Re: Vatican reaffirms the Catholic Church is the one true church
quote:
Thanks Knux. There is truth in what you say. In fact, getting everyone to agree in all areas on even scientific realities is impossible.
Thats very true.
quote:
I also agree that it is not necessary to agree on everything as truth when we are not certain of the truth, or if it really is just a matter of opinion (like whether the "Left Behind" movies are entertaining or not).
It is true not everybody agrees on matters of opinion. However, I am not so sure its a matter of "opinion" on Left Behind.
quote:
If we can agree on the Trinity and the Virgin Birth, why not on the reality of the Eucharist (for example)?
Because the matter of the exact nature of Christ's presense in Communion is not something I think the Holy Spirit intended to guide to exact specifics. The Holy Spirit guides, but the Spirit doesn't tell me "put the paper on top of the table and not the chair".
quote:
Either way, we must never lose hope, even if evidence is to the contrary. For example, I don't believe I'll ever see peace in my time because of human nature, but I still hope and work for it.
Of course.
--- Guilty people wear pumpkins for Landmine Awareness Day.
Re: Vatican reaffirms the Catholic Church is the one true church
quote:
Because the matter of the exact nature of Christ's presense in Communion is not something I think the Holy Spirit intended to guide to exact specifics. The Holy Spirit guides, but the Spirit doesn't tell me "put the paper on top of the table and not the chair".
That's a good point. But on what basis do you believe that? For example, when Christ's true nature was questioned with conflicting teachings, the Holy Spirit guided the church to a very specific understanding of the truth (true God and true man). When the relationship and nature of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit was questioned, the Holy Spirit guided the church to a very specific understanding (three Persons in one God). Very specific and almost technical, even.
Why not for other conflicting teachings that arise in the church, such as the Eucharist (is it a symbol, a spiritual presence in faith in bread, or the fully present Christ: Body, Soul, and Divinity)? Wouldn't that be consistent with what the Holy Spirit has done in the past?
Re: Vatican reaffirms the Catholic Church is the one true church it is true that not everyone agrees on matters of opinion;but when Fr Corapi preaches he makes a point of saying this is NOT Fr Corapi's opinion.
He passes to the faithful the doctrines of the Church.
He does note when it is his personal opinion.
Let's put it this way:Jesus didn't teach opinions.
I am certain that the message of salvation (His teachings)were to be handed down intact.You don't give someone a road map they can't follow and this is a Divine Plan to boot.
We also note scripture says two things;
1. the Holy Spirit will lead into ALL truth.
2. the Church is the pillar and bulwark(foundation)of truth.
Those have to count.
GB!~
p4p
Re: Vatican reaffirms the Catholic Church is the one true church
quote:
That's a good point. But on what basis do you believe that?
Many of the doctrines that churches debate over aren't: 1) something a begining believer is asked to believe; 2) many of the doctrines are built on phrases and small quotes that are debated in meaning.
quote:
For example, when Christ's true nature was questioned with conflicting teachings, the Holy Spirit guided the church to a very specific understanding of the truth (true God and true man).
Which is built on Gospel and Pauline texts for that understanding, yes.
quote:
Why not for other conflicting teachings that arise in the church, such as the Eucharist (is it a symbol, a spiritual presence in faith in bread, or the fully present Christ: Body, Soul, and Divinity)? Wouldn't that be consistent with what the Holy Spirit has done in the past?
No because the Bible doesn't get specific on the nature of Christ's presense. That comes down to the nature of the mind how to understand the physical and spiritual and that isn't talked about when discussing Communion.
--- Guilty people wear pumpkins for Landmine Awareness Day.
Re: Vatican reaffirms the Catholic Church is the one true church
quote:
Let's put it this way:Jesus didn't teach opinions.
I am certain that the message of salvation (His teachings)were to be handed down intact.You don't give someone a road map they can't follow and this is a Divine Plan to boot.
I don't disagree the message of salvation is to be intact. No problem here.
quote:
1. the Holy Spirit will lead into ALL truth.
2. the Church is the pillar and bulwark(foundation)of truth.
#1 as long as it deals with salvation and being Christian, I agree.
#2 Getting everybody to agree with that would be a little bit tougher
--- Guilty people wear pumpkins for Landmine Awareness Day.
Re: Vatican reaffirms the Catholic Church is the one true church
quote:
#2 Getting everybody to agree with that would be a little bit tougher
except that scripture says so.
We're probably not gonna get everyone 'on board' anyway...there's all kinds of stuff going on out there these days.Course it's probably the same ol rehashed.
Athiests,pagan,wiccans, heretics etc etc.
I can guarantee there is going to come a time when there won't be any fence sitters and that may be the time when the unity Jesus desired is going to be very attractive.That will ultimately (most likely)depend on faith in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
Finally,let's remember Jesus said to go into all nations and teach ALL that He taught.Not some,not part-not a little here and there.
ALL.Very important.
GB!~
p4p
Last edited by praying4patience, 8/14/2007, 9:22 pm
Re: Vatican reaffirms the Catholic Church is the one true church Hi Knux,
I appreciate your points, but disagree for the following reasons:
1. The concept of the Real Presence and the Eucharist is built on fundamental passages from the Gospel and Paul's first letter to the Corinthians.
2. Just as it doesn't get into the specifics of the Real Presence in the Eucharist, the Bible also doesn't get into the specifics on the nature of the Trinity and the Incarnation. Ecumenical Councils were required to do that because of false teachings that sprung up around false understandings of those details as the church sought to better understand these teachings.
The Councils clarified and explained to the level of detail that was required to protect Scriptural Truth. Understanding the Trinity and Incarnation as explained by the Councils required an understanding of the metaphysical concepts of "person" and "nature." That's one criticism of the doctrine of the Trinity by the new Arians and Nestorians.
Re: Vatican reaffirms the Catholic Church is the one true church I have edited the previous post to include other information:
quote:
Step back and breath calmy. Don't respond if your mind is stressful. Believe me, when I am stressed I can let my emotions get to me.
Stress has nothing to do with this. I'm not at all stressed.
quote:
The meaning is not the same. Don't change words and phrases in Catholic documents and claim they mean what you want.
Port, what I am trying to tell you is the words are synonyms and thus I was simply restating the obvious. To say I was changing the meaning is something some people refer to as "nitpicking". I did not change the meaning nor did I intend to.
Okay, you may mean by saying "Protestants don't have all of Christianity, " the same as what I mean by they are "lacking the fullness of truth". I am not disagreeing with this part. That was never in dispute to my knowledge. I am disagreeing that Protestants are not full or real Christians. The fact that they do not possess the fullness of truth does not render them less Christian is what I am saying. They are united to Christ by virtue of their baptism "In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirt."
quote:
If you are not persuaded by this, I'm done here.
Who says I wasn't persuaded?
Knux, I said IF you are not persuaded, not that you are not persuaded.
quote:
I've already said several times that I leave full unity to God. What is not possible for men to accomplish is possible with God. I fully support dialogue and I pray for God's will to be done.
And in no way did I contradict that.
And?
quote:
Your concept of unity is just not acceptable.
If that is what you think, so be it. Most Christians do wish for what you do. But then I always think if that is the type of union that would make God happy...to agree on all primary and secondary doctrine.
Thank you. Just as you are entitled to your idea of what should constitute unity, I am entitled to mine. Let me be clear just in case there is any doubt, that I fully support the Church's position that no one should ever be coerced against conscience to join the Catholic Church. By the same token, anyone who comes knocking on our door, is welcome.
quote:
I disagree with that. You want to Protestantize the Catholic Church. No thanks.
Thats incorrect. I have never sought that and thats a mischaracterization of what I said. To agree on basics doesn't mean each major branch disagrees on other doctrine and not continue to debate about it. Agreeing to the basics is the foundation to further dialogue.
Well isn't that the situation that we already have since you seem to think we are agreed on the basics? Trinity, Virgin birth, death and resurrection of the Lord, hypostatic union, etc? And we do utilize these areas of agreement to further dialogue. So from your perspective, what do we need to do beyond this to further unity? Recognize each other as equal branches of Christianity? Anything else?
quote:
quote: I don't accept that both can have errors. In your world, nobody has truth or can be certain there is truth.
Incorrect, that is not my world view.
How can it not be? If all positions may be wrong, then how is it possible to determine truth? Or are you saying that we can know all primary doctrines to be true but it's not possible to know if there is truth in secondary doctrines?
quote:
The basics are in the New Testament.
I would agree with that. But whose interpretation of the New Testament? The Catholic Church understands the Scriptures as giving authority to the Church as the pillar and foundation of truth; as establishing a hierarchy to teach with authority in Jesus' name, as Christ instituting seven Sacraments, Apostolic succession as necessary, etc.
quote:
Many basics were discarded in the 16th century and you want agreement in basics?
Thats funny. Basics discarded in the 16th century. Haha.
I'm not making a joke as you very well know. Nothing funny here. Sola Scriptura and sola fide were never basics of the Church, nor even the Eastern Orthodox and yet they are the foundations of "reformation" Christianity. The Church's authority was completely rejected during the so called reformation. The authority of the Church is pretty basic to us. That we are not justified by faith alone is also basic to Catholicism and Orthodoxy.
quote:
Conversions don't irk me, Port. Guess again. You are trying to label be as worrying about the issue, but you are the one expressing concern of not becoming Protestant. You are the one worried about it, not me.
Worried about what? I'm not converting to Protestantism and yet, I don't want to force anyone to remain Catholic against their own free will. I actually have more respect for those who leave, knowing and acknowledging that they cannot follow the tenets of the Church, than I do for those who stay and pick and choose what they will believe and what they will reject. I have every right to object to a concept of unity that I perceive to be tantamount to Protestantizing the Catholic Church, however, without it making me worried. I don't believe I accused you of being worried, but having an objection to conversions.
How many times have I stated that I leave full unity to God and that I firmly believe that no one should ever convert against his will or conscience? You, OTOH, are the one who made derogatory remarks about the Coming Home Network, which assists people in coming in to the Catholic Church.
You also indicated that you are the one seeking full unity without the necessity of anyone having to convert.
quote:
Your post about the Coming Home Network clearly displayed your hostility to conversions.
No, my beef is with organizations like that, not with conversions. Clearly, you are very mistaken.
Organizations like that? The CHN is not what you claim. They exist to help people who have decided to convert, people who knock on our door. They are not dragging anyone against their will into the Church. There was no deceit involved in that article about Luther just because you object to it. Dave Armstrong presented the truth. For some reason you appear to think people should not be given that particular truth. I could understand your complaint if the article was deceptive about Luther's convictions regarding Mary. But it wasn't.
quote:
Port, you misread me again. Maybe I was not clear. I was not saying I was an expert of Vatican dogma. What I was saying is my basic beliefs are no different from the Vatican.
Yes they are. That's what I am saying and you dismissed that as nonsense. Since I know better than you what is basic to Catholicism just as you know better what is basic to Baptists, your casual dismal of what I was saying and use of the word nonsense, appeared to indicate that you are an authority on Catholic dogma.
quote:
Beyond those three creeds I mentioned (and have been mentioning for years), those are secondary doctrines that are the basis for virtually all Christian disagreement.
This is not my understanding of what is basic to Catholicism. I am required to give an assent of faith to ALL doctrines de fide, whether or not they are infallible by formal definition or the ordinary universal magisterium. No if, ands, or buts. Many doctrines that you consider secondary doctrines are non-negotiable.
Here is a list of doctrines de fide (infallible teachings) regarding the Church:
The Church:
1. The Catholic Church was founded by the God-Man Jesus Christ.
2. Christ founded the Catholic Church in order to continue His work of redemption for all time.
3. Christ gave His Church a hierarchical constitution.
4. The powers bestowed on the Apostles have descended to the Bishops.
5. Christ appointed the Apostle Peter to be the first of all the Apostles and to be the visible Head of the whole Catholic Church, by appointing him immediately and personally to the primacy of jurisdiction.
6. According to Christ's ordinance, Peter is to have successors in his Primacy over the whole Catholic Church and for all time.
7. The successors of Peter in the Primacy are the Bishops of Rome.
8. The Pope possesses full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole Catholic Church, not merely in matters of faith and morals, but also in Church discipline and in the government of the Church.
9. The Pope is infallible when he speaks ex cathedra.
10. By virtue of Divine right, the bishops possess an ordinary power of government over their dioceses.
11. Christ founded the Catholic Church.
12. Christ is the Head of the Catholic Church.
13. In the final decision on doctrines concerning faith and morals, the Catholic Church is infallible.
14. The primary object of the Infallibility is the formally revealed truths of Christian Doctrine concerning faith and morals.
15. The totality of the Bishops is infallible, when they, either assembled in general council or scattered over the earth propose a teaching of faith or morals as one to he held by all the faithful.
16. The Church founded by Christ is unique and one.
17. The Church founded by Christ is holy.
18. The Church founded by Christ is catholic.
19. The Church founded by Christ is apostolic.
20. Membership of the Catholic Church is necessary for all men for salvation.
Taken from Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Dr. Ludwig Ott,1955. Reprinted in U.S.A. by Tan Books and Publishers, Rockford, Illinois, 1974.
quote:
Protestants all agree Christ is present, but the disagreement is the manner of his presense. In the bread or not/ and if in the bread, how exactly.
That's not what I have read. Jaams Antersson provided several articles for me to read regarding the three understandings of communion while he was still Protestant. Spiritual presence is different than Real Presence and symbolic is no presence at all. To us the doctrine of transubstantiation is basic. While we welcome anyone to worship with us we ask that only Catholics in a state of grace present themselves for Communion. This is the heart of our unity.
quote:
Advocating those three creeds does not amount to Protestantizing of Roman Catholicism and the Vatican. Not one iota.
The Church agreeing that she is one branch of Christianity among two other equals does amount to her becoming Protestantized. This would be a reversal of two thousand year old teachings. But don't we all accept the major creeds now (with the exception of some radical fundamentalist groups)?
What I understand so far is that you advocate:
We all accept the creeds
We all accept the basics as found in the New Testament (but whose interpretation of basics we have yet to determine)
We may dialogue regarding secondary doctrines
Recognition that we are all equal branches of Christianity with unity in basics as determined by whom and how?
No conversion to any one branch is necessary.
Please feel free to correct any inadvertent errors on my part.
quote:
Is Baptism necessary for salvation or not? I can never get a straight answer to this question if I even get an answer, which come to think of it, I never have.
I remember answering this before. Even those churches who claim "no" say that only because it is argued its a mere formality and following Christ. In reality, all churches do it and encourage it once one becomes a believer (or a Christian).
Well, I don't recall you ever answering this before but if you did, yahoo, mountain dew, you're the only one that's ventured a response. So your answer is yes, it's necessary for salvation?
Re: Vatican reaffirms the Catholic Church is the one true church i shouldn't interrupt a great discussion-don't let this throw it off track any but a few things crossed my mind.It really boils down to;who are you going to listen to, doesn't it?
ANotherwords,whose authority will we accept?
The "reformation' decided authority wasn't neccesary yet it had to expound some doctrine that could be accepted,right? Let's skip the justified grievances for this discussion.We know there were some-has nothing to do with this.They all decided it wasn't going to be the Church anymore.They came up with their own doctrine. Yet,they really couldn't claim authority.That'd be like replacing the Pope wiht another Pope,wouldn't it?
On the other hand they had to have adherents to their particular doctrine.Viola-you have sola scriptura.
Seems to me though they hoped that they would have adherents to each ot their particular doctrine.
I say each of theirs because-as we know-the disagreements started from the get.
That hasn't changed either. You can take a handful of verses from scripture and start a denomination.
Let's be honest-most denominations started from some disagreement all claiming scripture as the ultimate authority.Jesus Himself desired unity.
That was the plan.
I'll grant you that some exgesis of scripture is better than others-not saying all adherents of sola scriptura don't do some serious study BUT the result is still varying interpretations.
No matter how good it is.
So who do you listen to? The founder of the denomination? The preacher in a particular community? Yourself?
Even scripture says if there is dsiagreement among brethern that can't be settled to take it to the church.Then you would have to ask..which one?
What there is suppoed to be is a visible witness to the world.The answer has to be the Catholic Church but more especially the Eucharist.
Now,as Portia says,if in good conscience that's unaccaptable..that's another matter.
But was the Reformation really the answer?
Sola Scriptura--did this doctrine of scripture being the sole authority really work? Didn't each of these men(reformers) excpect that ppl would become adherents of the doctrine THEY interpreted from scripture?
If Sola Scriptura were divinely instituted then would it have not had the unity Jesus desired and one of their doctrines been universally accepted?
What about the Catholic Church guarding and passing down and protecting sacred scripture all those years? How does that fit into the picture?
God Bless,
p4p
So your answer is yes, it's necessary for salvation?
