I will ask again -- was that not yourself which testified on these pages previously of having received baptism of the Spirit in a Pentecostal Church?
While you had also shared that you were raised in the Roman Catholic Church...but for a time had not attended, etc?
And then here you say ---
"the Church"?
Since when was the Roman Catholic church ever exclusively "the" church? It most certainly was not in the earliest beginnings. Ah, but then in later centuries took up the trappings of Empire of Rome as that disintegrated and dissolved, blending that with "Church".
The idea itself the the Roman Catholic Church (which Catholic insist should be called only The Catholic Church) is indeed The Church, either in entirety, or as central authority is a Romish fantasy (and always has been!)...possibly reinforced here and there by mistaking correlation (of Spirit) for causation (themselves!)-- when the cause is God's own grace & mercy -- which can be found in full abundance far outside the narrow confines of Roman Catholicism.
One need not accept popery in order to enjoy communion, through Christ, with God. BUT -- that concept is among many that Roman Catholics (including popes) have long asserted is a requirement, even one which Christ Himself would require of all human beings (if one listens closely enough to Romanists).
Being that it that exclusivity if so far from the truth --- that aspect is in the least -- error, a mistake -- if not being an outright lie from the pit of hell itself.
And you just got through here on these pages with showing statues of early Reformers (and John Wesley, who was a leader -- but one whom few consider to have been entirely without flaw) in comparison to making graven images & statues representative of (now) spiritual entities considered to be now in Heaven -- that one can and even should direct prayers towards?
All the excuses, all the rationalizations --- they are not enough to change the reality of having incrementally populated the Heavens with lesser ranked gods and goddesses --- regardless of all the studious avoidance of using those terms of description for departed saints, in end result having renewed pagan religious thought and practice that there be a pantheon of individual spirits which one can (and should) direct their prayers towards -- other than the One True God -- the God of the Hebrews, the one God whom should be rightfully feared (even) since that is the ONE God who actually does things.
I cannot describe His Holiness, but it is frightening -- or can be -- as the Scriptures attest Moses experienced.
God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Though He is utterly Holy, complete and entire, there being no variableness or shadow of turning within Himself, nothing within Him which is contradictory, yet still, He does have his own emotion as it were --- knowing happiness, joy, good pleasure & contentedness, He also can be angered and knows sadness (oh, boy -- does He ever know sadness).
He has allowed myself to hear as it were some of those emotions, those kind of "feelings" which were within Him in conjunction with a some (but not all) things which He shared portion of His own thought with -- little me -- who is not much, just one individual human being among billions.
You talk about "Mary" directing you towards Jesus? Really.
How does that happen?
Can you break it down for us?Can you describe how that communication transpires?
Is it more like remembering what NT texts say about her, and what various individuals within the RCC say and "teach" about Mary, producing within trains of thought and then also --- emotion?
Or is there some "spirit" which you identify as being "Mary" herself?
I'm not sure why the Helper which Christ described in John 16 would require additional assistance.
So go ahead, get mad, tell me what's what with the usual excuses, I do believe I have heard them all, and remain still far from convinced of the veracity of much of the usual RC apologetic -- but not for reason that I do not understand it.
Or -- as is more typical -- just shine me on, avoid questions which may be inconvenient, ignore what I'm really saying here -- yet if answering at all, answer just for some smallish part -- some aspect which can be like a stray strand of thread to be pulled on, diverting attention to some seam imagined to be weakpoint.
I expect nothing else.
The Truth. Ha. He's like a lonely vagabond -- homeless, wandering, searching with His lamp high and low -- and most people when they stumble over him, just pick themselves up like nothing just happened.
" I will ask again -- was that not yourself which testified on these pages previously of having received baptism of the Spirit in a Pentecostal Church?"
No. I never received baptism of the Spirit in a Pentecostal church. I do have dear Pentecostal friends (Church of God in Christ), whose church I never attended. Through generous befriending and dialogue they helped me recover faith in Christ, Whom I had--- through my sinful fault --- abandoned in my late teens-early 20's.
"While you had also shared that you were raised in the Roman Catholic Church...but for a time had not attended, etc?"
Yes.
"And then here you say --- "the Church"?"
Yes. And I mean "the Catholic" Church in both senses: as in "all the Baptized" (because Baptism is entrance into the Catholic Church --- for you as well as for me, BlueDragon) as well as "in communion with Peter and his succssors".
(This kind of discussion often suffers from the failure to make distinctions between the different, though mostly concentric and mostly coherent --- multiple senses of the word "Church." I will try to keep these senses explicit, without becoming totally exasperating, I hope.)
"Since when was the Roman Catholic church ever exclusively "the" church? It most certainly was not in the earliest beginnings."
In the early beginnings, before Peter came to the city of Rome, there was no "See of Rome," of course. But there was Peter. And if you were in communion with Peter and the other Apostles, you were a member of the Catholic Church (the church cata holos, the whole Church) whereas if you were with someone not in communion with Peter (e.g. Simon Magus) you were not a member of the Catholic Church.
"Ah, but then in later centuries took up the trappings of Empire of Rome as that disintegrated and dissolved, blending that with "Church"."
The "trappings" do not make up the Church. There were, in the earliest centuries, FIVE patriarchal sees --- Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople, and Rome --- and none of them except Rome had precisely Roman trappings (Constantinople being a special case, since Constantinople was "Roman" for 1,000 years beyond the existence of the Western Empire). But the other local Churches --- even as far away as Mosul (Iraq) or Xi'an (western China)--- which were not culturally or politically Roman at all --- were still Catholic if they had not broken communion with Peter.
"The idea itself the the Roman Catholic Church (which Catholic insist should be called only The Catholic Church).."
Thank you. That's much to be preferred..
"...is indeed The Church, either in entirety, or as central authority is a Romish fantasy (and always has been!)..."
...corroborated by certain, uh, trifles of historic documentary and physical evidence...
"...possibly reinforced here and there by mistaking correlation (of Spirit) for causation (themselves!).."That's too complicated for me to even make out, not knowing who are the exact "themselves" of whom you speak. For a really good and reliable "himself", however, I would recommend Irenaeus of Lyon. OK, carry on...
"-- when the cause is God's own grace & mercy -- which can be found in full abundance far outside the narrow confines of Roman Catholicism."
I certainly agree that God's grace and mercy fall outside of any confines whatsoever. Although these people, too, are ordered (that is, being oriented toward) the Church, themselves, even if they are ever so far from a visible, institutional affiliation.
"One need not accept popery in order to enjoy communion, through Christ, with God."
This is true. I hope you are using the word "popery" with a wry sense of irony --- as my best popish friends do. Otherwise, be prepared to be called one of the --- brace yourself--- "separated brethren"! :o)
" BUT -- that concept is among many that Roman Catholics (including popes) have long asserted is a requirement, even one which Christ Himself would require of all human beings (if one listens closely enough to Romanists)."
Ditto the word "Romanists" --- you separated brethren, you!
BTW, I'm about out of time here for the nonce. Concerning your statement about people being saved outside of the Catholic Church, let me refer you to an authoritative statement of what the Catholic Church says about that:
| Catechism of the Catholic Church, para. 819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth" are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements." Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation..." |
Please read it with plenty of context (paragraphs before and after, at least) so you'll get the bigger picture and not fall into some misunderstanding.
You're certainly Catholic.
Tagline :o)