Posted on 01/02/2012 3:13:39 PM PST by RnMomof7
LORENZAGO DI CADORE, Italy For the second time in a week, Pope Benedict XVI has corrected what he says are erroneous interpretations of the Second Vatican Council, reasserting the primacy of the Roman Catholic Church and saying other Christian communities were either defective or not true churches.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Previously you said "the requirement of Apostolic succession isnt found in the Bible." Apparently you are now saying that "the requirement of Apostolic succession is found in the Bible, but it was just a mistake by the Apostles and metmom knows better than they."
As far as schismatic - Council of Trent. The Roman Catholics are the splinter, not the Eastern Orthodox. Sorry, but thats the fact. And they have as much claim to the See of Peter as the Bishop of Rome has.
You doubt the historical record of Peter in Rome? Then your dispute is with secular historians as much as with Catholics. The schism between Rome and the East Orthodox happened well before the Council of Trent and has nothing to do with it. Mainly, the East resents the Venetian sack of Constantinople (against the orders of the pope). Eastern Orthodox take the Catholic side in the doctrinal disputes with Protestants.
No, I’m saying apostolic succession is not Biblical; the Roman Catholics insist it is, but don’t realize their own hypocrisy in being schismatics themselves.
This is a case where the Protestant position would actually save the Roman Catholics - but we can’t have that, can we?
As far as Peter - no dispute with him in Rome. And until the Council of Trent in 1054 there was a single Church, and it moved its seat of power to Constantinople. Then in 1054 the Roman Catholics splintered off - and thus are no longer part of the single succession they so righteously insist upon. No more so than Lutherans, when Luther split from the Roman Catholic Church.
You used the phrase, and I quote: “the leader of Catholicism.” He’s the leader of the Catholic Church. Period. And He is indeed sinless. Thus, my humble correction of your mistake.
If instead you do not understand who the Church itself names as her head, again the answer is: Jesus Christ. I’ll make it easy for you. Look here:http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm
More specifically, and this is only one of those where you can read it yourself:
“SECTION TWO
THE PROFESSION OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH
CHAPTER TWO
I BELIEVE IN JESUS CHRIST, THE ONLY SON OF GOD
The Good News: God has sent his Son
422 ‘But when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.’1 This is ‘the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God’:’2 God has visited his people. He has fulfilled the promise he made to Abraham and his descendants. He acted far beyond all expectation - he has sent his own ‘beloved Son’.3
423 We believe and confess that Jesus of Nazareth, born a Jew of a daughter of Israel at Bethlehem at the time of King Herod the Great and the emperor Caesar Augustus, a carpenter by trade, who died crucified in Jerusalem under the procurator Pontius Pilate during the reign of the emperor Tiberius, is the eternal Son of God made man. He ‘came from God’,4 ‘descended from heaven’,5 and ‘came in the flesh’.6 For ‘the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father. . . And from his fullness have we all received, grace upon grace.’7
424 Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’8 On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church.9
“To preach. . . the unsearchable riches of Christ”10
425 The transmission of the Christian faith consists primarily in proclaiming Jesus Christ in order to lead others to faith in him. From the beginning, the first disciples burned with the desire to proclaim Christ: “We cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard.”’11 It And they invite people of every era to enter into the joy of their communion with Christ:
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life - the life was made manifest, and we saw it, and testify to it, and proclaim to you the eternal life which was with the Father and was made manifest to us- that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you may have fellowship with us; and our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ. And we are writing this that our joy may be complete.12
At the heart of catechesis: Christ
426 “At the heart of catechesis we find, in essence, a Person, the Person of Jesus of Nazareth, the only Son from the Father. . .who suffered and died for us and who now, after rising, is living with us forever.”13 To catechize is “to reveal in the Person of Christ the whole of God’s eternal design reaching fulfillment in that Person. It is to seek to understand the meaning of Christ’s actions and words and of the signs worked by him.”’14 Catechesis aims at putting “people . . . in communion . . . with Jesus Christ: only he can lead us to the love of the Father in the Spirit and make us share in the life of the Holy Trinity.”15
427 In catechesis “Christ, the Incarnate Word and Son of God,. . . is taught - everything else is taught with reference to him - and it is Christ alone who teaches - anyone else teaches to the extent that he is Christ’s spokesman, enabling Christ to teach with his lips. . . Every catechist should be able to apply to himself the mysterious words of Jesus: ‘My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me.’”16
428 Whoever is called “to teach Christ” must first seek “the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus”; he must suffer “the loss of all things. . .” in order to “gain Christ and be found in him”, and “to know him and the power of his resurrection, and [to] share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, that if possible [he] may attain the resurrection from the dead”.17
429 From this loving knowledge of Christ springs the desire to proclaim him, to “evangelize”, and to lead others to the “yes” of faith in Jesus Christ. But at the same time the need to know this faith better makes itself felt. To this end, following the order of the Creed, Jesus’ principal titles - “Christ”, “Son of God”, and “Lord” (article 2) - will be presented. The Creed next confesses the chief mysteries of his life - those of his Incarnation (article 3), Paschal mystery (articles 4 and 5) and glorification (articles 6 and 7).
1 Gal 4:4-5.
2 Mk 1:1.
3 Mk 1:11; cf. Lk 1:5,68.
4 Jn 13:3.
5 Jn 3:13; 6:33.
6 1 Jn 4:2.
7 Jn 1:14,16.
8 Mt 16:16.
9 Cf. Mt 16:18; St. Leo the Great, Sermo 4,3:PL 54,150-152; 51,1:PL 54,309B; 62,2:PL 54,350-351; 83,3:PL 54,431-432.
10 Eph 3:8.
11 Acts 4:20.
12 1 Jn 1:1-4.
13 CT 5.
14 CT 5.
15 CT 5.
16 CT 6; cf. Jn 7:16.
17 Phil 3:8-11.”
For further reading:http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/index/c.htm#Christ
You should look into the One, True, Holy and Apostolic Catholic Church. Not only to learn what she really stands for, though that alone would be of benefit to you. As I said, Jesus is the leader of the Catholic Church.
The Council of Trent started in 1545, but what's this about the Church moving her seat of power to Constantinople?
LXX related word(s)
H1 av
אב
'âb
awb
A primitive word; father in a literal and immediate, or figurative and remote application: - chief, (fore-) father ([-less]), X patrimony, principal. Compare names in Abi-
You haven’t looked at the entire section of that Scripture. You are still speaking out of context, because you have not found the context in which Christ was speaking.
Luther was ex-communicated by the Catholic church for wanting to hold it accountable and getting rid of the corruption within..
He did not split to start a new denomination, as some Catholics here have proposed, but rather he was trying to get the Catholic church back to its roots in the Bible that Catholics claim their own church WROTE.
How dare he expect the RCC follow their (allegedly) own Scripture?
Is this really how we are going to start off the New Year?
Pointless beyond point.
—
My bible (KJV) does not mention Pope or Cardinal. It does mention Bishops and deacons.
I Timothy 3:2
“A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; 4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) 6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. “
“Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; 9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. 10 And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless. 11 Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things. 12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. 13 For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.”
—
So church leaders are to have one wife. Curious statement.
The seat of the Church moved when the power-mad Pope in Rome was excommunicated from the Church, in 1054. And it’s been that way ever since... The Roman Catholics are trying to come back to the Church, but their heretical beliefs (in particular, the Filioque, Papal primacy, original sin and others) prevent their rejoining the true Church.
Catholics can call up many passages that prove their point and Protestants can do the same. It just goes on and on. Just saying.
No, Luther used the corruption as cover to introduce novel, heretical doctrine. There were other prominent non-heretical scholars who were highly critical of the corruption, just as there are now.
Cardinals too. Where did that concept come from in NT theology?
Exactly. Luther was acting as we’re called to do - hold our fellow Christians to account for their actions. And Rome didn’t like it - so they tried to eliminate the person rather than address its error.
It is 100% scriptural to hold others - even those “above” us - to account for their actions and positions. And if the person will not repent, then THEY are to be shut out. Rome got it 100% backwards.
Deu 32:1 Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth.
Deu 32:2 My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass:
Deu 32:3 Because I will publish the name of YHVH: ascribe ye greatness unto Elohiym.
Deu 32:4 He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: Elohiym of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.
Deu 32:5 They have corrupted themselves, their spot is not the spot of his children: they are a perverse and crooked generation.
Deu 32:6 Do ye thusH2063 requiteH1580 YHVH,H3068 O foolishH5036 peopleH5971 and unwise?H3808 H2450 is notH3808 heH1931 thy father H1 that hath boughtH7069 thee? hath heH1931 not madeH6213 thee, and establishedH3559 thee?
H1 - ab = Abba = f(F)ather, the patriarch of the family. Abba, the patriarch of His Kingdom on earth as it is in heaven.
Call No Man Father When in public, dressed in priest's attire, I have often been accosted with the question, "Since the Bible states, "Call no man father," how is it that Catholic priests have the title of father? Why do Catholics go against the teachings of Sacred Scripture?
The following statement was included in Dan Terry's message: "I refrain from calling you "father", since the bible clearly tells us to call no man father except that which is in Heaven." The following is the correct Biblical quote: Matthew 23:9 "Call no one on earth your father; you have but one Father in heaven." The key word "your" is in most Bible versions including the King James. The use of this word "your" signifies that only the creator, as Father of the spirit -- that which lasts for all eternity -- is the true "Father." All other references to "father" refer to human beings who in one way or another serve as foster fathers. The argument that "dad" or "pa" or "pop" bears a different significance than the word "father" is to be considered as being close minded. If one calls someone "dad" with the notion that dad is his creator, and believes that this is okay because it does not go against the literal interpretation contained in Scripture, then many messages of Jesus must be considered as rendered useless. The spirit is of God the Father. The material body (that which is mortal) has a human father. It should be noted that there are 1,511 references to father, fathers. etc. in the King James version of Sacred Scripture. Most of these do not refer to God the Father. There is no admonition by Jesus or anyone else that these usages were wrong. When Jesus used the reference your father it would have had little meaning if the basic concept of father was not clearly understood by being in common usage.
The use of the word "father," in regards to priests, only means that a priest acts as a spiritual guide under the authority of God the Father. No one in their right mind thinks that each priest is God the Father or that any human being is their creator. Jesus made this statement to help us focus on our true origins and upon that which has lasting value. This type of message is called a metaphor. It is figurative language used as a method of teaching and not meant to be taken literally. It is a way of getting across a message.
ADDENDUM:
|
Yep...and amen
Do you deny that Luther went beyond criticizing financial corruption to introduce new doctrine?
Amen
the 1st appearance the word translated as bishop in English is Numbers 14
16 And to the office of Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest[episkopos] pertaineth the oil for the light, and the sweet incense, and the daily meat offering, and the anointing oil, and the oversight of all the tabernacle, and of all that therein is, in the sanctuary, and in the vessels thereof
the 1st appearance of the word translated as deacon[diakonos] in English is only found in the book of Esther [διακονοι (3) Est_2:2, Est_6:3, Est_6:5 διακονοις (1) Est_1:10] and they all pertain to the king's servants
Just know that we are cursed and move on :)
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.