Posted on 10/15/2001 6:54:40 AM PDT by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
In other words, its a verb when we want it to be and a noun when its convenient as well. Ho hum.
How is it ambiguous? The church is the body of Christ. Once you accept Christ as Lord and Savior, you become a member. Pretty straight forward, obvious, and well documented in Scripture.
sigh
Also straight forward, obvious, and well documented in Scripture (as well as in the entire concept of the epistle) is that Jesus established one Church, gave its leaders power to forgive sins, passed their authority on to new leaders as situations warranted, and remained united in one faith, one bread, one cup.
And that Jesus prayed for the Church to remain one.
SD
No, I have a clue - a very good one. He's not really present, but it's symbolic. It's not symbolic, it's an extension of the sacrifice. It's not the sacrifice because it's over, it's the flesh and the blood. Actually, it's not really flesh and blood - it's symbolic....
Circular and intended to keep you from being pinned down. Intended that way because either they don't have a clue what they are talking about or they'd rather other's not know what they really mean. In either case it's confusion. And it is not of the Lord.
"Catholic heresy" is an oxymoron.
Catholicism is not a denomination.
In other words, its a verb when we want it to be and a noun when its convenient as well. Ho hum.
OK, Steven I let you do this twice, but I'll have to clear this up for anyone else who may be reading. You mean to say "adjective" not "verb." Adjectives modify nouns. "Catholic" is an adjective which morphed into a proper noun (the "name" of a thing) through use. Much like in "stick shift" "stick" started as a description, an adjective describing the type of shift, but is now all more or less one one noun. Stick shift.
The useage of "catholic" meaning "universal" started, as I said, only in opposition to heresey. Without being challenged the Church needs no name. It simply is the Church. The Church thus adopted its descriptive adjective as its "name."
Every other church picked a name to oppose itself to the universal church. They literally de-nominated (to give a name to) themselves. The original Church remains. Universal. Catholic. Not denominated.
SD
If "confusion" were evidence of a doctrine being "not of the Lord" there wouldn't be much sound doctrine left on this board now would there? ;-)
No, I have a clue - a very good one. He's not really present, but it's symbolic. It's not symbolic, it's an extension of the sacrifice. It's not the sacrifice because it's over, it's the flesh and the blood. Actually, it's not really flesh and blood - it's symbolic....
Circular and intended to keep you from being pinned down. Intended that way because either they don't have a clue what they are talking about or they'd rather other's not know what they really mean. In either case it's confusion. And it is not of the Lord.
Like I said, if you would like me to explain it to ya slowly I will. Do you really need to write two paragraphs more to display that you don't know a thing about it?
SD
To remind us of the reality of what God did for us. It is all well and good to have happy resurrected Jesus as our Savior and Friend. But we need to be reminded that this is not just a fairy tale or a theological experiment. Jesus really was nailed to a cross and died for us. And if looking at that and contemplating it makes you feel anything it should be grateful.
SD
They do. As far as I know the local churches are incoprporated as "The Diocese of Pittsburgh." Reference is made to "The Church of Greensburg."
It is only for clarity in communicating with outsiders that the name "Catholic" is used.
SD
That Jesus rose again and we can too is just gravy.
SD
This is actually only one (I thiink of three) common depictions that Catholics use. It is common to see Christ depicted in the act of the sacrifice. It is almost as common to see Him depicted as risen (and conquering) the cross (hands and feet not in contact with the cross, eyes open, etc.) and I can't remember the third (I think it's a living Christ enduring the suffering for our sins).
All (or just a plain cross) are acceptable and used largely depending on circumstances (e.g. the parish I grew up in would cover the risen depiction that was on our cross from Good Friday until Easter - It just didn't seem proper to display a risen Christ while contemplating the results of our sin)
I would add to your comment the Holy Spirit “guiding the Church that Christ established to insure sound doctrine is taught.”
The reformation with Luther was a great work of the Holy Spirit.
The reformation with Luther split Christendom. This couldn’t possibly be the work of the Holy Spirit.
But man seems to take these movements and turn them into tradition or organizations.
Yes, its called Protestantism.
So the truth that Luther uncovered reformed the church and brought many to Christ but man eventually turned what Luther did into the Lutheran denomination. With Calvin, men created the Presbyterian denomination. And the list goes on. These man made denominations get all the press
Like I said, this is not the work of the Holy Spirit.
but God does keep a remnant, just like he did in Elijah's time. The Catholic church is not the true church because it separates the body of Christ, the TRUE church.
I disagree. Christ established a Church to endure until the end of time. If it’s not the Catholic Church then it must be the Orthodox, but it most certainly is not a Protestant or non denominational Church. The evidence is just not there.
We are all members of this church, but you would rather hold on to the traditions of man, rather than the word of God.
No, the word of God tells me that Christ established a Church and that’s why I am a member of it.
My ox didn't get gored either way. I believe that I am the only Proddie on these threads who reads Mt. 16:18 the same as the Catholics (though we obviously arrive at different places from the same reading). So, the petra argument is irrelevant to me, which made your change of the subject all the more aggravating ;)
Without enciting an internicene war, I would like to point out that the rubrics pretty clearly anticipate a crucified corpus on the main crucifix in the sanctuary. Of course we all know the rubrics were largely thrown out in practice because of "the Spirit of Vatican II."
For the eventual end of this spirit see the movie "Dogma" and the "Buddy Christ" figure.
SD
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.