Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: MarkBsnr
That is why we consider the Catholic (including Orthodox) Churches to be apart from this statement. They are not given absolutely authority. The Pope, for instance, is considered the steward; he does not have absolutely authority.

Yet the Pope can speak ex cathedra where his word is literally law, and cannot be questioned. No absolute authority there! And that is one of the biggest contentions between the Orthodox and the Catholic Churches - the absolute infallibility of the Pope when he speaks ex cathedra.

In this case, I believe the Protestant and Orthodox churches get it right - NO MAN has authority to speak without error, without question. It's not Biblical, and it has led - and will lead again - to evil being ensconced in the Church.

Some of those in Germany in the Church were corrupt; they were rooted out.

And the other parts of Catholicism? Spain, Italy, France, all were blameless and pure? Just those evil Germans? The selling of indulgences, the purchase of bishoprics, the graft and corruption certainly didn't stem from Rome... Wait, isn't a major part of this thread how bishops must be approved by other bishops of their higher ups (like cardinals, or the Pope)?

To try to insinuate that the Vatican was blissfully unaware of hundreds of years of corruption is simply not a tenable position.

Did Luther contribute to it? Certainly, he did. But, given the damage that he has caused to Christianity, was it worth the evil he did?

In fact, I think it is the arrogance and willful unrepentance of the Catholic Church that has continued hundreds of years of evil. Look at the loathing of your own Church to own up to its complicity in the sexual abuse of thousands of children.

My own church - the very place I worship - had a pastor 10 years ago who was caught in adultery. Rather than shuffle him off to another church to offend again, he was called out, confronted (as we are told to do in Acts), stripped of his commission (defrocked), and until he completed a restoration process was barred from being a member of any church in our denomination.

That's how you deal with evil; you don't simply say "it was over there" and go about your merry, hypocritical ways...

But what do I know, I'm just an illegitimate Christian, now apparently a bastard child of evil, too!

283 posted on 08/10/2009 6:33:24 PM PDT by PugetSoundSoldier (Indignation over the sting of truth is the defense of the indefensible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies ]


To: PugetSoundSoldier

***That is why we consider the Catholic (including Orthodox) Churches to be apart from this statement. They are not given absolutely authority. The Pope, for instance, is considered the steward; he does not have absolutely authority.

Yet the Pope can speak ex cathedra where his word is literally law, and cannot be questioned. No absolute authority there! And that is one of the biggest contentions between the Orthodox and the Catholic Churches - the absolute infallibility of the Pope when he speaks ex cathedra.***

List for me the infallible pronouncements, if you would, please.

***In this case, I believe the Protestant and Orthodox churches get it right - NO MAN has authority to speak without error, without question. It’s not Biblical, and it has led - and will lead again - to evil being ensconced in the Church.***

If the Holy Spirit were not involved, then yes, I’d agree.

***Some of those in Germany in the Church were corrupt; they were rooted out.

And the other parts of Catholicism? Spain, Italy, France, all were blameless and pure? Just those evil Germans? The selling of indulgences, the purchase of bishoprics, the graft and corruption certainly didn’t stem from Rome... Wait, isn’t a major part of this thread how bishops must be approved by other bishops of their higher ups (like cardinals, or the Pope)?

To try to insinuate that the Vatican was blissfully unaware of hundreds of years of corruption is simply not a tenable position.***

There is a difference between generalized corruption and specific corruption. If a postal clerk in Bozeman is corrupt, is the Postmaster General expected to be immediately aware of that corruption? The PG is responsible, yet he may not be ever made aware.

***Did Luther contribute to it? Certainly, he did. But, given the damage that he has caused to Christianity, was it worth the evil he did?

In fact, I think it is the arrogance and willful unrepentance of the Catholic Church that has continued hundreds of years of evil. Look at the loathing of your own Church to own up to its complicity in the sexual abuse of thousands of children. ***

You may wish to take a look at the timing of the various events. Luther was around for 450 years before this horrific affair.

***My own church - the very place I worship - had a pastor 10 years ago who was caught in adultery. Rather than shuffle him off to another church to offend again, he was called out, confronted (as we are told to do in Acts), stripped of his commission (defrocked), and until he completed a restoration process was barred from being a member of any church in our denomination. ***

Very responsible. You guys are to be commended if indeed the restoration process was of utility. Was it?

***That’s how you deal with evil; you don’t simply say “it was over there” and go about your merry, hypocritical ways... ***

Agree.

***But what do I know, I’m just an illegitimate Christian, now apparently a bastard child of evil, too!***

By what inference do you not infer that the consequences of Luther’s actions were evil?


342 posted on 08/11/2009 5:13:40 PM PDT by MarkBsnr ( I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson