Posted on 07/10/2007 8:00:34 AM PDT by Bladerunnuh
If in your own mind you think the object which you made has powers beyond the material, you are committing idolatry.
Well, that is not how it goes. No one believes the object that was made, is going to help them. Somewhere in the process, “spirits”, “gods” and other supernatural beings are invoked.
But that is how it goes. The man-made objects are believed to be imbued with supernatural powers.
many churches, one Church, one faith, one truth. If the individual churches began to teach a doctrine other than what Paul had left with them, he corrected them.
When I say worship as they choose... I mean the religion they were born into and if not that religion then I guess they have to find something that gives them peace and serenity. Either way...I still say everyone should worship as they choose. I’m not going to break it down ... it’s a personal choice for people. I prefer my own religion and I practice it and pray in that tradition. That is my business and no one elses. Therefore, I give the same respect and privacy to those who practice their faith in the manner they see fit. I am not the ruler of the world or the religion police and I don’t think anyone else should be either. My point being...everyone should have the freedom to worship as they choose and not be chided by someone in some other religion...including the Vatican!
I have reproduced a few of these below. There is NO QUESTION that according to official church teaching, theologically astute protestants are damned. The church has never repudiated Trent (indeed, it cannot, as it is part of the magisterium).
I had a good friend who was recently considering converting to Catholocism. I told him that "if you accept the magisterium as the revealed will of God, YOU MUST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I AM DAMNED, FOR I REJECT UNCATEGORICALLY THE FOLLOWING TEACHINGS, which I have reproduced below ( I actually personalized them in making them a confession of faith, like "I, Dreams of Polycarp, assert the following" using the direct language of Trent. He did NOT want to go there, but preferred to quote the Dominus Jesus or some other document, but those are not clear at all. Trent has never been reversed, and contains the following:
On Original Sin(these three canons teach among other things, that original sin has been cleased by baptism. It is clearly baptismal regeneration. Again, the issue is not whether I think the Roman church is wrong (I do think so!) but the issue is the fact that I reject the idea that grace is entrusted to the church through baptism and that it cleanses one (rightly administered) of original sin and transfers merit to Jesus. I reject this idea as unscriptural, and the church officially still pronounces me as damned.3. If any one asserts, that this sin of Adam,--which in its origin is one, and being transfused into all by propogation, not by imitation, is in each one as his own, --is taken away either by the powers of human nature, or by any other remedy than the merit of the one mediator, our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath reconciled us to God in his own blood, made unto us justice, santification, and redemption; or if he denies that the said merit of Jesus Christ is applied, both to adults and to infants, by the sacrament of baptism rightly administered in the form of the church; let him be anathema:
4. If any one denies, that infants, newly born from their mothers' wombs, even though they be sprung from baptized parents, are to be baptized; or says that they are baptized indeed for the remission of sins, but that they derive nothing of original sin from Adam, which has need of being expiated by the laver of regeneration for the obtaining life everlasting,--whence it follows as a consequence, that in them the form of baptism, for the remission of sins, is understood to be not true, but false, --let him be anathema.
5. If any one denies, that, by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is conferred in baptism, the guilt of original sin is remitted; or even asserts that the whole of that which has the true and proper nature of sin is not taken away; but says that it is only rased, or not imputed; let him be anathema.
ON JUSTIFICATIONThis damns me, as I am a Calvinist. Arminians are off the hook on this one, but it gets me square between the eyes. I believe that my will is wholly and completely dead and I can no more "cooperate" with the grace of God than I can sprout wings and fly to Mars. I deny this canon without reservation and it damns me just as cleanly.CANON IV.-If any one saith, that man's free will moved and excited by God, by assenting to God exciting and calling, nowise co-operates towards disposing and preparing itself for obtaining the grace of Justification; that it cannot refuse its consent, if it would, but that, as something inanimate, it does nothing whatever and is merely passive; let him be anathema.
CANON VII.-If any one saith, that all works done before Justification, in whatsoever way they be done, are truly sins, or merit the hatred of God; or that the more earnestly one strives to dispose himself for grace, the more grievously he sins: let him be anathema.I believe that there are NO works done before (or after) Justification which are not sinful and need the cleansing of Christ. I repudiate this canon. The canon says clearly that I am "anathema" as the Greek says "eternally condemned" (the same word as Galatians 1:8,9)
CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.That is me, baby! Faith ALONE. Any works are an evidence of faith and play no more part in my justification than Hungarian goose farts in July. I am unequivocably and irresolvably damned according to this canon, and so are all protestants who follow in the tradition of Luther.
CANON XI.-If any one saith, that men are justified, either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ, or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema.ME AGAIN!!! I say I am justified SOLELY by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, and that any grace and charity that are poured forth in my heart are the RESULTS of that justification ONLY. Again, you can disagree, but you may not disagree that the position of the Roman Church is that I am damned forever because of this.
CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.Here I am again! I confess this fully and freely, knowing exactly what it says and means. Most of my evangelical Catholic friends are aghast that this language exists in the magisterium and try to ignore it (God bless 'em!) and say that the Dominus and the Catechism say I am ok...., but the Dominus and the Catechism both affirm Trent.....
CANON XV.-If any one saith, that a man, who is born again and justified, is bound of faith to believe that he is assuredly in the number of the predestinate; let him be anathema. CANON XVI.-If any one saith, that he will for certain, of an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift of perseverance unto the end,-unless he have learned this by special revelation; let him be anathema.Yep, I believe it to be the clear teaching of scripture that because I am born again, that I will OF NECESSITY continue on to glory, because I can KNOW that I am predestinate (elect), by the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit. Now I know that some arminians who are protestants may disagree, but that is not the issue. The fact is that I DO SO BELIEVE THIS, and that the papacy pronounces me damned on account of it.
CANON XVII.-If any one saith, that the grace of Justification is only attained to by those who are predestined unto life; but that all others who are called, are called indeed, but receive not grace, as being, by the divine power, predestined unto evil; let him be anathema.Yeah, I believe that only those eternally predestinated unto life believe. No others ever believe, and that those predestinated unto life will believe and will carry on unto glory. This one as well clearly damns me.
CANON XVIII.-If any one saith, that the commandments of God are, even for one that is justified and constituted in grace, impossible to keep; let him be anathema.Damned again! I believe that ALL of our works are infected and saturated with sin. In fact, if the GREATEST command is to love God with all my heart soul and man, then I am a GREAT SINNER every waking moment, and the idea that this is a "venial" or "light" sin vs a "mortal" sin (like sleeping with another woman than my wife, or a man) is unbiblical. I reject such a distinction, which also damns me.
ON THE SACRAMENTSI believe in two sacraments, baptism and the Lord's supper ONLY. I reject the other five as properly sacraments (and the other COMMANDED activity by Jesus, the washing of feet!) as being a sacrament. I am, therefore, anathema.CANON I.-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law were not all instituted by Jesus Christ, our Lord; or, that they are more, or less, than seven, to wit, Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Order, and Matrimony; or even that any one of these seven is not truly and properly a sacrament; let him be anathema.
CANON IV.-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not ineed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.I believe that men SHOULD desire the (two) sacraments. I deny that the other five activities are sacraments and that any of them are necesary to salvation. Again, you can say I am WRONG, but the clear teaching of the church is that I am not only wrong, but damned. No wiggle room
CANON VI.-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law do not contain the grace which they signify; or, that they do not confer that grace on those who do not place an obstacle thereunto; as though they were merely outward signs of grace or justice received through faith, and certain marks of the Christian profession, whereby believers are distinguished amongst men from unbelievers; let him be anathema. CANON VIII.-If any one saith, that by the said sacraments of the New Law grace is not conferred through the act performed, but that faith alone in the divine promise suffices for the obtaining of grace; let him be anathema.I deny any intrinsic grace in these activities, and affirm that their efficacy depends wholly on the faith of the recipient, NOT of the storehouse of merit/grace that the church transfers to me. I am, therefore, damned.
ON BAPTISM CANON III.-If any one saith, that in the Roman church, which is the mother and mistress of all churches, there is not the true doctrine concerning the sacrament of baptism; let him be anathema.Well, there ya go!
CANON V.-If any one saith, that baptism is free, that is, not necessary unto salvation; let him be anathema.Again, here I am!
CANON XIII.-If any one saith, that little children, for that they have not actual faith, are not, after having received baptism, to be reckoned amongst the faithful; and that, for this cause, they are to be rebaptized when they have attained to years of discretion; or, that it is better that the baptism of such be omitted, than that, while not believing by their own act, they should be bapized in the faith alone of the Church; let him be anathema.This one lets ME off the hook! (I am a paedobaptist reformed presbyterian) but it gets all the baptists right between the eyes! These are representative, not exhaustive. I had been to seminary and never knew the canons until recently.
I believe that there are many Roman Catholics who are truly regenerate and in the body of Christ. I also know that many of my Roman Catholic brothers and sisters acknowledge me as a true Christian. I only wish they did not have to deny the magisterium to do so. No way around it. I asked my friend if he could affirm the magisterium in light of my "confession" (I have prayed with, loved and encouraged this guy for years). He wanted really really badly to tell me that I just didn't understand the teaching of the church and that I misunderstood the canons (he did say that he could NOT affirm that I was headed for hell, no matter what). I asked him to then explain them to me, where I was in error. Maybe he will. I hope he can. We have a tentative date to talk with some priests about it. I am quite willing to affirm that Catholics who futz justification all up (they confuse it with the sanctification process) can nevertheless still be Christians. I only wish the leadership would do the same for me.
So, who left who?
I could not understand that while the Scriptures are God (Holy Spirit) inspired, the Protestants and other Non Catholics would state that certain scriptures were facts, while others were analogies, descriptions or some sort of play on words by Christ. Well as Jesus is our Savior, He cannot lie nor can he speak in riddles, metaphors or whatever. He only speaks the truth.
A Protestant speaks of the Eucharist:
“Answer
You probably can’t consider me a “Protestant” because I believe that the bread and wine ARE the body and blood of Christ.
Our churches don’t claim to understand it, but since Jesus said that (the bread and wine)”THIS IS by body and blood”, then IT IS!
We don’t try to make it logical or magical. We have the bread and we have His body. We have the wine and we have His blood. And we eat and drink with this faith in His word.
1 Cor 10:16
16 Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ?
(from New International Version)
1 Cor 11:27-32
27 Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30 That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep. 31 But if we judged ourselves, we would not come under judgment. 32 When we are judged by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned with the world.
(from New International Version)”
Well said.
I don’t see why everyone is up in arms about the Pope’s words. What he’s saying is what I grew up hearing when I was Catholic—it’s nothing new.
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.