Pope Paul VI and Cardinal Wojtyla, c.1967
Posted on 06/22/2014 2:42:07 PM PDT by NYer
A common criticism of the Catholic Church’s teachings on sexual morality has to do with the largely unmarried clergy who are charged with preaching the message. The accepted wisdom is that celibate males have no business telling married couples how to live their lives: “What do they know about the subject?”
I remember a particularly egregious example. In 1974, Earl Butz, then U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, ridiculed Pope Paul VI’s opposition to contraception, “He no playa the game, he no maka the rules.” He later apologized, but in reality he was only saying publicly what many, including many Catholics, were saying privately.
I’ve never understood this. Jesus, God Incarnate, was a celibate male. Why would any Christian assume that a man striving to emulate Christ in the flesh would have nothing to offer about the nature of love?
Christians agree that God is love. What they don’t agree on is what should be derived from this fact.
I’ve taught natural family planning for almost twenty years and I consider one of the most important elements of this instruction to be what is conveyed about the nature of love. I always hesitate to use an adjective such as “true” to describe a noun such as “love.” It seems inadvertently to give status to any falsehood parading as truth.
Love is what it is. Everything else is a pretender and should be described with its own noun. Love is not lust; love is not use; love is not convenience. Love is divine, with all that implies.
St. John Paul II’s pontificate emphasized church teaching about love and its incarnational aspects. From 1981 through 1984, he devoted a whole series of audiences to this subject, which he dubbed “The Theology of the Body.” These talks were later gathered into a book and became the basis of serious theological reflections
Although continence for the sake of the Kingdom was an important aspect of this teaching, the theology on marriage seemed to get the most focus when it was disseminated and discussed. Celibacy was initially given short shrift, which is unfortunate, because the fact of the matter is, if you don’t understand or appreciate continence for the sake of the Kingdom, you aren’t going to appreciate or understand the nature of the sacrament of marriage.
Pope Paul VI and Cardinal Wojtyla, c.1967
A keystone of St. JPII’s teaching in this matter is found in Gaudium et Spes:
Indeed, the Lord Jesus, when He prayed to the Father, “that all may be one. . . as we are one” (John 17:21-22) opened up vistas closed to human reason, for He implied a certain likeness between the union of the divine Persons, and the unity of God’s sons in truth and charity. This likeness reveals that man, who is the only creature on earth which God willed for itself, cannot fully find himself except through a sincere gift of himself. [24]
The essence of love is a willingness to give a sincere gift of self. We only love when we act like God. God the Son showed us what this means by giving such a complete gift of Self that He emptied Himself, as St. Paul tells us, going all the way to the cross.
Our life of love is a continuum that starts here on earth and is fulfilled in Heaven. The crucifixion was completed by the resurrection, when love conquered even death. Celibacy for the kingdom is the eschatological symbol of love and it has much to teach those of us who are married.
In a 1981 audience, reflecting on Christ’s words about the resurrection of the body found in Mt. 22:30, St. JPII wrote:
The reciprocal gift of oneself to God – a gift in which man will concentrate and express all the energies of his own personal and at the same time psychosomatic subjectivity – will be the response to God’s gift of himself by man, a gift which will become completely and definitively beatifying, as a response worthy of a personal subject to God’s gift of Himself, “virginity,” or rather the virginal state of the body, will be totally manifested as the eschatological fulfillment of the “nuptial” meaning of the body, as the specific sign and the authentic expression of all personal subjectivity. In this way, therefore, that eschatological situation in which “they neither marry nor are given in marriage” has its solid foundation in the future state of the personal subject, when, as a result of the vision of God “face to face,” there will be born in him a love of such depth and power of concentration on God Himself, as to completely absorb his whole psychosomatic subjectivity.
It is the mutual gift of self that is imaged in conjugal love. Without denigrating the noble vocation of marriage, it can rightly be said that the couple undertaking marriage can find no better guide to understanding the essential nature of the gift of self than the celibate priest who has emptied himself in imitation of Christ.
Let’s thank our priests for showing us this most radical example of self-gift.
Preaching is not oral tradition.
Preaching is preaching, the word of God going forth. It's not the Word being passed down from one generation to the next orally, with no written record of it.
“Paul says that much Christian teaching is to be found in the tradition which is handed down by word of mouth (2 Tim. 2:2). He instructs us to “stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thess. 2:15).
This oral teaching was accepted by Christians, just as they accepted the written teaching that came to them later.”
The problem is that there is ZERO indication that ‘Sacred Tradition’ involves some oral teaching passed down from Pope to Pope. Even the Catholic Church has long since admitted that its traditions evolve, and are NOT something handed over from the Apostles. Transubstantiation is not a doctrine handed down from Peter to someone else to someone else for a thousand years before it was leaked to the Press!
Paul did NOT hand down an oral teaching that Peter was responsible for all the churches, nor did he suggest that there was future revelation needed for the church. Instead he wrote:
“Apart from such external things, there is the daily pressure on me of concern for all the churches. 29 Who is weak without my being weak? Who is led into sin without my intense concern?” 2 Cor 11
““And now, behold, I know that all of you, among whom I went about preaching the kingdom, will no longer see my face. 26 Therefore, I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. 27 For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God. 28 Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. 29 I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them...” - Acts 20
“the whole purpose of God”
There was nothing left to reveal, nothing left to develop. The whole purpose of God had been revealed before the Apostles died. But there wasn’t a secret list of thing passed on, Peter to Pope to Pope, particularly since there is no indication Peter - the Apostle to the Jews - had any authority over the other Apostles.
But as both Paul and Peter revealed, after them would come wolves to attack the flock and “draw away the disciples after them...”
Our Lord Himself wrote nothing. He commanded the Apostles not to write but to teach and preach: "Going, therefore, teach all nations" and "preach the Gospel to every creature." Christ's disciples and the Christians were commanded to hear the Church, not to read the still nonexistent or at best incomplete New Testament Scriptures: "He who hears you, hears Me."
The teaching Church was in existence long before a single line of the New Testament was written. The Apostles evangelized different peoples, not by presenting to them a copy of the New Testament which did not as yet exist, but by preaching the Gospel, the oral message of Christ to them. Thousands of men became Christians and adhered to the whole truth of God before they saw or read a single book of the New Testament.
Just what are those traditions Paul was referring to that he handed down that we are to keep that were not included in Scripture?
Paul illustrated what tradition is: "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures. . . . Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed" (1 Cor. 15:3,11). The apostle praised those who followed Tradition: "I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you" (1 Cor. 11:2).
The first Christians "devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching" (Acts 2:42) long before there was a New Testament. From the very beginning, the fullness of Christian teaching was found in the Church as the living embodiment of Christ, not in a . The teaching Church, with its oral, apostolic tradition, was authoritative. Paul himself gives a quotation from Jesus that was handed down orally to him: "It is more blessed to give than to receive" (Acts 20:35). book
This saying is not recorded in the Gospels and must have been passed on to Paul. , even the Gospels themselves are oral tradition which has been written down (Luke 1:1–4). What’s more, Paul does not quote Jesus only. He also quotes from early Christian hymns, as in Ephesians 5:14. These and other things have been given to Christians "through the Lord Jesus" (1 Thess. 4:2).
How can we know which traditions are apostolic and which are merely human? The answer is the same as how we know which scriptures are apostolic and which are merely human—by listening to the magisterium or teaching authority of Christ’s Church. Without the Catholic Church’s teaching authority, we would not know with certainty which purported of Scripture are authentic. If the Church revealed to us the canon of Scripture, it can also reveal to us the "canon of Tradition" by establishing which traditions have been passed down from the apostles. After all, Christ promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church (Matt. 16:18) and the New Testament itself declares the Church to be "the pillar and foundation of the truth" 1 Tim 3:15
But as both Paul and Peter revealed, after them would come wolves to attack the flock and “draw away the disciples after them...”
The Catholic Church traces its origin to Jesus Christ and the Apostles through a documented line of successors.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
“How can we know which traditions are apostolic and which are merely human? The answer is the same as how we know which scriptures are apostolic and which are merely human—by listening to the magisterium or teaching authority of Christ’s Church. Without the Catholic Church’s teaching authority, we would not know with certainty which purported of Scripture are authentic. If the Church revealed to us the canon of Scripture, it can also reveal to us the “canon of Tradition”...”
The most obvious problem with this theory is that non-Catholics REJECT the Roman Catholic Canon. Indeed, the Roman Catholics did not have an authoritative canon until the Council of Trent in the 1500s, which then managed to screw up the list of books, forcing the invention of the word “deuterocanonical” to describe the shortened Apocrypha.
The canon was largely in place by 150-200 AD, long before any council discussed it.
And even today, there has never been a decision by the Roman Catholic Church on the question of the deuterocanon’s value in determining doctrine - Trent left the dispute between Jerome and Augustine in place.
The second major problem is in this sentence:
“If the Church revealed to us the canon of Scripture, it can also reveal to us the “canon of Tradition” by establishing which traditions have been passed down from the apostles.”
Even the Catholic Church admits its teachings include many things which were NOT passed down from the Apostles - IOW, that the Catholic Church is teaching doctrines developed AFTER the Apostles.
As the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster, Henry Edward Manning (1808-1892) put it:
“But the appeal to antiquity is both a treason and a heresy. It is a treason because it rejects the Divine voice of the Church at this hour, and a heresy because it denies that voice to be Divine. How can we know what antiquity was except through the Church?...I may say in strict truth that the Church has no antiquity. It rests upon its own supernatural and perpetual consciousness. . . . The only Divine evidence to us of what was primitive is the witness and voice of the Church at this hour.”
http://www.the-highway.com/tradition_Webster.html
There is no secret decoder ring passed down from Pope to Pope. There is no whisper in the ear, passing on secret truths to be revealed a thousand years later. The Roman Catholic Church makes up its tradition as it goes along, often pretending what no scholar would say, that there was unanimity among the “Church Fathers”.
What is the history of the Roman Catholic Church? Which one? The one that asserted papal primacy and broke away from the Orthodox? The one that rejected the clear teaching of God’s Word and started having priests offering a perpetual sacrifice of Jesus, ignoring Christ’s command to “Do this in remembrance of me”? Is it the Roman Catholic Church that believes in Papal Infallibility, a concept not taught for nearly 2000 years?
The Roman Catholic Church is constantly evolving its doctrine, adding new doctrines to meet the desires of its cardinals, rather than adhering to the truth taught by the Apostles. As Paul said, “I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.”
So it happened, and those wolves created the Roman Catholic Church.
Judaism predates Catholicism by many centuries. Catholicism as we know it did not start in 33 A.D. It was well after the last Apostle expired. To build your denomination up by running others down is a weak argument. Gods Church is not a denomination. It is the group of believers worldwide throughout the ages. Each group you mention has a faction of rabid fanatics whose actions show they have replaced the worship of God with the worship of their denomination. God should be our focus of worship. The only True Compass of Truth is the Bible not a denomination or a group of “wise men” from Rome. Gods real Church started in the Garden of Eden.
"When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they said, Some [say that thou art] John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ." - Matthew 16:13-20
Gods Church is not a denomination. It is the group of believers worldwide throughout the ages.
According to Scripture, Christ wanted us to be one (John 17:22-23). We are all as a Church to be of one mind and to think the same (Philippians 2:2; Romans 15:5). There is only to be one "faith" (Ephesians 4:3-6), not many. For the Church is Christ's Body and Christ only had one Body, not many.
The only True Compass of Truth is the Bible not a denomination or a group of “wise men” from Rome. Gods real Church started in the Garden of Eden.
Christ stated that the Church, not Scripture should be the final authority: "And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the Church: but if he neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican." (Matthew 18:17 ) Christ did not state to refer to or consult Scripture for disputes and correction. He said to go to the Church as It is the final authority in Christianity. In addition, St. Paul states that the Church, not Scripture is "THE pillar and ground of the truth." (1 Timothy 3:15) Since the Church alone is mentioned as the pillar of truth, then It alone has the right to discern the truth and interpret Scripture. For if individuals could correctly interpret Scripture, then all interpretations would be exactly the same as there can only be one Spiritual Truth for the plural of the word "truth" never appears in Scripture.
1 Corinthians 12:12-20 For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit. For the body does not consist of one member but of many. If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. If all were a single member, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.
11 Corinthians 12:27 Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.
It's obvious that Catholics just don't understand what the body of Christ is all about as presented and defined Scripturally.
The body of Christ is an organism, made up of born again living people, not an organization run top down in dictatorial fashion.
Another verse Catholics take way out of context to support their doctrine.
That verse is not Christ giving blanket authority to the church to dictate the lives of the adherents.
In context, it has everything to do with dealing with conflict between believers.
Christ did not state to refer to or consult Scripture for disputes and correction.
Absolute and total nonsense.
Jesus used Scripture authoritatively when dealing with Satan in the wilderness, to CORRECT him.
And what do you all do with THIS statement of Jesus? How are you going to mangle that one to tell us that He didn't mean what He said?
Matthew 22:29 But Jesus answered them, “You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God.
Mark 12:24 Jesus said to them, “Is this not the reason you are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God?
In addition, St. Paul states that the Church, not Scripture is "THE pillar and ground of the truth." (1 Timothy 3:15) Since the Church alone is mentioned as the pillar of truth, then It alone has the right to discern the truth and interpret Scripture.
But not TRUTH itself. Only that which supports truth, and that truth is Jesus and His word.
John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
John 17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.
Give us a link to a commentary on the Bible written by the infallible magisterium which tells us the *correct* interpretation of the Bible. If only the Catholic is correct in how it interprets Scripture, because they allegedly have the same interpretation for its entire 2,000 year history, it ought to be written down by now. So which of the ECF's has the correct interpretation?
CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
Now, give me a link to an "authoritative protestant" commentary on abortion, in-vitro fertilization, cloning, gay marriage on which ALL protestants agree.
Except for the Ten Commandments.
He commanded the Apostles not to write but to teach and preach: "Going, therefore, teach all nations" and "preach the Gospel to every creature." Christ's disciples and the Christians were commanded to hear the Church, not to read the still nonexistent or at best incomplete New Testament Scriptures: "He who hears you, hears Me."
So you're denying the Holy Spirit is part of the Godhead now?
Romans 10:17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.
It's the word of God which is powerful and sharper than any double edged sword. Preaching without the Word is just talking and does not accomplish anything. It's the Word of God, which Catholics dis and diminish, that is powerful.
The teaching Church was in existence long before a single line of the New Testament was written. The Apostles evangelized different peoples, not by presenting to them a copy of the New Testament which did not as yet exist, but by preaching the Gospel, the oral message of Christ to them. Thousands of men became Christians and adhered to the whole truth of God before they saw or read a single book of the New Testament.
So what? They had the OT, which testified about Jesus. Someone could come to faith in Jesus through the OT as it pointed to Him. That was how they were able to recognize the Messiah when He came. The OT was all about Jesus.
The teaching Church, with its oral, apostolic tradition, was authoritative.
I'll try asking this again, since no one has answered it yet....
Just what are those traditions Paul was referring to that he handed down that we are to keep that were not included in Scripture?
How do you know?
How do you know they’re from the apostles, Paul in particular?
How do you know they’ve been passed down faithfully?
What is your source for verifying all of the above?
Please provide the sources for verification purposes.
Romans 10:17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ. (not through the hearing of *sacred tradition*)
The history of my church is this.....
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+1&version=ESV
Start here in chapter 1.
That is not a verse by verse commentary of Scripture.
That’s simply the opinions of man.
The request was for a commentary on the BIBLE, not a statement of faith and doctrinal position on current moral issues.
Stop changing the subject and answer the question.
NYer: CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
Now, give me a link to an "authoritative protestant" commentary on abortion, in-vitro fertilization, cloning, gay marriage on which ALL protestants agree.
Because, as we all know, every single communion-receiving Catholic on the planet agrees with the catechism. Including Pelosi, Biden, the Kennedys, etc etc etc.
Please show me where the word BIBLE appears in Scripture? Provide me with a commentary on which ALL non-Catholic denominations agree. Is the Bible to be taken literally - "word for word?" No. The Bible doesn't state anywhere that It should be taken literally. The Bible was written by different authors with different literary styles at different times in history and in different languages. Therefore, the writings should be interpreted with these circumstances in mind. The Bible is a religious book, not a scientific or a history "textbook."
Can there be more than one interpretation of the Bible? No. The word "truth" is used several times in the New Testament. However, the plural version of the word "truth" never appears in Scripture. Therefore, there can only be one Truth. Only the Catholic church traces its origins to the Apostles.
You mean like this?
FRANCISCANS PARTICIPATE IN PRIDE FESTIVAL--- ARCHDIOCESE EVADES RESPONSIBILITY
“Christ stated that the Church, not Scripture should be the final authority: “And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the Church: but if he neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.” (Matthew 18:17 )”
As I’ve pointed out before, context is important. Jesus did not give local churches authority to determine doctrine. However:
“15 “If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. 16 But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18 Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”
Jesus quotes scripture, already given (”by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed”), in saying how the future church should handle DISCIPLINE. When does this kick in? “If your brother sins...”
The Apostles did have the right to determine doctrine, backed by the miracles God performed through them. Thus we ended up with the New Testament, the written record of what Jesus & the Apostles taught.
“the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth”
It truly is, but not some heretical church that made up false doctrines and substituted the teachings of man for the teachings of God. When a church abandons scripture, and places itself above the Word of God, it rejects both the written Word of God and the Living Word of God, Jesus Christ.
The church lifts the truth up and holds it high, but the church is not, itself, the truth. The duty of the church is to hold the truth up before an unbelieving world, to lead some to repentance and confirm others in their damnation. The Apostles did this, and backed up what they preached with the Word of God, because it is God’s Word that is truth. The church is not the truth. God is, and His revelation to man, in the life of Christ in human flesh, the scripture and the lives of believers. The church holds that truth up for all the world to see.
The church cannot invent the truth any more than a pillar can create a building.
“14 As Moses lifted up the bronze snake on a pole in the desert, in the same way the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15 so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.”
So it is the job of the church to lift up Jesus, in word and deed. Our job is to hold the truth up for all to see, not to replace it with our own thoughts and values. It is Jesus who is exulted, and the church only “in Him”.
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.