The "Pagan" roots of the "Traditions" of Rome

All that were burned in this passage were books used in the magic arts. How you get from that to "pagan things" is something you'll have to explain to us.

 

And that about says it all for me!

Since you're quoting Cardinal Newman with apparent approval, do you also approve of this statement?

 

Well, Jerry, you still have a problem.

WHAT do you do with us Eastern Orthodox? We developed a completely different Liturgy than the Roman rite and even after the schism of 1054, we never repudiated one of the teachings which we share with the Latin Church.

Everything in our Liturgy is stylistically different than in a Mass, the culture is different, the saints are different, but yet we share in the same doctrines.

HOW, sir, did that happen? I need you to explain this to me. We were not influenced by Rome one bit. There were parishes in the East long before Constantine supposedly "paganized" the Church. The beliefs you don't like and call "pagan" were around in the East long before Constantine or the organization of the Roman rite and the papacy as an official organism.

So explain...if you can...how we developed these so called "errors" before Rome and the papacy actually existed and functioned over the Church.

How bout it?

And I notice that you got some excellent answers from my Latin brethren and basically blew them off. But what they said still stands.

For instance, the Protoevangelium of Genesis contains the promise of a woman giving birth to a child who would be the Redeemer of mankind. WHAT do you not understand about how that lore could be, over 1,000's of years, corrupted into a pagan form? This is where all the mother/child pagan religions such as Isis/Osiris -- Tammuz/Nirmod, etc. developed from. Does that make the truth wrong that pagans had a corrupted and incomplete form of it?

Well if so, better dump the Trinity (or maybe you don't believe in it anyway, hmmmm?) because the idea of a Triadic godhead was taught THOUSANDS of years before the Church taught it as truth.

Paganism has a lot of partial truths in it...they are obscured because of time and how lore was passed down, and also because men, in their sinful natures, distorted them to use them to get power over others. That does not make the truth untrue. It simply means that the Church would go forth and clarify and teach all mankind the truth in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Brother Ed

 

Why Bob, you seem to be such a history buff. Then I pull up something from history and you sweep it under the rug. Doesn't fit your biases so let's ignore it. With regard to the candle outside the tabernacle, I wasn't referring to candles lit for the deceased. You quite apparently didn't pay too much attention in Mass now did you. Ever see that little candle lit up in front of the Church.

Blessings

 

MikeS,

The books used in the magic arts were indeed things of the pagans,and they were an integral part of pagan religion.</font>[/QUOTE]We're not communicating. You said

The only things burned were books of magic. However, the Church did not adopt books of magic into itself, so your comment is a non-sequitur.

 

And that about says it all for me!

Since you're quoting Cardinal Newman with apparent approval, do you also approve of this statement? </font>[/QUOTE]MikeS,

How does the church at Rome "sanctify" the things of demon-worshp--by saying "hocus pocus" over them?

In His grace,--Jerry </font>[/QUOTE]Hocus pocus?! You know that's a mocking reference to the Catholic Mass, right? And you chose to use it anyway?

Moving along, the things of demon-worship?!

...temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields; sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison, are all of pagan origin...

Anybody else think all of these are the things of demon-worship?

 

Jerry --

You are epistomologically incorrect. Rome and Constantinople are two entirely different foundations and have two entirely different approaches to worship and Liturgy. On top of that, since the Orthodox severed themselves from Rome in 1054, one might think that they would have also jettisoned all that was of Rome that was in error. Yet we see that they kept the true worship of the Lord in praxis.

Your further problem is that the things which you decry as pagan have very strong foundation in the scriptures and were practiced 3 centuries before the so called "Romanization" of paganism by St. Constantine. There is no way to attach "Romanizing" to the Eucharist, for example, when you find in the second century the writings which show that the earliest of the church fathers both practiced and taught this as learned directly from the apostles.

The fact that paganism has elements of truth in it can be explained from Romans 2: 13-16 where it states that the Holy Spirit works in the hearts of even Gentiles (pagans) and places His law in their hearts. If they follow that law, even imperfectly and in error, they are nonetheless, according to Romans, a law unto themselves and shall be judged according to how well they kept that law impressed upon their hearts.

It is not the Catholic/Orthodox Faith which violates Scripture and is pagan. It is those non-catholic religions which violate the teachings of Scripture. I cannot fit the doctrines of Protestantism and Anabaptistry into the form of the covenantal salvation which our God established on earth through the Cross. But I most certainly can do that with the universal Faith.

And of course, after I examined it closely and found that it met all the requirements of covenantalism, then all I could do was to convert to that Faith which is the ancient and true faith of our God.

Brother Ed

 

Why Bob, you seem to be such a history buff. Then I pull up something from history and you sweep it under the rug. Doesn't fit your biases so let's ignore it. With regard to the candle outside the tabernacle, I wasn't referring to candles lit for the deceased. You quite apparently didn't pay too much attention in Mass now did you. Ever see that little candle lit up in front of the Church.

Blessings </font>[/QUOTE]#1. I never claimed to be Catholic (just the details).

#2. I am simply pointing out that when Carson tries to pull in the reference to candles - (in fact it is a lampstand filled with oil) that in fact that lampstand was never used for the pagan practice of praying to the dead or for the dead. It was located inside the Holy Place of the tabernacle (the first room) as you can see in Hebrews 9.

In Christ,

Bob

 

The question is asked whether the paganism of Rome went across to the Eastern Orthodox - since much of the paganism was adopted by the 5th and 6th centuries.

Lets view some of the specific examples listed by Catholic historians..

 

"The "mixed chalice" is in regard to the Roman practice of adding water and wine together during their worship service."
Actually it was a Roman secular practice, nothing religious about it.

Drinking wine pure was seen as extremely crude and provincial. Exactly the sort of thing a Galilean would do. That Galilean happened to be God, but that doesn't mean polite society has to lower itself to Galilean standards now does it.

 

Why Bob, you seem to be such a history buff. Then I pull up something from history and you sweep it under the rug. Doesn't fit your biases so let's ignore it. With regard to the candle outside the tabernacle, I wasn't referring to candles lit for the deceased. You quite apparently didn't pay too much attention in Mass now did you. Ever see that little candle lit up in front of the Church.

Blessings </font>[/QUOTE]#1. I never claimed to be Catholic (just the details).

#2. I am simply pointing out that when Carson tries to pull in the reference to candles - (in fact it is a lampstand filled with oil) that in fact that lampstand was never used for the pagan practice of praying to the dead or for the dead. It was located inside the Holy Place of the tabernacle (the first room) as you can see in Hebrews 9.

In Christ,

Bob </font>[/QUOTE]

 

A Better Catholic you will not find.

I commend your consistency Mioque - congrats!

But I have to wonder about our RC slackers - how are you letting Mioque get away - he has all but genuflected at every opportunity. What gives? Does he have coodies??


In Christ,

Bob

 

Don't you just love to see Thess snoozing through quotes of his own material - Catholic sources making Thess snooze!!

Must be like sitting through confirmation classes again..

In Christ,

Bob

 

"If the answer is so simple why in the world would the church fathers from the earliest times attempted to determine why Rome uses a mixed chalice?"
What do you expect? That they admit that they did things somewhat differently than God himself because they belong to a different culture where drinking unmixed wine is considered uncouth?

Anyhow the Roman habit of never drinking pure wine is a secular habit caused in large part by the dismal quality of most of the vintages available in that era.