First Epistle was written almost undoubtedly from Rome, since the salutation at the end reads: "The church that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you: and so doth my son Mark" (5:13). Babylon must here be identified with the Roman capital; since Babylon on the Euphrates, which lay in ruins, or New Babylon (Seleucia) on the Tigris, or the Egyptian Babylon near Memphis, or Jerusalem cannot be meant, the reference must be to Rome, the only city which is called Babylon elsewhere in ancient Christian literature (Revelation 17:5; 18:10; "Oracula Sibyl.", V, verses 143 and 159, ed. Geffcken, Leipzig, 1902, 111).
From Bishop Papias of Hierapolis and Clement of Alexandria, who both appeal to the testimony of the old presbyters (i.e., the disciples of the Apostles), we learn that Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome at the request of the Roman Christians, who desired a written memorial of the doctrine preached to them by St. Peter and his disciples (Eusebius, Church History II.15, 3.40, 6.14); this is confirmed by Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3.1). In connection with this information concerning the Gospel of St. Mark, Eusebius, relying perhaps on an earlier source, says that Peter described Rome figuratively as Babylon in his First Epistle.
Another testimony concerning the martyrdom of Peter and Paul is supplied by Clement of Rome in his Epistle to the Corinthians (written about A.D. 95-97), wherein he says (chapter 5): "Through zeal and cunning the greatest and most righteous supports [of the Church] have suffered persecution and been warred to death. Let us place before our eyes the good Apostles — St. Peter, who in consequence of unjust zeal, suffered not one or two, but numerous miseries, and, having thus given testimony (martyresas), has entered the merited place of glory". He then mentions Paul and a number of elect, who were assembled with the others and suffered martyrdom "among us" (en hemin, i.e., among the Romans, the meaning that the expression also bears in chapter 4). He is speaking undoubtedly, as the whole passage proves, of the Neronian persecution, and thus refers the martyrdom of Peter and Paul to that epoch.
In his letter written at the beginning of the second century (before 117), while being brought to Rome for martyrdom, the venerable Bishop Ignatius of Antioch endeavours by every means to restrain the Roman Christians from striving for his pardon, remarking: "I issue you no commands, like Peter and Paul: they were Apostles, while I am but a captive" (Epistle to the Romans 4). The meaning of this remark must be that the two Apostles laboured personally in Rome, and with Apostolic authority preached the Gospel there.
Bishop Dionysius of Corinth, in his letter to the Roman Church in the time of Pope Soter (165-74), says: "You have therefore by your urgent exhortation bound close together the sowing of Peter and Paul at Rome and Corinth. For both planted the seed of the Gospel also in Corinth, and together instructed us, just as they likewise taught in the same place in Italy and at the same time suffered martyrdom" (in Eusebius, Church History II.25).
Irenaeus of Lyons, a native of Asia Minor and a disciple of Polycarp of Smyrna (a disciple of St. John), passed a considerable time in Rome shortly after the middle of the second century, and then proceeded to Lyons, where he became bishop in 177; he described the Roman Church as the most prominent and chief preserver of the Apostolic tradition, as "the greatest and most ancient church, known by all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul" (Against Heresies 3.3; cf. 3.1). He thus makes use of the universally known and recognized fact of the Apostolic activity of Peter and Paul in Rome, to find therein a proof from tradition against the heretics.
In his "Hypotyposes" (Eusebius, Church History IV.14), Clement of Alexandria, teacher in the catechetical school of that city from about 190, says on the strength of the tradition of the presbyters: "After Peter had announced the Word of God in Rome and preached the Gospel in the spirit of God, the multitude of hearers requested Mark, who had long accompanied Peter on all his journeys, to write down what the Apostles had preached to them" (see above).
Like Irenaeus, Tertullian appeals, in his writings against heretics, to the proof afforded by the Apostolic labours of Peter and Paul in Rome of the truth of ecclesiastical tradition. In De Præscriptione 36, he says: "If thou art near Italy, thou hast Rome where authority is ever within reach. How fortunate is this Church for which the Apostles have poured out their whole teaching with their blood, where Peter has emulated the Passion of the Lord, where Paul was crowned with the death of John". In Scorpiace 15, he also speaks of Peter's crucifixion. "The budding faith Nero first made bloody in Rome. There Peter was girded by another, since he was bound to the cross". As an illustration that it was immaterial with what water baptism is administered, he states in his book (On Baptism 5) that there is "no difference between that with which John baptized in the Jordan and that with which Peter baptized in the Tiber"; and against Marcion he appeals to the testimony of the Roman Christians, "to whom Peter and Paul have bequeathed the Gospel sealed with their blood" (Against Marcion 4.5).
The Roman, Caius, who lived in Rome in the time of Pope Zephyrinus (198-217), wrote in his "Dialogue with Proclus" (in Eusebius, Church History II.25) directed against the Montanists: "But I can show the trophies of the Apostles. If you care to go to the Vatican or to the road to Ostia, thou shalt find the trophies of those who have founded this Church". By the trophies (tropaia) Eusebius understands the graves of the Apostles, but his view is opposed by modern investigators who believe that the place of execution is meant. For our purpose it is immaterial which opinion is correct, as the testimony retains its full value in either case. At any rate the place of execution and burial of both were close together; St. Peter, who was executed on the Vatican, received also his burial there. Eusebius also refers to "the inscription of the names of Peter and Paul, which have been preserved to the present day on the burial-places there" (i.e. at Rome).
There thus existed in Rome an ancient epigraphic memorial commemorating the death of the Apostles. The obscure notice in the Muratorian Fragment ("Lucas optime theofile conprindit quia sub praesentia eius singula gerebantur sicuti et semote passionem petri evidenter declarat", ed. Preuschen, Tübingen, 1910, p. 29) also presupposes an ancient definite tradition concerning Peter's death in Rome.
The apocryphal Acts of St. Peter and the Acts of Sts. Peter and Paul likewise belong to the series of testimonies of the death of the two Apostles in Rome.
In opposition to this distinct and unanimous testimony of early Christendom, some few Protestant historians have attempted in recent times to set aside the residence and death of Peter at Rome as legendary. These attempts have resulted in complete failure. It was asserted that the tradition concerning Peter's residence in Rome first originated in Ebionite circles, and formed part of the Legend of Simon the Magician, in which Paul is opposed by Peter as a false Apostle under Simon; just as this fight was transplanted to Rome, so also sprang up at an early date the legend of Peter's activity in that capital (thus in Baur, "Paulus", 2nd ed., 245 sqq., followed by Hase and especially Lipsius, "Die quellen der römischen Petrussage", Kiel, 1872). But this hypothesis is proved fundamentally untenable by the whole character and purely local importance of Ebionitism, and is directly refuted by the above genuine and entirely independent testimonies, which are at least as ancient. It has moreover been now entirely abandoned by serious Protestant historians (cf., e.g., Harnack's remarks in "Gesch. der altchristl. Literatur", II, i, 244, n. 2). A more recent attempt was made by Erbes (Zeitschr. fur Kirchengesch., 1901, pp. 1 sqq., 161 sqq.) to demonstrate that St. Peter was martyred at Jerusalem. He appeals to the apocryphal Acts of St. Peter, in which two Romans, Albinus and Agrippa, are mentioned as persecutors of the Apostles. These he identifies with the Albinus, Procurator of Judaea, and successor of Festus and Agrippa II, Prince of Galilee, and thence conciudes that Peter was condemned to death and sacrificed by this procurator at Jerusalem. The untenableness of this hypothesis becomes immediately apparent from the mere fact that our earliest definite testimony concerning Peter's death in Rome far antedates the apocryphal Acts; besides, never throughout the whole range of Christian antiquity has any city other than Rome been designated the place of martyrdom of Sts. Peter and Paul.
Although the fact of St. Peter's activity and death in Rome is so clearly established, we possess no precise information regarding the details of his Roman sojourn. The narratives contained in the apocryphal literature of the second century concerning the supposed strife between Peter and Simon Magus belong to the domain of legend. From the already mentioned statements regarding the origin of the Gospel of St. Mark we may conclude that Peter laboured for a long period in Rome. This conclusion is confirmed by the unanimous voice of tradition which, as early as the second half of the second century, designates the Prince of the Apostles the founder of the Roman Church. It is widely held that Peter paid a first visit to Rome after he had been miraculously liberated from the prison in Jerusalem; that, by "another place", Luke meant Rome, but omitted the name for special reasons. It is not impossible that Peter made a missionary journey to Rome about this time (after 42 A.D.), but such a journey cannot be established with certainty. At any rate, we cannot appeal in support of this theory to the chronological notices in Eusebius and Jerome, since, although these notices extend back to the chronicles of the third century, they are not old traditions, but the result of calculations on the basis of episcopal lists. Into the Roman list of bishops dating from the second century, there was introduced in the third century (as we learn from Eusebius and the "Chronograph of 354") the notice of a twenty-five years' pontificate for St. Peter, but we are unable to trace its origin. This entry consequently affords no ground for the hypothesis of a first visit by St. Peter to Rome after his liberation from prison (about 42). We can therefore admit only the possibility of such an early visit to the capital.
The task of determining the year of St. Peter's death is attended with similar difficulties. In the fourth century, and even in the chronicles of the third, we find two different entries. In the "Chronicle" of Eusebius the thirteenth or fourteenth year of Nero is given as that of the death of Peter and Paul (67-68); this date, accepted by Jerome, is that generally held. The year 67 is also supported by the statement, also accepted by Eusebius and Jerome, that Peter came to Rome under the Emperor Claudius (according to Jerome, in 42), and by the above-mentioned tradition of the twenty-five years' episcopate of Peter (cf. Bartolini, "Sopra l'anno 67 se fosse quello del martirio dei gloriosi Apostoli", Rome, 1868) . A different statement is furnished by the "Chronograph of 354" (ed. Duchesne, "Liber Pontificalis", I, 1 sqq.). This refers St. Peter's arrival in Rome to the year 30, and his death and that of St. Paul to 55.
Duchesne has shown that the dates in the "Chronograph" were inserted in a list of the popes which contains only their names and the duration of their pontificates, and then, on the chronological supposition that the year of Christ's death was 29, the year 30 was inserted as the beginning of Peter's pontificate, and his death referred to 55, on the basis of the twenty-five years' pontificate (op. cit., introd., vi sqq.). This date has however been recently defended by Kellner ("Jesus von Nazareth u. seine Apostel im Rahmen der Zeitgeschichte", Ratisbon, 1908; "Tradition geschichtl. Bearbeitung u. Legende in der Chronologie des apostol. Zeitalters", Bonn, 1909). Other historians have accepted the year 65 (e.g., Bianchini, in his edition of the "Liber Pontificalis" in P.L. CXXVII. 435 sqq.) or 66 (e.g. Foggini, "De romani b. Petri itinere et episcopatu", Florence, 1741; also Tillemont). Harnack endeavoured to establish the year 64 (i.e. the beginning of the Neronian persecution) as that of Peter's death ("Gesch. der altchristl. Lit. bis Eusebius", pt. II, "Die Chronologie", I, 240 sqq.). This date, which had been already supported by Cave, du Pin, and Wieseler, has been accepted by Duchesne (Hist. ancienne de l'église, I, 64). Erbes refers St. Peter's death to 22 Feb., 63, St. Paul's to 64 ("Texte u. Untersuchungen", new series, IV, i, Leipzig, 1900, "Die Todestage der Apostel Petrus u. Paulus u. ihre rom. Denkmaeler"). The date of Peter's death is thus not yet decided; the period between July, 64 (outbreak of the Neronian persecution), and the beginning of 68 (on 9 July Nero fled from Rome and committed suicide) must be left open for the date of his death. The day of his martyrdom is also unknown; 29 June, the accepted day of his feast since the fourth century, cannot be proved to be the day of his death (see below).
Concerning the manner of Peter's death, we possess a tradition — attested to by Tertullian at the end of the second century (see above) and by Origen (in Eusebius, Church History II.1)—that he suffered crucifixion. Origen says: "Peter was crucified at Rome with his head downwards, as he himself had desired to suffer". As the place of execution may be accepted with great probability the Neronian Gardens on the Vatican, since there, according to Tacitus, were enacted in general the gruesome scenes of the Neronian persecution; and in this district, in the vicinity of the Via Cornelia and at the foot of the Vatican Hills, the Prince of the Apostles found his burial place. Of this grave (since the word tropaion was, as already remarked, rightly understood of the tomb) Caius already speaks in the third century. For a time the remains of Peter lay with those of Paul in a vault on the Appian Way at the place ad Catacumbas, where the Church of St. Sebastian (which on its erection in the fourth century was dedicated to the two Apostles) now stands. The remains had probably been brought thither at the beginning of the Valerian persecution in 258, to protect them from the threatened desecration when the Christian burial-places were confiscated. They were later restored to their former resting-place, and Constantine the Great had a magnificent basilica erected over the grave of St. Peter at the foot of the Vatican Hill. This basilica was replaced by the present St. Peter's in the sixteenth century. The vault with the altar built above it (confessio) has been since the fourth century the most highly venerated martyr's shrine in the West. In the substructure of the altar, over the vault which contained the sarcophagus with the remains of St. Peter, a cavity was made. This was closed by a small door in front of the altar. By opening this door the pilgrim could enjoy the great privilege of kneeling directly over the sarcophagus of the Apostle. Keys of this door were given as previous souvenirs (cf. Gregory of Tours, "De gloria martyrum", I, xxviii).
The memory of St. Peter is also closely associated with the Catacomb of St. Priscilla on the Via Salaria. According to a tradition, current in later Christian antiquity, St. Peter here instructed the faithful and administered baptism. This tradition seems to have been based on still earlier monumental testimonies. The catacomb is situated under the garden of a villa of the ancient Christian and senatorial family, the Acilii Glabriones, and its foundation extends back to the end of the first century; and since Acilius Glabrio, consul in 91, was condemned to death under Domitian as a Christian, it is quite possible that the Christian faith of the family extended back to Apostolic times, and that the Prince of the Apostles had been given hospitable reception in their house during his residence at Rome. The relations between Peter and Pudens whose house stood on the site of the present titular church of Pudens (now Santa Pudentiana) seem to rest rather on a legend.
Concerning the Epistles of St. Peter, see EPISTLES OF SAINT PETER; concerning the various apocrypha bearing the name of Peter, especially the Apocalypse and the Gospel of St. Peter, see APOCRYPHA. The apocryphal sermon of Peter (kerygma), dating from the second half of the second century, was probably a collection of supposed sermons by the Apostle; several fragments are preserved by Clement of Alexandria (cf. Dobschuts, "Das Kerygma Petri kritisch untersucht" in "Texte u. Untersuchungen", XI, i, Leipzig, 1893).

unleash97
5th Feb 2012, 00:08
Magandang gabi po :)


Salamat po sir hadeyah sa tanong.


Tungkol po sa katanungan po na ito, mas pinapaboran ko po ang salin ng Douay-Rheims ng mē battalogēsēte na speak not much kaysa vain repetitions, pero posible rin po na tama ang salin na babble, kung base po yung text sa Aramaic ܡܦܩܩܝܢ. Sa totoo lang po, mali ang saling vain repetitions. At lahat nung source[s] na pinagkuhanan ng mga Protestante, e.g. Ovid, Suidas, Terence, Eramus, etc. ay mas pinapaboran ang naging salin sa Douay-Rheims. Kahit sila (Protestante)[1] man din po ay aminado na hindi po ito ang orihinal na bersyon, ayon nga sa kilalang Protestant scholar na si Joseph Alexander (The Gospel According to Matthew Explained, p. 170), “Use not vain repetitions is a paraphrase and gloss but not a version, giving probably the sense but not the form of the original (…).” Yung mga sinabi pong etymological source[s] ng batta mula sa modernong Greek lexicon ngayon, e.g. nakuha daw ito sa pangalan ng Haring si Battus (tignan ang Rawlinson, The History of Herodotus, p. 106, para sa paliwanag), maging kay Battus the Poet (tignan ang Ovid, Met. ii. 688, &c.; Anton. Lib. 22, para sa sinasabing pinanggalingan daw nito, ayon kay Erasmus) ay hindi po ganun angkop sa totoong kahulugan nito. Nga po pala, makikita rin po ang sinasabi kong ito sa isang salin ng Bibliya ng Protestante na tugma sa salin sa Douay-Rheims


"But in preiynge nyle ze speke moche as hethen men don, for thei gessen that thei be herd in her moche speche."
- Matthew 6:7, Wycliffe (A.D. 1380)

Kung mapapansin mo po magkaparehas ang kahulugan ng salitang battalogia at polulogia dahil parehas lang po ang nais tukuyin nito at ito nga po'y speak [not] much. Ang ugat po ng salitang battalogēsēte ay battalogeo( verbal at nominal form) na nanggaling sa salitang ‘batta’ na ang ibig sabihin ay ‘much’, at sa ‘logeo' (from logia meaning word) na ang katumbas sa salitang Ingles ay to speak.[2] Habang ang salitang polulogia (a corresponding noun) ay nanggaling naman sa salitang ‘polu’ (kung saan nakuha natin ang salitang ‘poly’ = ‘many’ o ‘much’; hal. polytheism, much married, polygamy, many colored) at logia.

Ngayon, ang isa po sa magiging tanong dito ay kung ano po ba ang ibig sabihin po ng vain repetitions para sa mga Protestante? Dahil sa kung tutuosin po ay kahit sila-sila po'y hindi magkasundo sa kung ano po sa tekstong ito ang hinatulan ng Panginoon.[3] Isa rin po sa dapat natin tandaan na hindi po hiwalay ang teksto ng Mt 6:7 sa buong konteksto ng Mt 6 na kung saan ang tinutukoy ay mga Impokrito.[4] Kung titignan po natin ito sa may ganitong pananaw mas titibay po ang ebidensya na kasama parin po ito sa konteksto na tumutukoy sa mga Impokrito, sa kadahilanan kung atin po itong susuriin simula vss. 2-6 at vss. 16-18 sila po ang binanggit ni Cristo.

Bilang reperensya naman po na hindi kinundena ang repetitions (o ang pag-ulit-ulit) sa Bibliya narito po ang ilang halimbawa:



(1) Ang mga Seraphim ay nag-sisipag-awitan ng “Holy, Holy, Holy the Lord God of host…” (Is 6:3; cf. Rv 4:8) ng walang tigil, araw at gabi.

(2) Ang paggamit ni JesuCristo sa himno na tinatawag na hallel magnum, na nag-uumpisa sa Psalm 115 at nagtatapos sa Psalm 118; kung saan sa unang apat na berso ang parehas na salita’y madalas ginagamit.

(3) Sa Psalm 119, makailang ulit sinambit ni King David ang mga katagang ito: “Teach me, O Lord, thy statutes, ordinances, commandments, judgments, the way of thy statutes.”

(4) Sa Psalm 107, apat na beses ginamit ang mga salitang ito, “Oh that men would praise the Lord for His goodness.” (ver. 8, 15, 21, 31)

(5) Sa Psalm 136 [135], ang naturang mga salita, “For His steadfast love endures forever,” ay ginamit ng dalawampu’t-anim na beses.

(6) Sa awit ng mga awit (Canticle) ng tatlong bata, mababasa ang mga salitang ‘Blessed the Lord’ ay inulit ng mahigit kumulang tatlongpu’t-dalawang beses. (Da 3:51-90)

(7) Ang panalangin ni JesuCristo sa Getsemani (Mt 26:39, 42, 44; Mk 14:39)

(8) Sa awit ng mga awit 13, mababasa ang salitang ‘The Lord is his name!’ na inulit ng tatlong beses sa Amos 4 (vv. 5, 9)


*Adisyonal na reperensya


• Eph 1:16; Co 1:9; 4:12; I Th 1:2; II Th 1:11; II Ti 1:3 (Paulit-ulit na binabanggit ang iisang tao sa Intersasyon)
• Rm 1:9-10; 12:12: Phil 4:1 (pagdarasal at pagpapasalamat, at pagbanggit ng ibang Simbahan sa kanyang {San Pablo} panalangin ng tuloy-tuloy [incessantly])
• Ne 1:4-6; Ps 141:5 (Ang paggamit ng singular ‘prayer’ sa halip na ‘prayers’ ay nagpapahiwatig na ang panalangin ay iisa lamang at ito’y makailang ulit sinasambit)
• Ps 34:1; 35:28; 71:6; 33:9; 113:3 (Ang pagpupugay o pagbibigay papuri sa Diyos ay patuloy na gagawin magpakailanman)
• I Th 5:17 (manalangin ng walang tigil)

At bago ko po makalimutan, mayroon pong salin sa Tagalog na katulad ng sinasabi ko po. Base po ito sa salin ng Protestante at hindi po yung sa Catholic edition, ;)


“Sa pananalangin ninyo’y huwag kayong gagamit ng napakaraming salita, gaya ng mga Hentil. Ang akala nila’y pakikinggan sila ng Diyos dahil sa dami ng kanilang salita.”
- Mateo 6:7, TPV NT (1995)


____________

1 Ayon sa Protestant scholar na si Tholuck, “… the large majority of the translations take battalogia in the sense of [I]πολυλογια….. Almost all the commentators also restrict the meaning to much speaking in prayer.” (Tholuck, p. 310)
2 W. E. Vine, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (4 vols. in 1; Westwood: Fleming H. Revell, 1966), III, 281. (Protestant source)
3 Ayon po dito [mga sipi mula sa Protestante] ang hinatulan daw po ng panginoon ay ang mismong repetitions:


Ayon kay Rosenmuller: “Do not repeat the same words often. BATTA means to say the same thing very often.”

Ayon kay Grotius: “To repeat the word (Ecclus. 7:15) is the same thing that is here called BATTA.”

Ayon kay Beza: “In praying do not babble the same thing as the heathen.”

Ayon kay Gualperious: “BATTA means to often repeat the same word.”

Ayon sa Vincent's Word Studies “... to repeat the same formula many times...”

Habang dito [mga sipi mula sa Protestante] naman po ay iba naman ang hinatulan,


Ayon kay Cook: “The precept is not directed against the frequent repetition of earnest prayer. Our Lord's own example sanctions the use of long and repeated prayers.”

Muli, ayon kay Cook: “The precept is not against the frequent repetition of earnest prayer, but against the superstitious repetition of a form in the hope of being better heard by God, which is the point of Elijah's taunt, etc.”

Mula sa Gray, Bib. Museum in margin: “It is not repetition but vain repetition, empty of heart and devoid of hope that is here rebuked.”

Ayon sa Geneva Study Bible: “Long prayers are not condemned, but vain, needless, and superstitious ones.”

Ayon sa People's New Testament: “What is forbidden is not much praying, nor praying in the same words (the Lord did both), but making the number of prayers, length of prayers, or time spent in praying, a point of observance and of merit.”

Sino po kaya sa kanila ang tama? :)

4 Ayon sa Protestant scholar na si Tholuck, hindi daw dapat isipin na ang talata sa Mateo 6:7, 8, ay hiwalay sa konteksto ng Mateo 23:14, kung saan ang paggamit ng mahabang panalangin ay naging gawi na ng mga mapagkunwaring Pariseo para isipin ng mga taong makakakita na sila’y banal. (Tignan ang Introduction, p. 26, sa kanyang Commentary on the Sermon on the Mount, salin ni Lundin Brown); Sa Codex Vaticanus, ang tinutukoy sa Mateo 6:7 ay υποκριται ('hypocrites') imbes na εθνικοι ('gentiles') na ginamit naman sa Codex Sinaiticus. Kung susuriin mabuti ang kabuan ng Mateo 6, makikita na simula sa vv. 2-6 at vv. 16-18 ang tinutukoy ni Hesus ay ang mga Impokrito, tangin sa vv. 7-15 lamang ito naiba.

wow! ang galing! tnt :salute:

unleash97
5th Feb 2012, 00:49
St. Pio of Pietrelcina (Padre Pio)
You can see links before reply
Francesco Forgione was born to Grazio Mario Forgione (1860–1946) and Maria Giuseppa Di Nunzio Forgione (1859–1929) on 25 May 1887, in Pietrelcina, a farming town in the southern Italian region of Campania. His parents made a living as peasant farmers. He was baptized in the nearby Santa Anna Chapel, which stands upon the walls of a castle. He later served as an altar boy in this same chapel. Restoration work on this chapel was later undertaken by the Padre Pio Foundation of America based in Cromwell, Connecticut. His siblings were an older brother, Michele, and three younger sisters, Felicita, Pellegrina, and Grazia (who was later to become a Bridgettine nun). His parents had two other children who died in infancy. When he was baptized, he was given the name Francesco, which was the name of one of these two. He stated that by the time he was five years old he had already taken the decision to dedicate his entire life to God. He is also said to have begun inflicting penances on himself and to have been chided on one occasion by his mother for using a stone as a pillow and sleeping on the stone floor. He worked on the land up to the age of 10, looking after the small flock of sheep the family owned. This delayed his education to some extent.
Pietrelcina was a highly religious town (feast days of saints were celebrated throughout the year), and religion had a profound influence on the Forgione family. The members of the family attended daily Mass, prayed the Rosary nightly, and abstained from meat three days a week in honor of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. Although Francesco's parents and grandparents were illiterate, they memorised the Scriptures and narrated Bible stories to their children. It is asserted by his mother that Francesco was able to see and speak with Jesus, the Virgin Mary and his guardian angel, and that as a child, he assumed that all people could do so.
As a youth Francesco reported that he had experienced heavenly visions and ecstasies. In 1897, after he had completed three years at the public school, Francesco was drawn to the life of a friar after listening to a young Capuchin friar who was, at that time, seeking donations in the countryside. When he expressed his desire to his parents, they made a trip to Morcone, a community 13 miles (21 km) north of Pietrelcina, to find out if their son was eligible to enter the Capuchin Order. The Friars there informed them that they were interested in accepting Francesco into their community, but he needed more educational qualifications.
Francesco's father went to the United States in search of work to pay for private tutoring for his son, so that he might meet the academic requirements to enter the Capuchin Order. It was in this period that Francesco received the sacrament of Confirmation on 27 September 1899. He underwent private tutoring and passed the stipulated academic requirements. On 6 January 1903, at the age of 15, he entered the novitiate of the Capuchin Friars at Morcone where, on 22 January, he took the Franciscan habit and the name of Fra (Friar) Pio, in honor of Pope St. Pius V, the patron saint of Pietrelcina. He took the simple vows of poverty, chastity and obedience.
The deterioration of Padre Pio's health started during the 1960s in spite of which he continued his spiritual works. On 21 September 1968, the day after the 50th anniversary of his receiving the Stigmata, Padre Pio experienced great tiredness. The next day, on 22 September 1968, Padre Pio was supposed to offer a Solemn High Mass, but feeling weak and fearing that he might be too ill to complete the Mass, he asked his superior if he might say a Low Mass instead, just as he had done daily for years. Due to the large number of pilgrims present for the Mass, Padre Pio's superior decided the Solemn High Mass must proceed, and so Padre Pio, in the spirit of obedience to his superior, went on to celebrate the Solemn High Mass. While celebrating the Solemn High Mass, he appeared extremely weak and in a fragile state. His voice was weak when he said the Mass, and after the Mass had concluded, he was so weakened that he almost collapsed as he was descending the altar steps and needed help from a great many of his Capuchin confreres. This would be Padre Pio's last celebration of the Mass.
Early in the morning of 23 September 1968, Padre Pio made his last confession and renewed his Franciscan vows. As was customary, he had his rosary in his hands, though he did not have the strength to say the Hail Marys aloud. Till the end, he repeated the words "Gesù, Maria" (Jesus, Mary). At around 2:30am, he said, "I see two mothers" (taken to mean his mother and Mary).[24] At 2:30 a.m. he breathed his last in his cell in San Giovanni Rotondo with his last breath whispering, "Maria!"
His body was buried on 26 September in a crypt in the Church of Our Lady of Grace. His Requiem Mass was attended by over 100,000 people. He was often heard to say, "After my death I will do more. My real mission will begin after my death." The accounts of those who stayed with Padre Pio till the end state that the stigmata had completely disappeared without even leaving a scar. Only a red mark "as if drawn by a red pencil" remained on his side which then disappeared.
St. Pio of Pietrelcina is currently known as the patron saint of civil defense volunteers, after a group of 160 of them petitioned the Italian Bishops’ conference. The Bishops forwarded the request to the Vatican, which gave its approval to the designation. He is also “less officially” known as the patron saint of stress relief and the “January blues,” after the Catholic Enquiry Office in London proclaimed him as such. They designated the most depressing day of the year, identified as January 22, as Don’t Worry Be Happy day, in honor of Padre Pio’s famous advice: “Pray, hope, and don’t worry.”
Alleged supernatural phenomena
Padre Pio celebrating mass. His Mass would often last hours, as the mystic received visions and experienced sufferings. Note the coverings worn on his hands to cover his stigmata.
Even the Vatican was skeptical about supernatural claims but Padre Pio acquired fame as a worker. He was purported to have the gift of reading souls, he is alleged to have been able to bilocate according to eyewitness accounts.
In 1947, Father Karol Józef Wojtyła, a young Polish priest who would later go on to become Pope John Paul II, visited Padre Pio, who heard his confession. Austrian Cardinal Alfons Stickler reported that Wojtyła confided to him that during this meeting Padre Pio told him he would one day ascend to "the highest post in the Church though further confirmation is needed." Cardinal Stickler further went on to say that Wojtyła believed that the prophecy was fulfilled when he became a Cardinal, not Pope, as has been reported in works of piety. (John Paul's secretary, Stanisław Dziwisz, denies the prediction, while George Weigel's biography Witness to Hope, which contains an account of the same visit, does not mention it)
According to Oral tradition Bishop Wojtyła wrote to Padre Pio in 1962 to ask him to pray for Dr. Wanda Poltawska, a friend in Poland who was thought to be suffering from cancer. Later, what was thought to be Dr. Poltawska's cancer was found to be in Spontaneous remission; medical professionals were unable to offer an explanation for the phenomenon.
Because of the unusual abilities Padre Pio possessed, the Holy See twice instituted investigations of the stories surrounding him. However, the Church has since formally approved his veneration with his canonization by Pope John Paul II in 2002.
In the 1999 book, Padre Pio: The Wonder Worker, a segment by Irish priest Malachy Gerard Carroll describes the story of Gemma de Giorgi, a Sicilian girl whose alleged blindness some believe was corrected during a visit to the Capuchin priest. Gemma, who was brought to San Giovanni Rotondo in 1947 by her grandmother, was born without pupils. During her trip to see Padre Pio, the little girl reportedly began to see objects including a steamboat and the sea. Gemma's grandmother did not believe the child had been healed. After Gemma forgot to ask Padre Pio for Grace during her Confession, her grandmother reportedly implored the priest to ask God to restore her sight. Padre Pio, according to Carroll, told her, "The child must not weep and neither must you for the child sees and you know she sees." The section goes on to say that oculists were unable to determine how she gained vision. Padre Pio is alleged to have waged physical combat with Satan and his minions, similar to incidents described concerning St. John Vianney, from which he is said to have sustained extensive bruising. He is also said to communicate with angels and grant favors and healings prior to any written or verbal request.
On the day of his death, mystic and Servant of God Maria Esperanza de Bianchini from Caracas, Venezuela reported that Padre Pio appeared to her in a vision and stated "I have come to say good-bye. My time has come. It is your turn." It is reported that her husband then watched as his wife's face transfigured into that of Padre Pio. On the following day, they heard of the death of Padre Pio. Witnesses claim to have seen Ms. Esperanza herself levitating during Mass and engaging in bilocation[36] Padre Domenico da Cese a fellow Capuchin stigmatist reported that on Sunday, September 22, 1968 he saw Padre Pio kneeling in prayer before the Holy Face of Manoppello in Manoppello, although it was known that Padre Pio hadn't left his room.
Stigmata
Padre Pio showing the stigmata
On 20 September 1918, while hearing confessions, Padre Pio is said to have had his first occurrence of the stigmata—bodily marks, pain, and bleeding in locations corresponding to the crucifixion wounds of Jesus Christ. This phenomenon continued for fifty years, until the end of his life. The blood flowing from the stigmata is said to have smelled of perfume or flowers, a phenomenon mentioned in stories of the lives of several saints and often referred to as the odour of sanctity.
His stigmata, regarded by some as evidence of holiness, was studied by physicians whose independence from the Church is not known. The observations were reportedly unexplainable and the wounds never became infected. His wounds healed once, but reappeared. The wounds were examined by Luigi Romanelli, chief physician of the City Hospital of Barletta, for about one year. Dr. Giorgio Festa, a private practitioner also examined them in 1920 and 1925. Professor Giuseppe Bastianelli, physician to Pope Benedict XV agreed that the wounds existed but made no other comment. Pathologist Dr. Amico Bignami of the University of Rome also observed the wounds, but could make no diagnosis. Both Bignami and Dr. Giuseppe Sala commented on the unusually smooth edges of the wounds and lack of edema. Dr. Alberto Caserta took X-rays of the hands in 1954 and found no abnormality in the bone structure.
It was reputed, however, that his condition caused him great embarrassment, and most photographs show him with red mittens or black coverings on his hands and feet where the bleedings occurred. At Padre Pio's death in 1968, his body appeared unwounded, with no sign of scarring. Allegedly, there was report that doctors who examined his body found it empty of all blood.
Those who have accused Padre Pio of faking his stigmata, both religious and non-religious, such as Historian Sergio Luzzatto and others, claim that Padre Pio used carbolic acid to self-inflict the wounds. The sole piece of evidence for this is a single document found in the Vatican's archive — the testimony of a pharmacist at the San Giovanni Rotondo, Maria De Vito, from whom he ordered 4 grams of the acid. This letter was amongst the material gathered by those who disputed Padre Pio's stigmata at the time. According to De Vito, Padre Pio asked her to keep the order secret, saying it was to sterilise needles. The document was examined but dismissed by the Catholic Church during Padre Pio's beatification process.
One commentator expressed the belief that the Church likely dismissed the claims based on witnesses that stated the acid was in fact used for sterilization: "The boys had needed injections to fight the Spanish Flu which was raging at that time. Due to a shortage of doctors, Padres Paolino and Pio administered the shots, using carbolic acid as a sterilizing agent.”
Sainthood and later recognition
In 1982, the Holy See authorized the Archbishop of Manfredonia to open an investigation to discover whether Padre Pio should be considered a saint. The investigation went on for seven years, and in 1990 Padre Pio was declared a Servant of God, the first step in the progression to canonization.
Beginning in 1990, the Congregation for the Causes of Saints debated how heroically Padre Pio had lived his life, and in 1997 Pope John Paul II declared him venerable. A discussion of the effects of his life on others followed, including the cure of an Italian woman, Consiglia de Martino, which had been associated with Padre Pio's intercession. In 1999, on the advice of the Congregation, John Paul II declared Padre Pio blessed.
After further consideration of Padre Pio's virtues and ability to do good even after his death, including discussion of another healing attributed to his intercession, the Pope declared Padre Pio a saint on 16 June 2002. Three hundred thousand people were estimated to have attended the canonization ceremony.
Padre Pio is one of only two saints who were priests living after the Second Vatican Council; the other being Saint Josemaria Escriva. Both priests had permission from the pope to offer the traditional Latin Mass without any of the liturgical reforms that stemmed from the Council.
On 1 July 2004, Pope John Paul II dedicated the Padre Pio Pilgrimage Church in San Giovanni Rotondo to the memory of Saint Pio of Pietrelcina. A statue of Saint Pio in Messina, Sicily attracted attention in 2002 when it reportedly wept tears of blood. Padre Pio has become one of the world's most popular saints. There are more than 3,000 "Padre Pio Prayer Groups" worldwide, with three million members. There are parishes dedicated to Padre Pio in Vineland and Lavallette, New Jersey and Sydney, Australia, and there is a St. Padre Pio Shrine in Buena, New Jersey. A 2006 survey by the magazine Famiglia Cristiana found that more Italian Catholics pray to Padre Pio than to any other figure. This prayer, more properly understood as a request, is not to be confused with worship which the Catholic Church teaches is due only to God himself.
The body of Saint Pio of Pietrelcina
On 3 March 2008, the body of Saint Pio was exhumed from his crypt, 40 years after his death, so that his remains could be prepared for display. A church statement described the body as being in "fair condition." Archbishop Domenico D'Ambrosio, papal legate to the shrine in San Giovanni Rotondo, stated "the top part of the skull is partly skeletal but the chin is perfect and the rest of the body is well preserved." Archbishop D’Ambrosio also confirmed in a communiqué that “the stigmata are not visible.” He went on to say that St. Pio's hands "looked like they had just undergone a manicure." It was hoped that morticians would be able to restore the face so that it will be recognizable. However, due to its deterioration, his face was covered with a life-like silicone mask.
Cardinal José Saraiva Martins, prefect for the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints, celebrated Mass for 15,000 devotees on 24 April at the Shrine of Holy Mary of Grace, San Giovanni Rotondo, before the body went on display in a crystal, marble, and silver sepulcher in the crypt of the monastery. Padre Pio is wearing his brown Capuchin habit with a white silk stole embroidered with crystals and gold thread. His hands hold a large wooden cross. 800,000 pilgrims worldwide, mostly from Italy, made reservations to view the body up to December 2008, but only 7,200 people a day were able to file past the crystal coffin. Officials extended the display through September, 2009.
Saint Pio's remains were placed in the church of Saint Pio, which is beside San Giovanni Rotondo. In April 2010 they were moved to a special golden "Cripta."

Diego_99
5th Feb 2012, 01:12
salamat po sa karagdagang kaalaman sir unleash. :)

Diego_99
5th Feb 2012, 11:16
wow! ang galing! tnt :salute:


Salamat po sir. Naalala ko lang po ito may ginawa po kasi akong article po tungkol dito dati. :)

kazel0729
5th Feb 2012, 12:17
the problem with this claim is that the word of God has not only been transmitted through writings but foremost and primarily through oral preachings.
tanungin kita, did st. paul regard his epistles as "scriptures"? :slap:

Siguro hindi na naman yan sasagutin.. Or siguro hindi niya alam ang sagot..

unleash97
5th Feb 2012, 21:01
nakakalungkot naman magbasa sa mga threads dito. ang dami kong nababasa na naging atheist o agnostic dahil na rin sa walang katapusang bangayan ng mga religions.
actually that is the state of mind of today's youths. they are like sheeps without sheepherds. we lack good spiritual guardians.
hopefully, yung mga magtatanong naman ay maging tungkol sa relationship with God para matalakay ang topic na yan at magkaroon rin ng idea yung iba sa ikakapanatag na rin ng kalooban ng lahat.
remember that the Lord do not desires so much for us to be good at debates but rather to grow in our relationship with Him and to our fellow men. a good spiritual councilor is thereby imperative to guide and nurture our mind for a deeper cultivation of our fatith, as it has been said "the future of the world stands in peril unless wiser men are forthcoming".
hence, sa mga me personal difficulties regarding God and our faith, you are free to unburden your troubles in here. i'll try to lift that loads of woes, if you will just open your heart (wag lang financial na problema kasi mahirap lang din ako, haha).
our foremost duty is to spead the light and the warmth of God's kindness. God isnt a distant creator -He is above all our heavenly merciful Father. if men is dismayed by the fact that they dont feel His caring providence, it is because we who believe in Him refused to show Him in us to humans who are in trouble. bonum est diffusivum sui, diffuse goodness, show Christ, give Christ through your relationship with others. by this we will materialize the kingdom of God here on earth.
your guidance councilor's desk is now open, haha

musckah7777
5th Feb 2012, 21:13
nakakalungkot naman magbasa sa mga threads dito. ang dami kong nababasa na naging atheist o agnostic dahil na rin sa walang katapusang bangayan ng mga religions.
actually that is the state of mind of today's youths. they are like sheeps without sheepherds. we lack good spiritual guardians.
hopefully, yung mga magtatanong naman ay maging tungkol sa relationship with God para matalakay ang topic na yan at magkaroon rin ng idea yung iba sa ikakapanatag na rin ng kalooban ng lahat.
remember that the Lord do not desires so much for us to be good at debates but rather to grow in our relationship with Him and to our fellow men. a good spiritual councilor is thereby imperative to guide and nurture our mind for a deeper cultivation of our fatith, as it has been said "the future of the world stands in peril unless wiser men are forthcoming".
hence, sa mga me personal difficulties regarding God and our faith, you are free to unburden your troubles in here. i'll try to lift that loads of woes, if you will just open your heart (wag lang financial na problema kasi mahirap lang din ako, haha).
our foremost duty is to spead the light and the warmth of God's kindness. God isnt a distant creator -He is above all our heavenly merciful Father. if men is dismayed by the fact that they dont feel His caring providence, it is because we who believe in Him refused to show Him in us to humans who are in trouble. bonum est diffusivum sui, diffuse goodness, show Christ, give Christ through your relationship with others. by this we will materialize the kingdom of God here on earth.
your guidance councilor's desk is now open, haha


YEAh...thnx to you ts,, continue sharing the word of god. ..god bless you

Yael11
5th Feb 2012, 21:22
(---sinong me sabi na dapat direct ang dasal sa Dyos? bakit si st. paul bids christians to pray for him kung kelangan lagi direct ang dasal sa Dyos?)

ay! maganda ang pagkaintindi mu brad! hehe! :yipee:
"pray for him" is diferrent from "pray to him/pray to me"
tatagalugin ko po, " Ipagdasal nyo ako.."
Napakalinaw po ng pagkasabi,at galing na din mismo sa inyo..hehe

yeoh_8
6th Feb 2012, 07:16
You can see links before reply

The word “pope” according to Catholic authorities means, “father”.

Although Catholic authorities say that Peter was the first pope, no records in history, in archaeology or in the Bible will prove that Peter was once a pope! The apostles, including Peter were prohibited by the Lord Jesus Christ to use the title “father” or “teacher”.

MATTHEW 23:8-9 (KJV)

But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

Arguments to the contrary based on illogical reasoning and distorted personal opinions are passed off as truth by the Catholics but the final authority is the word of God, which never said that there has been such an office in the true Church.

The truth of the matter is that the Catholic Church invented the word “pope” only in the 11th century many hundreds of years after the death of the apostles. Allegedly, the pope is the recipient of the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven being handed down from one pope to another in an undisturbed or unbroken succession! Is that reality or just mere fantasy???

yeoh_8
6th Feb 2012, 07:23
Biblically, Peter can not be a pope! It was prohibited by Christ to the original twelve disciples to be called ‘rabbi’ or teacher because their only teacher was Jesus Christ.

(Matthew 23:8) “But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren.”

They were also forbidden to address anybody on earth their father because (religiously speaking) they have only one Father, which is the Father in heaven.

(Matthew 23:9) “And call none your father upon earth; for one is your father, who is in heaven.”

Peter will definitely not allow anybody to call him pope because that word means Father, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia cited afore.

So, we can safely conclude that Peter did not ever hold the position of pope, biblically and historically, according to the Bible, and to official documents from the Catholic Church itself.

But was he the rock upon which the Church was built?

Peter, an Apostle, first to be called, is part of the Church.

(1 Corinthians 12:28) “And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.”

He is not the rock or the foundation, but was among those who were founded upon the real rock or ‘petra’, or foundation.

πε?τρα

petra

pet’-ra

Feminine of the same as G4074; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively): – rock.

Strong’s Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries

Dictionaries of Hebrew and Greek Words taken from Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance by James Strong, S.T.D., LL.D., 1890.

Note that the Church was founded on a ‘petra’ — in the feminine gender, and not on a ‘petros’ ( a stone), the name ascribed to Peter.

(John 1:42) “And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.”

It was not only Peter that was called a stone, but Peter himself called the members of the first century Church as lively stones.

(1 Peter 2:5) “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.”

Members of the first century Church were called by Peter as ‘lively stones’ or ‘lithos’ in the original Greek tongue.

λι?θος

lithos

Thayer Definition:

1) a stone

1a) of small stones

1b) of building stones

1c) metaphorically of Christ

They, Peter, the other Apostles, and the members, altogether formed the edifice founded on the rock or ‘petra’.

(Matthew 16:18) “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

The rock mentioned is ‘petra’ and not ‘petros’.

(Ephesians 2:20) “And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone…”

Note that the Apostles (including Peter) and the prophets are built upon the foundation(they are not the foundation), the chief cornerstone, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Is there anybody else qualified to be the foundation of the true Church in the Bible?

(1 Corinthians 3:11) “For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”

Anybody who will build a church, and make Peter or any other man its foundation is rejecting Christ and building it in vain. Peter said:

(Acts 4:10-12) “Be it known to you all and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God hath raised from the dead, even by him, this man standeth here before you, whole. This is the stone which was rejected by you the builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved” DOUAY-RHEIMS VERSION

The house or the building founded on or built upon the ‘petra’ or the foundation rock (which is Christ), is the Church of God.

(1 Timothy 3:15) “But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.”

God built it upon Christ — the real foundation.

(Hebrews 3:4) “For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.”

(Psalams 127:1) “Except the LORD build the house, they labor in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain.”

yeoh_8
6th Feb 2012, 07:29
Christ’s way of liberating people from errors and fallacies! It is from Him we pattern our interactions, especially as he said in

MARK 7:7, Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Jesus Christ criticized the man-made doctrines of the Jews! So we also criticize the practices of some – not to waste our time – but for errors and fallacies to be highlighted – so that people will be liberated from their ignorance of Christ’s way.

MATTHEW 15:5-9
5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;

6 And honor not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

7 Ye hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying,

8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoreth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

The Catholic Mass is a man-made doctrine, and so I have compassion for the many millions who were made to believe that it is a commandment of God!

It is always an act of love to show people their errors that they may reform and be saved from shame! If criticizing the belief of others is a waste of time according to you, why are you criticizing our way which is the way of Christ? Aren’t you contradicting yourself? To disapprove of something rightfully being used by others and then approve of what you wrongfully use is utterly against the Bible.

THE ROMANS 14:22

Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.

Please note that I am not aware of you reading my blogs. I hope that in your doing so, your time is not being wasted!

Another comment from a certain Michael says, “In your church you do it another way, not similar to the Roman Catholic’s but it’s the same way actually.” [Laughter]

How can it be the same when, according to you, “In your church you do it another way….” Understand first the meaning of the simple word, “other” or another before you laugh!

“Other” or another means different, and in no way could they be the same. The intention is different; therefore, the spirit is different.

KU, my reader says: “All religions were invented by men. No one can say one is better than the other. No one religion can guarantee eternal salvation, if ever there is such a thing. Denigrating other religions, whether it’s Roman Catholic, Anglican, Islam, etc, so as to give the impression that yours is better, doesn’t work for me. It’s like when courting a girl. Telling the girl about the imperfections of your rivals only reflects on your own insecurities. Stand on your own. Highlight your good qualities but not on the expense of others.”

The work of preaching is not dictated by men, starting from topics to delivery. You do not compare it, for example, with worldly activities like courting. And there is no system that works for one and doesn’t in another. It is either it is according to God’s will or not.

It is not our principle to stand on “our own” as you said! And we do not “highlight our good qualities at the expense of others!” It is our principle to stand on the faith we learned from the Bible.

COLOSSIANS 1:23

If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

It is your own belief that all religions were invented by men! Where did you base that claim? The Bible teaches a religion established by God and not by men!

MATTHEW 6:33

But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

JAMES 1:27

Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

There are those who have established their own righteousness like you! It is obviously because of a different intention and therefore, a different spirit that works. The Bible says something about submitting to the righteousness of God. In ROMANS 10:3, For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

As to your charge that I criticize to my own advantage, it is not good for anybody to highlight his own qualities! Mali ka dyan pare! You don’t know me. PROVERBS 27:2 tells us, Let another man praise thee, and not thine own mouth; a stranger, and not thine own lips.

Further, it is not true that we are “DENIGRATING” anybody or any religion! We are telling the truth! Telling the truth so that the people may know is not denigrating. You cannot blacken something already black; you cannot speak damagingly of something already damaged! On the other hand, you must tell the TRUTH! And telling the truth is telling it as it is.

Sometimes truth can hurt us and others, but telling the truth is a duty. That is just what I am doing here. I cannot, for example, greet Godspeed to those who practice their man-made inventions. The Bible says in PROVERBS 24:24, He that saith unto the wicked, Thou art righteous; him shall the people curse, nations shall abhor him:

Still another reader, Doug Lawrence says: “At Mass, Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, who IS the perfect and eternal sacrifice for the sins of the world, is NOT sacrificed again and again, but he most certainly is OFFERED UP to God the Father again and again, for the sins of the world … renewing the divine promise of salvation … every hour of every day … every day of every year … in virtually every nation on earth.”

My question is: Who gave you or your priests the right to offer again and again the Lord Jesus Christ at the altar of the Catholic Church? As you said, “but he most certainly is OFFERED UP to God the Father again and again, for the sins of the world….”

The truth is that it is Jesus Christ who offered Himself up according to the Bible! What right do human beings have in offering up Jesus Christ? Is that even commanded for believers to do? Would God accept a Christ being offered up by others? And would Christ allow human beings to offer him up to the Father? What ascendancy do Catholic priests have over having to offer up Christ to the Father – even just once?

Here’s what the Bible says in three references.

HEBREWS 7:27

Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

HEBREWS 9:14

How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

HEBREWS 9:26

For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Note in the preceding verses the following citations! The words “offer himself” and “sacrifice himself” point out that He did the act himself. The verb is reflexive.

…“Who needeth not daily”…

…“for this he did once, when he offered up himself”…

…“offered himself without spot to God”…

…“but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin

by the sacrifice of himself”…

The offering of Christ gives sanctification or holiness, because of the sacrifice he had to undergo. Surely, it does not speak of his body and blood simply given on a platter by human beings in rituals, and then offered up to God. There is sacrifice involved.

…HEBREWS 10:10

By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of

Jesus Christ once for all.

…HEBREWS 10:10(BIBLE IN BASIC ENGLISH)

By that pleasure we have been made holy, by the offering of the body

of Jesus Christ once and for ever.


It will constitute an insult then to Christ if anybody will offer Him up again and again!

HEBREWS 6:6

If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.


Partaking of the bread and cup as commanded to the 1st century Christians is not to offer again and again what Jesus Christ had offered “once for all” and “once forever”. It is proclaiming the Lord’s death until He comes.

I CORINTHIANS 11:26(REVISED STANDARD VERSION)

For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

I CORINTHIANS 11:26(KING JAMES VERSION)

For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till he come.

I CORINTHIANS 10:16-17

16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

We are 100% certain that “this bread” is not the “host” of the Catholic Church!

MATTHEW 15:17

Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?


The host is fed through the mouth and will certainly be cast out into the draught! The bread Christians have to partake is not literal but spiritual!

JOHN 6:50, 63

50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.

63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

Being a part of the body “or the church” is the way to partake with the bread or flesh and the blood of the Lord Jesus!

I CORINTHIANS 10:17

For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

The body is the church!

COLOSSIANS 1:18

And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

taken from esoriano.wordpress.com

winmail
6th Feb 2012, 09:40
Biblically, Peter can not be a pope! It was prohibited by Christ to the original twelve disciples to be called ‘rabbi’ or teacher because their only teacher was Jesus Christ.

(Matthew 23:8) “But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren.”

They were also forbidden to address anybody on earth their father because (religiously speaking) they have only one Father, which is the Father in heaven.

(Matthew 23:9) “And call none your father upon earth; for one is your father, who is in heaven.”



Masyado mong ginawang litteral yun nakasulat sa Mat: 23:9

ito

Actually wala naman masama kung tawagin Father katunayan sa

Acts 7:2... Ang sabi ni Stephen ganito...
To this he replied: "Brothers and fathers, listen to me! The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham while he was still in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Haran. 'Leave your country and your people,' God said, 'and go to the land I will show you.'

yan si Abraham tinawag na Father masama po ba?.

Ito pa

Judges 17:9-10 Micah told the Levite: "Be to me a PRIEST and FATHER."

1 Corinthians 4:15

English Standard Version (ESV)
15 For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.





Christ’s way of liberating people from errors and fallacies! It is from Him we pattern our interactions, especially as he said in

MARK 7:7, Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.



ang dami mong Copy Paste kay eli-boy e hindi naman nya alam ang Orignal Greek translation nyan.

etong una lang muna sagutin ko sinagot na to ni Bro. Diego_99

ito sagot nya sa sinasabi mong Vein repetition .



Magandang gabi po :)


Salamat po sir hadeyah sa tanong.


Tungkol po sa katanungan po na ito, mas pinapaboran ko po ang salin ng Douay-Rheims ng mē battalogēsēte na speak not much kaysa vain repetitions, pero posible rin po na tama ang salin na babble, kung base po yung text sa Aramaic ܡܦܩܩܝܢ. Sa totoo lang po, mali ang saling vain repetitions. At lahat nung source[s] na pinagkuhanan ng mga Protestante, e.g. Ovid, Suidas, Terence, Eramus, etc. ay mas pinapaboran ang naging salin sa Douay-Rheims. Kahit sila (Protestante)[1] man din po ay aminado na hindi po ito ang orihinal na bersyon, ayon nga sa kilalang Protestant scholar na si Joseph Alexander (The Gospel According to Matthew Explained, p. 170), “Use not vain repetitions is a paraphrase and gloss but not a version, giving probably the sense but not the form of the original (…).” Yung mga sinabi pong etymological source[s] ng batta mula sa modernong Greek lexicon ngayon, e.g. nakuha daw ito sa pangalan ng Haring si Battus (tignan ang Rawlinson, The History of Herodotus, p. 106, para sa paliwanag), maging kay Battus the Poet (tignan ang Ovid, Met. ii. 688, &c.; Anton. Lib. 22, para sa sinasabing pinanggalingan daw nito, ayon kay Erasmus) ay hindi po ganun angkop sa totoong kahulugan nito. Nga po pala, makikita rin po ang sinasabi kong ito sa isang salin ng Bibliya ng Protestante na tugma sa salin sa Douay-Rheims


"But in preiynge nyle ze speke moche as hethen men don, for thei gessen that thei be herd in her moche speche."
- Matthew 6:7, Wycliffe (A.D. 1380)

Kung mapapansin mo po magkaparehas ang kahulugan ng salitang battalogia at polulogia dahil parehas lang po ang nais tukuyin nito at ito nga po'y speak [not] much. Ang ugat po ng salitang battalogēsēte ay battalogeo( verbal at nominal form) na nanggaling sa salitang ‘batta’ na ang ibig sabihin ay ‘much’, at sa ‘logeo' (from logia meaning word) na ang katumbas sa salitang Ingles ay to speak.[2] Habang ang salitang polulogia (a corresponding noun) ay nanggaling naman sa salitang ‘polu’ (kung saan nakuha natin ang salitang ‘poly’ = ‘many’ o ‘much’; hal. polytheism, much married, polygamy, many colored) at logia.

Ngayon, ang isa po sa magiging tanong dito ay kung ano po ba ang ibig sabihin po ng vain repetitions para sa mga Protestante? Dahil sa kung tutuosin po ay kahit sila-sila po'y hindi magkasundo sa kung ano po sa tekstong ito ang hinatulan ng Panginoon.[3] Isa rin po sa dapat natin tandaan na hindi po hiwalay ang teksto ng Mt 6:7 sa buong konteksto ng Mt 6 na kung saan ang tinutukoy ay mga Impokrito.[4] Kung titignan po natin ito sa may ganitong pananaw mas titibay po ang ebidensya na kasama parin po ito sa konteksto na tumutukoy sa mga Impokrito, sa kadahilanan kung atin po itong susuriin simula vss. 2-6 at vss. 16-18 sila po ang binanggit ni Cristo.

Bilang reperensya naman po na hindi kinundena ang repetitions (o ang pag-ulit-ulit) sa Bibliya narito po ang ilang halimbawa:



(1) Ang mga Seraphim ay nag-sisipag-awitan ng “Holy, Holy, Holy the Lord God of host…” (Is 6:3; cf. Rv 4:8) ng walang tigil, araw at gabi.

(2) Ang paggamit ni JesuCristo sa himno na tinatawag na hallel magnum, na nag-uumpisa sa Psalm 115 at nagtatapos sa Psalm 118; kung saan sa unang apat na berso ang parehas na salita’y madalas ginagamit.

(3) Sa Psalm 119, makailang ulit sinambit ni King David ang mga katagang ito: “Teach me, O Lord, thy statutes, ordinances, commandments, judgments, the way of thy statutes.”

(4) Sa Psalm 107, apat na beses ginamit ang mga salitang ito, “Oh that men would praise the Lord for His goodness.” (ver. 8, 15, 21, 31)

(5) Sa Psalm 136 [135], ang naturang mga salita, “For His steadfast love endures forever,” ay ginamit ng dalawampu’t-anim na beses.

(6) Sa awit ng mga awit (Canticle) ng tatlong bata, mababasa ang mga salitang ‘Blessed the Lord’ ay inulit ng mahigit kumulang tatlongpu’t-dalawang beses. (Da 3:51-90)

(7) Ang panalangin ni JesuCristo sa Getsemani (Mt 26:39, 42, 44; Mk 14:39)

(8) Sa awit ng mga awit 13, mababasa ang salitang ‘The Lord is his name!’ na inulit ng tatlong beses sa Amos 4 (vv. 5, 9)


*Adisyonal na reperensya


• Eph 1:16; Co 1:9; 4:12; I Th 1:2; II Th 1:11; II Ti 1:3 (Paulit-ulit na binabanggit ang iisang tao sa Intersasyon)
• Rm 1:9-10; 12:12: Phil 4:1 (pagdarasal at pagpapasalamat, at pagbanggit ng ibang Simbahan sa kanyang {San Pablo} panalangin ng tuloy-tuloy [incessantly])
• Ne 1:4-6; Ps 141:5 (Ang paggamit ng singular ‘prayer’ sa halip na ‘prayers’ ay nagpapahiwatig na ang panalangin ay iisa lamang at ito’y makailang ulit sinasambit)
• Ps 34:1; 35:28; 71:6; 33:9; 113:3 (Ang pagpupugay o pagbibigay papuri sa Diyos ay patuloy na gagawin magpakailanman)
• I Th 5:17 (manalangin ng walang tigil)

At bago ko po makalimutan, mayroon pong salin sa Tagalog na katulad ng sinasabi ko po. Base po ito sa salin ng Protestante at hindi po yung sa Catholic edition, ;)


“Sa pananalangin ninyo’y huwag kayong gagamit ng napakaraming salita, gaya ng mga Hentil. Ang akala nila’y pakikinggan sila ng Diyos dahil sa dami ng kanilang salita.”
- Mateo 6:7, TPV NT (1995)


____________

1 Ayon sa Protestant scholar na si Tholuck, “… the large majority of the translations take battalogia in the sense of [I]πολυλογια….. Almost all the commentators also restrict the meaning to much speaking in prayer.” (Tholuck, p. 310)
2 W. E. Vine, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (4 vols. in 1; Westwood: Fleming H. Revell, 1966), III, 281. (Protestant source)
3 Ayon po dito [mga sipi mula sa Protestante] ang hinatulan daw po ng panginoon ay ang mismong repetitions:


Ayon kay Rosenmuller: “Do not repeat the same words often. BATTA means to say the same thing very often.”

Ayon kay Grotius: “To repeat the word (Ecclus. 7:15) is the same thing that is here called BATTA.”

Ayon kay Beza: “In praying do not babble the same thing as the heathen.”

Ayon kay Gualperious: “BATTA means to often repeat the same word.”

Ayon sa Vincent's Word Studies “... to repeat the same formula many times...”

Habang dito [mga sipi mula sa Protestante] naman po ay iba naman ang hinatulan,


Ayon kay Cook: “The precept is not directed against the frequent repetition of earnest prayer. Our Lord's own example sanctions the use of long and repeated prayers.”

Muli, ayon kay Cook: “The precept is not against the frequent repetition of earnest prayer, but against the superstitious repetition of a form in the hope of being better heard by God, which is the point of Elijah's taunt, etc.”

Mula sa Gray, Bib. Museum in margin: “It is not repetition but vain repetition, empty of heart and devoid of hope that is here rebuked.”

Ayon sa Geneva Study Bible: “Long prayers are not condemned, but vain, needless, and superstitious ones.”

Ayon sa People's New Testament: “What is forbidden is not much praying, nor praying in the same words (the Lord did both), but making the number of prayers, length of prayers, or time spent in praying, a point of observance and of merit.”

Sino po kaya sa kanila ang tama? :)

4 Ayon sa Protestant scholar na si Tholuck, hindi daw dapat isipin na ang talata sa Mateo 6:7, 8, ay hiwalay sa konteksto ng Mateo 23:14, kung saan ang paggamit ng mahabang panalangin ay naging gawi na ng mga mapagkunwaring Pariseo para isipin ng mga taong makakakita na sila’y banal. (Tignan ang Introduction, p. 26, sa kanyang Commentary on the Sermon on the Mount, salin ni Lundin Brown); Sa Codex Vaticanus, ang tinutukoy sa Mateo 6:7 ay υποκριται ('hypocrites') imbes na εθνικοι ('gentiles') na ginamit naman sa Codex Sinaiticus. Kung susuriin mabuti ang kabuan ng Mateo 6, makikita na simula sa vv. 2-6 at vv. 16-18 ang tinutukoy ni Hesus ay ang mga Impokrito, tangin sa vv. 7-15 lamang ito naiba.

yeoh_8
6th Feb 2012, 10:40
You can see links before reply 115337_n.jpg

Jeremias 2:27
"Na nangagsasabi sa kahoy, Ikaw ay aking ama; at sa bato, Iyong ipinanganak ako: sapagka't kanilang ipinihit ang kanilang likod sa akin, at hindi ang kanilang mukha: nguni't sa panahon ng kanilang kabagabagan ay sasabihin nila, Ikaw ay bumangon, at iligtas mo kami.

kazel0729
6th Feb 2012, 11:20
You can see links before reply

The word “pope” according to Catholic authorities means, “father”.

Although Catholic authorities say that Peter was the first pope, no records in history, in archaeology or in the Bible will prove that Peter was once a pope! The apostles, including Peter were prohibited by the Lord Jesus Christ to use the title “father” or “teacher”.



Peter was not the first pope, no records in history, in archaeology? Sure ka na ba dyan or tamad lang siguro mag-research. Copy-paste mo lang mga sinabi ni eliboy. Bakit hindi mo confirm yan by yourself para malaman mo.

Peter became the first pope of early Christian during 33 AD – 67 AD. Si Eli pinanganak noong April 4, 1947. Siguro sinasabi niya na hindi first pope si Peter kasi hindi niya nakita, kasi naman obvious layo nang agwat. No history records? :lol:

Siguro karamihan or halos lahat sa mga member ninyo (MCGI a.k.a. ADD) hindi alam na mga ancestors ninyo galing sa INC (Iglesia ni Cristo). Mahilig kasi sa “wala”, “wala yan” at no history records.

kazel0729
6th Feb 2012, 14:53
The truth of the matter is that the Catholic Church invented the word “pope” only in the 11th century many hundreds of years after the death of the apostles. Allegedly, the pope is the recipient of the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven being handed down from one pope to another in an undisturbed or unbroken succession! Is that reality or just mere fantasy???


Ano pala para sa inyo ang ibig sabihin ng Pope? Yan lang ba pagka-intindi ninyo “Father”? Mga members ninyo sabi rin na ang meaning daw ng Pope ay “Kahalili ng Diyos”, yan ba pagka-intindi ninyo sa inyong literal na interpretation?

Pwde rin ninyong sabihin na ang first pope ay si Simon, yan naman ang pangalan niya. Tinatawag at binansagan siya ni Jesus na Peter which means Rock. Hindi ata nagbabasa ng Biblia mga taong ‘to.

Matthew 16: 18-19 KJV

18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter [petros, which means little rock] , and upon this rock [petra, means very great rock, referring to Christ Himself] I [pointing to Himself] will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Hindi rin po namin gawain ang literal na mag-translate sa Biblia. Verse 19, yan siguro sinasabi mong "keys" na literal mong interpret. Sabi rin ng mga members ninyo na ang bato dyan ay ang bato daw mismo sa lugar na nakatungtong sila.. :lol: Sobrang galing nyo talaga mag-interpret..:clap:

kazel0729
6th Feb 2012, 15:02
Quote ko lang 'to na galing sayo yeoh_8

“The rise in number of scientists that reject the Bible is due to these scientists’ frustrations in false religions led by these false prophets. The increasing number of atheists worldwide is also caused by the imprudent interpretations of the Scriptures by these blind religious leaders!”


Hindi mo rin siguro alam na ang Leader ninyo ay ganyan.

1.Imprudent interpretations of the Scriptures – meaning unwise interpretations, literal interpretations of the scriptures

2.Blind Religious Leader - meaning still blinded and forever blinded despite of the existing Facts


Kung kayo rin po ay blind, hindi po yan ipagtataka dahil blind din kasi ang leader.

Matthew 15:14

Let them alone; they are blind guides. And if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit.”


Isa pa dyan, ang inyong leader ay laging nag-mumura kahit sa kanyang TV program. Ito po ang mga salita na sinasabi niya: “Tarantado”, “Ulol”, “Gago”.

Matthew 5:22

But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.

James 1:26

If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless.

Santiago 1:26

Kung inaakala ninuman na siya'y relihiyoso, ngunit hindi naman siya marunong magpigil ng dila, dinadaya lamang niya ang kanyang sarili. Walang kabuluhan ang kanyang pagiging relihiyoso.


Sabi rin ng leader ninyo, ok lang daw mag-mura at naniwala naman kayo.:upset:

unleash97
6th Feb 2012, 17:25
ay! maganda ang pagkaintindi mu brad! hehe! :yipee:
"pray for him" is diferrent from "pray to him/pray to me"
tatagalugin ko po, " Ipagdasal nyo ako.."
Napakalinaw po ng pagkasabi,at galing na din mismo sa inyo..hehe

ahh, so you think that praying is always equal to worship? of course, hindi sasabihin ni st. paul sa mga early christians na "i pray you, pray me to God" kasi mga buhay pa yung hinihingan nya ng pabor, tnt.
the saints, although dead bodily, are all alive in God. hence, we can ask their intercession. now, pano mo yan sasabihin sa kanila? sisigaw ka sa ibabaw ng bubong nyo? lol
we communicate to the saints by mentally thinking them and by faith, that in this mystical body of Christ we are all united, -and this kind of communication is through prayer, but it is not necessarily worship.
we do not adore or worship the saints, rather we beseech their brotherly aid to pray for us to God who in heaven they beheld face to face. kung talagang dapat direct to God ang dasal, bakit ang mga tao duon nakikiusap instead ke moises rather than direct to God? bakit hindi na lang gumaling ang sinuman kesa maghintay sa mga apostol? the fact is that me mga tao lang talaga na mas malapit sa Dyos kesa sa atin, so it would be nice na lapitan ang tao na malapit sa Dyos, am i right? tnt
ito nga pala katunayan na ang mga early christians ay nagpi-pray ng intercession sa mga santo, galing yan sa mga catacombs

You can see links before reply

Photo: Catacomb of St. Sabastiano: Fragments of a wall plaster from the triclia with numerous graffiti that ask for the prayers of the martyred apostles, Peter and Paul. :excited:

unleash97
6th Feb 2012, 17:31
You can see links before reply

The word “pope” according to Catholic authorities means, “father”.

Although Catholic authorities say that Peter was the first pope, no records in history, in archaeology or in the Bible will prove that Peter was once a pope! The apostles, including Peter were prohibited by the Lord Jesus Christ to use the title “father” or “teacher”.

MATTHEW 23:8-9 (KJV)

But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

Arguments to the contrary based on illogical reasoning and distorted personal opinions are passed off as truth by the Catholics but the final authority is the word of God, which never said that there has been such an office in the true Church.

The truth of the matter is that the Catholic Church invented the word “pope” only in the 11th century many hundreds of years after the death of the apostles. Allegedly, the pope is the recipient of the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven being handed down from one pope to another in an undisturbed or unbroken succession! Is that reality or just mere fantasy???

mawalang galang na, pero nasagot na ang accusation na yan, ibinabalik mo na naman, tnt.
ganito na lang, can you prove to me na sinugo ni Jesus si eli? hindi mo pa nasasagot yan ah, lol

unleash97
6th Feb 2012, 18:09
Biblically, Peter can not be a pope! It was prohibited by Christ to the original twelve disciples to be called ‘rabbi’ or teacher because their only teacher was Jesus Christ.

(Matthew 23:8) “But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren.”

They were also forbidden to address anybody on earth their father because (religiously speaking) they have only one Father, which is the Father in heaven.

(Matthew 23:9) “And call none your father upon earth; for one is your father, who is in heaven.”

Peter will definitely not allow anybody to call him pope because that word means Father, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia cited afore.

So, we can safely conclude that Peter did not ever hold the position of pope, biblically and historically, according to the Bible, and to official documents from the Catholic Church itself.

(---nasagot na rin ito ah, tnt. parang wala lang kasi prejudiced na ang isip, tnt)

But was he the rock upon which the Church was built?

Peter, an Apostle, first to be called, is part of the Church.

(1 Corinthians 12:28) “And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.”

He is not the rock or the foundation, but was among those who were founded upon the real rock or ‘petra’, or foundation.

πε?τρα

petra

pet’-ra

Feminine of the same as G4074; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively): – rock.

Strong’s Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries

Dictionaries of Hebrew and Greek Words taken from Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance by James Strong, S.T.D., LL.D., 1890.

Note that the Church was founded on a ‘petra’ — in the feminine gender, and not on a ‘petros’ ( a stone), the name ascribed to Peter.

(John 1:42) “And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.”

It was not only Peter that was called a stone, but Peter himself called the members of the first century Church as lively stones.

(1 Peter 2:5) “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.”

Members of the first century Church were called by Peter as ‘lively stones’ or ‘lithos’ in the original Greek tongue.

λι?θος

lithos

Thayer Definition:

1) a stone

1a) of small stones

1b) of building stones

1c) metaphorically of Christ

They, Peter, the other Apostles, and the members, altogether formed the edifice founded on the rock or ‘petra’.

(Matthew 16:18) “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

The rock mentioned is ‘petra’ and not ‘petros’.

(Ephesians 2:20) “And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone…”

Note that the Apostles (including Peter) and the prophets are built upon the foundation(they are not the foundation), the chief cornerstone, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Is there anybody else qualified to be the foundation of the true Church in the Bible?

(1 Corinthians 3:11) “For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”

Anybody who will build a church, and make Peter or any other man its foundation is rejecting Christ and building it in vain. Peter said:

(Acts 4:10-12) “Be it known to you all and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God hath raised from the dead, even by him, this man standeth here before you, whole. This is the stone which was rejected by you the builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved” DOUAY-RHEIMS VERSION

The house or the building founded on or built upon the ‘petra’ or the foundation rock (which is Christ), is the Church of God.

(1 Timothy 3:15) “But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.”

God built it upon Christ — the real foundation.

(Hebrews 3:4) “For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.”

(Psalams 127:1) “Except the LORD build the house, they labor in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain.”

(---hmmn, ang dami pang pasikot-sikot, simple lang naman, tnt. ang tanong dyan, sino ba kausap ni Jesus? si simon, si simon kasi nagsabi ke Lord na "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God". in return, Christ said to hin (simon) "you are rock, and upon this rock I shall build My Church". hence, from that time on tinawag na nila si simon bilang bato na sa aramaic ay kipha (transliterated into greek as cephas) at petrus sa koine greek.
now, tungkol naman sa petrus and petra distinction mo, ang distinction na yan ay hindi applicable sa koine greek, dahil ginagamit lang ang distinction na yan sa poetry at hindi sa technical language. technically, ang maliit na bato ay lithos lang. besides, ang petra-petrus ay mga gender noun, alangan namang tawagin ni Jesus si simon na petra, eh di nagmukhang bakla si simon, ahahaha! :lmao:
but the fact is, ang language nila Jesus ay aramaic, hence ang word na kipha ang original na ipinangalan Nya ke simon at ang word na yan ay noun na gender neutral, but most of all ang kipha means ROCK, tnt) :dance:

unleash97
6th Feb 2012, 18:19
Christ’s way of liberating people from errors and fallacies! It is from Him we pattern our interactions, especially as he said in

MARK 7:7, Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Jesus Christ criticized the man-made doctrines of the Jews! So we also criticize the practices of some – not to waste our time – but for errors and fallacies to be highlighted – so that people will be liberated from their ignorance of Christ’s way.

MATTHEW 15:5-9
5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;

6 And honor not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

7 Ye hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying,

8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoreth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

The Catholic Mass is a man-made doctrine, and so I have compassion for the many millions who were made to believe that it is a commandment of God!

It is always an act of love to show people their errors that they may reform and be saved from shame! If criticizing the belief of others is a waste of time according to you, why are you criticizing our way which is the way of Christ? Aren’t you contradicting yourself? To disapprove of something rightfully being used by others and then approve of what you wrongfully use is utterly against the Bible.

THE ROMANS 14:22

Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.

Please note that I am not aware of you reading my blogs. I hope that in your doing so, your time is not being wasted!

Another comment from a certain Michael says, “In your church you do it another way, not similar to the Roman Catholic’s but it’s the same way actually.” [Laughter]

How can it be the same when, according to you, “In your church you do it another way….” Understand first the meaning of the simple word, “other” or another before you laugh!

“Other” or another means different, and in no way could they be the same. The intention is different; therefore, the spirit is different.

KU, my reader says: “All religions were invented by men. No one can say one is better than the other. No one religion can guarantee eternal salvation, if ever there is such a thing. Denigrating other religions, whether it’s Roman Catholic, Anglican, Islam, etc, so as to give the impression that yours is better, doesn’t work for me. It’s like when courting a girl. Telling the girl about the imperfections of your rivals only reflects on your own insecurities. Stand on your own. Highlight your good qualities but not on the expense of others.”

The work of preaching is not dictated by men, starting from topics to delivery. You do not compare it, for example, with worldly activities like courting. And there is no system that works for one and doesn’t in another. It is either it is according to God’s will or not.

It is not our principle to stand on “our own” as you said! And we do not “highlight our good qualities at the expense of others!” It is our principle to stand on the faith we learned from the Bible.

COLOSSIANS 1:23

If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

It is your own belief that all religions were invented by men! Where did you base that claim? The Bible teaches a religion established by God and not by men!

MATTHEW 6:33

But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

JAMES 1:27

Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

There are those who have established their own righteousness like you! It is obviously because of a different intention and therefore, a different spirit that works. The Bible says something about submitting to the righteousness of God. In ROMANS 10:3, For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

As to your charge that I criticize to my own advantage, it is not good for anybody to highlight his own qualities! Mali ka dyan pare! You don’t know me. PROVERBS 27:2 tells us, Let another man praise thee, and not thine own mouth; a stranger, and not thine own lips.

Further, it is not true that we are “DENIGRATING” anybody or any religion! We are telling the truth! Telling the truth so that the people may know is not denigrating. You cannot blacken something already black; you cannot speak damagingly of something already damaged! On the other hand, you must tell the TRUTH! And telling the truth is telling it as it is.

Sometimes truth can hurt us and others, but telling the truth is a duty. That is just what I am doing here. I cannot, for example, greet Godspeed to those who practice their man-made inventions. The Bible says in PROVERBS 24:24, He that saith unto the wicked, Thou art righteous; him shall the people curse, nations shall abhor him:

Still another reader, Doug Lawrence says: “At Mass, Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, who IS the perfect and eternal sacrifice for the sins of the world, is NOT sacrificed again and again, but he most certainly is OFFERED UP to God the Father again and again, for the sins of the world … renewing the divine promise of salvation … every hour of every day … every day of every year … in virtually every nation on earth.”

My question is: Who gave you or your priests the right to offer again and again the Lord Jesus Christ at the altar of the Catholic Church? As you said, “but he most certainly is OFFERED UP to God the Father again and again, for the sins of the world….”

The truth is that it is Jesus Christ who offered Himself up according to the Bible! What right do human beings have in offering up Jesus Christ? Is that even commanded for believers to do? Would God accept a Christ being offered up by others? And would Christ allow human beings to offer him up to the Father? What ascendancy do Catholic priests have over having to offer up Christ to the Father – even just once?

Here’s what the Bible says in three references.

HEBREWS 7:27

Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

HEBREWS 9:14

How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

HEBREWS 9:26

For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Note in the preceding verses the following citations! The words “offer himself” and “sacrifice himself” point out that He did the act himself. The verb is reflexive.

…“Who needeth not daily”…

…“for this he did once, when he offered up himself”…

…“offered himself without spot to God”…

…“but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin

by the sacrifice of himself”…

The offering of Christ gives sanctification or holiness, because of the sacrifice he had to undergo. Surely, it does not speak of his body and blood simply given on a platter by human beings in rituals, and then offered up to God. There is sacrifice involved.

…HEBREWS 10:10

By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of

Jesus Christ once for all.

…HEBREWS 10:10(BIBLE IN BASIC ENGLISH)

By that pleasure we have been made holy, by the offering of the body

of Jesus Christ once and for ever.


It will constitute an insult then to Christ if anybody will offer Him up again and again!

(---For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.)
[
B]HEBREWS 6:6

If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
[/B]

Partaking of the bread and cup as commanded to the 1st century Christians is not to offer again and again what Jesus Christ had offered “once for all” and “once forever”. It is proclaiming the Lord’s death until He comes.

I CORINTHIANS 11:26(REVISED STANDARD VERSION)

For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

I CORINTHIANS 11:26(KING JAMES VERSION)

For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till he come.

I CORINTHIANS 10:16-17

16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

We are 100% certain that “this bread” is not the “host” of the Catholic Church!

(---hmp, how sure? from the earliest days of christianity nandyan na ang holy Eucharist, tnt)

MATTHEW 15:17

Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?

(---hmmn, wala sa context, iba pinag-uusapan sa verse na yan, tnt)
The host is fed through the mouth and will certainly be cast out into the draught! The bread Christians have to partake is not literal but spiritual!

JOHN 6:50, 63

50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.

63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

Being a part of the body “or the church” is the way to partake with the bread or flesh and the blood of the Lord Jesus!

I CORINTHIANS 10:17

For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

The body is the church!

COLOSSIANS 1:18

(---the body is the church? that means Christ is inviting us to eat the church -one of the most silliest statements i've ever red, ad nauseam! lol)

And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

taken from esoriano.wordpress.com

ahm, mawalang galang na ulit, hindi ito thread ng ADD; gumawa ka ng sarili mong thread kung gusto mong magpreach. at kung wala kang tanong (na matino, tnt) bat ka nagpopost sa thread ng mga katoliko, wala bang me pumapansin sayo? lol :lol:

unleash97
6th Feb 2012, 18:24
You can see links before reply 115337_n.jpg

Jeremias 2:27
"Na nangagsasabi sa kahoy, Ikaw ay aking ama; at sa bato, Iyong ipinanganak ako: sapagka't kanilang ipinihit ang kanilang likod sa akin, at hindi ang kanilang mukha: nguni't sa panahon ng kanilang kabagabagan ay sasabihin nila, Ikaw ay bumangon, at iligtas mo kami.

we boast the cross of Christ, we venerate it as the instrument through which Christ redeemed the world

winmail
6th Feb 2012, 18:35
God forbid that I should glory, save in THE CROSS OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST…” [Galatians 6:12-16 KJV]

That’s the reason why we Catholics are fond of the Cross because it reminds us that the Risen Lord died on the Cross for our Salvation.

unleash97
6th Feb 2012, 18:45
St. Teresa of Avila
You can see links before reply
Teresa Sanchez Cepeda Davila y Ahumada
Born at Avila, Old Castile, 28 March, 1515; died at Alba de Tormes, 4 Oct., 1582.
The third child of Don Alonso Sanchez de Cepeda by his second wife, Doña Beatriz Davila y Ahumada, who died when the saint was in her fourteenth year, Teresa was brought up by her saintly father, a lover of serious books, and a tender and pious mother. After her death and the marriage of her eldest sister, Teresa was sent for her education to the Augustinian nuns at Avila, but owing to illness she left at the end of eighteen months, and for some years remained with her father and occasionally with other relatives, notably an uncle who made her acquainted with the Letters of St. Jerome, which determined her to adopt the religious life, not so much through any attraction towards it, as through a desire of choosing the safest course. Unable to obtain her father's consent she left his house unknown to him on Nov., 1535, to enter the Carmelite Convent of the Incarnation at Avila, which then counted 140 nuns. The wrench from her family caused her a pain which she ever afterwards compared to that of death. However, her father at once yielded and Teresa took the habit.
After her profession in the following year she became very seriously ill, and underwent a prolonged cure and such unskillful medical treatment that she was reduced to a most pitiful state, and even after partial recovery through the intercession of St. Joseph, her health remained permanently impaired. During these years of suffering she began the practice of mental prayer, but fearing that her conversations with some world-minded relatives, frequent visitors at the convent, rendered her unworthy of the graces God bestowed on her in prayer, discontinued it, until she came under the influence, first of the Dominicans, and afterwards of the Jesuits. Meanwhile God had begun to visit her with "intellectual visions and locutions", that is manifestations in which the exterior senses were in no way affected, the things seen and the words heard being directly impressed upon her mind, and giving her wonderful strength in trials, reprimanding her for unfaithfulness, and consoling her in trouble. Unable to reconcile such graces with her shortcomings, which her delicate conscience represented as grievous faults, she had recourse not only to the most spiritual confessors she could find, but also to some saintly laymen, who, never suspecting that the account she gave them of her sins was greatly exaggerated, believed these manifestations to be the work of the evil spirit. The more she endeavoured to resist them the more powerfully did God work in her soul. The whole city of Avila was troubled by the reports of the visions of this nun. It was reserved to St. Francis Borgia and St. Peter of Alcantara, and afterwards to a number of Dominicans (particularly Pedro Ibañez and Domingo Bañez), Jesuits, and other religious and secular priests, to discern the work of God and to guide her on a safe road.
The account of her spiritual life contained in the "Life written by herself" (completed in 1565, an earlier version being lost), in the "Relations", and in the "Interior Castle", forms one of the most remarkable spiritual biographies with which only the "Confessions of St. Augustine" can bear comparison. To this period belong also such extraordinary manifestations as the piercing or transverberation of her heart, the spiritual espousals, and the mystical marriage. A vision of the place destined for her in hell in case she should have been unfaithful to grace, determined her to seek a more perfect life. After many troubles and much opposition St. Teresa founded the convent of Discalced Carmelite Nuns of the Primitive Rule of St. Joseph at Avila (24 Aug., 1562), and after six months obtained permission to take up her residence there. Four years later she received the visit of the General of the Carmelites, John-Baptist Rubeo (Rossi), who not only approved of what she had done but granted leave for the foundation of other convents of friars as well as nuns. In rapid succession she established her nuns at Medina del Campo (1567), Malagon and Valladolid (1568), Toledo and Pastrana (1569), Salamanca (1570), Alba de Tormes (1571), Segovia (1574), Veas and Seville (1575), and Caravaca (1576). In the "Book of Foundations" she tells the story of these convents, nearly all of which were established in spite of violent opposition but with manifest assistance from above. Everywhere she found souls generous enough to embrace the austerities of the primitive rule of Carmel. Having made the acquaintance of Antonio de Heredia, prior of Medina, and St. John of the Cross, she established her reform among the friars (28 Nov., 1568), the first convents being those of Duruelo (1568), Pastrana (1569), Mancera, and Alcalá de Henares (1570).
A new epoch began with the entrance into religion of Jerome Gratian, inasmuch as this remarkable man was almost immediately entrusted by the nuncio with the authority of visitor Apostolic of the Carmelite friars and nuns of the old observance in Andalusia, and as such considered himself entitled to overrule the various restrictions insisted upon by the general and the general chapter. On the death of the nuncio and the arrival of his successor a fearful storm burst over St. Teresa and her work, lasting four years and threatening to annihilate the nascent reform. The incidents of this persecution are best described in her letters. The storm at length passed, and the province of Discalced Carmelites, with the support of Philip II, was approved and canonically established on 22 June, 1580. St. Teresa, old and broken in health, made further foundations at Villanuava de la Jara and Palencia (1580), Soria (1581), Granada (through her assistant the Venerable Anne of Jesus), and at Burgos (1582). She left this latter place at the end of July, and, stopping at Palencia, Valladolid, and Medina del Campo, reached Alba de Torres in September, suffering intensely. Soon she took to her bed and passed away on 4 Oct., 1582, the following day, owing to the reform of the calendar, being reckoned as 15 October. After some years her body was transferred to Avila, but later on reconveyed to Alba, where it is still preserved incorrupt. Her heart, too, showing the marks of the Transverberation, is exposed there to the veneration of the faithful. She was beatified in 1614, and canonized in 1622 by Gregory XV, the feast being fixed on 15 October.
St. Teresa's position among writers on mystical theology is unique. In all her writings on this subject she deals with her personal experiences, which a deep insight and analytical gifts enabled her to explain clearly. The Thomistic substratum may be traced to the influence of her confessors and directors, many of whom belonged to the Dominican Order. She herself had no pretension to found a school in the accepted sense of the term, and there is no vestige in her writings of any influence of the Areopagite, the Patristic, or the Scholastic Mystical schools, as represented among others, by the German Dominican Mystics. She is intensely personal, her system going exactly as far as her experiences, but not a step further.
fortunately, me copy ako ng libro nya na the interior castles, tnt. she was deeply a mystic, and in this regard i felt affiliated to her charisma

igieboy900
6th Feb 2012, 19:05
bakit walang nasusulat sa bibliya tungkol sa mga dinosaur?

unleash97
6th Feb 2012, 19:06
St. Giovanni Melchior Bosco
You can see links before reply
(Or St. John Bosco; Don Bosco.)
Founder of the Salesian Society. Born of poor parents in a little cabin at Becchi, a hill-side hamlet near Castelnuovo, Piedmont, Italy, 16 August, 1815; died 31 January 1888; declared Venerable by Pius X, 21 July, 1907. Note: Pope Pius XI beatified him in 1929 and canonized him in 1934.
When he was little more than two years old his father died, leaving the support of three boys to the mother, Margaret Bosco. John's early years were spent as a shepherd and he received his first instruction at the hands of the parish priest. He possessed a ready wit, a retentive memory, and as years passed his appetite for study grew stronger. Owing to the poverty of the home, however, he was often obliged to turn from his books to the field, but the desire of what he had to give up never left him. In 1835 he entered the seminary at Chieri and after six years of study was ordained priest on the eve of Trinity Sunday by Archbishop Franzoni of Turin.
Leaving the seminary, Don Bosco went to Turin where he entered zealously upon his priestly labours. It was here that an incident occurred which opened up to him the real field of effort of his afterlife. One of his duties was to accompany Don Cafasso upon his visits to the prisons of the city, and the condition of the children confined in these places, abandoned to the most evil influences, and with little before them but the gallows, made such a indelible impression upon his mind that he resolved to devote his life to the rescue of these unfortunate outcasts. On the eighth of December, 1841, the feast of the Immaculate Conception, while Don Bosco was vesting for Mass, the sacristan drove from the Church a ragged urchin because he refused to serve Mass. Don Bosco heard his cries and recalled him, and in the friendship which sprang up between the priest and Bartolomeo Garelli was sown the first seed of the "Oratory", so called, no doubt, after the example of St. Philip Neri and because prayer was its prominent feature. Don Bosco entered eagerly upon the task of instructing this first pupil of the streets; companions soon joined Bartolomeo, all drawn by a kindness they had never known, and in February, 1842, the Oratory numbered twenty boys, in March of the same year, thirty, and in March, 1846, four hundred.
As the number of boys increased, the question of a suitable meeting-place presented itself. In good weather walks were taken on Sundays and holidays to spots in the country about Turin where lunch was eaten, and realizing the charm which music held for the untamed spirits of his disciples Don Bosco organized a band for which some old brass instruments were procured. In the autumn of 1844 he was appointed assistant chaplain to the Rifugio, where Don Borel entered enthusiastically into his work. With the approval of Archbishop Franzoni, two rooms were secured adjoining the Rifugio and converted into a chapel, which was dedicated to St. Francis de Sales. The members of the Oratory now gathered at the Rifugio, and numbers of boys from the surrounding district applied for admission. It was about this time (1845) that Don Bosco began his night schools and with the closing of the factories the boys flocked to his rooms where he and Don Borel instructed them in rudimentary branches.
The success of the Oratory at the Rifugio was not of long duration. To his great distress Don Bosco was obliged to give up his rooms and from this on he was subjected to petty annoyances and obstacles which, at times, seemed to spell the ruin of his undertaking. His perseverance in the face of all difficulties led many to the conclusion that he was insane, and an attempt was even made to confine him in an asylum. Complaints were lodged against him, declaring his community to be a nuisance, owing to the character of the boys he befriended. From the Rifugio the Oratory was moved to St. Martin's, to St. Peter's Churchyard, to three rooms in Via Cottolengo, where the night schools were resumed, to an open field, and finally to a rough shed upon the site of which grew up an Oratory that counted seven hundred members. Don Bosco took lodgings nearby, where he was joined by his mother. "Mama Margaret", as Don Bosco's mother came to be known, gave the last ten years of her life in devoted service to the little inmates of this first Salesian home. When she joined her son at the Oratory the outlook was not bright. But sacrificing what small means she had, even to parting with her home, its furnishings, and her jewelry, she brought all the solicitude and love of a mother to these children of the streets. The evening classes increased and gradually dormitories were provided for many who desired to live at the Oratory. Thus was founded the first Salesian Home which now houses about one thousand boys.
The municipal authorities by this time had come to recognize the importance of the work which Don Bosco was doing, and he began with much success a fund for the erection of technical schools and workshops. These were all completed without serious difficulty. In 1868 to meet the needs of the Valdocco quarter of Turin, Don Bosco resolved to build a church. Accordingly a plan was drawn in the form of a cross covering an area of 1,500 sq. yards. He experienced considerable difficulty in raising the necessary money, but the charity of some friends finally enabled him to complete it at a cost of more than a million francs (about 200,000). The church was consecrated 9 June, 1868, and placed under the patronage of Our Lady, Help of Christians. In the same year in which Don Bosco began the erection of the church fifty priests and teachers who had been assisting him formed a society under a common rule which Pius IX, provisionally in 1869, and finally in 1874, approved.
Character and growth of the oratory
Any attempt to explain the popularity of the Oratory among the classes to which Don Bosco devoted his life would fail without an appreciation of his spirit which was its life. For his earliest intercourse with poor boys he had never failed to see under the dirt, the rags, and the uncouthness the spark which a little kindness and encouragement would fan into a flame. In his vision or dream which he is said to have had in his early boyhood, wherein it was disclosed to him what his life work would be, a voice said to him: "Not with blows, but with charity and gentleness must you draw these friends to the path of virtue." And whether this be accounted as nothing more than a dream, that was in reality the spirit with which he animated his Oratory. In the earlier days when the number of his little disciples was slender he drew them about him by means of small presents and attractions, and by pleasant walks to favorite spots in the environs of Turin. These excursions occurring on Sunday, Don Bosco would say Mass in the village church and give a short instruction on the Gospel; breakfast would then be eaten, followed by games; and in the afternoon Vespers would be chanted, a lesson in Catechism given, and the Rosary recited. It was a familiar sight to see him in the field surrounded by kneeling boys preparing for confession.
Don Bosco's method of study knew nothing of punishment. Observance of rules was obtained by instilling a true sense of duty, by removing assiduously all occasions for disobedience, and by allowing no effort towards virtue, how trivial soever it might be, to pass unappreciated. He held that the teacher should be father, adviser, and friend, and he was the first to adopt the preventive method. Of punishment he said: "As far as possible avoid punishing . . . . try to gain love before inspiring fear." And in 1887 he wrote: "I do not remember to have used formal punishment; and with God's grace I have always obtained, and from apparently hopeless children, not alone what duty exacted, but what my wish simply expressed." In one of his books he has discussed the causes of weakness of character, and derives them largely from a misdirected kindness in the rearing of children. Parents make a parade of precocious talents: the child understands quickly, and his sensitiveness enraptures all who meet him, but the parents have only succeeded in producing an affectionate, perfected, intelligent animal. The chief object should be to form the will and to temper the character. In all his pupils Don Bosco tried to cultivate a taste for music, believing it to be a powerful and refining influence. "Instruction", he said, "is but an accessory, like a game; knowledge never makes a man because it does not directly touch the heart. It gives more power in the exercise of good or evil; but alone it is an indifferent weapon, wanting guidance." He always studied, too, the aptitudes and vocations of his pupils, and to an almost supernatural quickness and clearness of insight into the hearts of children must be ascribed no small part of his success. In his rules he wrote: "Frequent Confession, frequent Communion, daily Mass: these are the pillars which should sustain the whole edifice of education." Don Bosco was an indefatigable confessor, devoting days to the work among his children. He recognized that gentleness and persuasion alone were not enough to bring to the task of education. He thoroughly believed in play as a means of arousing childish curiosity — more than this, he places it among his first recommendations, and for the rest he adopted St. Philip Neri's words: "Do as you wish, I do not care so long as you do not sin."

this saint inspires me to value the youths, magaling syang tagaturo ng mga bata. i would like to be like him someday, tnt

unleash97
6th Feb 2012, 19:08
bakit walang nasusulat sa bibliya tungkol sa mga dinosaur?

(---hindi encyclopedia ang bible, tnt)

unleash97
6th Feb 2012, 19:20
St. Martin de Porres
You can see links before reply
Martin de Porres (December 9, 1579 – November 3, 1639) was a lay brother of the Dominican Order who was beatified in 1837 by Pope Gregory XVI and canonized in 1962 by Pope John XXIII. He is the patron saint of mixed-race people and all those seeking interracial harmony.
He was noted for work on behalf of the poor, establishing an orphanage and a children's hospital. He maintained an austere lifestyle, which included fasting and abstaining from meat. Among the many miracles attributed to him were those of levitation, bilocation, miraculous knowledge, instantaneous cures, and an ability to communicate with animals.
Account of his life
Juan Martin de Porres was born in the city of Lima, in the Viceroyalty of Peru, on December 9, 1579, the illegitimate son of a Spanish nobleman and a black former slave who was born in Panama. He had a sister named Juana, born three years later in 1581. He grew up in poverty and, when his mother could not support him, Martin was confided to a primary school for two years, and then placed with a surgeon-barber to learn the medical arts. He was spent hours of the night in prayer, a practice which increased as he grew older. At the age of 15 he asked for admission to the Dominican Convent of the Rosary in Lima and was received first as a servant boy, and as his duties grew he was promoted to almoner. Eventually he felt the call to enter the Dominican Order, and he was received as a tertiary. Years later, his piety and miraculous cures led his superiors to drop the racial limits on admission to the friars, and he was made a full Dominican. It is said that when his convent was in debt, he implored them: "I am only a poor mulatto, sell me." Martin was deeply attached to the Blessed Sacrament, and he was praying in front of it one night when the step of the altar he was kneeling on caught fire. Throughout all the confusion and chaos that followed, he remained where he was, unaware of what was happening around him.
When he was 34, after he had been given the habit of a coadjutor brother, Martin was assigned to the infirmary, where he was placed in charge and would remain in service until his death at the age of fifty-nine. His superiors saw in him the virtues necessary to exercise unfailing patience in this difficult role. It was not long before miracles were attributed to him. Saint Martin also cared for the sick outside his convent, often bringing them healing with only a simple glass of water. One day an aged beggar, covered with ulcers and almost naked, stretched out his hand, and Martin took him to his own bed. One of his brethren reproved him. Martin replied: “Compassion, my dear Brother, is preferable to cleanliness."
When an epidemic struck Lima, there were in this single Convent of the Rosary sixty friars who were sick, many of them novices in a distant and locked section of the convent, separated from the professed. Martin is said to have passed through the locked doors to care for them, a phenomenon which was reported in the residence more than once. The professed, too, saw him suddenly beside them without the doors having been opened. Martin continued to transport the sick to the convent until the provincial superior, alarmed by the contagion threatening the religious, forbade him to continue to do so. His sister, who lived in the country, offered her house to lodge those whom the residence of the religious could not hold. One day he found on the street a poor Indian, bleeding to death from a dagger wound, and took him to his own room until he could transport him to his sister’s hospice. The superior, when he heard of this, reprimanded his subject for disobedience. He was extremely edified by his reply: “Forgive my error, and please instruct me, for I did not know that the precept of obedience took precedence over that of charity. The superior gave him liberty thereafter to follow his inspirations in the exercise of mercy.
Martin was a vegetarian. He begged for alms to procure necessities the convent could not provide. In normal times Martin succeeded with his alms to feed 160 poor persons every day, and distributed a remarkable sum of money every week to the indigent.
Martin founded in the city of Lima a residence for orphans and abandoned children. This lay brother had always wanted to be a missionary, but never left his native city; yet even during his lifetime he was seen elsewhere, in regions as far distant as Africa, China, Algeria and Japan (note: nakarating din sya sa maynila and was seen healing people during an epidemic). An African slave who had been in irons said he had known Martin when he came to relieve and console many like himself, telling them of heaven. When later the same slave saw him in Peru, he was very happy to meet him again and asked him if he had had a good voyage; only later did he learn that Saint Martin had never left Lima. A merchant from Lima was in Mexico and fell ill; he said aloud: “Oh, Brother Martin, if only you were here to care for me!” and immediately saw him enter his room. And again, this man did not know until later that he had never been in Mexico.
Death and commemoration
San Martin de Porres Catholic Church in Laredo, Texas
St. Martin de Porres Catholic Church in Jensen Beach, Florida
Martin was a friend of both Saint John de Massias and Saint Rose of Lima. When he died in Lima on November 3, 1639, Martin was known to the entire city. Word of his miracles had made him known as a saint throughout the region. As his body was displayed to allow the people of the city to pay their respects, each person snipped a tiny piece of his habit to keep as a relic. It is said that three habits were taken from the body. His body was then interred in the grounds of the monastery.
After he died, the miracles and graces received when he was invoked multiplied in such profusion that his body was exhumed after 25 years and said to be found intact, and exhaling a fine fragrance. Letters to Rome pleaded for his beatification; the decree affirming the heroism of his virtues was issued in 1763 by Pope Clement XIII. Pope Gregory XVI beatified Martin de Porres in 1837. Nearly 125 years later, Blessed Martin was canonized in Rome by Pope John XXIII on May 6, 1962. His feast day is November 3. He is the patron saint of people of mixed race, and of innkeepers, barbers, public health workers and more.
He is commemorated in the Calendar of Saints of the Church of England on 3 November.

st. martin is my favorite saint for he is meek and humble like the Master. in him catholicism shines brightly :excited:

unleash97
6th Feb 2012, 19:35
Mother Teresa of Calcutta
You can see links before reply
Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu, the future Mother Teresa, was born on 26 August 1910, in Skopje, Macedonia, to Albanian heritage. Her father, a well-respected local businessman, died when she was eight years old, leaving her mother, a devoutly religious woman, to open an embroidery and cloth business to support the family. After spending her adolescence deeply involved in parish activities, Agnes left home in September 1928, for the Loreto Convent in Rathfarnam (Dublin), Ireland, where she was admitted as a postulant on October 12 and received the name of Teresa, after her patroness, St. Therese of Lisieux.
Agnes was sent by the Loreto order to India and arrived in Calcutta on 6 January 1929. Upon her arrival, she joined the Loreto novitiate in Darjeeling. She made her final profession as a Loreto nun on 24 May 1937, and hereafter was called Mother Teresa. While living in Calcutta during the 1930s and '40s, she taught in St. Mary's Bengali Medium School.
On 10 September 1946, on a train journey from Calcutta to Darjeeling, Mother Teresa received what she termed the "call within a call," which was to give rise to the Missionaries of Charity family of Sisters, Brothers, Fathers, and Co-Workers. The content of this inspiration is revealed in the aim and mission she would give to her new institute: "to quench the infinite thirst of Jesus on the cross for love and souls" by "labouring at the salvation and sanctification of the poorest of the poor." On October 7, 1950, the new congregation of the Missionaries of Charity was officially erected as a religious institute for the Archdiocese of Calcutta.
Throughout the 1950s and early 1960s, Mother Teresa expanded the work of the Missionaries of Charity both within Calcutta and throughout India. On 1 February 1965, Pope Paul VI granted the Decree of Praise to the Congregation, raising it to pontifical right. The first foundation outside India opened in Cocorote, Venezuela, in 1965. The Society expanded to Europe (the Tor Fiscale suburb of Rome) and Africa (Tabora, Tanzania) in 1968.
From the late 1960s until 1980, the Missionaries of Charity expanded both in their reach across the globe and in their number of members. Mother Teresa opened houses in Australia, the Middle East, and North America, and the first novitiate outside Calcutta in London. In 1979 Mother Teresa was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. By that same year there were 158 Missionaries of Charity foundations.
The Missionaries of Charity reached Communist countries in 1979 with a house in Zagreb, Craotia, and in 1980 with a house in East Berlin, and continued to expand through the 1980s and 1990s with houses in almost all Communist nations, including 15 foundations in the former Soviet Union. Despite repeated efforts, however, Mother Teresa was never able to open a foundation in China.
Mother Teresa spoke at the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations General Assembly in October 1985. On Christmas Eve of that year, Mother Teresa opened "Gift of Love" in New York, her first house for AIDS patients. In the coming years, this home would be followed by others, in the United States and elsewhere, devoted specifically for those with AIDS.
From the late 1980s through the 1990s, despite increasing health problems, Mother Teresa travelled across the world for the profession of novices, opening of new houses, and service to the poor and disaster-stricken. New communities were founded in South Africa, Albania, Cuba, and war-torn Iraq. By 1997, the Sisters numbered nearly 4,000 members, and were established in almost 600 foundations in 123 countries of the world.
After a summer of travelling to Rome, New York, and Washington, in a weak state of health, Mother Teresa returned to Calcutta in July 1997. At 9:30 PM, on 5 September, Mother Teresa died at the Motherhouse. Her body was transferred to St Thomas's Church, next to the Loreto convent where she had first arrived nearly 69 years earlier. Hundreds of thousands of people from all classes and all religions, from India and abroad, paid their respects. She received a state funeral on 13 September, her body being taken in procession - on a gun carriage that had also borne the bodies of Mohandas K. Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru - through the streets of Calcutta. Presidents, prime ministers, queens, and special envoys were present on behalf of countries from all over the world.

unleash97
6th Feb 2012, 19:57
St. Thomas Aquinas
You can see links before reply
Philosopher, theologian, doctor of the Church (Angelicus Doctor), patron of Catholic universities, colleges, and schools. Born at Rocca Secca in the Kingdom of Naples, 1225 or 1227; died at Fossa Nuova, 7 March, 1274.
Life
The great outlines and all the important events of his life are known, but biographers differ as to some details and dates. Death prevented Henry Denifle from executing his project of writing a critical life of the saint. Denifle's friend and pupil, Dominic Prümmer, O.P., professor of theology in the University of Fribourg, Switzerland, took up the work and published the "Fontes Vitae S. Thomae Aquinatis, notis historicis et criticis illustrati"; and the first fascicle (Toulouse, 1911) has appeared, giving the life of St. Thomas by Peter Calo (1300) now published for the first time. From Tolomeo of Lucca . . . we learn that at the time of the saint's death there was a doubt about his exact age (Prümmer, op. cit., 45). The end of 1225 is usually assigned as the time of his birth. Father Prümmer, on the authority of Calo, thinks 1227 is the more probable date (op. cit., 28). All agree that he died in 1274.
Landulph, his father, was Count of Aquino; Theodora, his mother, Countess of Teano. His family was related to the Emperors Henry VI and Frederick II, and to the Kings of Aragon, Castile, and France. Calo relates that a holy hermit foretold his career, saying to Theodora before his birth: "He will enter the Order of Friars Preachers, and so great will be his learning and sanctity that in his day no one will be found to equal him" (Prümmer, op. cit., 18). At the age of five, according to the custom of the times, he was sent to receive his first training from the Benedictine monks of Monte Cassino. Diligent in study, he was thus early noted as being meditative and devoted to prayer, and his preceptor was surprised at hearing the child ask frequently: "What is God?"
About the year 1236 he was sent to the University of Naples. Calo says that the change was made at the instance of the Abbot of Monte Cassino, who wrote to Thomas's father that a boy of such talents should not be left in obscurity (Prümmcr, op. cit., 20). At Naples his preceptors were Pietro Martini and Petrus Hibernus. The chronicler says that he soon surpassed Martini at grammar, and he was then given over to Peter of Ireland, who trained him in logic and the natural sciences. The customs of the times divided the liberal arts into two courses: the Trivium, embracing grammar, logic, and rhetoric; the Quadrivium, comprising music, mathematics, geometry, and astronomy . . . . Thomas could repeat the lessons with more depth and lucidity than his masters displayed. The youth's heart had remained pure amidst the corruption with which he was surrounded, and he resolved to embrace the religious life.
Some time between 1240 and August, 1243, he received the habit of the Order of St. Dominic, being attracted and directed by John of St. Julian, a noted preacher of the convent of Naples. The city wondered that such a noble young man should don the garb of poor friar. His mother, with mingled feelings of joy and sorrow, hastened to Naples to see her son. The Dominicans, fearing she would take him away, sent him to Rome, his ultimate destination being Paris or Cologne. At the instance of Theodora, Thomas's brothers, who were soldiers under the Emperor Frederick, captured the novice near the town of Aquapendente and confined him in the fortress of San Giovanni at Rocca Secca. Here he was detained nearly two years, his parents, brothers, and sisters endeavouring by various means to destroy his vocation. The brothers even laid snares for his virtue, but the pure-minded novice drove the temptress from his room with a brand which he snatched from the fire. Towards the end of his life, St. Thomas confided to his faithful friend and companion, Reginald of Piperno, the secret of a remarkable favour received at this time. When the temptress had been driven from his chamber, he knelt and most earnestly implored God to grant him integrity of mind and body. He fell into a gentle sleep, and, as he slept, two angels appeared to assure him that his prayer had been heard. They then girded him about with a white girdle, saying: "We gird thee with the girdle of perpetual virginity." And from that day forward he never experienced the slightest motions of concupiscence.
The time spent in captivity was not lost. His mother relented somewhat, after the first burst of anger and grief; the Dominicans were allowed to provide him with new habits, and through the kind offices of his sister he procured some books — the Holy Scriptures, Aristotle's Metaphysics, and the "Sentences" of Peter Lombard. After eighteen months or two years spent in prison, either because his mother saw that the hermit's prophecy would eventually be fulfilled or because his brothers feared the threats of Innocent IV and Frederick II, he was set at liberty, being lowered in a basket into the arms of the Dominicans, who were delighted to find that during his captivity "he had made as much progress as if he had been in a studium generale" (Calo, op. cit., 24).
Thomas immediately pronounced his vows, and his superiors sent him to Rome. Innocent IV examined closely into his motives in joining the Friars Preachers, dismissed him with a blessing, and forbade any further interference with his vocation. John the Teutonic, fourth master general of the order, took the young student to Paris and, according to the majority of the saint's biographers, to Cologne, where he arrived in 1244 or 1245, and was placed under Albertus Magnus, the most renowned professor of the order. In the schools Thomas's humility and taciturnity were misinterpreted as signs of dullness, but when Albert had heard his brilliant defence of a difficult thesis, he exclaimed: "We call this young man a dumb ox, but his bellowing in doctrine will one day resound throughout the world."
In 1245 Albert was sent to Paris, and Thomas accompanied him as a student. In 1248 both returned to Cologne. Albert had been appointed regent of the new studium generale, erected that year by the general chapter of the order, and Thomas was to teach under him as Bachelor. (On the system of graduation in the thirteenth century see ORDER OF PREACHERS — II, A, 1, d). During his stay in Cologne, probably in 1250, he was raised to the priesthood by Conrad of Hochstaden, archbishop of that city. Throughout his busy life, he frequently preached the Word of God, in Germany, France, and Italy. His sermons were forceful, redolent of piety, full of solid instruction, abounding in apt citations from the Scriptures.
In the year 1251 or 1252 the master general of the order, by the advice of Albertus Magnus and Hugo a S. Charo (Hugh of St. Cher), sent Thomas to fill the office of Bachelor (sub-regent) in the Dominican studium at Paris. This appointment may be regarded as the beginning of his public career, for his teaching soon attracted the attention both of the professors and of the students. His duties consisted principally in explaining the "Sentences" of Peter Lombard, and his commentaries on that text-book of theology furnished the materials and, in great part, the plan for his chief work, the "Summa theologica".
In due time he was ordered to prepare himself to obtain the degree of Doctor in Theology from the University of Paris, but the conferring of the degree was postponed, owing to a dispute between the university and the friars. The conflict, originally a dispute between the university and the civic authorities, arose from the slaying of one of the students and the wounding of three others by the city guard. The university, jealous of its autonomy, demanded satisfaction, which was refused. The doctors closed their schools, solemnly swore that they would not reopen them until their demands were granted, and decreed that in future no one should be admitted to the degree of Doctor unless he would take an oath to follow the same line of conduct under similar circumstances. The Dominicans and Franciscans, who had continued to teach in their schools, refused to take the prescribed oath, and from this there arose a bitter conflict which was at its height when St. Thomas and St. Bonaventure were ready to be presented for their degrees. William of St-Amour extended the dispute beyond the original question, violently attacked the friars, of whom he was evidently jealous, and denied their right to occupy chairs in the university. Against his book, "De periculis novissimorum temporum" (The Perils of the Last Times), St. Thomas wrote a treatise "Contra impugnantes religionem", an apology for the religious orders (Touron, op. cit., II, cc. vii sqq.). The book of William of St-Amour was condemned by Alexander IV at Anagni, 5 October, 1256, and the pope gave orders that the mendicant friars should be admitted to the doctorate.
About this time St. Thomas also combated a dangerous book, "The Eternal Gospel" (Touron, op. cit., II, cxii). The university authorities did not obey immediately; the influence of St. Louis IX and eleven papal Briefs were required before peace was firmly established, and St. Thomas was admitted to the degree of Doctor in Theology. The date of his promotion, as given by many biographers, was 23 October, 1257. His theme was "The Majesty of Christ". His text, "Thou waterest the hills from thy upper rooms: the earth shall be filled with the fruit of thy works" (Psalm 103:13), said to have been suggested by a heavenly visitor, seems to have been prophetic of his career. A tradition says that St. Bonaventure and St. Thomas received the doctorate on the same day, and that there was a contest of humility between the two friends as to which should be promoted first.
From this time St. Thomas's life may be summed up in a few words: praying, preaching, teaching, writing, journeying. Men were more anxious to hear him than they had been to hear Albert, whom St. Thomas surpassed in accuracy, lucidity, brevity, and power of exposition, if not in universality of knowledge. Paris claimed him as her own; the popes wished to have him near them; the studia of the order were eager to enjoy the benefit of his teaching; hence we find him successively at Anagni, Rome, Bologna, Orvieto, Viterbo, Perugia, in Paris again, and finally in Naples, always teaching and writing, living on earth with one passion, an ardent zeal for the explanation and defence of Christian truth. So devoted was he to his sacred task that with tears he begged to be excused from accepting the Archbishopric of Naples, to which he was appointed by Clement IV in 1265. Had this appointment been accepted, most probably the "Summa theologica" would not have been written.
Yielding to the requests of his brethren, he on several occasions took part in the deliberations of the general chapters of the order. One of these chapters was held in London in 1263. In another held at Valenciennes (1259) he collaborated with Albertus Magnus and Peter of Tarentasia (afterwards Pope Innocent V) in formulating a system of studies which is substantially preserved to this day in the studia generalia of the Dominican Order (cf. Douais, op. cit.).
It is not surprising to read in the biographies of St. Thomas that he was frequently abstracted and in ecstasy. Towards the end of his life the ecstasies became more frequent. On one occasion, at Naples in 1273, after he had completed his treatise on the Eucharist, three of the brethren saw him lifted in ecstasy, and they heard a voice proceeding from the crucifix on the altar, saying "Thou hast written well of me, Thomas; what reward wilt thou have?" Thomas replied, "None other than Thyself, Lord" (Prümmer, op. cit., p. 38). Similar declarations are said to have been made at Orvieto and at Paris.
On 6 December, 1273, he laid aside his pen and would write no more. That day he experienced an unusually long ecstasy during Mass; what was revealed to him we can only surmise from his reply to Father Reginald, who urged him to continue his writings: "I can do no more. Such secrets have been revealed to me that all I have written now appears to be of little value" (modica, Prümmer, op. cit., p. 43). The "Summa theologica" had been completed only as far as the ninetieth question of the third part (De partibus poenitentiae).
Thomas began his immediate preparation for death. Gregory X, having convoked a general council, to open at Lyons on 1 May, 1274, invited St. Thomas and St. Bonaventure to take part in the deliberations, commanding the former to bring to the council his treatise "Contra errores Graecorum" (Against the Errors of the Greeks). He tried to obey, setting out on foot in January, 1274, but strength failed him; he fell to the ground near Terracina, whence he was conducted to the Castle of Maienza, the home of his niece the Countess Francesca Ceccano. The Cistercian monks of Fossa Nuova pressed him to accept their hospitality, and he was conveyed to their monastery, on entering which he whispered to his companion: "This is my rest for ever and ever: here will I dwell, for I have chosen it" (Psalm 131:14). When Father Reginald urged him to remain at the castle, the saint replied: "If the Lord wishes to take me away, it is better that I be found in a religious house than in the dwelling of a lay person." The Cistercians were so kind and attentive that Thomas's humility was alarmed. "Whence comes this honour", he exclaimed, "that servants of God should carry wood for my fire!" At the urgent request of the monks he dictated a brief commentary on the Canticle of Canticles.
The end was near; extreme unction was administered. When the Sacred Viaticum was brought into the room he pronounced the following act of faith:
If in this world there be any knowledge of this sacrament stronger than that of faith, I wish now to use it in affirming that I firmly believe and know as certain that Jesus Christ, True God and True Man, Son of God and Son of the Virgin Mary, is in this Sacrament . . . I receive Thee, the price of my redemption, for Whose love I have watched, studied, and laboured. Thee have I preached; Thee have I taught. Never have I said anything against Thee: if anything was not well said, that is to be attributed to my ignorance. Neither do I wish to be obstinate in my opinions, but if I have written anything erroneous concerning this sacrament or other matters, I submit all to the judgment and correction of the Holy Roman Church, in whose obedience I now pass from this life.
He died on 7 March, 1274. Numerous miracles attested his sanctity, and he was canonized by John XXII, 18 July, 1323. The monks of Fossa Nuova were anxious to keep his sacred remains, but by order of Urban V the body was given to his Dominican brethren, and was solemnly translated to the Dominican church at Toulouse, 28 January, 1369. A magnificent shrine erected in 1628 was destroyed during the French Revolution, and the body was removed to the Church of St. Sernin, where it now reposes in a sarcophagus of gold and silver, which was solemnly blessed by Cardinal Desprez on 24 July, 1878. The chief bone of his left arm is preserved in the cathedral of Naples. The right arm, bestowed on the University of Paris, and originally kept in the St. Thomas's Chapel of the Dominican church, is now preserved in the Dominican Church of S. Maria Sopra Minerva in Rome, whither it was transferred during the French Revolution.
A description of the saint as he appeared in life is given by Calo (Prümmer, op. cit., p. 401), who says that his features corresponded with the greatness of his soul. He was of lofty stature and of heavy build, but straight and well proportioned. His complexion was "like the colour of new wheat": his head was large and well shaped, and he was slightly bald. All portraits represent him as noble, meditative, gentle yet strong. St. Pius V proclaimed St. Thomas a Doctor of the Universal Church in the year 1567. In the Encyclical "Aeterni Patris", of 4 August, 1879, on the restoration of Christian philosophy, Leo XIII declared him "the prince and master of all Scholastic doctors". The same illustrious pontiff, by a Brief dated 4 August, 1880, designated him patron of all Catholic universities, academies, colleges, and schools throughout the world.
Writings (method and style)
It is not possible to characterize the method of St. Thomas by one word, unless it can be called eclectic. It is Aristotelean, Platonic, and Socratic; it is inductive and deductive; it is analytic and synthetic. He chose the best that could he find in those who preceded him, carefully sifting the chaff from the wheat, approving what was true, rejecting the false. His powers of synthesis were extraordinary. No writer surpassed him in the faculty of expressing in a few well-chosen words the truth gathered from a multitude of varying and conflicting opinions; and in almost every instance the student sees the truth and is perfectly satisfied with St. Thomas's summary and statement. Not that he would have students swear by the words of a master. In philosophy, he says, arguments from authority are of secondary importance; philosophy does not consist in knowing what men have said, but in knowing the truth (In I lib. de Coelo, lect. xxii; II Sent., D. xiv, a. 2, ad 1um). He assigns its proper place to reason used in theology (see below: Influence of St. Thomas), but he keeps it within its own sphere. Against the Traditionalists the Holy See has declared that the method used by St. Thomas and St. Bonaventure does not lead to Rationalism (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 1652). Not so bold or original in investigating nature as were Albertus Magnus and Roger Bacon, he was, nevertheless, abreast of his time in science, and many of his opinions are of scientific value in the twentieth century. Take, for instance, the following: "In the same plant there is the two-fold virtue, active and passive, though sometimes the active is found in one and the passive in another, so that one plant is said to be masculine and the other feminine" (3 Sent., D. III, Q. ii, a 1).
The style of St. Thomas is a medium between the rough expressiveness of some Scholastics and the fastidious elegance of John of Salisbury; it is remarkable for accuracy, brevity, and completeness. Pope Innocent VI (quoted in the Encyclical, "Aeterni Patris", of Leo XIII) declared that, with the exception of the canonical writings, the works of St. Thomas surpass all others in "accuracy of expression and truth of statement" (habet proprietatem verborum, modum dicendorum, veritatem sententiarum). Great orators, such as Bossuet, Lacordaire, Monsabré, have studied his style, and have been influenced by it, but they could not reproduce it. The same is true of theological writers. Cajetan knew St. Thomas's style better than any of his disciples, but Cajetan is beneath his great master in clearness and accuracy of expression, in soberness and solidity of judgment. St. Thomas did not attain to this perfection without an effort. He was a singularly blessed genius, but he was also an indefatigable worker, and by continued application he reached that stage of perfection in the art of writing where the art disappeared.

proud to be a thomistic-aristotelian philosopher! :excited:

Yael11
6th Feb 2012, 20:18
ahh, so you think that praying is always equal to worship? of course, hindi sasabihin ni st. paul sa mga early christians na "i pray you, pray me to God" kasi mga buhay pa yung hinihingan nya ng pabor, tnt.
the saints, although dead bodily, are all alive in God. hence, we can ask their intercession. now, pano mo yan sasabihin sa kanila? sisigaw ka sa ibabaw ng bubong nyo? lol
we communicate to the saints by mentally thinking them and by faith, that in this mystical body of Christ we are all united, -and this kind of communication is through prayer, but it is not necessarily worship.
we do not adore or worship the saints, rather we beseech their brotherly aid to pray for us to God who in heaven they beheld face to face. kung talagang dapat direct to God ang dasal, bakit ang mga tao duon nakikiusap instead ke moises rather than direct to God? bakit hindi na lang gumaling ang sinuman kesa maghintay sa mga apostol? the fact is that me mga tao lang talaga na mas malapit sa Dyos kesa sa atin, so it would be nice na lapitan ang tao na malapit sa Dyos, am i right? tnt
ito nga pala katunayan na ang mga early christians ay nagpi-pray ng intercession sa mga santo, galing yan sa mga catacombs
You can see links before reply
Photo: Catacomb of St. Sabastiano: Fragments of a wall plaster from the triclia with numerous graffiti that ask for the prayers of the martyred apostles, Peter and Paul. :excited:

kelan nagkaron ng pakialam yung tinatawag mung santo sayo para ipagdasal ka nya? at kahit sabihin na nating naririnig ka nya,nung santong hinihingan mu ng favor para ipagdasal ka, makikinig kaya si GOD dun sa Santo? A big no no po! hehe!
Wala pong special treatment si GOD kahit sa kanino mang namuhay o
nabubuhay dito sa mundo, hanggat andun yun faith mu sa Kanya
and obeying HIS will, He will never forsake you..
ang mga santong tinatawag ay mga tao din yan..
and hindi kelan man sila naging mediator sayo at kay GOD..
GOD commanded us to directly pray to him..
Salvation is individual, at walang alam yung mga santo sa kung anung mga gingagawa mu, neither they hear or see you..
tinuruan na nga po tayo ni GOD ng tamang pagdarasal eh tapus ngayon
idadamay nyo pa ung mga walang alam..hehe..
Sana mamulat po kayo..
:salute:



PS..

anu pu yong nasa pic? naiintindihan mu ba yung nakasulat dun?hehe..
paki translate nga po please.. :lmao:

Yael11
6th Feb 2012, 20:28
tanong ulit, magsite nga po kayo ng certain text sa Bible na nagsasabing humingi kayo ng tulong sa mga santo para ipagdasal kayo ng mga ito..
eh hindi naman po kasi kayo nagbabase sa fundamental writings ng christians which is the Bible..
sa mga Catholics writings din po kayo nagbabase eh..
anu ba yan..
dapat wag isali ang mga sulat nyo.. sa BIble lang basis natin..
okay? :)

unleash97
6th Feb 2012, 20:30
San Lorenzo Ruiz
You can see links before reply
Lorenzo Ruiz was born in Binondo, Manila, of a Chinese father and a Tagalog mother. His father taught him Chinese while his mother taught him Tagalog. Both of his parents were Roman Catholics.
Ruiz served as an altar boy at the convent of Binondo church. After being educated by the Dominican friars for a few years, Ruiz earned the title of escribano (calligrapher) because of his skillful penmanship. He became a member of the Cofradia del Santissimo Rosario (Confraternity of the Most Holy Rosary). He married and had two sons and a daughter with Rosario, a native. Life for them was generally peaceful, religious and full of contentment.
In 1636, while working as a clerk at the Binondo Church, Ruiz was falsely accused of killing a Spaniard. Due to the allegation, Ruiz sought asylum on board a ship with three Dominican priests: Saint Antonio Gonzalez; Saint Guillermo Courtet; Saint Miguel de Aozaraza, a Japanese priest; Saint Vicente Shiwozuka de la Cruz; and a layman named Saint Lazaro of Kyoto, a leper. Ruiz and his companions left for Okinawa, Japan on June 10, 1636, with the aid of the Dominican fathers and Fr. Giovanni Yago.
Martyrdom
The Tokugawa shogunate was persecuting Christians by the time Ruiz had arrived in Japan. The missionaries were arrested and thrown into prison. After two years, they were transferred to Nagasaki to face trial by torture.
On September 27, 1637, Ruiz and his companions were taken to the Nishizaka Hill, where they were tortured by being hung upside down a pit. This form of torture was known as tsurushi (釣殺し) in Japanese or horca y hoya in Spanish. The method was supposed to be extremely painful. Though the victim is bound, one hand is always left free so that victims may be able to signal a recantation of beliefs. In such cases, they would be freed. Ruiz refused to renounce Christianity and died from blood loss and suffocation. His body was cremated and his ashes were thrown into the sea.
According to early records on Filipino Cathecism, Lorenzo declared these words upon his death:


“Ego Catholicus sum et animo prompto paratoque pro Deo mortem obibo. Si mille vitas haberem, cunctas ei offerrem.”

English:

"I am a Catholic and wholeheartedly accept death for the Lord; if I have a thousand lives, all of them I will offer to Him."

Tagalog:

"Isa akong Katoliko at buong pusong tinatanggap ang kamatayan para sa Panginoon, kung ako man ay may sanlibong buhay, lahat ng iyon ay iaalay ko sa Kaniya."

Path to sainthood
Lorenzo Ruiz was beatified in Manila on February 18, 1981, by Pope John Paul II during his papal visit to Manila, the first beatification ceremony held outside the Vatican. San Lorenzo Ruiz was canonized by Pope John Paul II in the Vatican City, Rome, on October 18, 1987, making him the first Filipino saint and the first Filipino martyr.

ang gupo namin ay ang Knights of the Altar of San Lorenzo Ruiz, mabuhay! hehe :excited:

unleash97
6th Feb 2012, 20:41
kelan nagkaron ng pakialam yung tinatawag mung santo sayo para ipagdasal ka nya? at kahit sabihin na nating naririnig ka nya,nung santong hinihingan mu ng favor para ipagdasal ka, makikinig kaya si GOD dun sa Santo? A big no no po! hehe!
Wala pong special treatment si GOD kahit sa kanino mang namuhay o
nabubuhay dito sa mundo, hanggat andun yun faith mu sa Kanya
and obeying HIS will, He will never forsake you..
ang mga santong tinatawag ay mga tao din yan..
and hindi kelan man sila naging mediator sayo at kay GOD..
GOD commanded us to directly pray to him..
Salvation is individual, at walang alam yung mga santo sa kung anung mga gingagawa mu, neither they hear or see you..
tinuruan na nga po tayo ni GOD ng tamang pagdarasal eh tapus ngayon
idadamay nyo pa ung mga walang alam..hehe..
Sana mamulat po kayo..
:salute:



PS..

anu pu yong nasa pic? naiintindihan mu ba yung nakasulat dun?hehe..
paki translate nga po please.. :lmao:

walang special treatment? kung walang special treatment eh bat hindi Sya nagpapakita sayo, sa iba lang? tnt
yung nakasulat sa picture? tingnan mo sa baba ng pix me description. nuh ba yan, lol


tanong ulit, magsite nga po kayo ng certain text sa Bible na nagsasabing humingi kayo ng tulong sa mga santo para ipagdasal kayo ng mga ito..
eh hindi naman po kasi kayo nagbabase sa fundamental writings ng christians which is the Bible..
sa mga Catholics writings din po kayo nagbabase eh..
anu ba yan..
dapat wag isali ang mga sulat nyo.. sa BIble lang basis natin..
okay? :)

marami samples dyan, at sa dami nyan tinatamad ako magsitas kasi bulag lang ang di makakabasa nyan, tnt
ha? bible lang ang basihan? sino me sabi na dapat bible lang ang basihan? lol :lol:

unleash97
6th Feb 2012, 21:07
Blessed Pedro Calungsod
You can see links before reply

PEDRO CALUNGSOD was a young native of the Visayas region of the Philippines. Very little is known about him. He was just one of the boy catechists who went with some Spanish Jesuit missionaries from the Philippines to the Ladrones Islands in the western Pacific in 1668 to evangelize the Chamorros.
Life in the Ladrones was hard. The provisions for the Mission did not arrive regularly; the jungles were too thick to cross; the cliffs were very stiff to climb, and the islands were frequently visited by devastating typhoons. Despite all these, the missionaries persevered, and the Mission was blessed with many conversions. Subsequently, the islands were renamed “Marianas” by the missionaries in honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary and of the Queen Regent of Spain, María Ana, who was the benefactress of that Mission.
But very soon, a Chinese quack, named Choco, envious of the prestige that the missionaries were gaining among the Chamorros, started to spread the talk that the baptismal water of the missionaries was poisonous. And since some sickly Chamorro infants who were baptized died, many believed the calumniator and eventually apostatized. The evil campaign of Choco was readily supported by the Macanjas (sorcerers) and the Urritaos (young male prostitutes) who, along with the apostates, began persecuting the missionaries.
The most unforgettable assault happened on 2 April 1672, the Saturday just before the Passion Sunday of that year. At around seven o’clock in the morning, Pedro—by then already about 17 years old—and the superior of the mission, named Padre Diego Luís de San Vitores, came to the village of Tomhom, in the Island of Guam. There, they were told that a baby girl was recently born in the village, so they went to ask the child’s father, named Matapang, to bring out the infant for baptism. Matapang was a Christian and a friend of the missionaries, but having apostatized, he angrily refused to have his baby baptized.
To give Matapang some time to cool down, Padre Diego and Pedro gathered the children and some adults of the village at the nearby shore and started chanting with them the truths of the Catholic Faith. They invited Matapang to join them, but the apostate shouted back that he was angry with God and was already fed up with the Christian teachings.
Determined to kill the missionaries, Matapang went away and tried to enlist in his cause another villager, named Hirao, who was not a Christian. At first, Hirao refused, mindful of the kindness of the missionaries towards the natives; but when Matapang branded him a coward, he got piqued and so he consented. Meanwhile, during that brief absence of Matapang from his hut, Padre Diego and Pedro took the chance of baptizing the infant, with the consent of the Christian mother.
When Matapang learned of the baptism, he became even more furious. He violently hurled spears first at Pedro. The lad skirted the darting spears with remarkable dexterity. The witnesses said that Pedro had all the chances to escape because he was very agile, but he did not want to leave Padre Diego alone. Those who knew Pedro personally believed that he would have defeated his fierce aggressors and would have freed both himself and Padre Diego if only he had some weapons because he was a very valiant boy; but Padre Diego never allowed his companions to carry arms. Finally, Pedro got hit by a spear at the chest and he fell to the ground. Hirao immediately charged towards him and finished him off with a blow of a cutlass on the head. Padre Diego gave Pedro the sacramental absolution. After that, the assassins also killed Padre Diego.
Matapang took the crucifix of Padre Diego and pounded it with a stone while blaspheming God. Then, both assassins denuded the bodies of Pedro and Padre Diego, dragged them to the edge of the shore, tied large stones to the feet of these, brought them on a proa to sea and threw them into the deep. Those remains of the martyrs were never to be found again.
When the companion missionaries of Pedro learned of his death, they exclaimed, “Fortunate youth! How well rewarded his four years of persevering service to God in the difficult Mission are: he has become the precursor of our superior, Padre Diego, in Heaven!” They remembered Pedro to be a boy with very good dispositions, a virtuous catechist, a faithful assistant, and a good Catholic whose perseverance in the Faith even to the point of martyrdom proved him to be a good soldier of Christ (cf. II Tim 2:3).
Sainthood
On 19 December 2011, the Holy See officially approved the miracle qualifying Calungsod for sainthood by the Roman Catholic Church. The recognized miracle dates from 2002, when a Leyte woman who was pronounced clinically dead by accredited physicians two hours after a coronary heart attack was allegedly brought back to life when a doctor prayed for Calungsod's intercession.
Cardinal Angelo Amato presided over the declaration ceremony on behalf of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints. He later revealed that Pope Benedict XVI approved and signed the official promulgation decrees recognising the miracles as authentic and worthy of belief. While the miracle for Calungsod's sainthood has been signed by Pope Benedict XVI and approved by the Holy See, Filipino Catholics are waiting for the Pope to recite the official Latin formula, which will declare Calungsod a saint.. It is necessary for the Pope to recite the Latin formula of canonisation after a formal consistory is completed with the cardinals present in Rome.
After Saint Lorenzo Ruiz, Calungsod will be the second Filipino declared a saint by the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Catholic calendar of Martyrology celebrates Calungsod's feast along with Blessed Diego Luis de San Vitores every 2nd of April.

no doubt, pagnacanonize si pedro calungsod me mangyayaring maganda sa pilipinas.
(kamukha ko talaga sya, tnt)

igieboy900
6th Feb 2012, 21:16
TS pansin mo puro rant lng makikita mo d2 sa thread mo? kc no one cares!

hindi kme pumunta ng symbianize para magbasa ng copy paste mo >_>

unleash97
6th Feb 2012, 21:29
TS pansin mo puro rant lng makikita mo d2 sa thread mo? kc no one cares!

hindi kme pumunta ng symbianize para magbasa ng copy paste mo >_>

well, i simply dont care either. im doing this for God, to glorify Him. choice nila yan kung magbabasa sila o hindi, basta ako im just doing what is right, tnt

chijay
7th Feb 2012, 01:36
TS pansin mo puro rant lng makikita mo d2 sa thread mo? kc no one cares!

hindi kme pumunta ng symbianize para magbasa ng copy paste mo >_>

eh bakit ka pumasok dito? ganon ka na bang sobrang walang magawa sa buhay mo kaya pati wala kang pakialam eh nakakapagpost ka pa para sabihin lang na wala kang pakialam? :clap: good for you! :clap:

igieboy900
7th Feb 2012, 03:31
look at this... do we really need that to praise GOD? its a mentality created by mankind... I myself believe in God but not that hyperbolic! God don't choose, everyone is equal to God's eyes. Look at this. look at the church nowadays priest marries, some got caught in corruption etc etc there is even news about Vatican about its untold under the table businesses. We are all people here. I know the bible cuz I've read it. There is nothing wrong about it, I guess this is too much, right?! We all know what is history about and YES this is part of history but I guess, this too mind controlling. I do believe in GOD but not in the church cuz people dictates it, not GOD. I further conclude that "religion" nowadays is pure business, Its not reaching its advertising. by the way im a roman catholic :) and im sorry about my last post.

winmail
7th Feb 2012, 08:39
look at this... do we really need that to praise GOD? its a mentality created by mankind... I myself believe in God but not that hyperbolic! God don't choose, everyone is equal to God's eyes. Look at this. look at the church nowadays priest marries, some got caught in corruption etc etc there is even news about Vatican about its untold under the table businesses. We are all people here. I know the bible cuz I've read it. There is nothing wrong about it, I guess this is too much, right?! We all know what is history about and YES this is part of history but I guess, this too mind controlling. I do believe in GOD but not in the church cuz people dictates it, not GOD. I further conclude that "religion" nowadays is pure business, Its not reaching its advertising. by the way im a roman catholic :) and im sorry about my last post.

@igieboy900 dun ka nlang po sa agnostic or athiest site. mag-post ng ganyan hindi kami interesado sa idea mo konting respeto naman

para lang po ito sa mga katoliko.

unleash97
7th Feb 2012, 10:23
look at this... do we really need that to praise GOD? its a mentality created by mankind... I myself believe in God but not that hyperbolic! God don't choose, everyone is equal to God's eyes. Look at this. look at the church nowadays priest marries, some got caught in corruption etc etc there is even news about Vatican about its untold under the table businesses. We are all people here. I know the bible cuz I've read it. There is nothing wrong about it, I guess this is too much, right?! We all know what is history about and YES this is part of history but I guess, this too mind controlling. I do believe in GOD but not in the church cuz people dictates it, not GOD. I further conclude that "religion" nowadays is pure business, Its not reaching its advertising. by the way im a roman catholic :) and im sorry about my last post.

(---the fact that Christ built and instituted a church (and upon this rock I will build My church) is sufficient enough to dismiss your claim.
yes, God shows no partialities in judgement, we are all the same, for we all have a share in human dignity as a person. in dignity therefore all humans are equal, but as reality shows we also have differences in aptitudes, in virtues, and all the other distinctions that can be made as a result of the singularity of our personhood. hence, other humans may possess a greater propensity to be humble; some to have an innate desire for God; while others to be more docile to God's impulse -these qualities makes them endear to God more than the others, for God is a lover of good.
kaya naman ipinapakita ko dito ang mga santo para matuto tayo in how they pleased God. they are here to inspire us, by their good example, so that we, too, may learn how to make God happy.
it is true that some of the saints are more predisposed to do good kasi parang natural na yan sa kanila. but im not here showing their virtuous lives para lang idisplay at para lang tayo ay maglaway sa inggit sa kabutihan nila. no. let their example inspire you to follow them, keeping in mind that "what they are by nature, we must strove to be like through virtues".
hindi na kailangan gumawa ng great acts, importante lang ay yung fundamental orientation of the heart -sino ba talaga pinagsisilbihan mo, ang Dyos ba o ang sarili? on this point the saints can show us how to serve God while not destroying the self so that we may have an idea of how to please God in our distinct situation.
now, tungkol naman sa sinasabi mo na corruptions inside the church; 1st, wag masyadong magpapaniwala sa mga unsubstantiated allegations. always remember, in case of doubt, suspend, hindi reject. 2ndly, as a matter of fact and realistically, me mga kurap talaga kahit sa loob ng simbahan. hindi maiiwasan yan, normal kasi sila din ay mga tao lang, nagkakamali, nagkakasala. parang palayan, as the Lord remarked, kung saan ang palay at talahib ay tumutubo at hinahayaan Nya imperatively para ang mabubuti ay lalong lumakas, katulad ng katawan na kapag pinapahirapan ay lalong lumalakas. virtues are reinforced in such times of adversities; that under the blows of hammer we are being moulded according to the likeness of Jesus Christ, our one Master and Lord.
the universality of the church embraces all men so as to lead all to salvation -she, the bride of the Lamb, is therefore the church of saints and the church of sinners. like the Lord who is often polemized for being with publicans, the not so pure, the outcast, in a word, sinners, deigned to embrace them so as by His holiness the unclean may become clean -and so, too, the church has sinners in her bossom so that she may cure them. kung walang pasyente wala ng reason ang existence ng doktor, and hence the church.
as a catholic, you are bound by charity to pray for our erring fellow catholics, may they be simple members or belonging to the clergy. what good can you profit in whinning to the supposed ill behavior of some of our priests and bishops? nothing but discord in thoughts, and worse, resentment and feelings of rebellion. that can never be productive of anything good but injures the mystical body.
gaano man kasama, mga tao lang din sila who needs our help and be brought back to God. and it would be more helpful to pray na sana yung mga nasa loob ng simbahan ay mabiyayaan ng grasya at mabuting pag-iisip. indeed, hindi sila naging pari, bishop, cardinal o pope by sheer accident but where chosen by divine providence. God makes no mistake in chosing someone, talagang underpressure o me malakas na tentasyon ang humihila sa kanila, and for this reason we must support them (na parang sandigan) by our sacrifices and prayers para maibalik sila sa tamang landas. infallibility does not mean that they can not commit sins, it only signify that they are not liable to teach errors, and for this the Lord instructs us, "they sit at moses' chair (that is, they have authority): do therefore what they teach you but do not do what they do" (masasamang gawa).
dont lose your trust in the sanctity of the church, instead pray for the church. in this way you can please God and make Him happy than to sow confusion and tumultous rebellion which will break the heart of our heavenly Father. the choice is yours.
"he who hears you hears Me. he who rejects you rejects Me and the One who sent Me."

nyaharharhar
7th Feb 2012, 11:17
You can see links before reply

igieboy900
7th Feb 2012, 11:35
katoliko ako =_=

winmail
7th Feb 2012, 11:40
no Base sa statement mo @igieboy900 i think your a agnostic turning in to atheist..

may atheist and agnostic thread dito dun ka nlang mag post... hanapin mo nalang yun thread nila dito sa SB

unleash97
7th Feb 2012, 12:18
You can see links before reply

Saint Maximilian Maria Kolbe OFM Conv (8 January 1894 – 14 August 1941) was a Polish Conventual Franciscan friar, who volunteered to die in place of a stranger in
the Nazi German concentration camp of Auschwitz, located in German-occupied Poland during World War II. He was canonized on 10 October 1982 by Pope John Paul II, and declared a martyr of charity. He is the patron saint of drug addicts, political prisoners, families, journalists, prisoners, and the pro-life movement.[3] Pope John Paul II declared him "The Patron Saint of Our Difficult Century".[4] In Italian he is known as "San Massimiliano
Maria Kolbe"; his given name in Polish is
"Maksymilian", in French, "Maximilien". Due to his efforts to promote Consecration and entrustment to Mary, he is known as the Apostle of Consecration to Mary. [5] Biography Maximilian Kolbe was born Raymund
Kolbe on 8 January 1894 in Zduńska Wola, which was part of the Russian Empire at the time. He was the second son of Julius
Kolbe and Maria Dabrowska. His father was an ethnic German[6] and his mother of Polish origins. He had four brothers,
Francis, Joseph, Walenty (who lived a
year) and Andrew (who lived four years). His parents moved to Pabianice where they worked first as basket weavers. Later, his mother worked as a midwife (often donating her services), and owned a shop
in part of her rented house which sold
groceries and household goods. Julius
Kolbe worked at the Krushe and Ender Mill
and also worked on rented land where he
grew vegetables. In 1914, Julius joined Józef Piłsudski's Polish Legions and was captured by the Russians and hanged for fighting for the independence of a partitioned Poland. Kolbe's life was strongly influenced by a
childhood vision of the Virgin Mary that he later described: That night, I asked the Mother of God
what was to become of me. Then she
came to me holding two crowns, one
white, the other red. She asked me if I
was willing to accept either of these
crowns. The white one meant that I should persevere in purity, and the
red that I should become a martyr. I said that I would accept them both.[7] In 1907, Kolbe and his elder brother
Francis decided to join the Conventual Franciscans. They illegally crossed the border between Russia and Austria- Hungary and joined the Conventual Franciscan junior seminary in Lwów. In 1910, Kolbe was allowed to enter the novitiate. He professed his first vows in 1911, adopting the name Maximilian, and
the final vows in 1914, in Rome, adopting the names Maximilian Maria, to show his
devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary. Kolbe would later sing hymns to the Virgin Mary
in the concentration camp. In 1912, he was sent to Kraków, and in the same year to a college in Rome, where he
studied philosophy, theology,
mathematics, and physics. He earned a
doctorate in philosophy in 1915 at the Pontifical Gregorian University, and the doctorate in theology in 1919 at the
Pontifical University of St. Bonaventure. During his time as a student, he witnessed
vehement demonstrations against Popes St. Pius X and Benedict XV in Rome during an anniversary celebration by the
Freemasons. According to St. Maximilian, They placed the black standard of the
"Giordano Brunisti" under the
windows of the Vatican. On this
standard the archangel, St. Michael,
was depicted lying under the feet of
the triumphant Lucifer. At the same time, countless pamphlets were
distributed to the people in which the
Holy Father was attacked shamefully. [8][9] This event inspired Saint Kolbe to organize
the Militia Immaculata, or Army of Mary, to work for conversion of sinners and
enemies of the Catholic Church, specifically
the Freemasons, through the intercession
of the Virgin Mary. So serious was St.
Maximilian about this goal that he added
to the Miraculous Medal prayer: Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray
for us who have recourse to thee. And
for all those who do not have recourse
to thee; especially the Masons and all those recommended to thee.[10] The Immaculata friars utilized the most
modern printing and administrative
techniques in publishing catechetical and
devotional tracts, a daily newspaper with a
circulation of 230,000 and a monthly
magazine with a circulation of over one million.[11] Kolbe also used radio to spread his Catholic faith and to speak out
against the atrocities of the Nazi regime.
He is the only canonized saint to have held
an amateur radio license, with the call sign
SP3RN. In 1918, Kolbe was ordained a priest. In 1919, he returned to the newly independent Poland, where he was very active in promoting the veneration of the Immaculate Virgin Mary, founding and supervising the monastery of Niepokalanów near Warsaw, a seminary, a radio station, and several other
organizations and publications. Maximilian
Kolbe founded the monthly periodical
Rycerz Niepokalanej in 1922, and in 1927
founded a Franciscan monastery at
Niepokalanow, which became a major publishing centre. Kolbe left Poland for
Japan in 1930, spending six years there.
The monastery at Niepokalanow began in
his absence to publish the daily
newspaper, Maly Dziennik, which became
Poland's top-seller. Kolbe was accused of anti-semitism based on the content of
these newspapers, which included claims of a Zionist plot for world domination.[12] [13] However, he sheltered Jewish refugees during the war, and, according to
one person who worked close to him:
"When Jews came to me asking for a piece
of bread, I asked Father Maximilian if I
could give it to them in good conscience,
and he answered me, 'Yes, it is necessary to do this because all men are our brothers.'"[14][15] Between 1930 and 1936, he took a series of missions to Japan, where he founded a monastery at the
outskirts of Nagasaki, a Japanese paper, and a seminary. The monastery he
founded remains prominent in the Roman
Catholic Church in Japan. Kolbe decided to
build the monastery on a mountainside
that, according to Shinto beliefs, was not
the side best suited to be in harmony with nature. When the atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, Kolbe's monastery was saved because the other side of the
mountain took the main force of the blast.
During the Second World War, he provided
shelter to refugees from Greater Poland, including 2,000 Jews whom he hid from
Nazi persecution in his friary in Niepokalanów. On 17 February 1941, he was arrested by
the German Gestapo and imprisoned in the Pawiak prison. On 28 May, he was transferred to Auschwitz as prisoner # 16670. At the end of July 1941, three prisoners
disappeared from the camp, prompting SS- Hauptsturmführer Karl Fritzsch, the deputy camp commander, to pick 10 men to be
starved to death in an underground bunker
in order to deter further escape attempts.
When one of the selected men, Franciszek Gajowniczek, cried out, "My wife! My children!", Kolbe volunteered to take his place.[16] In the starvation cell, he celebrated Mass
each day for as long as he was able and
gave Holy Communion to the prisoners
covertly during the course of the day; the
bread given to prisoners was unleavened
and so could be used in the Eucharist, and sympathetic guards gave him materials,
including wine, that he could use. He led the other condemned men in song
and prayer and encouraged them by
telling them they would soon be with
Mary in Heaven. Each time the guards
checked on him, he was standing or
kneeling in the middle of the cell and looking calmly at those who entered. After
two weeks of dehydration and starvation,
only Kolbe remained alive. The guards
wanted the bunker emptied and so gave
Kolbe a lethal injection of carbolic acid. Some who were present at the injection
say that he raised his left arm and calmly waited for the injection.[17] His remains were cremated on 15 August, the feast of
the Assumption of Mary.

Yael11
7th Feb 2012, 12:53
walang special treatment? kung walang special treatment eh bat hindi Sya nagpapakita sayo, sa iba lang? tnt
yung nakasulat sa picture? tingnan mo sa baba ng pix me description. nuh ba yan, lol


marami samples dyan, at sa dami nyan tinatamad ako magsitas kasi bulag lang ang di makakabasa nyan, tnt
ha? bible lang ang basihan? sino me sabi na dapat bible lang ang basihan? lol :lol:

so what do you mean? that GOD makes special treatment? nakakatawa ka po.. hehe.. do you know who really GOD is? :)
kung may special treatment sya, eh di u mean that He promotes injustice?
kilala mu po ba tlga si GOD?
and if ever may special treatment sya, kindly site some instances or events na nagpapakita ng special treatment from HIM..

Another thing is that the Bible contains all the standards of all moral things in this world.. It teaches you to become what GOD want you to be..
Lahat ng kabutihan na naiisip mo mahahanap mu sa Bible yun..
Kung nag iisip ka po tlaga ng mabuti..hehe..
tama ba yan, nagtatanong syo ung ato tapus tinatamad ka
magsite? Ganyan ba ang turo sa inyo? Na maging tamad sa pagshare ng faith? tsk tsk tsk! :slap:
marami pong writings ang gawa ng TAO which relates to the happenings in
the Bible but not all really sites what happened and what the Bible
want us to obtain to become part of our knowledge.
kaya nga merong tintawag na Obsolete teachings..

winmail
7th Feb 2012, 13:35
so what do you mean? that GOD makes special treatment? nakakatawa ka po.. hehe.. do you know who really GOD is? :)


@Yael11 nakausap mo naba sayo ang Dios?

ganito lang yan patas ang tingin ng Dios sa lahat pero may pinipili syang tao para kausapin at mababasa mo yun sa Biblia.



Another thing is that the Bible contains all the standards of all moral things in this world.. It teaches you to become what GOD want you to be..
Lahat ng kabutihan na naiisip mo mahahanap mu sa Bible yun..
Kung nag iisip ka po tlaga ng mabuti..hehe..
tama ba yan, nagtatanong syo ung ato tapus tinatamad ka
magsite? Ganyan ba ang turo sa inyo? Na maging tamad sa pagshare ng faith? tsk tsk tsk! :slap:
marami pong writings ang gawa ng TAO which relates to the happenings in
the Bible but not all really sites what happened and what the Bible
want us to obtain to become part of our knowledge.
kaya nga merong tintawag na Obsolete teachings..

so what is your point?

winmail
7th Feb 2012, 13:42
so what do you mean? that GOD makes special treatment? nakakatawa ka po.. hehe.. do you know who really GOD is? :)


@Yael11 nag pakita naba sayo ang Dios?

ganito lang yan patas ang tingin ng Dios sa lahat pero may pinipili syang tao para kausapin at mababasa mo yun sa Biblia.



Another thing is that the Bible contains all the standards of all moral things in this world.. It teaches you to become what GOD want you to be..
Lahat ng kabutihan na naiisip mo mahahanap mu sa Bible yun..
Kung nag iisip ka po tlaga ng mabuti..hehe..
tama ba yan, nagtatanong syo ung ato tapus tinatamad ka
magsite? Ganyan ba ang turo sa inyo? Na maging tamad sa pagshare ng faith? tsk tsk tsk! :slap:
marami pong writings ang gawa ng TAO which relates to the happenings in
the Bible but not all really sites what happened and what the Bible
want us to obtain to become part of our knowledge.
kaya nga merong tintawag na Obsolete teachings..

so watch your point?

igieboy900
7th Feb 2012, 13:49
ikaw lng nagsasabi na agonist ako or atheist, wala kasing any MEANS to, aanhin mo pagkabanal mo? aber? tignan mo attitude now, you are turning me away... gawain ba ng mabait yan? di porke natatapakan ang idealism mo e, itatapon mo na! try to see what you dont want to see, its called WISDOM!!!

winmail
7th Feb 2012, 14:54
ikaw lng nagsasabi na agonist ako or atheist, wala kasing any MEANS to, aanhin mo pagkabanal mo? aber? tignan mo attitude now, you are turning me away... gawain ba ng mabait yan? di porke natatapakan ang idealism mo e, itatapon mo na! try to see what you dont want to see, its called WISDOM!!!

Ganito lang yan e kung hindi ka interisado sa paksa dito.. wag ka nalang mag post o mag-basa kasi wala ka naman mapapala dahil hindi ka naman naniiwala para ka lang nag-sasayang ng oras mo

respeto lang po ang hinihingi namin dito.

Yael11
7th Feb 2012, 18:51
@Yael11 nakausap mo naba sayo ang Dios?

ganito lang yan patas ang tingin ng Dios sa lahat pero may pinipili syang tao para kausapin at mababasa mo yun sa Biblia.



so what is your point?


@Yael11 nakausap mo naba sayo ang Dios?

ganito lang yan patas ang tingin ng Dios sa lahat pero may pinipili syang tao para kausapin at mababasa mo yun sa Biblia.

tama ka po.. a big yes yes! pero sapat na bang basehan un para sabihing may special treatment?
at special treatment ba tawag dun? anu po ba yung pagkakaintindi mu sa special treatment?

kung may special treatment si GOD, sana hindi ka naging christian ngayon, sana isa ka ngayung budhist o kung anumang religion dyan,.

so what is your point?

sabi ko po dapat main basis is the Bible..

tuklawww
7th Feb 2012, 19:08
makiraan lng po.... ang sa akin lng po kanya kanya po tyu ng paniniwala at pananampalatay,,, sana po wlang sitahan ng paniniwala at pananampalaya... dapat po matuwa tyo n madami ang nalalapit s diyos at naniniwala kay kristo. kng ano man ang tawag s grupo nla... basta naniniwala ang tao kay kristo dapat ituring n kpatid.... peace god bless...

igieboy900
7th Feb 2012, 19:27
@tuklaw TOMO!!!!!

maxado kasing rigid utak ni TS eh, kung gusto nya na ang magpopost d2 is yung nod nod lang sa kanya, gawa na lng xa ng site nya... FORUM to, like anybody else we are free to say what we want to express.

michaelborton
7th Feb 2012, 20:51
huwag gagawa ng kasmaan.. yan ang main basis ng Catholic..:pray:

winmail
7th Feb 2012, 21:55
tama ka po.. a big yes yes! pero sapat na bang basehan un para sabihing may special treatment?
at special treatment ba tawag dun? anu po ba yung pagkakaintindi mu sa special treatment?

kung may special treatment si GOD, sana hindi ka naging christian ngayon, sana isa ka ngayung budhist o kung anumang religion dyan,.


sabi ko po dapat main basis is the Bible..

Oo naman main-basis ang Bible katunayan nasa Bible na mas malakas ang dasal ng mga righteous o yun mga banal eto ang nakasulat

James 5:16 Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects

ang mga santo kasi kagaya ni ST. Mary ay banal kaya malaki ang epekto ng panalangin nila

ito pa

Hebrews 12:23 [English Standard Version] and to the assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect,

chijay
7th Feb 2012, 22:02
@tuklaw TOMO!!!!!

maxado kasing rigid utak ni TS eh, kung gusto nya na ang magpopost d2 is yung nod nod lang sa kanya, gawa na lng xa ng site nya... FORUM to, like anybody else we are free to say what we want to express.

qquote ko nanaman itong si mod marquess...



Tanungin ang ibang members lalu na yung mga tanong na nanghihingi ng patunay o katibayan.
Kaya lang naman tayo nagtatanong at nanghihingi ng katibayan ay dahil iba ang pinaniniwalaan natin sa pinaniniwalaan nila. Wag natin silang hingan ng paliwanag. Tayo ang magpaliwanag kung bakit iba ang paniniwala natin.

Makipagdebate o makipagsagutan sa ibang members na may ibang paniniwala.
Kung may makita tayong post o thread na iba sa paniniwala natin, huwag na po tayong mag-reply don. Mag-reply lamang po tayo dun sa mga post na sumasang-ayon tayo.

Sa madaling salita...
MIND YOUR OWN RELIGION!

actually marami na silang sinagot na arguments. kaya hindi puro nod nod ang mababasa mo. kung babasahin mo sa simula tong thread marami kang mababasang debate. tapos eto ka dadating at pag sasabihin ang kapwa mo katoliko na wag mag praise sa god.

ako hindi ako nag ppraise kay god dito sa forums kagaya mo. pero di yun dahilan para pigilin mo sila. kaya nga yung unang post ko dito sa thread na to eh, natanong ko rin yung TS kung bkit sya gumawa ng thread ng catholics sa ganitong klase ng environment na forum, puro away ang magkakaibang religion gaya ng ginagawa nila sa TV. pero di ba nga? "wala ng pakialamanan ng may buhay" ano bang mapapala mo sa pag pigil? saka una sa lahat.. sinaktan ka ba nila? may mali ba silang sinabi sayo bago mo sila pakialaman?...

remember this?


TS pansin mo puro rant lng makikita mo d2 sa thread mo? kc no one cares!

hindi kme pumunta ng symbianize para magbasa ng copy paste mo >_>

sa tingin mo matutuwa ka pag ikaw sasabihan nyan?...

unleash97
8th Feb 2012, 00:10
so what do you mean? that GOD makes special treatment? nakakatawa ka po.. hehe.. do you know who really GOD is? :)
kung may special treatment sya, eh di u mean that He promotes injustice?
kilala mu po ba tlga si GOD?
and if ever may special treatment sya, kindly site some instances or events na nagpapakita ng special treatment from HIM..

(---hindi ba special treatment kung ke moises lang Sya nakikipag-usap? hindi ba special treatment kung me iilang tao lang ang naililigtas miraculously sa trahedya [tulad ni prophet daniel na nailigtas sa apoy] while children in africa die of starvation? hindi rin ba special treatment na naging tao ka while in fact He can create someone else who is far more better than you? ang mga nabanggit ba ay hindi special treatments? does the bestowal of special treatment always involve an injustice? pero sino ka para magreklamo sa Dyos na ang iba ay binigyan Nya ng special treatment at yung iba naman ay hindi?)

Another thing is that the Bible contains all the standards of all moral things in this world.. It teaches you to become what GOD want you to be..
Lahat ng kabutihan na naiisip mo mahahanap mu sa Bible yun..
Kung nag iisip ka po tlaga ng mabuti..hehe..
(---the bible contains all the standards of all moral things? me masasabi ba ang bible tungkol sa in vitro at artificial insemination? me ethics ba dyan para sa technology at clinical laboratory? that while the bible admonishes us to treat slaves humanly, the concept of human slavery is abhorrent to the modern man, tnt)

tama ba yan, nagtatanong syo ung ato tapus tinatamad ka
magsite? Ganyan ba ang turo sa inyo? Na maging tamad sa pagshare ng faith? tsk tsk tsk! :slap:

(---yeah, tamad din ako magturo sa taong nagbubulagbulagan. spoonfed na, ayaw pa ring kumain, kaya hayaan na lang para di mabastos ang grasya, lol)
marami pong writings ang gawa ng TAO which relates to the happenings in
the Bible but not all really sites what happened and what the Bible
want us to obtain to become part of our knowledge.
kaya nga merong tintawag na Obsolete teachings..


(---one of those human writings is the bible, do you imply that the bible, too, is obsolete? if the authors of the bible have not written faithfully the truth this goes against the material sufficiency of the bible. do you really know what you are saying? lol)

unleash97
8th Feb 2012, 00:31
@tuklaw TOMO!!!!!

maxado kasing rigid utak ni TS eh, kung gusto nya na ang magpopost d2 is yung nod nod lang sa kanya, gawa na lng xa ng site nya... FORUM to, like anybody else we are free to say what we want to express.

(---the much vaunted freedom of speech -what do you mean by that, na pwede mong sabihin ang lahat ng gusto mong sabihin kahit na nawawalan ka na ng respeto sa iba, ganon ba? subukan mong gawin yan sa ama mo, tingnan natin kung hindi magsitalsikan ang mga ngipin mo, lol
this is a catholic thread, alangan namang ang ituro ko dito ay bible fundamentalism, tnt
and, well, obvious naman kung sino ang rigid ang pag-iisip, lol)

unleash97
8th Feb 2012, 00:50
@ all catholics, let us pray para sa mga nasalanta ng lindol dito sa visayas regions, lalo na sa mga pumanaw
eternal Father, we offer You the body and blood, soul and divinity, of Your dearly beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, in atonement of our sins and those of the whole world.
for the sake of His sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and the whole world.
holy God, holy Mighty One, holy Immortal One, have mercy on us and the whole world.
Jesus, king of mercy, we trust in You.

Diego_99
8th Feb 2012, 01:28
Why didn't God tell us in the Bible that He was sending the pope as the Vicar of Christ? Was there such a word in the bible?




You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)
Si Pedro hawak ang mga susi. Ang mosaic na ito ay dating nasa libingan ng Emperor na si Otto II (d. 938)
Ang Apostle ay ipinakitang katabi ng nakaupong si Cristo, habang siya'y niyakap nito ng kaliwa Nitong kamay.




Magandang araw po,


Salamat po sa tanong, sir mcjal :)


Sa pananampalatayang Kristyano, mayroon pong mga salitang ginagamit na hindi tuwirang ipinakita o naisulat sa Bibliya, ngunit nagsisilbing pundasyon ng paniniwala. (Hindi lamang para sa mga Katoliko kundi maging sa ibang sekta o denominasyon) Ang ilan pong halimbawa ay ang mga sumusunod:


• Trinity (Ang salitang Trinity [Gk. Trias] ay hindi direktang mababasa sa Bibliya (‘explicitly’), subalit ang konsepto nito’y mababasa halos sa kabuoan nito (‘implicitly’), i.e. Mt 3:16-17; 28:19; 2 Cor 13:14; John 14:16; 17:5; etc. Ito ay unang ginamit ni Theophilus of Antioch[1] taong 180 AD, kasunod ay si Tertullian (On Pudicity 21), Origen (P.G., X, 986) at sa mga sumusunod na Konseho ng; Nicaea (325 AD), Efeso (431 AD), at Chalcedon (451 AD)).[2]
• Bible (Ang salitang ito’y ginamit ng mga Kristyano noong ca. 223 AD).
• homooúsios (Gk. ὁμοούσιος, mula sa Gk: ὁμός, homós, o “same” at οὐσία, ousía, “essence, being”; Ang salitang ito’y unang ginamit ni Origen (tignan ang PG 14:1308 at PG 17:580, 581) at ginamit naman sa unang Konseho ng Nicaea noong AD 325).
• orthodoxy (Gk. ‘orthodoxa,’ “correct opinion’, unang ginamit ni St. Irenaeus noong ikalawang siglo (2nd century)).
• Rapture (Taong 1827 ng unang ginamit ni John Nelson Darby ang salitang ‘rapture’ patungkol sa Dispensationialism (You can see links before reply))

At ilan pang Halimbawa: Canon of the Scriptures; authors of Synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark Luke, John); authors of Acts of the Apostles, Hebrews, 1, 2 & 3 John, Revelation; Incarnation; Atheism, Hypostatic Union, Altar Call, etc


Katulad nito, ang salitang Vicar ay hindi matatagpuan sa Bibliya “explicitly” ngunit ang konsepto nito ay maaring maunawaan “implicitly.” Ngayon, ang konsepto ng titulong Vicar of Christ (You can see links before reply) (L. Vicarius Christi)[3] ay base po sa nakatala sa teksto ng John 21 (vv. 15-17), kung saan sinabi ni Cristo kay San Pedro na: “Feed my lambs.( . . .). Feed my sheep (You can see links before reply),” na nagtatalaga kay San Pedro bilang pinunong Apostol[4] at tagapag-ingat ng Kanyang mga tupa, at pansamantalang tatayo sa Kanyang pwesto para maging taga-bantay ng mga ito, hanggang sa Kanyang muling pagbabalik; kaya’t ang pagiging Vicar (o Bikaryo) ay nangangahulugan ng pagiging katuwang, katulong, kahalili o bilang kinatawan (representative/deputy), o embahador (ambassador) ni Cristo. (Mt 16:17-19; Jn 21:15-17; cf. II Cor 5:20) Ganito rin ang naging tema ng pagsasalarawan sa Liturhiya ng Syro-Chaldean,[5] “Here is Simon, whom the Lord thrice called upon (saying): “Feed Me My rams and My gentle sheep. I entrust thee with the keys of My spiritual treasury, that thou mayest bind and loose on earth and in heaven. I will install thee Vicar of the heavenly kingdom; rule justly,[6] and govern the children of thy household (the Church) at ni St. Ephraem the Syrian (c. 306-373) sa kanyang Sermone de Martyrio[7] : “(…) Peter merited to receive from Christ the Vicarship over His people.” Makikita rin ang konseptong ito sa sulat ni St. Ignatius, Obispo ng Antioque (Antioch), at disipolo ni San Juan, sa Magnesians na naisulat sa pagitan ng taong 88 A.D., hanggang 107 A.D., kung saan kanyang itinala ang mga katagang ito: “Your bishops presides in the place of God (…).”Hindi man ito isang maliwanag (‘explicit’) na reperensya, ngunit ang konsepto’y naroroon sa pahayag.

Ngayon, ang titulong Vicar of Christ ay unang ginamit sa Synod of Rome noong taong 495 AD (tignan ang I.S. Robinson, “The Institution of the Church, 1073-1216,” chap. 2, p. 369), kay Pope St. Gelasius I (r. 492-496), ang pontipikong gumamit ng sanaysay na “Vicar of the Apostolic See” (I, Ep. vi) na panturing sa kanya. Sa pagpasok ng ika-siyam na siglo, ang titulong Vicar of Christ ay ginamit naman partikular na sa mga Obispo sa labas ng Roma, baga man ang pagkakabit nito’y marahil na rin, sa pagpapaalam (o papaliwanag) na estado lamang. (Bunson 2004, p. 950) Ang pagtanggap naman nito’y naitala sa curia (tignan ang Addis & Arnold, “Curia Romana,” mula sa A Catholic Dictionary, pp. 239-243) noong panunungkulan ni Eugenius III[8] sa taong 1145, hanggang 1153 AD. Bilang pagpapalawak, sa pagpasok ni Pope Innocent III (r. 1198-1216) bilang pang ika-isang daan at pitongpu’t limang papa, ang titulong Vicar of Christ ay ginawa niyang pantukoy sa may hawak ng pwesto ni Pedro, at tumatayong Obispo ng Roma. Kasunod nito, sa Konseho ng Florence, noong 1439, inilabas ang decrees para sa mga Griyego na nagbibigay paliwanag na ang papa ay siyang “tunay na bikaryo ni Cristo,” ang kahulugang ito ay tinanggap sa unang Vatican council (in Pastor Aeternus, chap. 1, 1870: ‘Christ made Peter the visible head and chief pastor over the universal Church’ [mula sa Ignatius Bible Commentary]). At maging sa ikalawang Vatican council, ngunit sa pagkakataong ito ang titulo ay mas pinalawig pa ang kahulugan, kung saan hindi lamang ito tumutukoy sa papa, kundi pati na rin sa mga obispo (“vicars and ambassadors [legates] of Christ”: CCC # 894: LG 27; cf. Lk 22:26-27) na s’yang nagsisilbing mga katuwang ng papa sa pangangalaga ng simbahan.

Sa puntong pong ito, titignan naman natin ang kabuang teksto na ginamit na pantukoy kay Pedro bilang bikaryo sa John 21, vss. 15-17. Pero bago po ang lahat, gusto ko muna pong ipaalala na ang kahulugan sa Tagalog ng salitang Vicar ay ‘kahalili’ o ‘katulong,’[9]


You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)


15 Ὅτε οὖν ἠρίστησαν, λέγει τῷ Σίμωνι Πέτρῳ ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Σίμων Ἰωάννου, ἀγαπᾷς με πλέον τούτων; λέγει αὐτῷ: ναί κύριε, σὺ οἶδας ὅτι φιλῶ σε. λέγει αὐτῷ: βόσκε τὰ ἀρνία μου. 16 λέγει αὐτῷ πάλιν δεύτερον: Σίμων Ἰωάννου, ἀγαπᾷς με; λέγει αὐτῷ: ναί κύριε, σὺ οἶδας ὅτι φιλῶ σε. λέγει αὐτῷ: ποίμαινε τὰ προβάτιά μου. 17 λέγει αὐτῷ τὸ τρίτον: Σίμων Ἰωάννου, φιλεῖς με; ἐλυπήθη ὁ Πέτρος ὅτι εἶπεν αὐτῷ τὸ τρίτον: φιλεῖς με; καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ: κύριε, πάντα σὺ οἶδας, σὺ γινώσκεις ὅτι φιλῶ σε. λέγει αὐτῷ: Ἰησοῦς βόσκε τὰ προβάτιά μου.

Sa konteksto ng Ebanghelyo sa Juan 21 (vv. 15-17) mababasa kung papaanong ipinagbigay tagubilin (o pinagbilin) ni JesuCristo kay Pedro ang kawan[10] ng mga tupa para ito’y kanyang pakainin, gabayan, pamunuan (o pamahalaan), at alagaan, hanggang sa Kanyang muling pagbabalik dito sa lupa. (MacEvilly, p. 375) Ang komisyong ito’y tatlong-beses inulit ni Cristo sa mga katagang Kanyang sinambit, ‘feed my lambs’ (v. 15), ‘tend my sheeps’ (v. 16), ‘feed my sheeps’ (v. 17); kung saan ginamit sa una’y βόσκε (You can see links before reply), kasunod ay ποιμαινε, at muling ibinalik sa βόσκε. Ang ibig sabihin ng Griyegong salita na βόσκε ay feed, habang ang ποιμαινε ay tend (You can see links before reply), rule (You can see links before reply=onepage&q=to%20tend%20means%20to%20rule%20john%2021%3A15-17&f=false), lead, govern (You can see links before reply). (2 Sa 7:7; Ps 2:9; Mt 2:6) Sa Synoptic ang salitang βόσκείν ay kalimitan ginamit sa pagpapakain ng mga baboy; pero ito rin ay regular na ginamit sa LXX sa pagpapakain ng mga tupa. (hal. Gen 29:7; 37:12), at sa Ezekiel 34:2 sa metaporikong kahulugan na pastol na nagpapakain ng kanyang kawan ng espiritwal na pagkain. Ang salitang ποιμαίνω naman ay kinapapalooban ng mga tungkulin tulad ng pagbabatay, pag-iingat, pamumuno at pagpapakain sa kawan, mapa ito man ay may literal na kahulugan (Lk 17:7) o kaya’y simbolismo (Ez 34:10; Ac 20:28).

Nung unang tinawag ni Pedro si Hesus sa katawagang “pastol,” tinawag nya rin itong “overseer” (I Pt 2:25; cf. Ac 20:28; CD 13.7-9). Sa Hudaismo, ang titulong “overseer” ay tumutukoy sa Diyos (e.g. Wis 1:6; Sib. Or. 1.152; 2.177; Frag. 1.3; T. Benj. 4:3; 6:6; 4 Bar. 7:35; cf. Wis 7:23; Theon Progymn 11.194) at sa kaparehas na sentimyento, ang Griyegong termino na ‘ ποίμαινείν, to tend’ ay nangangahulugang din ‘oversight’[12] (superintendence), at kapansin-pansin na sa Juan 21:16, ito ang ginamit ito ni Hesus kay Pedro ng sabihin Nyang, ‘tend my sheep’ (v. 16), na nagbibigay paliwanag kung papaanong ipinagbigay tagubilin ni Hesus sa kanyang magiging kahaliling pastol [kay Pedro] ang paggabay at pamamahala sa mga tupang Kanyang iiwanan.

May ilang iskolars (hal., sila MacEvilly (You can see links before reply/n381/mode/2up), Lapidé (You can see links before reply), Godet, etc) ang naniniwala at ikinukunsidera ang teksto ng Juan 21:15-17 bilang katuparan ng teksto ng Mateo 16:18-19 kung saan ibinigay ni Cristo ang [mga] ‘susi’ (‘keys’; plural) kay Pedro na sumisimbolo ng owtoridad,[13] liban dito kanila rin itong idinidikit sa tekstong mababasa sa Lucas 22:32 sa sinabi ni Cristo kay Pedro’ng, “(…) strengthen your brethren.”[14] Maging ang ilang sinaunang Greek commentators’ ay kumikilala sa mga talatang ito bilang pagpapatunay sa kabunyian (o kataasan) o ang kaunahan ni San Pedro sa ibang Apostoles (S. Chrysostom, in John. .xxi.15-17, Homil. Ixxxviii; Theophylact, in John. xxi.15-17; vol. i. p. 769; Euthymius, in John. xxi.15, vol. iv. p. 657), at maging sa kanyang pamumuno sa buong Iglesia. Sa totoo lang, makikita rin natin ang koneksyon nito kung malalaman natin ang sinisimbolo ng tupa sa naturang talata. Sa Vulgate (vv. 15, 16)[15] at Arabic (v. 16) imbes na sheep ay nanatili sila sa saling lamb sa nasabing [mga] talata, habang ang sa Greek (at Syriac) naman ang πρόβατον ay isinalin sa v. 16 sa katumbas na kahulugan na ‘sheeps’. Posibleng sa Arabic at Vulgate, ang wikang Griyego na πζοβατία ay binasa nila na kasama ang salitang iota na ang ibig sabihin ay ‘little sheep’ (‘lambs’) na ayon kay Lapidé ay para mapagtuonan ng pansin ng susunod na punong pastol ang pangangalaga sa kanila. Kung susuriin ang bawat codices makikita na mayroong hindi pagkakasundo ang mga ito (ang sumusunod na deskripsyong ay base sa ibinigay ni Hermann Olshausen sa ‘Appendix to John’s Gospel’)


You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)

*Codex Vaticanus (B); Codex Sinaiticus (S o א); Sahidic version, the Bohairic version, Codex Ephraem recriptus (C); Codex Bezae (D); Codex Alexandrian (A)


Sa naturang mga uri/klase (variants) ng codices, kalimitan ng ginagamit ang ἀρνία (v. 15) … προβάτια (v. 16) … πρόβατα (v. 17) sa mga modernong salin sa Ingles ng Bibliya; ito ay kahit na ang uncial evidence para sa Greek πρόβατα sa v. 16 ay hindi ganong kalakasan. Ito ang ilang halimbawa:


v. 15 – ‘lambs’ – (KJV; TEV; JB; NKJV; NAB; ASV; ERV; YLT; WEB)
v. 16 – ‘sheeps’ – (KJV; TEV; JB; NKJV; NAB; ASV; ERV; YLT; WEB)
v. 17 – ‘sheeps’ – (KJV; TEV; JB; NKJV; NAB; ASV; ERV; YLT; WEB)


Dito makakabuo na tayo ng konklusyon na; una, sa v. 15, ang sinabi ni Hesus na pakainin ni Pedro ay ang mga batang tupa (lambs); ikalawa, sa v. 16, pamunuan ang mga tupa (sheeps) at ikatlo, sa v. 17, muli, pakainin ang tupa (sheeps). Ang tanong para san ba ito? Ito po’y para matukoy natin ang hanay ng mga hinabilin ni Cristo kay Pedro at para mabigyan liwanag at pagkakakilanlan ang mga ito ayon sa kung anong kanilang sinisimbolo. Base sa komentaryo ni Jansen, ang lambs at sheep ay walang pagkakaiba. Sa parehas na pananaw, sinang-ayunan din ito ni Dr. MacEvilly (p. 375), na ayon sa kanya wala rin itong pinag-iba, dahil sa bawat pahayag, mababasa at mayroong reperensyang ibinigay sa kabuoang kawan o sa Iglesia. At aniya pa, ang “my lambs”, “my sheeps” ay ganuon din ang pakiwari sa nabanggit sa Mateo 16:18, “my Church”. Gayun man, ang ‘lambs’ at ‘sheep’ ay maari pang palawigin ang kahulugan. Tulad na lamang ng pagkakaunawa dito ng komentarista ng Bibliya na si Bl. Theophylact of Ohrid (1055–1107 AD). Ayon sa kanya (You can see links before reply), kaya raw ito tinawag na lambs ay para makilala na sila’y (Gentiles; Hentil) mga bagong hikaya’t palang sa Kristyanismo, at ang kanilang paniniwala (o pananampalataya) ay mas nangangailangan ng mas higit na atensyon, pangangalaga (o kalinga) at gabay, kaya’t muli itong inulit ni Cristo sa Kanyang magiging kahalili, ‘feed my lambs [agnos]’ sa v. 15, at muli sa v. 16, ‘feed my lambs [agnos]’ (Vulgate). Kung ang lambs ay mga bago palang mananampalatayang Kristyano, ang sheeps naman aniya ay yung mga matatag o matibay na sa kanilang paniniwala: - mga guro, pastor, obispo, pari, at apostoles. (St. Ambrose, Haydock’s (You can see links before reply)) Minsan, ang pares na ito tumutukoy rin sa mga bata (lambs) at matatanda (sheeps).[16]

Pagkatapos maipakita ang kahulugan ng lambs at sheeps sa naturang mga teksto, pupunta naman tayo sa kahulugan ng pastol at kung ano ang sinisimbolo nito.

Sa banal a kasulatan, ang Diyos o si Yahweh sa anyo o pagwawanigis ay tinawag na ‘Pastol’ (Ps 23:1-4; 28:9; 74:1-2; 77:20; 78:52; 79:13; 80:1; 100:3; Is 40:11; Jer 13:17; 31:10; Ez 34:11-17; Mic 7:14; Zech 9:16; 10:3), maging sa mga nakaraang literatura (Si 18:13; 1 Enoch 89:18; Philo Agric. 50-53; Pseudo-Philo 28:5; 30:5; b. Hag. 3; Pes. 118; Ex Rab. 34:3; Lam. Rab. 1:17, § 52; Pesiq. R. 3:2)[17] at ang mga tupa (tao) ang Kanyang pinapastol (Ps 74:1; 95:7; 100:3; Ez 34:31). Ang imahe na ito ng Diyos bilang isang pastol ay imahe ng pamumuno at pagtatangol sa bawat taong kanyang kinakalinga. Ang imaheng ito ay maihahalintulad sa ipinapakita ng mga pastol na responsableng nag-aalaga at nagbabantay (o nagmamasid) sa kawan ng mga tupa, mapa-araw man o gabi (Gn 30:39-40; Jr 33:13; Lk 2:8) at tumatayong tagapag-ingat ng mga ito, sa paraang bawat isa’y matutugunan ang kanilang pangangailangan. Ang imahe ring ito, ay naging pantukoy kay JesuCristo, na kalimitang tinatawag na “Pastol” – “Ang mabuting Pastol na nagbigay ng Kanyang sariling buhay para sa Kanyang mga tupa” (Ez 34:23; Zech 8:7; Jn 10:11-16; Heb 13:20; 1 Pt 5:4). Liban dito, ayon kila Ralph P. Martin at Peter H. Davids,[18] ang pastol ay matagal ng nagbibigay pasubali sa analohiya ng mga tagapamahala [rulers] o mga tagapatnubay [leaders] (cf. Anacharses Ep. 7; Artem-idorus Oneir. 2.12; Homer II. 1.263[19]). Makikita ang analohiyang ito Lumang Tipan, sa estadong kinapuntahan ni David. Nung una’y siya’y tagapastol lamang ng kawan ng kanyang ama (Is 16:15, 34-37; Ps 78:70-71), di naglaon ginawa na siyang hari ng Diyos at ang kanya ng pinapastol (pinamumunuan, ginagabayan, at pinapakain) ay ang mismong mga tao na o ang Israel. (2 Sa 5:2; I Ch 11:2; Ps 78:70-72; Ez 34:23; 37:24; sa mga nakaraang literatura cf. Pss. Sol. 17:40; Gen. Rab. 59:5) Ganito rin ang ekspresyon na mababasa patungkol kay Cyrus, na tinawag ding pastol, at ang prinsepe at haring pinili ng Diyos (Is 44:28). Ngayon kung ikukumpara ang Griyegong terminolohiya na ginamit sa John 21:16 na ‘tend (ποιμαινε, poimaine) my sheeps’ ay makikita sa simpleng lohika na ang trabahong gagampanan ni Pedro ay may kaugnayan hindi lamang sa pagpapakain ng mga tupa, kundi maging sa pamunuan (pangunahan) na rin dito.[20] Ang salitang ginamit dito na ποιμαινε, gaya ng napakita na natin sa simula palang, ay ginamit din sa Psalm 2:9 (sa Septuagint), ‘Thou shalt rule (poimaneis; Heb. Tirem, eq., ‘Thou shalt feed them’) them with a rod of iron,’ na nagbigay koneksyon sa komisyong iniatang ni Cristo sa tatayong representante Nya at magsisilbing kahaliling pastol na mamumuno sa iiwan Nyang mga tupa.

Ang analisasyong ito tinanggap ng Protestant scholar na si Joachim Jeremias,[21] na ayon sa kanyang isinulat ‘Only in Jn 21:15-17, which describes the appointment of Peter as shepherd by the risen Lord, does the whole Church seen to have been in view as the sphere of activity.’ Ganito din ang pananaw ng Protestant scholar na si Hermann Olshausen,[22] na ayon naman sa kanya ang pagkakapili aniya ni Cristo kay Pedro na maging pastol ng Kanyang kawan ay hindi maitatanggi dahil narin sa resultang ipinakita sa nasabing mga talata. Maging si F. Godet,[23] na isa ring prominenteng Protestant scholar ay naniniwala dito,


On this reply, Jesus assigns to him [Peter] the care of His flock. “He confides those whom He loves to the man who loves Him,” says Luthardt. The expression: “the lambs,” does not denote a special class of the members of the Church, the children and laity, for example, but the entire flock viewed in relation to the individual care and tender painstaking needed by all its members from him [Peter] who is over them as the representative of the Chief Shepherd. (Emphasize added)

Diego_99
8th Feb 2012, 01:29
Pagpapatuloy... ;)


Bilang pangwakas na konklusyon sa maikling komentaryong ito, masasabi na natin na sa naturang mga teksto (Jn 21:15-17) si Pedro ay pinili ni Cristo na pinunong pastol na aalalay sa Kanya bilang kahaliling pastol. Ito’y natunghayan mismo sa komisyong iniatang Nya sa kanyang bikaryo, ‘pakainin mo ang aking mga tupa, pamunuan mo ang aking mga tupa,’ kung saan ang tupa ay sumisimbolo sa kabuang Simbahan, habang ang pagpapakain at pamumuno naman ay sumisimbolo sa owtoridad niya [Pedro] bilang bagong pinunong pastol dito sa lupa, at ang nasabing pagkilalang ito ay ipinasa naman ni Pedro sa mga sumunod sa kanya.


He saith to him, "Feed my sheep". Why does He pass over the others and speak of the sheep to Peter? He was the chosen one of the Apostles, the mouth of the disciples, the head of the choir. For this reason Paul went up to see him rather than the others. And also to show him that he must have confidence now that his denial had been purged away. He entrusts him with the rule [prostasia] over the brethren. . . . If anyone should say "Why then was it James who received the See of Jerusalem?", I should reply that He made Peter the teacher not of that see but of the whole world.
- St. John Chrysostom, Homily 88 on John, 1. Cf. Origen, "In Ep. ad Rom.", 5:10; Ephraem Syrus "Hymn. in B. Petr." in "Bibl. Orient. Assemani", 1:95; Leo I, "Serm. iv de natal.", 2]. (Catholic Encyclopedia)


Para naman po sa pananaw at opinyon ng mga Ama ng Simbahan (Church Fathers) at sa mga sinaunang kasulatan, narito ang ilang sipi mula sa mga librong The Evidence for the Papacy ni Colin Lindsay (pp. 59-60)[24] at sa Tradition of the Syriac Church of Antioch ni Cyril Benhamm (pp. 51-52)[25] (Tignan ang *appendix para sa karagdagang sipi)

IV. S. Peter The Vicar, or Representative of Christ.


The Church “having been founded First and Alone, by the voice of the Lord, upon Peter.”
- St. Cyprian (d. 258)

“… To Peter Alone Christ said, whatsoever thou shalt bind,” &c., and afterwards to the other Apostles.”
- St. Firmilian (d. 269)

“O thou blessed one (Peter) that obtainedst the Place of the Head.”
- St. Ephraim (c. 306-373)

“Whom (Peter) He was leaving with us, as it were, the Vicar of His own love.”

“How could He not confirm His faith, unto whom, of His own authority, He gave the Kingdom, and whom, when He styled a Rock, He pointed out The Foundation of the Church.”

“To Peter Alone is it said, Launch out unto deep …. Into the depths of disputation the Church is led by Peter.”
- St. Ambrose (c. 337/340 –397 AD)

“Peter …. The Pillar of The Church, The Buttress of the faith, The Foundation of the confession, The Fisherman of The universe.”

“He places in his (Peter) hands The Government over the brethren.”

“He (Peter) who was Set Over the whole habitable world …. to whom He instructed the Doing and Supporting all things.”
- St. John Chrysostom (c. 347–407)

“Peter did, indeed, receive the whole world.”
- St. Augustine (c. 354-430 AD)

“Hence it is the Master Himself seeks for helpers, for associates to take charge of the whole world…. Hence it is that when about to return to heaven He commend His sheep to be fed by Peter in His Stead.”
– St. Peter Chrysologus (c. 380 – c. 450)

“That what things are Mine by My power, may be Common to thee being made Partaker of them with Me.”

“Peter is chosen to be Set Over the vocation of all the nations,” &c.
– St. Leo (r. 440-461)
(Emphasize added)


Chapter VII - Vicar of Christ


It has been naturally provided by the Creator that children should not disinherit their parents, but on the contrary, fathers should have authority over their children…. Now all perfection should prevail in the Holy Church: so that as one is the veritable Father, one His Son, our Savior Jesus Christ, one His Spirit, the Paraclete; so also is His faithful Vicar, Simon Barjona, who has been called (Kipho) the Rock, as (Christ) Himself had promised him saying: “Upon this Rock I will build My Church.” And again, “To thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven.”
- Nestor. Synod (sub Patriarch Dadishoo)., Cod. de Prop. (Syriac), 27, p. 277.

And Simon Peter was their head (of the Apostles); holding the throne of Christ upon earth.
- Amrus Matthæ, Nestorian Hist. Cod. de Prop. (Arabic), 45, p. 63.

The old Pontificate had ceased, and the new one begun; it was confirmed by our Redeemer when He established peter, head of the Apostles, and gave him the keys of the kingdom of heaven.
- Gregory Bar-Hebræs (Abulpharagius), in Chronic. Cod. Vatic. (Syriac), 166, p. 247, a teryo.

After the Pontiffs of the old, (comes) Peter, the Pontiff of the New Testament.
- The same, ibid. in Titulo Cod. eod.
(Emphasize added)



At para naman po sa mga mahihilig mag-kwe-kwenta, narito po’t ginawan ko na ng Gematria ang opisyal na titulong Vicarius Christi at maging sa katumbas nito sa Latin Quaballah Simplex. Hindi po s'ya 666 (six hundred and sixty-six) :D



Latin Letter-Number Equivalents
(Gematria of the Latin title Vicarius Christi)

You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)
*Sa Roman Numerals ang letrang “U” ay walang specific na value, ngunit maari ring gamitin ang letrang “V” na ang katumbas na numero ay 5.


Latin Quaballah Simplex
(Vicarius Christi)

You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)



_______________________


1 “In like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity (Τριάδος), of God, and His Word, and His wisdom. And the fourth is the type of man, who needs light, that so there may be God, the Word, wisdom, man.” (Theophilus, Apologia ad Autolycum, Book II, Chapter 15)
2 Para sa pangmalawakang pagtalakay sa konsepto ng Trinidad (Trinity) puntahan lamang ang mga sumusunod: una (You can see links before reply)/ ikalawa (You can see links before reply=onepage&q=Trinity&f=false)/ ikatlo (You can see links before reply)/ ikaapat (You can see links before reply=onepage&q=Trinity&f=false)/ ikalima (You can see links before reply).
3 Ayon sa New Grolier Webster International Dictionary, ang salitang Vicar of Christ ay nangangahulugan na representante ni Cristo sa mga bagay na may kaugnay sa turo at pagpapatakbo ng Simbahan dito sa lupa. (p. 1104); Ganito rin ang ibinigay na kahulugan ng Funk & Wagnalls Standard Dictionary sa salitang Vicar of Christ (p. 1399). (Tignan din ang kahulugan ng salitang Pope sa Westminster dictionary of theological terms ni Donald K. McKim, p.212).
4 Ang mga sumusunod ay mga pahayag (citations) sa Banal na Aklat na nagpapakita ng Primacy of St. Peter (at pati na rin ang sumunod na kahalili [succession] n’ya mula sa mga sinaunang kasulatan): Si San Pedro ang laging ipinapakitang tagapagsalita ng mga Apostol (Mk 8:29; Mt 18:21; Lk 12:41; Jn 6:67-68); Sa tuwing may eksenang ipinapakita sa mga Ebanghelyo (Gospels), si San Pedro ang palaging sentrong pigura (Mt 14:27-28; 17:24-25; Lk 5:3-8; Mk 10:28); Si San Pedro ang laging unang pinapangalanan sa tuwing inililista ang mga Apostol sa Ebanghelyo at sa Gawa ng mga Apostol (Acts of the Apostles) (Mk3:16-17; Mt 10:2; Lk 6:13-14; Acts 1:13; etc); Sa mga Sulat ni San Pablo, si San Pedro ang sinasabing unang saksi ng muling Pagkabuhay (I Cor 1:12, 3:22; 9:5; 15:3-5; Ga 1:18; 2:9, 11, 14); Sa Gawa ng mga Apostol mariing sinang-ayunan ni San Lucas ang pamumuno ni San Pedro (Acts 2:14; 3:12; 4:8; 5:3; 5:15; 5:29; 8:20; 10;9-10; 10:34; 10:46-47; 11:4; 15:7; 3:6; 9:34; 9:40, etc); Hindi pangkaraniwan na sa tuwing binabanggit ang mga Apostol ganito palagi ang pagtukoy, “Peter & his companions” (o “Peter & the Apostles”) (Ac 2:37; 5:29; Lk 9:32); Sa liwanag ng pagtawag sa kaniyang buhay, ang mga banal na manunulat ay binanggit si San Pedro ng nakahiwalay at may pagpapakita ng respeto (Jn 20:3-8; 21:15-17); Sa Ebanghelyo may mga malinaw na pahayag (explicitly) tungkol sa gagampanang papel ni San Pablo sa Simbahan (Church) (Lk 22:31; 31-32; Jn 21:15-17; Mt 16:15-19); Nabanggit ni Pablo si St. Linus, (II Ti 4:21) bilang Kristyanong nanahan sa Roma; isang interesanting pahayag naman ang isinulat ni St. Irenaeus sa Against Heresies (III. 3.3) na nagsasabing ang tinutukoy ni Pablo na Linus ay ang s’yang sumunod kahaliling Obispo ng Roma pagkatapos ni Pedro. (Tignan ang mga sumusunod: Julius Africanus; Hippolytus, Dict. Christian Biog I, 577; Eusebius, Church History V.6 (You can see links before reply); Liberian catalogue of 354 (You can see links before reply), Liber Pontificalis (You can see links before reply/n7/mode/2up) (trans. w/ intro by Louise Ropes Loomis, Ph.D); tignan din ang A Chronicle of the Popes from St. Peter to Pius X (You can see links before reply/n11/mode/2up) ni A. E. McKilliam, M.A., G. Bell & Sons, LTD, 1912, p. 2)
5 Com. SS. Apost. Petri et Pauli. Cod. Vatic. (Syriac), 86, p. 35.
6 You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)
7 Sermone de Martyrio, Pet. et Paul. Cod. Vatic. cxcix. ex. Syr. ap. David, op. cit. p. 26. Sa kaparehas na tema, muling binanggit ni St. Ephraem the Syrian ang tungkol sa pagiging Bikaryo ni Pedro: “Then Peter deservedly received the Vicariate (of Christ) over His people.” (Sermone de Martyrio, SS. Ap. Petri et Pauli. Cod. Vatic. (Syriac), 196, p. 194, a tergo)
8 Eugenius III, JL. 9714, PL 180, col. 15898: ‘nos, qui licer indigni Christi vices in terris agimus,’ na ang kahulugan ay ‘we, although unworthy, exercise the vicariate of Christ on earth.’
9 Isa sa dapat nating tandaan ay ang salitang Vicar sa Tagalog ay nangangahulugang ‘katulong’ o ‘kahalili’ (Charles Nigg, Tagalog-English and English-Tagalog Dictionary, 1904, p. 352), kaya’t ang pagiging bikaryo ni Pedro (o ng mga Papa) ay nangangahulugang pagiging ‘kahalili ni Cristo’ dito sa lupa sa mga bagay na may kaugnayan sa pagpapalaganap ng mga nakasulat sa banal na kasulatan at tagapagbigay ng espiritwal na pagkain, kabilang narin dito ang pangangalaga at pamumuno ng Simbahan. (Tignan din ang Calderon, Sofronio G., "Vicar," mula sa Diccionario Ingles-Español-Tagalog Con partes de la oracion y pronuciacion figurada)
10 Ang kawan (o ‘lupon’; ‘flock’) ay nagrerepresenta sa pamayanan na pinamumunuan ng Diyos (hal., Ps 74:1; 77:20; 77:20; 78:52; 79:13; 80:1; 100:3; Is 49:9; 63:11; Jer 13:17; 31:10; Zech 9:16; 10:13)
11 Ang salitang Hebreo na ‘raa’ at Latin ‘pasco’ ay katumbas ng salitang Griyego na ποιμαίνω na ang ibig sabihin ay ‘to rule’. (Mic 5:2; Ac 20:28; Rev 2:7; 12:5; 19:15)

Diego_99
8th Feb 2012, 01:30
Pagpapatuloy... ;)


12 G. Abbot-Smith, D.D., D.C.L., A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, 1922, pp. 84-374; J. H. Thayer, D.D., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Harper & Brothers, 1889, p. 527.
13 Ang mga sumusunod ay mula sa komentaryo at pananaw ng mga Protestant scholars patungkol sa owtoridad ng susi (keys) na ibinigay ni Hesus kay Pedro:


"The keys are the symbol of authority, and Roland de Vaux (Ancient Israel, tr. by John McHugh [New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961], 129 ff.) rightly sees here the same authority as that vested in the vizier, the master of the house, the chamberlain of the royal household in ancient Israel." --W. F. Albright and C. S. Mann, The Anchor Bible: Matthew, (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1971), 196.

"For the same reason, Christ calls the office of teaching the word, (Mat 16:19) 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven'; so that it is idle and foolish to spend much time in endeavoring to find a hidden reason, when the matter is plain, and needs no ingenuity." --John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Isaiah, vol. 2, trans. William Pringle, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1948), 136-137.

"The image of keys (plural) perhaps suggests not so much the porter, who controls admission to the house, as the steward, who regulates its administration (Is 22:22, in conjunction with 22:15). The issue then is not that of admission to the church (which is not what the kingdom of heaven means; see pp. 45-47) but an authority derived from a delegation of God's sovereignty." --Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament, (Downer's Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1993), 256.

"The keeper of the keys has authority within the house as administrator and teacher (cf. Isa 22:20-25, which may have influenced Matthew here). The language of binding and loosing is rabbinic terminology for authoritative teaching, for having the authority to interpret the Torah and apply it to particular cases, declaring what is permitted and what is not permitted. Jesus, who has taught with authority (7:29) and has given his authority to his disciples (10:1,8 ) here gives his primary disciple the authority to teach in his name." -- M. Eugene Boring, "Matthew," in Pheme Perkins and others, eds., The New Interpreter's Bible, vol. 8, (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1995), 346.

"The keys of the kingdom would be committed to the chief steward in the royal household and with them goes plenary authority." -- George Buttrick and others, eds., The Interpreter's Bible, (New York: Abingdon, 1951), 453.

"The authority of Peter is to be over the Church, and this authority is represented by the keys." -- S. T. Lachs, A Rabbinic Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, (Hoboken, NJ: Ktav, 1987), 256.

"What do the expressions 'bind' and 'loose' signify? According to Rabbinical usage two explanations are equally possible: 'prohibit' and 'permit', that is, 'establish rules'; or 'put under the ban' and 'acquit.'" -- Oscar Cullman, Peter: Disciple, Apostle, Martyr, trans. Floyd V. Filson, (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1953), 204-205.

"These terms [binding and loosing] thus refer to a teaching function, and more specifically one of making halakhic pronouncements which are to be 'binding' on the people of God. In that case, Peter's 'power of the keys' declared in [Matthew] 16:19 is not so much that of the doorkeeper, who decides who may or may not be admitted to the kingdom of heaven, but that of the steward . . . . whose keys of office enable him to regulate the affairs of the household." --R. T. France, Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1989), 247.

"In other words, Peter would give decisions, based on the teachings of Jesus, which would be bound in heaven; that is, honored by God." --Ralph Earle, "Matthew," in A. F. Harper and others, eds., Beacon Bible Commentary, vol. 6, (Kansis City, MO: Beacon Hill, 1964), 156.

"This verse [Mat 16:19] therefore probably refers primarily to a legislative authority in the church." -- Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament, (Downer's Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1993), 90.

"Hence handing over the keys implies appointment to full authority. He who has the keys has on the one side control, e.g., over the council chamber or treasury, cf. Mt. 13:52, and on the other the power to allow or forbid entry, cf. Rev. 3:7." -- J. Jeremias, "Kleis," in Gerhard Kittel, ed., and Geoffrey W. Bromley, trans. and ed., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 3, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1968), 749-750.

Isa sa kapansin-pansin ay ang mga salitang binitiwan ni Martin Luther sa sinulat nyang “The Keys,” siyam na taon pagkatapos niyang ma-excommunicate:


"So we stand there and with open mouth stare heavenward and invent still other keys. Yet Christ says very clearly in Mat. 16:19 that he will give the keys to Peter. He does not say he has two kinds of keys, but he gives to Peter the keys he himself has and no others." -- Martin Luther, "The Keys," in Conrad Bergendoff, ed., trans. Earl Beyer and Conrad Bergendoff, [I]Luther's Works, vol. 40, (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1958), 365-366.(Source (You can see links before reply))

14 Jansenius, in Concord, Evang., cxxxiii, p. 479; Maldonatus, in Lk xxii.31, vol. ii. p. 337; Cornelius Lapidé, in Lk xxii.31, vol. viii, p. 846.
15 “cum ergo prandissent dicit Simoni Petro Iesus Simon Iohannis diligis me plus his dicit ei etiam Domine tu scis quia amo te dicit ei pasce agnos (lambs) meos dicit ei iterum Simon Iohannis diligis me ait illi etiam Domine tu scis quia amo te dicit ei pasce agnos (lambs) meos dicit ei tertio Simon Iohannis amas me contristatus est Petrus quia dixit ei tertio amas me et dicit ei Domine tu omnia scis tu scis quia amo te dicit ei pasce oves (sheep) meas.” (John 21:15-17, Latin Vulgate)
16 Ito pa ang isang analohiya sa kung anong sinisimbolo ng lambs at sheeps sa John 21:15-17 mula kay Bishop Moses Bar Kepha the Syrian (890 AD):


“Under the name of lambs (Jesus) meant the Pastors and Prelates of the Church, over which Simon was appointed by his Lord Head and Ruler…Likewise under the same name of lambs He meant the holy twelve Apostles and the seventy-two disciples. Next, under the name of rams He meant the Priests, the Doctors, the Prelates, and Rulers…Lastly, he called sheep the holy flock of all the faithful together.” In John 21:15-17. Cod. Eod. (Verses from the Peshitto Text)

17 Ralph P. Martin & Peter H. Davids (editors), “Flock of the Shepherd,” mula sa Dictionary of the Later New Testament & Its Development, InterVarsity Press, 1997, p. 1090; Bastow J. A., “Shepherd” mula sa A Bible Dictionary: History and Antiquities of the Hebrews and Neighbouring Nations, Longmans, Green Reader and Dyer, p. p. 683.
18 Ibid. p. 1091, “Flock of the Shepherd”; Covel James Junior, A Concise Dictionary of the Holy Bible, G. Lane & P. P. Sanford, 1843.
19 Ang tawag ng paganong manunulat na si Homer sa Griyegong haring si Agamemnon ay ποίμενα λαω̃ν, a shepherd of the people o pastol ng mga tao.
20 Renn, S. D., Expository Dictionary of the Bible words: word studies for key English Bible, p. 376; Brown, R. E, The Community of the Beloved Disciple, p. 162; Brown, R. E., Peter in the New Testament: a collaborative assessment by Protestant & Roman Catholics (editors Raymond E. Brown, Karl P. Donfried, John Henry Paul Reumann) Augsburg Pub. House, 1973.
21 Jeremias, Joachim, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 5:498, mula sa sipi ng librong St. John’s Gospel: A Bible study guide and commentary ni Steve Ray.
22 Hermann Olshausen, D.D., ‘Appendix to John’s Gospel,’ mula sa Biblical Commentary on the Gospels, and The Acts of the Apostles (trans., by Richard Garvey, A.M.), T & T Clark, p. 319.
23 Godet, F. D.D., Commentary on the Gospel of St. John, With a Critical Introduction (trans., by S. Taylor & M. D. Cusin), vol. 3, T & T Clark, 1880, pp. 349-50.
24 Lindsay, Colin (The Hon.), “Vicar of Christ,” mula sa Evidence of the Papacy: As derived from the Holy Scriptures and from Primitive Antiquity, Longmans, Green, & Co. PaterNoster Row.
25 Behnam, Cyril, “Vicar of Christ,” mula sa The Tradition of the Syriac Church of Antioch, 1871, pp. 51-52.


*Appendix



“Simon, the Chief of the Apostles, who RULED over all powers [shultonin], that he might bind and loose without obstacle.”
— Syriac Liturgy, in Feast of Apostles Saints Peter and Paul, Noct. i. Cod. de Propaganda (Syriac), 65, p. 369

“One is His (Christ’s) faithful Vicar, Simon Barjonas, who is named Kifo (stone), to whom (Christ) Himself made the promise, saying: Upon this stone I build My Church: and again: To thee I will give the keys of the heavenly kingdom. Christ in truth did not say to all the Apostles: “I will build upon you, I will give you.”.. Although to each Disciple was given the priestly office, the singular primacy which is a spiritual primacy, has not been given to all, but to a single one, as to the faithful Vicar of the one true God, that he should rule and guide all, and be over all his brethren.”
— Nestorian Synod (schismatic/heretical) Sub Patriarch Dadishoo, in Nomocanone. Cod. De Prop. (Syriac), 27, p. 277.

“The Disciples were all Apostles; each of them had received the imposition of hands of our Redeemer, all of them were made Bishops, but for the sake of government, Simon was appointed Chief.”
— Bishop Moses bar Kepha the Syrian (schismatic ie. Jacobite Monophysite), de Sacerdotio, Tract 4, cap 6, Cod. eod. p 124 c. AD 890

“(Peter) He was the leader* to penance; hence The Church is well built upon him in all shifts. Prudent indeed was the Son of the carpenter who laid her foundation, and purposely built her upon Simon at the beginning. Of penance, rather than of anything else, the Church is exultant, since by it all her congregations thrivingly flourish. Should an adulteress or thieves ever struggle to get into (Paradise) without penance, who would open to them the door'? For this the Church is built upon him who denied, that all her superstructures might closely cement without rifting."
— St. James (Jacob) of Serug, de Abnegatione Simonis, Hom. 57. Cod. Vatic. (Syriac), 118, p. 238, a tergo. *literally: “the head and the first”

"Andrew was the first to meet Christ, inasmuch as Peter was the younger in age. But . . . Peter became a Leader to his own brother. And God sees the dispositions of the heart, and knowing who is worthy to be appointed unto Presidency, He also chose Peter to be the Leader of His disciples, as in every way has been clearly shown."
— St. Epiphanius c.A.D. 374 "Adversus Haereses" 51, n. 17

"For since the most blessed Peter received the headship of the Apostles from the LORD, and the church of Rome still abides by His institutions, it is wicked to believe that His holy disciple Mark, who was the first to govern the church of Alexandria, formed his decrees on a different line of tradition: seeing that without doubt both disciple and master drew but one Spirit from the same fount of grace, and the ordained could not hand on aught else than what he had received from his ordainer."
— Pope Leo the Great, Letter 9, To DIOSCORUS, BISHOP OF ALEXANDRIA. June 21, c. AD 445.. The Pope declares that Peter was the top Apostle.

"Although the tradition of the Fathers has attributed to the Apostolic See so great authority that none would dare to contest its judgments...For(Peter) himself has care over all the Churches, and above all that in which he sat nor does he suffer any of its privileges or decisions to be shaken"
— Pope Zosimus [regn. A.D. 417-418 ], To Aurelius and the Council of Carthage, Epistle 12(A.D. 418),in GCC,95,115

"Since to great Peter Christ our Lord gave the office of Chief Shepherd after entrusting him with the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, to Peter or his successor must of necessity every novelty in the Catholic Church be referred. [Therefore], save us, oh most divine Head of Heads, Chief Shepherd of the Church of Heaven."
— St. Theodore AD 759-826, Book I, Epistle 23 to Pope Leo III.

“But still, as I have made use of the testimony of the chief Apostle, in which he openly confessed the Lord Jesus Christ as God..”
— St. John Cassian, Contra Nestorium, 3:13 (A.D. 430), in SPP, 61

“Peter also the chief of the apostles says: "And now why do you tempt God to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear. But we believe that we shall be saved by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ even as they were."”
— St. John Cassian, Contra Nestorium, 5:9 (A.D. 430)

"The memory of Peter, who is the head of the apostles...he is the firm and most solid rock, on which the savior built his Church."
— St Gregory of Nyssa, Panegyric on St. Stephen,3(ante A.D. 394),in SPP,56

vaLium10
8th Feb 2012, 01:58
TS pansin mo puro rant lng makikita mo d2 sa thread mo? kc no one cares!

hindi kme pumunta ng symbianize para magbasa ng copy paste mo >_>

Reported. Iwasan natin ang pag gamit ng txt like posting. Walang bastusan ng thread dre. wala namang pumilit sayo na basahin tong thread na to e. Magbasa ka nga ng forum rules.

fortune4u
8th Feb 2012, 02:46
visit nalang kayo dito sa website na to at masasagot lahat ng mga katanongan nyo...

You can see links before reply

fortune4u
8th Feb 2012, 02:48
Online Social Networking that pays you and its free forever!!!

Welcome to WAZZUB!
The most exciting phenomenon on the Internet
Win $5,000 in Cash Prizes
From now until April 9, 2012

THIS IS EXTREMELY TIME SENSITIVE!

The gates are closing on April 9th, 2012 (midnight Eastern Time)
So what should you do?
TAKE ACTION...Seize your future…Start promoting WAZZUB NOW

Here is what you need to share about WAZZUB :

FREE FOREVER (NO FEES) + NO AUTOSHIPS + NO JOBS TO DO +

NOTHING TO SELL + NOTHING TO BUY + NOT MLM

NOTHING TO DOWNLOAD
= THE PERFECT INTERNET OPPORTUNITY

As a free member, your goal is to spread the word far and wide as fast as you can. The more people you have signed up (for free) in your "Uni-level x 5" WAZZUB community by April 9, 2012, the more money you will make (every month with no more work to do)


Example: If you invite just 5 people to join for free and they do the same 5 generations deep, you could earn about $4,000 every month PASSIVELY for life, doing NOTHING different than what you are currently doing every day.


What if everyone invited just 10 people? That amount would EXPLODE to:$111,110.00 every month. There is NO limit!
The more people you invite the more money you'll earn. Period!
Now is the time to create: massive, PASSIVE, residual monthly income for life..

Steps to Join:

Don't forget to verify your account by opening your email.

1. Register with your name and working email

2. Open your email and check for the wazzub message and click the verification link to verify..

3. After verified check for the 2nd email for your login details..

4. Go to wazzub members login and login to your account.

5. copy you personal link and paste it to your facebook wall or here in symbianize forums

6. Invite as many as you can, the more you invite the more cash you will earn every month for life..

7. Read on FAQ, Blogs, and Facebook walls of the wazzub to learn more..


JOIN NOW:

You can see links before reply

fortune4u
8th Feb 2012, 02:54
The real world of wisdom. Ito na ang mga kaalaman na dapat natin pag aaralan, nandito na ang panginoon at nakabalik na sya na di nyo alam dahil sya nga ay babalik as a Holy Spirit, the Comforter.

Visit kayo dito at ikaka surpresa nyo to.

You can see links before reply

The continuation of the teachings of Christ, as he said:

I will send to you the Comforter that will teach you all that I did not tell you now.............

yeoh_8
8th Feb 2012, 05:31
@Diego_99

tanong ko lang po sir, diba po sa bible may nakasulat na ganito:

Ang mga bagay ngang ito, mga kapatid, ay inianyo ko sa halimbawa sa aking sarili at kay Apolos dahil sa inyo; upang sa amin ay mangatuto kayo na huwag magsihigit sa mga bagay na nangasusulat; upang ang sinoman sa inyo ay huwag magpalalo ang isa laban sa iba.
1 Cor. 4:6

Kung anong bagay ang iniuutos ko sa iyo, ay siya mong isasagawa: huwag mong dadagdagan, ni babawasan. Deut. 12:32

ang tanong ko po eh bakit naman patuloy kayong gumagawa ng sarili niyong mga utos at doktrina, halimbawa eh rosaryo, limbo, sta.claus, purgatoryo, sign of the cross, difference between father and pope (our father who art in heaven or yung father ba na sa simbahan kase diba father din ang tawag sa kanila pati yung nasa roma eh pope or father din, kakalito no?), paghalik or pagpunas sa rebulto na alam niyo naman na wala sa biblia? (1 Cor. 4:6 and Deut.12:32)

o eto po ang magandang paliwanag diyan:

Ang Ephraim ay napighati, siya'y nadikdik sa kahatulan; sapagka't siya'y nasisiyahang lumakad ng ayon sa utos ng tao. Hos. 5:11

Datapuwa't walang kabuluhan ang pagsamba nila sa akin, Na nagtuturo ng kanilang pinakaaral ng mga utos ng mga tao. Mar. 7:7

Nilisan ninyo ang utos ng Dios, at inyong pinanghahawakan ang sali't-saling sabi ng mga tao.
Mar. 7:8

(Ang lahat ng mga bagay na ito ay mangasisira sa paggamit), ayon sa mga utos at mga aral ng mga tao? Col. 2:22

Na huwag mangakinig sa mga katha ng mga Judio, at sa mga utos ng mga tao na nangagsisisinsay sa katotohanan. Tit. 1:14

buti na lang merong mga ganitong talata sa biblia.

hindi ba sapul na sapul kayo diyan? o siyempre hindi niyo naman aaminin yan, so mali pala ang biblia? nakakatawa lang kung babanatan na naman ako dito na, "fundamentalist ka kase! hindi mo alam ang translations at history ng bible" kakatuwa naman, sila pala ang expert sa bible bakit napaka simpleng talata nagiging kumplikado para sa kanila, pag sinabing HUWAG kang papatay, bawal ba or pede? eh yung HUWAG kang gagawa ng larawang inanyuan, pagdating ba sa pananamplatayang pang relihiyon eh pede ba gumawa or bawal? simple lang naman ang sagot, bakit kase may mga history or translations pa na palusot which makes things complicated, or baka naman para naman makalusot lang kase hindi na nga naman mababago yung docrtines na nakasanayan na sa napakaraming taon at kahiyaan na lang kung babaguhin pa, kaya gawin na lang complicated.