Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Aquinasfan; drstevej
Well, so do all other Protestants, but the agreement ends there. Calvinists represent one of 30,000 Bible-only denominations. ~~ Aquinasfan

No, according to your "30,000 plus" Romanist definitions, there are hundreds of Calvinist "denominations".

Not that it really matters.

Wanna know the difference between the Orthodox Presbyterian "Denomination" and the Bible Presbyterian "Denomination"?

Frankly, there's going to be vastly more difference between a Molinist Jesuit who attends a church with "Saint James Catholic" on the marquee, and an Augustinian Traditionalist who attends a church with "Saint Jude Catholic" on the marquee... than between any church with "Orthodox Presbyterian" or "Bible Presbyterian" on the marquee.

Hundreds of Calvinist "denominations", but we all speak with a far more united voice than do the hundreds of Roman Catholic Denominations.

Oh, oh, you say... there is but one Roman Catholic Denomination?? No, there isn't. There are hundreds. What are Thomists and Augustinians and Molinists and Traditionalists and Conservatives and "Dignity" Catholics and whatever else have you except Theological NAMES to decribe various Theological Groupings? And what is the assignation of a Theological NAME to a Theological Grouping, if not a De-NOM-ination?

That's what it boils down to.

And there is FAR more Unity and Fraternity and Collegiality amongst the hundreds of Calvinist denominations,than there is "unity" or "fraternity" or "collegiality" amongst the hundreds of Roman Catholic denominations.

241 posted on 03/21/2004 12:44:16 PM PST by OrthodoxPresbyterian (We are Unworthy Servants; We have only done Our Duty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies ]


To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Dominicans, Fanciscans and Jesuits... OH MY!
Capuchins, Carmelites and Benedictines... TOO.

Not to mention (and we really shouldn't mention it above a whisper)...

OPUS DEI !!!


***Wanna know the difference between the Orthodox Presbyterian "Denomination" and the Bible Presbyterian "Denomination"?***

Carl McIntyre?
242 posted on 03/21/2004 12:51:12 PM PST by drstevej
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies ]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian; Aquinasfan
Oh, oh, you say... there is but one Roman Catholic Denomination?? No, there isn't. There are hundreds. What are Thomists and Augustinians and Molinists and Traditionalists and Conservatives and "Dignity" Catholics and whatever else have you except Theological NAMES to decribe various Theological Groupings? And what is the assignation of a Theological NAME to a Theological Grouping, if not a De-NOM-ination?

You must be kidding O.P.  

For the sake of space, let's look at ONE Catholic individual: St. Thomas Aquinas.
Philosopher, theologian, doctor of the Church (Angelicus Doctor), patron of Catholic universities, colleges, and schools. Born at Rocca Secca in the Kingdom of Naples, 1225 or 1227; died at Fossa Nuova, 7 March, 1274.
You'll note that he was a THEOLOGIAN; no where will you find that he was an "INITIATOR of a RELIGION".  One of the brightest men to ever walk the face of the earth knew that that wasn't necessary because the RELIGION was, and still is CATHOLIC, universal, and established by Jesus Christ.  If you care to know what St. Thomas said about Religion: 

On the contrary, Tully says (Rhet. ii, 53) that "religion consists in offering service and ceremonial rites to a superior nature that men call divine."

I answer that, as Isidore says (Etym. x), "according to Cicero, a man is said to be religious from 'religio,' because he often ponders over, and, as it were, reads again [relegit], the things which pertain to the worship of God," so that religion would seem to take its name from reading over those things which belong to Divine worship because we ought frequently to ponder over such things in our hearts, according to Prov. 3:6, "In all thy ways think on Him." According to Augustine (De Civ. Dei x, 3) it may also take its name from the fact that "we ought to seek God again, whom we had lost by our neglect" [St. Augustine plays on the words 'reeligere,' i.e. to choose over again, and 'negligere,' to neglect or despise.]. Or again, religion may be derived from "religare" [to bind together], wherefore Augustine says (De Vera Relig. 55): "May religion bind us to the one Almighty God." However, whether religion take its name from frequent reading, or from a repeated choice of what has been lost through negligence, or from being a bond, it denotes properly a relation to God. For it is He to Whom we ought to be bound as to our unfailing principle; to Whom also our choice should be resolutely directed as to our last end; and Whom we lose when we neglect Him by sin, and should recover by believing in Him and confessing our faith.

Reply to Objection 1. Religion has two kinds of acts. Some are its proper and immediate acts, which it elicits, and by which man is directed to God alone, for instance, sacrifice, adoration and the like. But it has other acts, which it produces through the medium of the virtues which it commands, directing them to the honor of God, because the virtue which is concerned with the end, commands the virtues which are concerned with the means. Accordingly "to visit the fatherless and widows in their tribulation" is an act of religion as commanding, and an act of mercy as eliciting; and "to keep oneself unspotted from this world" is an act of religion as commanding, but of temperance or of some similar virtue as eliciting.

Reply to Objection 2. Religion is referred to those things one exhibits to one's human kindred, if we take the term religion in a broad sense, but not if we take it in its proper sense. Hence, shortly before the passage quoted, Augustine says: "In a stricter sense religion seems to denote, not any kind of worship, but the worship of God."

Reply to Objection 3. Since servant implies relation to a lord, wherever there is a special kind of lordship there must needs be a special kind of service. Now it is evident that lordship belongs to God in a special and singular way, because He made all things, and has supreme dominion over all. Consequently a special kind of service is due to Him, which is known as "latria" in Greek; and therefore it belongs to religion.

Reply to Objection 4. We are said to worship those whom we honor, and to cultivate [In the Latin the same word 'colere' stands for 'worship' and 'cultivate']: a man's memory or presence: we even speak of cultivating things that are beneath us, thus a farmer [agricola] is one who cultivates the land, and an inhabitant [incola] is one who cultivates the place where he dwells. Since, however, special honor is due to God as the first principle of all things, to Him also is due a special kind of worship, which in Greek is Eusebeia or Theosebeia, as Augustine states (De Civ. Dei x, 1).

Reply to Objection 5. Although the name "religious" may be given to all in general who worship God, yet in a special way religious are those who consecrate their whole life to the Divine worship, by withdrawing from human affairs. Thus also the term "contemplative" is applied, not to those who contemplate, but to those who give up their whole lives to contemplation. Such men subject themselves to man, not for man's sake but for God's sake, according to the word of the Apostle (Gal. 4:14), "You . . . received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus."

249 posted on 03/21/2004 1:48:57 PM PST by GirlShortstop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies ]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
What are Thomists and Augustinians and Molinists and Traditionalists and Conservatives and "Dignity"

Thomists are Catholics Scholastic philosophers. The Church recognizes St. Thomas as Its premier theological doctor (teacher). However, St. Thomas' teaching isn't regarded as infallible. This is obvious, since it is the Church that approves or disapproves of St. Thomas' specific teachings, and not the other way around. The Church determines the truth or falsity of the individual teachings of Its Doctors.

The Church has determined that both St. Thomas' and Molina's teachings regarding predestination are permissible. As a result, the Catholic Church has avoided the pointless "predestination wars" that have torn Protestantism. Pointless, because no practical difference between the two doctrines arises since no one on this side of the grave knows whether he's one of the elect, unless he's been given a private revelation. Again, the Church circumscribes the bounds of theological speculation.

But back to the main point. You are artificially limiting the boundaries of "Bible-only" denominations to the Presbyterian denomination. There are countless other "Bible-only" denominations with countless other contradictory doctrines.

256 posted on 03/21/2004 3:09:09 PM PST by Aquinasfan (Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson