Gay Episcopal Bishop to Preach at San Francisco Catholic Parish

Catholic Culture ^ | 11/22/11

[marshmallow]

A notoriously 'gay-friendly' parish in San Francisco has invited an openly homosexual Episcopalian cleric to lead an Advent Vespers service.

Most Holy Redeemer parish asked Bishop Otis Charles, a retired Episcopalian prelate, to lead the November 30 service. After serving as the Bishop of Utah from 1971 to 1993, he publicly announced that he is homosexual. Divorced from the mother of his 5 children, he solemnized a same-sex union in 2004.

[D-fendr]

Biblical Anarchist, interesting viewpoint.

Unitarians, Universalists, Tritheist, Oneness Pentecostals, the previously discussed Dispensationalits of many stripes, and the sect possessing the ultimate in sola scriptura praxis, the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, Jehovah’s Witnesses.

They certainly include all the old heresies and maybe even some new ones.

[ArrogantBustard]

So ... are you claiming to be an infallible interpreter of Scripture, or an inerrant arbiter of doctrine?

That's a simple "Yes" or "No" question.

You have not yet answered it.

[mitch5501]

placemark

[CynicalBear]

>> Therefore, the Church only defines doctrine when it is absolutely necessary.<<

ROFL When you don’t have the firm foundation of scripture to stand on I can easily understand the apprehension.

[D-fendr]

Does the church you attend say the Nicene Creed? Apostles Creed? Chalcedonian Creed?

[ArrogantBustard]

I do realize that scripture takes a back seat to Rome for Catholics

No.

You do not "realize" that. It is a falsehood.

You may well hold that falsehood in your mind ... I cannot say ... I am not a mind reader.

One cannot, however, realize a falsehood.

[rzman21]

It’s the Catholics who can’t seem to make everything agree with scripture. I’ll use the simple concept of the bodily assumption of Mary as an example. Catholics couldn’t even agree or settle that issue until the 1950s and even then couldn’t reconcile it with scripture.

>>The Assumption isn’t a problem for the Orthodox. They believe in it. Frankly, what the Protestants think about it doesn’t really matter.

It fits the definition of universal assent and antiquity.

What matters is that the Theotokos is in heaven, and as Martin Luther wrote, how she got there body and soul is a mystery.

Apocalypse 12:1-18
1 And a great sign appeared in heaven: A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. 2 And being with child, she cried travailing in birth: and was in pain to be delivered. 3 And there was seen another sign in heaven. And behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns and on his heads seven diadems. 4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to be delivered: that, when she should be delivered, he might devour her son. 5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod. And her son was taken up to God and to his throne. 6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she had a place prepared by God, that there they should feed her, a thousand two hundred sixty days.
7 And there was a great battle in heaven: Michael and his angels fought with the dragon, and the dragon fought, and his angels. 8 And they prevailed not: neither was their place found any more in heaven. 9 And that great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, who seduceth the whole world. And he was cast unto the earth: and his angels were thrown down with him. 10 And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying: Now is come salvation and strength and the kingdom of our God and the power of his Christ: because the accuser of our brethren is cast forth, who accused them before our God day and night. 11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of the testimony: and they loved not their lives unto death. 12 Therefore, rejoice, O heavens, and you that dwell therein. Woe to the earth and to the sea, because the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, knowing that he hath but a short time.
13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman who brought forth the man child. 14 And there were given to the woman two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the desert, unto her place, where she is nourished for a time and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent. 15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth, after the woman, water, as it were a river: that he might cause her to be carried away by the river. 16 And the earth helped the woman: and the earth opened her mouth and swallowed up the river which the dragon cast out of his mouth. 17 And the dragon was angry against the woman: and went to make war with the rest of her seed, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. 18 And he stood upon the sand of the sea.’’

Another would be the paying of indulgences or eating meat on Friday.
>>Where was buying indulgences ever a dogma? You keep forgetting that the Council of Trent condemned the practice.

Eating meat or not eating meat on Friday is a matter of custom that the Church can establish or dispense with. I might add that it’s still on the books and that Eastern Catholics do more than just that.

We give up meat and dairy products, fast during Advent, Lent, the Dormition fast, etc.

You are just ignorant about Catholicism, period.

[CynicalBear]

>> You have not yet answered it.<<

All those who are filled with the Holy Spirit understood my answer why didn’t you?

[rzman21]

The only creed the Biblical Anarchists follow are their own egos.

[RnMomof7]

Maybe I missed it in all the noise ... but this article is about a high-ranking protestant minister who is also a flaming faggot. Have you anything to say about that?

Sure..he is a closet Catholic priest

[ArrogantBustard]

Nice example of poisoning the well. And of (attempted, but failed) mind reading.

Quite simply put, you have not answered my question. You have replied to it: certainly. Your replies, however, have not provided an answer.

If you don't want to answer, fine. Just say so. I can think of many reasons why a protestant would not want to answer the question:

"Do you claim to be an infallible interpreter of Scripture, or an inerrant arbiter of doctrine?"

[ArrogantBustard]

Do you honestly believe that?

Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

[RnMomof7]

Scripture is only true and valuable as defined by tradition and the Roman church.. ...yea a bit like a dog chasing its tail..

[rzman21]

IF only the "roman church' can infallibly interpret scripture why would they wish to withhold that truth from its people.. why would they hide it and allow every Catholic theologian,teacher, writer to develop his own fallible teaching.. no different than the protestants?? >>They can't come up with new interpretations. What a Protestant does is start with the text and decides for himself/herself what it says. A Catholic is forbidden from innovation. A Catholic exegete must always refer to what the Church fathers and councils have said about the relevant scriptural passages where consensus exists. St. Vincent of Lerins defines in the 5th century what it means to be a Catholic better than anyone else in history. Chapter 2. A General Rule for distinguishing the Truth of the Catholic Faith from the Falsehood of Heretical Pravity.

[4.] I have often then inquired earnestly and attentively of very many men eminent for sanctity and learning, how and by what sure and so to speak universal rule I may be able to distinguish the truth of Catholic faith from the falsehood of heretical pravity; and I have always, and in almost every instance, received an answer to this effect: That whether I or any one else should wish to detect the frauds and avoid the snares of heretics as they rise, and to continue sound and complete in the Catholic faith, we must, the Lord helping, fortify our own belief in two ways; first, by the authority of the Divine Law, and then, by the Tradition of the Catholic Church.

[5.] But here some one perhaps will ask, Since the canon of Scripture is complete, and sufficient of itself for everything, and more than sufficient, what need is there to join with it the authority of the Church's interpretation? For this reason—because, owing to the depth of Holy Scripture, all do not accept it in one and the same sense, but one understands its words in one way, another in another; so that it seems to be capable of as many interpretations as there are interpreters. For Novatian expounds it one way, Sabellius another, Donatus another, Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius, another, Photinus, Apollinaris, Priscillian, another, Iovinian, Pelagius, Celestius, another, lastly, Nestorius another. Therefore, it is very necessary, on account of so great intricacies of such various error, that the rule for the right understanding of the prophets and apostles should be framed in accordance with the standard of Ecclesiastical and Catholic interpretation.

[6.] Moreover, in the Catholic Church itself, all possible care must be taken, that we hold that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and in the strictest sense Catholic, which, as the name itself and the reason of the thing declare, comprehends all universally. This rule we shall observe if we follow universality, antiquity, consent. We shall follow universality if we confess that one faith to be true, which the whole Church throughout the world confesses; antiquity, if we in no wise depart from those interpretations which it is manifest were notoriously held by our holy ancestors and fathers; consent, in like manner, if in antiquity itself we adhere to the consentient definitions and determinations of all, or at the least of almost all priests and doctors. Chapter XX

[48] "....he is the true and genuine Catholic who loves the truth of God, who loves the Church, who loves the Body of Christ, who esteems divine religion and the Catholic Faith above every thing, above the authority, above the regard, above the genius, above the eloquence, above the philosophy, of every man whatsoever; who set light by all of these, and continuing steadfast and established in the faith, resolves that he will believe that, and that only, which he is sure the Catholic Church has held universally and from ancient time; but that whatsoever new and unheard-of doctrine he shall find to have been furtively introduced by some one or another, besides that of all, or contrary to that of all the saints, this, he will understand, does not pertain to religion, but is permitted as a trial, being instructed especially by the words of the blessed Apostle Paul, who writes thus in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, 'There must needs be heresies, that they who are approved may be made manifest among you:' as though he should say, This is the reason why the authors of Heresies are not forthwith rooted up by God, namely, that they who are approved may be made manifest; that is, that it maybe apparent of each individual, how tenacious and faithful and steadfast he is in his love of the Catholic faith."

Chapter XXIII, "On the Development of Doctrine in the Church"

[54] "But some one will say perhaps, 'Shall there, then, be no progress in Christ's Church?' Certainly; all possible progress. For what being is there, so envious of men, so full of hatred to God, who would seek to forbid it? Yet on condition that it be real progress, not alteration of the faith. For progress requires that the subject be enlarged in itself, alternation, that it be transformed into something else. The intelligence, then, the knowledge, the wisdom, as well of individuals as of all, as well of one man as of the whole Church, ought, in the course of ages and centuries, to increase and make much and vigorous progress; but yet only in its own kind; that is to say, in the same doctrine, in the same sense, and in the same meaning.

[55] The growth of religion in the soul must be analogous to the growth of the body, which, though in process of years it is developed and attains its full size, yet remains still the same. There is a wide difference between the flower of youth and the maturity of age; yet they who were once young are still the same now that they have become old, insomuch that though the stature and outward form of the individual are changed, yet his nature is one and the same, his person is one and the same. An infant's limbs are small, a young man's large, yet the infant and the young man are the same. Men when full grown have the same number of joints that they had when children; and if there be any to which mature age has given birth, these were already present in embryo, so that nothing new is produced in them when old which was not already latent in them when children. This, then, is undoubtedly a true and legitimate rule of progress, this the established and most beautiful order of growth, that mature age ever develops in the man those parts and forms which the wisdom of the Creator had already framed beforehand in the infant. Whereas, if the human form were changed into some shape belonging to another kind, or at any rate, if the number of its limbs were increased or diminished, the result would be that the whole body would become either a wreck or a monster, or, at the least, would be impaired and enfeebled.

[56] In like manner, it behooves Christian doctrine to follow the same laws of progress, so as to be consolidated by years, enlarged by time, refined by age, and yet, withal, to continue uncorrupt and unadulterated, complete and perfect in all the measurement of its parts, and so to speak, in all its proper members and senses, admitting no change, no waste of its distinctive property, no variation in its limits.

[57] For example: Our forefathers in the old time sowed wheat in the Church's field. It would be most unmeet and iniquitous if we, their descendants, instead of the genuine truth of wheat, should reap the counterfeit error of tares. This rather should be the result'there should be no discrepancy between the first and the last. From doctrine which was sown as wheat, we should reap, in the increase, doctrine of the same kind'wheat also; so that when in process of time any of the original seed is developed, and now flourishes under cultivation, no change may ensure in the character of the plant. There may supervene shape, form, variation in outward appearance, but the nature of each kind must remain the same. God forbid that those rose-beds of Catholic interpretation should be converted into thorns and thistles. God forbid that in that spiritual paradise from plants of cinnamon and balsam darnel and wolfsbane should of a sudden shoot forth.

Therefore, whatever has been sown by the fidelity of the Fathers in this husbandry of God's Church, the same ought to be cultivated and taken care of by the industry of their children, the same ought to flourish and ripen, the same ought to advance an go forth to perfection. For it is right that those ancient doctrines of heavenly philosophy should, as time goes one, be cared for, smoothed, polished; but no that they should be changed, not that they should be maimed, not that they should be mutilated. They may receive proof, illustration, definiteness; but they must retain withal their completeness, their integrity, their characteristic properties.

[59] But the Church of Christ, the careful and watchful guardian of the doctrines deposited in her charge, never changes anything in them, never diminishes, never adds, does not cut off what is necessary, does not add what is superfluous, does not lose her own, does not appropriate what is another's, but while dealing faithfully and judiciously with ancient doctrine, keeps this one object carefully in view'if there be anything which antiquity has left shapeless and rudimentary, to fashion and polish it, if anything already reduced to shape and developed, to consolidate and strengthen it, if any already ratified and defined to keep and guard it. Finally, what other object have Councils ever aimed at in their decrees, than to provide that what was before believed in simplicity should in future be believed intelligently, that what was before preached coldly should in future be preached earnestly, that what was before practiced negligently should thenceforward be practiced with double solicitude? This, I say, is what the Catholic Church, roused by the novelties of heretics, has accomplished by the decrees of her Councils'this, and nothing else'she has thenceforward consigned to posterity in writing what she had received from those of olden times only by Tradition, comprising a great amount of matter in a few words, and often, for the better understanding, designating an old article of the faith by the characteristic of a new name." –Saint Vincent of Lerins

[RnMomof7]

All those who are filled with the Holy Spirit understood my answer why didn’t you?

Wanna guess??

[D-fendr]

If you are truly interested in how the Church interprets and applies Her Holy Scriptures, you can start here.This will also give you a good general view of the important teachings of the Church including the Creeds.

You can just note and read the verse quotes and scripture cites relative to their meaning given here and/or follow the other cites to Church Fathers and look up their verse quotes, scripture cites and continue on.

When you have finished with these interpretations, I can send you St. John Damascene's compilation as well as many encyclicals with their cites, verses and how these are interpreted in the Church.

Just let me know when you're ready for the next link, I'll wait.

If you're not truly interested in the Church's interpretation of Holy Scripture, then say so and I won't wait.

[rzman21]

The Ethiopian Orthodox believe in the Assumption. http://www.ethiopianorthodox.org/amharic/seasonal/Filsataineotc.pdf

[RnMomof7]

One more time.. IF THE magisterium is the infallible teaching arm of the church why would they not desire that the people have access to a completely infallible commentary of the scriptures?? pretty simple question

[mas cerveza por favor]

I suspect they have never wanted to put their" infallible "teachings in writing because that might eliminate the future "revelations" by the prophet pope.

All infallible teachings have been put into writing. Catholics are free to speculate on scriptural interpretation in all other areas as long as we do not try to define our own dogmas like Protestants.

[rzman21]

Why are you so obsessed with the Roman Church? Where’s your venom for the Orthodox?