WHY ARE OUR CATHOLIC LAITY SO ILLITERATE WHEN IT COMES TO THE CATHOLIC FAITH

Southern Orders ^ | May 31, 2013 | Fr. Allan J. McDonald

[Natural Law]

"Do you believe everything that someone says about God that comes down the pike just because they say so?"

No, some people I never believe, but I always believe the Magisterium.

"Are you saying then, that Catholicism doesn't appeal to Scripture to support any of it's doctrines?"

No, I'm saying that Catholicism doesn't appeal exclusively to Scripture.

Peace be with you.

[Natural Law]

"This is what it means...."

I'm afraid not. Although you cite Scripture you do so incompletely. That is analogous to you reading the old saying that; 'if you want to make an omelet you have to break a few eggs', and then standing before a counter top covered in broken eggs and shells declaring it an omelet.

Peace be with you

[Elsie]

However, the Church has beliefs in parallel with Scripture, for example, the Didache, that did not make it into final Scripture, that is still held to be true.

What's the penalty for NOT 'believing' them?

[Elsie]

No, some people I never believe, but I always believe the Magisterium. a group of them.

[Elsie]

Although you cite Scripture you do so incompletely.

Then it should behoove you to fill in the blanks; or you're an accomplice to inaccuracy.

[Natural Law]

"No, some people I never believe...."

Although I often enjoy your wit, I wish that more often you would use more than half of it. ;o)

[Elsie]

I don’t want you to be overwhelmed.

[Syncro]

LOL!

[JCBreckenridge]

“You’re wrong.”

No, you’re wrong here. I’m sorry. Are you saying that Eve did not disobey God?

Are you saying it wasn’t sin when she disobeyed God and then ate of the fruit of the tree of life?

[JCBreckenridge]

This is the frustrating part of it. You don’t understand how the magisterium works. It has to do with the corpus, the body as a whole, not of the part.

[CynicalBear]

You don’t honestly think that I’m going to take that as an answer to my question do you? Seriously Mark, you made a statement that demands you show who made such a statement that you claimed. Here’s my question again to refresh your memory.

“Would you please show from posts by non Catholics that they have stated that belief please.”

Now if you can’t show where someone made the claim that “They consider themselves double 0 - naught. Licence to sin” then you need to admit that you are either making a false statement or injecting meaning into their words that aren’t there. I have never seen anyone even come close to making that claim and if I ever did I would understand that they are definitely not saved nor do they understand what salvation is. For you to publicly say they did make that claim demands proof.

[MarkBsnr]

This is what it means....

That is a part of it, not the whole thing. The OSAS crowd assumes that is particularly about them.

What do you think comes from the belief that one cannot lose one’s salvation no matter what he does? You have seen as much as I have here and elsewhere from individuals who essentially feel free to do what they want whenever they want to, to the extent that they want to, simply because they believe themselves saved.

Oh yeah? Post numbers please.......

On the contrary, anyone who really thinks that way is not saved because nobody who is saved will take that salvation so lightly. It's not fire insurance or a get out of hell free card.

Are you kidding. Look at your own posts. How many times have you posted that you are saved and that exactly nobody and nothing can stop your own personal salvation. I have no idea of what you truly believe, so I can only go on your actual postings.

Let me ask you this a little more formally: do you believe that you are saved and that exactly nobody and nothing (not even God) can change that?

[MarkBsnr]

I'm afraid not. Although you cite Scripture you do so incompletely. That is analogous to you reading the old saying that; 'if you want to make an omelet you have to break a few eggs', and then standing before a counter top covered in broken eggs and shells declaring it an omelet.

Excellent analogy. Here's another.

A cat has four legs. My dog has four legs. Therefore my dog is a cat.

[MarkBsnr]

However, the Church has beliefs in parallel with Scripture, for example, the Didache, that did not make it into final Scripture, that is still held to be true.

What's the penalty for NOT 'believing' them?

Whatever God says it is. At everyone's Judgement by God.

[CynicalBear]

>> If there was ever anyone who heard the word of God and kept it it was Mary.<<

There were many throughout scripture that were faithful to God. The Catholic church has chosen Mary partly because they could incorporate the pagan “queen of heaven” belief to attract pagans into the church. If the myth the RCC perpetuates about Mary being assumed into heaven why isn’t there any record of it like there is of Elijah?

Anyone who truly wants to follow Christ needs to leave the bonds of the RCC and it’s pagan ways.

[CynicalBear]

So you’re saying they “assume” that Mary was assumed into heaven and on an assumption they have built a great part of their belief system? Wow! Just Wow!

>>However, the Church has beliefs in parallel with Scripture, for example, the Didache, that did not make it into final Scripture, that is still held to be true.<<

Do you realize how weak that sounds? “The Church has beliefs in parallel with Scripture”? No kidding? I’d get out of that pagan cult as fast as I could.

[CynicalBear]

You have gotten answers many times. We can’t be held responsible if you don’t choose to believe what scripture says or try to change what the words in scripture mean.

[CynicalBear]

>> A cat has four legs. My dog has four legs. Therefore my dog is a cat.<<

Hey! That’s the rationale for the belief in the assumption of Mary! Finally!

[Natural Law]

"You have gotten answers many times."

On the few times there was a response it was an obfuscation usually around 2 Timothy 3:16. Not once has anyone ever answered the question. I do admit that it is a trick question, though because the answer is not in Scripture.

[CynicalBear]

It’s there if you want to be absolutely sure you are following the words of God. The only infallible words are found in scripture. No other source has proven infallibility. Jesus Himself used scripture to refute Satan. Jesus always quoted scripture. Name one time when He referred to “tradition” in a positive way. Throughout scripture we are shown that the written word is to be relied on to prove the words of men. Scripture itself claims its infallibility. Those who rely on tradition can not make that claim. I think we are in good company relying solely on scripture as the base of belief.

Catholics should head the scripture.

Matthew 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

2 Timothy 3:16,17 - All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching & furnishing to all good works.

Not so tradition.