Posted on 04/01/2017 7:10:18 AM PDT by Kaslin
"One indeed is the universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved, in which the priest himself is the sacrifice, Jesus Christ, whose body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the species of bread and wine; the bread (changed) into His body by the divine power of transubstantiation, and the wine into the blood, so that to accomplish the mystery of unity we ourselves receive from His (nature) what He Himself received from ours."
--Pope Innocent III and Lateran Council IV (A.D. 1215)
“It’s literally the exact opposite of what you’re teaching.”
That’s what you say. I have no reason to believe you or your interpretation of things.
“You teach salvation is available to “all” people.”
Actually, I’m saying grace is accessible to all in some way or else there would be no point to free will.
“Augustine says it isn’t, and that “all” only means “all kinds of people, the wealthy, the poor, the old,” etc.”
Again, that’s through your interpretative lens - which is not squared with everything that St. Augustine wrote. One of the problems with Protestants interpreting St. Augustine is that they ignore entire categories of his thinking. Praying for the dead, for instance, completely ignored or simply dismissed by Protestants. If there’s prayer for the dead, then the Protestant understanding of St. Augustine is wrong. Grace through the sacraments: If there is grace there, then the Protestant understanding of St. Augustine is wrong.
Our Lord is speaking here of the Pharisees’ tradition (”traditions of men”) and not Apostolic tradition (which comes from Himself, Our Lord, through the Apostles.)
Love ya, Elsie. But you have way too much time on your hands.
“Mother of God” That’s the big one. After that, the rest are just variations and ways to meditate. It has always amazed me how much the Protestants refuse to acknowledge this fact.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther%27s_Marian_theology
More complicated than just rejected her out of hand.
Catholics do not worship Mary but venerate her. It is implied in this wiki article that we believe that we need Mary and the saints to have salvation. That is not true. We believe that we receive salvation from Jesus Christ. We also however believe that He knows how weak and sinful we are and so he gave us his mother (Jn. 19:25). He also gave us the saints to be our guides and role models. And of course we believe that he gave us the sacraments to strengthen us. To believe that we can just forge on on the strength of our own will is silly of course and to believe that just saying the magic words and then never having to worry about sin again is also silly.
Just SOME of the stuff he wrote; which I have posted in this thread; shows that CATHOLIC teaching ain't what it USED to be!
Ok; where is the EVIDENCE of 'Apostolic tradition' to be found in the bible?
Sorry MrsDon-0; but you have too much to explain than a mere waving of the imperial hand can dismiss lightly.
Izaat so...
Why?
No where in the bible is she 'venerated'.
I venerated my mother while she lived. Why would I not venerate the Mother of God?
This sort of rhetoric would be more useful in a propaganda sense if you didn't overdo it. As it stands, repeating it over and over again, especially in posts where you deliberately misinterpret what the other party has explained and re-explained more than once, robs it of most of its power.
I’ll keep saying it as long as you keep doing it. I have no reason to believe any Protestant interpretations.
Who founded the Eastern Orthodox Churches? And are they heretics too?
There are places in the NT where [Pharisees'] traditions or the "traditions of men" are warned against. There are other places in the NT --- particularly in the writings of St. Paul--- where Apostolic traditions are positively recommended(1 Cor. 11:2, 2 Thess. 2:15, 2 Thess. 3:6, 2 Tim. 2:2) and a great deal more.
I never see the Non-C Arguers attempt to distinguish between one sort of tradition which is warned against, and another sort of Tradition (with a capital T) which is recommended, or even required. Biblically required.
I never see a Non-C Arguer with a serious commitment to ferret out the content of this Biblically required Tradition, or even commit to find out how to find it!
All too often even an initial step of explanation on Catholics' part is met by mockery (GUESSWORK! MAKING IT UP!) or blasphemy (Crucified Christ whining, "Howcome I don't get no dulia?") -- not the seriousness expected of an inquiring heart.
Why should I get into Point 2 when you're still mocking Point 1?
I've got lots of parish obligations from now until Easter. Bringing eleven n00bies into the Church! And then I'm helping lead the Mystagogia discussions from Easter to Pentecost.
Gotta run. I'll go ask Blessed Mary to pray for you.
“Who founded the Eastern Orthodox Churches?”
The Eastern Orthodox.
“And are they heretics too?”
The founders? Some may have been since some were schismatics - as even some Eastern Orthodox seem to tacitly admit with more modern examples. There’s no reason to think of those in Eastern Orthodox Churches today as heretics, however.
So today’s Protestant churches are heretics, but the Orthodox are not?
"Ok; where is the EVIDENCE of 'Apostolic tradition' to be found in the bible?"
1 Cor. 11:2
2 Thess. 2:15
2 Thess. 3:6
2 Tim. 2:2 ....
from Paul.
And on to John: what is the significance of this: "There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were t be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written"? This same John recalls Jesus saying this: "The Advocate, the Holy Spirit Whom the Father will send in My Name --- He will teach you everything and remind you of all I have told you."
Ether John's saying it's all insignificant and not worth looking into,
~OR~ there's much --- not a little, but "much"---- which the Holy Spirit is going to remind and teach the Church.
John come back to this unwritten "much-ness" repeatedly:
2 John 1:12 - "Although I have much to write to you, I do not intend to use paper and ink, Instead, I hope to visit you and speak face to face so that our joy may be complete."
And
3 John 1:13-14 - "I have much to write to you, but I do not wish to write with pen and ink. Instead, I hope to see you soon, when we can talk face to face."
Again: insignificant? Or so significant that he insistently repeated it and said he had to tell them face to face?
How would you find out what was taught by the Apostles bet not written in the Four Gospels or the NT Letters? Would it be reasonable to look into the writings of their disciples?
Disciples of John the Evangelist
OK, is there another reasonably way? How about looking at the local churches St. John and his disciples founded, and find out what teachings and practices they have faithfully transmitted through the earliest centuries as of Apostolic origin?
If you find substantial agreement on doctrines and practices from one end of the Church to the other --- local churches in Asia, Africa, and Europe -- which the churches treasure as having been handed on to them by the Apostolic founders, isn't that evidence of the Holy Spirit leading all these churches in the same direction?
Or did the Church just kinda "peter out" after the first century, whereupon the Holy Spirit, forgetting He was to remind them of "everything," curled up and fell asleep? --- not to reawaken until 1400 years later, when this is what he "reminded" the "reformed" churches: "Verily, forget all that stuff"? I
I had no idea Luther said such things. Well.
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.