Refuting the Plagiarized Lies of Mr. Anon Nymous PART 3

(ON IMMACULATE CONCEPTION OF MARY)

La Purísima Inmaculada Concepción
by Bartolomé Esteban Murillo, 1678, now in Museo del Prado, Spain.
courtesy:wikipedia

 Mr. Anon nymous said:

[Anon Nymous March 25, 2014 at 11:37 PM 

Catholic False Doctrine 3 

The Roman Catholic Church claim that Mary was sinless. 

"The church has become ever more aware that Mary "full of grace" through God was redeemed from the moment of her conception. This is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses ..... Mary was.... from the first moment of her conception ...... preserved immune from all stain of original sin." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 491) 

Not only does the Bible declare that ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23), but Mary herself declared that she needed a Saviour.
Luke 1:46-47 .....'And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God MY Saviour.']

REPLY: It has been proven in the part 1 of this series that Mr. Anon Nymous is guilty of Plagiarism which is a clear violation of what God has commanded to us, “Thou shalt not steal”. Aside from the fact that he committed robbery and theft through plagiarizing an article from one website, it is also proven beyond reasonable doubt that Mr. anon nymous committed a grievous crime of perjury in which he badly falsified our Catholic documents to please himself in attacking our Holy Church. He testified as a false witness trying to deceive others by quoting Bible verses and Catholic dogmas even it is proven that HIS STATEMENTS ARE ALL PLAGIARIZED LIES.

Mr. Anon Nymous said:

"The church has become ever more aware that Mary "full of grace" through God was redeemed from the moment of her conception. This is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses ..... Mary was.... from the first moment of her conception ...... preserved immune from all stain of original sin." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 491)

Not only does the Bible declare that ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23), but Mary herself declared that she needed a Saviour.

Well,  it is clear in his plagiarized statement that Mr. Anon Nymous tried to attack the Catholic Marian doctrine of Immaculate Conception but he forgot that the CCC 491 declared that Mary being sinless and Immaculately conceived WAS REDEEMED BY GOD, SO THE CATHOLIC CATECHISM AFFIRMS THAT MARY HERSELF NEEDED A SAVIOR!!! IT NEVER CONTRADICTS THE BIBLE AT ALL!!

CCC 491:Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, "full of grace" THROUGH GOD, WAS REDEEMED FROM THE MOMENT OF HER CONCEPTION. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception  confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854:
The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.

The official statement of the Catholic Church declares that Mary herself needed God in order to be saved but the salvation of Mary is different from ours because she is highly-favored by God, she is full of grace (kecharitomene) and she received her salvation through God right at the moment she was conceived immaculately. Therefore, it is reasonable to say that the Catechism itself does not contradict the statement of Mr. Anon nymous when he said, “she needed a Savior.” Ergo, Mr. Anon Nymous was caught lying again. IT IS GOD THAT MADE HER IMMACULATE NOT MARY HERSELF.

Now is it possible?

Of course yes, because Angel Gabriel himself said:

Luke 1:27 –NLT  

For NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE with God.

The declaration of Catholic doctrine of Immaculate Conception of Mary does not lower down the power of God but instead it brings glory to the power of God.

God made Mary Immaculate because God promised that He will put ENMITY between the Woman and Satan in the protoevangelium at Genesis 3:15;

Genesis 3:15 [emphasis added] 

And I WILL PUT ENMITY BETWEEN THEE AND THE WOMAN, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. (KJV)

Jesus Christ Himself, a True God called Mary “woman” not to bring disgrace to her BUT TO AFFIRM THE FACT THAT MARY IS THE WOMAN WHO WOULD BECOME THE ENMITY OF SATAN.

JOHN 19:26-KJV                                                       
When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!

You should notice that in Genesis 3:15; the offspring of Woman (seed) shall crush the head of Satan. This was done by Jesus Christ which is the Son of Mary, but who is this “Woman”? Guess who.

God putted enmity between “Woman” and Satan, while in New testament writings, Mary was called Woman. It is not a coincidence but rather a FULFILLMENT OF GOD’S PLAN ABOUT MARY BEING IMMACULATE, PURE AND SINLESS. THE SALVATION OF MARY IS NOT THE SAME TO US. GOD REDEEMED MARY THROUGH PREVENTIVE REDEMPTION.

Jeremiah 1:5- ESV [emphasis added]  

“Before I  you in the womb I knew you,
and before you were born I CONSECRATED YOU;

Psalms 97:10-NKJV 

You who love the LORD, hate evil! He preserves the souls of His saints;
He delivers them out of the hand of the wicked –

We all know that because of Satan, Adam and Eve had sinned and the Bible tells that sin makes us enemies of God (James 4:4 & 1 John 3:8 ). Now if Mary is a sinner, then she must not be the one who will become enmity of Satan. The very sad truth for heretics like Mr. Anon nymous is the fact that Mary was made faultless in order to become worthy as our “New Ark of Covenant” and “New Eve” who would bear the Son of God (theotokos), which is indeed our Lord Jesus Christ. (this will be explained in later part of the series)

In angelic salutation at the first chapter of Luke where an angel of God brought good news to Mary; Angel Gabriel said; (it should be noted that some of NT writings were written in Greek)

Luke 1:28 - NA – καὶ εἰσελθὼν πρὸς αὐτὴν εἶπεν, χαῖρε, κεχαριτωμένη, ὁ κύριος μετὰ σοῦ

greek NT

The word used here is “κεχαριτωμένη” (KECHARITOMENE) which is the perfect participle form of the Greek word “charitoo” which means “to honor with blessings”. It denotes the fact that Mary has always  been and forever remains “full of grace”. Since it is in perfect participle  form, then Mary is made “full of grace” or sinless right at the beginning of her life where she was conceived. Ergo, Mary is made Immaculate by God proven by the fact that she is CALLED “KECHARITOMENE”.

Kecharitomene, the perfect passive participle, shows a completeness with a with permanent result. Kecharitomene denotes continuance of a completed action (H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968 ) 108-109, sec 1852:b)  (Blass and DeBrunner p.175.)  

 Mr. Anon nymous also said:

Not only does the Bible declare that ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23)

Romans 3:23 does not denote to “all” without exemption. In Greek, the word used is “pantes” πάντες.  It was derived from Greek root word “pas” which means “vast majority” not in the strict sense “all”.

In Thayer’s definition:

1.      individually
1.      each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things, everything
2.      collectively
1.      SOME OF ALL TYPES
... "the whole world has gone after him" Did all the world go after Christ? "then went all Judea, and were baptized of him in Jordan."Was all Judea, or all Jerusalem, baptized in Jordan? "Ye are of God,little children", and the whole world lieth in the wicked one". Does the whole world there mean everybody? The words "world" and "all" are used in some seven or eight senses in Scripture, and it is very rarely the "all" means all persons, taken individually. The words are generally used to signify that Christ has redeemed some of all sorts-- some Jews, some Gentiles, some rich, some poor, and has notrestricted His redemption to either Jew or Gentile ...

Source: http://www.studylight.org/desk/interlinear.cgi?search_form_type=interlinear&q1=romans+3%3A23&ot=bhs&nt=na&s=0&t3=str_nas&ns=0

If we accept his proposition that all have sinned, then that would include Jesus Christ because being human is part of the dual nature of Christ being also a True God. It would be blasphemous at this part since we all know that aside from Mary, Christ is also sinless (Heb. 4:15)

Aside from Romans 3:23; Mark 14:64 also used the word “pantes”:

Mark 14:64- NRSVCE 

You have heard his blasphemy! What is your decision?” All of them condemned him as deserving death.

If we accept that “all” condemned Christ to death then Saint Peter also condemned Christ to death because Saint Peter was there during that time:

Mark 14:54-NRSVCE 

Peter had followed him at a distance, right into the courtyard of the high priest; and he was sitting with the guards, warming himself at the fire.

Did Peter condemn Christ to death?? Of Course not, Saint Peter is a very loyal servant. Though he denied Christ three times, he cannot condemn Christ to death. The majority condemned Him but not all of them.

In Luke 1:5-6 (NLT)(emphasis added);
When Herod was king of Judea, there was a Jewish priest named Zechariah. He was a member of the priestly order of Abijah, and his wife, Elizabeth, was also from the priestly line of Aaron.  ZECHARIAH AND ELIZABETH WERE RIGHTEOUS IN GOD’S EYES, CAREFUL TO OBEY ALL OF THE LORD’S COMMANDMENTS AND REGULATIONS

VERSUS

ROMANS 3:23 AND ROMANS 3:10

as it is written:“None is righteous, no, not one; (Rom.3:10)

If Zechariah and Elizabeth obeyed all Lord’s commandments, then they are worthy to be called righteous before the eyes of God but if we are going to accept the word “all” in strict sense of Romans 3:23 and “no one is righteous” in Romans 3:10, Is it false to call Zechariah and Elizabeth righteous in God’s eyes? Saint Luke versus Saint Paul?

The fact that Zechariah and Elizabeth were recognized as righteous ones and that Mother Mary is called KECHARITOMENE supports the fact that the “all” in Romans 3:23 has exceptions. Like what Thayer’s definition stated, it must also be accepted in “collective” sense permitting some exceptions and admitting the fact that some also became worthy and righteous in the eyes of God. THEREFORE, THE WORD “ALL” IN ROMANS 3:23 IS NOT “ABSOLUTE”. 

Refuting the Plagiarized Lies of Mr. Anon Nymous PART 2

An example of Indulgence proclaimed by the Catholic Church

(on Indulgences)

------

[Anon Nymous March 25, 2014 at 11:36 PM

Catholic False Doctrine 2 

The Roman Catholic Church SELLS THE GOSPEL through Indulgences. 

"The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead ... An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin. Indulgences may be applied to the living or the dead." (Catholic Catechism) 

The Roman Catholic Church teaches that after death, everyone who has sinned will go to "purgatory", where they will face punishment for their sins. After this they are then allowed into the heavenly kingdom, once they have "PAID" for their sins. But with an indulgence, you can pay the church some money and you will receive an indulgence which will either reduce your time in "purgatory" or erase it all together. By the way, the Vatican was built on indulgences, and Martin Luther exposed the error of indulgences back in the 1500's with his 95 Thesis. 

Now anyone who knows the Bible will see that there is grave error in this teaching, because not only is the grace of God a FREE GIFT to anyone, but Christ Jesus PAID the FULL PRICE for our sins. 

And what did Simon Magus, the Pagan sorcerer try to do? He tried to BUY the gift of God WITH MONEY, and the apostle Peter sharply rebuked him in very strong words, telling him that his money will die with him! 

Ephesians 2:8 ...'For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.' 

Have you ever heard of a free gift that you had to pay for? So why does the Catholic Church do this? So they can line their pockets with filthy money. And did you know that the Vatican was built from the selling of indulgences? Yes, it was not only built upon a Pagan burial site. It was built from SELLING the gospel!]

------

REPLY:

It has been proven from the previous part that this heretic hiding under the alias of Mr. Anon Nymous is guilty of PLAGIARISM and is caught in the act of spreading gossips and lies about the Church. He perhaps forgot what the Holy Scripture tells us about this anachronistic act:

Proverbs 19:5 [emphasis added] 

A false witness will not go unpunished,
and a liar will not escape.

Regarding his second set of what he called as "Catholic False Doctrine," let us once again expose the glaring errors of MR. ANON NYMOUS.

He said:

Catholic False Doctrine 2

The Roman Catholic Church SELLS THE GOSPEL through Indulgences. 

"The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead ... An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin. Indulgences may be applied to the living or the dead." (Catholic Catechism)

The Roman Catholic Church teaches that after death, everyone who has sinned will go to "purgatory", where they will face punishment for their sins. After this they are then allowed into the heavenly kingdom, once they have "PAID" for their sins.  

Aside from its banal title and incomplete citation, both the original author and our featured blog visitor display their gross ignorance of catholic position on Indulgences in quoting these passages purportedly taken from the "Catholic Catechism."

The Church does not and will never "SELL THE GOSPEL through INDULGENCES" or by any means!

Surprisingly, neither the quoted passage nor any of the existing official Church documents allowed this blasphemous practice. Instead of supporting the title of his plagiarized comment, what we can notice above is the emphasis on "almsgiving, indulgences and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead " followed by Catholic distinctions between "partial and plenary indulgences." There is no mention of selling the gospel (otherwise please notify me if I'm mistaken, perhaps its time to change my eyeglasses), thus his argument is invalid.

The catholic practice of doing sacrifices "on behalf of the dead" is deeply rooted in the Holy Bible. As we can read in the Old Testament times, Jews pray for the dead:

2 Maccabees 12:42-45  [emphasis added] 

Judas Maccabeus

and they turned to supplication, praying that the sin that had been committed might be wholly blotted out. The noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened as the result of the sin of those who had fallen. He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably, taking account of the resurrection. For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, so that they might be delivered from their sin.

This deuterocanonical book, although considered apocryphal by our protestant counterparts, reveals the Jewish practice of praying for the dead just like what we catholics used to do. It is also important to note that the protocanonical book of Prophet Nehemiah tells the same thing.

Nehemiah 1:6 Good News Translation [emphasis added]

Look at me, Lord, and hear my prayer, as I pray day and night for your servants, the people of Israel. I confess that we, the people of Israel, have sinned. My ancestors and I have sinned.

and

Nehemiah 2:5 Good News Translation [emphasis added]

and then I said to the emperor, “If Your Majesty is pleased with me and is willing to grant my request, let me go to the land of Judah, to the city where my ancestors are buried, so that I can rebuild the city.”

Relating these two passages, it is very clear that Prophet Nehemiah prayed for his DEAD ANCESTORS. Likewise, the second book of Samuel accounts the sacrifices made by the Jews for those "killed in the battle:" 

2 Samuel 1:12 Good News Translation [emphasis added]

They grieved and mourned and fasted until evening for Saul and Jonathan and for Israel, the people of the Lord, because so many had been killed in battle.

We are all aware that grieving and mourning are both common practices of the bereaved family, relatives and friends when their loved ones dies. But now we have read that they also fasted--fasting directed for the dead--another evidence that sacrifices on behalf of the dead are biblically and historically correct.

There is also an instance when St. Paul prayed for the dead:

2 Timothy 1:16-18  [emphasis added]

May the Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, because he often refreshed me and was not ashamed of my chain; when he arrived in Rome, he eagerly searched for me and found me—may the Lord grant that he will find mercy from the Lord on that day! And you know very well how much service he rendered in Ephesus.

Here we read St. Paul commending Onesiphorus on the mercy of the Lord. Even protestant writers regard these passages as an early example of christian prayer for the dead. Read their remarks here.

Now, concerning the"partial and plenary indulgences" (for the living and the dead), we believe that it can be basically explained by discussing two major catholic teachings: the SACRAMENT OF PENANCE and the PURGATORY.


on the Sacrament of Penance:

Matthew 16:19 [emphasis added]

I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

Matthew 18:18 [emphasis added]

Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

John 20:23 [emphasis added]

If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”

These passages form the biblical foundation of the Authority to forgive sins [absolution] delegated to the Church first to St. Peter then to the rest of the apostles and then later to their successors [the Pope and all the clergy]. It is significant to note that Jesus himself gave them the power to "bind and loose" which is perfectly executed in the case of the Sacrament of Penance where it includes administering and removing the temporal penalties due to sin.

The Bible then distinguishes between MORTAL and VENIAL SINS:

1 John 5:16-17 [emphasis added]

If you see your brother or sister committing what is not a mortal sin, you will ask, and God will give life to such a one—to those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin that is mortal; I do not say that you should pray about that. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin that is not mortal.

and  teaches us about the Ministry of Reconciliation entrusted to the Church:

2 Corinthians 5:17-20 [emphasis added]

So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new! All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us. So we are ambassadors for Christ, since God is making his appeal through us; we entreat you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.

James 5:13-16 [emphasis added]

Are any among you suffering? They should pray. Are any cheerful? They should sing songs of praise. Are any among you sick? They should call for the elders of the church and have them pray over them, anointing them with oil in the name of the Lord. The prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise them up; and anyone who has committed sins will be forgiven. Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, so that you may be healed. The prayer of the righteous is powerful and effective.

Clearly, the CHURCH received the Holy Spirit, commissioned to proclaim the Gospel, baptize all nations and entrusted with the Ministry of Reconciliation. If one cannot be included in the people of God without the Church, how can he return to God in repentance without the Church?

on Purgatory:

The most direct allusion to purgatory can be found in the first Pauline Epistle to the Corinthians:

1 Corinthians 3:10-17  [emphasis added]

According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and someone else is building on it. Each builder must choose with care how to build on it. For no one can lay any foundation other than the one that has been laid; that foundation is Jesus Christ.  Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw—  the work of each builder will become visible, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each has done.  If what has been built on the foundation survives, the builder will receive a reward. If the work is burned up, the builder will suffer loss; the builder will be saved, but only as through fire. Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you? If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy that person. For God’s temple is holy, and you are that temple.

In summary:

VERSE 14- Heaven; where man will receive his reward
VERSE 15- Purgatory; where man, though assured of his salvation, will undergo purging
VERSE 17- Hell; where man will be condemned into eternal damnation

Since we are called in ONE BODY [cf. Eph 4:4; Rom. 12:5] in Christ which cannot be separated even by DEATH [cf. Rom 8:35-39], the Church calls us to "build up one another" [cf. 1Thess 5:11],"bear one another's burdens" [cf. Gal 6:2] and of course, "pray for one another" [cf. Jms 5:16]. If the Holy Scriptures tell us that we are in communion with each other including our departed brothers and sisters in faith, who are we to exclude them in our christian duties as prescribed by the apostles?

This must be true in the case of Indulgences. We do sacrifices [acts of penance] as not only reparation for our own sins but also for our departed loved so that they may be freed from consequences of their sins.  As the Church taught us, Acts of Penance first before gaining Indulgences.

(For more detailed discussion on Plenary and Partial Indulgences, click here.)

Now, this is becoming ridiculous and absurd. To subscribe in the notion that "everyone who has sinned will go to purgatory" is to deny the very existence of eternal damnation, meaning HELL reserved for those who died in the state of mortal sin. But clearly, this is not what the Catholic Church really teaches to its members. We firmly believe in the existence of heaven, purgatory and hell. Even the Catechism devoted a long article to discuss this belief  [Art. 12, Chap. 3, Sec. 2, Part 1 CCC].

on Heaven:

Those who die in God's grace and friendship and are perfectly purified live for ever with Christ. They are like God for ever, for they "see him as he is," face to face... 

1023, Catechism of the Catholic Church [emphasis added]

on Purgatory:

All who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven. 

1030, Catechism of the Catholic Church [emphasis added]

on Hell:

The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire." The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs. 

1035, Catechism of the Catholic Church [emphasis added]

We must concede that it is true that after final purification [purgatory] "they are then allowed into the heavenly kingdom, once they have "PAID" for their sins":

1 Corinthians 3:15 [emphasis added]

If the work is burned up, the builder will suffer loss; the builder will be saved, but only as through fire.

for we know that no unclean will enter the heaven:

Revelation 21:27 [emphasis added]

But nothing unclean will enter it, nor anyone who practices abomination or falsehood, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life.

But Mr. Anon Nymous once again made a fool out of himself when he mentioned another myth on Indulgences:

But with an indulgence, you can pay the church some money and you will receive an indulgence which will either reduce your time in "purgatory" or erase it all together. 

Catholic Answers, the largest catholic apologetic ministry in the US, in response to this attack wrote on their website:

The definition of indulgences presupposes that forgiveness has already taken place: "An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven" (Indulgentarium Doctrina 1, emphasis added). Indulgences in no way forgive sins. They deal only with punishments left after sins have been forgiven.

The number of days which used to be attached to indulgences were references to the period of penance one might undergo during life on earth. The Catholic Church does not claim to know anything about how long or short purgatory is in general, much less in a specific person’s case. 

The Council of Trent instituted severe reforms in the practice of granting indulgences, and, because of prior abuses, "in 1567 Pope Pius V canceled all grants of indulgences involving any fees or other financial transactions" (Catholic Encyclopedia). This act proved the Church’s seriousness about removing abuses from indulgences.

 Excerpts retrieved from: http://www.catholic.com/tracts/myths-about-indulgences

So the allegations of Mr. Anon Nymous holds no water at all. He is just merely barking at the wrong tree.

He then add another half-truth-ergo-a-lie trivia about the Vatican:

 By the way, the Vatican was built on indulgences, and Martin Luther exposed the error of indulgences back in the 1500's with his 95 Thesis. 

Actually, in medieval times, the Pope or bishops granted indulgences for people who will support catholic charity works or building of churches [including the St. Peter's Basilica located at the Vatican Hill] provided that they satisfied the conditions set by the Church (approach the Sacraments of Penance and Eucharist).

However, the problem is not on "indulgences" but on local priests who abused their power and emphasized only almsgiving, but not true penance. This is historically personified by John Tetzel, a german priest, who although proclaimed certified catholic teaching on INDULGENCES FOR THE LIVING, taught his unorthodox doctrine of INDULGENCES FOR THE DEAD which held nothing but offering of money without any question of contrition nor confession. And as noted above, this abuse was already condemned by the Church.

The "error" that stirred Martin Luther to revolt is attributed in his objections first to the abuses then to the traditional scriptural foundations of Indulgences. He then pioneered the blasphemous protestant legacy of rejecting the deuterocanonical books (particularly the Maccabean book cited above as prooftext for alms giving and prayer for the dead). And then the rest is history.

Finally, Mr. Anon Nymous tried to wrapped up his case through a conclusion drawn from his purely baseless and pathetic understanding of Indulgences:

Now anyone who knows the Bible will see that there is grave error in this teaching, because not only is the grace of God a FREE GIFT to anyone, but Christ Jesus PAID the FULL PRICE for our sins. 

And what did Simon Magus, the Pagan sorcerer try to do? He tried to BUY the gift of God WITH MONEY, and the apostle Peter sharply rebuked him in very strong words, telling him that his money will die with him! 

Ephesians 2:8 ...'For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.' 

The Church agrees that "the grace of God a FREE GIFT to anyone" and " Christ Jesus PAID the FULL PRICE for our sins." It is for this reason that the Church, in defining INDULGENCE, mentions the "merits of  Christ." 

An indulgence is obtained through the Church who, by virtue of the power of binding and loosing granted her by Christ Jesus, intervenes in favor of individual Christians and opens for them the treasury of the merits of Christ and the saints to obtain from the Father of mercies the remission of the temporal punishments due for their sins. Thus the Church does not want simply to come to the aid of these Christians, but also to spur them to works of devotion, penance, and charity.

1478, Catechism of the Catholic Church [emphasis added] 

To set the facts straight, an indulgence is not an instant ticket to heaven that you can buy in wholesale to avoid Purgatory or maybe HELL. The Church teaches that INDULGENCE is granted only as the "“remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven" (CCC 1471) which is derived from the treasury of the merits Christ and the saints. In other words, one can only received indulgence provided that he satisfied his works of penance. It can also be gained for the dead since they are part of the Church [communion of the saints] but cannot help themselves.

Indulgences in no way adds nor subtracts anything from the efficacy of Jesus' sacrifice on the Cross. But instead, it derives itself from the very truth that Jesus sufferings have infinite power to free every man from sin and remove its temporal punishments through the CHURCH which is the 'dispenser' of God's grace on every soul.

The big question for now is: why "merits of Christ and the saints"?

Some see these as a sort of blasphemy since it seemingly connotes equality of the merits of the saints and that of Christ. However, the Church stress the fact that Christians share in Christ redemptive sufferings:

Colossians 1:24 [emphasis added]

I am now rejoicing in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am completing what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church.

Clearly, Paul is suffering for the sake of the CHURCH. So if we can share in the redemptive sufferings of Christ, we also contribute our own merits to that of Christ for the good of the CHURCH. A good allusion on  how the debt for sin can be made up for another especially for the souls of the departed.

Moreover, James Akin once wrote regarding "merits":

Humans can't earn anything from God, though by His grace they can please him in a way He chooses to reward. Picturing the saints' acts under a single, collective metaphor (such as a treasury) is biblical: "It was granted her [the Bride] to be clothed with fine linen, bright and pure" (Revelation 19:8). John tells us, "For the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints." Here the righteous deeds of the saints are pictured under the collective metaphor of clothing on the bride of Christ, the Church. Jewish theology also recognizes a treasury of merits. Jewish theologians speak of "the merits of the fathers" – the idea being that the patriarchs pleased God and inherited certain promises as a reward. God fulfills these promises and ends up treating later Jews more gently than they would have been treated. The idea of "the merits of the fathers" is essentially the same as the Catholic concept of the "treasury of merits." Both postulate a class of individuals, the Old Testament patriarchs on the one hand and Christ and the saints on the other, who have pleased God and whom God chooses to reward in a way involving lesser temporal punishments on others.

Source: A Primer on Indulgences, James Akin, This Rock Magazine, November 1994 issue 

We do sacrifices [not only in the form of money, although alms giving is praiseworthy] on behalf of them as prescribed by the Church and gain indulgences for them so that they may be removed from their attachments to their old sins.

He ended his comment with malicious accusations about the Church:

Have you ever heard of a free gift that you had to pay for? So why does the Catholic Church do this? So they can line their pockets with filthy money. And did you know that the Vatican was built from the selling of indulgences? Yes, it was not only built upon a Pagan burial site. It was built from SELLING the gospel!

Having read these, the best thing to do now is to commend him to the Holy Spirit who alone can enlighten his mind regarding the truth in the Catholic Church.

We also challenge Mr. Anon Nymous to do more research, produce/cite credible sources that will support his allegations without conforming on old hearsays and myth.

+Pax Christi!    

----------
*Unless otherwise stated, all scriptural verses cited by the author of the blog are taken from the New Revised Standard Version Bible: Catholic Edition, copyright © 1989, 1993 the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America.

Refuting the Plagiarized Lies of Mr. Anon Nymous PART 1

(ON THE CHURCH AND THE POPE’S AUTHORITY and SOLA SCRIPTURA)

One heretic, probably an Adventist commented on our article entitled “ISANG TANONG, MALING SAGOT NG MGA BORN AGAIN”. He brought his allegations against the Catholic Church in our blog revealing to us his beliefs about Catholic doctrines which according to him are false. Well, we had examined his accusations and all we found out is that, MR. ANON NYMOUS HAD JUST COPIED THIS FROM ADVENTIST WEBSITE WITHOUT EVEN ACKNOWLEDGING HIS RESOURCES MAKING IT A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF PLAGIARISM. BEFORE WE GO ON, ALLOW US TO EXPLAIN WHAT PLAGIARISM IS.

“PLAGIARISM” or “PLAGIARIZE” ACCORDING TO MERRIAM-WEBSTER DICTIONARY IS:

“to commit LITERARY THEFT :  present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source.”

or

“TO STEAL and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own :  use (another's production) without crediting the source” 

source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plagiarize

THIS EXPLAINS WHY IN OUR WORK ETHICS ESPECIALLY IN MANY PAPERWORKS, DEBATES, FORUMS, ETC, WE ARE REALLY FORBIDDEN TO COMMIT LITERARY THEFT OR PLAGIARISM. To avoid plagiarism, one must recognize his reference materials he has used in citing such ideas he borrowed. And since many considered it as a “Theft” or a sort of “Robbery” therefore it can be considered as a sin. God said; 

Exodus 20:15 RSV 

 “YOU SHALL NOT STEAL.”

WHAT DO YOU THINK READERS? Is Mr. Anon Nymous guilty on this?

One thing we cannot really comprehend is that, instead of making it a little bit harder to copy all the texts on that particular website, why didn’t he try to give us the website (http://www.end-times-prophecy.org/catholic-church-false-doctrine.html)? Much easier, isn’t it? 

Now let’s try to refute these plagiarized lies of Mr. Anon nymous.

Mr. Anon Nymous through his plagiarism said:

"The Pope has the power to change times, to abrogate laws, and to dispense with all things, even the precepts of Christ. The Pope has the authority and often exercised it, to dispense with the command of Christ." (Decretal, de Tranlatic Episcop. (The pope can modify divine law) Ferraris' Ecclesiastical Dictionary)”

This must be a misrepresented quote since I cannot find any sort of evidence that authenticates this distorted and perverted quote just to say that Pope is equal to God and can therefore change laws by his authority. The Church never taught anything about the absolute monarchy inside the Church being the Pope as equal to Christ. But the Church being infallible is the sole authority here on Earth to define Christian dogmas and ethics NOT TO BECOME AS EQUAL TO GOD. THE AUTHORITY OF POPE DOES NOT MEAN HE CAN CHANGE LAWS, THAT’S WHY IN THE SAME BOOK YOU HAD QUOTED WHICH IS ALSO READABLE IN ONE CATHOLIC WEBSITE. IT SAYS:

“Q. Can anyone change the doctrine of Jesus Christ, or the articles of faith, the commandments, or the sacraments? 

A. TO THINK SO AND TO ATTEMPT TO DO SO WOULD BE AS FOOLISH as it would be for one to attempt to reform the visible world and the laws which God has established to preserve and maintain it.”

Source: "Familiar Explanation of Christian Doctrine”.Rev, Muller, Michael. Benzinger Brothers, 1876

Readable at Lesson VIII, “What Cannot And What Can Be Reformed In The Church” in the same book at website: http://www.catholicapologetics.info/thechurch/catechism/familiar.htm

Therefore, the Infallibility and the Authority of the Pope did not give him the power to invent doctrines or to change something but instead IT GIVES HIM POWER TO AFFIRM AND DEFINE IT JUST LIKE THE WAY IT WAS TAUGHT IN THE PAST EVEN AT THE EARLY AGE OF CHRISTIANITY.

AND BY THE WAY, THERE’S NO SUCH THING AS “FERRARIS’ ECCLESIASTICAL DICTIONARY WRITTEN IN ENGLISH BECAUSE ALL I KNOW IS HIS LATIN BOOK ENTITLED “PROMPTA BIBLIOTHECA CANONICA WHICH IS WRITTEN IN LATIN AND NOT IN ENGLISH. Tell me, where did Ferraris learn his English skills? Hmm?? We smell something fishy. Again, Mr. Anon Nymous through his plagiarism said:

"The authority of the Church could therefore not be bound to the authority of the Scriptures, because the church had changed the Sabbath into Sunday, not by command of Christ, but by it's own authority." (Canon and Tradition. page 263)

This is a LIE again because the Church did not change the Sabbath instead, the Catechism teaches that it is the fulfilment of the old Sabbath:

CCC 2175-2176

2175 Sunday is expressly distinguished from the sabbath which it follows chronologically every week; for Christians its ceremonial observance replaces that of the sabbath. In Christ's Passover, SUNDAY FULFILLS THE SPIRITUAL TRUTH OF THE JEWISH SABBATH AND ANNOUNCES MAN’S ETERNAL REST IN GOD. For worship under the Law prepared for the mystery of Christ, and what was done there prefigured some aspects of Christ:¹⁰⁷Those who lived according to the old order of things have come to a new hope, no longer keeping the sabbath, but the Lord's Day, in which our life is blessed by him and by his death.(  St. Ignatius of Antioch, Ad Magn. 9,1:SCh 10,88.)

2176 The celebration of Sunday observes the moral commandment inscribed by nature in the human heart to render to God an outward, visible, public, and regular worship "as a sign of his universal beneficence to all."¹⁰⁹ SUNDAY WORSHIP FULFILLS THE MORAL COMMAND OF THE OLD COVENANT, TAKING UP ITS RHYTHM AND SPIRIT IN THE WEEKLY CELEBRATION OF THE CREATOR AND REDEEMER OF HIS PEOPLE.

Source: http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c1a3.htm

Therefore, it is not a change but rather a “FULFILMENT of the Old, being Christians as new creation living in new hope”. I am not familiar on what he had quoted but it seems it might be ANOTHER PERVERTED QUOTE GIVEN BY MR. ANON NYMOUS BY HIS PLAGIARISM. (the topic about Sabbath will be tackled and explained on the next part of this series)
Mr. Anon nymous through his plagiarism also said:

"The doctrines of the Catholic Church are entirely independent of Holy Scripture." (Familiar Explanation of Catholic Doctrine. Rev. M Muller, page 151)

Unfortunately for our unknown visitor, Mr. Anon nymous who hides at that account misses something very important. He/She misses the point that people like us cannot be easily fooled by just stating some quotes from Catholic books to point out that it is really being taught. I am very familiar with this tactic and maybe he/she had learned it from Ellen 666 White or from Manalistas of INC. Now, let’s try to see the page 151 of the book I have also used earlier:

p.151 of Familiar Explanation of Christian Doctrine (please click the image)

Readers and also Mr. Anon nymous, CAN YOU SEE THE EXACT SENTENCE YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT??? well read it again in American libraries online archive: https://archive.org/details/familiarexplana00mlgoog

REMEMBER, COMMITTING A LIE IS A GRIEVOUS SIN:

Exodus 20:16 KJV 

“ Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.”

THE QUESTION IS, IS IT TRUE?? OF COURSE ANOTHER PLAGIARIZED LIE. JOSEPH DE LA TORRE, A CATHOLIC THEOLOGIAN SAID IN HIS BOOK;

“Revelation contained holy Scripture- written word and Sacred Tradition... BOTH SCRIPTURE AND TRADITION MAKEUP A SINGLE, INSEPARABLE SOURCE, TRANSMITTED AND INTERPRETED INFALLIBLY BY THE CHURCH.”

Source: p.13, Christian Philosophy. Dela Torre, Joseph

FOR US CATHOLICS, we are not basing our faith by Bible alone and we are not basing our faith by Tradition alone, instead, we are making these two inseparable things as our basis of faith and morals. This affirms what the Bible states when Saint Paul said:

2 Thessalonians 2:15-DRV [emphasis added] 

Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and HOLD THE TRADITIONS WHICH YOU HAVE LEARNED, WHETHER BY WORD, OR BY OUR EPISTLE.

Lastly, Mr. Anon Nymous through his plagiarism also said:

Matthew 4:4 ...'But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.' 

1 Peter 1:25 ...'But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.' 

Hebrews 4:12 .....'For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.'

This is very clear. We are to live by the Word of God ALONE. Which means no man or church has been given the authority to change God's Word. Is the word of the pope able to discern the thoughts and intents of the heart? No, only God is able to do this. Therefore the pope CANNOT have any authority over God's Word in the Bible.

If Mr. Anon Nymous was a keen reader, then it is no use for him to comment this since it has been thoroughly explained in our blog but since he included the issue again about man-made doctrine of Scripture Alone, so be it.

Unfortunately, all of verses he used against us are not strong enough to support his delusions and fantasies. It is very clear that the phrase “word of God “ALONE”” is not present in Matthew 4:4, 1 Peter 1:25 or in Heb. 4:12. Just like Saint Paul said, we must hold the traditions we have learned WHETHER BY WORD WHICH MEANS ORAL TRADITION OR BY EPISTLE WHICH MEANS SCRIPTURE.

THE WORD SOLA SCRIPTURA CAN NEVER BE FOUND IN THE BIBLE AND ITS ORIGIN CANNOT BE DATED BACK FARTHER THAN 16^TH CENTURY. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE INSEPARABLE TRADITION AND SCRIPTURE HAS BEEN TAUGHT BY THE CHURCH EVER SINCE IT WAS FOUNDED BY CHRIST.  The Bible never said that it is sufficient enough to tell all truth but IT HAS BEEN CONSTANTLY SAYING that THE CHURCH IS THE BULWARK OF TRUTH;

1 Timothy 3:15 NRSVCE [emphasis added]

“if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, THE PILLAR AND BULWARK OF THE TRUTH.”

THE CHURCH IN FACT IS THE BASIS OF TRUTH AND NOT THE BIBLE. THE CHURCH BEING THE BEARER OF TRUTH AND LIGHT, JESUS CHRIST, THE HEAD OF THE CHURCH IS THE SOURCE OF TRUTH. THAT’S WHY IN HISTORY OF THE BIBLE, THE CHURCH IS CREDITED IN ITS COMPILATION, PRESERVATION AND ITS CANONIZATION. THE CHURCH GAVE BIRTH TO THE BIBLE NOT THE BIBLE GAVE BIRTH TO THE CHURCH.

“By about 200 AD, the church canon included most of today’s New Testament. In AD 367, the content of New Testament was first listed exactly as we know it.”(p.284, World Book Vol.2(2008))

what Church is it by the way? Is it your church or MY CHURCH?

Now, does our Pope have an authority over the Bible? The answer is yes. Let us understand that The Bible cannot stand on itself by just interpreting it privately on our own. Christ gave us Ministerial Priests to interpret our Scriptures accordingly and this is being led by the Pope, the Successor of Saint Peter who received the “keys of heaven” and the power of “binding and loosing” (Matthew 16:18). Bishops also have this power of binding and loosing making them an authority over the correct interpretation of Scripture. Christ gave his apostles an authority when He said;

Luke 10:16 NRSVCE [emphasis added] 

“WHOEVER LISTENS TO YOU LISTENS TO ME, AND WHOEVER REJECTS YOU REJECTS ME, AND WHOEVER REJECTS ME REJECTS THE ONE WHO SENT ME.”

It is also clear that the Bible is not directly given to us by God from heaven. Even Jesus Christ did not say that “this Bible is your sole authority”. God used the Church to compile it, to write the NT writings and to preserve it.  Even today that we have Bibles, we are not asked to subscribe alone in the Bible but we are asked to subscribe to the One who made it, The Church, the mystical body of Christ, the PILLAR AND BULWARK OF TRUTH.

Now, maybe it is common for some heretics to use 2 Timothy 3:16 saying that all Scripture is God-breathed. Unfortunately, the verse never used “alone”. Even it is God-breathed, it cannot be directly produced by God. It is God-breathed because its authors and its compilers are divinely inspired.

JESUS CHRIST DID NOT BREATHE ON THE BIBLE, HE BREATHED ON HIS APOSTLES;

John 20:22 NRSVCE [emphasis added] “When he had said this, HE BREATHED ON THEM AND SAID TO THEM, “RECEIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT.”

IF APOSTLES ARE GOD-BREATHED, THEN THEIR SUCCESORS ARE GOD-BREATHED TOO, MAKING THEM AUTHORITATIVE WHEN IT COMES TO SCRIPTURE. AND SINCE THEY WERE THE ONES WHO WROTE, COMPILED AND CANONIZED THE BIBLE, THEN THE BIBLE MUST BE CONSIDERED GOD-BREATHED TOO.

THE QUESTION IS, IS ELLEN WHITE GOD-BREATHED TOO?? O BAKA BAD BREATH?? I DO NOT WANT TO MAKE IT LONG. JUST WAIT FOR THE PART 2 OF OUR REBUTTAL.