I can't shout over the voices of your own personal magisterium in your head.
Catholicspeak for "I have no answer so I'll try to bluster my way through it."
A typical response from the
Posted on 10/31/2010 11:59:22 AM PDT by RnMomof7
In Christ Alone lyrics
Songwriters: Getty, Julian Keith; Townend, Stuart Richard;
In Christ alone my hope is found He is my light, my strength, my song This Cornerstone, this solid ground Firm through the fiercest drought and storm
What heights of love, what depths of peace When fears are stilled, when strivings cease My Comforter, my All in All Here in the love of Christ I stand
In Christ alone, who took on flesh Fullness of God in helpless Babe This gift of love and righteousness Scorned by the ones He came to save
?Til on that cross as Jesus died The wrath of God was satisfied For every sin on Him was laid Here in the death of Christ I live, I live
There in the ground His body lay Light of the world by darkness slain Then bursting forth in glorious Day Up from the grave He rose again
And as He stands in victory Sin?s curse has lost its grip on me For I am His and He is mine Bought with the precious blood of Christ
Whoever wanted to sit next to the cry baby in the class who had nothing and wanted everything the good kids had. The type everyone avoided. ;)
annalex wrote, in reference to 2 Peter 1:12-15:
“He was speaking of his life ending, but he also said that he will endeavor that the Church continues in the knowledge that the Apostles witnessed to be true. That is a promise to keep his office through generations.”
That last sentence is NOT exegesis of the given text, but eisegesis pure and simple. Peter is plainly referring to the very epistle he was writing, not some office you assume he was establishing and conferring.
But you are correct in this, this is one of the very, very small handful of verses that the Roman church uses to try to establish some scriptural support for an ongoing papal office, an office which is, I might add, clearly one of development over time and not the result of scriptural definition and divine mandate.
The larger and more serious issue is this: Just as Jesus pointed out that one who trusts in himself that he is righteous (i.e. that he is justified before God on the basis of some quality in himself) must at the same time despise others (Luke 18:9ff.), so too must the dogmatic Romanist in order to defend his assertion of the superiority of Rome’s so-called holy tradition and magisterium belittle the Holy Scriptures. This is the point that will forever divided Rome from the rest of Christendom. At the same time much of the rest of Christendom is far too quick to dispense with tradition, often with no support from the Scriptures. In other words, the extreme assertion of Rome usually provokes an equally extreme reaction. This situation usually devolves into little more than a shouting match akin to the exchange of talking points such as one sees on cable news shows between political operatives of the opposite viewpoint.
The Holy Scripture has something to say about this; in fact, it has a lot to say about this, beginning with “Honor your father and your mother.” One does not disobey father and mother unless they teach or command contrary to the clear will of God. Then one must obey God rather than men.
The proper attitude is to honor and uphold tradition, i.e., that which we have received from our faithful forebears in so far as what we have received from them is in accord with God’s plain and manifest will, i.e., His written Word. The Catholic would turn this order around and have tradition sit in judgment of the written word. Many a Protestant (not all!) would too easily and lightly cast off tradition, any tradition, that seems to have any Catholic fingerprints on it. Both sides are wrong. And usually little light is generated in arguments between them, but heat and smoke abound.
“Holy Inquisition has renewed and restored the hierarchy repeatedly. It will eventually be brought back and the ranks of bishops and priests will be cleansed once again.”
And there are so many more Jews and heretics to burn and behead now, too!
Now now.
The White Hankys just can’t cover impertinent questions very well. How dare you.
/s
VERY WELL PUT:
That last sentence is NOT exegesis of the given text, but eisegesis pure and simple. Peter is plainly referring to the very epistle he was writing, not some office you assume he was establishing and conferring.
But you are correct in this, this is one of the very, very small handful of verses that the Roman church uses to try to establish some scriptural support for an ongoing papal office, an office which is, I might add, clearly one of development over time and not the result of scriptural definition and divine mandate.
The larger and more serious issue is this: Just as Jesus pointed out that one who trusts in himself that he is righteous (i.e. that he is justified before God on the basis of some quality in himself) must at the same time despise others (Luke 18:9ff.), so too must the dogmatic Romanist in order to defend his assertion of the superiority of Rome’s so-called holy tradition and magisterium belittle the Holy Scriptures. This is the point that will forever divided Rome from the rest of Christendom.
“Behold, the King cometh, meek and sitting on an ass and a colt the foal of an ass”
As pope, he should have had the spiritual insight to make the distinction. And I fail to see how he didn't know what kissing the koran signified.
It is only clear to those that can not rightly divide the word of God
This chapter deals with MINISTRIES
There was division in the church ..some said they were followers of Apollos and some said they followed Paul .. Paul was writing to them not to look at the preacher but to Christ.. With that back round read the word with me
! Cor:3: 1And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
2I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.
3For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
4For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?
5Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?
6I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
7So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
8Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.
9For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.
10According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon
. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
11For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
13Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. 14If any man's WORK abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
15If any man's WORK shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
16Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
17If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
18Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.
19For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
20And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.
21Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours;
22Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours; 23And ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's.
This scripture has nothing to do with sins or purgatory.
The message is that God will judge a mans WORKS .. in context their ministries.. those that are God ordained and true will be rewarded ..those that are not will be destroyed,( without eternal reward )...
This scripture does not address men "paying" for their own sin.. but rather having their works tested and judged
No, you must have never learned history. The Spanish Inquisition was only concerned with public, baptized Catholics. Jews and Muslims were outside of its scope. On the other hand, any heretical Catholic bishops seeking to destroy the Church from within should be investigated and punished, then and now.
The Spanish government had made heresy a capital crime. Catholic heretics who would not repent were turned over to the state. It is unlikely that modern states would pass similar laws against heresy. Inquisition is purely an internal Catholic matter and not really the business of any non-Catholic.
Could you provide the scriptural references for Jesus teaching the principle or gift of Apostolic succession ? Could you provide the scripture where God ordained a new testament priesthood? Could you provide the scriptural reference for an infallible papacy or even an infallible teaching by the church ? Could you provide the scriptural reference for 7 sacraments instituted by Christ or where he teaches that they give grace ?
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Inquisition.html
...In the beginning, the Inquisition dealt only with Christian heretics and did not interfere with the affairs of Jews. However, disputes about Maimonides’ books (which addressed the synthesis of Judaism and other cultures) provided a pretext for harassing Jews and, in 1242, the Inquisition condemned the Talmud and burned thousands of volumes. In 1288, the first mass burning of Jews on the stake took place in France...
...An estimated 31,912 heretics were burned at the stake, 17,659 were burned in effigy and 291,450 made reconciliations in the Spanish Inquisition. In Portugal, about 40,000 cases were tried, although only 1,800 were burned, the rest made penance...
The pope is infallible in defining faith and morals. Not in his personal behavior.
If the RCC has popes in it like JPII, then what about all the decisions he makes? What about the blessings on others that he allegedly bestows? Are they not valid?
The offices of priest or bishop were instituted by Christ as conduits for His blessings that come from Christ. The personal faults of the man do not affect the blessings.
Aren't Catholics obligated to follow the pope at risk of losing their salvation if they don't?
Yes normally, but that does not override the requirement to avoid sin and error.
How could the Church make such a *mistake* as appointing a *bad* pope?
How could Christ make the "mistake" of appointing a bad apostle like Judas and a weak pope like Peter? Christ founded His Church upon weak men so it would remain dependent upon Him.
The child is not judged for the sins of his parents. Neither is the Catholic judged for the sins of Church officials.
Catholics allegiance is to a church. Christians (His Body of Christ) has allegiance only to God/Jesus is The Word. Only ONE of those ways is right. Not a difficult choice.
The Catholic Church IS the Body of Christ and is therefore the only choice. Historically, there is no denying that He founded the Catholic Church. There is no historically serious claim (with details) that the Church has ever diverged from Christ's original teaching. Objectively secular historians understand this. Only Protestants live in stark denial of the basic historical record.
God designed it so the Spotless Lamb, the Christ of the Living God, is the Head of His Church and everyone of His children go directly to HIM. There is no 'man' to taint us.
Christ appointed Peter and his successors to be His earthly stewards. How can you rebel against His leadership decision in this regard?
I find it ironic - Catholics want to go directly to Heaven but they don't want to go directly to HIM in prayer
This is 100% false. Are you intentionally lying?
, in belief in HIM/HIS Word alone. They are taught to go to Mary for some things, a priest/confession for others, dead saints for another, the church for another, allegiance to a 'man' Pope, the catechism, church doctrine, etc. They are taught all those have answers for them. While JESUS is the ONLY answer for everything and HIS children know that. And His children have nothing to survive because they don't align themselves with man but their SAVIOR alone.
Let Jesus be Jesus. You have no authority to redefine His teaching. I could understand if you had questions about the historical authenticity of Church teaching and wanted to investigate further, but you are not saying that. You pronounce your own infallible doctrine heedless of what Jesus taught, implying that your authority is greater than His.
Catholicspeak for "I have no answer so I'll try to bluster my way through it."
A typical response from the
Inquisition is purely an internal Catholic matter and not really the business of any non-Catholic.
You know, we can argue theology all day long, but this kind of historical revisionism is sick and disgusting, and permits people like annalex to call for a return to the Inquisition.
But not everyone is as ignorant of history as some RC apologists appear to be.
Initially a tribunal would open at a location and an edict of grace would be published calling upon those who are conscious of heresy to confess; after a period of grace, the tribunal officers could make accusations. Those accused of heresy were sentenced at an auto de fe, Act of Faith. Clergyman would sit at the proceedings and would deliver the punishments. Punishments included confinement to dungeons, physical abuse and torture. Those who reconciled with the church were still punished and many had their property confiscated, as well as were banished from public life. Those who never confessed were burned at the stake without strangulation; those who did confess were strangled first. During the 16th and 17th centuries, attendance at auto de fe reached as high as the attendance at bullfights. In the beginning, the Inquisition dealt only with Christian heretics and did not interfere with the affairs of Jews. However, disputes about Maimonides’ books (which addressed the synthesis of Judaism and other cultures) provided a pretext for harassing Jews and, in 1242, the Inquisition condemned the Talmud and burned thousands of volumes. In 1288, the first mass burning of Jews on the stake took place in France. In 1481 the Inquisition started in Spain and ultimately surpassed the medieval Inquisition, in both scope and intensity. Conversos (Secret Jews) and New Christians were targeted because of their close relations to the Jewish community, many of whom were Jews in all but their name. Fear of Jewish influence led Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand to write a petition to the Pope asking permission to start an Inquisition in Spain. In 1483 Tomas de Torquemada became the inquisitor-general for most of Spain, he set tribunals in many cities. Also heading the Inquisition in Spain were two Dominican monks, Miguel de Morillo and Juan de San Martin. First, they arrested Conversos and notable figures in Seville; in Seville more than 700 Conversos were burned at the stake and 5,000 repented. Tribunals were also opened in Aragon, Catalonia and Valencia. An Inquisition Tribunal was set up in Ciudad Real, where 100 Conversos were condemned, and it was moved to Toledo in 1485. Between 1486-1492, 25 auto de fes were held in Toledo, 467 people were burned at the stake and others were imprisoned. The Inquisition finally made its way to Barcelona, where it was resisted at first because of the important place of Spanish Conversos in the economy and society. More than 13,000 Conversos were put on trial during the first 12 years of the Spanish Inquisition. Hoping to eliminate ties between the Jewish community and Conversos, the Jews of Spain were expelled in 1492.. The next phase of the Inquisition began around 1531, when Pope Leo X extended the Inquisition to Portugal. Thousands of Jews came to Portugal after the 1492 expulsion. A Spanish style Inquisition was constituted and tribunals were set up in Lisbon and other cities. Among the Jews who died at the hands of the Inquisition were well-known figures of the period such as Isaac de Castro Tartas, Antonio Serrao de Castro and Antonio Jose da Silva. The Inquisition never stopped in Spain and continued until the late 18th century...""...While many people associate the Inquisition with Spain and Portugal, it was actually instituted by Pope Innocent III (1198-1216) in Rome. A later pope, Pope Gregory IX established the Inquisition, in 1233, to combat the heresy of the Abilgenses, a religious sect in France. By 1255, the Inquisition was in full gear throughout Central and Western Europe; although it was never instituted in England or Scandinavia.
Your posts are a blessing, RnMom. Sunday school on Saturday. 8~)
It was a sinful act on the part of JPII to kiss the Koran. Only God's mercy will have kept him from burning in hell for it.
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.