Posted on 04/26/2015 1:05:20 PM PDT by RnMomof7
No wonder.you have been praying to the wrong guy.. St Anthony is the find guy
And of course you know that is what the epistles are... written teaching and corrections to the church,that were circulated between the churches
I was using that one difference as an example, not as a starting point for discussion, so I will comment only briefly. For Catholics, to do penance is a natural outcome of our realization that we have offended God, and our desire to contribute in some tiny way to the repair of the harm we have caused, for which Christ paid such a heavy price. We want to join ourselves in the small way that we are capable of with Him in that endeavor. We are in no way trying to insincerely get away with a lesser reaction to our sin; we just have a different understanding of how to express that sorrow.
So do 5 hail marys and 5 our fathers repair any damage on might have done /??
I am sorry: I should have been more clear that I was referring only to the New Testament writings when I discussed the teachings of the early Church. Of course the Apostles had the Old Testament.
Actually Pauls letter to the churches were considered scripture as they were being written 2 Peter 3:16
Ahhhh, I see...So what will St. Alfonso give me???
.
>> “For Catholics, to do penance is a natural outcome of our realization that we have offended God, and our desire to contribute in some tiny way to the repair of the harm we have caused...” <<
.
But the word of God plainly tells us that we cannot do that!
Our “payment” is just more filthy rags to add to the mountain thereof.
And finally, the apostles didn’t just “have” the ancient scriptures; they were the total substance of what they preached. They didn’t teach men’s traditions, they taught God’s word. (Read Acts 28 for Luke’s testimony to that effect)
.
.
>> “Actually Pauls letter to the churches were considered scripture as they were being written 2 Peter 3:16 “ <<
The word “other” in 2Peter 3:16 was added in by Eusebius, 300 years after Peter wrote it. Its not in the early copies.
The apostles had too much humble appreciation for the ancient scriptures from which they lived their lives to declare their contemporary contributions “scripture.” (even though we do place that value upon them)
.
Having admitted down-thread that the Scriptures in the hands of the Early Church were the Hebrew Scriptures, Don't you think that it would be wise to understand the Hebrew concept?
The concept is teshuva, and follows fairly closely to the definition of repentance as noted by Protestants... However, I will give you a fig leaf - There is a form of penance in modern Judaism at least, in that one must confess to the one(s) harmed by your actions, and do all you can to repair any harm you have caused. It is important to understand that forgiveness is not offered by a priest, but rather from those whom you have offended.
However, that isn't much of a fig leaf, because the normative Protestant sense of repentance generally assumes these things...
But in the ancient sense, the concept means to turn - to turn once again to face YHWH and away from one's sins... To go back to the path of Torah. If forgiveness cannot be found in those you have offended, your appeal ultimately rests in YHWH, who promises to forgive you like you have forgiven others...
So with that in mind, maybe there is some middle ground to be found in following Torah.
You will love this .....of St. Alphonsus Marie Liguori, bishop, patron saint of priest-confessors and moral theologians, and the founder of the Redemptorist Congregation of priests, brothers, and sisters.Aug 1, 2014
Moral Theologins
Moral Theologins
Wow...LOLOL...
****Having admitted down-thread that the Scriptures in the hands of the Early Church were the Hebrew Scriptures, Don’t you think that it would be wise to understand the Hebrew concept?****
Well, since the New Testament refers to material found in the Septuagint (which includes more books than do the Hebrew Scriptures), it seems that they were familiar with the Greek Scripture, altho using as their languages Aramaic and Hebrew.
____________________________
****The concept is teshuva, and follows fairly closely to the definition of repentance as noted by Protestants... However, I will give you a fig leaf - There is a form of penance in modern Judaism at least, in that one must confess to the one(s) harmed by your actions, and do all you can to repair any harm you have caused. It is important to understand that forgiveness is not offered by a priest, but rather from those whom you have offended.****
That was an interesting article, thank you for posting it. Yes, atonement would be another word for the Catholic idea of “doing penance,” except that now we have also to recognize our debt to God. If I steal money from a person, not only must I make atonement to the person himself, I must also make atonement to God… which is what we call “doing penance.”
_____________________________
****However, that isn’t much of a fig leaf, because the normative Protestant sense of repentance generally assumes these things…****
I did not know that and am glad to hear that this is the case.
****But the word of God plainly tells us that we cannot do that!****
We cannot “contribute in some tiny way to the repair of the harm we have caused”? We cannot in any way make atonement for our sins?
_______________________________
****Our “payment” is just more filthy rags to add to the mountain thereof.****
????? I do not understand this; I have never seen anything like it in the Bible.
______________________________
****And finally, the apostles didn’t just “have” the ancient scriptures; they were the total substance of what they preached. ****
I think I must have been unclear, or maybe I am misunderstanding you. Are you saying that everything the Apostles taught is in the OT? Or that there is nothing taught by the Apostles outside the OT and the NT combined? Or something else?
****They didn’t teach men’s traditions, they taught God’s word. (Read Acts 28 for Luke’s testimony to that effect)****
And the Catholic Church teaches the same thing. The difference is that the Church’s understanding is that not *everything* Christ taught to the Apostles, which the Apostles then taught to their disciples, etc., is in the Bible.
****But the word of God plainly tells us that we cannot do that!****
We cannot “contribute in some tiny way to the repair of the harm we have caused”? We cannot in any way make atonement for our sins?
_______________________________
****Our “payment” is just more filthy rags to add to the mountain thereof.****
????? I do not understand this; I have never seen anything like it in the Bible.
______________________________
****And finally, the apostles didn’t just “have” the ancient scriptures; they were the total substance of what they preached. ****
I think I must have been unclear, or maybe I am misunderstanding you. Are you saying that everything the Apostles taught is in the OT? Or that there is nothing taught by the Apostles outside the OT and the NT combined? Or something else?
****They didn’t teach men’s traditions, they taught God’s word. (Read Acts 28 for Luke’s testimony to that effect)****
And the Catholic Church teaches the same thing. The difference is that the Church’s understanding is that not *everything* Christ taught to the Apostles, which the Apostles then taught to their disciples, etc., is in the Bible.
****And of course you know that is what the epistles are... written teaching and corrections to the church,that were circulated between the churches****
Since Christ told the Apostles to teach, and since St Paul emphasized the need to hear, it would seem that there was no impetus to write down *everything* Christ taught. The Catholic Church acknowledges this and maintains the “Oral Tradition” in what we call Tradition. It is not a tradition of men but a separate body of knowledge taught by Christ through the Apostles and not included in the writings later canonized into the NT.
___________________________________
****So do 5 Hail Marys and 5 Our Fathers repair any damage on might have done /??****
Not at all. The penance we see the priest request of the penitent is merely a starting point.
****If you don’t accept the milk of the word, God will never give you any meat...As a result many Christian when they can’t get beyond a certain point, will come up with their own interpretation instead of God’s…****
How would Protestants know which teachings are correct? How would they be able to judge among the various ideas?
_________________________________
****The same thing happens in your religion except that we use God’s word, the bible as our standard where you guys use man’s failed wisdom as your standard…****
Many Protestants do seem to think that the Catholic Church’s teachings come from the thinking of humans; they do not understand that our foundation includes the Bible—which many Protestants seem to take as their sole authority—but the Catholic Church also has other parts to the authority—parts which are **also and equally** from God.
Please cease pinging me to your posts to other FReepers.
****My goodness. The RCC has had 2,000 YEARS to write interpretations of the Bible.
****They sure had enough time to write out that list of anathemas for anyone who disagreed with them.
I regret that neither I nor the article posted by another poster were sufficient to explain the Catholic view of the Church’s teachings.
.
.
.
Editor-Surveyor says that Protestants don’t interpret the Bible, so, actually, I am now confused about the topic of interpretation. Perhaps you could clarify—maybe I am using the wrong words, or perhaps misunderstanding?
****Scripture is easy enough to deal with.
****You read it and obey it.
****that alone is enough to keep a person busy for a lifetime.....
****And if you don’t understand something, ask the Holy Spirit to show you what it means. He WILL do it.****
How does one become a member of the Body of Christ? Protestants have different views about this, why is that? Which view is correct? How does one judge?
I am not ignoring your reply; it is simply taking me a long time to write a response for your very informative comment.
I am so sorry! And unfortunately I think I sent a couple more before I saw your post to me.
Again, my apologies.
.
>> “Many Protestants do seem to think that the Catholic Church’s teachings come from the thinking of humans; they do not understand that our foundation includes the Bible—which many Protestants seem to take as their sole authority—but the Catholic Church also has other parts to the authority—parts which are **also and equally** from God” <<
.
If it isn’t in the Bible, it didn’t come from God.
The ancient Hebrew scriptures are consistent throughout the centuries, and are the total of God’s revelation to men.
The NT merely repeats and confirms those scriptures.
Every doctrinal point Yeshua ever uttered was preceded with the words “It is written.”
Even Paul’s revelation of the “mystery” of Yeshua’s remarriage to his rejected bride was there in Torah and the prophets all along.
.
Please cease pinging me to your posts to other FReepers.
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.