Modern day people look at the Christian message and reject it for two reasons:
1) Their modern logic tells them that such a story, is just that, a
story.
Response: On the surface, it may seem that way, but when truly
digging in the details, there is A LOT where logic can be used to
substantiate Christianity.
There was a book called ''Who moved the stone.'' It was
two skeptics looking to disprove Christianity. One converted based on
what he found. Link to Book
2) The second is sin. People all over the place are denying sin, or if they are Christian, take part in a church that says: All of your sins are forgiven when you accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior! (Born Again-Calvinist-Baptist-Evangelicals)
Modern people equate 'nice' as not evil, or as good. I am nice to 90% of the people I know, therefore, I am good.
It won't be rare to find me writing 'evil' like this: 'evil'
Because people do not like this term categorically, and
so by putting the ' ' around it. I am acknowledging that the word has a
personal interpretation, but I by no means am trying to sugar coat it, I mean to use the word evil.
In Morality, there is Good and Evil. Evil is
usually interpreted as of the devil, mean spirited, an evil person as
the devil themself, or to mean that if they are evil the they are DAMNED, going to Hell.
But it is
not the case, evil simply means against Good, and not a personal
good, but the Great Good. It would be 'nicer' to say, harmony. Sin is
against what is harmonious.
In this very blog, I try to illustrate this in the post about 'Untamed Sexuality.'
Modern day people are so offended by the word evil, they categorically
deny the term, and then deny sin all together, or almost all together. If not all together, then they only recognize those really, really 'evil' things
people do like serial killers, or cruel world leaders.
It shocks me that people want to deny sin, i.e. evil
The hard truth, I think, is that majority of people are not only
sinners (as we all are sinners) but the majority do not want to hear
about their lifestyles as being profoundly sinful. And they then have a very simple solution for this, they take away the voices that say they are living in sin.
In other words, it is not a denial on evidential
circumstances, it is a denial based on self-preservation and self
interests.
Also known as PRIDE, the deadliest of all sins
Our culture is one of pleasure and
release. This release is typically either by violence or through an
imprisonment of sexual channels
Basically, we as a
culture do not like sin, because we are sour pusses / immature in our
nature / confused on what is a true good. Or as the pope says, maybe we are just idiots.
WHAT modernity loses in Christianity is the answer to sin. Not an answer by denying it, or a self-interested redefining of what sin is or is not, the Christian answer to sin is one of mercy.
Mercy is what is not appreciated. It is not appreciated that we are capable to recognize ourselves as
sinners, but we have a calling to pursue the mercy offered to us despite our sinfulness.
This is great, and this is harmonious! One can
thrive in knowing that even with the pain of sin, we still have the advantage of recapturing/reconciling oneself despite sin.
When talking to modern
people, they don't want to hear the words ''evil'' or 'sin.'' So
instead. one can say disharmony, harmful, unhealthy,
unwholesome,'troublesome'
You have to soften the language as if to a child !!!!!!
I wonder if it helps modern westerners to think of sin in a new way, sin as against liberty
and justice. What is sin if it is not invading one's freedom? Freedom
of living. Is a robber not a sinner? Is a rapist or a murder not
sinful? These people take away one's freedom, you see. Taking away the freedom of
walking down the street safely, freedom of preserving their body,
freedom of meeting their own life end. What is Justice if there is not
sin? On what account can one claim injustice without sin? I put it to them who deny sin, that this has to be sincerely re-evaluated!
Well are we talking about the book of Jesus' followers, containing His Words, parts of His life, and His mission? We know where to find it, don't we.
OR!
Is it the book He wrote Himself? His own work, very literally, ''the words of the Lord.''
Where is it? Let's examine what this non-existence means.
Let's be straight forward and brief about what this means, it means that Jesus intended men to carry out His work. It means that the very act of writing a Gospel or a letter preaching the teachings of Christ is done by work. It means that salvation is not by faith alone, it means the word must be given, something must be done for all to share in the salvation. It is a mission of man, commissioned by God.
The Bible is much more than a foretelling of the One True God incarnate. It is more than trying to tell or convince one of the existence of God.
The Bible is a lot more than a book which tells one, 'Hey" Don't I have a message for you! Jesus is Lord, if you accept Him, You are saved!''
Much more!
Yes! It is a witness to Christ as incarnate, yes!, it is about God's design for salvation through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
But when you read the letters, understand that these are people who are bringing us Jesus' message, not Jesus Himself. Jesus commissioned men (and 'man') to the obligation to spread the message.
Many non-Catholics look at the Catholic Church and question all claims of authority by a single expression, ''Catholicism is a man's religion.''
The Bible was written by men, guided by the Holy Spirit to claim the Truth.
How could one, on one hand, say that the Catholic Church is 'man made,' but the Bible is 'Holy Spirit guided.
There is an obvious inconsistency there. Could it just so happen to be that this Holy Spirit not only guided men to write a book, but stayed with their communities and guided them as well?
Without getting into the theological disputes on grace, one should surely see that what is salvation without works? What is it without the works of men?
What if the Apostles were just happy to live by faith and did not go out and work on missions around the Mediterranean and Middle East? Where would we be today without the work of men?
Does one not see that men are commissioned to work for God? God's plan is for men to take the seeds of His mission in the works of Jesus Christ and to water and nurture this message.
God commissioned us! God's vision of man is of men!
So what is the beef with the Catholic Church? Is the Church not descendants of the Apostles themselves? Protestants may not want to believe it, but history says otherwise.
This is very evident when reading the New Testament book of the Acts of the Apostles and in the Epistles.
Let's get biblical and show how evident this is: Jesus came to plant the seed, men were commissioned for it to grow.
1 Corin 3 : 6 I planted, Apol′los watered, but God gave the growth. 7 So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth. 8 He who plants and he who waters are equal, and each shall receive his wages according to his labor. 9 For we are God’s fellow workers;[a] you are God’s field, God’s building. 10 According
to the commission of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I
laid a foundation, and another man is building upon it. Let each man
take care how he builds upon it. 11 For no other foundation can any one lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if any one builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble— 13 each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day[b] will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. 14 If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. 15 If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.
Galatians 6: 6 Brethren,
if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual should
restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Look to yourself, lest you too be
tempted. 2 Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. 3 For if any one thinks he is something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself. 4 But let each one test his own work, and then his reason to boast will be in himself alone and not in his neighbor. 5 For each man will have to bear his own load.
48 But
he who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, shall receive a
light beating. Every one to whom much is given, of him will much be
required; and of him to whom men commit much they will demand the more.Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE)
Catholicism is often looked on by other Christians and the non-Christian/non-Religious crowds as being harsh, and filled up with rules.
Outsiders shouldn't fret over these rules, it is simple: It takes belief, and when one has belief God blesses them greatly, when one is blessed so greatly, it is on them to blossom and sustain this grace as the most precious gift that it is.
In other words, to who much is given, much is required.
In Catholic circles, it is quite understood that priest and the ordained, i.e. those who are involved in counseling Christians in being Christians, will be judged more harshly than outsiders.
Catholicism is a calling, it is the call to the mission of the Lord, he who carries his cross follows Him! (Matthew 16: 24-26) Or, he who follows Him will have to bear crosses!
So when outsiders criticize Catholics over the rules, as my own wife offered 'I once thought the Church was suppose to help people, but when I got closer, it was nothing but rules,' it seems pointless.
Of course, it seems pointless, they are lacking faith.
In one way, it is like saying, it is pointless being a mother, motherhood is nothing but doing for others, why would anyone WANT to do that? That can't be fun!
Well for those who believe that motherhood is the greatest of gifts, it is fun! as is Catholicism. When one is able not to love themselves, but love the gift given, it is a walk in the park on a cool and sunny Sunday morning ( with humming birds and dancing flora).
Just look to this pope. The media has fallen head over heels over his expression of mercy and humanity (and well deserved) towards the world.
It is because Pope Francis gets it!
Look at what this merciful pope tells fellow priests:
THIS IS THE BEST I CAN FIND SO FAR, BUT HE HAS BEEN AFTER PRIESTS IF ONE HAS PAID ATTENTION
"We are anointed by the Spirit, and when a priest is far from Jesus
Christ he can lose this unction. In his life, no: essentially he has
it... but he loses it. And instead of being anointed he ends up being
smarmy," the pope added.
"And how damaging to the Church are
smarmy priests!" the leader of the world's 1.2 billion Roman Catholics
went on to say. "Those who put their strength in artificial things, in
vanity, in an attitude... in a cutesy language... But how often do we
hear it said with sorrow: 'This is a butterfly-priest,' because they are
always vain... [This kind of priest] does not have a relationship with
Jesus Christ! He has lost the unction: he is smarmy."
By being far from Jesus, "we necessarily compensate for this with other,
worldly attitudes," he added. "And so all these figures...
priest-wheeler dealers, priest-tycoons... But the priest who adores
Jesus Christ, the priest who talks with Jesus Christ, the priest who
seeks Jesus Christ and who is allowed to seek Jesus Christ: this is the
center of our life. If that is not there, we lose everything. And what
will we give to the people?"
People cannot be fooled, the pope suggested. When they look at a true
priest they say: "Yes, he's difficult, he's this or that... But he is a
priest! And people know!" On the other hand, when they see "priest
idolaters, so to speak, priests who instead of having Jesus have little
idols... worshipers of the god Narcissus... When people see [priests
like this] they say 'poor guy!'"
The relationship with Jesus "saves us from worldliness and idolatry that
makes us smarmy, preserves us in the anointing [we have received]," the
pope said. "And today, this is my hope for you… Even if you lose
everything in life, don't lose this relationship with Jesus Christ! This
is your victory. Go forward with this!"
Reading this, I do not find it harsh, but I am inspired by this message to our priests, but imagine if any of this language was a winkle of what the world was hearing from the pope, the world would scorn him, as they have the other gracious popes.
But this pope has talent, he knows those of who much is given, much is required.
Ignatius lived from around A.D. 35 to 107. He was the third bishop of
Antioch and tradition records that he was a disciple of the apostle John
On the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that the Eucharist is truly the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ (1374). In his Letter to the Smyrnaeans, Ignatius addresses the issue of those who do not believe as the Church does:
Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the
grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their
opinions are to the mind of God… They abstain from the Eucharist and
from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the Flesh
of our Savior Jesus Christ, Flesh which suffered for our sins and which
the Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of
God are perishing in their disputes. —Letter to the Smyrnaeans, Ch 6
Ignatius also explains that the Eucharist must be administered either by a bishop or one of his ordained ministers:
Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is administered either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it.—Letter to the Smyrnaeans, Ch 8
On the Authority of the Catholic Church The Greek
root of the term catholic means "according to the whole" or
“universal.” Ignatius uses the term to refer to the visible and
authoritative Church:
See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ
does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and
reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do
anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be
deemed a proper Eucharist, which is administered either by the bishop,
or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear,
there let the multitude of the people also be; even as wherever Jesus
Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. —Letter to the Smyrnaeans, Ch 8
Ignatius urges the faithful to submit to the authority of their bishop because it is the will of God:
But inasmuch as love suffers me not to be silent in
regard to you, I have therefore taken upon me first to exhort you that
you would all run together in accordance with the will of God. For even
Jesus Christ, our inseparable life, is the manifested will of the
Father; as also bishops, settled everywhere to the utmost bounds of the
earth, are so by the will of Jesus Christ… Let us be careful, then, not
to set ourselves in opposition to the bishop, in order that we may be
subject to God. —Letter to the Ephesians, Ch 3,5
Ignatius recognizes the authority, or “presidency,” in particular of the Church at Rome:
Ignatius, also called Theophorus, to the Church that has
found mercy in the greatness of the Most High Father and in Jesus
Christ, his only son; to the Church beloved and enlightened after the
love of Jesus Christ, our God, by the will of him that has willed
everything which is; to the Church wich also holds the presidency in the
place of the country of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor,
worthy of blessing, worthy of praise, worthy of success, worthy of
sanctification, and because you hold the presidency of love, named after
Christ and named after the Father; here therefore do I salute in the
name of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father. —Letter to the Romans, Intro
Ignatius indicates that the Church at Rome possessed the authority to teach others:
You have envied no one; but others you have taught. I
desire only that what you have enjoined in your instruction may remain
in force. —Letter to the Romans, Ch 3
Finally, Ignatius confirms—as do other Church Fathers—that this authoritative Church at Rome was founded by Peter and Paul:
Not as Peter and Paul did, do I command you. They were
apostles and I am a convict. They were free, and I even to the present
time am a slave. —Letter to the Romans, Ch 4
The devil did not want to serve, He was envy of our creation. The Devil is not trying to conquer God ( as that would be stupid) but conquer US!
Wisdom 2:24
Revised Standard Version (RSV)
24 but through the devil’s envy death entered the world, and those who belong to his party experience it.
Jeremiah 2:20
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
20 “For long ago [a]I broke your yoke And tore off your bonds; But you said, ‘I will not serve!’ For on every high hill And under every green tree You have lain down as a harlot.
Isaiah 14:12-14
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
12 “How you have fallen from heaven, O [a]star of the morning, son of the dawn! You have been cut down to the earth, You who have weakened the nations! 13 “But you said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God, And I will sit on the mount of assembly In the recesses of the north. 14 ‘I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.’
Martin Luther, Mr. 95 theses. A man who set to reform the Church, but ended up changing history and the Church of God.
One must find it interesting from the Church's side, that the Counter Reformation gave way not to great effects in Europe, but it sprawled Catholicism to Egypt, India and to the wider globe.
Some of the great Saints came from the Counter Reformation: St. Ignatius of Loyola and St. Francis of Xavier, St. Theresa of Alva and St. John of the Cross.
What escapes most people, is that Luther wasn't alone in wanting to reform the Church. Much in the way of Vatican II, these things didn't just happen. There was dialogue and movements for decades upon decades before Luther wrote his 95 theses.
In fact, Luther considered himself a part of this dialogue which inspired him to do such a thing as write the 95 theses.
The answer of the Pope by censuring 41 of Luther's 95 in the papal bull Exsurge Domine (Arise O Lord), and the threat of excommunication caused the old monk to respond and his followers to respond even more zealously.
Also, much misconstrued is that being excommunicated is not being condemned to hell. Condemning one to hell is not a Catholic practice, but warning one to the potential of being damned is certainly a practice. Excommunication, however, is setting one outside the Church. In Catholicism, all can be redeemed, no one is condemned to hell, repentence is always welcomed. As an aside, which is very important for those who criticize the Church on modern questions of morality to understand that there is always opportunity for redemption.
When the 95 theses was written, Luther was very happy to consider himself as a member of the Church. It could be benefitial to hear a bit more on the council of Trent by Fr. Robert Barron of ''Word on Fire.'' Coucil of Trent of course is the council which answered Luther's movement and propositions.
Today, Lutherans and Catholics are close in theology- Of course, not as close as the Eastern Orthodox and the Catholic Church. In fact, only the Anglicans are the protestants who have the closest reltionship to Roman Catholicism. But to any effect, the religions in most regards are still very similiar. In fact, seems as though I have recently read that dialogue between the two have really been rather fruitful in the most recent of times.
Essentially, what Martin Luther did was to simplify the religion and scaled the religion back from any honor to any saint or Mary. do Catholcis worship Saints or Mary?
Just logically, it seems to make sense to make the religion more Christ-centric. Catholics would say that Jesus would want us to honor His Mother, just as He would have by following the commandment of honoring thy mother and father, and although there are no commandments to honor the dead and the saints, this follows the jewish faith and is biblical as in Revelation 5:8, where John depicts the
saints in heaven offering our prayers to God under the form of "golden
bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints."
But anyway, that is the school grade depiction of Lutheranism. There are more interesting, more full assets to Lutheran's theology which are a deeper reflection into what Jesus dying on the cross means and of which can be used to support his doctrines of Sola Fide and Sola Gratia. There is more to Luther than Romans 3 : 28 which is the foundational verse of Sola Fide.
Essentially, Luther has a very dour view of human nature. He famously or infamously spent hours in the confessional. Not so much because he sinned so much, but because he felt himself so unworthy to live up to God's call and God's Will. This view and experience certainly affected his theology as a theologian.
He celebrated when in Romans 3, he read into the passage that he was saved by faith, and not works. This relieved his sorrowful soul.
This idea of faith alone is more understood when one understands the major divide amongst Catholics and Luther, Protestants on the idea of grace.
In Catholicism, there are two types of grace, actual grace and sanctifying grace.
Sanctifying grace is grace which makes one soul pure, ready for Heaven. Actual grace is the grace we feel which helps us in our faith and our trials. Actual grace is God's interventions. The grace we usually speak of when we say that God pushed me in the right direction.
In Lutheranism and Protestantism, all is finished by the work of grace on the cross. Once one repents or accepts God in their heart, they are justified by faith. Lutheranism and many structured protestants hold to baptism, other protestant churches such as the Baptist and born-again Evangelicals do not.
Luther compared human nature to cow dung, and God's grace covered the foul nature of humanity with his grace as snow would cover cow dung on a field. This is how Luther described the working of grace from the cross.
Below, you will see two charts which clarifies even more clearly Luther's theology. For Luther there are two rhealms (I believe this is derived from St. Augustine's the City of God and City of Man), one of God, the Divine, and one of Man, the natural or physical.
The one of God is spiritual. It is what makes men saintly when they are spiritually aware of Jesus and God's Will. Man understands God's Will by following the Gospels.
The one of Man is natural, temporal and finite. It is one where the law is so man can set boundaries and thus are imprisoned. Because there is imprisonment, there is sin, as sin keeps man away from God and are slaves onto themselves. They are captive in nature and to their own nature. Only God's sanctifying grace can come down and save man from this nature. Which would be why God came down as man, to bring Himself into the realm of man, into sin, to destroy the imprisonment and nature of sin.
So being, according to Luther, Man is both always a saint and a sinner at the same time, never less or more of the other. One can not be holier than another Christian. This is the essence of Luther, and how he came to understand the work on the cross and the nature of man.
Here I must ask. Is this actually biblical? The word holy means ''to separate.'' So something 'holy' means it is separate, unique. So for Luther only Divine things can be holy, not natural things. Did God not tell Moses to be careful, that Moses was standing on 'Holy' ground, and ground of course being a natural place of natural sediment and soil. We have another example in the burning bush.
Moving on, here is the dichotemy of God and nature in a diagram.
Whatever you think of this dichotomy, there are apparently claims made which say that Lutherans have a theology which is best. I suspect this is said in protestant circles without Catholic consideration.
No matter what you may think of the theology as best, or whatever you think of the ideas in his theology at all.
The practicality of the theology is extremely weak.
I believe Luther himself wouldn't like what has transpired in the church which carries his teachings. It is of course his own fault. If we are always saints and sinners, then to him that means we have nothing to work towards which alleviates works, as he perceives is the intent of Romans 3: 28.
But yet! Luther has kept all the traditions of the saints who were before the reformation. If we are all saints and sinners, and can not become more holy, then how does he justify keeping saints of his time?
But even more, this dichotomy makes for great confusion. I have come to this realisation by listening to a Lutheran theologian who couldn't answer some of the most basic questions.
Such as, ''Do we need to go to Church.''
He says this is a hard question! He says he would suspect that grace from God would motivate us to want to go to Church, but if it is required for salvation, he didn't really say for sure. To me, I could hear in his voice, technically you are not saved by going to church, but if people didn't go to church, why do we need priest and ministers and buildings to start with. So it is in the interest of the church to promote going to church to keep the faith going. As you see, this is a pickle for the practicality of the faith, going to church doesn't help anything, and doesn't hurt anything. Eventually, people will figure this out, and in today's world, choose to tend to more practical or more entertaining things.
And that actually brings another dimension to Luther's theology. Free Will. The only free will we possess is before we have faith and are justified. After we cling to the Lord's Word, our free will is affected. He has eliminated free will, because everything we do in God's graces is not works, but God's grace working in us. That is, one doesn't go to mass by choice, but the grace we receive has guided us to church, thereby not from our will and not freely.
In Luther's writing ''On the Bondage of the Will,'' Luther describes humans as a horse, and if God is the rider, He leads us to salvation, if the devil rides us, damnation.
Which I don't think is ultimately the best metaphor for Luther, because the horse is cooperating, and Luther does not believe in any type of human cooperation in salvation. It is all God.
But the idea is imprisonment, bondage, and in this bondage we are incapable of working on our own rescue, our own salvation. Thus, we have no will in our destination, thus no free will.
So being, one does not do anything for God, but God does it all for us. Once one has faith in God and can claim justification, the grace from the work on the cross brings you into doing God's work, which one can assert takes away free will. By being saved, we are losing a piece of our free will.
Which contradicts the angels, who are in heaven, the good ones anyway, but they have free will. If they did not have free will, Lucifer would never have freely gone against God. Of course, in today's Lutheranism, it is debatable if angels exist. Aside from the debate on the existence of angels, the angels are in play to many Lutherans still, and they are a case where they are in the graces of God and still have free will, yet it is propositioned that man is saved in a way where free will doesn't really exist after the fact.
So my two greatest inference is that Luther's theology is not the best, it is a travesty!
1) The saint / sinner dichotomy leaves for no easy answer for what the Religion thus teaches about morality and activity.
2) We are saved not only by faith, we are saved only by the works of God, we are not in control of our actions which I find very much wayward and untrue.
Maybe if one cares to, they can listen to the link below, and discover the complications in answering the simplest questions of this Great theology which only took 400 years for modernity to increasingly complicate things.
Scholars, Catholic scholars mostly, like to say, ''Luther took one pope away and made millions.''
Possibly no greater example of modernity causing great disorder in Lutheranism exists in Scandinavia. In Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, Lutheranism is the state religion (Well, no longer in Sweden). Each have freedom of religion but through their monarchies still sponsor the state religion of their Lutheran Church. In the case of same-sex marriage, it took an act of the parliament to claim the right for same-sex couples to marry in the churches. So the authority has become the state. What would Luther think? He took away the pope, and people of his persuasion are using civil authorities to determine church matters.
Okay, so not the best case, a drastically radical case of modernism causing disorder in the Lutheran Church in 400 years.
This is a pretty full disclosure. I am first a child of God, and then a follower of God's begotten Son, Jesus Christ.
Have I always been this?
I have never struggled with the question, ''Is there a God.''
To me it was evident, where else do we come from? What else explains a sudden creation of man, let alone the Earth and the Universe.
Why aren't there more talking species in the world? How can it be that we even talk and build art and architecture?
If all are natural, why aren't we thinking as the animals think, and living as the animals live? Why aren't we always hunting for food, resting after hunting, and all other primal behaviors of the animal kingdom?
As I said, all was easy to see for me.
I grew up in a Christian home, a Catholic home. I went to mass, went to Catholic school, and served as an altar boy.
In my high school days, I was more influenced by American and Southern things than God things. Although, I was still a practicing Catholic, I would read more about America and history than my Bible or about my faith.
I even had a remarkable occurrence in a dream, or rather, not in a dream, but while I was sleeping.
Sleeping in the waiting room in a Vet hospital which happened to be adjacent to my sick grandfather's room, I heard a clear voice speak to me.
And unfortunately, I recently forgot the exact wording. Was it, ''Matthew, He's gone,'' or was it ''Matthew, He's dead.''
I think it likely to be ''gone.''
This of course was amazing to hear, and it instantly woke me up, and I walked in the next room unconscious to the time or anything of what was around as I was still wiping away the sleep.
As I entered, I saw my mother looking over my grandfather, I heard a funny sound repeat itself in the oxygen tube.
When my mom looked towards me, I said, ''He's dead, isn't he?''
She said, ''Yes,'' And confirmed to me that I walked in only seconds after he passed on.
This was real to me, and I was very spiritual for a while. I was intensely aware of my spirituality for at least a year, and even quit the wrestling team as those boyhood ambitions to be a champion and seek glory seemed trivial.
It took a year or so before I was back to being completely distracted by sports, girls, parties, and teenage dreams.
Off to college, and I was still partially faithful to my Catholicism, but more out of love of my Louisiana culture than out of the love of God.
I didn't live like a believer, and you can really say I was agnostic, maybe a prayerful agnostic as I was somewhat practicing but it was not for any foundational belief in anything other than, ''Well I am not sure, but I believe in God, so might as well pray and keep my culture as that is the best I have anyway.''
And agnostic to Jesus Christ more than God, or a god, a creator.
And this agnosticism allowed me to live unsure and therefore inconsistent to any value I would say I had.
Later in my college days, I was attracted to my spirituality again, I sort of convinced myself that I had a natural spiritual gift. I sort of impressed upon myself a notion that when I drowned as an infant, I was brought back to life and this happening gave me stronger feelings to the spiritual world, a stronger connection. I attributed the voice in my sleep and other mediation experiences I had to this. That one of my talents is that I just might have a connection with the spirit world from my 'death' as an infant.
Of course, I have no memory of drowning, but my parents tell me that I was basically dead and then came to.
After a nice retreat with an uncle and my grandfather, I considered living this out, and becoming a priest. It came from my uncle, he said, and I never knew what made him say it, but he said to me, ''Why don't you become a priest.''
I was in college and although the thought was contemplated before in my life, it was never seriously contemplated until my uncle said those words. It suddenly really struck me as a very interesting proposal.
I told myself, I have this spirituality, maybe I am suppose to use it in that way.
So I spoke to a priest actually, and I told him that I didn't want to be a priest, I wanted a family, but felt that I could be called to become a priest. He said that everything I was saying was a good sign that I was being called, because it usually is not in our will.
But then, I was left only to experience something oppressive after that conversation. I suddenly had a crux of faith, and I went back and told the priest that I didn't want to be a priest, the good Lord willing, maybe I would be a deacon.
This oppressive feeling was one of emptiness and confusion, and felt that I was not even certain about the Catholic faith anymore. I felt a bit ridiculous to feel this was for me and moments later be stricken with all kinds of doubt and confusion.
It was not only confusion, however, it was also rationale, I was not going to sign my life away to something I wasn't sure I knew and understood. And the pope was a huge sticking point for me, why the pope? And why would I join the pope?
This left a lot off the table, and I continued my life as a regular student in college, and spiritually was in an insecure place, but still at peace with where things were. I was happy to say as Socrates, ''I know nothing.''
I would leave for Ireland, and I had a few religious talks in my first few months, however, I really wasn't comfortable talking about my faith as I was unsure what to say in a world I heard more voices against what I was than voices that substantiated what I was.
Then I met this lovely Danish girl on her own spiritual journey. We would talk about things, and I was in my ''I know nothing'' stage, but she showed me how wonderful it was to be on a spiritual journey.
She was also very intriguing as no one in her environment influenced her, she found this road on her own.
She grew up with Lutheran sensibilities as a Dane, but was very persuaded by the Catholic Faith, and she taught me about a few saints and really opened my eyes to a beautiful spiritual journey.
Even more, she would ask questions, and she inspired me to do what I really never actually did. Despite attending fine Catholic schools in my young life, I never really examined all the why's of my Catholic Faith. Those questions weren't in my peripheral, only was there a God, and was Jesus him? I suppose it was because I already saw myself as a Christian by name, and I had no reason to think what is all this stuff in Catholicism really about to its core. It was the way I learned to be a Christian, and that was that.
I would marry this girl in a Lutheran Church. I was not one bit concerned with marrying her in any certain Church. I had developed my own rationales, that marriage existed before Jesus so any marriage is the same with the intent on it being with God.
I had no inclination in me that a marriage in a Christian Church was not Godly. It was the promise of the two people to God themselves which made it Godly.
This is where I was, I was an American, everything could be answered this way. I was a Catholic, but I was not a papist. I was a Matthew, and my Catholicism was that of my conscious not of the law or of the pope and Church teachings to the inscription.
I also allowed my son to be baptized in a Lutheran Church, but this was more so because I knew the Catholic Church recognized all Christian baptisms and being in Denmark as we were this was convenient, and I also made an agreement to allow my wife's brother be the first sponsor which he could not do in a Catholic Church, and my brother as another, but I am still not sure what position this is in Lutheranism, but seemed fair enough so my own twin could claim the title of 'parain' in some way.
But I was still on a quest which my wife help inspire, although after these early years, our spiritual lives took us on different courses. I was actually intrigued by Lutheranism as I still hadn't answered the question for myself why they pope? I also understood the arguments which would question any need to pray to the saints or Mary.
So the essentials of Lutheranism actually made sense to me for a while, and I examined them.
My examinations ever so slowly, however, led me back to the Catholic faith.
The story of Fatima really got my energies going in understanding that in Catholicism the Word of God is alive. Catholicism is a living tradition and is not one where we are only to look in a book centuries old.
With Protestantism, of course people have experiences of God in their own lives, but the foundation of the religion is back in time. Prophets and miracles are what are read of in the Bible. A greater sense of God's mystic body is lost in the textual based faith. Catholicism moves with the world, as God is not stagnant but also involved. For many Protestants, if something happens that is not in the Book, it is rejected. The Catholic Church is very open to God's mysticism at work even today, and there are some wonderful stories which seem to reflect this view as a true one.
And this lead to much more, and then I discovered the vast and amazing resources to me in understanding the existence of God and the existence and Truth which lies in Jesus Christ on the world wide web, specifically youtube.
This blog is all from these moments where I began to get answers I didn't realize they were there all along, and my twin told me to stop sending emails, and start a blog where people could go to if they wanted.
I still send emails :), but they are shorter because I have links to share with what it is I have to say ;)
All are people of God, whether they know it or not, because all people are from God, and we are His.
Lumen Gentium is the Vatican II document which reinforces this idea, that all are God's people, not just believers.
With this, I want to focus on my Protestant friends. They must be on the verge of cursing my existence by now with all the links I send their way and seemingly to attack them as people. That is what I can imagine lying in their hearts, a cringe when they see my name attached to something.
I don't blame them, I actually would like a response every once in a while, but of course, disregard is the greatest insult. So I suppose they can claim that for themselves.
And for the record, a couple have replied.
There are several reasons this is the case. One lies in convenience, one lies in distaste, and one reason lies in a loss of the sense of what is Good and True.
Sharing one's heart is the greatest thing to do, there is very little anything else anyone should want of another than the sharing of their heart.
But when a sharing of the heart is ingested as a sharing of one's mind, people object more substantially.
It is not in my interest to make people uneasy. It is not my interest to make people think ill of my intentions. I have no greater value mentally then they do, I just am in the instrument of sharing knowledge. Sharing truth. Do we know what truth is today?
It may seem as though I am living in the Reformation Age to them. It may seem this way certainly, but I am not I would like to assure them. I believe the Holy Spirit works in each human being, and only in sharing am I opening them to my soul. It is a great honesty I write to them and I share things with them.
I am not out to show them what is wrong with them as people, I love them as people, and I love them as Christians. It is this love which I want them to understand what the Word is. That is in loving their ideals, I want to share with them more completely what their ideals stand for.
I would love to engage the atheist just the same, but they are a different breed of man. The Protestant is believing, so in theory, they should believe in what Jesus said and did.
1500 years went by before foundational elements of the Faith were changed. Of course, there were always people practicing the Faith contrary to the Faith, but the Reformation was one where the crisis of Faith grew far and wide.
How does one explain 1500 years of remarkable accomplishments towards congruency and just accept that it needed to be changed when speaking of what we speak of, God became man and revealed himself to us.
Of course, there was the East-West schism, but foundationally the teachings are the same, differences would come later.
And I think it would be greatly proper to disclose several things to my Protestant brothers and sisters about myself, about my spiritual journey.
A quick display on why protestantism deserves its name. It is not only a protest to the Pope and Catholicism, but just as well a protest to the Word it proclaims as the only authority in which man can believe in. ORIGINAL POST CENTERED ON THESE FIVE, BUT I FOUND ONE WHICH IS OUTSTANDING
Colossians 1:24
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
24 Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I [a]do my share on behalf of His body, which is the church, in filling up what is lacking [b]in Christ’s afflictions. ''for your sake,'' (Not only God, but a cooperation), DO (action, a work) my share on behalf of HIS Body (THE CHURCH!), in filling what is lacking (NOT FINISHED) in Christ's afflictions.
5 Articles of Scripture which should make any Protestant stay aback in laying any claim to Sola Scriptura, and thus Truth.
1 -1 Tim 3 : 15if
I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God,
which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the
truth.
2 - Romans 13 1 Every[a]person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except [b]from God, and those which exist are established by God.2 Therefore [c]whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.3 For rulers are not a cause of fear for [d]good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same;4 for
it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be
afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a
minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.5 Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience’ sake.6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing.7 Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.
Of course, it mainly speaks to civil authority, but the ending of verse one suggests all authority, and does it make sense that one should be subject to only civil authority and not a spiritual authority when the general existence of authority is 'established by God?' And this is vindicated in 1 Corin 1 : 10 -13
3 - ALL OF THE SERMON OF THE MOUNT FROM MATT 5 - 7 : 27 Matt 5 : 13“You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has become tasteless, how [e]can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men. 14 “You are the light of the world. A city set on a [f]hill cannot be hidden;15 nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a [g]basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house.16Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven. 17 “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.18 For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not [h]the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.19 Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches [i]others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever [j]keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 “For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 - Parable of the Sower Explained Luke 8 : 11“Now the parable is this: the seed is the word of God.12 Those
beside the road are those who have heard; then the devil comes and
takes away the word from their heart, so that they will not believe and
be saved.13 Those on the rocky soil are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no firm root;[c]they believe for a while, and in time of temptation fall away.14 The seed
which fell among the thorns, these are the ones who have heard, and as
they go on their way they are choked with worries and riches and
pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to maturity.15 But the seed
in the good soil, these are the ones who have heard the word in an
honest and good heart, and hold it fast, and bear fruit with [d]perseverance. As I believe the Catholic Church maintains the true interpretations of the Word, I believe the first is one who as said, begins on the path to righteousness, but follows the wrong course by persuasions of the devil, the second is not protestants as a whole as it says that they lose faith after a while, but this does show that Born-Again Christians are wrong in thinking that one can not lose salvation from their belief. The third can be light weight to earthly to rich and powerful Catholics or hints towards the protestant theology inspired by the temporal concerns of modern liberty. Forth is self-explanatory, but the existence of 'perseverance' once again fortifies the idea that we are not saved by faith alone! 5- St. Paul, not only St. Peter, makes the case that we are justified by deeds, Romans 2 : 5But [d]because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,6 who will render to each person according to his deeds:7 to those who by perseverance (Luke 8 : 15) in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life;8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation. Romans 2 : 12For all who have sinned [f]without the Law will also perish [g]without the Law, and all who have sinned [h]under the Law will be judged [i]by the Law;13 for it isnot the hearers[j]of the Law who are [k]just before God, but the doers [l]of the Law will be justified.14 For when Gentiles who do not have [m]the Law do [n]instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having [o]the Law, are a law to themselves,15 in that they show the
work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing
witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.
Historical claim against Sola Scriptura
The historical claim against Sola Scriptura is that it was the authority that the protestants protest against that claimed the authority to establish the Bible. That is, the authority that the protestants say have no authority are indeed the ones who decided which books should be in the Bible. It was a collection of bishops at the Council of Rome in the year 382, after Constantine. If we are to be a scriptural based religion, ask yourself a very reasonable question: If God's intent was to have scripture, why didn't Jesus write? You sort of wish he did, but he did not which is a clear indication that His Will was for man to carry the burden to bring the Good News to the world. He taught, and told His Apostles to teach as He did. It is scriptural that Jesus told His followers to teach the Word : Matt 28 : 20 teaching them oto observe all that pI have commanded you. And behold, qI am with you always, to rthe end of the age.” This is clear that we are to listen to men of the Christian God. We are to be humble in being guided and taught. I made up a quote, and it is relevant to this case : Even the smallest journeys teach us about ourselves.... We can not be answered until we allow ourselves to be guided My dear wife, an Evangelical Luthern of the Church of Denmark, made claim to me, ''The Bible is there so everyone can read the Word of God.'' This is not the case, anyone who reads about what went on at the Council of Rome in 382 when the Bible canon was established would find out. It was decided, not only which books are true, but which books are meant to be read in Mass, that is, the feast of the Lord. Thorough non-Christian scholarship has indicated that in those days, it was common to have a biographical piece of literature read at meals, at meals! What is a Christian meal? The remembrance and true sacrifice of the Eucharist ( Eucharist explained:Christ-in-the-eucharist ). The officials, who were granted their positions by ordination straight from the Apostles, kept the canon in Latin. Why not the vernacular? It was an attempt to make the mass universal, that is, exactly the same, and to them it was also important people could pray the prayers they learn no matter where they were in the world. The Bible simply was not made for individual interpretation. It was also not only claiming which scriptures are true or not. The Apocalypse, or revelation, of Peter was not rejected based on Truth, but on that idea that it did not match the intent of the Mass: wiki/Apocalypse_of_Peter And the Protestants who rail against the Romanism of the Catholic Church, seriously overlook the beauty of what happened in 313 through the Edict of Milan. It was extraordinary! So extraordinary, it was supernatural as Constantine's motivations came from a revelation in a dream. Think biblically, the Jews expected a conqueror to defeat the Romans. What happened? Of course it was not the way it was expected, but in the infinite wisdom of God and the power of Christ persevered and this Church He built took down the pagan Roman conquerors. How Glorious! And this story of Constantine is exactly the mysticism and mystery that Protestantism lacks, and the Catholic faith is engulfed with. AGAINST SALVATION APART FROM BAPTISM The following is from: Catholic Answers
Born of Water and the Spirit
The passage in Romans 6 (backed up by Colossians 2) is not the only
evidence from the New Testament that baptism is effective and therefore
necessary for salvation. The apostles Peter and John confirm St. Paul’s
teaching. In Acts 2, when St. Peter is preaching at Pentecost, his
hearers ask what they must do to be saved, and he replies, "Repent and
be baptized." In 1 Peter 3, Noah’s ark is referred to as a type of
baptism, and Peter writes, "In it only a few people, eight in all, were
saved through water, and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves
you—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good
conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ"
(1 Pet. 3:20-21). The most famous New Testament evidence for the efficacy and necessity
of baptism is in John’s Gospel. When Nicodemus comes to visit Jesus by
night, Jesus says that a person cannot enter the kingdom of God without
being born again. Nicodemus asks how a man might enter again into his
mother’s womb and Jesus corrects him, saying, "No one can enter the
kingdom of heaven unless he is born of water and the Spirit" (John
3:3-5). From the earliest days of the Church this passage has been
understood to refer to baptism, and this interpretation is virtually
unanimous down through history. Once again, to the question of authority, well I leave it to the Honorable Archbishop Fulton Sheen to disclose this reality of authority. In short, the authorities of God are not in authority for power, but of service!
This post will turn to two outside sources to illustrate an insurance of faith. That is, how do I know I am on the right path, first as a Christian, and secondly as a Catholic?
CHRISTIANITY
We have the Bible of course, but how can we be sure this Bible which was not put together until 382 AD at the Council of Rome is true?
Never mind it was bishops of the Catholic Church, how does any Christian believe that the Bible is true?
This is of course is a HUGE question for those who have no authority but the Bible, i.e. protestants who adhere to the principle of Sola Scriptura (despite it being the authority they reject who said it was so that it was these scriptures which were the Word of God).
With modern scholarship on the attack to prove Christianity wrong, or flawed, or what have you, it is very important to have some substance on the upper side of one's neck.
Well, Thank You, Dr. Peter Williams. Dr. Peter Williams of Oxford University puts together as good a case.
If you do not wish to watch the whole video, let's boil it down for you. Dr. Peter Williams answers several arguments against the accounts that say the Gospels are eyewitness accounts.
Most of these arguments come from the fact that the gospels were written in Asia Minor-Aegean Sea areas and were written in Greek, not Aramaic, therefore, strong evidence against it being persons of 1rst century Judea as the Apostles were.
Well, Dr. Peter Williams presents resounding facts and figures which illustrate that the Gospels were written in great detail, that is, in great familiarity with the names of the region.
Other scriptures, the now famous other gospels and some found in the Dead Sea scrolls, do not provide these details.
As in, the name John, the writers of the Gospel knew to distinguish such a common name of the region. Other names not all that common were not distinguished, they simply said their name. I am from New Orleans, a writer who knows much about New Orleans can write about Mardi Gras from afar. They can say, at Mardi Gras there is a parade, and this parade can have a theme, and this parade is held annually the Saturday before Fat Tuesday, and this parade runs from this intersection to that one every year. Well, anyone could write about Mardi Gras, and give accurate information on it, but only an eyewitness would say more, as in more personal details, as in: We went to the Saturday parade in Mardi Gras season with a friend Jacque-Imo, and we sang the Jacque-Imo song from 7th street all the way to Lee's circle. See, I added a little local flavor, I added more specifics to a story and to a place by saying something a bit more about the people and place. This substantiates my story as I can speak more freely about small details and be consistent in what I am saying about the area, as any local would be. This is what the video presents, and very well!
CATHOLIC TRADITION
Another insurance of faith is a look at the writings of Polycarp.
Polycarp was of the second generation of Christians, that is, not eye-witnesses but are the ones who knew the Apostles and the direct followers of the Apostles.
So this guy actually spoke to John or one of the Apostles, and heard the story of Jesus not written in a book, but from the eyewitnesses themselves!
If I was a Christian, I would want to read what they say!
I think of Dr. Peter Kreeft of Boston College. Dr. Kreeft was once a protestant, and he went to school, and the professor was telling them that the Catholics say they were the only Church for 1500 years and that protestantism didn't start until then. What do we tell the Catholics then? How do we answer the Catholics?
The professors answer was:
'' The Catholics say they are as a tree. Jesus planted the seed, and the Church grew large and grew branches, the Apostles are the trunk, Jesus the seed, and Truth its roots. We say, that tree got sick, and we found the remedy-''
Kreeft then tells, he rose his hand and asked, ''Are you saying, if I travel back in time to the early church, I would feel more at home and recognize more things than a Catholic?''
The professor answered positively, and Kreeft says that he was joyed when he heard this, that means he could research that question by himself by reading the early fathers.
I agree with his insight, if we read the early fathers, the one's who knew the apostles outside of their writings, who would fit in would show you which church is the real church.
Iranaeus' writings could be more insuring, but Polycarp knew the Apostles, so please read what is there, especially see in this letter his mentioning of the presbyters and calls to the point that the presbyters held an 'office' (Polycarp 11: 1) which puts to shame any argument that the Church was not well organized from the beginnings.
Polycarp also mimics St. Paul (and the Catholic Church) in Polycarp 1 : 3 in saying '' by grace ye are saved, not of works, but by the will of God through Jesus Christ''
but continues:
...Polycarp 2 : 1 whose blood God
will require of them that are disobedient unto Him. Polycarp 2:2
Now He that raised Him from the dead will raise us also; if we
do His will and walk in His commandments and love the things which He
loved, abstaining from all unrighteousness, covetousness, love of
money, evil speaking, false witness;
Illustrating the Church stands right in faith and works (obedience to the commandments), and Luther in fault in thinking faith alone.
Polycarp 5: 3 He promised us to raise us from the dead, and that if we conduct ourselves worthily of Him we shall also reign with Him, if indeed we have faith.
Polycarp 6:1
And the presbyters also must be compassionate, merciful towards all
men, turning back the sheep that are gone astray
Polycarp 12:3 Pray for all the saints.
THE EPISTLE OF POLYCARP
Translated by J.B. Lightfoot.
Polycarp prologue:1
Polycarp and the presbyters that are with him unto the Church of God
which sojourneth at Philippi; mercy unto you and peace from God
Almighty and Jesus Christ our Savior be multiplied.
Polycarp 1:1
I rejoiced with you greatly in our Lord Jesus Christ, for that ye
received the followers of the true Love and escorted them on their
way, as befitted you--those men encircled in saintly bonds which are
the diadems of them that be truly chosen of God and our Lord;
Polycarp 1:2
and that the steadfast root of your faith which was famed from
primitive times abideth until now and beareth fruit unto our Lord
Jesus Christ, who endured to face even death for our sins, whom God
raised, having loosed the pangs of Hades; on whom,
Polycarp 1:3 though ye saw Him not, ye believe with joy unutterable and full of
glory; unto which joy many desire to enter in; forasmuch as ye know
that it is by grace ye are saved, not of works, but by the will of
God through Jesus Christ.
Polycarp 2:1 Wherefore gird up your loins and serve God in fear and truth,
forsaking the vain and empty talking and the error of the many, for
that ye have believed on Him that raised our Lord Jesus Christ from
the dead and gave unto him glory and a throne on His right hand;
unto whom all things were made subject that are in heaven and that
are on the earth; to whom every creature that hath breath doeth
service; who cometh as judge of quick and dead; whose blood God
will require of them that are disobedient unto Him.
Polycarp 2:2
Now He that raised Him from the dead will raise us also; if we
do His will and walk in His commandments and love the things which He
loved, abstaining from all unrighteousness, covetousness, love of
money, evil speaking, false witness; not rendering evil for evil or
railing for railing or blow for blow or cursing for cursing;
Polycarp 2:3
but remembering the words which the Lord spake, as He taught; Judge
not that ye be not judged. Forgive, and it shall be forgiven to
you. Have mercy that ye may receive mercy. With what measure ye
mete, it shall be measured to you again; and again Blessed are
the poor and they that are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for
theirs is the kingdom of God.
Polycarp 3:1
These things, brethren, I write unto you concerning righteousness,
not because I laid this charge upon myself, but because ye invited
me.
Polycarp 3:2
For neither am I, nor is any other like unto me, able to follow the
wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul, who when he came among you
taught face to face with the men of that day the word which
concerneth truth carefully and surely; who also, when he was absent,
wrote a letter unto you, into the which if ye look diligently, ye
shall be able to be builded up unto the faith given to you,
Polycarp 3:3 which is the mother of us all, while hope followeth after and love
goeth before--love toward God and Christ and toward our neighbor. For
if any man be occupied with these, he hath fulfilled the commandment
of righteousness; for he that hath love is far from all sin.
Polycarp 4:1 But the love of money is the beginning of all troubles. Knowing
therefore that we brought nothing into the world neither can we
carry anything out, let us arm ourselves with the armor of
righteousness, and let us teach ourselves first to walk in the
commandment of the Lord;
Polycarp 4:2
and then our wives also, to walk in the faith that hath been given
unto them and in love and purity, cherishing their own husbands in
all truth and loving all men equally in all chastity, and to train
their children in the training of the fear of God.
Polycarp 4:3
Our widows must be sober-minded as touching the faith of the Lord,
making intercession without ceasing for all men, abstaining from all
calumny, evil speaking, false witness, love of money, and every evil
thing, knowing that they are God's altar, and that all sacrifices are
carefully inspected, and nothing escapeth Him either of their
thoughts or intents or any of the secret things of the heart.
Polycarp 5:1
Knowing then that God is not mocked, we ought to walk worthily of
His commandment and His glory.
Polycarp 5:2
In like manner deacons should be blameless in the presence of His
righteousness, as deacons of God and Christ and not of men; not
calumniators, not double-tongued, not lovers of money, temperate in
all things, compassionate, diligent, walking according to the truth
of the Lord who became a minister (deacon) of all. For if we be
well pleasing unto Him in this present world, we shall receive the
future world also, according as He promised us to raise us from the
dead, and that if we conduct ourselves worthily of Him we shall
also reign with Him, if indeed we have faith.
Polycarp 5:3
In like manner also the younger men must be blameless in all things,
caring for purity before everything and curbing themselves from every
evil. For it is a good thing to refrain from lusts in the world, for
every lust warreth against the Spirit, and neither whoremongers
nor effeminate persons nor defilers of themselves with men shall
inherit the kingdom of God, neither they that do untoward things.
Wherefore it is right to abstain from all these things, submitting
yourselves to the presbyters and deacons as to God and Christ. The
virgins must walk in a blameless and pure conscience.
Polycarp 6:1
And the presbyters also must be compassionate, merciful towards all
men, turning back the sheep that are gone astray, visiting all the
infirm, not neglecting a widow or an orphan or a poor man: but
providing always for that which is honorable in the sight of God
and of men, abstaining from all anger, respect of persons,
unrighteous judgment, being far from all love of money, not quick to
believe anything against any man, not hasty in judgment, knowing that
we all are debtors of sin.
Polycarp 6:2
If then we entreat the Lord that He would forgive us, we also ought
to forgive: for we are before the eyes of our Lord and God, and we
must all stand at the judgment-seat of Christ, and each man must
give an account of himself.
Polycarp 6:3
Let us therefore so serve Him with fear and all reverence, as He
himself gave commandment and the Apostles who preached the Gospel to
us and the prophets who proclaimed beforehand the coming of our Lord;
being zealous as touching that which is good, abstaining from
offenses and from the false brethren and from them that bear the name
of the Lord in hypocrisy, who lead foolish men astray.
Polycarp 7:1
For every one who shall not confess that Jesus Christ is come in
the flesh, is antichrist: and whosoever shall not confess the
testimony of the Cross, is of the devil; and whosoever shall pervert
the oracles of the Lord to his own lusts and say that there is
neither resurrection nor judgment, that man is the firstborn of
Satan.
Polycarp 7:2
Wherefore let us forsake the vain doing of the many and their false
teachings, and turn unto the word which was delivered unto us from
the beginning, being sober unto prayer and constant in fastings,
entreating the all-seeing God with supplications that He bring us
not into temptation, according as the Lord said, The Spirit is
indeed willing, but the flesh is weak.
Polycarp 8:1
Let us therefore without ceasing hold fast by our hope and by the
earnest of our righteousness, which is Jesus Christ who took up our
sins in His own body upon the tree, who did no sin, neither was
guile found in His mouth, but for our sakes He endured all things,
that we might live in Him.
Polycarp 8:2
Let us therefore become imitators of His endurance; and if we should
suffer for His name's sake, let us glorify Him. For He gave this
example to us in His own person, and we believed this.
Polycarp 9:1
I exhort you all therefore to be obedient unto the word of
righteousness and to practice all endurance, which also ye saw with
your own eyes in the blessed Ignatius and Zosimus and Rufus, yea and
in others also who came from among yourselves, as well as in Paul
himself and the rest of the Apostles;
Polycarp 9:2
being persuaded that all these ran not in vain but in faith and
righteousness, and that they are in their due place in the presence
of the Lord, with whom also they suffered. For they loved not the
present world, but Him that died for our sakes and was raised by
God for us.
Polycarp 10:1
Stand fast therefore in these things and follow the example of the
Lord, being firm in the faith and immovable, in love of the
brotherhood kindly affectioned one to another, partners with the
truth, forestalling one another in the gentleness of the Lord,
despising no man.
Polycarp 10:2 When ye are able to do good, defer it not, for Pitifulness
delivereth from death. Be ye all subject one to another, having
your conversation unblamable among the gentiles, that your good
works both ye may receive praise and the Lord may not be
blasphemed in you.
Polycarp 10:3
But woe to him through whom the name of the Lord be blasphemed.
Therefore teach all men soberness, in which ye yourselves also walk.
Polycarp 11:1
I was exceedingly grieved for Valens, who aforetime was a presbyter
among you, because he is so ignorant of the office which was given
unto him. I warn you therefore that ye refrain from covetousness, and
that ye be pure and truthful. Refrain from all evil.
Polycarp 11:2
But he who cannot govern himself in these things, how doth he enjoin
this upon another? If a man refrain not from covetousness, he shall
be defiled by idolatry, and shall be judged as one of the Gentiles
who know not the judgment of the Lord, Nay, know we not, that the
saints shall judge the world, as Paul teacheth?
Polycarp 11:3
But I have not found any such thing in you, neither have heard
thereof, among whom the blessed Paul labored, who were his letters in the beginning. For he boasteth of you in all those churches which alone at that time knew God; for we knew Him not as
yet.
Polycarp 11:4
Therefore I am exceedingly grieved for him and for his wife, unto
whom may the Lord grant true repentance. Be ye therefore yourselves
also sober herein, and hold not such as enemies but restore them
as frail and erring members, that ye may save the whole body of you.
For so doing, ye do edify one another.
Polycarp 12:1
For I am persuaded that ye are well trained in the sacred writings,
and nothing is hidden from you. But to myself this is not granted.
Only, as it is said in these scriptures, Be ye angry and sin not,
and Let not the sun set on your wrath. Blessed is he that
remembereth this; and I trust that this is in you.
Polycarp 12:2
Now may the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the eternal
High-priest Himself the [Son of God Jesus Christ, build you up in
faith and truth, and in all gentleness and in all avoidance of wrath
and in forbearance and long suffering and in patient endurance and in
purity; and may He grant unto you a lot and portion among His saints,
and to us with you, and to all that are under heaven, who shall
believe on our Lord and God Jesus Christ and on His Father that
raised him from the dead.
Polycarp 12:3 Pray for all the saints. Pray also for kings and powers and
princes and for them that persecute and hate you and for the
enemies of the cross, that your fruit may be manifest among all
men, that ye may be perfect in Him.
Polycarp 13:1
Ye wrote to me, both ye yourselves and Ignatius, asking that if any
one should go to Syria he might carry thither the letters from you.
And this I will do, if I get a fit opportunity, either I myself, or
he whom I shall send to be ambassador on your behalf also.
Polycarp 13:2
The letters of Ignatius which were sent to us by him, and others as
many as we had by us, we send unto you, according as ye gave charge;
the which are subjoined to this letter; from which ye will be able to
gain great advantage. For they comprise faith and endurance and every
kind of edification, which pertaineth unto our Lord. Moreover
concerning Ignatius himself and those that were with him, if ye have
any sure tidings, certify us.
Polycarp 14:1
I write these things to you by Crescens, whom I commended to you
recently and now commend unto you: for he hath walked blamelessly
with us; and I believe also with you in like manner. But ye shall
have his sister commended, when she shall come to you. Fare ye well
in the Lord Jesus Christ in grace, ye and all yours. Amen.
Want more? Try finding writings of St. Clement of Rome and Ignatiusof Antioch, Irenaeus. I have a link to Irenaeus
