Again, the Pope is only infallible when he makes official, solemnly declared statements from the Chair of Peter. His opinions as a private theologian are not infallibly protected, only those when operating as the official promulgator and definer of Catholic faith or morals. As I mentioned before, this is an extraordinary charism from the Spirit. It has been exercised only TWICE in 150 years, the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary and the Dogma of the Assumption of Mary.
I did not have any idea about this. Thanks very much for the explanation. This will put a whole new light on how I read the news about these Vatican statements. And, I certainly believe that the Pope is no slouch as a private theologian :) I also did not know that the idea of the immaculate conception of Mary is so relatively new? Was it the case that the idea was always "there", but was only made "official" in the last 150 years, or is this truly new?
The Church is not a business, but is more a family (of God). To give an example, would you remove a father from a family because they didn’t discipline their children very well or taught them some disgusting habit, perhaps? It is much the same thing.
It would depend on the habit, and there certainly is a line that, once crossed, would require removal. I do not presume at all to dictate to the Catholic Church what that line should be, however, I know that you agree with me that clergy of any Christian faith should always be held to higher standards than the non-clerical father in your example.
Thank you very much for the compliment on open mindedness. :)
Protestant communities are NOT part of the Church of Christ.
I hope you understand that to mean “the First Southern Baptist Church on Main Street” is not part of the Church of Christ, BUT some of the PEOPLE who attend the “First Southern Baptist Church on Main Street” ARE of the Church of Christ…
That is the way I took it, but I shuttered at the implications, following up on above. I appreciate that lay people like me have a chance through invincible ignorance, but wouldn't you have to say that my pastor is necessarily doomed? How about Billy Graham? By this reasoning, all well trained and very learned leaders of Protestant churches are actively leading people away from the Church of Christ. INCLUDING CHILDREN. They must have special places in hell reserved for them, no? :)
Perhaps it was you that I wrote that I cannot convert anyone, only God can. I merely present the Catholic side. If God wills, the seed planted will grow into faith, either now, or a later time. My “job” is to present the truth of the Catholic Faith, ...
It was you, and I cannot agree more with the sentiment. :)
[On whether there is a need for a hierarchy] Because there can only be ONE truth! I believe you are succumbing to the idea in society that is way over-used and misunderstood: Tolerance. By making truth subjective, by saying “your truth is as good as mine”, you are saying that truth is not really important; it is a matter of opinion.
I don't see truth as a matter of opinion at all, I might be tolerant of a person out of love, but certainly not to her views if I believe them to be in error. I would then work very hard, as you would, to make the case. I do believe there is one and only one truth, whether I know it, or like it, or not. I seek to know it and reckon it, and of course in my biased opinion, on balence, so far so good! :)
In addition, while I think there is only one truth on a given matter, I can sometimes give some leeway on the way to get there. For example, we both believe that the Spirit indwells and guides the saved person. This is the truth. We disagree on how that happens, you believe it comes through the Church, and I believe it happens in a more direct manner. The "core" issue is the existence of the indwelling Spirit. I respectfully and strongly disagree about the mechanics, but I choose to focus on the bigger issue. I think I get this approach from what Jesus said concerning John the Baptist:
Matt. 11:11, 18-19 : "11 I tell you the truth: Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. ... 18 For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, 'He has a demon.' 19 The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and "sinners." ' But wisdom is proved right by her actions."
They had completely different methods of preaching. John was "fire and brimstone", while Jesus was calmer and more declarative. Both were absolutely correct and arrived at the same place via different means. Both spoke absolute truth. I still remember how much that understanding knocked me over when I first learned it. Jesus was certainly "tolerant" of John's methods even though they were not His own. He sacrificed no truth to hold this view.
Well, I thought I explained that “our” inner goodness comes from God and God alone. We cooperate in salvation merely because God ALLOWS us to. ... Thus, we must not willingly reject Him. But we realize that all that God gives us is gift. We cannot truly begin to understand God until we understand that EVERYTHING we have is a gift from Him. So knowing this, cooperation is merely saying “yes” to God’s gifts.
You certainly did explain that God graces us to be able to cooperate in free will to accept Him. My point, as I understand you, is that the decision remains your own to be saved, this is your free will.
Here's what I don't get: I think that you say that God graces us all with enough to make a decision for or against God. Some say 'yes', some say 'no'. OK, why would anyone say "NO"? Who wouldn't accept such a gift? Does God give more grace to some than others? Are some people born with a larger capacity for cooperation than others? Would that come from God, since God created "all of" all of us? Doesn't God Himself create the free will that we would use? (This goes back to my use of the word "luck".) What separates the 'yes' people from the 'no' people?
What errors does the Catholic Church teach? I am not aware of anything that is taught that is explicitly denied of us in Scriptures. Everything I am aware of that is taught is not in contradistinction to Scripture.
On many matters, there is clearly no contradistinction. On others, it is precisely a matter of interpretation, which is why I put it in the context of what the Spirit reveals to us. I know the Catholic theology is well developed enough not to allow patent error to all readers (e.g. Jesus never lived on earth in human form). So, all of our theologies have critics from other Christians. Among Christian faiths, this does not bother me to a huge extent, because if someone I disagree with is really a Christian, then he will be in heaven and when I see him I can say "NAH, NAH!" :)
You yourself believe that man sins, that man sometimes chooses sin, even after our “salvation”. How do you know you are not choosing something that suits your current fancy?
For whatever current fancy I might have I would first look to scripture to the best of my knowledge. After that, I might look to others of like faith and learn their teachings. As we touched on recently, on this thread I did have a fancy, and it was wrong. I didn't know the scripture well enough to realize it, and I have heard people I respect promote "once saved always saved" so that was my fancy. I am grateful to God that I have been touched and further sanctified and have learned a better teaching.
However, I also believe that I could have gone for the rest of my life without learning this new teaching and still have gone to heaven. I "KNOW" I will never learn a new teaching now that will get me into heaven where I was lost before (now).
How do you know the devil is not leading you to believe something? How do you know you are accurately interpreting what the Spirit says? How do you know the “promptings” within you are actually the Spirit?
I know for sure that the devil tries to lead me away from God each and every day. But, I also know that I am protected and that God keeps His own. God will not allow me to don the Nikes and go chasing after Haley's comet. I have said that I make no claim of a monopoly on perfect interpretation of all scripture. :) My faith says that the Spirit will always point me toward the narrow road, even if I sometimes stray through briers or rocky sidepaths.
If there is one thing I admire regarding Protestants is there desire to learn more about God through the Scriptures. They do it often on their own time (outside the Sunday “obligation”).
I thank you for the very kind words. I am in great admiration of your vast knowledge of scripture. You represent your faith exceedingly well.
God bless.
Even though "ordinary" statements are not necessarily infallible, we still give proper obedience to his statements! Infallibility applies only to explain the Deposit of Faith. But there are many issues that are not part of this deposit - such as "can a priest be married"? Such ecclesiastical disciplines are not part of the Faith passed down from the Apostles.
I also did not know that the idea of the immaculate conception of Mary is so relatively new? Was it the case that the idea was always "there", but was only made "official" in the last 150 years, or is this truly new?
The former. St. Justin the Martyr around 150 AD wrote about the New Eve, paralleling the New Adam of Romans 5. Him and other writers of the time (St. Ireneaus and Tertullian, for example) note that God works in parallel manners. If Adam and Eve (both sinless, they note) fell, God would "untie the knot of their discord" in the same manner - through TWO sinless people, the New Adam and New Eve. Thus, the idea of the Immaculate Conception is quite old - it is just not DOGMA - infallible teaching - until 1854, I think.
I know that you agree with me that clergy of any Christian faith should always be held to higher standards than the non-clerical father in your example.
Yes, we should just be careful and not jump the gun, remembering that the priest is a spiritual father rather than a middle manager in the Church.
"...wouldn't you have to say that my pastor is necessarily doomed? How about Billy Graham? By this reasoning, all well trained and very learned leaders of Protestant churches are actively leading people away from the Church of Christ. INCLUDING CHILDREN. They must have special places in hell reserved for them, no? :)
Seemed determine to catch me here, huh? ;-) We cannot know how much a person realizes that the Catholic Church is the TRUE Church, that it subsists within it, and that it was formed to bring people into union with Christ. Just because you are visibly not a Roman Catholic doesn't mean you have REJECTED the ACTUAL Roman Catholic Church. We would hope you are rejecting a misperception of it!
I do believe there is one and only one truth, whether I know it, or like it, or not. I seek to know it and reckon it, and of course in my biased opinion, on balence, so far so good! :)
Fair enough
we both believe that the Spirit indwells and guides the saved person. This is the truth. We disagree on how that happens, you believe it comes through the Church, and I believe it happens in a more direct manner.
The Spirit certainly can come in a "more direct manner", but not to the exclusion of the Church, which is what I believe Protestantism teaches. How can a person reject the Church that gave us the Bible, gives us the Apostolic teachings, and then claim to be following the Spirit? Protestantism rejects Catholicism's claim. Catholicism rejects Protestantism's authority to break away - admitting that some Protestants still remain, unknowingly, in the Church.
Jesus was certainly "tolerant" of John's methods even though they were not His own. He sacrificed no truth to hold this view.
I am not arguing over teaching methods, but teaching contents! John and Jesus taught the Kingdom as near. Repent and believe! The Church continues this teaching.
OK, why would anyone say "NO"? Who wouldn't accept such a gift?
Faith is the gift, correct? What is faith? "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" (Heb 11:1). It is not seen yet! The PROMISE made is just that - a promise of eternal life. Thus, people are free to not accept the promise for whatever reason (we've heard a number of excuses). Again, we base our faith on the word of others - that God speaks to us through the Scripture is based on faith, not on visible reality.
Does God give more grace to some than others? Are some people born with a larger capacity for cooperation than others? Would that come from God, since God created "all of" all of us? Doesn't God Himself create the free will that we would use?
Yes to all.
I also believe that I could have gone for the rest of my life without learning this new teaching and still have gone to heaven. I "KNOW" I will never learn a new teaching now that will get me into heaven where I was lost before (now).
Perhaps. I don't agree that we can infallibly know that we are of the elect. That takes away from God's freedom to choose whether we deserve heaven or not. Or to condemn whom He wills. Perhaps in the future, you will learn of a greater appreciation of the Eucharist, partake in it, and learn to be more virtuous, more humble, etc. Who can say what this "new" devotion will mean on our spiritual lives. God wants us to come to the fullness of the Truth, not to "just barely make it"!
My faith says that the Spirit will always point me toward the narrow road, even if I sometimes stray through briers or rocky sidepaths.
:-) as long as you can identify the "voice of the Spirit", that would work great! Sometimes, that is hard to do. Discernment is a difficult ART (not a science) that takes a lot of work and prayer. My point is that we are given more of God's instruments of graces through the Church's liturgical life, through her devotional life. I am not saying that a person CANNOT attain to heaven without this, but it makes matters easier, for those who are aware of the gift God has given us. If people knew what the Church was, and they desired to enter into Christ, they would RUN to enter the Church, since Christ works most powerfully through His Body, His Bride, the Church
I thank you for the very kind words. I am in great admiration of your vast knowledge of scripture. You represent your faith exceedingly well.
NO!!! You are tempting my primary vice, pride! Careful, Joe...Ooo, head is starting to swell... Danger, danger...Engage "humility manuevers"... "Joe, you don't know what you are talking about. And you got a lot of work before you could even hope to know the Old Testament like your separated brothers..." AH, swelling coming down. Much better...! :-)
Pride puffs up, love builds up.
Brother in Christ