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 |
Mack ... give the keyboard back to Becky. ;o)
I'll say it ... he was wrong. He stepped over the line with the Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff statement. This came from a bull not from the doctrine of the Catholic Church. These bulls are not necessarily the CC's beliefs or teachings but are the views and beliefs of their authors.
--------------------
ALL:Good morning, everybody.
Wednesday, November 7, 2001 | ||
|
From you know where ...
Love is the fulfilling of the law. (Romans 13:10)
With this one simple sentence, Paul went to the heart of a controversy that was threatening to divide Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome. As it appeared in other places where Paul visited, the question arose among the Romans about the degree to which believers in Christ were still bound to the ancient Law of Moses.
What's the relationship between love and obeying a set of laws? The link is God himself, who is Love. He created us out of love and designed us in such a way that we would not be fulfilled until we came to share in his goodness, perfection, and divinity. From the very beginning, he loved us as part of his "very good" creation (Genesis 1:31)--even though he knew we would turn away from him in sin. It was out of love that God commanded our first parents not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:17), and love that motivated every other law he gave his people.
It was love--for the Father and for all of us--that drove Jesus to the cross. And it was the same love that moved the Spirit to fill our hearts and build the church.
If love is the foundation of all God has done for us and in us, it's only logical that love should be our response to him. But how can we respond to love if we don't experience that love? That's the challenge that St. Paul puts before us today. Can we ask Jesus to show us his love in such a way that it will melt our hearts and move us to follow him? Can we build our lives on the solid rock of his love and know that any action done in love is not wasted? Can we put aside the world's fallen notions of love and let the love of Christ flow through us? Can we let him love us so that we can love as he loves? The more we let this happen, the more we will find ourselves joyfully and peacefully fulfilling all the laws of God.
"Father, I praise and adore you. Nothing is more powerful or more awesome than your love! Come and fill me with this love today so that I will become good as you are good."
--------------------
Have a great day, everyone!
It's Steven. If you want proof, ask him the meaning of Matt. 1:25.
You missed one, Douglas. The Holy Trinity is the boss (or bosses), then comes the pope, etc. :o)
I told you I would mess it up!
What are you al?
Been nice knowing Mack. Meet me at the east gate in New Jerusalem and say hello.
It helps, I'm sure that one of our teams, is called the "Cheese Wizzards", packer fan of course. And then we have "The Alfred Packers". Alfred Packer was a cannibal in the Rocky Mountains back in the 1800's.
When has this ever happened? On my watch?
Now I know for sure I'm not worthy. Thank you dig for sharing that catholic truth with me.
Catholics would do well to print this up and distribute it far and wide. I mean, if it contains no falsehood, its worth repeating, right?
Last September the Catholic Church issued Dominus Iesus which is essentially a re-statement of the above, taking into consideration the present day reality. The Church is one and the Church is necessary for salvation. This statement caused a lot of flack, still is getting a lot of heavy fire. Both from outside and from the modernists inside.
So yes, to this point, the Church should and has distributed this teaching far and wide. Absolute truths can hurt. But at times political correctness must fall by the wayside. I have to say that the Catholic Church is necessary and that all who will be saved will be saved because of the existence of Her.
I know you have said that you know of some Rabbi's who believe that Christianity is "an acceptable form of monotheism for Gentiles." But in honesty, this is not an orthodox Jewish position. Jesus either was the Son of God or a madman. We are following a supreme blashphemer.
Catholics, c'mon, what do you really think of this? Surely you don't accept the relationship between civil and religious authority advocated here? Do you think we all must be subject to the Roman Pontiff on threat of eternal damnation? Do you, personally, accept the notion of extra ecclesiam nulla salus?
I maintain that the civil authorities should have no say so in matters of the Church. We would think it quite odd for the government to be selecting bishops, and rightly so. It is not a gov't matter. (Witness the debacle in Washington with the conflict between the Episcopal bishopress and the conservative pastor who refused her command to leave his church. Someone got the gov't involved and had a hearing and all that. Absolutely disgraceful of a Church to not be able to handle its own internal affairs without calling in the law. But I digress)
I don't think that we should all be civilly subject to the Pope, or that we should be coerced into such submission. But I do believe that all should come to the realization that the Pope is the leader of God's Church and should voluntarily submit to his spiritual leadership.
Do I believe that those outside of the Church are in danger for their salvation? Yes. If the Church did not exist no one would be saved.
SD, diggy, it seems to me as an outsider that the biggest problem the Church has is its apparent utter inability to admit when screws up something doctrinally. I give JPII all the credit in the world for stepping up and apologizing for wrongdoings committed against the Jewish people by the Church. But when it comes to matters of doctrine, every discrepancy is denied, every conflict is papered over. Why not just say "Boniface was wrong"? Surely that is easier than to torturously try to turn A into -A. I suppose the belief that the Church cannot be in error in matters of faith prevents this from ever happening.
Why not just say Boniface was wrong? Because you can't.
Circumstances change. You must admit that. The type of language used when practically everybody in existence is a Catholic and no one has been "brought up" differently is a different sitation from what exists today. If we are to damn a Protestant kid cause his parents raised him that way, we are to extend the sins of the father to the suceeding generations.
Rather than repudiating our truth, as you would have us do, our truth has come to be more fully understood, as seen through the eyes of a merciful God. We still proclaim, as I have several times in this post, that all who are saved are saved by the actions of the Church in the world. The mystical Body of Christ will include, by ignorance, many who could not possibly give up their biases against the Pope. This does not make them less Christian.
Non-Christians who may be saved will do so becuase they have received special graces. The source of the graces is the Crucifixion and the gateway for these to enter the world is the Church.
This sounds like triumphalism, and I guess it is. The victory has been won, we are beginning to build up God's Kingdom.
SD
How bout some pintos crockpotted for apprx 14 hours. I'll bring some tortillas too.
Each Jewish community is independent, and hires its own rabbi. Synagogues join associations of like-minded congregations (Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, or Reconstructionist), but these associations have no authority over the individual congregations, other than the power to expel them if they are teaching in contradiction to their beliefs. The associations exist to unite groups with similar interests to act in a unified way to accomplish common goals.
Doctrinal authority derives from a process very similar to secular common law. When there are questions about an issue of doctrine or practice, a rabbi is consulted for an opinion. Previous opinions are used as precedence for future ones. Following this opinion is voluntary, not manditory--he has no authority to impose his views. Rabbinic authority is thus a moral authority. The degree to which a rabbi's opinion is valued is based upon his reputation for scholarship and holiness. Over time, as issues are hashed out, a consensus emerges. The Talmud is (among other things) a record of the debates and opinions of the sages on matters of doctrine, law, theology, spirituality, practice, etc. If halakhah is the 'common law' of Judaism, then the Torah is our 'constitution' and 'statutes', and the Talmud is our 'case book'.
It happens nearly every day. You guys are just too obstinate to admit your wrong. :>)
Pray for John Paul II
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.