WHY THE MAGISTERIUM MAKES SENSE TO ME

Ignitum Today ^ | February 2, 2012 | Colin Gormley

[johngrace]

If you look up every epistle/letter you will see it starts with a plural meaning Church or the Leader of the Church. Nowhere is it first address to the individual in the back row in it's title. It goes to THE Leader of the Church for the Church. Or from a leader to a Church.

The Leader of a Church or The Churches. Because of Geography it is really a Group of Churches meaning One Church (umbrella) as a Whole. Notice the City Churches. The Epistles/Letters Are addressed to Cities.

The New Testament: The Epistle of Paul to the Romans

The New Testament: The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians

The New Testament: The Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians

The New Testament: The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians

The New Testament: The Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians

The New Testament: The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians

The New Testament: The Epistle of Paul to the Colossians

The New Testament: The First Epistle of Paul to the Thessalonians

The New Testament: The Second Epistle of Paul to the Thessalonians

The New Testament: The First Epistle of Paul to Timothy

The New Testament: The Second Epistle of Paul to Timothy

The New Testament: The Epistle of Paul to Titus

The New Testament: The Epistle of Paul to Philemon

The New Testament: The Epistle to the Hebrews

The New Testament: The Epistle of James

The New Testament: The First Epistle of Peter

The New Testament: The Second Epistle of Peter

The New Testament: The First Epistle of John

The New Testament: The Second Epistle of John

The New Testament: The Third Epistle of John

The New Testament: The Epistle of Jude

The New Testament: The Book of Revelation

Also Notice the end of the Bible.

REVELATION 22:

16 “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you[a] this testimony FOR THE CHURCHES. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”

17 The Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let the one who hears say, “Come!” Let the one who is thirsty come; and let the one who wishes take the free gift of the water of life.

TO GIVE YOU[A] THIS TESTIMONY FOR THE CHURCHES.

It is Through The Churches.

[daniel1212]

These things led me to realize that if the Body of Christ has to go at Faith with a Bible Alone approach we are doomed. The time, culture and language separations are a huge obstacle to getting at the actual meaning of the texts, with all the nuance and subtlety that comes with theological understanding and the development of those concepts.

Sadly, for all the talk about understanding context, Roman Catholics constantly miscomprehended the “sola in SS to mean the Bible alone is to be used, and as opposed the church magisterium, as if Westminster confession did not say things like,

“The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man's salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture... and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the Church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed.”

It belongs to synods and councils, ministerially to determine controversies of faith, and cases of conscience; to set down rules and directions for the better ordering of the public worship of God, and government of his Church; to receive complaints in cases of maladministration, and authoritatively to determine the same; which decrees and determinations, if consonant to the Word of God, are to be received with reverence and submission; not only for their agreement with the Word, but also for the power whereby they are made, as being an ordinance of God appointed thereunto in His Word. (CHAPTERs 1, 31)

And from Alister McGrath's The Genesis of Doctrine: A Study in the Foundation of Doctrinal Criticism:

Although it is often suggested that the reformers had no place for tradition in their theological deliberations, this judgment is clearly incorrect. While the notion of tradition as an extra-scriptural source of revelation is excluded, the classic concept of tradition as a particular way of reading and interpreting scripture is retained. Scripture, tradition and the kerygma are regarded as essentially coinherent, and as being transmitted, propagated and safeguarded by the community of faith. There is thus a strongly communal dimension to the magisterial reformers' understanding of the interpretation of scripture, which is to be interpreted and proclaimed within an ecclesiological matrix. It must be stressed that the suggestion that the Reformation represented the triumph of individualism and the total rejection of tradition is a deliberate fiction propagated by the image-makers of the Enlightenment. — James R. Payton, “Getting the Reformation Wrong: Correcting Some Misunderstandings”

Also, THE SECOND HELVETIC CONFESSION - Page 2 (Heinrich Bullinger: Calvinist confession; adopted by the Reformed Church not only throughout Switzerland but in Scotland (1566), Hungary (1567), France (1571), Poland (1578), and next to the Heidelberg Catechism is the most generally recognized Confession of the Reformed Church.) states,

Interpretations of the Holy Fathers. Wherefore we do not despise the interpretations of the holy Greek and Latin fathers, nor reject their disputations and treatises concerning sacred matters as far as they agree with the Scriptures; but we modestly dissent from them when they are found to set down things differing from, or altogether contrary to, the Scriptures. Neither do we think that we do them any wrong in this matter; seeing that they all, with one consent, will not have their writings equated with the canonical Scriptures, but command us to prove how far they agree or disagree with them, and to accept what is in agreement and to reject what is in disagreement.

Meanwhile, for all their talk of certainty, to repeat what i have said before, while Roman Catholics look to an assuredly infallible magisterium and its pronouncements, they have made a fallible choice to do so, and must use fallible human reasoning in deciding which ones are infallible, and at least some of what they mean, as well as much of the other teachings of Rome. In reality, while Catholics subscribe to a certain set of core beliefs, allowable and disallowable disagreements within Rome are substantial even if they do not result in as many formal divisions.

Furthermore, the basis for Rome's claim is derived from Scripture, Tradition and history, yet under this basis we still see still many divisions* between Catholic churches who like Rome claim an assuredly infallible magisterium based upon Scripture, Tradition and history.

Under Sola Scriptura, souls also make a human decision to trust in an assuredly infallible authority, that being the Divinely established Scriptures, and also must exercise fallible human reasoning, if prayerfully, in understanding what it means. And under which there usually is a denominational magisterium, which again, is effectively all that Rome has herself. However, even without a central magisterium, they overall subscribe and manifestly contend for a limited set of core beliefs, outside of which one is rendered a heretic, yet outside of which allowable and disallowable disagreements are substantial and even result in many formal divisions (although evangelicals manifest a remarkable degree of spiritual unity in manifold ways which transcends denominations.)

Finally, the quality if not quantity, of the unity based upon implicit assent to an assuredly infallible magisterium can hardly be said to be superior to the unity attained by the Berean hearts and method, even if relatively rare.

Therefore as said, division is only about degrees, with any superiority of Rome's model being that of organizational unity, which any single denomination can compete with, while exhibiting essential spiritual unity across the lines and evidencing more fruits of regeneration, as they preached not themselves but Christ Jesus the Lord.

*

[anglian]

What do Catholics think of words from their saints? I’d charge this one with blasphemy, yet he was made a saint. St. Louis de Montfort Honored in Roman Catholic Church
Beatified 1888 by Pope Leo XIII
Canonized 1947 by Pope Pius XII
In going to Jesus through Mary, we are really paying honour to our Lord, for we are showing that, because of our sins, we are unworthy to approach his infinite holiness directly on our own. We are showing that we need Mary, his holy Mother, to be our advocate and mediatrix with him who is our Mediator. We are going to Jesus as Mediator and Brother, and at the same time humbling ourselves before him who is our God and our Judge.

We must never go to our Lord except through Mary, using her intercession and good standing with him. We must never be without her when praying to Jesus.

Beware, chosen soul, of thinking that it is more perfect to direct your work and intention straight to Jesus or straight to God. Without Mary, your work and your intention will be of little value. But if you go to God through Mary, your work will become Mary’s work, and consequently will be most noble and most worthy of God. - St. Louis de Montfort

http://www.ewtn.com/library/Montfort/SECRET.HTM

[daniel1212]

Sources for above picts: http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2009/12/special-pleading-of-sola-ecclesia-ists.html (left) http://www.friesian.com/popes.htm#popes (right)

[Quix]

Still waitin’ on that OT scripture telling Simeon he’d see the Messiah before he died to substantiate your personal definition of God’s Word.

What’s it been Quix: three, four years?

---

I think time must have mangled your expectations.

I don’t recall that one.

The Scripture I recall about Simeon seeing the Messiah is in the Gospels.

I think there was an Old Testament verse of similar ilk but I don’t recall for certain.

I’ve certainly been wrong before and will be again.

You are not the least bit obligated to believe me . . .

unless what I say is congruent with and speaking forth God’s Word born truths as affirmed by Holy Spirit.

I don’t see what the Simeon thing has to do with the current topic, however.

[Quix]

Klunky, clumsy dodge, BTW.

[Quix]

Hideous blasphemy, indeed.

[Heart-Rest]

Wow, that's a bit too long to read right now, as I have to leave.

Just glancing through your post however, I wanted to point out just a couple quick things.

First of all, the "Nihil Obstat" and "Imprimatur" do NOT imply some kind of infallible stamp of approval on a work of art (writing) by the Catholic Church. Those things merely reflect the opinions of the persons whose names are attached to them concerning some specific work of art, not the infallible approval of Magisterium of the Church.

Also, if you genuinely want to know the real, official teachings of the Catholic Church, and many of the extensive Scripture references that support those teachings, I highly recommend you read the "Catechism of the Catholic Church", which you can obtain here:

http://www.amazon.com/Catechism-Catholic-Church-Second-U-S/dp/0385508190/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1328337010&sr=1-2

Good night, and may the "Light of the World" enlighten your soul, and clear up the many glaring misconceptions you have about the Church that Jesus Christ founded.

[johngrace]

So Daniel who has inherited the Westminister Confession Today?

[presently no screen name]

Depends upon which RC interpretation you listen you, or you which century you live in.

Ah, political flip floppers, something for everyone!

And God's WORD NEVER Changes. There is only ONE Truth.

Thanks, Daniel. As usual, excellent job.

[Quix]

I’m keenly and excruciatingly aware

of the disingenuous glib cop-out regarding the Catechism. I was gifted a copy by a very rational RC hereon and have even begun to read some of it. Dreadful stuff, that.

The fact remains . . . A rather high-ranking official of the Vatican Institution approved the book as quite edifying and kosher for the faithful.

There’s no weasel words adequate to shirk that fact.

We realize that y’all seem to make it a RELIGIOUS DUTY to write and talk out of both sides . . . and jump to whichever side is expedient in whatever context and discussion.

That doesn’t wash with us Proddys and it doesn’t wash with God.

The arrogance that seems to think they are fooling God with such hubris is doubly hideous.

[presently no screen name]

See how they wait years for an answer from ‘man’ and never bother to seek God’s Word for themselves.

[Lera]

Read Revelation chapter 2
It tells you exactly what happens to churches who have lost their first love and become legalistic .

Rev 2:5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.

What does that candlestick represent ?

What happens to a church whose light is removed ?
Are they now in darkness ?
What does darkness represent ?

[presently no screen name]

AMEN!!!!

[presently no screen name]

WOW! Satan really piled it on with that! They will never know HIM.

[Quix]

LOL.

They try hard to !!!!DEMAND!!!! that I play by their rules and meet their expectations.

Such chronic Vatican flavored habitual arrogance has never impressed me a bit.

[presently no screen name]

Whenever head counts were taken in Israel it was only the males that were counted

Thank you. I didn't know that but it explains the 5,000 (2 fish and 5 loaves) and how they say it could have been 15,000 to 20,000 there. And more left over than when they started. That's our God - He always supplies more than enough.

[presently no screen name]

I laugh at their chronic Vatican flavored habitual arrogance!. Pathetic orphans that they are. Running from their abusive authorities/church and peeking in at us wanting what we have; yet, saying who don't have it. LOL!

PRAISE GOD FOR HIS WORD!! Thank YOU, JESUS!

[presently no screen name]

I highly recommend you read the "Catechism of the Catholic Church", which you can obtain here:

Hi newbie. I highly recommend the catechism be burnt, I burnt mine. Deception is repulsive.

[Lera]

You’re welcome:)
You get the first hint of it in Numbers 1
males over 20 - their army