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
Kosta's posts point out one truth: that either the scripture came from a single source and that it why it shows consistency of story and doctrine, or it is a harmonization of previously discordant stories. I beleive the former, and so I belive in inerrancy of the scripture as a product of the inerrant Catholic Church. Kosta doesn't believe in much, but at least he doesn't believe in scripture dropping down from heaven in King James version. Further, Kosta's unbelief is an informed one. If he chooses to belief, he will have it right, -- which I cannot say for Protestantism which is error upon error and falsehood upon falsehood without a hope of getting unraveled.
That "simply universal" dates to the times of Reformation when the sectants decided to keep mouthing the Creed while "protesting" against it. Catholic means one sharing the fullness of Roman Catholic faith without dogmatic difference whatsoever, yet retaining if they wish a local praxis such as liturgy. The term was used in St. Ignatius of Antioch in early 2c to mark the difference between the churches united in their belief in the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist and obedience to the local bishop, -- these are Catholic -- and their opposite various heretical sects. The Orthodox in that sense are Catholic; The Protestants are not.
Chapter 4. Beware of these heretics
I give you these instructions, beloved, assured that you also hold the same opinions [as I do]. But I guard you beforehand from those beasts in the shape of men, whom you must not only not receive, but, if it be possible, not even meet with; only you must pray to God for them, if by any means they may be brought to repentance, which, however, will be very difficult. Yet Jesus Christ, who is our true life, has the power of [effecting] this. But if these things were done by our Lord only in appearance, then am I also only in appearance bound. And why have I also surrendered myself to death, to fire, to the sword, to the wild beasts? But, [in fact,] he who is near to the sword is near to God; he that is among the wild beasts is in company with God; provided only he be so in the name of Jesus Christ. I undergo all these things that I may suffer together with Him, Romans 8:17 He who became a perfect man inwardly strengthening me. Philippians 4:13
Chapter 5. Their dangerous errors
Some ignorantly deny Him, or rather have been denied by Him, being the advocates of death rather than of the truth. These persons neither have the prophets persuaded, nor the law of Moses, nor the Gospel even to this day, nor the sufferings we have individually endured. For they think also the same thing regarding us. For what does any one profit me, if he commends me, but blasphemes my Lord, not confessing that He was [truly] possessed of a body? But he who does not acknowledge this, has in fact altogether denied Him, being enveloped in death. I have not, however, thought good to write the names of such persons, inasmuch as they are unbelievers. Yea, far be it from me to make any mention of them, until they repent and return to [a true belief in] Christ's passion, which is our resurrection.
Chapter 6. Unbelievers in the blood of Christ shall be condemned
Let no man deceive himself. Both the things which are in heaven, and the glorious angels, and rulers, both visible and invisible, if they believe not in the blood of Christ, shall, in consequence, incur condemnation.
He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.Matthew 19:12 Let not [high] place puff any one up: for that which is worth all is faith and love, to which nothing is to be preferred. But consider those who are of a different opinion with respect to the grace of Christ which has come unto us, how opposed they are to the will of God. They have no regard for love; no care for the widow, or the orphan, or the oppressed; of the bond, or of the free; of the hungry, or of the thirsty.Chapter 7. Let us stand aloof from such heretics
They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that you should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion [of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.
Chapter 8. Let nothing be done without the bishop
See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.
Chapter 9. Honour the bishop
Moreover, it is in accordance with reason that we should return to soberness [of conduct], and, while yet we have opportunity, exercise repentance towards God. It is well to reverence both God and the bishop. He who honours the bishop has been honoured by God; he who does anything without the knowledge of the bishop, does [in reality] serve the devil. Let all things, then, abound to you through grace, for you are worthy. You have refreshed me in all things, and Jesus Christ [shall refresh] you. You have loved me when absent as well as when present. May God recompense you, for whose sake, while you endure all things, you shall attain unto Him.
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans
CSomeone here not recently ventured to say that the Church Fathers were Protestant. Well, read the above and disabuse yourselves.
Your denigrated view of non-Catholics as "defective" shows only your own defects
It is not my personal view, so let us not get personal.
FIFTH QUESTIONWhy do the texts of the Council and those of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of “Church” with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?
RESPONSE
According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery[19] cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called “Churches” in the proper sense[20].
RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH
This is what the Angel said:
[28] ...Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. [...30...] Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found grace with God. [31] Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and shalt bring forth a son; and thou shalt call his name Jesus. [32] He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the most High; and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father; and he shall reign in the house of Jacob for ever. [33] And of his kingdom there shall be no end.The angle says what will be. Nothing happened yet. But for some reason, Mary does not take it as a prediction of her future child with Joseph:
How shall this be done, because I know not man?
Note: she is more astonished about conceiving a child than about that child having this extraordinary power.
The angel them proceed to further explain, all that in the future sense: "The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee..."
So it is not my own interpretation: Mary is astonished that she, a betrothed woman, will have a child. Go figure.
when are you interested in ‘verbatim’?
Always. Some verses of the Bible are poetical or allegorical, but by default the first interpretation is always literal and even if not, attentive to detail. I am, you know, Catholic: I love, study and obey he scripture as written. If I wanted to spread around my own theories I'd become Protestant and tell tall stories instead.
Some people seem unable to grasp the FACT that if a typical young woman (let's just set aside today's issues with premarital sex, birth control, etc.) who is engaged is told that she will conceive a child, her reaction will be along the lines of, "Of course, my husband and I will have intercourse after we marry and hopefully I will get pregnant very soon."
She would react this way because this has been the NORM throughout history. The ONLY REASON why a woman would react otherwise is if she believed that there was no possibility for her to conceive and, for a young virgin two thousand years ago, this could ONLY mean that she planned to remain a virgin.
People try to pretend that the Holy Family was a "normal" family, but they weren't, they were the most abnormal family ever. Angels of God appeared to both the Blessed Mother and Saint Joseph, they KNEW that their entire lives wouldn't be "normal" because they were being entrusted with the care of the Son of God.
ph
True.
Yes, indeed. So you understand now that this manner of speech points to her not intending to have carnal relations with Joseph?
The Church does teach outside of the Holy Scripture also. What I did say is that if something is in the scripture then the Holy Church teaches that, but not the other way around. The Scripture reflects exactly what the Church teaches on the subjects covered by the scripture, but the Scripture does not reflect everything that the Church teaches.
But that comment makes no sense if she had planned to have children with Joseph. Obviously she did not plan for that.
No, because like you yourself commented in your previous post she understood that married people have children. But she was engaged to be married, yet she wondered how was it possible for her to have children. This indicates that she did not intend to have carnal relations with Joseph.
Sure there is a way: ask. The Church preserved what the Holy Apostles taught.
You did not accuse me of anythying? Good.
contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints. (Jude 1:3)
What do you think that thing was that was delivered?
Catholic church has many traditions of teaching that are both offensive and fly in the face of what Jesus taught and the scriptures tell us.
Name one.
My examples don't prove that, and I don't think that Mary was a temple virgin at the temple in Jerusalem. They show that the idea of women dedicated to God rather than to their husbands existed, if not in Saduccean Judaism then at its periphery, for example among the sects such as the Essenes. The best proof of that was in Mary's own words, "I know not man".
I do not agree that because a person believes Scripture, that it means he is also believes the "Church". In this case we know that it is the Roman Catholic Church for which this reference is meant. This is why we can honestly say that we do not believe that the "Church" is the arbiter of truth over the inspired Word of God. What should instead be pondered, rather than why a person who believes in Scripture does at some point not believe the Church, is why is the Church at odds with some points of Scripture?
I see, so the idea then is to fill in what is perceived might be the blanks? Inventing ones own traditions and calling it "Holy" tradition somehow makes it that? So what's then preventing everyone from devising their own "Holy" traditions and selling their ideas as well?
contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints. (Jude 1:3) What do you think that thing was that was delivered?
Well it's very clear Jude is speaking about the Gospel and all it's implications. The truth was under attack and needed to be defended if you read it in context...and continue with the following verses. Speaking further of Godless men "whose condemnation was written about"...."who change the grace of God".
Therefore he is not speaking of traditions but of sin and those who were opposing the Gospel and using it for their own purposes...."teaching the traditions of men" as it is written and of which Christ warned.
A church or denomination’s teachings are authoritative and binding on Christians only if they represent the true meaning and clear teaching of Scripture. This is important in order to understand the connection between Protestantism and the Roman Catholic Church,......... and the reason that the Protestant Reformation took place.....catholics put tradition on par with the scriptures and for that create many issues and divisions among believers
Since when is sex within the bounds of marriage *carnal relations*? What is it with the Catholic mind that views sex as something wrong or dirty?
Mary simply asked the obvious question of how it was possible for her to become pregnant because she had not YET had sex, not because she never intended to.
Her never intending to affects her future, not her present. That would be a stupid question to ask if what she meant was what you say she meant.
How can I be come pregnant as I never intend to have sex with Joseph?
That's just silly.
We have. Repeatedly. I don't recall seeing any answer.
The Church preserved what the Holy Apostles taught.
Where outside the Bible?
She never said she never intended to not know a man. All she said is that she wasn't in a relationship with a man at the time of the angelic visit.
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.