Author Topic: Is God the Father of Jesus? (Read 2527 times)

Santo Subito · « **on:** September 02, 2012, 07:21:52 PM »

Traditio just recently trashed Cardinal Timothy Dolan and his prayer at the Republican National Convention. See below:

Quote

Dear TRADITIO Fathers:

Did you see that at the conclusion of the U.S. Republican National Convention on August 30, 2012, Newchurch's cardinal Timothy Dolan gave a blasphemous "benediction"? He began the prayer to "Almighty God, Father of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jesus." I thought that Jesus is God, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. The other three aren't God. Somehow, in the New Order sect, "Jesus" has become just another patriarch. This proves that Newchurch is so corrupt, so scandalous, so sacrilegious, and so downright unCatholic that it even fails to recognize the Blessed Trinity.

The TRADITIO Fathers Reply.

Yes, we did see that. We also saw Dolan's getup. He looked more like a Protestant minister that even a Novus Ordo cardinal. He had on just a black clergy suit with a crucifix (it's so non-descript that it looks like simple cross from a distance), not a real pectoral cross. This provides just more evidence that Newchurch and its minions are not Catholic, but Protestant.

Moreover, Catholics typically do not use the term "Jesus" alone. The Holy Name, upon the utterance of which the priest at Mass bows his head deeply (you didn't see Dolan doing this at the convention) is usually joined with "Christ," or, more often, a periphrasis is used, such as "Our Lord." There is a very good reason why Dolan omitted the title Christ. This term is not a name, but a title: the Christ, the Anointed One, the Messias.

If Dolan had used the term "Jesus Christ," he would have been proclaiming the Catholic dogma that Our Lord is the Messias for both the Gentiles and the Jєωs. And that dogma Dolan does not want to proclaim because it would offend the Jєωιѕн infidels. Too bad! The truth is the truth, but Dolan doesn't proclaim it. He is an imposter bishop, a Modernist heretic, upon whose face God has planted a stupid grin that he cannot seem to lose, as if God were telling the world: this is no priest, but a Modernist fool!

My question is, how is saying that God is Jesus' Father in any way heretical or blasphemous?

Nadir · « **Reply #1 on:** September 02, 2012, 08:12:30 PM »

Quote

"Almighty God, Father of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jesus."

definitely sounds like a laundry list of God the Father's sons, and seems to put Our Blessed Lord on an equal footing, or possibly even below in rank than the other brothers. It seems to me that Dolan is trying to please the judaics in the audience.

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #2 on:** September 02, 2012, 08:47:49 PM »

Quote from: Santo Subito

My question is, how is saying that God is Jesus' Father in any way heretical or blasphemous?

What does the first few sentences from the Gospel of St. John say?

Think also of the context in which the offending sentence was uttered.

Sigismund · « **Reply #3 on:** September 02, 2012, 09:45:53 PM »

I very much doubt that he meant anything heretical. If you asked him I am sure he does not see an equal sign between Got the Father's relationship to Isaac and His relationship to Jesus Christ.

He said what he said very poorly, however, so he really doesn't get to complain if people conclude this.

Also, after wearing Styrofoam cheese on his head instead of a miter, he has given up any expectation that anyone on any side of any issue will ever take him seriously again.

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #4 on:** September 02, 2012, 09:52:55 PM »

Quote from: Sigismund

I very much doubt that he meant anything heretical. If you asked him I am sure he does not see an equal sign between Got the Father's relationship to Isaac and His relationship to Jesus Christ.

He said what he said very poorly, however, so he really doesn't get to complain if people conclude this.

Also, after wearing Styrofoam cheese on his head instead of a miter, he has given up any expectation that anyone on any side of any issue will ever take him seriously again.

First some newcardinal in new church is saying that Jesus is just one of many, better than some - not as good as others, and here on this forum we have Sigismund professing a belief in an unknown deity that he calls "Got"...

Telesphorus · « **Reply #5 on:** September 03, 2012, 01:06:41 AM »

I don't understand why some Catholics are willfully blind to this sort of thing.

It's very disturbing.

Nadir · « **Reply #6 on:** September 03, 2012, 04:20:42 AM »

I believe in God the Father Almighty, creator of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ His only Son Our Lord......

Hobbledehoy · « **Reply #7 on:** September 03, 2012, 05:20:29 AM »

Quote from: Nadir

Quote
"Almighty God, Father of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jesus."

definitely sounds like a laundry list of God the Father's sons, and seems to put Our Blessed Lord on an equal footing, or possibly even below in rank than the other brothers. It seems to me that Dolan is trying to please the judaics in the audience.

It certainly seems that way, as contextualized by the theoretical and political trajectory that the Johannine-Pauline structures have followed and which had served as its very foundation.

To me, at least, one would be able to label such phraseology as "offensive to pious ears" without rashness, especially in this modern age contextualized by the above-mentioned political orientation towards the carnal and false Sion, principally through the false syncretism that compromises the very nature of the divine revelation that the cited "invocation" supposedly defends or illustrates.

It would be, for example, as if one prayed to St. Mary Magdalene thusly: "Sancta Maria Magdalena, meretrix, ora pro nobis." The sacred Magdalene was indeed a Penitent, but it is grossly obscene to mention her former transgressions whilst praying for her celestial patronage: especially since by divine charity she has been co-equated unto the heavenly choir of Virgins, as Pope St. Gregory the Great preached in one of his Whitsuntide Homilies.

Although it is true, and a testimony to the perfect humanity of the Word Incarnate and to the fidelity of God in fulfilling the oracles of the Patriarchs and Prophets of sacred yore as found in Holy Writ, to say that Our Lord descends from the Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob by means of the virginal maternity of Mary Most Holy: it is, however, unbecoming (to say the least) to phrase this in such wise so as to co-equate the only-begotten of the Eternal Father, co-equal unto Him as one God in the unity of the Holy Ghost, to these same Patriarchs.

The divine filialiton of Eternal Word and the adoption of grace whereby the Patriarchs were justified by the future merits of the Redeemer seem to be confused in the wording of this "invocation." The very nature of the hypostatic union of the divine nature eternally engendered by the heavenly Father and immaculate human nature from the chaste womb of the ever-Virgin Mother in the divine Person of Our Lord is thereby obscured: and occasions of heresies or errors proximate to heresy are unnecessarily and rashly brought about, in extreme prejudice against the faithful who are already so confused by the present state of the Church as it is.

This is why a Catholic should find the query of the original poster most disconcerting:

Quote

My question is, how is saying that God is Jesus' Father in any way heretical or blasphemous?

It is disconcerting because a century ago a Catholic would never have even thought of positing such a query. Leave it to the modernists to find a way to debase and profane the lexicon of sacred doctrine and Holy Writ: and surely they have found it.

alaric · « **Reply #8 on:** September 03, 2012, 06:21:19 AM »

Quote from: Nadir

Quote
"Almighty God, Father of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jesus."

definitely sounds like a laundry list of God the Father's sons, and seems to put Our Blessed Lord on an equal footing, or possibly even below in rank than the other brothers. It seems to me that Dolan is trying to please the judaics in the audience.

You're damn right that's the case.

Dolan is just placating the Jєωs and those Republican twits who serve them and beg for their support in order to defeat the other party that the liberal Jєωs support that now run the WH.

This is so A-typical of the cowtowing and groveling by Christian politicians and clergy in order to graner the "Jєωιѕн Vote" which really means Jєωιѕн money from lobby groups like AIPAC than doesn't give a damn about Christ or America.

Really, what a way to phrase it, Jesus is now reduced to nothing but a mere "brother" to the O.T. Patriarchs, God forbid one of the highest members of the RCC in America actually avow Jesus's divine nature, why that would just "offend" those in the audience that don't believe it. Why didn't he just throw "Mohamed and Buddha" in there as well, I mean God is their father too?

This kind of stuff sometimes makes me sick to be a Catholic, even a Christian these days, Dolan is nothing but another tool for the Judaics in a room full of them. Too bad hurricane "Issac" (How ironic) didn't gain steam and take out the whole lot of them, now that would be divine intervention.

TKGS · « **Reply #9 on:** September 03, 2012, 06:54:45 AM »

Quote from: Sigismund

I very much doubt that he meant anything heretical.

Isn't that the point with Modernists?

Modernists have a habit of saying things that can be understood in multiple ways. Catholics try to give the benefit of the doubt at first, but when these things happen over and over again, it is no longer possible to do so.

We should remember that this was not a spontaneious prayer made up on the spot while he was standing before a large audience and possibly a little nervous. This was a prepared text that he read. He considered his words carefully and chose a formula that is clearly objectionable by placing our Lord in a series where He clearly does not belong but could still be considered orthodox according to the grammatical construction of the phrase.

I am perplexed as to how a faithful Catholic can defend him.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #10 on:** September 03, 2012, 07:14:17 AM »

Someone who used the same expression is that awful character George Weigel.

There's absolutely nothing innocent about it, and no possible innocent intention behind it. We need to be careful not to give these people "reasonable doubt" when there is none.

When we say God is Our Father, it does not mean we are God's only begotten son.

The failure to distinguish here is intentional blasphemy.

alaric · « **Reply #11 on:** September 03, 2012, 07:21:32 AM »

Quote from: TKGS

Quote from: Sigismund
I very much doubt that he meant anything heretical.

Isn't that the point with Modernists?

Modernists have a habit of saying things that can be understood in multiple ways. Catholics try to give the benefit of the doubt at first, but when these things happen over and over again, it is no longer possible to do so.

We should remember that this was not a spontaneious prayer made up on the spot while he was standing before a large audience and possibly a little nervous. This was a prepared text that he read. He considered his words carefully and chose a formula that is clearly objectionable by placing our Lord in a series where He clearly does not belong but could still be considered orthodox according to the grammatical construction of the phrase.
I am perplexed as to how a faithful Catholic can defend him.

Very true.

statements like this don't just "happen", Dolan and his PR people all get together and the first thing they talk about is how they do not offend all the other Christian denominations and unbelievers in the room, but most of all, our Jєωιѕн "brothers" whom we are trying consolidate in our "big tent".

I believe nothing offends nonChristians more than the divinity of Christ's nature, that's it, that's the sticking point they can't get around so they always come around to the "man" Jesus, it's so much more safe and convienant, especially for catholic cardinals.

How quickly they forget it is written in Holy Scripture that the name Jesus is written above every other name and one day that all......ALL will bow down and declare Jesus is Lord. Someday Dolan, his PC buddies and Jєωιѕн "friends" will be reminded of this.

CathMomof7 · « **Reply #12 on:** September 03, 2012, 11:17:45 AM »

Quote from: Sigismund

I very much doubt that he meant anything heretical. If you asked him I am sure he does not see an equal sign between Got the Father's relationship to Isaac and His relationship to Jesus Christ.

He said what he said very poorly, however, so he really doesn't get to complain if people conclude this.

Also, after wearing Styrofoam cheese on his head instead of a miter, he has given up any expectation that anyone on any side of any issue will ever take him seriously again.

A truly Catholic cleric would have begun a prayer similar to this:

Almighty God, Father of His only-begotten Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, and also the Father of the Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.....

However, the New Church is always apologizing that Jesus Christ is indeed Our Lord and King of all Nations. They deny Him and His Kingship to please the Jєωs and the Freemasons. They deny Him to please the un-believers and the pagans. They deny Him because they do not believe.

This is not a secret. Those who remain in the New Church do so to the peril of their own soul.

What did Our Lord Jesus Christ say about those who deny Him? "But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in Heaven."

May God have mercy!

Sigismund · « **Reply #13 on:** September 03, 2012, 07:01:07 PM »

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

Quote from: Sigismund
I very much doubt that he meant anything heretical. If you asked him I am sure he does not see an equal sign between Got the Father's relationship to Isaac and His relationship to Jesus Christ.

He said what he said very poorly, however, so he really doesn't get to complain if people conclude this.

Also, after wearing Styrofoam cheese on his head instead of a miter, he has given up any expectation that anyone on any side of any issue will ever take him seriously again.

First some newcardinal in new church is saying that Jesus is just one of many, better than some - not as good as others, and here on this forum we have Sigismund professing a belief in an unknown deity that he calls "Got"...

Hey, I am a lousy typist. But only a material lousy typist, not a formal one. :smile:

I up thumbed your post too, Captain. I can't imagine why anyone would down thumb it.

Sigismund · « **Reply #14 on:** September 03, 2012, 07:03:38 PM »

Quote from: TKGS

Quote from: Sigismund
I very much doubt that he meant anything heretical.

Isn't that the point with Modernists?

Modernists have a habit of saying things that can be understood in multiple ways. Catholics try to give the benefit of the doubt at first, but when these things happen over and over again, it is no longer possible to do so.

We should remember that this was not a spontaneious prayer made up on the spot while he was standing before a large audience and possibly a little nervous. This was a prepared text that he read. He considered his words carefully and chose a formula that is clearly objectionable by placing our Lord in a series where He clearly does not belong but could still be considered orthodox according to the grammatical construction of the phrase.

I am perplexed as to how a faithful Catholic can defend him.

Yeah. He is a gladhanding twit. I don't know why I even tried to defend him.