Pages

Our Motto:

The Connecticut Catholic Corner Motto: Romans 14:16 "Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil."

All articles owned by Connecticut Catholic Corner

© 2007-2024 All articles owned by Connecticut Catholic Corner *except EWTN press releases(see sidebar)*

***FYI: Comments***

Due to continued problems with Disqus I have removed them from this blog- in doing so comments from 2018-2020 have disappeared from my blog posts.

Thursday, January 10, 2008

Your church- it's really a CULT


someone writes: Your church--it's really a CULT--was founded by the last pagan Pontiff and the first "Christian" (yeah, right!) Pontiff, Constantine in 312 AD.
---

My response: My Church, the Holy Catholic Church is not a "cult" and it was not founded by a pagan Pontiff Constantine in 312 AD. The Catholic Church was founded by Jesus Christ and the record of this can be found in scripture when Jesus changed Simon's name to Peter (meaning "rock") and told him he was going to build a church on him the 'rock'. This is the significance of Jesus changing Simon's name to "Peter" [rock]. To mark his position.
Matt.16:17-19 "Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter [rock], and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."
There are a few significant words used here, first as noted is Simon's name changed to Peter [Rock]. The second is Christ telling Simon Peter that he is going to create a church on Peter the rock. And third, Jesus handing the "keys" to Peter. Keys show an authoritative position held and Jesus giving the keys to Simon Peter clearly show him as set apart from the other disciples. Finally, Jesus gives Simon Peter the power and authority to "bind and loose" on earth and in heaven. In the last chapter of John, Jesus singles Peter out again from all the other disciples and reinforces the place of authority he has placed him in (John 21:15-19).
Early Christian writings clearly document that the Catholic Church existed long before Constantine was a twinkle in his mother's eye. Here are a few for you to consider and please note the dates and words used like "Catholic" and "Eucharist" which identify that the Early Church was the Catholic Church as it is even today, because Christ said 'the gates of Hades will not overcome it'. And so the Catholic Church has existed and grown since Jesus founded her on the 'rock' in the scriptures.


Ignatius of Antioch
"Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop or by one whom he ordains [i.e., a presbyter]. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church" (Letter to the Smyrneans 8:2 [A.D. 110]).


The Martyrdom of Polycarp"And of the elect, he was one indeed, the wonderful martyr Polycarp, who in our days was an apostolic and prophetic teacher, bishop of the Catholic Church in Smyrna. For every word which came forth from his mouth was fulfilled and will be fulfilled" (Martyrdom of Polycarp 16:2 [A.D. 155]).


The Muratorian Canon"Besides these [letters of Paul] there is one to Philemon, and one to Titus, and two to Timothy, in affection and love, but nevertheless regarded as holy in the Catholic Church, in the ordering of churchly discipline. There is also one [letter] to the Laodiceans and another to the Alexandrians, forged under the name of Paul, in regard to the heresy of Marcion, and there are several others which cannot be received by the Church, for it is not suitable that gall be mixed with honey. The epistle of Jude, indeed, and the two ascribed to John are received by the Catholic Church (Muratorian fragment [A.D. 177]).


Tertullian"Where was [the heretic] Marcion, that shipmaster of Pontus, the zealous student of Stoicism? Where was Valentinus, the disciple of Platonism? For it is evident that those men lived not so long ago—in the reign of Antonius for the most part—and that they at first were believers in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the church of Rome under the episcopate of the blessed Eleutherius, until on account of their ever restless curiosity, with which they even infected the brethren, they were more than once expelled" (Demurrer Against the Heretics 30 [A.D. 200]).


And Constantine was never "pontiff" of the Catholic Church. He converted to the Catholic faith on his death bed and soon died afterwards. I hope this has dispelled your previously held misconceptions of the origin of the Catholic Church and Constantine's relationship to the Catholic Church.

Wednesday, January 9, 2008

Why Am I Catholic?


This is not my video, it comes from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0nSjxDKJEo

Tuesday, January 8, 2008

What's so bad about Harry Potter?


Goodness the final book (if Rowling doesn't change her mind) has been out for months and the suspense is over yet the controversy continues over "the boy who lived". As a parent, I feel it's my responsibility to pre-read any books that may be questionable before allowing my children to read them. When Harry Potter first came on the scene my children were too young to read so Mr. Potter wasn't an issue I had to deal with for a few years. During that time I have read reports of the Potter series book burnings, banning from schools and all sorts of declarations that reading such books will harm children and turn them to the occult. There have been statements by clergy from all different churches about the Harry Potter books, most against it. Does anyone truly fear children will reject the Gospel Message in favor of wands and flying broomsticks? I can't help but wonder if anyone felt this way when "The Wizard of Oz" or "Alice in Wonderland" were first released? I mean, there are all sorts of magical events in Wonderland and Oz, not to mention drinking mysterious magic potions to alter Alice's body, asking a Wizard for help, evil witches verses good witches. What's so alarmingly different about Harry Potter? I needed to find out.
When my oldest child neared the third grade and I knew around that age kids began to read the books for themselves, I figured it was high time I learned what all the hoopla over Harry was about. I just hoped I wouldn't be bored to tears while having to read the entire series before giving it my stamp of approval or banning it from our acceptable books reading list (not that I have such a list written down anywhere). So off I go and purchase the first four books in the series and sit down with a cup of hot tea to read. It didn't take long for my tea to grow cold as I became very engrossed in the world of Harry Potter. Rowling is a talented story teller and the character of Harry Potter is a delight. He brings forth assorted emotions; you feel sorry for any child growing up as he did, so horribly treated, yet you admire him because he's a good kid and kindhearted even though all he's known is misery and poor treatment. You laugh with him and cry for him. You cheer him on and stand by him in his defeats. You can't help but like Harry Potter.
The occult? No more occult in Harry Potter than the Wizard of Oz in my opinion. My only concern with the story was that it was a murder plot. A who-would-kill-who first storyline. Would Harry Potter kill the evil Voldemort or would Voldemort kill Harry Potter (and numerous others along the way). Some kids might find this upsetting and I knew my kids weren't ready yet for the murder plot. It's a scary thing for a child to read a book that's storyline is someone is out to kill the main character who happens to be a little boy and will stop at nothing to do it! That's the stuff nightmares are made of.
So while I enjoyed the series as I do like mystery books, I held off on letting my kids read it till the summer before my oldest entered the 5th grade. That summer she devoured the books and couldn't wait till the last book was released this past summer. We even went to our local library for their midnight Harry Potter Party and we were the first people to purchase the final Harry Potter book in our town. I couldn't wait to begin reading, but I didn't want it to end either as I have enjoyed getting to know Mr. Potter and his loyal friends over the years.
Looking back at the entire series what stands out is a little boy who has a tragic start to life, yet triumphed over evil and made some remarkable caring, loving and steadfast friends along the way. He made his mistakes but they never caused him to turn from his path of defeating evil and protecting those he loved. He willingly gave his life to save the life of his friends. Now this part is a bit mysterious as Harry seemed to 'die' and talk to the already dead Dumbledore, then Harry "came back". The point is, he had a choice to lay down his life for his friends and he decided to do just that because he loved his friends so much. Out of love for others he made the choice to sacrifice his own life so that they could live. What greater love is there?
The book wasn't about magic or the occult, the book was about love and friendship and over coming hardships and tragedy. Just like the Wizard of Oz wasn't about magic or the occult, but love, family and appreciating our gifts that we have. I think what most kids will be able to take away from these books is how important it is to do "good" and not be tempted by evil, the value of friendships and to appreciate their family, friends and other blessings God has given them. Harry didn't start off with much, but his blessings grew along the way. And what does the bible say about the willingness to put your life on the line for another? John 15:13 "Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends."

Monday, January 7, 2008

What About the Suffering of Mary?



We Christians, regardless of which church or denomination we belong to, we're familiar with the scriptures depiction of the suffering of Christ for our salvation. And if reading about his suffering didn't give us a visual certainly the Mel Gibson blockbuster movie "The Passion of the Christ" gave us all images we would be hard pressed to ever forget. Now that Epiphany is over and the Lenten season is looming near I can't help but think of the two things that have become a sort of tradition in my home during Lent.
First, I begin to listen to Tatiana's "I Thirst" CD over and over. What an incredible voice she has! And the music ... the lyrics make me weep no matter how often I hear them because she is singing the scriptures- namely the story of Christ's crucifixion and she's got the voice of an angel. The second tradition in my home during Lent is watching "The Passion of the Christ" again. I watch this movie once a year and only once a year. I don't ever want to become desensitized to the suffering Christ did, but I do want to see it each year as movies can have a way of bringing things to life and effecting us deeply in ways we never forget. That is what Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" does to me. I know what's coming, the horror and suffering portrayed so amazingly by all involved in the movie,but I still have to watch in horror as each lash of the whip falls on Christ's back. Even just the scene of Mel Gibson's hands nailing Christ to the cross and knowing that Gibson wanted to be the one to do that scene because he knows we all are guilty of the sins that put our precious Lord on that cross to die for our salvation. Powerful. The film is powerful as is the music of Tatiana's "I Thirst" CD. If you haven’t heard Tatiana’s “I Thirst” or seen Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ” I recommend both, but be warned they are powerful and Gibson’s portrayal is graphic and disturbing.
With these two traditions come my thoughts of Mary. As a mother, I cannot begin to grasp the ordeal she suffered in watching her son being humiliated, beaten, tortured and finally killed by such a brutal death. As a mother, I'd give my life for my children and do anything in my power to protect them from pain and suffering, but Mary couldn't do that. Mary had to stand by and witness it all silently suffering the horror of her precious son’s brutal death. How she bore that is nothing short of miraculous and the Hand of God on her. The scriptures have one small verse to say about this: "And a sword will pierce your own soul too." (Lk.2:35)
The song "Silently, Silently" by Tatiana depicts Mary's silent suffering as she witnesses the death of her Son. As I hear the words of this song being sung my mind visualizes the scenes of Gibson's account of Mary watching Jesus carry the cross and stumble along the way with flashbacks of Jesus as a child running and falling with Mary running to go to him. Yet this time, as Jesus struggles with the cross falling to the ground she can't go to him. She must stand by and watch while her heart breaks. My admiration and love for Mary grows each time I reflect on her life as the Mother of God Incarnate and all that entails.
Often many think of Mary around Christmas and the happy occasion of Christ's birth. How many think of the suffering Mary endured being the Mother of our Savior? As Lent grows nearer and we rightly meditate on our Lord and the price He paid for our salvation, let's take a moment and reflect on Mary and the suffering she endured as the Mother of God.
John 19:25 "Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother,..."

Friday, January 4, 2008

"How Dumb Can Your Popes Get?"


J writes: The original churches of the New Testament which were founded by the Christ, did you venerate the bread of the Lord's Supper.BTW, "The Lord's Supper" is what they called it because that's what our Lord NAMED it.Then your popes and your "church fathers" came alone and began to venerate the bread so much that it became "worship." Jesus did not originate the Lord's Supper so that you would worship the stupid bread. He refered to Himself as the "bread" only FIGURATIVELY--NOT LITERALLY!!!!! HOW DUMB CAN YOUR POPES GET?Then God raised St. Martin Luther to break the power of these popes who HAD CHANGEDTHE NAME AND THE MEANING:FROM THE LORD'S SUPPER AS A MEMORIAL TO CALVARYTO "THE MASS" AS AN OFFERING THE EUCHARIST TO GOD FOR THE SINS OF MAN.THE POPES HAD PERVERTED CHRISTIANITY AND LUTHER CORRECTED IT

My response: Ouch! Is that what you truly believe or something you picked up in a Jack Chick tract? Wow, OK let me take this one thing at a time. First, Catholics don't "venerate bread" we worship Jesus Christ. The Eucharist is explained by Jesus in scriptures.
Jesus said in John 6:50 "This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world.” 52 The Jews therefore quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this Man give us His flesh to eat?” 53 Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. 56 He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who feeds on Me will live because of Me."
Now Jesus is the one who said He IS the 'bread' that came down from Heaven and that those who "feed on" Him have eternal life and abide in Him. There is nothing "stupid" about the Eucharist and I am dearly sorry you feel that way, but perhaps it's because you don't yet understand the teaching and once you do, you will feel differently. I hope so anyway.
I am not aware that Jesus "named it the Lord's Supper" but fail to see the problem with calling it Holy Communion. Many non-Catholic Christians and their churches refer to the Lord's Supper as "Holy Communion", I am guessing you don't belong to one of these groups. Regardless of what you call it, both terms mean the same thing and the action of participating in "the Lord's Supper" or "Holy Communion" is seen in scripture. If you prefer to call it "the Lord's Supper" then by all means do so. I prefer Holy Communion because it is a holy Communion with God, but that's just me I guess. Why get all worked up over something like these two terms for the same thing? Moving on...
Jesus did not refer to himself and I quote you "as the "bread" only FIGURATIVELY". Jesus was specific in his words. He uses the Greek word "trogon" which is a literal word for 'chewing'. This isn't figurative at all but very literal and descriptive. In John 6:66 we see what those who rejected the teaching of the Eucharist did, they walked away and didn't follow Christ anymore because they couldn't believe a literal Eucharist just like you. Had they taken Jesus' teaching as figurative only as you are suggesting those people would not have walked away from Christ. Why walk away from a figurative description? You wouldn't, but if it was literal and you couldn't wrap your mind around it you would walk away and that is what we see in John 6:66. Interestingly, that the number for those who don't believe the Eucharist is also the number given in Revelation for the mark of the Beast.
After Jesus was crucified and came out of the tomb the disciples didn't recognize him until when? When they saw the Eucharist! Luke 24:35 "Then the two told what had happened on the way, and how Jesus was recognized by them when he broke the bread." They saw Christ in the Eucharist, that is what scripture says. You have free will to accept the Word of God or reject it. It is what it is.
Moving on again...what was next on your list? Oh yeah, "How dumb can your popes get?". Well, I can't personally speak for any Pope but as human beings I'd say we all have our occasionally 'dumb' moments in life wouldn't you? But when a Pope is speaking of the faith and Church teachings he is not "dumb". The Holy Spirit guides the Church in it's teachings and there is nothing "dumb" about the Holy Spirit. Enough of that, I think.
Next you say "God raised St. Martin Luther to break the power of these popes". First, I don't know of any one declaring Martin Luther a "saint"- not even his own Lutheran Church, so I guess I can't say much more about that. (Perhaps a Lutheran will comment on that). And the only "power" any Pope has is what Christ gave them and you can find that in scripture. (Mt.16:19, Mt.18:18, Mk.16:17-18, John 20:23 etc.). Luke 9:1 "When Jesus had called the Twelve together, he gave them power and authority to drive out demons and to cure diseases,".
Hope I answered all of your misconceptions about the Catholic faith and what is really said in scripture about each of these matters to your satisfaction. And I really hope one day you have a better view of the Catholic Church and it's teachings.

"Mother of God"


Someone writes: THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS A "MOTHER OF GOD."


My response: Jesus is God Incarnate and Mary gave birth to Him, thus Mary is the "Mother of God". It's really that simple. Jesus was God Incarnate in Mary's womb, he didn't become God after birth. Mary gave birth to the Divine Christ, God Incarnate and she is the "Mother of God". To deny this, is to deny the divinity of Christ. I am not sure why "Mother of God" seems to disturb so many non-Catholics when I dare say, most if not all denominations believe that Christ was born God Incarnate. If you believe that, then what's the problem with "Mother of God"? This is basic Christian theology.

Christ's "brothers"

Someone writes: Mary had children. Christ had half-brothers and sisters. The Bible tells us so. Therefore, while no one is disputing the fact of Mary's virginity until after she gave birth to Jesus, the Bible invalidates the Catholic man-made tradition that Mary remained a perpetual virgin. You know the Bible also calls cousins, cousins: And behold, your COUSIN Elisabeth hath also conceived a son in her old age (Luke 1:36). Luke doesn't call Elisabeth her SISTER, but her cousin.

My response: According to the bible and tradition Mary gave birth to only Jesus Christ. There is no other recording of her giving birth to anyone. The term "brothers" does not translate into literal siblings in scripture, but to ANY relative (uncle, nephew, cousins, etc.). How do we know this? Because the bible shows us. Let's go to the scriptures to see who is called "brother" and what their real relationship is then I will respond to the "cousins" Mary and Elizabeth. In Gen. 14 we see Lot call Abraham "brother" when the fact is Lot was Abraham's nephew. They were not siblings, but uncle and nephew. Another example from scriptures would be Jacob and his Uncle Laban. Scripture calls them "brother" when in fact they are not siblings at all. The same is done with Jesus and his "brothers" in scripture. They are family relatives (uncles, cousins, etc.), but they are not literal siblings because Mary didn't give birth to anyone but the Christ, God Incarnate. Now, getting back to Mary and Elizabeth being "cousins". It is by tradition that they are referred to as 'cousins' not the original written text as it says "relative" or "kinswoman". I hope that helps dispel your views that "the Bible invalidates the Catholic man-made tradition". The Catholic Church is teaching the faith the same today as it has since Christ created the Church.

Wednesday, January 2, 2008

Baby Nevernamed


I’m baby Nevernamed. Many people call me an “unborn child”, I prefer "pre-born child". I’m a person. A person in the earliest stages of growth and development. It was never a question as to whether or not I’d leave the womb. The question was, when?
I’m an eight week old pre-born child. I’ve done a lot of growing in my eight weeks of life in the womb. I’m an inch long and weigh 0.1 oz. and my heart is beating about 150 beats a minute, that’s faster than my Mommy’s heart beats. All my major organs are formed, even my muscles are growing so I can be big and strong one day. I have two eyes I can move, a nose and a mouth full of taste buds! I even have all my tooth buds for my first teeth. I have all my tiny fingers and all ten tiny toes and they wiggle. I can move! Sometimes, if I can catch it, I suck my thumb. Once I even had the hiccups! There is so much I have to look forward to, each day is another step forward for me and full of new and exciting things. So much potential in my future- if I had a future.
I won’t ever have the hiccups again. And I only have a little while left to suck my thumb, wiggle my toes and stretch my arms. I’ll never use my taste buds or my baby teeth. I won’t see light or hear my Mommy’s voice. I’ll never be named. Someone told my Mommy she could kill me. They told her she has a ‘right’ and a ‘choice’ to make sure I never get born. Nobody gave me my ‘rights’ or my ‘choice’. Nobody even gave me a name.
Please help me and all the other pre-born human beings who want their ‘right’ to life. The right to see light, taste food, breath air and the right to have a birthday and a name. I can’t talk yet, so I need others to speak for me and my rights to life. Please support a Pro-Life group today and let everyone know that I have a Right to Life and I want a name.
Thank you for taking a moment out of your life to think of the life of a pre-born human being.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...