|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 8/19/2008 9:49:45 PM
|
|
|
gatolover
Posts: 544
Joined: 6/23/2006
Status: offline
|
Well hello again, turretinfan,
quote:
I would like to be able to sense danger with a "Spidey-sense" and leap tall buildings in a single bound. The fact that those things would be handy doesn't mean that I can obtain them.
What if Christ, our Lord God Himself, promised that you would be gifted with "Spidey-sense" in Scripture? Oops...He didn't! And He didn't promise to lead you or anybody else with a bible unto all Truth! [Good thing this Catholic Christian is quite familiar with the bible, no?] 
He didn't do that, but He did promise to lead His Apostles unto all Truth, and there is evidence they laid hands on and appointed successors.
I think I'll stick with the Church instituted by Christ and guarded against error by the Holy Spirit.
Good to "see" you again, BTW.
Pax et bonum,
gatolover
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 8/20/2008 12:08:45 AM
|
|
|
Zhi
Posts: 1441
Joined: 7/31/2007
Status: online
|
quote:
What if Christ, our Lord God Himself, promised that you would be gifted with "Spidey-sense" in Scripture? Oops...He didn't! And He didn't promise to lead you or anybody else with a bible unto all Truth! [Good thing this Catholic Christian is quite familiar with the bible, no?]
He didn't do that, but He did promise to lead His Apostles unto all Truth, and there is evidence they laid hands on and appointed successors.
I think I'll stick with the Church instituted by Christ and guarded against error by the Holy Spirit.
Yet again, I must point out how astonishing it is to me that Catholics think they can take an assignment made directly to John and carried out, according to Scripture, ONLY by John, to take care of His mother Mary as a statement that Mary is the mother of us all. But, when Jesus gives a job description of the Holy Spirit to everyone in the upper room, a Holy Spirit whose presence with believers, with or without any intervention whatsoever of an actual Apostle much less the laying on hands and succession appointment, is repeatedly stated in Scripture, you claim that it ONLY applies to the Apostles. If doctrinal statements made by Jesus in the upper room apply solely to the Apostles, we basically have nothing left.
It does beg the question though. Do you believe that the average Catholic believer is indwelled by the Holy Spirit, or only the Pope?
Edit: It occurred to me, during my nightly Bible reading, that when Jesus said that the Holy Spirit "will guide you in all truth" in the upper room that night... Paul was NOT THERE. So, if that promise applied ONLY to those in the room, then the statement did not apply to guy who wrote the most books in the New Testament. Don't you think that perhaps the idea that the guy who wrote the majority of books we get our doctrine from missing out on being guided in all truth by the Holy Spirit might be a bit of a problem?
< Message edited by Zhi -- 8/20/2008 12:59:52 AM >
_____________________________
The optimist says the glass is half full. The pessimist says the glass is half empty. The engineer says the glass is twice as large as it needs to be.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 8/21/2008 6:41:08 AM
|
|
|
Doghouse
Posts: 889
Joined: 8/25/2007
From: The Buckle of the Bible Belt
Status: offline
|
quote:
And about two million people go to the Hajj each year. Does that mean that Islam is more relevant and therefore has more of a foundation of authority? It, in fact, means exactly that. And it begs the question for Christians - Why is Islam so authoritative for so many? What can we do as Christians to assert and establish the greater authority we know to exist in God and in the truth of Jesus, so as to show the "authority" of Islam for what it is - grave error?
If 2,000,000 follow L. Ron Hubbard, then L. Ron Hubbard is more authoritative than you or I are for these 2,000,000. What do you and I do about that?
In my case, I adhere to and follow and choose to be in communion with that which I believe is THE authority in regards to Christianity. Not some loose collection of vaguely affiliated people who read the same Book, but in communion with a billion other people who recognize the authority of the institution established by Jesus at Pentecost.
If you are uncomfortable with that authority being the Roman Catholic Church, then substitute the 4th Baptist Church of Edmond, OK, if you wish. How effective is that authority? One congregation, in communion? What about Joel Olsteen's Church in ... where the heck is Joel Olsteen from? Even if it is 50,000, you are not going to make much of a dent.
When will Protestants begin to collect as a single communion under a single heading of "Church", rather than being fractured and splintered into "Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, Anglican, Church of Christ, Assembly of God", "Church of the Nazarene", "Presbyterian", "Quaker", "Amish", "Mennonite"...who did I leave out? When will that single heading have authority over all, and not have the Methodists disagreeing with the Presbyterians?
_____________________________
When someone virtuous turns away from virtue to commit iniquity...it is because of the iniquity he committed that he must die. But if he turns from the wickedness he has committed, he does what is right and just, he shall preserve his life" - Ez 18:25-28
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 8/21/2008 10:48:01 AM
|
|
|
Zhi
Posts: 1441
Joined: 7/31/2007
Status: online
|
quote:
It, in fact, means exactly that. And it begs the question for Christians - Why is Islam so authoritative for so many? What can we do as Christians to assert and establish the greater authority we know to exist in God and in the truth of Jesus, so as to show the "authority" of Islam for what it is - grave error?
Well, frankly, I think it mostly means that they put a requirement on their adherents that Christianity does not put on its adherents. If we promised free salvation for anyone who shows up in Des Moines, Iowa, at a certain point every year, then there would be a whole lot of people in Des Moines, Iowa every year. The thing is, we would be lying, wouldn't we. Since there is no requirement on Christians to show up in a certain place at a certain time of year, we don't. Since there is no requirement for Christians to go see a certain person (even for Catholics, seeing the Pope is exciting but not a religious requirement afaik), we don't.
quote:
If 2,000,000 follow L. Ron Hubbard, then L. Ron Hubbard is more authoritative than you or I are for these 2,000,000. What do you and I do about that?
It does not bother me that 2,000,000 people do not follow me personally. I care whether they follow Christ.
quote:
In my case, I adhere to and follow and choose to be in communion with that which I believe is THE authority in regards to Christianity. Not some loose collection of vaguely affiliated people who read the same Book, but in communion with a billion other people who recognize the authority of the institution established by Jesus at Pentecost.
Well, I follow a Book which I believe to be THE authority on Christianity, and which the RCC also accepts as, well, AN authority I suppose.
quote:
If you are uncomfortable with that authority being the Roman Catholic Church, then substitute the 4th Baptist Church of Edmond, OK, if you wish. How effective is that authority? One congregation, in communion? What about Joel Olsteen's Church in ... where the heck is Joel Olsteen from? Even if it is 50,000, you are not going to make much of a dent.
When will Protestants begin to collect as a single communion under a single heading of "Church", rather than being fractured and splintered into "Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, Anglican, Church of Christ, Assembly of God", "Church of the Nazarene", "Presbyterian", "Quaker", "Amish", "Mennonite"...who did I leave out? When will that single heading have authority over all, and not have the Methodists disagreeing with the Presbyterians?
I think this shows a basic misunderstanding of what Protestantism is.
We really couldn't care less what doors you care to darken on Sunday (or Saturday if you prefer) morning. It doesn't matter to us. Not at all. To be in communion with us, what matters is that you a) believe in Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior, and b) do your best to be obedient to Him, as is spelled out in His Word. To me, my friend and coworker who goes to the Presbyterian church is just as much my Christian brother as my friends at my church. My Catholic aunt who trusts in Christ is just as much my Christian sister as my Baptist uncle who trusts in Christ is my Christian brother. Our communion is in Christ. Not in a denomination. We do not think less of each other for not choosing our name over their door on their place of worship. We do not exclude them from our communion for that. We believe in a communion, a church, of all believers, that far exceeds any denominational lines or minor doctrinal quirks.
_____________________________
The optimist says the glass is half full. The pessimist says the glass is half empty. The engineer says the glass is twice as large as it needs to be.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 8/21/2008 7:37:45 PM
|
|
|
turretinfan
Posts: 5256
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Death to Life by the Power of the Spirit
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: gatolover
Well hello again, turretinfan,
quote:
I would like to be able to sense danger with a "Spidey-sense" and leap tall buildings in a single bound. The fact that those things would be handy doesn't mean that I can obtain them.
What if Christ, our Lord God Himself, promised that you would be gifted with "Spidey-sense" in Scripture?
Then my wishing it to be so, or not, would be totally irrelevant. Same goes for the second coming of Christ. It is coming whether you or I want or not.
quote:
ORIGINAL: gatolover
Oops...He didn't!
ok
quote:
ORIGINAL: gatolover
And He didn't promise to lead you or anybody else with a bible unto all Truth! [Good thing this Catholic Christian is quite familiar with the bible, no?]
He didn't just promise, he already gave us the Bible. And the Bible is inspired and sufficient to thoroughly furnish us unto every good work.
2 Timothy 3:16-17
16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
We quite properly latch hold of the Psalms as well:
Psalm 25:5 Lead me in thy truth, and teach me: for thou art the God of my salvation; on thee do I wait all the day.
Psalm 43:3 O send out thy light and thy truth: let them lead me; let them bring me unto thy holy hill, and to thy tabernacles.
I certainly take that "me" pronoun quite personally.
If you are trying to latch hold of this promise for your church, for your councils, or for your pope:
John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
Then be prepared to substantiate when it is that you think your church has declared the things to come, or your councils have seen the future, or your popes have truly prophesied. I tell you this straight: Benedict XVI is no prophet: he does not have the gift described in John 16:13 of being able to see the things to come. Likewise, while the first council of the Vatican made some interesting claims about the past, they were unable to speak of things to come.
quote:
ORIGINAL: gatolover
He didn't do that, but He did promise to lead His Apostles unto all Truth, and there is evidence they laid hands on and appointed successors.
Name a second successor to an apostle, supported by contemporaneous evidence. The one example of a "successor" is Matthias, the successor to Judas: and that was done to fulfill a specific prophecy of condemnation on Judas.
That's not to deny ordination existed, or that the miraculous gifts were transmitted by the laying on of hands in the Apostolic era (recall Simon's foolish attempt to purchase the gifts).
Nevertheless, nowhere does Scripture make any connection between such ordination and transmission or transfer of the promise that the Holy Spirit would lead the apostles.
In short, it is simpler to see this as being fulfilled through the penning of Scripture, than any other way. For Scripture is the very Word of God.
quote:
ORIGINAL: gatolover
I think I'll stick with the Church instituted by Christ and guarded against error by the Holy Spirit.
a) Whatever else may be said of the verse you seem to be referencing, it is not made to an instituted Church. It is made to a plurality of people.
b) The church of Christ is the body of believers, not those who stand in favor with a man who wears soft clothes and sits on an earthly throne in a magnificent palace.
c) Thus, your church is not "the Church" - but even if it were, there is no promise that it will be prevented from making any errors (one need only think of Liberius or the Arian controversy). Moreover, not even the apostles themselves (who were among the "you" in the verse you had in mind) were free from making errors - consequently Paul had to resist Peter to his face.
quote:
ORIGINAL: gatolover
Good to "see" you again, BTW.
Pax et bonum,
gatolover
I am glad to be interacting with you as well.
-TurretinFan
_____________________________
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 8/22/2008 2:37:10 AM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 3886
Status: offline
|
quote:
When will Protestants begin to collect as a single communion under a single heading of "Church", rather than being fractured and splintered into "Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, Anglican, Church of Christ, Assembly of God", "Church of the Nazarene", "Presbyterian", "Quaker", "Amish", "Mennonite"...who did I leave out? When will that single heading have authority over all, and not have the Methodists disagreeing with the Presbyterians? Over and over RCs proudly proclaim their ignorance of what a Christian church is. And by doing so, they fail to understand the teaching of Jesus Christ.
A Christian church does not depend upon whether water baptism is done in infancy or adulthood. Doesn't even depend upon whether their clergy dress-up in funny gear. Nor does it depend upon its governmental style.
Christ supplied the stones used to build the church, problem is RC added stone after stone of its own and thereby built a different edifice. How did they do this?....by discarding the Bible as its ultimate rule of authority.
RC continues to build its own edifice by supplying new revelation year after year. Doing so, without regard to the messages Christ has given, once for all, His religion to the world, and His message has been written in the Gospels.
Only that "development" which is in harmony with the message of Jesus is a legitimate development ; all other is distortion, corruption, deterioration.
What is a Christian church? We find out when we search the Scripture. We find all doctrines that are common to the majority of churches - the doctrines of the apostolic creed, the means of grace. These are divinely instituted because they've been revealed in Scripture.
The rest?....mostly of human origin and therefore should never be made binding upon the conscience. Any church that does so oversteps openly the command of Christ, and turns the religion of Jesus, which is a religion of liberty, into a religion of oppression.
_____________________________
“beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow”
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 9/1/2008 11:41:28 AM
|
|
|
Doghouse
Posts: 889
Joined: 8/25/2007
From: The Buckle of the Bible Belt
Status: offline
|
quote:
a) believe in Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior, and b) do your best to be obedient to Him, as is spelled out in His Word. Define "believe" in point (a) and "be obedient" in (b).
Heretics believe in Jesus and are sure they are obedient to Him. How do we guard faith against error by allowing any personal interpretation that an individual desires?
If there is one communion - why Baptist, why Methodist? What's the difference, other than the name, and if these differences are "non-salvic", or "non-doctrinal" why have them to begin with?
_____________________________
When someone virtuous turns away from virtue to commit iniquity...it is because of the iniquity he committed that he must die. But if he turns from the wickedness he has committed, he does what is right and just, he shall preserve his life" - Ez 18:25-28
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 9/1/2008 3:06:41 PM
|
|
|
Zhi
Posts: 1441
Joined: 7/31/2007
Status: online
|
quote:
Define "believe" in point (a) and "be obedient" in (b).
Well, like I said, believe in Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior, and be obedient to Him as is spelled out in His Word. You picked two words and pulled them out of the specifying context. I'm not sure what more you want me to say there, I can start listing verses if you're really having trouble with the specifics I've already given.
quote:
Heretics believe in Jesus and are sure they are obedient to Him. How do we guard faith against error by allowing any personal interpretation that an individual desires?
By studying Scripture, making sure what we think and do is in keeping with what Scripture says, and praying for discernment by way of the leading of the Holy Spirit. Yes, someone can take a verse out of context and claim something heretical from that, but if you're truly studying the Word, then that won't hold up against other verses.
quote:
If there is one communion - why Baptist, why Methodist? What's the difference, other than the name, and if these differences are "non-salvic", or "non-doctrinal" why have them to begin with?
Well, you have to understand that there's a difference between communion and practice. We have communion with each other by virtue of the fact that, if we have put our faith in Jesus, we are all adopted children of God, therefore we are all family. But, some of us like to do things one way and others another. This can have to do with anything from music style, to church organization, to specifics like whether you sprinkle or immerse and at what age, which I believe is the primary difference between a Baptist church and a Methodist church (for the record, my parents attend a Baptist church, one of my sisters attends a Methodist church, and it's not considered an issue.) In fact out of 4 daughters, last I checked all 4 of us attend different denominations from each other and from our parents, but it's just not an issue, because the question is whether or not the church you attend is preaching the Word, and the rest doesn't particularly matter. Nor does it bother us at all to attend church with whoever we're visiting rather than attempting to seek out our own denomination, because denomination is simply just not that important (we all live in different parts of the country).
_____________________________
The optimist says the glass is half full. The pessimist says the glass is half empty. The engineer says the glass is twice as large as it needs to be.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 9/2/2008 10:02:50 AM
|
|
|
LBolt
Posts: 954
Joined: 11/30/2007
Status: online
|
Using this quote as well as other inherit false doctrines that RCC espouses I choose not to unite myself under a Pope (which isn't even biblical) who claims to be Messiah (God) on the Earth to us mere mortals. Here's a quote from Cardinal Gibbons, I can give a lot of interesting quotes and claims of divine authority:
"Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act...and the act is a mark of her ecclesiatical power...Sunday is our mark of authority!" In other words the "Church" transcends the Word of Yahweh and the change from 7th day Sabbath to Sunday Sabbath attests to this. This is a mark of their authority much like Sabbath is a mark (Hebrew owt-a mark or proof) of those who follow Him (Yahweh). See Exodus 31:13.
Are we following the Word of Elohim or the authority of men? You may say that's the RCC but this is me. I don't follow them. Ahhh, but you are following in their customs. Dan. 7:25...This is the spirit of Anti-Messiah at work IMO.
This may seem like an indictment of sorts but it is time for us to wake up and regard the Word of Yah over the traditions of men. This is the same message Yahusha brought against the religious of His day...and this is the same message He is speaking today. Follow the Word of God and disregard man-made customs that usurp the authority of God!
_____________________________
Wisdom is the principle thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding...she shall give to thine head an ornament of grace..---Proverbs 4:7
www.tatepublishing.com/bookstore/book.php?w=978-1-60604-743-9
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 9/4/2008 6:39:09 AM
|
|
|
Doghouse
Posts: 889
Joined: 8/25/2007
From: The Buckle of the Bible Belt
Status: offline
|
quote:
But, some of us like to do things one way and others another. Kind of the way some of us assent to the authority which we believe was instituted by Jesus for the purposes of guarding, defending and defining faith for the faithful - namely Church, in our accepted practice of following Jesus and His instructions to us?
How is it that some Protestants can claim communion across all types and practices of Protestant faith that may range from differences in the acceptance and participation in the Sacraments (or - sacraments, if you like...), to differences in standards and order of worship, to differences in the definition of fidelity to and completeness of the lifestyle of Christianity, to differences in interpretation of Scriptures and their instructions to the faithful, and yet refuse to be in communion with Catholics and their practice of faith, and place themselves outside the open arms and outreached hands of this largest community of faithful and practicing Christians?
_____________________________
When someone virtuous turns away from virtue to commit iniquity...it is because of the iniquity he committed that he must die. But if he turns from the wickedness he has committed, he does what is right and just, he shall preserve his life" - Ez 18:25-28
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 9/4/2008 8:39:27 AM
|
|
|
turretinfan
Posts: 5256
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Death to Life by the Power of the Spirit
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Doghouse
Kind of the way some of us assent to the authority which we believe was instituted by Jesus for the purposes of guarding, defending and defining faith for the faithful - namely Church, in our accepted practice of following Jesus and His instructions to us?
The Church has an important role. Nevertheless, its role must be subservient to that of the very Word of God.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Doghouse
How is it that some Protestants can claim communion across all types and practices of Protestant faith that may range from differences in the acceptance and participation in the Sacraments (or - sacraments, if you like...), to differences in standards and order of worship, to differences in the definition of fidelity to and completeness of the lifestyle of Christianity, to differences in interpretation of Scriptures and their instructions to the faithful, and yet refuse to be in communion with Catholics and their practice of faith, and place themselves outside the open arms and outreached hands of this largest community of faithful and practicing Christians?
The pope preaches a different gospel. A gospel that, in essence, amounts to requiring submission to his authority as part and parcel of what is required for salvation of those who follow his religion. Question for you: is it mortal sin to willfully reject what the pope dogmatically defines (ex cathedra) to be true?
That's one more reason we don't need (or want) a pope.
-TurretinFan
_____________________________
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 9/4/2008 11:03:12 AM
|
|
|
Odeliya
Posts: 2377
Joined: 8/10/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Doghouse
How is it that some Protestants can claim communion across all types and practices of Protestant faith that may range from differences in the acceptance and participation in the Sacraments (or - sacraments, if you like...), to differences in standards and order of worship, to differences in the definition of fidelity to and completeness of the lifestyle of Christianity, to differences in interpretation of Scriptures and their instructions to the faithful, and yet refuse to be in communion with Catholics and their practice of faith, and place themselves outside the open arms and outreached hands of this largest community of faithful and practicing Christians?
maybe some protestants..., I, for one, always thought we were in communion. 
I have Catholic friends with whom we share agreement on basic Gospel, occasional catholic dates, enjoy a Mass now and then and take Eucharist with greatest respect while there, try to mimic all the Catholics do during the service, it’s beautiful.
C weddings, and C baptisms - lovely ceremony! beats attending circumcisions, let me tell you friends,baptized baby yells much less.
Isnt that being in communion enough? disagreements on theol.we surely got, but brothers can disagree.
I mean if I politely decline the offer when people share sausage pizza or a pot stash that doesn’t adversely affect our sisterly/brotherly love with my friends. Why cant i politely decline Pope when offered? I dont think we should do everything the same to be in communion . that smells socialistic.
_____________________________
Proverbs XI:14 Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counselors there is safety.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 9/4/2008 12:34:55 PM
|
|
|
Zhi
Posts: 1441
Joined: 7/31/2007
Status: online
|
quote:
Kind of the way some of us assent to the authority which we believe was instituted by Jesus for the purposes of guarding, defending and defining faith for the faithful - namely Church, in our accepted practice of following Jesus and His instructions to us?
I guess you can believe that if you want to. I choose a different pastor, and I submit only to Jesus and His Word as the final authority. I do not believe that submission to the Pope is at all necessary, because there's nothing in Scripture that states that it is. So, you submitting to the Pope, to me, is like me deciding to submit to the instruction of the pastor of my church. Granted I don't think my pastor is infallible, but considering that we've already discussed that papal infallability is kind of a vague thing (there's no definitive list of ex cathedra statements, so you kind of have to guess what is and isn't) I don't think that's all that big of a deal. I guess the main difference is that I feel I have the responsibility to check what my pastor is saying against Scripture and make sure he's staying on track (and, in fact, he exhorts us to do so almost every sermon).
quote:
How is it that some Protestants can claim communion across all types and practices of Protestant faith that may range from differences in the acceptance and participation in the Sacraments (or - sacraments, if you like...), to differences in standards and order of worship, to differences in the definition of fidelity to and completeness of the lifestyle of Christianity, to differences in interpretation of Scriptures and their instructions to the faithful, and yet refuse to be in communion with Catholics and their practice of faith, and place themselves outside the open arms and outreached hands of this largest community of faithful and practicing Christians?
Sacraments tend to be pretty much the same in terms of the intent involved, if not the absolute specifics thereof. For instance, communion is a sacrament, but we practice it differently in different churches, which tends to be more a matter of logistics than anything. The important part is the fact that we're doing it in rememberance of Him like He said to, not whether we got up to go get it or a plate were passed around or whether we all waited and partook at the same time or not (actually, communion has been done all of those listed ways in the church we've been attending for the past couple years alone, because we just don't think that how you get ahold of the bread and juice is all that important). I don't think God really cares whether you sing first and then hear the message, or vice versa, or whether you're singing ancient hymns or more contemporary stuff (with drums, gasp) so long as He is the one being praised, so I don't really see why order of worship is important. Interpretation of scripture doesn't tend to be all that different in Protestant churches, or at least isn't different enough that we would think that the people in the church down the street are all going to hell while the people in our building are all going to heaven. As far as we're concerned, that includes you, and we consider ourselves to be in communion with Catholics who put their faith in Jesus just as much as we consider ourselves to be in communion with those in our own local church who put their faith in Jesus.
We've also discussed the fact that although you claim unity under the Pope, it's not really the truth. Catholics do not march lock-step with the Pope on any issue, be it social issues like abortion, or spiritual issues regarding what they really actually think of and practice toward Mary. There are many rites, some of which are currently in favor, some of which aren't but haven't been kicked out yet, etc. You also count all the Orthodox and the Anglicans when stating that Catholics are "the largest", who don't pay much attention to your Pope either. If the Pope can't keep his own flock in order, why on earth should we join the chaos, and start participating in all those practices that aren't Scriptural anyway (or not, since that would seem to be fine also)? As for numbers, you count anyone who's ever darkened the door and gotten splashed, last I checked. Heck, I'm probably on your rolls in my hometown since my great aunt dragged me through the door and had the priest throw water at me when I was around 6.
_____________________________
The optimist says the glass is half full. The pessimist says the glass is half empty. The engineer says the glass is twice as large as it needs to be.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 9/5/2008 4:13:57 PM
|
|
|
Doghouse
Posts: 889
Joined: 8/25/2007
From: The Buckle of the Bible Belt
Status: offline
|
quote:
Question for you: is it mortal sin to willfully reject what the pope dogmatically defines (ex cathedra) to be true? I suppose I can answer that question with one of my own - is it possible to accept everything written in Scriptures, except for that part about Jesus dying for our sins, and still be a full-fledged card-carrying Christian? In order for something to be "mortal" sin, there has to be foreknowledge that the choice is a choice from an alternative of other choices (non-coerced, in other words), the recognition that the choice is "wrong", and then consciously making the choice anyway. In my case, I believe the Church is authoritative, and in that believe I accept that reject her puts me in ex-communication with her. And, if I conscoiusly elect to exercise and will that choice into action, then yes - I am in a state of mortal sin.
In your case - I don't know. Such matters become the realm of the just judgment of God.
The rejection of the Pope is to reject the authority that lies within the Church. And rejecting the Church is to reject the instruction of Jesus, who established Church, authorized it, and gave it it's mission. Please - everyone substitute the name of the Church you attend every Sunday for the word "Church" in the second sentence of this paragraph, and then read the sentence back to yourself. Example - for those who attend St. Mark Lutheran Church - read sentence as follows: "Rejecting the St. Mark Lutheran Church is to reject the instruction of Jesus, who established the St. Mark Lutheran Church, authorized it, and gave it it's mission".
Who disagrees with that sentence if you substitute the name of your own Church into the sentence. Is Christ not the cornerstone of your Church? Is worship not instructed by Jesus (worship together - in a congregation of believers...?). Did Jesus give St. Mark Lutheran Church some other mission than to worship God and support the and develop the practice of faith?
What part of the sentence are you disagreeing with?
Maybe we need to have that conversation first, because I just don't get some of what I read here sometimes. Without the assent to the authority of a shared belief of a congregatioinal body, which I am referring to as "Church", there is nothing but a bunch of unaligned rogues practicing chaos.
quote:
Isnt that being in communion enough? disagreements on theol.we surely got, but brothers can disagree. If we don't commit to the set of beliefs we accept, then what are we really agreeing on? We all believe we follow Scriptures, but some here accuse me of error, and decide they cannot be in communion with me. So somewhere - interpretation has come in to play, because we are reading the same set of Scriptures (well...NT anyway...). I see something different in Scripture than you do. So - you choose to not be in communion with me. And it is your free choice to do just that.
quote:
Catholics do not march lock-step with the Pope on any issue, be it social issues like abortion, or spiritual issues regarding what they really actually think of and practice toward Mary. Catholics who do so are doing it consciously as the Church is not only clear, but well publicized on where it stands in the issue. I don't perfectly follow my faith - its something I have to work on and is a personal failing; the fault does not lie with the Church teachings.
quote:
You also count all the Orthodox and the Anglicans when stating that Catholics are "the largest", who don't pay much attention to your Pope either Not true. Neither the Anglicans nor the Lutherans nor the Eastern Orthodox Church accept the authority of the Roman Catholic Church, and in doing so, they are in the same position as the Catholics you describe who reject the authority of the Church, even though liturgically they are close. There is more to faith than just liturgy.
quote:
If the Pope can't keep his own flock in order, why on earth should we join the chaos, Yes...so much better to particpate in another flavor of chaos...
quote:
Heck, I'm probably on your rolls in my hometown since my great aunt dragged me through the door and had the priest throw water at me when I was around 6. Indeed you might be, but the numbers reported by the Church are generally gleaned from those rolls of active particpants who financially support the Church at any level. So while there may be some percentage of those numbers claimed who send money without ever attending Mass, or are non-practicing, I believe the numbers are pretty accurate (70 million US, 1 billion world wide) because they come from active Church rolls of people who give money, not the ones who were kidnapped by their aunt.
The Catholic Church has very large numbers of participants in India and some very highly concentrated populations. And then you always have places like France, Spain, and the Republic of Ireland (the green, white and orange flagged country that makes Guinness, not the other guys in the north...) where there are many, many Catholics and not much of anything else. Between Los Angeles, Chicago and New York City - there are a bunch of Catholics. We'll give you guys Houston, although the Hispanics are making a serious dent down there...
Numbers don't make it right. I am trying to describe to what does make it right and to identify that for one and all - in my opinion, of course...
_____________________________
When someone virtuous turns away from virtue to commit iniquity...it is because of the iniquity he committed that he must die. But if he turns from the wickedness he has committed, he does what is right and just, he shall preserve his life" - Ez 18:25-28
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 9/5/2008 5:32:33 PM
|
|
|
Odeliya
Posts: 2377
Joined: 8/10/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
O: Isnt that being in communion enough? disagreements on theol.we surely got, but brothers can disagree.
DH: If we don't commit to the set of beliefs we accept, then what are we really agreeing on? We all believe we follow Scriptures, but some here accuse me of error, and decide they cannot be in communion with me. So somewhere - interpretation has come in to play, because we are reading the same set of Scriptures (well...NT anyway...). I see something different in Scripture than you do. So - you choose to not be in communion with me. And it is your free choice to do just that.
Wait. So being in communion with you means believing same things and going thru the same religious motions that you do? So essentially, being in communion with you mean being Catholic?  You one baaaad dog. :) Why didnt you say so right away then?
If that is the case that most catholics are not in communion with each other either - i yet to meet 2 catholics that agree on everything their church teaches.
_____________________________
Proverbs XI:14 Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counselors there is safety.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 9/6/2008 5:09:43 AM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 3886
Status: offline
|
quote:
Example - for those who attend St. Mark Lutheran Church - read sentence as follows: "Rejecting the St. Mark Lutheran Church is to reject the instruction of Jesus, who established the St. Mark Lutheran Church, authorized it, and gave it it's mission".
Another example of the same principle would be.....
for those who attend Mary Queen of Heaven Church - read sentence as follows: "Rejecting the Mary Queen of Heaven Church is to reject the instruction of Jesus, who established the Mary Queen of Heaven Church, authorized it, and gave it it's mission"
....makes as much sense
RC's problem is they refuse to acknowledge what Christ and the Apostles teach concerning what the Church actually is. They prefer instead what their pope says the Church is. Of the two choices, the first is exceedingly more preferable.
_____________________________
“beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow”
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 9/6/2008 9:50:17 AM
|
|
|
Doghouse
Posts: 889
Joined: 8/25/2007
From: The Buckle of the Bible Belt
Status: offline
|
quote:
If that is the case that most catholics are not in communion with each other either - i yet to meet 2 catholics that agree on everything their church teaches. I would challenge that it is more likely the case that you have yet to meet 2 Catholics that practice everything the Church teaches. The Catechism of the Catholic Church is readily available, and it is clear to most Catholics where the Church stands on the issues.
To assent to the authority of the Church in matters of faith is to be in communion. To reject that authority in favor of a personal rendering or version of faith is to place one's self outside communion with the Church.
_____________________________
When someone virtuous turns away from virtue to commit iniquity...it is because of the iniquity he committed that he must die. But if he turns from the wickedness he has committed, he does what is right and just, he shall preserve his life" - Ez 18:25-28
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 9/7/2008 2:30:41 AM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 3886
Status: offline
|
quote:
To assent to the authority of the Church in matters of faith is to be in communion. To reject that authority in favor of a personal rendering or version of faith is to place one's self outside communion with the Church. When one assents to the authority of his church, he assents to what is simply another version of faith; and, it is just another personal, individual choice he makes.
_____________________________
“beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow”
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 9/7/2008 7:16:32 PM
|
|
|
Zhi
Posts: 1441
Joined: 7/31/2007
Status: online
|
The rejection of the Pope is to reject the authority that lies within the Church. And rejecting the Church is to reject the instruction of Jesus, who established Church, authorized it, and gave it it's mission. Please - everyone substitute the name of the Church you attend every Sunday for the word "Church" in the second sentence of this paragraph, and then read the sentence back to yourself. Example - for those who attend St. Mark Lutheran Church - read sentence as follows: "Rejecting the St. Mark Lutheran Church is to reject the instruction of Jesus, who established the St. Mark Lutheran Church, authorized it, and gave it it's mission".
Who disagrees with that sentence if you substitute the name of your own Church into the sentence. Is Christ not the cornerstone of your Church? Is worship not instructed by Jesus (worship together - in a congregation of believers...?). Did Jesus give St. Mark Lutheran Church some other mission than to worship God and support the and develop the practice of faith?
What part of the sentence are you disagreeing with?
Maybe we need to have that conversation first, because I just don't get some of what I read here sometimes. Without the assent to the authority of a shared belief of a congregatioinal body, which I am referring to as "Church", there is nothing but a bunch of unaligned rogues practicing chaos.
No. The rejection of the Pope is to reject the claim of supreme authority made by the Pope, and by extension of the RCC. This should not be terribly surprising to you, as rejecting the Pope's claim of supreme authority has been going on since the Pope claimed supreme authority. It is definitely NOT the same thing as rejecting the instruction of Jesus, and Jesus's comments regarding His Church body and the mission of those who believe in Him. Jesus alone has supreme authority over the true church.
We DO have a shared belief in a body, but that body consists of all those who believe in Jesus Christ. He is the authority. Nobody else. Not the Pope, not the random buildings we meet in on Sunday mornings or whenever they choose to meet.
quote:
If we don't commit to the set of beliefs we accept, then what are we really agreeing on? We all believe we follow Scriptures, but some here accuse me of error, and decide they cannot be in communion with me. So somewhere - interpretation has come in to play, because we are reading the same set of Scriptures (well...NT anyway...). I see something different in Scripture than you do. So - you choose to not be in communion with me. And it is your free choice to do just that.
Disagreeing on a point of theology does not immediately disqualify communion as part of the body of Christ. This is clearly spelled out by Paul repeatedly, in telling people they can decide how exactly they want to worship in everything from what they think they should eat to whether or not women cover their heads. There really is only one thing that prevents communion as part of the body of Christ... specifically, not believing in and putting your faith in Christ.
quote:
Catholics who do so are doing it consciously as the Church is not only clear, but well publicized on where it stands in the issue. I don't perfectly follow my faith - its something I have to work on and is a personal failing; the fault does not lie with the Church teachings.
Then are they out of your communion?
quote:
Not true. Neither the Anglicans nor the Lutherans nor the Eastern Orthodox Church accept the authority of the Roman Catholic Church, and in doing so, they are in the same position as the Catholics you describe who reject the authority of the Church, even though liturgically they are close. There is more to faith than just liturgy.
Then are they out of your communion? If so, you just lost the majority I'm afraid, from every statistical set I can find.
quote:
Yes...so much better to particpate in another flavor of chaos...
Why wouldn't it be, if we're convinced that the flavor is closer to that recommended by Scripture?
quote:
Indeed you might be, but the numbers reported by the Church are generally gleaned from those rolls of active particpants who financially support the Church at any level. So while there may be some percentage of those numbers claimed who send money without ever attending Mass, or are non-practicing, I believe the numbers are pretty accurate (70 million US, 1 billion world wide) because they come from active Church rolls of people who give money, not the ones who were kidnapped by their aunt.
The Catholic Church has very large numbers of participants in India and some very highly concentrated populations. And then you always have places like France, Spain, and the Republic of Ireland (the green, white and orange flagged country that makes Guinness, not the other guys in the north...) where there are many, many Catholics and not much of anything else. Between Los Angeles, Chicago and New York City - there are a bunch of Catholics. We'll give you guys Houston, although the Hispanics are making a serious dent down there...
Numbers don't make it right. I am trying to describe to what does make it right and to identify that for one and all - in my opinion, of course...
Actually the statistics I could find stated that the qualification for Catholics is "baptized as".
I have an aunt and uncle who are missionaries to Italy. They say it's interesting witnessing there, because everyone identifies as "Christian" (Catholic) regardless of whether they've been anywhere near a church in the recent (or even distant) past... all were baptized Catholic, pretty much. About three-quarters actually bothered going through Confirmation. Maybe half still go to Mass on occasion, usually the Christmas/Easter thing.
_____________________________
The optimist says the glass is half full. The pessimist says the glass is half empty. The engineer says the glass is twice as large as it needs to be.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 9/7/2008 8:34:48 PM
|
|
|
Doghouse
Posts: 889
Joined: 8/25/2007
From: The Buckle of the Bible Belt
Status: offline
|
quote:
No. The rejection of the Pope is to reject the claim of supreme authority made by the Pope, and by extension of the RCC. This should not be terribly surprising to you, as rejecting the Pope's claim of supreme authority has been going on since the Pope claimed supreme authority. I believe that there are only two alternatives here:
- either you assent and submit to the authority of the Church as a Body of Believers and accept the teachings and instruction provided by it,
or
- you submit to nothing but your own personal interpretation of Scriptures. If you gather together with others, and there is not agreement, then you vote with your feet (leave and go find someone more compatible), or you try to sway the others to your view. Either way is a statement and exercise of personal authority over the authority of institution (the corporal body resulting form the collection of the faithful for the purposes of worship and practicing faith).
If there is another alternative, please define it for me.
You seem to be in the "personal discernment" bullet above.
And I can assure you I am not in the "personal discernment" camp. I am not smart enough, wise enough, nor have I been suitably trained, prepared, tested and scrutinized for this task.
< | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
