Metmom does the usual Bible Christian thing and lets loose a cascade of scriptural quotations without realizing that he is implicitly telling us that he alone knows the “definitive” interpretation of these verses.
Does not every priest, Sunday School teacher, preacher, etc do this on Sundays or possibly Wednesdays or whenever they teach/preach? Take time to think about this.
Every priest around the world gives the same message on Sunday.
Every priest.
The same message.
No deviations whatsoever.
Does this guy get his stuff cleared by the pope before he writes and publishes it? Msgr. Charles Pope
Unless you're willing to tell me that every message from every priest, or every catholic thread that is posted, is signed off by the Vatican, then you have no ground to stand on your assertion and you diminish your position even further.
In fact, the opinions as stated on this forum indicate catholicism does not speak with one voice as claimed.
Of course his own Protestant colleagues will disagree. Just go and ask the Grahams, Sharptons, Osteens, David Koreshs, and Jim Jones. Each will offer us “his” definitive view.
Maybe we could ask Pope Urban II why he promised salvation for those who died in battle in the Crusades....a form of Christian jihad.
Maybe we could ask all those priests who've molested children what was on their minds.
Maybe we could ask all those popes why they committed murder, adultery, taught/allowed indulgences and offices to be bought; continue to advocate and even encourage the worship of Mary contrary to Scripture's injunctions against praying to false gods.
Maybe we could ask the catholic church why they continue to promote Mary as advocate, helper and co-redemtrix when no where in Scripture do we see this attributed to her....nor is it found in "sacred tradition".
This line of absurd logic only helps cement that infallible and one authority: The Catholic Church. The Church that formally and authentically declared the canonical texts as the word of God in AD 382.
This has been discredited so many times it is embarrassing you continue to post this.
I’ll leave boatbums with his B.A. in Biblical Education & Theology to answer that. Somehow Augustine, Aquinas, Newman, and Benedict’s explanations are not good enough. Nor should we bore our Protestant friends with the beliefs and practices of the early Church Fathers.
And if the ECFs were in 100% agreement on the issues we discuss you and other catholics would have a point. However, they are not. And it is easily proven. So upon which ECF do you lean upon? The one you agree with? Or disagree with?
Unless there is 100% agreement from the ECFs we have no recourse but to default back to the texts.
This was nearly four centuries before the canonical texts were assembled under Petrine authority and affirmed as the true written Word of God by cross checking the hundreds of written fragments with the sacred oral tradition, also the Word of God. And just to be clear, some of the early Church fathers were contemporaries of John the Evangelist. Now, we don’t need a B.A. of any kind to know that.
You would serve yourself well to do a real in-depth study of how the NT canon came into being. In addition, some study of the 1st century would serve you well also.
Nice try but you are flat out wrong. We have the Credo and the Catholic Catechism. This is a set of firm beliefs that identify us as Catholics. Of course, one can take a Parable of Christ and drawn several lessons from it but this does not mean a different “belief” interpretation. Indeed, you contradict yourself, the priest like every other priest in the Catholic Church affirms the Credo, and participates in the Sacrifice of the Mass and the central belief in the Eucharist, the alpha and omega of Catholic worship and adoration: The risen Christ Himself under the appearances of the consecrated bread and wine. Unbelief in the Eucharist, is unbelief in what the Resurrection is all about.