Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: xone

Why didn’t I include Trent?

If you don’t accept Chalcedon, why would you accept Trent?

If you accept all the others, then we can talk about Trent. The problem with thinking that this is Catholic only, is that this isn’t at all a ‘Catholic’ issue.

These are issues across all protestant denominations.

If we regard as you do, then no one is bound by a Church council. We can’t simply accept what we want and leave the rest. The same is with the problem of authority. If the Church called the councils and they are authoritative, then the question is why we ought to be out of communion?


163 posted on 06/15/2010 2:34:17 PM PDT by BenKenobi (I want to hear more about Sam! Samwise the stouthearted!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies ]


To: BenKenobi
If you don’t accept Chalcedon, why would you accept Trent?

I wouldn't, it is just the council that anathemizes me.

We can’t simply accept what we want and leave the rest.

I can accept Scriptural results from such a council, no problem.

The same is with the problem of authority.

If all the councils used the Scripture as the final authority on doctrine, and the Pope had follwed them, we wouldn't be out of communion.

166 posted on 06/15/2010 2:41:37 PM PDT by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | 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