Posted on 11/19/2004 8:21:22 AM PST by Stubborn
Well-meaning, not highly educated Catholics who eagerly joined bible-study groups after the Council not uncommonly found their inherited faith shaken, as they were invited -- by group leaders and by written materials -- to scrutinize Catholic teachings and practices sceptically and to measure them against the New Testament in classical Protestant fashion, a scrutiny which usually seemed to work to the Church's disadvantage. Although this was not their original intention, many people became liberal Catholics through the medium of Bible study. (Thus liberal Catholics are quick to ask, for example, "Where does the New Testament condemn homosexuality?" or "Where does it say that women cannot be ordained priests?")
(Excerpt) Read more at cwnews.com ...
You have been well indroctinated by Church. :)
JH :)
The 4 marks of the Church are:
1. One (The Church does not cling to contrary doctrines in different places)
2. Holy (Even though her people are sinners, her stated goals are objectively holy)
3. Catholic (As in 'universal' applicable in all places, at all times)
4. Apostolic (Posessing the Authority handed down from the Apostles)
The Orthodox are a real Church: they've got apostolic sucession. The methodists are not a real "Church"; and you'll never find them referred to as a 'Church' in Vatican documents. Most Protestant organizations are 'ecclesiastical communities'.
Theologically speaking, the Church is made up of the people of God, those baptized in Jesus Christ. Some people in the Church are more united to her (the Roman Catholics, Byzantine Catholics, Chaldean Catholics, perfectly so) than others (Orthodox, who are rather close, and Baptists, who are in many ways, way out there)
The scrolls in the synagogue that He went to, more likely than not, had these books on them.
Mostly, Protestant bibles simply translate and crossreference in a way to promote a Protestant point of view. Sadly, the dominant American bible, NAB, is skeptical so it is problemmatic too.
See, I wasn't born into it, though. The only thing I ever got from my Ma was a story about how the Catholic Church was only after money and they'd kick you out if you didn't return the donation envelopes.
I'd come home with the church school text book and we'd sit there and she'd make fun of it. She didn't understand why Catholics had to learn all this crap before First Communion.
I was taught that 'Catholics are mean'. And we kind of are. The most orthodox RC parishes don't even have greeters, for heaven's sakes!
Pyro7480:The scrolls in the synagogue that He went to, more likely than not, had these books on them.
Not if they were in Hebrew. One of the reasons you don't find the "deuterocanonical" books in the Jewish canon is there are no Hebrew originals. If Yeshua's synogogue had Hebrew scriptures (which is probably if not certain) He would not have had access to the "deuterocanonical" books.
BTW, Hebrew and Aramaic are incredibly similar and fluency in one can easily translate into fluency into the other. If Yeshua could read Aramaic, he certainly could have read Hebrew.
There may be some factions of the Jewish faith that prays for the dead, or believes in some form of purification, but since each Jewish faith determines its own doctrine, and there is no hierarchy telling them what they must believe, that doesn't surprise me, but I don't think it can be called a part of the Jewish faith by a long shot.
In fact, both Jews and all Christians except Protestants pray for the dead. So why are you guys the odd men out?
For the dead, or to the dead?
If it's for the dead, then God indeed is not the same yesterday today and forever, if His judgments can be changed and altered by humans who haven’t a clue as to why they were condemned in the first place.
If you mean you pray to them for help, I don't believe anyone who dies is consciously aware of time, or their presence in eternity until either the rapture, or the resurrection, so it would be foolish for me to pray to people who are no more able to effect my life then they are their own.
JH :)
Give me some examples of what it is that you read in the Bible.
JH :)
Tsk, tsk JH.... "One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism."
What are you talking about? Catholicism is not the religion of birth. There are millions of converts with no previous Catholic background every year. That's just a silly thing to say.
And when did you become the world's counselor? How do you know who would be comfortable in the Catholic Church. Again, you are speaking nonsense here. Pure opionion.
Have you even tried to learn the truth about the Catholic church? Not what others mistakenly believe the Catholic Church to be. It's not scary. We don't bite.
A really good book for anyone that is interested in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church can be found here:
http://www.deaconsil.com/catalog/product1931.html
I love reading about the Early Church!
The "Church" is "One" because it is the ONLY "One" founded by Christ, built upon St. Peter the Rock.
It is "Catholic" because in it, all are welcome and all who are members of His Kingdom here on earth, may then be made partakers of His heavenly Kingdom when they meet Him face to face when they die.
It is God's Kingdom, established by God, here on earth. We petition for God to grow, strengthen and preserve His Kingdom each time we say the "Lord's Prayer" when we say "Thy Kingdom come".
It is Holy because it is God's.
It is Apostolic because it is "of the Apostles", meaning they are the ones who promulgated it at the command of Christ when He commanded them to "Go forth and teach all nation...and behold, I am with you till the consumation of the earth". Had He said: "Go forth and distribute the Bible", I am sure they would have - but He didn't and they didn't.
Ephesians, chapter 4 gives perhaps the clearest description of "the Church". I believe the Church is the Body of Christ.
I appreciate your answer, but it doesn't answer my original question, which is...who determines "authorized interpretations" and states doctrine. I believe the implied answer based on many posts in this thread, is the "one Church" is the Catholic church, but there is a lot of beating around the bush to avoid making what should be a rather clear statement. If you sincerely believe something, I don't know why you'd be afraid to state that belief clearly. I do not believe the Catholic Church has any authority to "authorize" interpretations of God's word. I believe God is "The One" authority, and that he communicates with us directly.
I think you are terribly confused. "The Orthodox" is at best an unclear term that could mean any number of things. Let's assume you mean it refers to a religion that adheres to early Christian ecumenical creeds. It will no doubt surprise you, that by that definition, the Methodist Church is very much orthodox, as is the Lutheran Church, the Presbyterian Church and several other Protestant churches. The fact that Vatican documents don't refer to them as Churches is absolutely meaningless. Vatican documents say any number of things that have no bearing on reality or Christianity. Many Protestant organizations do not consider the Vatican a real "Church". That doesn't make it so.
If we would define and describe this true Church of Jesus Christ - which is the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church - we shall find nothing more noble, more sublime, or more divine than the expression "the Mystical Body of Christ" - an expression which springs from and is, as it were, the fair flowering of the repeated teaching of the Sacred Scriptures and the Holy Fathers.That the Church is a body is frequently asserted in the Sacred Scriptures. "Christ," says the Apostle, "is the Head of the Body of the Church." If the Church is a body, it must be an unbroken unity, according to those words of Paul: "Though many we are one body in Christ." But it is not enough that the Body of the Church should be an unbroken unity; it must also be something definite and perceptible to the senses as Our predecessor of happy memory, Leo XIII, in his Encyclical Satis Cognitum asserts: "the Church is visible because she is a body. Hence they err in a matter of divine truth, who imagine the Church to be invisible, intangible, a something merely "pneumatological" as they say, by which many Christian communities, though they differ from each other in their profession of faith, are united by an invisible bond. (Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi, 13-14)
It would seem that you don't understand the purpose of prayer for the dead. Hint: it's not to alter God's judgments. Take the example of a law court which condemns a man to pay a large fine. If you pay part of his fine for him, are you "altering" the court's judgment or fulfilling it?
As for the damned, of course they will remain in Hell forever - prayer is only given to those who were judged righteous by God but were not fully absolved of all reparation due for their forgiven sins. See 2 Samuel 12:13-14: "The Lord also hath taken away thy sin ... for this thing, the child that is born to thee, shall surely die". He was forgiven, his sin "taken away", yet still punished for "this thing".
At length, after an exposition of the catholic faith to the abbot, as far as this seemed to be necessary, and his humble acceptance of it, we have delivered in the name of the Lord in this solemn session, with the approval of this sacred ecumenical council of Florence, the following true and necessary doctrine ...It professes that one and the same God is the author of the old and the new Testament — that is, the law and the prophets, and the gospel — since the saints of both testaments spoke under the inspiration of the same Spirit. It accepts and venerates their books, whose titles are as follows.
Five books of Moses, namely Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, Esdras, Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Job, Psalms of David, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, namely Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; two books of the Maccabees; the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; fourteen letters of Paul, to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, two to the Thessalonians, to the Colossians, two to Timothy, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews; two letters of Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude; Acts of the Apostles; Apocalypse of John. (Ecumenical Council of Ferrara-Florence, Bull of Union with the Copts, 4 February 1442)
Well, we're getting closer to what many are implying but not saying. At least you have included "Roman" in your definition.
Apparently Christ's death and resurection did not provide enough "reparation"?
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.