Catholic Faith Defender

JOHN. 8:32 “et cognoscetis veritatem et veritas liberabit vos”

Archive for January, 2009

Knowing the Catholic Teaching and Dogma by reading magazine everyday?

Posted by catholicfaithdefender on January 30, 2009

Knowing the Catholic Teaching and Dogma by reading magazine everyday?


Buy Tumbok Magazine because Bro. Cenon Bebe Jr.; one of the best defender of Catholic Faith in Luzon area had a column in Tumbok Magazine; which answers all protestant questions, criticism, wiles and attacks in our Catholic Doctrine.

Bro Cenon Bebe writes on his column about Biblical teaching of Catholic Church, and even the Apostolic Tradition which we Catholic believe.

Bro Cenon Bebe write in the most excellent way in his apologetics course of answering protestant objections in a quick and understandable manner and, he writes many fundamental beliefs of Catholics Church.

He also writes in his column about countering Protestantism; here are the examples:


Posted in Apologetics-Tagalog, Books (Products), THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HAS THE ANSWER | 2 Comments »

“Executive Minister of Iglesia Ni Cristo Back to the True Church”

Posted by catholicfaithdefender on January 30, 2009

“Executive Minister of Iglesia Ni Cristo Back to the True Church”

By Bro. G-one Paisones

May nabasa po akong isang aklat na maganda at magagamit sa mga evangelization at apologetics purposes ng mga Catholic Apologist at lahat ng mga Katoliko. Ang aklat na ito ay ang “Paano Ninyo Sasagutin” ni Fr. Ben Carreon (Unang Aklat). Ang naturang aklat ay naglalaman ng mga sagot at information na dapat mabasa ng lahat ng mga Katoliko sa boung Pilipinas. Ang aklat na ito ay mabibili sa mga St. Paul stores.

Madalas na nating naririnig at nababasa na may mga Katoliko na winaksi ang kanilang pananampalataya bilang Katoliko na hindi man lang nila nalalaman ang stand ng doctina ng Santa Iglesia Catolica; ika nga ignoranting mga Katoliko. Ang ilan sa kanila ay umanib sa Iglesia ni Cristo na itinatag ni Felix Manalo noong 1914. Ang isa sa mga information na nakuha ko sa aklat (“Paano Ninyo Sasagutin”) ay makatutulong upang tatagan ang paniniwalang Katoliko at malaman ang Doctrina ng Santa Iglesia Catolica basi narin sa Biblia, Apostolic Tradition at sa Banal na Santa Iglesia Catolica; at maging sa mga karagdagang standard references ay narito:

Paano Ninyo Sasagutin

St. Paul Publication

7708 St. Paul Road, ASV

Makati, Metro Manila

Tel.:88-97-70* 85-50-82

(1st Printing, 1966)

(Revised Edition, 1986)

Pahina 128-129

Sino ang Humirang kay Manalo?

Ni Fr. Ben Carreon

(Emphasis Added)

Totoo ang iyong (Quirico Porras) sinasabing ang ginawa ng mga Kapatid nating nahihiwalay sa mga sektang Saksi ni Jehova at Iglesia ni Kristo ay pulos panlilinlang sa mga Katolikong alanganin ang paniniwala at kulang ng kaalaman sa relihyon. Una: malaking kasinungalingan ang sinasabi ng mga iglesya (Iglesia ni Cristo) na sila ang pinakauna sa lahat ng relihyon. Sang-ayon sa Encyclopedia of the Philippines, Vol. 10, 1936 edition, pahina 432-433, sinulat ni Zoila Galang, ang Iglesya ay itinatag noong 1914, sa Punta, Sta. Ana, Maynila ni Felix Manalo.

Isa rito sa 18 “hinirang ng Diyos” ay si Mr. Igmidio Zabala, dating Superintendente ng mga Iglesya sa Central Luzon, na ngayon ay nagbalik na sa pagka-Katoliko at ang sabi niya’y hindi totoo na sila’y hinirang ng Diyos. Ang humirang sa kanila ay si G. Manalo. Sa “katunayan,” sudlong pa ni Mr. Zabala, “ano mang oras ay naiaalis ni Manalo ang sino man sa amin. Siya ang nag turo sa aming kung ano ang ituturo namin sa mga kaanib sa sariling pakahulugan niya sa mga talata ng Bibliya. Siya ang nagbibigay ng sweldo sa amin.” Bakit sasabihing Diyos ang humirang sa 18 ito?

Samaktwid, sang-ayon na rin sa tinatawag ni Manalong “hinirang ng Diyos” na si Mr. Zabala, hindi totoong Diyos ang humirag sa mga ministro ng Iglesia, at gayon din hindi totoong Diyos ang humirang kay Felix Manalo. Mayroon bang Diyos na pabagu-bago ng patakaran?

At samakatwid, sang-ayon na rin kay Manalo, ang Iglesya ay natayo sa Punta, Ata. Ana, Maynila noong 1914 at hinirang ng Diyos ang kanyang mga ministro noon ding mga petsang yaon. Paano itong magiging “pinakauna” sa lahat ng relihyon? Mahina yata sa arithmetic ang ating mga kapatid na iyan.

Pahina 135

Ang Tunay na Sugo

We are very haapy to have Mr. Igmidio Zabala as a guest columnist in Paano Ninyo Sasagutin. A well-known figure in Manila, he broadcast in DZST as one of the Tinig ni Mang Huwan and writes a column in Sentinel. Mr. Zabala’s name is in the Philippines Encyclopedia as one of the original 18 Ministers of the Iglesya ni Kristo, in which sect he labored for over twenty years, rising to executive position in Luzon until he came back to the Catholic Church a few years ago. A small autobiography has been published: “Ako ay naging Ministro ng Igleya ni Kristo” in which he traced his many years with Felix Manalo and his later disillusionment. The small book has been sold out and no copy is available. We wrote the publishers to request. If they don’t we are planning to serialize it here in the Mindanao Cross.

Posted in Books (Products), Converts, How to Help others become Catholic, Iglesia ni Cristo-Manalo, What is the History of Your Church? | Leave a Comment »

Worship On the Sabbath?

Posted by catholicfaithdefender on January 29, 2009

Worship On the Sabbath?


Christians no longer worship on Saturday But on Sunday since our Lord rose from the dead on a Sunday (John 20:1, Luke 24:1on the First day of the week), thus from then onwards Sunday became the day of Public worship for the apostles as we read in 1Corinthians 16:2 ” On the First day of the week (Sunday) (in Hebrew yom rishon) every one of you must put aside what he can afford, so that collections need not be made after I have come.”

The law to worship God in public one day a week has in no way been violated but rather affirmed and brought to its fullness. This is because all the covenants of the Old Law were given to God’s chosen people to prepare them for the coming of their redeemer who would reign for ever (John 1:45). St. Paul makes this clear saying ” These (former things of the Old Law i.e., New Moons or Sabbaths) were only pale reflections of what was coming; the reality is Christ” (Colossians 2:16-17). As baptism was the fullfilment of the Jewish circumcision (Col 2:11-12) for Christians, so to was Sunday the fullfillment of the Sabbath (Saturday). Christians must never make lightly of the price Christ paid for our redemption as for this reason does St. Paul say ” I wish to know nothing but Christ and him crucified” (1 Corinthians 2:2). The early Church for this reason, adopted Sunday as the day of the Lord (Acts 20:7 “On the first day of the week”) for our faith is not in sum superficial messiah but in Christ the Son of the eternal Father who died for us and rose again on the third day. Christ resurrection is an integral part of our faith as St. Paul puts it “if Christ be not risen, then our preaching is vain, and your faith is also in vain” (1 Corinthians 15:14). Thus in deed was Saturday substituted for Sunday (with divine approval) since Christ came to “fulfil the law and not abolish it” (Matt 5:17).

Sunday replaces the Sabbath as it was from hence forth especially consecrated to God by the community’s worship. At times Christians celebrated their Mass in each others homes (Acts 2:42-46). We Further read that the first day of the week is the day of worship of the early Christian Community in the following : Acts 20:7 “On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the morrow; and he prolonged his speech until midnight.” Here we see the two basic elements of Sunday worship which have been followed by the Church to this day: 1) the breaking of bread, which designates the celebration of the Lord’s Supper (Catholics call it the Mass); and 2) the sermon. Furthermore elsewhere St. Paul told the Corinthians to contribute money to the Church each Sunday (1 Cor 16:1-2). This would be a strange request, if Christians assembled on Saturdays.

From time to time the apostles did go to synagogue on the Sabbath, however this was in order audience to preach to. It would not have even possible for them on these occasions to celebrate mass, as the Jews had certainly not assembled there to celebrate a Christian Mass.

We read that in the Gospel of Luke (Luke 24:1). “But on the first day of the week” two men were going to a village named Emmaus, were upon meeting Jesus he (Jesus) began to interpret to them in all the scriptures “the things concerning himself”. Further on we read that when he was at table with them, he took the bread and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to them…(Luke1: 35) Then they told what had happened on the road, and how he was known to them in the breaking of the bread.” Christ’s actions signify the two elements of the Catholic Mass, namely the Lord’s Supper of the Lord’s and the word of God being exposed and explained to them. And He does this with the disciples on the first day of the week. An example for all Christians to follow.

It was also logical to consider Sunday as THE DAY OF THE LORD. It is by the way, the eighth day, that of the NEW Creation, restored by Jesus Death and Resurrection.

The word Sabbath as mentioned in Exodus is quite lengthy but if one reads it all we read : “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work; but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your manservant, or your maidservant, or your cattle, or the sojourner who is within your gates; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it” (Ex. 20:8-11). For the Jews the Seventh day was Saturday but if we read Exodus God doesn’t mention anything about Saturday all he says is that “six days you shall labor… but on the Seventh day you shall rest.” So what God is Concerned about is that, after six days of labor we should make the Seventh day, a day of rest and worship for God. Thus a Christian who works Six days and then Worships on The Seventh day (Sunday) fulfills exactly the request of God.

However St Paul answers this claim the best in that he says: (Colossians 2:16-17) “From now onwards, NEVER LET ANYONE ELSE DECIDE what should eat or drink, OR WHETHER YOU ARE TO OBSERVE ANNUAL FESTIVALS, NEW MOONS OR SABBATHS, THESE WERE ONLY PALE REFLECTIONS OF WHAT WAS COMING:THE Reality is CHRIST” In other words, Paul is saying let no one call the Christians to task for what they ate or drank or IN REGARD TO FESTIVALS: NEW MOONS (the thing of the pagans) and SABBATHS (Jews). Note also that the festival, new moon (2 kings 4:23) , and Sabbaths are references to the yearly, monthly, and weekly observances of the Mosaic calendar. Therefore the whole Jewish festal calendar is no longer binding and this includes the Sabbath’s of the Old Law. Thus St. Paul rebukes the idea of reverting back to Jewish customs and observance of feast days of the Mosaic calendar as if they were still binding (Galatians 4:9-11). Today those who object to Sunday worship also place themselves under St. Paul’s harsh words of condemnation

In reading the above text from St. Paul clearly one cannot say that the doing away with only applies for New moons but rather “New moons or Sabbaths”. This is also because when the Old Covenant completed its usefulness and passed away so did the signs. Circumcision is no longer an obligation (Galatians 5:2). Honoring the seventh day of the week is also no longer binding. Saint Paul states that the legal demands of the Old Covenant are canceled and explicitly mentions the Sabbath as one of these (Colossians 2:14). Thus worship on Sunday is not an abolishing of the Law but a fulfillment of it as the seventh day is a sign of the glory of the Old Covenant. However, it only prefigured the glory of the New Covenant (2 Corinth 3:5-10).

Further there are other Old Testament ritual laws which are now void, no longer binding, such as circumcision, temple sacrifices, etc. Cf. Galatians 5: 2, and Acts 15. Our Lord speaks of these old Laws as passing things, when he speaks of ” heaven and earth pass(ing) away” (Luke16:16-17) which refers to some sort of spiritual reality that has already occurred or is in the process of occurring. It is not a reference to the end of the world, but the coming of the new age, which occurs with the coming of the Messiah, and the New Covenant. Hebrews 9:26 “…But as it is, he (Jesus) has appeared once for all at the end of the age to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.” We are living in the new and final age that was prophesied by Isaiah as the time of the “new heavens and a new earth.” Isaiah 66:22-23 “As the new heavens and the new earth which I will make Shall endure before me, says the LORD, so shall your race and your name endure. From one new moon to another, and from one Sabbath to another, All mankind shall come to worship before me, says the LORD.”

In Regards to Worship Our Lord Himself Made it Clear How people Would Worship: John 4: 21 ” Believe me woman, a time will come when YOU will NO LONGER Worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. (Note The Jewish temple and Worship on Saturday is Were the Jews felt the real Place and Time of Worship was), You Worship what you do not know, we worship what we do know, for the Salvation is from the Jews. Yet A TIME is coming and has now come when the True worshipers will worship the Father in Spirit and Truth”. Note he Says nothing about the Sabbath (Saturday) making A true worshiper.

Jesus on many occasions offended the Pharisees of his day by working on the sabbath and performing miracles (Matt 12:9-14, Luke 13:10-17, John 9:1-33 ).The Pharisees also complained that Jesus let His disciples work on the Sabbath (Matt 12: 1-8) Jesus replied Matthew 12:8 “…For the Son of man is lord of the sabbath” which provides us with a deeper understanding of Sabbath. The Pharisees criticized Jesus because they got so caught up with the ritual aspect that they missed the more important spiritual one as the Sabbath is not an end in itself. Christ knowing their hearts (Mark 2:27) “said to them, ‘The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath;”. The Sabbath signifies two things: One, unlike the other animals we will not find our fulfillment and happiness in just working for our food and our other bodily needs because we have a spiritual as well as physical nature (Matt 4:4). Second, the purpose of man’s creation is to be in a covenant relationship with God and only in Him will we find true rest for our souls and lasting happiness. We are made to love and worship God and to be united with Him in His Covenant, thus Christians now live under the New Covenant (Jeremias 31:31, Hebrews 9:15) made in the blood of Christ.

We also read in the book of revelations St John Says (Rev 1:9-10) ” I am John, your brother…. I was On the island of patmos….. It was the LORD’S DAY” (in Greek: Kyriake hemera ) in Greek this designates the Sunday. We note this as the book of Revelations is a blueprint for the Sacred Liturgy of the Christian community’s weekly worship. There is the reading of the Word of God (chapters 2 -5), and the partaking of the wedding banquet of the Lamb of God, our Passover Sacrifice (chapter 19) and this takes place on the Lord’s Day.

Further many of the writings of the early Christians attest the fact that Sunday was the Day of Worship for the Christians e.g. The Didache (14:22); St. Ignatius of Antioch (around 110 AD); St. Justin of Neapolis (Holy Land, around 150), Dionysius of Corinth (around 170 AD): St. Clement of Alexandria (around 194); Melito of Sardes (beginning of the second century); Hieronymus (Jerome), Tertullian, Eusebius of Caesarea and many others.

The Church Fathers Speak

The Didache (C. 90-150 A.D.): “On the Lord’s Day of theLord gather together, break bread and give thanks, after confessing yourtransgressions so that your sacrifice may be pure…”



“Be not deceived with strange doctrines, nor with old fables, whichare unprofitable. For if we still live according to the Jewish law, weacknowledge that we have not received grace… If, therefore, those who werebrought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession ofa new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observanceof the Lord’s Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him andby His death…”

St. Ignatius of Antioch, [Epistle to the Magnesians 9] (110 A.D.):”Those who lived according to the old order of things have come toa new hope, no longer keeping the Sabbath, but the Lord’s Day, in whichour life is blessed by Him and by His death.”

Justin Martyr : The First Apology (155 AD) CHAP. 67 WEEKLY WORSHIPOF THE CHRISTIANS.

“…And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in thecountry gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles orthe writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, whenthe reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts tothe imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray,and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and waterare brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings,according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and thereis a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thankshave been given (Eucharistic elements)… And they who are well to do,and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is depositedwith the president, who succours the orphans and widows and those who,through sickness or any other cause, are in want, … and in a word takescare of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all holdour common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wroughta change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ ourSaviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on theday before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn,which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples,He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for yourconsideration.”

TERTULLIAN : An Answer to the Jews (206 AD) CHAP. 4. Of the Observanceof the Sabbath.

“It follows, accordingly, that, in so far as the abolition of carnalcircumcision and of the old law is demonstrated as having been consummatedat its specific times, so also the observance of the Sabbath is demonstratedto have been temporary… He predicts through Isaiah: ‘And there shall be,’He says, ‘month after month, and day after day, and sabbath after sabbath;and all flesh shall come to adore in Jerusalem, saith the Lord;’ whichwe understand to have been fulfilled in the times of Christ, when ‘allflesh’–that is, every nation—‘came to adore in Jerusalem’ God the Father,through Jesus Christ His Son, as was predicted through the prophet…Butthe Jews are sure to say, that ever since this precept was given throughMoses, the observance has been binding. Manifest accordingly it is, thatthe precept was not eternal nor spiritual, but temporary, which would oneday cease…”


“Hence it is not possible that the [day of] rest after the sabbathshould have come into existence from the seventh [day] of our God. On thecontrary, it is our Savior who, after the pattern of his own rest, causedus to be made in the likeness of his death, and hence also of his resurrection”(Commentary on John 2:28 [A.D. 229]).


“The sixth day [Friday] is called parasceve, that is tosay, the preparation of the kingdom. . . . On this day also, on accountof the passion of the Lord Jesus Christ, we make either a station to Godor a fast. On the seventh day he rested from all his works, and blessedit, and sanctified it. On the former day we are accustomed to fast rigorously,that on the Lord’s day we may go forth to our bread with giving of thanks.And let the parasceve become a rigorous fast, lest we should appear toobserve any sabbath with the Jews . . . which sabbath he [Christ] in hisbody abolished” (The Creation of the World [A.D. 300]).

Eusebius of Caesarea

“They [the early saints of the Old Testament] did not care aboutcircumcision of the body, neither do we [Christians]. They did not careabout observing sabbaths, nor do we. They did not avoid certain kinds offood, neither did they regard the other distinctions which Moses firstdelivered to their posterity to be observed as symbols; nor do Christiansof the present day do such things” (Church History 1:4:8 [A.D.312]).


“The sabbath was the end of the first creation, the Lord’s daywas the beginning of the second, in which he renewed and restored the oldin the same way as he prescribed that they should formerly observe thesabbath as a memorial of the end of the first things, so we honor the Lord’sday as being the memorial of the new creation” (On Sabbath andCircumcision 3 [A.D. 345]).

Cyril of Jerusalem

“Fall not away either into the sect of the Samaritans or into Judaism,for Jesus Christ has henceforth ransomed you. Stand aloof from all observanceof sabbaths and from calling any indifferent meats common or unclean”(Catechetical Lectures 4:37 [A.D. 350]).

Council of Laodicea

“Christians should not Judaize and should not be idle on the sabbath,but should work on that day; they should, however, particularly reverencethe Lord’s day and, if possible, not work on it, because they were Christians”(canon 29 [A.D. 360]).

John Chrysostom

“[W]hen he said, ‘You shall not kill’ . . . he did not add, ‘becausemurder is a wicked thing.’ The reason was that conscience had taught thisbefore hand, and he speaks thus, as to those who know and understand thepoint. Wherefore when he speaks to us of another commandment, not knownto us by the dictate of conscience, he not only prohibits, but adds thereason. When, for instance, he gave commandment concerning the sabbath–‘Onthe seventh day you shall do no work’–he subjoined also the reason forthis cessation. What was this? ‘Because on the seventh day God rested fromall his works which he had begun to make’ [Ex. 20:10]. And again: ‘Becauseyou were a servant in the land of Egypt’ [Deut. 21:18]. For what purposethen, I ask, did he add a reason respecting the sabbath, but did no suchthing in regard to murder? Because this commandment was not one of theleading ones. It was not one of those which were accurately defined ofour conscience, but a kind of partial and temporary one, and for this reasonit was abolished afterward. But those which are necessary and uphold ourlife are the following: ‘You shall not kill . . . You shall not commitadultery . . . You shall not steal.’ On this account he adds no reasonin this case, nor enters into any instruction on the matter, but is contentwith the bare prohibition” (Homilies on the Statues 12:9 [A.D.387]).


“Well, now, I should like to be told what there is in these TenCommandments, except the observance of the sabbath, which ought not tobe kept by a Christian . . . Which of these commandments would anyone saythat the Christian ought not to keep? It is possible to contend that itis not the Law which was written on those two tables that the apostle [Paul]describes as ‘the letter that kills’ [2 Cor. 3:6], but the law of circumcisionand the other sacred rites which are now abolished” (The Spiritand the Letter 24 [A.D. 412]).

Posted in Apologetics-Sabbath | 3 Comments »

The sacraments change our bodies and souls, Pope Benedict explains

Posted by catholicfaithdefender on January 27, 2009

The sacraments change our bodies and souls, Pope Benedict explains


.- The Paul VI Hall held around 5,000 faithful this morning, who listened to Pope Benedict unfold St. Paul’s teaching on the sacraments. When people receive the sacraments, he explained, they encounter the Spirit of Jesus in a way that changes their spirit and their body.

The Holy Father began his catechesis by indicating how “from St. Paul we have learned that there is a new beginning of history in Jesus Christ … formed by the ‘yes’ He pronounced to the Father … out of love and truth.”

“How can we enter,” the Pope asked, “into this new beginning, this new history? … How can Jesus reach my own life, my own being? The fundamental response of St. Paul, of all the New Testament, is: by the Holy Spirit.”

Benedict XVI then pointed out that the Holy Spirit “at the Pentecost created the beginning of a new humanity, a new community: the Church, the body of Christ.”

The spirit of Christ “touches me within … using two visible elements: the Word of announcement and the Sacraments, in particular Baptism and the Eucharist. … Faith comes not from reading but from listening. It is not only an interior experience but a relationship,” the Pope said.

The Holy Father then explained how the new humanity established by Christ comes into being through the Church, which the Holy Spirit established at Pentecost.

“For this reason, the Word of announcement becomes Sacrament. … No-one can baptize himself; … no-one can become Christian by himself. … We can only become Christian through the meditation of others, and this gives us the gift of faith. … Autonomous Christianity is a self-contradiction. … These ‘others’ are, in the first place, the community of believers, the Church. … Only Christ can constitute the Church, Christ is the true giver of the Sacraments.”

Lest we confine the new creation brought by Christ to the spiritual realm, Pope Benedict emphasized that, “Being Christian is more than a cosmetic operation that embellishes life … it is a new beginning and rebirth, death and resurrection. … It is not purely spiritual but involves the body, the cosmos, and extends to the new earth and to the new heavens.”

On the subject of the Eucharist, the Holy Father pointed out that St. Paul speaks of the institution of this Sacrament in his First Letter to the Corinthians, and he explained that “with the gift of the chalice of the new covenant Christ gives us the true sacrifice, the only true sacrifice is the love of the Son.”

The Pope then turned to the unity that is established between the believer and Christ and the believer and the Christian community by the Eucharist.

Referring to chapter ten of the First Letter to the Corinthians in which St. Paul speaks of us becoming “one body, for we all partake of the one bread,” Benedict XVI affirmed that “the realism of the Church is much more profound and authentic than that of the nation State, because Christ truly gives us His Body, converts us into His Body … and unites us to one another. … The Church is not just a corporation like a State, it is a body; it is not an organization but an organism.”

As he finished his thoughts on the sacraments, Pope Benedict touched on the Sacrament of Matrimony, which St. Paul defines as “a great mystery.”

“Married love has as its model the love of Christ for His Church,” the Holy Father said.

Having a “rewarding experience of true marriage” will happen if “a constant human and emotive development remains united to the effectiveness of the Word and the significance of Baptism,” he counseled. The Pontiff also spoke of how “participating in the Body and the Blood of the Lord consolidates the union and makes it visible, a union that grace then makes indissoluble.”

Posted in Sacrament | Leave a Comment »

Gay Marriage in the Bible?

Posted by catholicfaithdefender on January 27, 2009

Gay Marriage in the Bible?

By Dr. Jeff Mirus


Newsweek continues its herculean effort to redefine marriage in its December 15th issue, through Lisa Miller’s cover story, Gay Marriage: Our Mutual Joy. Miller, who is also Newsweek’s religion columnist, argues that conservative Christians are wrong when they cite the Bible against gay marriage. In fact, she says, the messages of inclusivity and love in the Bible favor the support of gay marriage. The tag-line on the column says it all: “Opponents of gay marriage often cite Scripture. But what the Bible teaches about love argues for the other side.”

This column, like much of Miller’s work, frames issues so that they will resolve themselves the way she prefers, abuses evidence to make it reveal only what she wants, over-simplifies nearly everything, and betrays an astonishing ignorance of how Christian beliefs must be understood and engaged. There are three principal errors which dominate Miller’s efforts:

  1. Interpretive Failure: To prove the Bible’s support for gay marriage, Miller is forced to assume that it is the recorded behavior of the characters in the Old Testament which determines Biblical teaching, and she is forced to ignore the larger scope of the Bible’s didactic message. For example, the fact that some of the Patriarchs were polygamists says absolutely nothing about God’s teaching, yet for Miller this proves that the Bible cannot be taken as a guide to the morals of marriage.

    At the same time, she ignores the Bible’s grand themes entirely. Fundamental motifs appear in Genesis, run throughout the prophetic tradition concerning God’s relationship with Israel, resurface more clearly in the words of Christ and the teachings of St. Paul, and always point both implicitly and explicitly toward marriage as an exclusive fruitful union of love between a man and a woman—a relationship which mirrors that of Christ and the Church.

  2. Lack of Context: Closely related to this first problem is Miller’s utter inattention to two important contextual issues which make it impossible to interpret the Bible in a manner favorable to gay marriage. First, while she admits that the Bible condemns homosexuality, she tries to dismiss this condemnation as mere cultural baggage. Hence, within a few breaths of refusing to recognize the obvious cultural baggage of patriarchal polygamy (represented in descriptions of how the patriarchs lived), she insists on dismissing the passages against homosexuality (represented in explicit teachings), thereby turning context on its head.

    Second, Miller ignores the lived experience of the Jewish and Christian communities from the time that the Old Testament was fully formed. This experience, based on the community’s own understanding of what God had revealed, enshrined a monogamous, heterosexual view of marriage which was to be fruitful in the bearing of children. Arguments in favor of contraception, homosexuality and gay marriage were of pagan origin, were kept at bay for well over 2,000 years, and have resurfaced only with the resurgence of paganism in our own era.

  3. Ignorance of Tradition and Authority: Miller can hardly be unaware of the role that tradition and authority play even in Jewish and Protestant belief, yet she chooses to frame her entire case in terms of a Fundamentalist reading of Scripture, as if the only Christian arguments come from proof-texting. Granted, some Christians are too quick to assert the Bible’s meaning, and only Catholics have an adequate answer to the claims of private interpretation of the “plain text”, but as indicated above, the traditions of the communities in question should provide interpretive clues to any serious exegete.

    And when we come to Catholicism, Tradition associated with the community becomes an acknowledged second source of Revelation. Moreover, the successor to Peter becomes an acknowledged source of authority for the settling of disputes over both Scripture and tradition. This highly crystallized tradition and authority has for 2,000 years spoken against all of the errors Miller advances, both interpretive and moral. Moreover, in Catholicism we have also a particularly rich and accessible embodiment of the Christian intellectual tradition, including extensive work on the natural law, a source of moral understanding open to all but made easier to discern by Revelation. Natural law similarly condemns both homosexuality and the grotesque parody of marital union represented by even the most enduring gay commitment.

For contrary to Lisa Miller, the core of marriage does not consist in stable emotional commitment. Rather, stable emotional commitment is demanded by marriage’s defining character as a deep and fruitful fidelity, by which a man and a woman actually complete and fulfill their respective natures, becoming two in one flesh. Sadly, about this basic character of marriage our contemporary Western, sophisticated and neo-pagan world has not the slightest clue. One would expect a religion columnist to notice such a glaring cultural fact. Instead, Lisa Miller aligns herself with a strong editorial trend, evidenced in at least three major statements over the past month (see also The End of Newsweek), by which Newsweek has revealed its own profound lack of vision, leading all those blind enough to follow into the proverbial pit.

Posted in Holy Matrimony, Moral Issue | Leave a Comment »

Pope Benedict lifts excommunication of bishops ordained by Lefebvre

Posted by catholicfaithdefender on January 27, 2009

Pope Benedict lifts excommunication of bishops ordained by Lefebvre


.- Pope Benedict XVI has lifted the excommunication of the four bishops from the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) ordained by Marcel Lefebvre in 1988 in a decision he hopes will lead to “real and final unity.”

A press release from the Vatican reveals that after dialogue between the Holy See and SSPX, represented by its Superior General, Bishop Bernard Fellay and his request in a letter on behalf of the other three bishops in the Society, Most Reverend Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Most Reverend Richard Williamson and Most Reverend Alfonso del Gallareta, the Holy Father has decided to lift “the excommunication in which they had incurred twenty years ago.”

The statement, released in Italian, recalls that because the Episcopal consecrations of June 30, 1988 were performed by Marcel Lefebvre without pontifical mandate, “the four aforementioned Prelates had incurred the excommunication latae sententiae, formally declared by the Congregation of Bishops on date July 1st 1988.”

A press release from the Vatican quotes the words of a letter from Bishop Fellay to the Holy Father: “we are always firmly determined in the will to remain Catholic and to put all of our energy to the service of the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ, which is the Roman Catholic Church. We accept Her teachings with filial spirit. We firmly believe in the Primacy of Peter and his prerogatives, and because of that we suffer greatly by the current situation.”

The release continues by explaining that the Holy Father, who has followed the Church’s relationship with SSPX from the beginning, “has always tried to heal the fracture with the Society, even personally meeting Bishop Bernard Fellay,” in August 2005.

“On such occasion, the Supreme Pontiff expressed his will to proceed gradually and in reasonable stages down such path and now, with pastoral concern and fatherly mercy, by means of a decree from the Congregation of Bishops dated January 21, 2009, revokes the excommunication applied to the aforementioned Prelates.”

“The Holy Father has been inspired in this decision by the hope of reaching the soonest possible full reconciliation and complete communion,” the statement concludes.

The Decree

The Decree from the Congregation of Bishops begins by recalling a letter dated December 15, 2008 written by Bishops Bernard Fellay on behalf of the other three bishops who were consecrated on June 30, 1988.  The letter, addressed to Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, President of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, “requested the lifting of the excommunication latae sententiae formally declared by decree of the Prefect of this Congregation for Bishops dated July 1st 1988.”

The Congregation’s decree quotes the passage from Bishop Fellay’s letter released by the Vatican Press office and continues: “His Holiness Benedict XVI – fatherly sensitive to the spiritual suffering expressed by those who face the sanction of excommunication” and who also trusts in the bishop’s commitment “not spare any effort to further engage in the necessary dialogue with the authorities of the Holy See over the unanswered questions…has decided to reconsider the canonical situation of bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta created by their episcopal consecration.”

“With this act –the decree continues- we wish to consolidate the mutual relations of trust and intensify and provide stability to the relation of the Society of St. Pius X with this Apostolic See.”

“This gift of peace, concluding the Christmas celebrations, wishes to also be a sign for promoting the unity in charity of the Universal church and to achieve the elimination of the scandal of division,” the decree states.

“We hope that this step may be followed by the caring accomplishment of the full communion with the Church of the whole Society of St. Pius X, thus witnessing true fidelity and truthful recognition of the Magisterium and the Pope’s authority with the proof of visible unity.”

“On behalf of the faculties expressly granted by the Holy Father Benedict XVI, in virtue of the current decree, I lift the censure of excommunication latae sententiae to Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta declared by this Congregation on July 1, 1988, while I declare null of juridical consequences, as of today, the decree released in the past.”

The decree is signed by Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, Prefect of the Congregation of Bishops, on January 21, 2009.

Posted in SSPX | Leave a Comment »

Vatican expert: Pope Benedict XVI to lift excommunication of Lefebvrists this week

Posted by catholicfaithdefender on January 27, 2009

Vatican expert: Pope Benedict XVI to lift excommunication of Lefebvrists this week


.- Andrea Tornielli, the Vatican expert of the Italian daily “Il Giornale” announced today that Pope Benedict XVI has decided to revoke the decree of excommunication of the four bishops consecrated by French Bishop Marcel Lefebvre in 1988, creating a schism in the Catholic Church.

The suspension of the excommunication of the Lefebvrist bishops has been making the rounds of several conservative blogs, mostly in Spanish, since Monday.

Although the announcement of the declaration was expected for Wednesday or Thursday, a Vatican source confirmed to CNA that it will be made public on Friday via the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, headed by Archbishop Francesco Coccopalmerio.

This decree will mean, Tornielli explains, that “the superior of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X, Bernard Fellay, and the other three bishops, Alfonso de Gallareta, Tissier de Mallerais and Richard Williamson will no longer be excommunicated.”

According to Tornielli, who first suggested the move on his blog on Wednesday, the decision “has been maturing in the recent months,” after Fellay sent a letter requesting Pope Benedict to revoke the act taken by Pope John Paul II following Lefebvre’s decision to ordain the bishops.

“It was then a schismatic act, since those consecrations were not legitimized by the Pontiff, justified by Lefebvre as a necessity for the survival of his Traditionalist community. A community that had accepted neither the post conciliar liturgical reform nor some decrees of the Second Vatican Council, all of them signed by Lefebvre himself, including the one on religious liberty,” Tornielli writes.

On January 20, the Traditionalists completed 1.7 million Rosaries as part of a campaign initiated by the four Lefebvrist bishops during a pilgrimage to the Marian shrine of Lourdes on the occasion of the feast of Christ the King. The campaign was launched to “obtain from Our Lady the lifting of the decree of excommunication of 1988.”

The two consecrating bishops–Marcel Lefebvre and the Brazilian Antonio de Castro Mayer–and the four bishops of the Fraternity of St. Pius X were all excommunicated by Pope John Paul II. Both Lefebvre and Castro Mayer are deceased.

Posted in SSPX | Leave a Comment »

SUKNAAN (6-27-2008)

Posted by catholicfaithdefender on January 22, 2009


Ni Bro. Socrates C. Fernandez

Date: June 27, 2008

Source: Bag-ong LUNGSORANON, Page 8


Ang Batang Jesus gidala sa Ehipto

Dunay panagsumpaki ang Biblia: Kay giingon man: “Ug mibangon (si Jose) ug gidala niya ang bata ug inahan uban kaniya sa kagabhion padulong sa Ehipto. Nagpabilin siya didto hangtud namatay si Herodes. Sa namatay na si Herodes… gikuha niya ang bata ug iyang inahan ug misulod sa yuta sa Israel… ug mipuyo sa lungsud nga ginganlan og Nazareth,” (Mat. 2:14-15, 19, 21, 23).

Pero ang Bata wala dad-a sa Ehipto

“Ug sa natuman ang mga adlaw pagpaputli sumala sa kasugoan ni Moises, ilang gidala ang Bata sa Jerusalem aron ihalad sa Ginoo. Ug gidala nila ang tanang gisulti sa balaod sa Ginoo namauli sila sa ilang kaugalingong syudad, ang Nazareth,” (Lukas 2:22-39). Dili ba dako kayo ang panagsumpaki sa report sa duha ka Ebanghelista?


WALA gayod kini magkasumpaki, ka yang hitabo sa paghalad sa bata ngadto sa Templo mao ang ikawalo ka adlaw nga lagda sa balaod nga ang bata ihalad ngadto sa Templo. “Sultihi ang mga anak sa Israel sa pagingon: Ang babaye nga manamkon ug magaanak og usa ka anak nga lalaki, nan, magmahugaw siya sulod sa pito ka adlaw… Ug sa ikawalo ka adlaw pagasirkusidahan ang unod sa yamis sa bata… ug magahalad siya og usa ka nating karnero nga may usa ka tuig ang panigon alang a halad nga sinunog, ug usa ka kuyabog nga salampati o usa ka kuyabog nga tukmo…” (Lev. 12:2-2, 6).

Ug human maitabo sa paghalad sa Batang Jesus misunog ang pagpadamgo sa anghel kang Jose aron molayas siya, ang Bata ug ang inahan padulong sa Ehipto kay buot man si Herodes mopatay sa Bata. “Ania karon usa ka anghel sa Ginoo nagpakita kang Jose pinaagi sa damgo ug miingon: Bangon ug dad-a ang bata ug inahan uban kanimo ug kagiw kamo ngadto sa Ehipto. Ug pabilin didto hangtod sultihan ko ikaw, kay si Herodes nagpangita sa Bata sa paglaglag Kaniya,” (Mat. 2:2-13).

Busa dakong sayop ang pag-ingon nga duna kini panagsumpaki.

Posted in Apologetics-Visayan, Socrates C. Fernandez, SUKNAAN (Visaya) | Leave a Comment »

Sino Ba ang Babae sa Revelation 12?

Posted by catholicfaithdefender on January 22, 2009

Sino Ba ang Babae sa Revelation 12?

Author : jason abalos (IP: ,
E-mail :
URL    :
Whois  :
May tanong po ako..

Sa isang aklat na isinulat ng PARI by ALBER HUNNI page.59

” The epistles has taken from the apocalips,a woman surrounded by the sons splender who is wearing a crown by the twelve star and the moon beniete her feet.Appears to saint john avoice announce that is hour salvation of the kingdom of jesus christ,The application to the IMMACULATE VIRGIN of LORDES is clear.

So Maliwanag.. Na sabi ng PARI nio na TURO ng IGLESIA KATOLIKA na si VIRGIN MARRY ang BABAE sa Apocalipsis 12:1.”

Anu nmn ang sinasabi ng catholic bible sa DOUAY RHIMES VERSION sa {FOOTNOTE} ng APOCALIPSIS 12:1 ganito ang sabi…

A woman,this WOMAN is NOT the BLESSED VIRGIN!

Ngayon alin po jan ang 22o? ang sabi ng pari sa aklat nio na virgin marry ang bab sa revlation 12:1

o sa catholic bible ng douay rhimes version na hindi raw si virgin marry ang babae sa revation 12:!?

pakisagot po..


Dear Bro. Jason,

Salamat sa comento mo sa amin, naway ang Dios ay gagabay sa iyo at sa iyong pamilya sa mga pag-araw araw na Gawain.

Sa hindi pa natin sagutin ang tanong mo, dapat malaman natin kung ano ang Book of Revelation o Apocalypse. Narito ang mga sumusunod na pahayag hinggil sa Book of Revelation:

NIV Compact Dictionary of the Bible (The Zondervan Corporation-OMF Literature Phil. Page 504-505 (emphasis added) -REVELATION, BOOK OF THE (Gr. Apokalypsis, an unveiling). Sometimes called the Apocalypse. This is the last book of the Bible and the only book of NT that is exclusively prophetic in character.

There are four main schools of interpretation:

  1. Pretest- holds that Revelation is simply a picture of conditions prevalent in the Roman Empire in the late first century, cast in the form of vision and prophecy to conceal its meaning from hostile pagan.
  2. Historical view contends that the book represents in symbolic form the entire course of church history from the time of writing to the final consummation, and that the mystical figures describe in it can be identified with human events in history.
  3. Futurist- on the basis of the threefold division given in Revelation 1:19, suggests that “what you have seen” refers to the immediate environment of the seer and vision of Christ (1”9-19), “what is now” denotes the churches of Asia or the church age they symbolize (2:1-3:22), and “what will take later” relates to those events that will attend the return of Christ and the establishment of the city of God.
  4. Idealist or Symbolic school treats Revelation as purely a dramatic picture of the conflict of good and evil.

The New Jerome Bible Handbook, Page 310. The Apocalypse (Revelation) narrates extraordinary visions that concern things normally unseen and unheard by human beings. It is unique in the New Testament, but not the ancient world… The Revelation has two focuses: Secrets of the cosmos and secret of the future. Secrets are revealed in order to present a particular interpretation of the times and to persuade the hearers or readers to think and live in a certain way.

Sa nasambit natin sa itaas, mapapansin natin na ang Revelation ay may maraming interpretations batay na rin sa bumabasa.

Atin pong talakayin ang Revelation Chapter 12 na basihan sa iyong katanungan.

Kay ALBER HUNNI is Santa Maria ang Rev. 12:1; sa DOUAY RHIMES VERSION (St. Joseph Edition) < CONFRATERNITY-DOUAY VERSION> hindi si Santa Maria ang Revelation 12. Makikita po natin na para pong contradict ang statement ng dalawa (o masasabi ng iba na contrary talaga ang dalawa). Peru bakit po sinabi natin na parang contradict ang dalawa? Narito ang kasagutan:

Dapat nating malaman na ang Revelation 12:1 ay isang fusion imagery o ang topiko ng Revelation ay may maraming kahulugan at nakadependi ito sa History, Phrase, Sentence, Context, at Interpretation ng mambabasa (Ang reference ay nasa itaas).

Narito ang nakasaad sa Rev. 12:1-2 (KJV) “And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: {12:2} And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.”

Ang interpretation ng dalubhasa sa Biblia tungkol sa woman ng Rev. 12:1 ay:

1. Israel = Mic. 4:9-10; Isa. 66:7; Gen. 37:9–11

2. Eve = she is part of the three-way conflict also involving her Seed and the Dragon, who is identified with the ancient serpent (the one from Eden) in 20:2. This mirrors the conflict in Genesis 3:15 between Eve, the serpent, and her unborn seed—which in turn is a symbol of the conflict between Mary, Satan, and Jesus. (from James Akin of Catholic Answer)

3. Church = because, as Rev. 12:17 tells us, “the rest of her offspring” are those who bear witness to Jesus, making them Christians. from James Akin of Catholic Answer)

4. Mary (Mother of Jesus) = Revelation 11:19- 12:1 it is Mary the Ark of New Covenant

Narito ang mga sumusonod na references:

Holy Bible- Douay Rheims Version, Page 295 –Apocalypse 12:1 Footnote -“A woman. The Church of God. It may also, by allusion, be applied to our blessed Lady. The church with the sun, that is, with Christ. She hath the moon, that is, the changeable things of the world, under her feet: and the twelve stars with which she is crown, are the twelve apostles: She is in labor and pain, whilst she brings forth her children, and Christ in them, in the midst of afflictions and persecutions.

The New Testament of the New American Bible, Page 626– Revelation 12: 1f. 4-6 Notes: “The Woman adorned with the sun, the moon, and the starts symbolized God’s people in the Old and New Testament; Gn 37, 9f. The Israel of old gave birth to Messiah (v 5) and then became the New Israel, the church, which suffers persecution by the dragon (vv 6:13-17).

Biblia sa Kristohanong Katilingban (Christian Community Bible) Page 485– Revelation 12 Notes: “Ang babaye nagpasabot sa katawhan nga mitabang sa plano sa Diyos, si Maria nga nanganak kang Jesus; siya ang simbahan nga “mikagiw sa disyerto”, sa ato pa, nagkinabuhing espirituhanong layo sa kalibutan, apan giamoma sa pulong sa Diyos panahon sa panglutos. TAGALOG: “Ang babae (ibigsabihin) ay ang mamamayang tomulong sa plano ng Diyos, Si Maria na nagluwal kay Jesus; siya ang simbahan na pumunta (tumongo) sa disyerto, ibigsabihin ay nabubuhay sa espiritual (spiritual way of living) na malayo sa pansanlibutan na buhay (masasamang bagay), peru inaalagaan ng Diyos sa panahon ng kagipitan.”

Revelation a Divine Message of Hope by: Fr. Bruce Vawter, CM. ((Catholic Information Service, Knights of Columbus Supreme Council, New Haven CT 06521-1971)) – (Imprimatur John F. Whealon, Archbishop of Hartford) Page 44 à “The first sign is “a woman clothed with the sun; with the moon beneath her feet and the twelve starts in a crown about her head. As we see from the complete description of this woman (12:1-2, 5-6), she is both the Church and the Mother of the Messiah. The Church is presented both glorified and in her period of trial, all at once… The Child to whom the woman gives birth in v.5 is certainly Jesus, as He is describe in the messianic language of Psalm 2:9.


Kaya kung ang buong chapter sa Revelation 12 ang pagbabatayan natin iyan po ay hindi kay Santa Maria lamang nakabasi o nakatoon peru kung pagbabasihan natin ang Literal na ina ni Cristo na nag panganak sa kanya hindi rin mali na e-apply natin ang Revelation 12:1 kay Santa Maria.

Ngayon alin po jan ang totoo? ang sabi ng pari sa aklat nio na virgin mary ang bab sa revelation 12:1
o sa catholic bible ng douay rhimes version na hindi raw si virgin marry ang babae sa revelation 12:!?


CONFRATERNITY-DOUAY VERSION, PAGE 272- REVELATION 12:1 FOOTENOTE: A woman: this woman is not the Blessed Virgin, for the details of the prophecy do not fit her. The prophesy pictures the Church of the Old and New Covenants. The beams of the divine glory clothe her, the moon is beneath her feet, she is crowned with a crown of twelve stars, and she must bring forth Christ to the world. By accommodation the church applies this verse to the Blessed Virgin.

Samakatuwid nais ng may akda ng CONFRATERNITY-DOUAY VERSION na hindi lamang dapat nakatoon ang pagkakaintindi (ng mga Katoliko) sa Revelation 12:1 kay Santa Maria sapagkat ang pinag-uusapan na “BABAE” sa boung chapter 12 ng Revelation ay hindi ni SANTA MARIA naka sentro.

Nasagutan po ang inyong tanong.


Posted in Apologetics-Tagalog, Virgin Mary | 31 Comments »


Posted by catholicfaithdefender on January 20, 2009


by Atty. Marwil Llasos of Defensores Fidei Foundation


Our Lady helping the souls in Purgatory through the help of angels


Intermediate state: Purgatory. No second chances – the souls there are saved, but through fire (1 Corinthians 3:15)

“There is a purgatory, and the souls there detained are assisted by the suffrages of the faithful, but especially by the most acceptable sacrifice of the altar” (Council of Trent).

This dogmatic definition contains 3 points of faith that all Catholics are required to believe:

1. There is a purgatory

2. After death, souls suffer there for their sins

3. The living can extend assistance to such souls

There is a purgatory

Forgiveness of sin in the next – Matthew 12:32

“Under the earth” – Revelations 5:2-3; Philippians 2:10

After death, souls suffer there for their sins

“You will not come out of it till you pay the last penny” – Matthew 5:26

“Matthean Parallel” (See: Matthew 18:23-35)

“Lazarusian Incident” (See: Luke 16:19-31)

Spirits in prison – 1 Peter 3:18-20; 4:6

The living can extend assistance to such souls

Restrain not grace from the dead – Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) 7:37

See: Ruth 1:8

Offerings/Sacrifice for the dead

2 Maccabees 12:38-36

“And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachms of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection” (2 Maccabees 12:43, Douay-Rheims Bible).

Fasting for the for the dead

1 Samuel 31:13;

1 Chronicles 10:12

2 Samuel 1:12

Prayer for the dead

2 Maccabees 12:44-46

“It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins” (2 Maccabees 12:46, Douay-Rheims Bible).

See: Nehemiah 1:4-6, cf. Nehemiah 2:5

Understanding Purgatory:

1. Understanding the doctrine of purgatory demands knowing the nature/attributes of God:

God is Holy (Habakkuk 1:13; Isaiah 6:3; Revelations 4:8; Leviticus 11:44

God is Just (1 John 1:9; Revelations 15:3)

God is Merciful (Psalm 116, Lamentations 3:22, Psalm 103:8)

See: Ruth 2:20

God is Love (1 John 4:8, 16)

2. Understanding the doctrine of purgatory demands a proper understanding of the concept of sin:

Gradation (degrees) of sin

Mortal Sin vs. Venial Sin (1 John 5:16-17, NRSV)

Nuestra Señora de Salvacion, ruega por nosotros! Marwil

Bro. Marwil Llasos is one of the best Catholic Apologist in the country today. If you want to read more of his Apologetic Materials I suggest you visit his Blogs. They are listed in our Blog links in the right side of this Blog.

Posted in Purgatory | 7 Comments »