Posted on 05/27/2004 7:10:58 AM PDT by AskStPhilomena
So you go with the loose confederation definition of Church then? Nothing discernible, no guidance in anything other than a myriad of scriptural interpretations? He went to all the trouble to come down form heaven, be born of the virgin, suffer die and rise again just to abandon us? I don't buy it.
So do you share Peters definition? Is it the only definition? Are there different "types" of "church"?
Absolutly! So then, what is "Church"?
I see...Best of luck Quix!
born of the virgin, suffer die and rise again just to abandon us?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
He didn't abandon us He sent the great Counselor= Holy Spirit.
John 16:[7] Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.
But it wasn't the Roman Catholic church.
No matter how much Rome wants it to be, Rome is not the Church, never has been and never will be.
Granted there are some from the Roman Catholic church who belong to the universal congregation of Christ's Church, who enter the gate through the narrow way of Faith in Christ alone, but the Roman church is not THE Church.
I think the last line of the article should answer your question sufficiently. But don't err in thinking that just because you are Catholic, you are going to Heaven. Far, far from it.
Why not?
So do you share Peters definition ?
Most definitely.
Is it the only definition ?
There are 'other descriptions' of the church, but none which is at variance with that of Peter.
Are there different "types" of "church" ?
No ... there is only one church ... bought with the blood of Jesus Christ, Himself ... wrought by the grace of God ... and batized by His Spirit.1 Corinthians 12:12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
-------------------------------------------------------
1 Corinthians 12:27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.
Yes, it is. But this is an un-nuanced interpretation of the true Catholci position, which allows for mitigating factors which can affect a person's personal culpability for remaining outside of the formal membership of the Church.
If you become aware of the necessity of the Church and refuse to enter, or refuse to honestly investigate her claims, then you will be condemned.
If you labor in ignorance that is invincible, you may be saved. God is not limited to whom He chooses to grace.
And yet He did establish one Church for the purpose of bringing grace into the world.
SD
That is exactly what it's saying, unless you are a pagan, then as long as you live a good life and don't commit any mortal sins, you are covered regardless of any relationship to Christ or the Church.
That RC rule only applies to Protestants.
Actually,
I'd prefer a burning bush daily auto recorded on DVD and copied onto my MINIDISC automatically.
Alas, there's this Scripture and part about
WALKING BY FAITH
And what's seen and touched is not by faith etc.
I'm reminded of the master rider/horse trainer which trains the horse to such a degree that the horse is so sensitive to the rider's even unconscious body movements that he anticipates so well that it seems like the horse reads the rider's mind.
I think God is training us to Hear His voice and obey Him to that degree as a testimony to
HIS GRACE,
GENTLENESS,
POWER,
MASTERFUL WISDOM,
LOVE.
and ours for Him.
Was this Paul's opinion, or was he expecting that those in Corinth would recognize his authority as a teacher?
Were those in Corinth free as Christians to reject Paul and decide all matters for themselves? Is that the model of ecclesial authority one finds inherent in the New Testament?
SD
You have wasted no effort condemning "traditions of men" - were the Apostles not men? Is St. Paul not telling you explicitly to follow the traditions he and the other Apostles taught "by word or by epistle"?
Quite a rare bird, that is. I wouldn't be too worried about it.
SD
So you don't believe that Christ founded a Church in Matthew 16:18? You see "church" as simply a body of believers? Is that correct?
Emphasis on "may."
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.