Posted on 09/18/2022 6:10:24 PM PDT by marshmallow
Reach out to the marginalized, ordain women, engage the youth.
Those were among the themes that emerged from a survey of North Jersey Catholics released last week by the Archdiocese of Newark, spiritual home to 1.3 million worshippers in Bergen, Essex, Hudson and Union counties.
In hundreds of in-person and online listening sessions this year, more than 15,000 local Catholics said the church needs to make fundamental reforms to become welcoming to women, LGBTQ parishioners, immigrants and the young people who have increasingly strayed from religious life.
"They believe that the Church is out of touch today," said a 39-page summary of the findings, released by the archdiocese.
(Excerpt) Read more at njherald.com ...
When you reject Sola Scriptura this becomes inevitable.
Really? Because Sola Scriptural has obviously generated unity amongst the:
Methodists
Baptists
Unitarians
Presbyterians
Church of Christ
Pentacostals
Anglicans
Assembly of God
Quakers
Shakers
Mormons
Non-denominationals.....
The list goes on and on and on.....
The denominations that don’t follow Sola Scriptura on that list are the only ones that have gone off the rails. Which confirms my original point.
From Wikipedia:
Sola scriptura is a formal principle of many Protestant Christian denominations, and one of the five solae. It was a foundational doctrinal principle of the Protestant Reformation held by many of the Reformers, who taught that authentication of Scripture is governed by the discernible excellence of the text, as well as the personal witness of the Holy Spirit to the heart of each man. Some evangelical and Baptist denominations state the doctrine of sola scriptura more strongly: Scripture is self-authenticating, clear (perspicuous) to the rational reader, its own interpreter ("Scripture interprets Scripture"), and sufficient of itself to be the final authority of Christian doctrine.
By contrast, the Protestant traditions of Anglicanism, Methodism and Pentecostalism uphold the doctrine of prima scriptura, with scripture being illumined by tradition and reason. The Methodists thought reason should be delineated from experience, though the latter was classically filed under the former and guided by reason, nonetheless this was added, thus changing the "Anglican Stool" to the four sides of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral.
They would say otherwise, and you would have no authority to say otherwise since, according to Sola Scriptural, everyone can interpret scripture for themselves.
And you totally miss the point. There shouldn’t be ANY denominations if Sola Scriptural is accurate.
But of course it isn’t, because until recently only scholars and the educated could read. Guess that damns all the centuries of illiterates to Hell, huh?
This is “Nighty-night, Baby” Tobin’s diocese. No matter what the people actually said, this was going to be the result.
Wow. And I thought the printing press wasn't invented till the 15th century.
See, because until then all books had to be hand written and reproduced by hand and very expensive, which means that most chrstians didn't have Bibles until fairly recently.
That’s nonsense. There will always be false denominations because there will always be false teachers as Jesus, Paul, Peter, John and Jude warned us. That some may misinterpret the same scripture Peter described as “difficult to understand” is not an argument against it being the sole infallible rule of faith.
Once again, that’s dumb. You think those illiterates didn’t have Godly pastors reading and preaching scripture to them every week? If you read a chapter a week it takes about 3 1/2 years to get through the whole Bible. And the earliest Christians without NT scripture had the Apostles themselves teaching. Which was scripture in itself.
The early church had writings by the apostles (and others). They also had oral tradition of course. As you know, the Bible was formed from early writings that were consistent and deemed to be authored by apostles. There were many false teachers who also wrote letters, but these were rejected for obvious reasons. So yes, the Bible is the best guide to the true teachings of Jesus.
Um, yeah, Catholic priests...
Just the logical progression of Vatican II and the Novus Ordo.
The earliest Christians in Jerusalem and Antioch had not one word of the New Testament. Their faith came not from study of sacred texts but from the oral witness of the apostles. The bible itself testifies that it is possible to be fully Christian without any of the New Testament as an Owner’s Manual. The protestant American view of the bible as the indispensible “Christian Instructions” in which everything can be looked up, is dangerous to the faith. Not to mention being unbiblical.
none from Rome.
Hahaha Catholicism isn’t a democracy…
Sounds like a bunch of faux Catholics to me.
You prove my point. YOU are saying that your denomination is the correct one. Think all of those other denominations read the Bible, said screw it, and denied the clear meaning that Sola Scriptura is supposed to automatically convey?
You have no authority to say anything about anyone else because for Protestantism every person is a faith into themselves. And that is why the only thing protestants agree upon us that they think the Catholic Church is wrong.
And that should tell you everything about Sola Scriptura. Breeds dissent, division and schism
The early believers actually did have scripture, the Old Testament, as well as instruction from the apostles. You are right that believers do not need the Bible to be saved, but what’s your point? Why do believers around the world risk martyrdom for portions of scripture? It’s because…
2 Timothy 3:16
New King James Version
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for [a]instruction in righteousness,
Reading scripture is not “dangerous” to the faith.
You are the one who said “The writings of those who knew Christ and were taught by Christ are the only way of conforming to Christ’s teachings.” I’m glad to see you retract that statement.
I think you are trying to make too fine a point for some reason. Of course someone can be saved without by hearing of Christ alone. Scripture is the standard by which someone knows whether or not what is being told confirms to Christ’s teachings.
This thread seems to be turning into some not-so-Christian Catholic versus Protestant argument. Faithful Christians can be found on both sides, and that opinion is backed by scripture. But if anyone comes to me and tells me something directly contradicted by scripture, then they are not in accordance with Christ’s teachings. That’s because scripture is what it claims to be, God inspired and suitable for correcting others.
Where did I say any denomination is the “correct” one, much less mine? I never even said what denomination I am. I certainly reject your position that no person can ever understand scripture so we should just disregard it and follow made up always changing traditions. It breeds confusion and as we certainly see heresy. Biblical based congregations are much more consistent and unified.
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.