Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WHY THE MAGISTERIUM MAKES SENSE TO ME
Ignitum Today ^ | February 2, 2012 | Colin Gormley

Posted on 02/03/2012 6:31:03 AM PST by NYer

I am married to a Korean national. I mention this not just because it is cool (and it is cool) but I’ve learned quite a few things about my Faith from being close to someone of a very different culture.

Because of my wife’s nationality I know quite a few Koreans by association. They come from education backgrounds that make your humble scribe feel quite inferior, or at least I’d feel that way if they weren’t so humble about it. And one of the core components of this education is learning the English language.

To me they do indeed speak English well. Some can even speak without the hint of a Korean accent. I know firsthand how difficult this is given my own extremely difficult time learning Korean.

(What does this have to do with the Magisterium? Please bear with me).

However despite their best efforts I have come to notice that no matter how fluent they were certain ways they would speak seemed…well..awkward. For example, almost to a man, when one of my wife’s friends say something like they were sick yesterday they would say “My condition was not good.” This was true regardless of how well any of them spoke English. I pointed it out to my wife and she noted that it was more or less a direct translation of the Korean expression for having been sick in the past. Despite the quality of their English, they were still speaking Korean using English words.

Another time my wife was telling me about her college days and describing a particular student and his relationship to the students in her freshman group. There literally is no English word for the particular position that this person held. It is something of a cross between a mentor, a Resident Assistant, and a full blown teacher. The attempt of my wife to explain this concept actually took a bit of time, and my above description is my best attempt to explain this position.

What I’m trying to say is that one’s culture has a powerful effect on one’s exposure to concepts as well as how one is going to express themselves. The ability to communicate with one another is heavily dependent on the concepts being discussed and the modes of expression that the communicants share. The greater the disparity in either, the more communication it takes to attempt to bridge the gap.

At one point this started me thinking about the Bible. The books are written a long time ago by a culture with wildly different concepts and modes of expression than we have in modern English. And the New Testament was a translation of one culture into another, from the Jewish culture and language (Aramaic) to the Common Greek. Not only are these cultures different from ours (the Jewish and the Greek) but both cultures have grown and developed over time.

Just to give one example is the notion of “brother” in Jewish culture. The original Aramaic that Jesus and His followers spoke had no concept of “cousin.” To describe the relationship of one cousin to another they would say something like, “He is the son of my father’s brother.” Given how wordy this is they would simplify it to “he is my brother.”

Now someone might object to this by pointing out that the Common Greek had a word for cousin and if the authors wanted to say “cousin” they would have. But to me this doesn’t fly for two reasons. First, that knowledge of a language does not bestow the modes of expression the language uses. As in my first example, the Korean expressing that they were sick still use the Korean wording of the concept rendered into English. Second, given that Jesus and his people used Aramaic to communicate, it is actually more accurate to have a word for word translation, complete with ambiguity, rather than to impose a meaning on the words by trying to translate the wording into something more friendly to the new language.

These things led me to realize that if the Body of Christ has to go at Faith with a Bible Alone approach we are doomed. The time, culture and language separations are a huge obstacle to getting at the actual meaning of the texts, with all the nuance and subtlety that comes with theological understanding and the development of those concepts. This is readily apparent with our Protestant brethren, who continue to split into numerous sects and sects within sects.

The Bible is a product of the times and cultures that produced it. Despite the fact that it is the inerrant Word of God it still uses human culture and language to communicate to us. And because of the limits of both human language and cultural concepts, the existence of the Magisterium and Sacred Tradition simply make sense.

Our Lord provided us with an authoritative body that can express the Truths of Revelation over time and cultures without error. A body that has the authority to interpret the Sacred Texts and present them to all cultures and times. A body that lives and breathes with the cultures in time but stands above them. That such a body, the Magisterim, exists is not only to my mind beneficial, but necessary for preserving the Word of God and revealing the Word to us using the concepts and modes of communication we use.

My exposure to a foreign culture as different as the Korean one only illustrates the need for the Sacred Tradition, and the need for the authority of the Magisterium to guarantee the transmission of that Tradition. There is more to the Truth of the Word than our cultures and languages can transmit. The Magisterium exists to teach us in the ways we communicate today, and will exist to teach the cultures of the future. Through the Magisterium we overcome the Tower of Babel now and in the future.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Religion & Culture; Theology
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-311 next last

1 posted on 02/03/2012 6:31:06 AM PST by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom; thefrankbaum; Tax-chick; GregB; saradippity; Berlin_Freeper; Litany; SumProVita; ...

Catholic ping!


2 posted on 02/03/2012 6:31:54 AM PST by NYer ("Be kind to every person you meet. For every person is fighting a great battle." St. Ephraim)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

“Our Lord provided us with an authoritative body that can express the Truths of Revelation over time and cultures without error. A body that has the authority to interpret the Sacred Texts and present them to all cultures and times. “

********************

You are merely pushing back your supposed problem by one level.

The Magesterium is ALSO subject to the limitations of time and culture. It’s pronouncements ALSO need to be interpreted.

If God was, according to your way of thinking, unable to clearly and adequately express Himself in the Bible, what makes you think He is capable of doing so through the Magesterium?


3 posted on 02/03/2012 6:46:56 AM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Great article, NYer.

Catholic tradition is real.
Sometimes Protestants FORGET that the Bible was collated by the Catholics and not until (finally) in 420 A.D. Before that there were just random copies of the words of Jesus and his Apostles floating around. With all that were forgeries and lies.
It was the task of the Catholic bishops to sort out all the documents and decide on which of them were real and which were false.
Thus the 27 documents which form the New Testament were the fruit of the Council called by the Pope, the direct descendant of Peter, in 420 A.D. That was the "birthday" of the Bible. Before that there was APOSTOLIC TRADITION, oral history, from the mouths of the Apostles to their diciples...THEN the finally-collated BIBLE.

History, you can't beat it. The early Christians took after their Jewish ancestors and kept records, wrote it all down, appreciated the efficacy of the written word.

I wonder why so many Protestants fight it?

4 posted on 02/03/2012 6:49:59 AM PST by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
A body that lives and breathes with the cultures in time but stands above them

The Magisterium is the fourth leg of the Trinity. When you add a "Mother" of God, you come up with a five sided representation.

5 posted on 02/03/2012 6:56:21 AM PST by Jack of all Trades (Hold your face to the light, even though for the moment you do not see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
You are merely pushing back your supposed problem by one level.
The Magesterium is ALSO subject to the limitations of time and culture. It’s pronouncements ALSO need to be interpreted.
If God was, according to your way of thinking, unable to clearly and adequately express Himself in the Bible, what makes you think He is capable of doing so through the Magesterium?

Pardon my interprtation, I don't THINK that the poster was saying that God was unable to clearly and adequately express Himself in the Bible.

God spoke through his chosen spokespeople. FIRST came the Magesterium, that is, the twelve Apostles, THEN came the Bible, 400 years later.

Also, there HAD to be a "final" source, an unimpeachable source. According to the Catholics, the Pope is that infallible source. They also believe that the Holy Spirit CONTINUES to inspire the Church and give the Pope that inspiration to be a final authority, as the Pope says He speaks through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Protestantism didn't surface until 1500 years later, thanks to the anger of a Catholic priest. Meanwhile, the years from 33-1500 WERE fruitful years which spread Christ's Word throughout the world.

Seems to me, God got it right on the money with His path of Apostolic Tradition, the Catholic Church, and THEN the Bible 400 years later.

6 posted on 02/03/2012 6:59:49 AM PST by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain

“the Bible was collated by the Catholics and not until (finally) in 420 A.D. “

2/3 of the “Bible” was in place before the founding of the Church.
The collation was in response to the abundance of false books that circulated.
It is debatable as to “Catholics” doing this. Orthodox Christians may have some thoughts for you there.


7 posted on 02/03/2012 7:08:39 AM PST by aMorePerfectUnion (Proud RINOmney Denialist since 2007!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain

“Pardon my interprtation, I don’t THINK that the poster was saying that God was unable to clearly and adequately express Himself in the Bible. “

Let me quote...

“These things led me to realize that if the Body of Christ has to go at Faith with a Bible Alone approach we are doomed. The time, culture and language separations are a huge obstacle to getting at the actual meaning of the texts, with all the nuance and subtlety that comes with theological understanding and the development of those concepts.”

**********

“’God spoke through his chosen spokespeople. FIRST came the Magesterium, that is, the twelve Apostles, THEN came the Bible, 400 years later. “

No. The Canon closed around 400 years later.

The vast bulk of the Bible was around even before Jesus was born. As it was ALREADY Scripture.

All of the New Testament was written within 40 years of Jesus’ death, (before the fall of Jerusalem).

The Bible did not suddenly appear 400 years after the fact.


8 posted on 02/03/2012 7:14:42 AM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus

-—You are merely pushing back your supposed problem by one level.
The Magesterium is ALSO subject to the limitations of time and culture. It’s pronouncements ALSO need to be interpreted.-—

It’s the difference between a living authority and a dead letter.

Regardless, the teaching authority of the Church is real and true, while the doctrine of “the Bible ALONE” is man-made, incoherent and false.

Why? See below.

Proving Inspiration

The Catholic method of proving the Bible to be inspired is this: The Bible is initially approached as any other ancient work. It is not, at first, presumed to be inspired. From textual criticism we are able to conclude that we have a text the accuracy of which is more certain than the accuracy of any other ancient work. 
 
An Accurate Text

Sir Frederic Kenyon, in The Story of the Bible, notes that “For all the works of classical antiquity we have to depend on manuscripts written long after their original composition. The author who is the best case in this respect is Virgil, yet the earliest manuscript of Virgil that we now possess was written some 350 years after his death. For all other classical writers, the interval between the date of the author and the earliest extant manuscript of his works is much greater. For Livy it is about 500 years, for Horace 900, for most of Plato 1,300, for Euripides 1,600.” Yet no one seriously disputes that we have accurate copies of the works of these writers. However, in the case of the New Testament we have parts of manuscripts dating from the first and early second centuries, only a few decades after the works were penned. 

Not only are the biblical manuscripts that we have older than those for classical authors, we have in sheer numbers far more manuscripts from which to work. Some are whole books of the Bible, others fragments of just a few words, but there are literally thousands of manuscripts in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Coptic, Syriac, and other languages. This means that we can be sure we have an authentic text, and we can work from it with confidence. 
 
The Bible as Historical Truth

Next we take a look at what the Bible, considered merely as a history, tells us, focusing particularly on the New Testament, and more specifically the Gospels. We examine the account contained therein of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. 

Using what is in the Gospels themselves and what we find in extra-biblical writings from the early centuries, together with what we know of human nature (and what we can otherwise, from natural reason alone, know of divine nature), we conclude that either Jesus was just what he claimed to be—God—or he was crazy. (The one thing we know he could not have been was merely a good man who was not God, since no merely good man would make the claims he made.) 

We are able to eliminate the possibility of his being a madman not just from what he said but from what his followers did after his death. Many critics of the Gospel accounts of the resurrection claim that Christ did not truly rise, that his followers took his body from the tomb and then proclaimed him risen from the dead. According to these critics, the resurrection was nothing more than a hoax. Devising a hoax to glorify a friend and mentor is one thing, but you do not find people dying for a hoax, at least not one from which they derive no benefit. Certainly if Christ had not risen his disciples would not have died horrible deaths affirming the reality and truth of the resurrection. The result of this line of reasoning is that we must conclude that Jesus indeed rose from the dead. Consequently, his claims concerning himself—including his claim to be God—have credibility. He meant what he said and did what he said he would do. 

Further, Christ said he would found a Church. Both the Bible (still taken as merely a historical book, not yet as an inspired one) and other ancient works attest to the fact that Christ established a Church with the rudiments of what we see in the Catholic Church today—papacy, hierarchy, priesthood, sacraments, and teaching authority. 

We have thus taken the material and purely historically concluded that Jesus founded the Catholic Church. Because of his Resurrection we have reason to take seriously his claims concerning the Church, including its authority to teach in his name. 

This Catholic Church tells us the Bible is inspired, and we can take the Church’s word for it precisely because the Church is infallible. Only after having been told by a properly constituted authority—that is, one established by God to assure us of the truth concerning matters of faith—that the Bible is inspired can we reasonably begin to use it as an inspired book. 


9 posted on 02/03/2012 7:15:59 AM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas

Don’t forget to quote your sources...
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/proving-inspiration

************

“while the doctrine of “the Bible ALONE” is man-made, incoherent and false.”

The teaching that the Bible contains in it all that a person need to find salvation and live a life pleasing to God is EXACTLY what St. Paul taught the early Christians.

You are free to choose not to believe St. Paul if you wish.


10 posted on 02/03/2012 7:25:23 AM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
All of the New Testament was written within 40 years of Jesus’ death, (before the fall of Jerusalem).

Except for Revelation ... 95 AD.

11 posted on 02/03/2012 7:26:39 AM PST by dartuser ("If you are ... what you were ... then you're not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: NYer

“The Magisterium”, if I understand correctly, is an extension of Oral Torah from the Jews.

Moses received extensive revelation on Mount Sinai (for several months), then taught orally for 40 years until he wrote a Torah Scroll just before his death. So not only was there a text that must be transmitted, but also explanations for its meanings and applications, as well as other conventional history.


12 posted on 02/03/2012 7:28:30 AM PST by jjotto ("Ya could look it up!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion; cloudmountain
It is debatable as to “Catholics” doing this. Orthodox Christians may have some thoughts for you there

At the time the Canon was established, we were one church.

13 posted on 02/03/2012 7:37:45 AM PST by NYer ("Be kind to every person you meet. For every person is fighting a great battle." St. Ephraim)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
2/3 of the “Bible” was in place before the founding of the Church. The collation was in response to the abundance of false books that circulated. It is debatable as to “Catholics” doing this. Orthodox Christians may have some thoughts for you there.

And then after Christ's resurrection they took out 7 books and parts of two more.

14 posted on 02/03/2012 7:46:55 AM PST by verga (Only the ignorant disdain intelligence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
2/3 of the “Bible” was in place before the founding of the Church. The collation was in response to the abundance of false books that circulated. It is debatable as to “Catholics” doing this. Orthodox Christians may have some thoughts for you there.

And then after Christ's resurrection they took out 7 books and parts of two more.

15 posted on 02/03/2012 7:48:08 AM PST by verga (Only the ignorant disdain intelligence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas
"Further, Christ said he would found a Church. Both the Bible (still taken as merely a historical book, not yet as an inspired one) and other ancient works attest to the fact that Christ established a Church with the rudiments of what we see in the Catholic Church today—papacy, hierarchy, priesthood, sacraments, and teaching authority."

May want to check your Greek and your history. The term "Church" is a word made up in later years from "kirk", a Scottish term. The word in the Scriptures is "assembly" and it is used to describe even the mob gathered in Ephesus. There is no papacy described in the Bible, no sacerdotalism, no sacraments, and none of the other errant traditions held by Rome.

16 posted on 02/03/2012 8:07:12 AM PST by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88

Please do not sully this thread with truth. :)


17 posted on 02/03/2012 8:09:43 AM PST by smvoice (Better Buck up, Buttercup. The wailing and gnashing are for an eternity..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus

-—The teaching that the Bible contains in it all that a person need to find salvation and live a life pleasing to God is EXACTLY what St. Paul taught the early Christians.-—

Was St. Paul speaking of the entire NT, including the books that had not yet been written?

—You are free to choose not to believe St. Paul if you wish.——

More fundamentally, How do you know that these are the words of St. Paul, if the Church that wrote, preserved and canonized these Scriptures is fallible?

Am i free to reject your fallible interpretation of St. Paul?

16All Scripture is God-breathed...

Yes, but this begs the question of What constitutes Scripture? Catholics offer a coherent answer: The Church that Christ founded tells us.

...and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

“Is useful for” does not mean “all that is necessary for.”

17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Who is “the man of God”? Some believe that this is a reference to priests. Is it possible to be thoroughly equipped, but not sufficiently equipped to do a good work? For example, a soldier may be thoroughly equipped for combat, yet still lack the will to fight.

Are good works alone sufficient for salvation?

Because this passage does not refer to faith, which is also necessary for salvation, this passage does not prove that scripture alone can supply us with everything that is necessary for salvation.

Finally, this passage again begs the question, What constitutes Scripture? The answer to this question requires an extra-biblical authority.

http://www.catholicsource.net/articles/ssmadrid.htm

OTOH, I am puzzled by the fact that Protestants ignore the following words of Jesus: “If he refuses to listen to the Church, treat him as a pagan or tax collector.”

Additionally, the Church is referred to in Scripture as the, “the pillar and foundation of truth.”


18 posted on 02/03/2012 8:30:19 AM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

“2/3 of the “Bible” was in place before the founding of the Church.”
You are of course referring to the Septuagint. How many protestant Bibles use that?

“It is debatable as to “Catholics” doing this. Orthodox Christians may have some thoughts for you there.”

There was ONE Catholic Church in 420. The Great Schism came later.


19 posted on 02/03/2012 8:31:47 AM PST by sayuncledave (et Verbum caro factum est (And the Word was made flesh))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Well written, however the Holy Spirit is my tutor.


20 posted on 02/03/2012 8:34:09 AM PST by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus

-—The teaching that the Bible contains in it all that a person need to find salvation and live a life pleasing to God is EXACTLY what St. Paul taught the early Christians.-—

Was St. Paul speaking of the entire NT, including the books that had not yet been written?

—You are free to choose not to believe St. Paul if you wish.——

More fundamentally, How do you know that these are the words of St. Paul, if the Church that wrote, preserved and canonized these Scriptures is fallible?

Am i free to reject your fallible interpretation of St. Paul?

16All Scripture is God-breathed...

Yes, but this begs the question of What constitutes Scripture? Catholics offer a coherent answer: The Church that Christ founded tells us.

...and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

“Is useful for” does not mean “all that is necessary for.”

17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Who is “the man of God”? Some believe that this is a reference to priests. Is it possible to be thoroughly equipped, but not sufficiently equipped to do a good work? For example, a soldier may be thoroughly equipped for combat, yet still lack the will to fight.

Are good works alone sufficient for salvation?

Because this passage does not refer to faith, which is also necessary for salvation, this passage does not prove that scripture alone can supply us with everything that is necessary for salvation.

Finally, this passage again begs the question, What constitutes Scripture? The answer to this question requires an extra-biblical authority.

http://www.catholicsource.net/articles/ssmadrid.htm

OTOH, I am puzzled by the fact that Protestants ignore the following words of Jesus: “If he refuses to listen to the Church, treat him as a pagan or tax collector.”

Additionally, the Church is referred to in Scripture as the, “the pillar and foundation of truth.”


21 posted on 02/03/2012 8:37:54 AM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88

-—The word in the Scriptures is “assembly” and it is used to describe even the mob gathered in Ephesus.-—

Then “the assembly” must be “the pillar and foundation of truth.” That assembly would be worth finding.

Perhaps it is the Church that Christ founded, the one which we ignore at our peril. “If he fails to listen to the Church, treat him as a pagan or tax collector.” For Christ’s command to be meaningful, His Church must be visible and identifiable.

This is where we turn to history.

Regarding the papacy, what key did Jesus give to Peter?


22 posted on 02/03/2012 8:52:45 AM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain
>> The early Christians took after their Jewish ancestors and kept records, wrote it all down, appreciated the efficacy of the written word.<<

I suppose then that you could show us where the apostles taught the bodily assumption of Mary?

23 posted on 02/03/2012 8:55:47 AM PST by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas
>>Some believe that this is a reference to priests.<<

Who does Peter say are priests?

1 Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

24 posted on 02/03/2012 9:09:14 AM PST by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: NYer
WHY THE MAGISTERIUM MAKES SENSE TO ME
Revelation, Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium
Vatican must ensure Caritas charity groups are “completely in accord” with Magisterium
What Is the Magisterium?

Allen interview of Cardinal George supports report of ‘parallel magisterium’ worries
The Magisterium: A Precious Gift (Catholic Caucus)
Catholic Biblical Apologetics: The Charism of Infallibility: The Magisterium
Anti-Popes and Dangers of a Parallel Magisterium (Church under attack) [Catholic Caucus]
Pontiff Calls for Complete Fidelity to Magisterium
Modernism and the Magisterium
Catholic Word of the Day: EXTRAORDINARY MAGISTERIUM , 10-23-09
“Exemplary loyalty and devotion to the Holy Father and the magisterium”
Nostra Aetate [Catholic Magisterium Rejecting Collective Guilt of Jews]
The Magisterium: A precious gift

25 posted on 02/03/2012 9:27:36 AM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus; St_Thomas_Aquinas
the Bible contains in it all that a person need to find salvation and live a life pleasing to God

I don't believe this is in scripture. Profitable/useful yes, but not entirely sufficient.

26 posted on 02/03/2012 9:48:41 AM PST by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas; Dr. Eckleburg; Forest Keeper; Gamecock; RnMomof7; HarleyD; fish hawk; ...
"Regarding the papacy, what key did Jesus give to Peter?"

And, from this the org builds a papacy? No wonder they have wandered from the pure Gospel of grace. We encourage you to abandon the chains of Rome and come into the light of Christ, alone...if you are permitted.

27 posted on 02/03/2012 9:50:46 AM PST by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: NYer

“At the time the Canon was established, we were one church. “

my point exactly. Still is one church.


28 posted on 02/03/2012 10:04:31 AM PST by aMorePerfectUnion (Proud RINOmney Denialist since 2007!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sayuncledave

“There was ONE Catholic Church in 420. The Great Schism came later.”

Always has been one church. Still is.


29 posted on 02/03/2012 10:05:49 AM PST by aMorePerfectUnion (Proud RINOmney Denialist since 2007!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas
OTOH, I am puzzled by the fact that Protestants ignore the following words of Jesus: “If he refuses to listen to the Church, treat him as a pagan or tax collector.”

Additionally, the Church is referred to in Scripture as the, “the pillar and foundation of truth.”

Mat 18:17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

It is not Church...It is church...

And what is church??? The church is a called out assembly...That's puts a whole different light on the subject, doesn't it...

The churches in the bible are called out assemblies...Local assemblies...The church is not some organization in Rome...

So as we can see, if you have a problem with someone, you take it to the local assembly of Christians where this person is a member...

The local assembly is the pillar and ground of the truth...That's what the bible says...You can't pervert the scripture into claiming that your religion is Rome is the pillar and ground of the truth...Won't work...

30 posted on 02/03/2012 10:51:16 AM PST by Iscool (You mess with me, you mess with the WHOLE trailerpark...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: sayuncledave
“2/3 of the “Bible” was in place before the founding of the Church.” You are of course referring to the Septuagint.

No...The Hebrew Bible...Written in Hebrew...

31 posted on 02/03/2012 10:53:12 AM PST by Iscool (You mess with me, you mess with the WHOLE trailerpark...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas
More fundamentally, How do you know that these are the words of St. Paul, if the Church that wrote, preserved and canonized these Scriptures is fallible?

That is really, really easy...Your Church did not exist when the disciples wrote the scriptures...

Your religion did not preserve anything...It almost did not even preserve a major portion of your Catholic manuscripts since they were dug out of a trash can just prior to being destroyed...

The fact that your religion created its own canon proves that it is fallible...

32 posted on 02/03/2012 10:58:00 AM PST by Iscool (You mess with me, you mess with the WHOLE trailerpark...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas; Dutchboy88; smvoice; metmom
Then “the assembly” must be “the pillar and foundation of truth.” That assembly would be worth finding.

And what truth is that pillar and foundation to up hold?

Note scripture does not say it is to BUILD a foundation or a truth ..it says to uphold an existing truth and be a foundation for it..

So what truth is the church to uphold?

33 posted on 02/03/2012 11:12:32 AM PST by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Searching for: CHURCH

MATTHEW 16:18 I will build my CHURCH; and the gates of
MATTHEW 18:17 tell it unto the CHURCH: but if he neglect
MATTHEW 18:17 neglect to hear the CHURCH, let him be unto
ACTS 2:47 Lord added to the CHURCH daily such as should
ACTS 5:11 came upon all the CHURCH, and upon as many
ACTS 7:38 that was in the CHURCH in the wilderness with
ACTS 8:1 great persecution against the CHURCH which was at Jerusalem;
ACTS 8:3 made havock of the CHURCH, entering into every house,
ACTS 11:22 the ears of the CHURCH which was in Jerusalem:
ACTS 11:26 assembled themselves with the CHURCH, and taught much people.
ACTS 12:1 forth his hands to vex certain of the CHURCH.
ACTS 12:5 without ceasing of the CHURCH unto God for him.
ACTS 13:1 there were in the CHURCH that was at Antioch
ACTS 14:23 them elders in every CHURCH, and had prayed with
ACTS 14:27 and had gathered the CHURCH together, they rehearsed all
ACTS 15:3 their way by the CHURCH, they passed through Phenice
ACTS 15:4 were received of the CHURCH, and of the apostles
ACTS 15:22 elders with the whole CHURCH, to send chosen men
ACTS 18:22 up, and saluted the CHURCH, he went down to
ACTS 20:17 to Ephesus, and called the elders of the CHURCH.
ACTS 20:28 overseers, to feed the CHURCH of God, which he
ROMANS 16:1 a servant of the CHURCH which is at Cenchrea:
ROMANS 16:5 Likewise greet the CHURCH that is in their house.
ROMANS 16:23 and of the whole CHURCH, saluteth you. Erastus the
1 CORINTHIANS 1:2 Unto the CHURCH of God which is at Corinth,
1 CORINTHIANS 4:17 Christ, as I teach every where in every CHURCH.
1 CORINTHIANS 6:4 to judge who are least esteemed in the CHURCH.
1 CORINTHIANS 10:32 to the Gentiles, nor to the CHURCH of God:
1 CORINTHIANS 11:18 come together in the CHURCH, I hear that there
1 CORINTHIANS 11:22 or despise ye the CHURCH of God, and shame
1 CORINTHIANS 12:28 set some in the CHURCH, first apostles, secondarily prophets,
1 CORINTHIANS 14:4 edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the CHURCH.
1 CORINTHIANS 14:5 except he interpret, that the CHURCH may receive edifying.
1 CORINTHIANS 14:12 ye may excel to the edifying of the CHURCH.
1 CORINTHIANS 14:19 Yet in the CHURCH I had rather speak five
1 CORINTHIANS 14:23 If therefore the whole CHURCH be come together into
1 CORINTHIANS 14:28 keep silence in the CHURCH; and let him speak
1 CORINTHIANS 14:35 a shame for women to speak in the CHURCH.
1 CORINTHIANS 15:9 an apostle, because I persecuted the CHURCH of God.
1 CORINTHIANS 16:19 the Lord, with the CHURCH that is in their
2 CORINTHIANS 1:1 our brother, unto the CHURCH of God which is
GALATIANS 1:13 measure I persecuted the CHURCH of God, and wasted
EPHESIANS 1:22 be the head over all things to the CHURCH,
EPHESIANS 3:10 be known by the CHURCH the manifold wisdom of
EPHESIANS 3:21 be glory in the CHURCH by Christ Jesus throughout
EPHESIANS 5:23 the head of the CHURCH: and he is the
EPHESIANS 5:24 Therefore as the CHURCH is subject unto Christ, so
EPHESIANS 5:25 Christ also loved the CHURCH, and gave himself for
EPHESIANS 5:27 to himself a glorious CHURCH, not having spot, or
EPHESIANS 5:29 and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the CHURCH:
EPHESIANS 5:32 mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the CHURCH.
PHILIPPIANS 3:6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the CHURCH; touching the righteousness which
PHILIPPIANS 4:15 departed from Macedonia, no CHURCH communicated with me as
COLOSSIANS 1:18 of the body, the CHURCH: who is the beginning,
COLOSSIANS 1:24 flesh for his body’s sake, which is the CHURCH:
COLOSSIANS 4:15 and Nymphas, and the CHURCH which is in his
COLOSSIANS 4:16 read also in the CHURCH of the Laodiceans; and
1 THESSALONIANS 1:1 and Timotheus, unto the CHURCH of the Thessalonians which
2 THESSALONIANS 1:1 and Timotheus, unto the CHURCH of the Thessalonians in
1 TIMOTHY 3:5 shall he take care of the CHURCH of God?)
1 TIMOTHY 3:15 God, which is the CHURCH of the living God,
1 TIMOTHY 5:16 and let not the CHURCH be charged; that it
PHILEMON 1:2 our fellowsoldier, and to the CHURCH in thy house:
HEBREWS 2:12 the midst of the CHURCH will I sing praise
HEBREWS 12:23 the general assembly and CHURCH of the firstborn, which
JAMES 5:14 the elders of the CHURCH; and let them pray
1 PETER 5:13 The CHURCH that is at Babylon, elected together with
3 JOHN 1:6 thy charity before the CHURCH: whom if thou bring
3 JOHN 1:9 I wrote unto the CHURCH: but Diotrephes, who loveth
3 JOHN 1:10 that would, and casteth them out of the CHURCH.
REVELATION 2:1 the angel of the CHURCH of Ephesus write; These
REVELATION 2:8 the angel of the CHURCH in Smyrna write; These
REVELATION 2:12 the angel of the CHURCH in Pergamos write; These
REVELATION 2:18 the angel of the CHURCH in Thyatira write; These
REVELATION 3:1 the angel of the CHURCH in Sardis write; These
REVELATION 3:7 the angel of the CHURCH in Philadelphia write; These
REVELATION 3:14 the angel of the CHURCH of the Laodiceans write;
—END—


34 posted on 02/03/2012 11:12:38 AM PST by johngrace (I am a 1 John 4! Christian- declared at every Sunday Mass , Divine Mercy and Rosary prayers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88

I have abandoned the chains of Protestantism and have come into the light of Christ as a Catholic.

I receive His sacraments, His love, His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity at each Mass.

I have received the fullness of faith in Jesus Christ.

Come home, we’ll leave the light on for you.


35 posted on 02/03/2012 11:14:23 AM PST by Not gonna take it anymore (If Obama were twice as smart as he is, he would be a wit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: NYer

This article makes me think of the old testament story of Israel wanting a King

1Sa 8:7 And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.

1Sa 8:8 According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.

1Sa 8:9 Now therefore hearken unto their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.

1Sa 8:10 ¶ And Samuel told all the words of the LORD unto the people that asked of him a king.

1Sa 8:11 And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint [them] for himself, for his chariots, and [to be] his horsemen; and [some] shall run before his chariots.

1Sa 8:12 And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and [will set them] to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.

1Sa 8:13 And he will take your daughters [to be] confectionaries, and [to be] cooks, and [to be] bakers.

1Sa 8:14 And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, [even] the best [of them], and give [them] to his servants.

1Sa 8:15 And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.

1Sa 8:16 And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put [them] to his work.

1Sa 8:17 He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.

1Sa 8:18 And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.

1Sa 8:19 ¶ Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us;

1Sa 8:20 That we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.

1Sa 8:21 And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he rehearsed them in the ears of the LORD.

1Sa 8:22 And the LORD said to Samuel, Hearken unto their voice, and make them a king. .......

Men are not satisfied by God..they want a visible representative or representatives to lead them ...


36 posted on 02/03/2012 11:17:18 AM PST by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore

Well, you certainly have received something. In a few years you will find out whether that was different than the boys in bathrobes claimed. You may turn the light off...we’re not swimming that foul Tiber. We are safe in the arms of Christ, alone.


37 posted on 02/03/2012 11:19:17 AM PST by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
WHY THE MAGISTERIUM MAKES SENSE TO ME

1 Corinthians 1:18-31 18 For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written, “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart.”

20 Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.

22 For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

26 For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. 27 But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; 28 God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, 29 so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.

30 And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, 31 so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”

All believers have the Holy Spirit and are just as capable as each other in understanding spiritual truth because it's SPIRITUALLY discerned.

It's not a matter of intellectual prowess and there's no Scriptural support for a select, elite bunch of people to make decisions about spiritual matters for everyone else.

As a matter of fact, we all answer to GOD individually.

Romans 14:12 So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.

38 posted on 02/03/2012 11:33:27 AM PST by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; caww; ...

Just wow........

What an indictment of Catholicism.

I see that our analysis of the RCC wanting to be completely in control was not off at all.

NOTHING is above the authority of Scripture. The Catholic church’s self-proclaimed final authority is meaningless because one cannot proclaim themselves as a final authority, it must be granted from the outside to be valid.

Only authority can confer authority and I don’t see God giving His up to Catholicism.


39 posted on 02/03/2012 11:39:23 AM PST by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
The teaching that the Bible contains in it all that a person need to find salvation and live a life pleasing to God is EXACTLY what St. Paul taught the early Christians.

John also states it. Matter of fact, all that's needed is the gospel of John.

John 20:30-31 30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

40 posted on 02/03/2012 11:46:15 AM PST by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas; Dutchboy88

Interesting word study on the word church....

In 1 Timothy 3:15 “if I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth.” (ESV)

http://biblos.com/1_timothy/3-15.htm

The Greek word is ekklésia: an assembly, a (religious) congregation

http://concordances.org/greek/1577.htm


41 posted on 02/03/2012 11:56:03 AM PST by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Yes, actually ekklesia was a widely used, regular term describing any gathering, sometimes public, sometimes private, but simply the assembling of people together. Rome has morphed this into a trademarked term as a figment of their imagination. But, biblically, there are no governmental structures, no bishoprics (that term is simply “older men”), and certainly no papacy.


42 posted on 02/03/2012 12:55:26 PM PST by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas

“Was St. Paul speaking of the entire NT, including the books that had not yet been written?”

He was speaking, I am sure, to the Scripture that existed at that point.

***************

“More fundamentally, How do you know that these are the words of St. Paul, if the Church that wrote, preserved and canonized these Scriptures is fallible?”

I recognize the the early church was give the privilege of identifying the presence of God’s Spirit in the sacred writings - much like John the Baptist was give the privilege of recognizing Jesus as the Messiah. But note: John the Baptist did not have the authority to choose the Messiah - only to recognize the one God had already chosen. Likewise, the church conferred nothing on the Scripture except to recognize the presence of God’s Spirit therein.

*****************

“Am i free to reject your fallible interpretation of St. Paul?”

You are. Freedom of conviction is something strongly present in the New Testament - and sadly lacking in the Catholic Church. There is always the implied threat of violence with the Romans.

****************

“Yes, but this begs the question of What constitutes Scripture? Catholics offer a coherent answer: The Church that Christ founded tells us.”

Now to turn your argument on itself...

How do you KNOW that Christ founded the church and gave it the claimed authority - apart from the Scriptures?

Because the Church says that He did?

Circular reasoning.

*********************

“Who is “the man of God”? Some believe that this is a reference to priests.”

Ah yes! Those who are paid to be “good” while the rest can relax and act like the sons of the devil. No doubt the Priests put forth this idea. Sorry, there are now “tiers” is Christianity, remember when Jesus said, “...and ye are all brothers.”

****************

““Is useful for” does not mean “all that is necessary for.””

“But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.”

Specifically:

“equipped for every good work”

************

“Because this passage does not refer to faith, which is also necessary for salvation, this passage does not prove that scripture alone can supply us with everything that is necessary for salvation.”

It does. Here...

“from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through FAITH in Christ Jesus.”


43 posted on 02/03/2012 1:01:00 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore; Salvation
I have abandoned the chains of Protestantism and have come into the light of Christ as a Catholic.

Welcome home!


44 posted on 02/03/2012 1:46:10 PM PST by NYer ("Be kind to every person you meet. For every person is fighting a great battle." St. Ephraim)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
I suppose then that you could show us where the apostles taught the bodily assumption of Mary?

If you are really interested in the Marian doctrines, you can go to the Vatican and look it up. They can explain it better than I can...that's their job. http://www.vatican.va/

If you are merely baiting me....GET A LIFE.

45 posted on 02/03/2012 1:56:58 PM PST by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: NYer; CynicalBear
Maybe you can give CynicalBear some information on Mary.
If he's interested he'll look it up; if he's just baiting me, he'll ignore it.

Thanks, NYer.

46 posted on 02/03/2012 1:59:21 PM PST by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
I think we're talking at cross purposes.
Of course, the Old Testament was written before Christ and of course, it's larger, much larger. Who would disagree? Of course, the New Testament was written within 40 years of Jesus' life and death, by those witnesses. Who else could have done it? You're preachin' to the choir.

I didn't say that the Bible suddenly appeared.
I did say that it was collated at a certain date: 380, 400 and 420 A.D. The Magesterium hadn't done the deed before because of the persecutions of the Romans. When the Romans finally made Christianity the state religion, THEN the Magesterium could come out of hiding, so to speak, and organize, collect, investigate and get all those documents OUT of hiding, together, with all the current bishops and rationally collate the new works of Jesus.

It's not rocket science or special information; it's just history.

47 posted on 02/03/2012 2:20:49 PM PST by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain

Been there done that. No Biblical support. The whole thing is built on maybe could be. One of the most ludicrous contentions is that all of the apostles were transported to the funeral but never once mention that in any of their writings.


48 posted on 02/03/2012 2:29:39 PM PST by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas
Regarding the papacy, what key did Jesus give to Peter?

If Peter was the first Pope and could speak God's Word infallibly, why does history tell us this?:

Why just five verses after the verse you so love to misinterpret (Matthew 17: 17-19) does Jesus call the "Pope" Satan and an offense to Christ? (Matthew 17:23)

Why, if Peter is Pope, did the Church have the Jerusalem Council? Wouldn't Peter just tell them what's what? Seems like a wonderful missed opportunity to show Peter's preeminence.

Since history has established that James ran the show at the Jerusalem Counsel, did he usurp Peter's position? Why would impetulent Peter sit quietly by and allow it to happen?

If Peter is Pope, why did he deny Christ three times? Kind of messes up his infallibility.

If Peter is Pope, why did he allow Paul to publicly dress him down on a theological issue? Doesn't Paul know his place? Would a modern-day Pope allow a Bishop or Cardinal to do that today?

If Peter was the first Pope, why was Paul the one who wrote most of the New Testament books?

If Peter is the first Pope, why did he have trouble understanding some of Paul's writings? (2 Peter 3:15-16)

These hardly fill one with confidence that Peter was the appointed Vicar of Christ. He didn't act like he knew it or that his contemporary Church leaders did either.

49 posted on 02/03/2012 2:36:51 PM PST by CommerceComet (If Mitt can leave the GOP to protest Reagan, why can't I do the same in protest of Romney?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: CommerceComet

Details, details......

Once a pope, always a pope, you know.....


50 posted on 02/03/2012 2:41:27 PM PST by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-311 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson