The Neverending Story (The New Christian Chronicles)

Southern Baptists ending talks with Catholic Church ^ | 3/24/01 | AP

[malakhi]

The Neverending Story
An ongoing debate on Scripture, Tradition, History and Interpretation.

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

Thread 162
TNS Archives

[al_c]

You mean we could get together and cut the cheese, thats right nice of you angelo.

Mack ... give the keyboard back to Becky. ;o)

[al_c]

Why not just say "Boniface was wrong"?

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

First Reading: Responsorial Psalm: Gospel:

Romans 13:8-10 Psalms 112:1-2, 4-5, 9 Luke 14:25-33 I greet you from Smyrna together with the Churches of God present here with me. They comfort me in every way, both in body and soul. My chains, which I carry about on me for Jesus Christ, begging that I may happily make my way to God, exhort you: persevere in your concord and in you community prayers.  -- St. Ignatius of Antioch

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!

[JohnnyM]

"Read it again. It says deliberate sinning. It doesn't mention it in this passage, but even then, repentance is possible. "

So your sacrificing Christ all over again. You say you can sin and fall out of eternal life, then by repenting you are back in. What that means is that Christ's sacrifice wasn't sufficeient enough to cover your sins in the first place. You say it only covers sins previously committed, and you have to sacrifice Him over and over again for each and every sin you commit after you have accepted Him. By sacrificing Him over and over you are saying he wasn't sufficient in the first place and have put the responsibility of salvation and eternal life IN YOUR HANDS, and you are back where you started before you accepted Christ. You are back to being under the condemnation of the Law.

JM

[OLD REGGIE]

Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.

( I am curious, though : Do you deny the right of spiritual authority to challenge the state's claim to loyalty over its citizens?)

Aside from the fact this dogmatic pronouncement is hardly defining a "challenge" and assuming you don't redefine what is meant by "loyalty", or add all kinds of nuances to "challenge", the answer is yes for matters of law.

Romans 13: RSV

1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.
2 Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval,
4 for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.
6 For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing.
7 Pay all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.
------------------------------------------------------------

[al_c]

Have we bumped heads here? I don't recognize the nic, and I'm not sure what you are apologizing for but it seems to fit a few I've swapped posts with :)

It's Steven. If you want proof, ask him the meaning of Matt. 1:25.

[al_c]

Can you all tell me what the structure of your respective denominations are? For example, my understanding (which is probably wrong) of Roman Catholicism is that the Pope is boss, cardinals are next, bishops are next, etc.

You missed one, Douglas. The Holy Trinity is the boss (or bosses), then comes the pope, etc. :o)

[DouglasKC]

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?

[Invincibly Ignorant]

I'm curious angelo, do you own one of those cheesehead hats?

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Becky is pretty good at cutting cheese too!

Been nice knowing Mack. Meet me at the east gate in New Jerusalem and say hello.

[JohnnyM]

Romans 6:3-7
"Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin; for he who has died is freed from sin."

Romans 7:1-6
"Or do you not know, brethren (for I am speaking to those who know the law), that the law has jurisdiction over a person as long as he lives? For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband. So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man. Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death. But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter."

This is clearly saying that once we have accepted Christ,we associate ourselves not only with His death, but also with His resurrection. That we (our old self) died on the Cross with Him, and have been resurrected with newness of life. We have died to the Law and are no longer condemned by the Law. To say that you can lose salvation is saying that you are still alive to the Law, because it is the Law that is removing your salvation, but we are alive in Christ. Christ overcame the Law so we didn't have to. It's not I that live, but Christ who lives in me. I am no longer subject to the condemnation of the Law. I have died to the Law and made alive in Christ. This is not a license to sin though. Paul even says in Rom 6:1-2 "What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase? May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it?" and again in verse 15 "What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be!". By saying you can lose your salvation you are still yoked with the Law and not yoked with Christ.

JM

[Invincibly Ignorant]

This is strange. On our fantasy football message board we get a lot of mileage out of the word "cheese" as well. I never expected it here. lol.

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.

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Catholic Truth that we show from Scripture.

When has this ever happened? On my watch?

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Because of that, perhaps we see that trying to explain a more highly nuanced doctrine like extra ecclesiam nulla salus to you guys would be, in every sense, an exercise in futility.

Now I know for sure I'm not worthy. Thank you dig for sharing that catholic truth with me.

[SoothingDave]

Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.

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

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Anytime, BigMack, anytime. We'll leave the girls at home. I'll provide the cheese. SD can bring the Rolling Rock. You bring the barbecue, and Steven can bring the beans. We'll pass the, um, time together.

How bout some pintos crockpotted for apprx 14 hours. I'll bring some tortillas too.

[malakhi]

Can you all tell me what the structure of your respective denominations are?

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'.

[dignan3]

When has this ever happened? On my watch?

It happens nearly every day. You guys are just too obstinate to admit your wrong. :>)

Pray for John Paul II