Posted on 07/10/2007 8:57:47 AM PDT by f150sound
LORENZAGO DI CADORE, Italy - Pope Benedict XVI has reasserted the universal primacy of the Roman Catholic Church, approving a document released Tuesday that says Orthodox churches were defective and that other Christian denominations were not true churches.
In the latest document — formulated as five questions and answers — the Vatican seeks to set the record straight on Vatican II's ecumenical intent, saying some contemporary theological interpretation had been "erroneous or ambiguous" and had prompted confusion and doubt.
It restates key sections of a 2000 document the pope wrote when he was prefect of the congregation, "Dominus Iesus," which set off a firestorm of criticism among Protestant and other Christian denominations because it said they were not true churches but merely ecclesial communities and therefore did not have the "means of salvation."
"Christ 'established here on earth' only one church," the document said. The other communities "cannot be called 'churches' in the proper sense" because they do not have apostolic succession — the ability to trace their bishops back to Christ's original apostles.
I just read a (really good -- and harrowing) book about Stalingrad and what I learned was "one front at a time, dammit!"
My impression was that ONE issue was: is it okay to ask people t pray for one. And NOW we're ALSO "inventing" (is the present tense really correct? Didn't we invent it quite a while back?) the whole communion of saints thing.
I sure hope we can keep the questions separate as long as possible.
We can thank God that He gave the Catholic Church the authroity to declare, definitivley, that John 3:16 is the word of God - otherwise we would not know it to be so!
While it is an important verse, it is clearly and undoubtedly lacking in details (as God Himself realized when He willed that the Catholic Church also declare definitively that there were 4 entire Gospel books (and many other NT books) that man should become familiar with in order to know, love and serve Him (in addition to this one short sentence known as John 3:16).
So, I would strongly disagree that John 3:16 says it all.
OK...Rush Limbaugh becoming a Muslim
Considering some of his views, I think he'd fit right in... :) (okay, I will get pelted for saying this...but Rush is not my idea of a representative concervative)
I disagree, but no flaming from me bro :)!
Thanks.
Well, thanks for prodding (uh, poor choice of words? heh heh heh) me to do it! By and large, this is the best conversation I’ve ever had on FR on Calflicks and Filthy ‘eathens and all. It has helped me greatly.
You have absolutely no idea what my church is going through. You think we submit to “modernist” teachings? We lost our 5 acre, 10 building property we had occupied for 125 years because we refused to give in to “modernist” teachings. We are now meeting in a school cafeteria instead of the 400+ seat sanctuary (with altar rails) we finished expanding only 4 years ago. We were lucky. Another church in the area had its priests and vestry members personally sued by our former diocese. We have done all of this beacuse we know that Truth is more important than stained glass windows, and that winning souls for Christ is a better investment than the good graces of heterodox bishops.
www.catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9712qq.asp Saith:
Already read it. In my initial screed, I had tried to "head off at the pass" this article by James Akin, (who wrote a nice little irenic book called The Salvation Controversy, btw), by pointing out some of the implications of the differences between canon law (which is variable) and dogmatics (which are part of the Magisterium). Alas, I have failed yet once again to be coherent, much less convincing. It is a cross that I must bear, it seems.
I will have to respond later. Last night I went to see Jason Isbell, formerly of the Drive by Truckers in a little venue in Raleigh. My mouth is still hanging slack jawed (it was an UNBELIEVABLE performance), my head is still ringing -from the NOISE, not from illegal substances or too much alcohol, and I am dependent on coffee to jump start the motor this a.m. (I usually ride my bike). At 52 years old, I am too old to hang out that late anymore. Thanks for the post, though.
If the RNC told us to do it, Rush would be quoting suras to us within a month, telling us it is consistent with conservative principles and we have just misunderstood it.
Protestants believe that the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit is more powerful and more sure than a fallible magisterium....., but it is nice to have a family squabble, rather than the kind of crap we used to have between Protestants and Catholics.
I will simply agree to disagree on that one.
One correction here: THE CHURCH declared a canon of scripture. Until 1054 AD, Catholic was NOT capitalized.
And yes, you are excommunicated, strictly speaking. I don't see why that would be a significant problem. I don't say it as a "Nyah, nyah," but what you think about Church and Sacrament is so different from what we think that it would be a kind of an abuse either for me to receive what your group offers as communion or for you to mutatis what my group offers as mutandis. From our POV you fail to "discern the Body" both in the sense of the Body of Christ, discerned as Thomas say in the hymn, by faith, or that wounded Church, also the Body of Christ. The excommunication is not only "medicinal" but "prophylactic"!
I don't see how that's wanting to have my cake etc. I'm saying we're in one Church, BOTH of us imperfectly to be sure AND to be exhaustively correct, but the imperfection of your participation is of such a kind that you ought not to imperil yourself by partaking of the Sacrament. (Mine, on the other hand is of such a kind that I'd better have a really persuasive explanation of how, while being surrounded with gifts I still live like a pauper, or why I insist on illness when God keeps giving me medicine.)
It seems non-contradictory to me. Help me see the contradiction, pliss.
I would say that a thoughtful, sincerely held Calvinism (assuming one has the capacity to do theology thoughtfully, not everyone does, no blame or condescension) for someone brought up in a thoughtful protestant household (or even a thoughtless, nominally Catholic household) is not so terrible a thing that the holder of it is latae sententiae damned.
He IS cutting himself of from SOME principle means of Grace (but not with malice and with possibly some traces of venial and invincible ignorance), and from some worthwhile ascetical activities -- among which I reckon obedience, sometimes in some circumstances, and from the beneficent prodding, chivvying, and needling that orthodoxy provides to the recalcitrant soul -- or at least to mine.
So there are consequences. But we share in worshipping a God who turns evil to Good through Love, and I will not despair either of your salvation or of mine and see no impetus or logical necessity to do so.
So if I am tied up in a Gordian knot, I lack not only Alexander's sword but the wits to be aware of being tied up.
Clearly you think I am missing something. It sure wouldn't be the first time.
May your head be healed and the only music echoing therein be that of angels singing praises and bearing glad tidings.
LOL!!!!
>> You think we submit to “modernist” teachings? <<
In the sense of modern (after the Renaissance), as opposed to ancient, yes. Sola Scriptura, for instance, is a modernist heresy that gives rise to innumerable other modernist heresies. TULIP represents five more modernist heresies.
You don’t remember the Bible stateing in John? Many heard Christ’s message about the Body of Christ in the Bread of Life — and they couldn’t swallow it, so they left Christ’s following?
Come on! It’s in the Bible!
Anglicans are not exactly the “sola scriptura” types. Rather, we use the “scripture, reason and tradition” approach. Sort of like a three legged stool.
What’s “TULIP”?
Oh, pardon me... I had thought you were Presbyterian. I must have confused you with others regardign past exchanges. Much of what I’ve said about Protestantism doesn’t actually *necessarily* hold true for Anglicans.
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.