Posted on 05/16/2008 3:19:30 PM PDT by netmilsmom
Stemming from this comment
>>I think the RCC doctrines are a product of the enemy<<
Please tell us where we stand here. Examples welcome, but I'm not sure that actual names can be used when quoting another FReeper, so date and thread title may be better.
What's your catechism say???
I believe it is very strange to complain of a "damnation" which one believes has no effect.
I didn't think you'd answer that...
Of course not...Never implied it...
This thread is not about me. Do not make this personal.
I can't imagine why someone who does not believe the Catholic Church can condemn one to hell would care if the Catholic Church condemned them to hell.
It makes no sense, except as an anti-Catholic fetish driven by hate.
The quote from St. Thomas was within the context of our becoming “partakers of the divine nature”. If the Church really thought that we became little gods then surely there would be much written about it. St. Thomas was a prolific writer; clearly he would have said more on the subject if this is what he meant. Please provide the references.
Historically, Unitarianism and the Unitarian Church grew out of the Protestant Reformation of the 16th century.
Unitarian churches were formally established in Transylvania and Poland (by the Socinians) in the second half of the 16th Century.
In England, the unitarian movement gained ground in the 18th Century when Samuel Clarke revised the Book of Common Prayer, removing the Trinitarian Nicene Crede and references to Jesus as God. Theophilus Lindsey also revived the Book of Common Prayer to allow a more Unitarian interpretation. His efforts met with substantial criticism. In response, in 1774, Lindsey founded the Essex Street Chapel, the first true Unitarian congregation in England. A third Anglican, Joseph Priestly founded a reform congregation. Priestly fled to America after his home was torched, and became a leading figure in the founding of the church on American soil.
In the United States, the Unitarian movement began primarily in the Congregational parish churches of New England. These churches, which may still be seen today in nearly every New England town square, trace their roots to the division of the Puritan colonies into parishes for the administration of their religious needs.
So I would consider Unitarian to basically fit within the Protestant wing of Christianity, given that Unitarian churches were created as offshoots of more mainstream Protestant movements.
That being said, I have no doubt that most Protestants overwhemingly reject Unitarian theology and were swift to denounce the rise of Unitarian churches as not following true Christian doctrine. So while most Catholics and Protestants today would reject unitarian teachings as non-Christian, the entire Universal-Unitarian movement traces its roots to Protestant Christian churches.
A phrase will be pulled from that context and used as a bludgeon, along with all the similar bludgeon phrases.
Catholic scholarship is just too deep for some minds, but fertile ground for those of ill will.
>>Netmilsmom thought those words were so egregious<<
Don’t read my mind or motivations.
If a link to the source had been posted, the point would be moot. It would have come with the footnote. Without an actual source, it can easily be mistaken for false given some FReepers past posting records
No link, Google search (posted in google link) reveled a non-Catholic site.
Anyone who wants to be taken with credibility on FR, links to the source. If not, then no credibility.
Libs post bits that suit their taste. FReepers know better and provide the actual source with all footnotes, not just the numbers.
Prolixin Decantoate is a wonderful drug for religious delusions. In fact, we had a lady that was hearing Jesus talk to her. She insisted on it.
My boss, the Head Psych at one of the Cleveland Hospitals always said that any delusions can be overcome with Prolixin or Haldol.
She was cured with Prolixin.
Take it up with the RM - your statement implies that you read my mind (why else would you presume to know that I make my own personal interpretation of Scripture?) and that, under the FR rules, is verboten.
In response, I would ask - what do you call when a large group of religious men make their own private interpretation of Scripture? Does it make right with you that it’s a group with authority within your religion? (That’s how the NIV was derived, albeit by a different group. Not a stellar result there, either.)
Interesting. I read something like that on this thread just this afternoon:
I expect FReepers to do their own homework and not to mis-attribute words and motives to other FReepers carelessly (and certainly to apologize when that happens.)
>>Actually, those are the views of the tiny minority of Protestants who hate Catholics and Catholicism. <<
But they’re so vocal sometimes!
I was divorced as well, and remarried. God is very forgiving. Not too sure about churches forgiving us but they aren’t the important ones.
>>I expect FReepers to do their own homework and not to mis-attribute words and motives to other FReepers carelessly (and certainly to apologize when that happens.) <<
Hmmmm, I do remember that being said! Now who was that (rubbing chin)....I think I want to say some poster but....Hmmmm.
I’ll have to think about it a while.
The criticisms levied by Protestants here with respect to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 460, are in fact, an implicit heresy with respect to failing to completely grasp the implications of the Incarnation. The Incarnation in readers digest language is the orthodox doctrine that the eternal son of God assumed a complete human nature and was born of the Virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, as Our Sunday’s Visitors Catholic Encyclopedia (p. 530) states “The union of the divine and human natures in Christ is a permanent and abiding one. In addition, a fundamental soteriological conviction is at stake in the doctrine: Whatever is not assumed is not saved. According to the scriptures, the Incarnation has the salvific purpose that embraces both the restoration of the image of God in us through the cross of Christ and the foretaste of the perfect union with God that is our destiny in Christ.”
Catholics meditate on the Incarnation constantly, as evidenced by the Annunciation being part of the Rosary and the Church requirement that the Faithful are obliged to attend the Christmas Liturgy regardless of which day it falls. More importantly, and I think this gets more into the crux of the matter, while Protestants accept the doctrine of the Incarnation, the implications for Protestants with respect to the Incarnation creates problems for their doctrines of justification. Lets take the mere fact that Christ loved our bodies (i.e. Human nature) enough to take a body himself). Since all the Creeds confess the orthodox doctrine of the “resurrection of the body” (Apostles Creed) and “We look for resurrection of the dead” (Nicene Creed), the Doctrine of the Incarnation is important and related to these statements as we will continue to have our bodies in heaven.
It is in the context of the Incarnation that paragraph CCC 460 is to be understood and again, here is where Protestants are implicitly embracing Gnosticism as many Protestant confessions have an anti-physical bias. Protestant doctrines about justification which say that God imputes his Grace, which amounts to a covering of the human person, is in opposition of the Catholic position with as I noted earlier, “God’s Grace restores us unto God’s image and is a foretaste of the perfect union with the Trinity.” The failure to contemplate the full implications of the Incarnation impacts how most Protestants view the Sacraments, as the Protestant understanding of Sacraments has the anti-physical bias which thus prevents them from understanding the orthodox understanding of the Eucharist and Baptism as they are taught in Scripture.
Earlier, Petronski linked a paper about “Theosis”, which is rooted in Incarnational Theology, and shows that this doctrine was taught as far back as St. Irenaeus of Lyons (AD 170-175), who I might add again, was writing against “The Gnostics”, hmmm, hmmm. As I noted earlier, Catholic soteriology is grounded in the orthodox doctrine of Christ’s Incarnation. Thomas Howard, in Evangelical is Not Enough (p. 36) writes: “The Incarnation took all that properly belongs to our humanity and delivered it back to us, redeemed. All of our inclinations and appetites and capacities and yearnings and proclivities are purified and gathered up and glorified by Christ.”
In addition to 2 Peter: 4, there are other passages that refer to human persons partaking God’s nature. St. Paul writes: “But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we also await a savior, the Lord Jesus Christ. He will change our lowly body to conform with his glorified body by the power that enables him also to bring all things into subjection to himself” (c.f. Phil 3:20-21). Similar to St. Paul and St. Peter, St. John makes a reference to being like God. For example, St. John writes: “Beloved, we are God’s children now; what we shall be has not yet been revealed. We do know that when it is revealed we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. Everyone who has this hope based on him makes himself pure as he is pure” (c.f. 1 John 3:2-3). If one thinks about logically, the fact that through the resurrection of Christ, we who die with Christ and our raised with him is in fact a participation in the Divine life and thus we are like God in that we will live for eternity. Thus, the doctrine in the CCC para. 460 is entirely orthodox. I have provided an Orthodox Church link which explains “theosis” in more detail for those who are interested in “learning and not polemics”
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Theosis
Regards
You have to remember this was back in the 40s and 50s. It would have been like marrying a black man back then. Glad that’s not the case anymore. (I wear size 10’s, so make the boots fit, please.)
LOL. I actually always liked Italian men, even dated one for a long while. Nice families.
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.