Posted on 06/27/2009 10:33:55 PM PDT by bdeaner
Quite the opposite: I'm dealing with people who cannot or will not refer to my Church by her proper name, and I am attempting to resolve that first.
You don't get it Petronski...Millions of us across the world can pick up a bible and immediately come to the same conclusions on much or most of what it says...How do you account for that???
You all don't even study the scriptures but get the conclusion of what it says from one and only one source, which almost always is contrary to what the millions of us strangers agree upon...
Figure it out Petronski...You're being misled, willfully...
And you do realize that the Vatican is NOT Rome, right?
You can, but the evidence suggests otherwise.
You all don't even study the scriptures ...
Who is that? I'm just the one guy.
You're being misled, willfully...
Well, you're sure trying. But I'm not buying.
No Christian can reject the concept of the Trinity. The concept of the trinity is heavily supported and defined and made truth by the Bible.
Of course not. Christ founded the Catholic Church, not the thing you described.
Let's play your game. Where is the word "Catholic" in the Bible?
Even better, where is the concept of a unitary leader of the church who can speak ex cathedra with the attendant impact of such speech, anywhere in the Bible?
Well I don't blame you...It's not that your sword has a dull blade, you don't even have a sword...
See my post #289, which addresses your question. Petronski is a rightly a Catholic, and canonically, I think is a Roman/Latin Rite Catholic, but again, all Catholics are not Roman/Latin Rite.
The concept of the Catholic Church is heavily supported and defined and made truth by the Bible.
Let's play your game.
It's not MY game, it's been yours from the start.
Where is the word "Catholic" in the Bible?
Where is Sola Scriptura in the Bible?
Where is the word Trinity in the Bible?
Even better, where is the concept of a unitary leader of the church who can speak ex cathedra with the attendant impact of such speech, anywhere in the Bible?
Even better still, where is sola Scriptura in the Bible?
Catholic Church, Latin Rite.
Correct sir.
Good luck with that! At least you don't have to come up with the proper names of over 30,000 Protestant denominations.
You see this as some kind of macho slash-and-burn combat situation.
I’ve seen my share of anti-Catholic bigots slashing and burning what the Catholic Church actually teaches, so as to get all medieval on a straw man.
I’m not here to sate your need for combat.
I’m just here to rebuke the anti-Catholic lies.
Even if the number is as low as 10,000 it’s still 10,000 versions of Truth.
There is only one Truth.
There cannot be multiple, mutually-exclusive truths.
I understand that, which is why I was curious if he was a Roman/Latin Rite Catholic, commonly called a "Roman Catholic". Apparently he holds to that Rite, but refuses to acknowledge the common phrase to identify such a person.
DING!
There's one really cool way to find that out.
That little “driftdiver is out of ideas” bell is getting quite a workout.
PugetSoundSoldier:
The concept of Primacy is rooted in the Gospels, for example, in MT: 16:16-19 we see Christ only speaking to the Apostles (e.g. The Twelve) as the parallel texts support (c.f. Mark 8: 27-30; Luke 9:18-21). Every Christian does not have the power to “bind and loose”. This was given only to the Apostles. So, after Judas betrayal and death, Peter called the Apostles together and quoted the Psalms and said “may another take his office” (c.f. Acts 1:20). In Acts 1:26, Mathias was counted with the eleven other apostles and we now have a reconstituted twelve apostles. So again, the power to bind and loose is given to all the Apostles (not every Christian) but St. Peter alone is named the “rock” given the keys.
Two points, St. Paul states “you are members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the Apostles and prophets with Christ as the capstone” (c.f. Eph 2:20) and the “keys” are a typological sign that is found in the OT and is an OT symbol of authority (c.f. Isaiah 22: 15-23) and prefigures the role Christ gave to St. Peter. Other important texts consistent with Peter having a leadership role among the Apostles can be found in the Gospels.
For example, Jesus prays for Peter alone, that his faith may not fail, and charges him to strengthen the rest of the apostles (c.f.. Luke 22:31-32). After asking Peter 3 times do you love me [to fully atone for the 3-fold denial at Christ’s trial] Jesus charges Peter to “feed my lambs,” “tend my sheep,” “feed my sheep., which in this context means both the fellow Apostles and all of the Christian people. (c.f. John 21:15-17).
In two resurrection narratives, St. John arrives first to the tomb but waits for St. Peter to arrive, who then enters the tomb first (c.f. Lk 24:12; John 20-4-6).
As previously noted in the Acts 1, we see St. Peter taking the role in re-establishing the 12 Apostles. After Pentecost, it is St. Peter who preaches the Gospel first (c.f. Acts 2:14), it is St. Peter who works the first miracle (c.f. Acts 3:6-7), it is St. Peter who issues the first excommunication against Ananias and Sapphira (c.f. Acts 5: 3). St. Peter resolves the doctrinal issues of dietary laws for the gentiles at the Council of Jerusalem (c.f. Acts 15: 6-12).
Also, we see in 1 Peter 5:13 “The Chosen one at Bablyon sends you greetings, as does my son Mark” [NAB translation.] In the RSV, my personal favorite, as it is the most accurate according to most Catholic scholars, translates 1 Peter 5:13 as “She who is at Babylon, who is likewise chosen, sends you greetings and so does my son Mark”.
This passage indicates the underlying concept that the Church of Rome was elected/chosen, etc. and St. Peter was the leader there as affirmed by the writings of the Church Fathers (i.e St Ignatius of Antioch CA 105-107AD, ST. Ireneaus of Lyon, CA 175 AD, etc), who both affirm the Primacy of the Church of Rome which was of course dogmatically recognized at the Council of Nicea in Canon 6, see link below.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3801.htm
“EVERYONE thinks his or her own individual interpretation of the Bible is the correct one. There is a lot of pride to go around”
You seem fixated on “individual interpretation”. Not sure where you’re getting that as there is nothing valid about that. Most individuals depend on the guidance of learned individuals. Bit it comes down to reading and praying. Listening to the Holy Spirit and seeking Gods wisdom.
Depending on the interpretation of some guy in Rome is not the mystical panacea.
“If you cannot find this teaching authority in the Catholic Church, where do you find it? Sincere question.”
Through personal study, group study, prayer, and worship with learned and Godly people. My salvation and communication to Christ does not require mediation through those people.
DING!
You do realize the catechism is not the Bible, don't you?
Where is Sola Scriptura in the Bible?
This Mediator [Jesus Christ], having spoken what He judged sufficient first by the prophets, then by His own lips, and afterwards by the apostles, has besides produced the Scripture which is called canonical, which has paramount authority, and to which we yield assent in all matters of which we ought not to be ignorant, and yet cannot know of ourselves.
For the Biblical reference, see 2 Thessalonians 2:15:
With all these things in mind, dear brothers, stand firm and keep a strong grip on the truth that we taught you in our letters and during the time we were with you.
So St. Augustine and St. Paul both call on the Divine and ultimate truth of the Bible. Sola Scriptura.
Still waiting for you to give any reference to the succession of the Pope as Biblical! Or his ability to speak ex cathedra.
Where is the word Trinity in the Bible?
The word is not. The concept is. Can you say the same about the Pope or ex cathedra writs from the Pope?
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.