PRIEST'S WORDS SPARK WALKOUT IN CHURCH

Troy Record ^ | March 25, 2003 | Jeff Buell and Kate Perry

[Maximilian]

The pastor at Sacred Heart in Troy delivered an insidious message. It goes well beyond distasteful.

In what way does the pastor's message diverge from everything the pope has been saying about Iraq?

[vrwc1]

Culturally they've been raised to believe that Catholic beliefs are not just wrong they're Satanic? Really, are there *any* beliefs Bible-only Evangelicals share with Catholics outside of the Trinity?

Wow, you guys are really thin-skinned...I've been trying to have a meaningful discussion, and now you're speculating on my upbringing and putting words in my mouth that I never said.

I think the most important thing of all is that we agree on Romans 10:9.

By the way, I was raised in the Catholic faith.

[Notwithstanding]

Does "profitable" mean "beneficial"?
If not, what does it mean?

[Notwithstanding]

The bible never mentions the Trinity.

[isthisnickcool]

Does anyone even think these comments are clever anymore?

I was not trying to be "clever". Far from it. I've met some good priests and I've met some not so good. Some of the "not so good" ones? They were "clever". And quite a bit more.

[Desdemona]

and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." The Scripture he is talking about, is, I think, the Old Testament.

You're definitely correct here. Weren't all of Paul's letters written before the Gospels even?

Yes. If memory serves - and it's been known to be faulty in this area - I think only Revelation, of the epistles and non-Gospel books (excluding Acts, which is just the second part of Luke), is the latest of them. Like between Luke and John.

[vrwc1]

Here's another thing I'd like to see if we can agree on...

Do you guys think all doctrine should be checked or benchmarked against scripture?

[Conservative til I die]

Wow, you guys are really thin-skinned...I've been trying to have a meaningful discussion, and now you're speculating on my upbringing and putting words in my mouth that I never said.

No one was talking about you in particular.

[Conservative til I die]

Do you guys think all doctrine should be checked or benchmarked against scripture?

No doctrine should contradict Scripture.

Not all doctrine is found in Scripture, because we have a living, breathing, teaching Church.

Doctrine does not have have to be found in a single sentence in the Bible for it to be considered Scriptural. Some doctrines are found in kernel form in the Bible. Purgatory is one. The Trinity is another.

This basically sums up my views on the matter.

[Desdemona]

Well, lucky me. We get good, moral homilies every Sunday at the Cathedral here. Our archbishop has even made some fairly strong statements against sin. He leads the pro-life Masses and there are always quite a few clergy in attendance.

There are people here though that do complain that he is too conservative. And, to my knowledge, there have been no overt statements against the war outside of SLU and St. Cronin's (the parish for the revolutionaries). We do pray for wisdom for our leaders and the safety of our troops and for a swift and just end to the conflict, but that we are supposed to do. And, as one who wishes Saddam dethroned, I have no problem with this.

I do have a problem with priests using the pulpit as a lectern and spouting their own opinions rather than treaching morality. All of you out there have my prayers.

[vrwc1]

The bible never mentions the Trinity.

You're correct, the word "Trinity" is not in the bible. However, the doctrine of the Trinity most certainly is. It is not the traditions of men - it is embedded in the Bible.

[Conservative til I die]

The bible never mentions the Trinity.

Ah, but it does. In kernel form though. You take one verse, piece it with another verse, use a little intuition, logic, and reasoning, and voila, you have a doctrine like the Trinity.

That's my problem with Sola Scriptura. Not only is it historically speaking, a recent invention, it actually inspires laziness towards learning the Scriptures. Instead of using reasoning skills, the Bible becomes a handbook to quote without thought or attention to context. So all doctrine has to be contained within one sentence in the plainest of words. Kind of a paint by numbers form of theology. When I was dealing with my on-again, currently off-again girlfriend's flirtation with Jehovah's Witnesses (I'll still never get how this unitarian wannabe Russelite gf of mine woke up one day last month deciding she wanted to be a Catholic again, a story for another time), Christian apologists I dealt with called the game of Scripture quoting "Bible hopscotch."

BTW, would you believe that when I tried convincing my gf of the evils of the Watchtower Society, it reawakened my dormant faith and actually led me to a lot of websites that were Bible-only evangelical sites, and I used to tell my gf the JW's were wrong because they believed in "a doctrine of salvation through works" and that all you needed was faith and the bible? As soon as I got exposed to some Catholic sites though, I luckily saw the light again, because Catholicism, itself called a cult on most of these evangelical sites, was able to answer all the questions the Evangelical Apologists were able to throw out.

[Romulus]

Since the Bible is the only record that we have of his words

"Going therefore, teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you..."

"But there are also many other things which Jesus did which, if they were written every one, the world itself. I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written."

"Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle."

[Conservative til I die]

You're correct, the word "Trinity" is not in the bible. However, the doctrine of the Trinity most certainly is. It is not the traditions of men - it is embedded in the Bible.

Right. And most Catholic doctrine is found embedded in the bible in the same way. You just have to do a little connecting of the dots and reasoning.

[vrwc1]

No doctrine should contradict Scripture.

Not all doctrine is found in Scripture, because we have a living, breathing, teaching Church.

When Paul and Silas preached in Berea, the people "examined the scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." (Acts 17:11) Why were they commended if not all doctrine is found in Scripture? Why doesn't this verse say "...except for the things that have been revealed that aren't supported by scripture."? I'll tell you why, because every doctrine that Paul preached to them, and every doctrine that Paul ever preached (and every doctrine that should ever be preached) is found in Scripture!" Anything else is traditions of men, and not suitable for doctrine.

[vrwc1]

Right. And most Catholic doctrine is found embedded in the bible in the same way. You just have to do a little connecting of the dots and reasoning.

What about the Catholic doctrine that's not in the Bible?

[Desdemona]

When Paul and Silas preached in Berea, the people "examined the scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." (Acts 17:11) Why were they commended if not all doctrine is found in Scripture? Why doesn't this verse say "...except for the things that have been revealed that aren't supported by scripture."? I'll tell you why, because every doctrine that Paul preached to them, and every doctrine that Paul ever preached (and every doctrine that should ever be preached) is found in Scripture!" Anything else is traditions of men, and not suitable for doctrine.

That would be the Old Testament - the WHOLE OT, not the fragment, although it didn't have that name then. Also, Acts was written down after Paul died and the Canon wasn't closed for another 300 years, thus Paul's letters weren't scripture yet, either.

[Desdemona]

What about the Catholic doctrine that's not in the Bible?

Name one.

[vrwc1]

That would be the Old Testament - the WHOLE OT, not the fragment, although it didn't have that name then. Also, Acts was written down after Paul died and the Canon wasn't closed for another 300 years, thus Paul's letters weren't scripture yet, either.

Doesn't matter - they were commended for checking everything against scripture, which serves as an example for us. You think he taught them doctrine that isn't in his letters and that isn't supported by scripture? I don't.

[vrwc1]

OK, how about the doctrine of Mary being a virgin forever? Or the doctrine of praying to "saints"?