At the risk of you’re soul choose to ignore this

[QUOTE]The Swamp of Subjective Sentimentality

June 29, 2015 by Fr. Dwight Longenecker

A friend commented about the same sex controversy saying that he has family members who are gay and they are furious with the Catholic church saying, “Who are they to define marriage?”

In discussing the problem we observed that most Americans are now so enswamped by subjective sentimentalism that they cannot conceive of someone having moral values that are given by an outside source of authority.[/QUOTE]

I would like to address this position as clearly and as briefly as possible [by me that is].

CHOOSE TO IGNORE IT AT THE PERIL OF YOU’RE SOUL!

THE “CATHOLIC CHURCH DID NOT DEFINE MARRIAGE; NO! GOD HIMSELF DID AND THEN APPOINTED PETER AND HIS SUCCESSORS TO “Teach “all” of his truths”

Either God is in charge or we are, and it seems evident for many, that they assumed [usurped is more accurate], this responsibility for themselves; with NO understanding of the consequences of their foolish choice. TIME WILL TELL AND TEACH.

Matthew 10: 1-8

[1] And having called his twelve disciples together, he gave them power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of diseases, and all manner of infirmities. [2] And the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, [3] James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the publican, and James the son of Alpheus, and Thaddeus, [4] Simon the Cananean, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him. [5] These twelve Jesus sent: commanding them, saying: Go ye not into the way of the Gentiles, and into the city of the Samaritans enter ye not. [6] But go ye rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. [7] And going, preach, saying: The kingdom of heaven is at hand. [8] [YOU!] Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out devils: freely have you received, freely give

Matthew 16:15-19

[15] Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am?

[16] Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God[17] And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven[18] And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock [YOU PETER] I will build my church, [singular] and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it[19]And I will give to thee [YOU PETER] [all of]  the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou [YOU PETER] shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou [YOU PETER] shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.” Amen!

John 17: 14-26

[14] I have given them thy word, and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world; as I also am not of the world. [15] I pray not that thou shouldst take them out of the world, but that thou shouldst keep them from evil.

[16] They are not of the world, as I also am not of the world. [17] Sanctify them in truth. Thy word is truth[18] As thou hast sent me into the world, I also have sent THEM! into the world. [19] And for THEM do I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth. [20] And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me; [21] That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. [22] And the glory which thou hast given me, I have given to THEM; that they may be one, as we also are one: [23] I in THEM, and thou in me; that they may be made perfect in one: and the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast also loved me. [24] Father, I will that where I am, they also whom thou hast given me may be with me; that they may see my glory which thou hast given me, because thou hast loved me before the creation of the world. [25] Just Father, the world hath not known thee; but I have known thee: and these have known that thou hast sent me. [26] And I have made known thy name to THEM, and will make it known; that the love wherewith thou hast loved me, may be in THEM, and I in them.”

[No other church, faith or religion has Christ Himself as the warranty of their teaching HIS singular truths [THAT MY FRIENDS IS THE REASON; THE AUTHORITY AND THE CLEAR MANDATE FORM JESUS HIMSELF TO “DEFINE MARRIAGE”]

Genesis 1:27-28

[27] And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them. [28] [***] And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and all living creatures that move upon the earth.”

Explained by the Douay bible [***] verse 28:  Increase and multiply”: This is not a precept, as some Protestant controvertists would have it, but a blessing, rendering them fruitful; for God had said the same words to the fishes, and birds, (ver. 22) who were incapable of receiving a precept”

The negation of the ability to procreate is a negation of God’s plan for marriage; and it is HE, God who defines it. Amen!

Matthew 28:16-20

16] And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. [17] And seeing him they adored: but some doubted. [18] And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power [**] is given to me in heaven and in earth. [19] Going therefore, teach YOU! all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [20]Teaching them to observe ALL things whatsoever I have commanded YOU!: and behold I am with YOU! all days, even to the consummation of the world.

[** explained by the Douay Bible] [18] “All power”: See here the warrant and commission of the apostles and their successors, the bishops and pastors of Christ’s church. He received from his Father all power in heaven and in earth: and in virtue of this power, he sends them (even as his Father sent him, St. John 20. 21) to teach and disciple, not one, but all nations; and instruct them in all truths: and that he may assist them effectually in the execution of this commission, he promises to be with them, not for three or four hundred years only, but all days, even to the consummation of the world. How then could the Catholic Church ever go astray; having always with her pastors, as is here promised, Christ himself, who is the way, the truth, and the life. St. John 14.

May God Guide YOU to HIS Truth!

Patrick

Advertisements

“Peter” whats all the fuss about?

The Vicar of Christ:

The papacy is the term for the office and the authority of the pope of Rome, the successor to Saint Peter as bishop of Rome and head of the universal Church. Also called “the pontiff,” “the Holy Father,” and “the Vicar of Christ,” the pope is the spiritual head of all Christendom and a visible symbol of unity in the Church.

First Among Equals

The understanding of the papacy has changed over time, as the Church has come to recognize the importance of the role. Once regarded simply as the primus inter pares, the “first among equals,” the pope of Rome, by virtue of being the successor to Saint Peter, the first of the apostles, was seen as worthy of the greatest respect of any of the bishops of the Church. From this emerged the idea of the pope as arbiter of disputes, and very early in Church history, other bishops began appealing to Rome as the center of orthodoxy in doctrinal arguments.

The seeds for this development were there from the beginning, however. In Matthew 16:15, Christ asked his disciples: “Who do you say that I am?” When Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,” Jesus told Peter that this had been revealed to him not by man, by God the Father.

Peter’s given name was Simon, but Christ told him, “You are Peter”—a Greek word which means “rock”—“and upon this rock I will build my Church. And the gates of Hell will not prevail against it.” From this comes the Latin phrase Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia: Wherever Peter is, there is the Church.

The Role of the Pope:

That visible symbol of unity is an assurance to the Catholic faithful that they are members of the one holy catholic and apostolic Church founded by Christ. But the pope is also the chief administrator of the Church. He appoints bishops and the cardinals, who will elect his successor. He is the final arbiter of both administrative and doctrinal disputes.

While doctrinal matters are normally resolved by an ecumenical council (a meeting of all of the bishops of the Church), such a council can only be called by the pope, and its decisions are not official until confirmed by the pope.

Papal Infallibility:

One such council, the First Vatican Council of 1870, recognized the doctrine of papal infallibility. While some non-Catholic Christians regard this as a novelty, this doctrine is simply a full understanding of Christ’s response to Peter, that it was God the Father who revealed to him that Jesus was the Christ.

Papal infallibility does not mean that the pope can never do anything wrong. However, when, like Peter, he is speaking on matters of faith and morals and intends to instruct the whole Church by defining a doctrine, the Church believes that he is protected by the Holy Spirit and cannot speak in error.

The Invocation of Papal Infallibility:

The actual invocation of papal infallibility has been very limited. In recent times, only two popes have declared doctrines of the Church, both having to do with the Virgin Mary: Pius IX, in 1854, declared theImmaculate Conception of Mary (the doctrine that Mary was conceived without the stain of Original Sin); and Pius XII, in 1950, declared that Mary had been assumed into Heaven bodily at the end of her life (the doctrine of the Assumption).

The Papacy in the Modern World:
Despite concerns about the doctrine of papal infallibility, both some Protestants and some Eastern Orthodox have expressed, in recent years, a growing interest in the institution of the papacy. They recognize the desirability of a visible head of all Christians, and they have a deep respect for the moral force of the office, especially as exercised by such recent popes as John Paul II and Benedict XVI.

Still, the papacy is one of the greatest stumbling blocks to the reunification of the Christian churches. Because it is essential to the nature of the Catholic Church, having been instituted by Christ himself, it cannot be abandoned. Instead, Christians of good will of all denominations need to engage in a dialogue to come to a deeper understanding of how the papacy was meant to unite us, rather than divide us.

From Catholic.com website:

Peter and the Papacy

There is ample evidence in the New Testament that Peter was first in authority among the apostles. Whenever they were named, Peter headed the list (Matt. 10:1-4, Mark 3:16-19, Luke 6:14-16, Acts 1:13); sometimes the apostles were referred to as “Peter and those who were with him” (Luke 9:32). Peter was the one who generally spoke for the apostles (Matt. 18:21, Mark 8:29, Luke 12:41, John 6:68-69), and he figured in many of the most dramatic scenes (Matt. 14:28-32, Matt. 17:24-27, Mark 10:23-28). On Pentecost it was Peter who first preached to the crowds (Acts 2:14-40), and he worked the first healing in the Church age (Acts 3:6-7). It is Peter’s faith that will strengthen his brethren (Luke 22:32) and Peter is given Christ’s flock to shepherd (John 21:17). An angel was sent to announce the resurrection to Peter (Mark 16:7), and the risen Christ first appeared to Peter (Luke 24:34). He headed the meeting that elected Matthias to replace Judas (Acts 1:13-26), and he received the first converts (Acts 2:41). He inflicted the first punishment (Acts 5:1-11), and excommunicated the first heretic (Acts 8:18-23). He led the first council in Jerusalem (Acts 15), and announced the first dogmatic decision (Acts 15:7-11). It was to Peter that the revelation came that Gentiles were to be baptized and accepted as Christians (Acts 10:46-48).

Peter the Rock

Peter’s preeminent position among the apostles was symbolized at the very beginning of his relationship with Christ. At their first meeting, Christ told Simon that his name would thereafter be Peter, which translates as “Rock” (John 1:42). The startling thing was that—aside from the single time that Abraham is called a “rock” (Hebrew: Tsur; Aramaic: Kepha) in Isaiah 51:1-2—in the Old Testament only God was called a rock. The word rock was not used as a proper name in the ancient world. If you were to turn to a companion and say, “From now on your name is Asparagus,” people would wonder: Why Asparagus? What is the meaning of it? What does it signify? Indeed, why call Simon the fisherman “Rock”? Christ was not given to meaningless gestures, and neither were the Jews as a whole when it came to names. Giving a new name meant that the status of the person was changed, as when Abram’s name was changed to Abraham (Gen.17:5), Jacob’s to Israel (Gen. 32:28), Eliakim’s to Joakim (2 Kgs. 23:34), or the names of the four Hebrew youths—Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah to Belteshazzar, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego (Dan. 1:6-7). But no Jew had ever been called “Rock.” The Jews would give other names taken from nature, such as Deborah (“bee,” Gen. 35:8), and Rachel (“ewe,” Gen. 29:16), but never “Rock.” In the New Testament James and John were nicknamed Boanerges, meaning “Sons of Thunder,” by Christ, but that was never regularly used in place of their original names, and it certainly was not given as a new name. But in the case of Simon-bar-Jonah, his new name Kephas (Greek: Petros) definitely replaced the old.

Promises to Peter

When he first saw Simon, “Jesus looked at him, and said, ‘So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas (which means Peter)’” (John 1:42). The word Cephas is merely the transliteration of the Aramaic Kepha into Greek. Later, after Peter and the other disciples had been with Christ for some time, they went to Caesarea Philippi, where Peter made his profession of faith: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:16). Jesus told him that this truth was specially revealed to him, and then he solemnly reiterated: “And I tell you, you are Peter” (Matt. 16:18). To this was added the promise that the Church would be founded, in some way, on Peter (Matt. 16:18).

Then two important things were told the apostle. “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matt. 16:19). Here Peter was singled out for the authority that provides for the forgiveness of sins and the making of disciplinary rules. Later the apostles as a whole would be given similar power [Matt.18:18], but here Peter received it in a special sense.

Peter alone was promised something else also: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 16:19). In ancient times, keys were the hallmark of authority. A walled city might have one great gate; and that gate had one great lock, worked by one great key. To be given the key to the city—an honor that exists even today, though its import is lost—meant to be given free access to and authority over the city. The city to which Peter was given the keys was the heavenly city itself. This symbolism for authority is used elsewhere in the Bible (Is. 22:22, Rev. 1:18).

Finally, after the resurrection, Jesus appeared to his disciples and asked Peter three times, “Do you love me?” (John 21:15-17). In repentance for his threefold denial, Peter gave a threefold affirmation of love. Then Christ, the Good Shepherd (John 10:11, 14), gave Peter the authority he earlier had promised: “Feed my sheep” (John 21:17). This specifically included the other apostles, since Jesus asked Peter, “Do you love me more than these?” (John 21:15), the word “these” referring to the other apostles who were present (John 21:2). Thus was completed the prediction made just before Jesus and his followers went for the last time to the Mount of Olives.

Immediately before his denials were predicted, Peter was told, “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again [after the denials], strengthen your brethren” (Luke 22:31-32). It was Peter who Christ prayed would have faith that would not fail and that would be a guide for the others; and his prayer, being perfectly efficacious, was sure to be fulfilled.

Who is the rock?

Now take a closer look at the key verse: “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church” (Matt. 16:18). Disputes about this passage have always been related to the meaning of the term “rock.” To whom, or to what, does it refer? Since Simon’s new name of Peter itself means rock, the sentence could be rewritten as: “You are Rock and upon this rock I will build my Church.” The play on words seems obvious, but commentators wishing to avoid what follows from this—namely the establishment of the papacy—have suggested that the word rock could not refer to Peter but must refer to his profession of faith or to Christ.

From the grammatical point of view, the phrase “this rock” must relate back to the closest noun. Peter’s profession of faith (“You are the Christ, the Son of the living God”) is two verses earlier, while his name, a proper noun, is in the immediately preceding clause.

As an analogy, consider this artificial sentence: “I have a car and a truck, and it is blue.” Which is blue? The truck, because that is the noun closest to the pronoun “it.” This is all the more clear if the reference to the car is two sentences earlier, as the reference to Peter’s profession is two sentences earlier than the term rock.

Another alternative

The previous argument also settles the question of whether the word refers to Christ himself, since he is mentioned within the profession of faith. The fact that he is elsewhere, by a different metaphor, called the cornerstone (Eph. 2:20, 1 Pet. 2:4-8) does not disprove that here Peter is the foundation. Christ is naturally the principal and, since he will be returning to heaven, the invisible foundation of the Church that he will establish; but Peter is named by him as the secondary and, because he and his successors will remain on earth, the visible foundation. Peter can be a foundation only because Christ is the cornerstone.

In fact, the New Testament contains five different metaphors for the foundation of the Church (Matt. 16:18, 1 Cor. 3:11, Eph. 2:20, 1 Pet. 2:5-6, Rev. 21:14). One cannot take a single metaphor from a single passage and use it to twist the plain meaning of other passages. Rather, one must respect and harmonize the different passages, for the Church can be described as having different foundations since the word foundation can be used in different senses.

Look at the Aramaic

Opponents of the Catholic interpretation of Matthew 16:18 sometimes argue that in the Greek text the name of the apostle is Petros, while “rock” is rendered as petra. They claim that the former refers to a small stone, while the latter refers to a massive rock; so, if Peter was meant to be the massive rock, why isn’t his name Petra?

Note that Christ did not speak to the disciples in Greek. He spoke Aramaic, the common language of Palestine at that time. In that language the word for rock is kepha, which is what Jesus called him in everyday speech (note that in John 1:42 he was told, “You will be called Cephas”). What Jesus said in Matthew 16:18 was: “You are Kepha, and upon this kepha I will build my Church.”

When Matthew’s Gospel was translated from the original Aramaic to Greek, there arose a problem which did not confront the evangelist when he first composed his account of Christ’s life. In Aramaic the word kepha has the same ending whether it refers to a rock or is used as a man’s name. In Greek, though, the word for rock, petra, is feminine in gender. The translator could use it for the second appearance of kepha in the sentence, but not for the first because it would be inappropriate to give a man a feminine name. So he put a masculine ending on it, and hence Peter became Petros.

Furthermore, the premise of the argument against Peter being the rock is simply false. In first century Greek the words petros and petra were synonyms. They had previously possessed the meanings of “small stone” and “large rock” in some early Greek poetry, but by the first century this distinction was gone, as Protestant Bible scholars admit (see D. A. Carson’s remarks on this passage in the Expositor’s Bible Commentary, [Grand Rapids: Zondervan Books]).

Some of the effect of Christ’s play on words was lost when his statement was translated from the Aramaic into Greek, but that was the best that could be done in Greek. In English, like Aramaic, there is no problem with endings; so an English rendition could read: “You are Rock, and upon this rock I will build my church.”

Consider another point: If the rock really did refer to Christ (as some claim, based on 1 Cor. 10:4, “and the Rock was Christ” though the rock there was a literal, physical rock), why did Matthew leave the passage as it was? In the original Aramaic, and in the English which is a closer parallel to it than is the Greek, the passage is clear enough. Matthew must have realized that his readers would conclude the obvious from “Rock . . . rock.”

If he meant Christ to be understood as the rock, why didn’t he say so? Why did he take a chance and leave it up to Paul to write a clarifying text? This presumes, of course, that 1 Corinthians was written after Matthew’s Gospel; if it came first, it could not have been written to clarify it.

The reason, of course, is that Matthew knew full well that what the sentence seemed to say was just what it really was saying. It was Simon, weak as he was, who was chosen to become the rock and thus the first link in the chain of the papacy.

Walled-In-Cities; Christ, Peter and the significance of the KEY”S to heaven

My dear friends in Christ, “WALLED IN City” is precisely the analogy that Christ had in mind in appointing Peter to Head and Govern His New Church, and to whom He entrust all of the Key’s to heavens access.

Jerusalem was such a city at the time of Peters appointment as Christ “VISAR” and was given unlimited powers of Governance, answerable only to and DIRECTLY to Christ Himself.

Matthew 16:15-19 [16] Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. [17] And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. [18] And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19]And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

http://www.bible-history.com/links.php?cat=39&sub=433&cat_name=Manners+%26+Customs&subcat_name=City+Walls

Manners & Customs: City Walls
City Walls in the Ancient World

Ancient Walls The Oriental Town or City WALLS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CITY AND VILLAGE, AS TO WALLS. In early Old Testament times the villages were smaller places of abode without walls around them, whereas the cities or towns were larger places that had walls around them. The Mosaic Law made such a distinction: “If a man sell a dwelling house in a walled city” (Leviticus 25:29). “But the houses of the villages which have no wall round about them” (Leviticus 25:31). The villages were often located near a fortified city upon which they were more or less dependent. Thus the city was the metropolis of the villages. We often read in the Bible of “cities and their villages,” Some speak of the expression: “cities and their daughters,” indicating a mother-city, and her dependent villages surrounding her (cf. Joshua 15:45 and 17:11).1 Walls a part of city fortifications. In Bible times most cities were walled and fortified for protection against an enemy. Those living in a city without walls would be interested in having walls built for them. Often when the Bible says that a certain character built a city, what is meant is not that a new site was located and a new city was built, but rather that a city already inhabited was supplied with walls entirely around its confines.2 It was thus that Solomon built “Bethhoron the upper, and Beth-horon the nether, fenced cities, with walls, gates, and bars” (II Chronicles 8:5). [Manners And Customs of Bible Lands]

http://www.baptistbiblebelievers.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=A5NFC4DIpHw%3d&tabid=232&mid=762

City Walls in Naves Topical Bible Of Bashan, destroyed by the Israelites De 3:5,6 -Of Jericho Jos 2:15; 6 -Of Jerusalem See JERUSALEM -Of Babylon Jer 51:44 -Broad Jer 51:58 -Of Beth-shan 1Sa 31:10 -Of Rabbah 2Sa 11:20 -Of Abel 2Sa 20:15,21 -Houses built upon Jos 2:15 -Double 2Ki 25:4; Isa 22:11 -Sentinels on See WATCHMAN -FIGURATIVE Of the new Jerusalem Re 21:12,14,17-21
http://www.bible-history.com/naves/W/WALLS,+OF+THE+CITIES/

Walls in Easton’s Bible Dictionary Cities were surrounded by walls, as distinguished from “unwalled villages” (Ezek. 38:11; Lev. 25:29-34). They were made thick and strong (Num. 13:28; Deut. 3:5). Among the Jews walls were built of stone, some of those in the temple being of great size (1 Kings 6:7; 7:9-12; 20:30; Mark 13:1, 2). The term is used metaphorically of security and safety (Isa. 26:1; 60:18; Rev. 21:12-20). (See FENCE ¯T0001321.)
http://www.bible-history.com/eastons/W/Wall/

http://www.bible-history.com/links.php?cat=39&sub=434&cat_name=Manners+%26+Customs&subcat_name=City+Gates

Manners & Customs: City Gates
City Gates in the Ancient World

Ancient Gates Character of gates. The gates of an Oriental city were of course connected with the walls; nevertheless, they were in a sense a structure by themselves. They were usually made of wood or stone, or wood that had been armored with metal. The Psalmist speaks of gates of brass (copper), and gates of iron (Psalm 107:16). Often they were two-leaved (Isaiah 45:1), and were provided with heavy locks and bars (I Samuel 23:7). Sometimes a city or town had two walls and therefore two gates with a space between them. A sentinel was stationed in the tower of the first gate. When David was at Mahanaim awaiting the result of the battle with Absalom, Scripture says: “And David sat between the two gates: and the watchman went up to the roof over the gate unto the wall, and lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold a man running alone” (II Samuel 18:24). This space between the gates was used for many purposes. [Manners And Customs of Bible Lands]
http://www.baptistbiblebelievers.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=A5NFC4DIpHw%3d&tabid=232&mid=762

Gate in Easton’s Bible Dictionary (1.) Of cities, as of Jerusalem (Jer. 37:13; Neh. 1:3; 2:3; 3:3), of Sodom (Gen. 19:1), of Gaza (Judg. 16:3). (2.) Of royal palaces (Neh. 2:8). (3.) Of the temple of Solomon (1 Kings 6:34, 35; 2 Kings 18:16); of the holy place (1 Kings 6:31, 32; Ezek. 41:23, 24); of the outer courts of the temple, the beautiful gate (Acts 3:2). (4.) Tombs (Matt. 27:60). (5.) Prisons (Acts 12:10; 16:27). (6.) Caverns (1 Kings 19:13). (7.) Camps (Ex. 32:26, 27; Heb. 13:12). The materials of which gates were made were, (1.) Iron and brass (Ps. 107:16; Isa. 45:2; Acts 12:10). (2.) Stones and pearls (Isa. 54:12; Rev. 21:21). (3.) Wood (Judg. 16:3) probably. At the gates of cities courts of justice were frequently held, and hence “judges of the gate” are spoken of (Deut. 16:18; 17:8; 21:19; 25:6, 7, etc.). At the gates prophets also frequently delivered their messages (Prov. 1:21; 8:3; Isa. 29:21; Jer. 17:19, 20; 26:10). Criminals were punished without the gates (1 Kings 21:13; Acts 7:59). By the “gates of righteousness” we are probably to understand those of the temple (Ps. 118:19). “The gates of hell” (R.V., “gates of Hades”) Matt. 16:18, are generally interpreted as meaning the power of Satan, but probably they may mean the power of death, denoting that the Church of Christ shall never die.

http://www.bible-history.com/eastons/G/Gate/

Wanna be a Friend of Jesus? Another I AM A Catholic Lesson by Pat Miron

Wanna be a “friend” of Jesus?
Another I AM a Catholic Lesson
by Pat Miron

John.15:14 “You are my friends if you do what I command you.”

ACTS 20:28-30 [Catholic Douay Bible]
“Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. [29] I know that, after my departure, ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock. [30] And of your own selves shall arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.”

If we truly what to be a friend of Jesus it seems both reasonable and prudent to ask oneself “what must I do to make it happen”; knowing that it is not all what I do, but very importantly, what Jesus would have me do, and what Jesus will permit me to do, and what Jesus will do for me.

One of the most amazing facts that can be known to mankind, is the fact that Jesus desires to be a “friend of ours”, much more ardently, much more zealously than we seek Him.
Matt.16: 24 “Then Jesus told his disciples, “If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me”

Friendship always demands a price. It has been said that Cf “we are more likely to be ‘hurt’ by our friends than by our casual acquaintances.” This might be because it is normal to spend more time with those we like, and or, we tend to be more open and frank with these personal relationships, or that we just spend more time with our friends and therefore are more likely to mess up?. It’s not unusual for dear friends to be made accountable for the decisions effecting both parties. And so it is with any relationship between us and Jesus. Friends “ask” and perhaps even demand certain things as the conditional price of their friendship.

Jesus, however, seems to have a “strange” way; an unusual condition for “friendship” with Him: Rev.3:19 “Such as I love, I rebuke and chastise. Be zealous therefore, and do penance. “

Jesus shares here a couple of demands on the price of friendship with Him: IF we are going to decide to follow Him” it will be on His terms; His conditions; His teachings in total, It can be no other way.

Lk. 9: 22-25 “Saying: The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the ancients and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and the third day rise again. And he said to all: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life, shall lose it; for he that shall lose his life for my sake, shall save it. For what is a man advantaged, if he gain the whole world, and lose himself, and cast away himself?”

From the examples of Noah, the Egyptian plagues, Sodom and Gomorrah, King David, and the three-time destruction of the Synagogue in Jerusalem, making the Hebrew Nation “a captive state;” of the Egyptians, the Babylonians, and the Roman’s; and then being called back by God to His Friendship; the example of Peter who denied Christ three times and was forgiven and granted “all of the Key’s to Christ Kingdom” after recanting in deep sorrow and contrition models for us, what Christ demands IF we ARE to be His Friend.

John 21: 7-17 “That disciple therefore whom Jesus loved, said to Peter: It is the Lord. Simon Peter, when he heard that it was the Lord, girt his coat about him, (for he was naked,) and cast himself into the sea. But the other disciples came in the ship, (for they were not far from the land, but as it were two hundred cubits,) dragging the net with fishes. As soon then as they came to land, they saw hot coals lying, and a fish laid thereon, and bread. Jesus saith to them: Bring hither of the fishes which you have now caught. Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to land, full of great fishes, one hundred and fifty-three. And although there were so many, the net was not broken. Jesus saith to them: Come, and dine. And none of them who were at meat, durst ask him: Who art thou? knowing that it was the Lord. And Jesus cometh and taketh bread, and giveth them, and fish in like manner. This is now the third time that Jesus was manifested to his disciples, after he was risen from the dead. When therefore they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter: Simon son of John, lovest thou me more than these? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs. …He saith to him again: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs. … He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep.”

Luke 12:4-5 “I tell you, my friends, do not fear those who kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I will warn you whom to fear: fear him who, after he has killed, has power to cast into hell; yes, I tell you, fear him

From the book: Jesus, King of Love by Fr. Mateo Crawley-Boevey.

“Sanctity is Jesus assimilated.”

“We are greatly mistaken if we think the value of an act depends on the act itself. It is worth only the love we put into it.”

“There are three loves which really constitute but one, namely: Love of the Eucharist, Love of the Cross and Love of Souls. You cannot separate them, nor can you have one to the exclusion of the others.”

“Opposition has always been and ever will be the divine seal upon all works…Such storms have never ruined a work dear to God, when the thoughts of the apostle were inspired by the great spirit of faith.”

In speaking of many Christians attitude toward Jesus and faith: “Remain in Your Tabernacle, O Lord, that we may live our family life as we wish, without Your intruding too intimately upon it.”

“Love is not loved. We do not sufficiently preach the love of Jesus Christ, and yet this love is not weak sentimentality. It is a love full of fire and life!”

“Call to the Master, hearken to Him and you will witness resurrections even more marvelous than that of Lazarus and conversions as wonderful and touching as that of Magdalen.
Received from: https://danardoyle.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/images-11.jpeg&h=252

[QUOTE]We are chosen by Christ to be His friends! How amazing is that! Being His friend means uniting our suffering in this life to His suffering. It means being different from most. It means being rejected sometimes. It means crucifying our self-will. On the flip side of that, we have assurance of His love, His mercy, His guidance, His strength..I can do all things through Christ who gives me strength! (Philippians 4:13) We can go out into the world with such confidence with Jesus as our strength. We must not draw back from our appointment by Christ – to “go and bear fruit that will remain.” This world is so thirsty for Him right now, and the world doesn’t even know it. It is so hungry, yet nothing it eats satisfies. We need to be bold witnesses of our Faith – of the Love of Christ that lives in our hearts! We also need to offer every suffering, every prayer for the conversion of souls! Let not one be lost, Dear Lord! “ [/QUOTE]

Love, even God’s love can be conditional. I MUST be careful here because God NEVER stops loving us, no matter who we are, where we are or what we are or what we have done; or perhaps failed to do. Such is the Love of God. BUT to be a FRIEND of Christ; that is where the conditions pop in. Towards the goal of developing true Friendship with Christ; He choose to found; to establish just His One True Church. Today’s Catholic Church [both historically and biblically provable], with just One Set of Faith beliefs [Ephesians 4:1-7], and to BOND this Friendship; Christ Instituted His Seven Sacraments as a direct means of the Grace man needs to “be holy as I AM Holy”[1 Peter 1:16]; from Known forgiveness of all of our Confessed sins; to Jesus actually being Present to us in Catholic Holy Communion; these gifts are LIGHTS to show us the way to the “Truth, the Way and the Life”: [John 14:16]. Jesus choose to have just One Church with One set of Faith beliefs to simplify man’s options and choices. With “just one” we can know if we are on the right path or not. So do we choose God’s way; or some other path? Do we CHOOSE Friendship with God; or choose to merely muse about it and do “it my way?” Do we REALLY desire Friendship with Christ? It has to be done HIS WAY!