“He who grounds his faith on Scripture only has no faith”

pontifications ^ | 02-08-06 | Johann Adam Möhler

[jecIIny]

“He who grounds his faith on Scripture only has no faith”

The faith existing in the Church, from the beginning throughout all ages, is the infallible standard to determine the true sense of Scripture: and accordingly, it is certain, beyond the shadow of doubt, that the Redeemer is God, and hath filled us even with divine power. In fact, he who grounds his faith on Scripture only, that is, on the result of his exegetical studies, has no faith, can have none, and understands not its very nature. Must he not be always ready to receive better information; must he not admit the possibility, that by nature study of Scripture another result may be obtained, than that which has already been arrived at? The thought of this possibility precludes the establishment of any decided, perfectly undoubting, and unshaken faith, which, after all, is alone deserving of the name. He who says, ‘this is my faith,’ hath no faith. Faith, unity of faith, universality of faith, are one and the same; they are but different expressions of the same notion. He who, if even he should not believe the truth, yet believes truly, believes at the same time that he holds fast the doctrine of Christ, that he shares the faith with the Apostles, and with the Church founded by the Redeemer, that there is but one faith in all ages, and one only true one. This faith is alone rational, and alone worthy of man: every other should be called a mere opinion, and, in a practical point of view, is an utter impotency.

Ages passed by, and with them the ancient sects: new times arose, bringing along with them new schisms in the Church. The formal principles of all these productions of egotism were the same; all asserted that Holy Writ, abstracted from Tradition and from the Church, is at once the sole source of religious truth, and the sole standard of its knowledge for the individual. This formal principle, common to all parties separated from the Church;—to the Gnostic of the second century, and the Albigensian and Vaudois of the twelfth, to the Sabellian of the third, the Arian of the fourth, and the Nestorian of the fifth century—this principle, we say, led to the most contradictory belief. What indeed can be more opposite to each other, than Gnosticism and Pelagianism, than Sabellianism and Arianism? The very circumstance, indeed, that one and the same formal principle can be applied to every possible mode of belief; and rather that this belief, however contradictory it may be in itself, can sill make use of that formal principle, should alone convince everyone, that grievous errors must here lie concealed, and that between the individual and the Bible a mediating principle is wanting.

What is indeed more striking than the fact, that every later religious sect doth not deny that the Catholic Church, in respect to the parties that had previously seceded from her, has in substance right on her side, and even recognizes in these cases her dogmatic decisions; while on the other hand, it disputes her formal principles? Would this ecclesiastical doctrine, so formed and so approved of, have been possible, without the peculiar view of the Church entertained of herself? Doth not the one determine the other? With joy the Arian recognises what has decided by the Church against the Gnostics; but he does not keep in view the manner in which she proceeded against them; and he will not consider that those dogmas on which he agrees with the Church, she would not have saved and handed down to his time, had she acted according to those formal principles which he requires of her, and on which he stands. The Pelagian and the Nestorian embrace also, with the most undoubted faith, the decisions of the Church against the Arians. But as soon as the turn comes to either, he becomes as it were stupified, and is inconsiderate enough to desire the matter of Christian doctrine without the appropriate ecclesiastical form—without that form, consequently, by the very neglect whereof those parties, to which he is most heartily opposed, have fallen on the adoption of their articles of belief. It was the same with Luther and Calvin. The pure Christian dogmas, in opposition to the errors of the Gnostics, Paulicians, Arians, Pelagians, Nestorians, Monophysites and others, they received with the most praiseworthy firmness and fervency of faith. But, when they took a fancy to deliver their theses on the relations between faith and works, between free-will and grace, or however else they may be called, they trod (as to form) quite in the footsteps of those whom they execrated….

This accordingly is the doctrine of Catholics. Thou wilt obtain the knowledge full and entire of the Christian religion only in connection with its essential form, which is the Church. Look at the Scripture in an ecclesiastical spirit, and it will present thee an image perfectly resembling the Church. Contemplate Christ in, and with his creation—the Church—the only adequate authority—the only authority representing him, and thou wilt then stamp his image on thy soul….

[The Catholic] is freely convinced, that the Church is a divine institution, upheld by supernal aid, ‘which leads her into all truth;’ that, consequently, no doctrine rejected by her is contained in Scripture; that with the latter, on the contrary, her dogmas perfectly coincide, though many particulars may not be verbally set forth in Holy Writ. Accordingly he has the conviction, that the Scripture, for example doth not teach that Christ is a mere man; nay, he is certain that it represents him also as God. Inasmuch as he professes this belief, he is not free to profess the contrary, for he would contradict himself; in the same way as a man, who has resolved to remain chaste, cannot be unchaste, without violating his resolution. To this restriction, which everyone most probably will consider rational, the Catholic Church subjects her members, and consequently, also, the learned exegetists of Scripture. A Church which would authorize anyone to find what he pleased in Scripture, and without any foundation to declare it as unecclesiastical, such a Church would thereby declare, that it believed in nothing, and was devoid of all doctrines; for the mere possession of the Bible no more constitutes a Church, than the possession of the faculty of reason renders anyone really rational. Such a Church would in fact, as a moral entity, exhibit the contradiction just adverted to, which a physical being could not be guilty of. The individual cannot at one and the same time believe, and not believe, a particular point of doctrine. But if a Church, which consists of a union of many individuals, permitted every member, as such, to receive or to reject at his pleasure, any article of faith, it would fall into this very contradiction, and would be a monster of unbelief, indifferent to the most opposite doctrines, which we might indeed, on our behalf, honour with the finest epithets, but certainly not denominate a Church. The Church must train up souls for the kingdom of God, which is founded on definite facts and truths, that are eternally unchangeable; and so a Church, that knows no such immutable dogmas, is like to a teacher, that knows not what he should teach. The Church has to stamp the image of Christ on humanity; but Christ is not sometimes this, and sometimes that, but eternally the same. She has to breathe into the hearts of men the word of God, that came down from heaven: but this word is no vague, empty sound, wherof we can make what we will.

Johann Adam Möhler

[magisterium]

True, there is a lot of porn out there. But my work computer filters differently depending on the content. In fact, I did get on message in that search that said "Access denied: nudity, pornographic content." Evidently, the software makes the distinction! Many, as I said, were for "extreme content" instead. Same kind of thing you get from whack-job neo-Nazi and white supremacy sites. Not that they're the same things, I suppose, but they're on the same order of nuttiness that the filter picks up on it.

[InterestedQuestioner]

"faith only is false doctrine faith without works is dead"

Bremenbody, I can see certainly identify with your concern over the doctrine of justification by faith alone, as it contradicts Scripture and is a doctrine that can easily be abused.

"faith come by hearing the word of God salvation comes by obeying God word."

I assume that we both believe that faith and salvation are gifts from God. Given those assumptions, I'd say that we are in complete agreement.

[InterestedQuestioner]

Thank you for your post. I looked up the source website, and would dispute the veracity of many of their claims. To stay on track, however, the question at hand is the allegation that the Catholic Church apostatized. None of those statements support that claim.


To apostatize, one has to reject the faith entirely, or turn away from a doctrine of faith. I think the source website confused immutability with apostasy. Christ built his Church upon the Apostles. The Apostles then are the foundation, and Christ built the Church upon that foundation. This means that the Church was not restricted to the Apostles, but rather the Apostolic teaching is foundational to a Church that grew and developed in time. The Church started out like a mustard seed, but it has grown into a large plant, just as Christ said it would. Practices have changed over time. For example, we are no longer instructed to abstain from eating meat from strangled animals, or blood, as was decreed at the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15: 19-21). Most of us therefore do not worry about have a rare steak or eating a chicken that may have had its neck wrung at the factory.

Practices can change over time as necessary, but doctrines, that is, definitive teachings on faith and morals, cannot be rejected.

To validate a claim of apostasy, one would have to demonstrate an Apostolic doctrine, and show that the Church rejected it. Would you agree to that definition?

[InterestedQuestioner]

"I believe that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ because Jesus said that it is."

Thank you for the wonderful quotes from Scripture. They all point to metaphors that Christ employed to explain Himself. They all take the format of metaphor followed by explanation of the metaphor, just as Jesus did with the parables. The Eucharistic references, however, do not take this format, it is clear to me that the literal and correct reading of the passages is that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. In response to your questions:

"John 10:9: "I AM the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture." Was jesus a door? John 10:11: "I AM the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep. Was jesus a Shepherd? John 15:1: "I AM the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser.Is Jesus a grape vine?

The entire context of John 10: 1-19 is metaphorical, and clearly so. Jesus answers your questions. He says that he is the good shepherd, and then he explains what this means: He lays down his life to save his followers. He says He is a door, and then He explains what he means: He is the way to the Father and salvation. He says that he is the vine, and we are the branches. He then explains what he means. If we do not bear fruit (do good actions, we will be cut off from Christ.

The Eucharistic context of the last supper is clear and unambiguous. Christ offers us His Body and Blood, and commands to eat. This is the literal meaning of the text, and he does not explain it as a metaphor.

"Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, "Take, eat; this is my body." And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." (Matthew 26-28)

The meaning of this Scripture is quite clear, and it is supported by the context of the rest of Scripture. The interpretation you posted is incorrect, it contradicts the clear meaning of Scripture, as well as 2000 years of Christian practice that was established by Christ, and which has been clearly documented historically.

The point of this of course is that demonstrates why sola scriptura is a flawed principle that does not work. Following traditions invented by men 16 centuries after the time of Christ, it leads to a flawed interpretatin of a major doctrine that is the exact opposite of the Faith handed down by Christ through the Apostles to his Church. This clearly demonstrates that sola scriptura is a flawed doctrine. The Church was founded by Christ, and exists in History. We know much about what the Church has always believed, because the beliefs of the Church have been documented over the past 2000 years. Christianity was not invented 16 centuries after the time of Christ.

[jo kus]

Notice, please, that the foregoing quotation was published as recentlv as the year 1954, and that it is the statement, originally, of Pope Leo XIII. This Catholic teaching states that "it is quite unlawful to demand or defend, or to grant unconditional freedom of thought, speech, writing or worship."

Big deal, the United States of America has a similar policy. We don't allow UNCONDITIONAL freedom of writing or speech, either. Ever hear of libel?

Regards

[InterestedQuestioner]

" Scripture never actually says that we are justified by faith alone."

"Perhaps that is because you have never read the NT ?"

That sounds a bit caustic, RnMomof7. Feel free to show me the quote in the New Testament, or Old, which says that I am justified by faith alone. You haven't done that. You've quoted a dozen and a half Scriptures, none of which say man is justified by faith alone.

"Faith and belief are the flip sides of the same coin"

Well, I can agree with you that they are closely related to each other. I would say that Obedience to God is the flip side of the coin to faith and belief. Does that sound reasonable to you?

"Jesus taught Salvation by Faith not works."

He did?? Can you show me where He says I'm saved by Faith and not works? This sounds a bit out of context to me.

"He (Jesus) said our works are the fruit of our salvation"

No he didn't. He said that we would be cut off from Him if we fail to produce good fruits.

"Translations prior to Luther used the terminology of faith alone with respect to Romans 3:28. The Nuremberg Bible of 1483 had "allein durch den glauben," while the Italian Bibles of Geneva in 1476 and even 1538 had "per sola fide."

Excuse me, RNMomof7, but it appears you plagiarized that statement. Would you like to cite your source so we can verify that statement? Apparently, if it was good enough to claim as your own without citing or putting in quotations marks, you believe it to be true. So then, you accept that Catholics were publishing the Bible in the Vernacular prior to Luther?

"Perhaps you do not understand what sola scriptura mean ? Ya think? :)"

Sure RnMomof7, that's entirely possible that I, misunderstand it. I've already offered my view on it, and asked how you define the term yourself. Feel free to comment on my definition or put down your own.

[InterestedQuestioner]

"if the truth be told and the catholic church had its way no one would be permitted to think, speak or write against it in any way.....no that is offical catholic church doctrine."

What Jo Kus said was correct. People are free to think in any way they want. Of course they can also write and speak against the Church as well, something they do all the time. The Church teaches that Truth is it's own best advocate, and that the individual has the freedom and the duty to pursue truth. The recognizes that the individual has rights with respect to the Church and the State. The idea that the Church has rejected is individual or group expression with no limitation from either church or state. This is something our society recognizes as well. Basically, the individual has rights vis a vis the church and state, but the state also has rights in relation to the individual, and so does the Church.

[TexConfederate1861]

I am speaking of the unwritten wisdom of the Apostles, and Early Church Fathers. Not everything the Apostles said and did was written.

[TexConfederate1861]

They were around BEFORE there was a Bible, and the SAME people that held those traditions sacred are the same people that put the Bible together. By the way, the Apocrypha was part of the original canon of scripture, and was even retained by Luther. The Puritans took it out in the 1600's. I am looking forward with GREAT anticipation to your explanation for this.

[bremenboy]

For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious and absurd principle of "naturalism," as they call it, dare to teach that "the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones." And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that "that is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require." From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an "insanity,"2 viz., that "liberty of conscience and worship is each man's personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way." But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching "liberty of perdition;"3 and that "if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling

http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/pope0255e.htm

[Nihil Obstat]

should people be allowed to perform human sacrifices then?

[InterestedQuestioner]

"that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever,";


That's a quote from Quanta Cura, an Encyclical published by Pope Pius IX in 1864. Funny, I was just reading that the other day. Some people have trouble with that paragraph if they don't read the whole sentence you highlighted. The idea is one that our own society supports as well, as has already been discussed in post 127.

Did you have a specific question regarding Quanta Cura? I'd be very interested in discussing it. One interested thing, that encyclical was part of a document that was censored at the time. The government of France prohibited priests from reading it to or discussing it with their parishioners, and the French press was banned from discussing it in any religious sense. Members of the government for the British Empire (which included Catholic Ireland, at the time,) used it as an occasion to attack Catholics. William Gladstone, for example, attacked the integrity and loyalty of Catholics, and insinuated they could not be loyal citizens.

[Clay+Iron_Times]

Thank you for your response "Interested"; The climate we see the world at present, I believe are the signs The Lord spoke of concerning his eminent return.

Whatever your present thoughts, shaped by a lifetime of events and reactions to those events both religious and otherwise, you cannot deny the world at present is on an exponential curve just as the Lord and His Prophets prophesied would be.

The whole earth which is a living organism and includes us humans, are feeling the effects of a new birth. We are in the birth pangs of ever increasing frequency and intensity.

My hope is for all to realize these signs and look deep within themselves and ask a simple question: Am I ready to face God? How would you know with certainty?

Man has always tried to do things his way, disregarding God's Word to him. They either willingly or ignorantly follow broad-way instead of His Way.

Apostasy / Adam and Eve

Eve fell because she disobeyed God willingly, Adam on the other hand by ignorance through unbelief. He did not take God's Word as to what would become of them by putting God to the test. And that's what men do, they put God to the test at their own peril.

Lesson: Apostasy is disobedience to God's Word

Apostasy / Cain

The two Offerings for Sacrifice were distinguished between Cains offering and Abels offering. Cain knew the type Sacrifice that the Lord would accept, but he rebelled against that admonition, demanding that God accept the labor of his hands, which in fact God could not accept. So we have, in the persons of Cain and Abel, the first examples of a religious man of the world and a genuine man of Faith. The rest of story you know, he, Cain murdered his brother Abel who's Sacrifice was accepted by God.

Why was Cains Sacrifice not accepted by God?

Cain gave a Sacrifice Without Blood!

"Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous" 1 John 3:12

"sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire.." Genesis 4:7

Cain was given a reprobate heart! And often times a murderous spirit accompanies those who do not follow God's but instead their own form of worship. Sounds familiar?

Lesson: Apostasy is Falling Away from God's Prescribed Way of Worship!

Apostasy / Brought the Flood

• Genesis 6:5 "And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually"
• Genesis 6:6 "And it repented the Lord that He had made man on the earth, and it grieved Him at His heart,"
• Genesis 6:7 "And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth..."
• Genesis 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.
• Genesis 6:9 ...Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.
• Genesis 6:17 ...I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the whole earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life...and everything...shall die."
• Hebrews 11:7 "By Faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of righteousness which is by faith"

The rest of the world was living by the imaginations of their own hearts! and they perished!

Lesson: Apostasy is man living by the imaginations of his own heart!

Apostasy / Twisting the Scriptures for False Beliefs

Warnings from the New Testament

• 2 Peter 3:15 "...Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you."
• 2 Peter 3:16 "As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction."
• 2 Peter 3:17 "Ye therefore, beloved seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness."

  God begins a fresh start with Noah and his Seed

  • Genesis 10:9 Tells us about a mighty man on the earth name Nimrod.
  • Genesis 10:10 "And the beginning of his Kingdom is Babel..."
  • Mankind became corrupted again and built the tower of Babel.
  • Many scholars believe that this was the beginning of idolatry and the beginning of mother and child worship.

  Now you have to ask why mother and child worship?

  After the fall of Adam and Eve in the Garden, God spoke to Satan and said:

  • Genesis 3:15 "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."

  God promised that a seed would come from the woman whose child would be a deliverer!

  A False Seed Deliverer Arises!
  • According to history, Nimrod died, and was believed to have been reincarnated as the son of his wife. Nimrod was then worshipped as the promised seed deliverer.
  • This false seed deliverer was given the name Baal in the land of Canaan. The title Baal meaning husband, lord, and master. (New Catholic Encyclopedia 2nd edition)
  • Genesis 11:4 "And they said, go to , let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach heaven...
  • Genesis 11:5 "And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded."

  This WAS NOT God's building program!

  This was Babylon's first attempt to have a one world religion with one world ruler without God! "Except the Lord build the house, they labour in vain that build it...Psalms 127:1

  • Genesis 11:6 "And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language;...and now nothing will be restrained from them..."
  • Genesis 11:7 "Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language..."
  • Genesis 11:8 "So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city."

  Twisting scriptures brought corruption! False Beliefs! God's Judgment brought confusion, and dispersion.

  Man was dispersed all over the world speaking different languages, but taking this godless religion with them.

  Lesson: Apostasy is Twisting the Scriptures for False Beliefs

  God begins a fresh start with Abraham and his Seed.

  God established his Covenant with Abraham. This Covenant continued with Isaac, a type of Christ; by miraculous birth, and by being raised up from the dead in figure through sacrifice. The seed unbroken, birthed Jacob whom God renamed Israel. From Israel, centuries later came Jesus, the promised seed deliverer of Genesis 3:15

  Now listen to this...

  • For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." Romans 4:2-3
  • Genesis 26:4 "And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven"
  • Romans 4:4-5 "Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness
  • "By Faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up his only begotten son" Hebrews 11:17
  • A ram was killed instead
  • "Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called: Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in figure." Hebrews 11:18-19
    Under the Old Covenant the Jews Compromised with Baal!

    There is a king of the Old Testament who was perhaps the greatest of God's heroes according to God's Word, even greater than King David! Most Christians today don't even know who he was, and he receives little or no recognition in todays pulpits.

    He instituted the Passover as no other king did. He was also known for putting away the worship of Baal and Baal Priest as no other king did. He was known for cleansing God's people and their land as no other king.

    Look what God's Word says about King Josiah in (2 Kings Chapter 23, verse 25.)

    • "And like unto him was there no other king before him, that turned to the Lord with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses; neither after him arose there any like him.

    This was one of the most radical men of the Old Testament. He had two major goals. The first was to restore God's people back to God. His second goal was to rid the land of Idolatry, which included getting rid of every trace of Baal!

    King Josiah went from border to border of the land and oversaw with his own eyes the wiping away of all Idolatry including Baal. He utterly destroyed all the high places. He personally watched it till it was done!

• 2 Kings 23:24 "...the images, and the idols, and all the abominations...in the land of Judah and in Jerusalem, did Josiah put away, that he might perform the words of the law which were written in the book...the priest found in the house of the Lord."

  Spiritual Fornication Brought the Moral Corruption of the Land!

  King Josiah knew what most Christian leaders have not a clue today. The reason for our moral decline in America is a result of spiritual fornication

  They are like the people in Elijah's day who didn't want to talk about it, or do anything about the issue of spiritual fornication! They the true reason why we have entered into a "Post Modern World". They just want to stick their heads in the sand and hope the issue will go away! They are true compromisers.

  Many Prophets of the Old Testament were severely persecuted and died for exposing Baal, especially by their leaders, the kings who compromised with Baal. Elijah was a prophet who had a showdown with the prophets of Baal and God's people.

  • And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? If the Lord be God, follow Him; but if Baal follow him. And the people answered him not a word." 1 Kings 18:21
  • The prophets were hated because they rebuked the people for worshiping Baal!
  • Like Cain, God rejects the sacrifice and the one who offers it, if it isn't God's Way
  • But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved unto myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal, Even so at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace." Romans 11:4-5
  • For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee" Romans 4:21

  The Apostle Paul in Romans Chapter 11, uses the teaching of Baal to explain Israel's fall! He warns us with this teaching to take heed also!

  Not only did the Apostle Paul warn us about Baal, but Jesus warns the churches about Baal! (Revelation 2:13-16,20-24)

  I chose not to name denominations or sects etc., with exception of the Jews. After all this is where all God's lessons manifested, and they are God's Chosen, still are to this day. That will never change. Apostasy is in ALL religions, some more, some less, some very evident. You might see some in yours. If anything was added or taken away, yours could be in trouble.

  In closing I would want to state that we all must come to a conclusion in discerning what God is saying through His Revealed Word. I have given you a few illustrations I hope would invigorate your appetite for more. Examine your hearts and what you have accepted as Truths. If it doesn't hold up to The Word of God, then you must question as to why and for what reason.

  I belong to Jesus Christ, thats my Church. I am His. God Bless

[DX10]

" am speaking of the unwritten wisdom of the Apostles, and Early Church Fathers. Not everything the Apostles said and did was written."

Of course I agree that not everything the Apostles said and did was written. But if the early church sources you read agree with what is recorded in the Bible, then what need do we have of it? And, if they disagree with what is written in the Bible, then who will you believe? As far as tradition is concerned, remember that Paul said that the law (Mosaic) was spiritual, but notice what happened with the Jews through the ages regarding their traditions and the law. Mark 7. By their traditions, they made the law of God of none effect! Be wary of man made tradition. Regards.

[magisterium]

It should be obvious, given all that we Catholics, right here on this FR forum, say about man's need to cooperate with God's grace, that all this talk about earthly authority within the episcopacy and papacy PRESUPPOSES the idea that the Holy Spirit guides the process Jesus established to rule the Church till He comes.

It is obvious from everything around us as living beings here on earth that it is part of God's plan to leave us to walk with faith along the path to eternal life He has chosen for us. He leaves us to self-govern, by external appearances, in most of our affairs. He *helps* us, when we cooperate with His grace and run our affairs according to His plan, but He does not simply do everything for us. He does NOT rule "directly," though He certainly *could* if He chose. The mere fact that He hasn't and doesn't *should* tell you something.

But, it must be pointed out, it is just as clear that He does not bestow everyone with equal gifts. The passage from Ephesians 4 that I cited earier today should make the principle clear enough. That, combined with the self-evident principle that private interpretation of Scripture is a short route to chaos (as Peter himself says in 2Peter 1:20 and 2Peter 3:15-17), makes it plain that the average laymen are not their own law with regard to Scripture. You would have it so, apparently, but that is not part of God's plan.

YOU say thae Church perverted Scripture, but the reference-standard here is yourself. I say that, quite to the contrary, the Church has NOT perverted Scripture at all. We would be at an impasse, with your word no better than mine, were there not other things to consider. Christ wanted the Church to be "one." So did St. Paul. This unity was effected by submission to the authority of the Church as a body, through the episcopacy, because it IS the will of God, and that will we submit to through faith. This was the ONLY Christian understanding of this matter until the 16th Century. Pride has had its way with those who separated from the fullness of the Church, and division upon division has been your plague ever since. Indeed, that spirit, spread throughout the world, has of late even affected individuals in Catholicism. May such dvision be healed from the top-down! We have hope for it, as it is only a recent and not yet totally pervasive malady within our communion. I pray that you will one day be healed of it, too, though I imagine it will be long in coming. God, after all, does not often overtly show His hand to make us act out of compulsion, as already noted.

Pax Domini.

[magisterium]

You evidently have not been reading the many posts that jo kus and I have been making regarding St. peter's presence and martyrdom in Rome. We have presented *Protestant* testimony to the veracity of our contention as well as quotes from early Christian sources as close as only 30 years after St. Peter's death, all indicating his Roman ministry and martyrdom. You will not accept anything, apparently, unless it is in the New Testament itself. If that is your reference standard, how do you "know," and how will you "accept," the supposition that St. Peter and the rest of the Apostles ever even died at all? It's not recorded in Scripture! You box yourself into logical absurdities like this with the position you hold. I'm afraid there is no reasoning with you.

[TexConfederate1861]

I have never read anything in Holy Tradition that contradicts the Scripture. I have read quite a bit that clarifies it though. Such as the story of the Holy Mother's life, how she was dedicated to God from birth, by her parents, Joachim & Anna, and how she lived her life after the Savior's resurrection, and how she died, etc.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***faith only is false doctrine faith without works is dead****

HOT DOG! I've been waiting for this opening!

By Grace are you saved,through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the GIFT OF GOD, NOT OF WORKS,lest any man should boast!
What shall we say then that Abraham, our father as pertaining to the flesh hath found?
For if Abrham were JUSTIFIED BY WORKS, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God.
For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
Now, to him that WORKETH is the reward not reconed of GRACE but of DEBT.
BUT TO HIM THAT WORKETH NOT, but BELIEVETH on him that justifieth the ungodly, HIS FAITH IS COUNTED FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

When was Abraham justified! When he offered up Issac or when he believed GOD?
Gen 22 is the offering of Issac. OR...
Gen 15 when Abraham believed GOD .."And he believed in the LORD and he counted it to him for Righteousnes."

Seven chapters difference! Let the Bible speak!
"How was it reconed? When he was in circumcision, or in UN-circumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision."
When was Abraham circumcised? Chapter 17! Way before hwe offered up Issac!

So, what of James' statement? Put it in context. James, Cephas and John were apostles to the CIRCUMCISION. Paul was the apostle to the Uncircumcision.
James' letter was written "to the 12 tribes scattered abroad." He spoke of theings AFTER abraham was circumcised when works were still necessary.

[Emmet Fitzhume]

Probably establishing the Church in Rome.

Paul was the forever traveling Evangelical, going even from Athens to Malta and beyond.

Peter was more centrally located, unless of course I have read the history wrong.

Paul's work is bar-none, the most amazing ever known.

It is to him that we owe our gratitude for the knowledge of Jesus Christ.

This was due to Paul's genuine wish that Gentiles know Christ, in addition to Jews. Peter's argument was that only Jews know Christ.

Thank goodness Paul convinced him otherwise.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***Paul's work is bar-none, the most amazing ever known. ***

Absolutly great! Three missionary journeys we know about and probably more we don't know about! he was shipwrecked four times! Yet we only have the story of one on the way to Rome (At Government expense at that).