|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/12/2008 7:56:23 AM
|
|
|
Doghouse
Posts: 1144
Joined: 8/25/2007
From: The Buckle of the Bible Belt
Status: offline
|
quote:
They don't have a leader that oversees the world's largest child exploitation ring. So, just what are you saying here...that the Protestants have the largest child exploitation ring, and they don't need a leader for that? (Go back and read your post)
You probably should start a new thread for that topic - this one is about the Pope.
_____________________________
I, then, urge you to live in a manner worthy of the call you have received, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another through love, striving to preserve the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/12/2008 8:08:10 AM
|
|
|
Doghouse
Posts: 1144
Joined: 8/25/2007
From: The Buckle of the Bible Belt
Status: offline
|
quote:
Surprisingly, the senior pastor said "I can't do anything about it. I wil not change it because of the quota." He was worried about that there could be a drop in church attendance and of course, less money. I do remember attending a few services and this pastor would preach long sermons on money and the need for it in the church, to support this local parish.
If you understood the finances in a Roman Catholic Parish and the relationship of the Parish to the Diocese, you would re-examine this piece of the story...this isn't how local parish support works. Parishes are not neccessarily "stand-alone"; they are supported by other Parishes with higher attendence or more generous parishioners. This is done through a system that is a lot like a "tax" that is paid to the Diocese by the Parish.
Somebody mis-understood somebody here.
The Dog serves on his Parish Council in his local Parish - and has done so for several years. I deal with the subjects your post addresses all the time. It doesn't work as you have described it, in my opinion.
< Message edited by Doghouse -- 4/12/2008 8:14:24 AM >
_____________________________
I, then, urge you to live in a manner worthy of the call you have received, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another through love, striving to preserve the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/12/2008 9:47:25 AM
|
|
|
Mannamuncher
Posts: 4280
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Doghouse
quote:
They don't have a leader that oversees the world's largest child exploitation ring. So, just what are you saying here...that the Protestants have the largest child exploitation ring, and they don't need a leader for that? (Go back and read your post)
You probably should start a new thread for that topic - this one is about the Pope.
No, I don't believe that is the emphasis here.
It is merely a statement of fact. Prove it ?
The RC crowd regularly boast about their numbers.
Being the biggest, and admitting the extent of the
crimes (not alleged), this is simply proportional.
No one here condones or sanctions this activity.
The disconnect here is that all this happened for
so long, and nothing was done to remedy. And,
it was not hidden within these communities.
The pope declares himself shepherd of the RCC.
However, his flock routinely ignores him on issues
such as birth control, homosexuality, affairs of the
church, even the very authority of the papacy.
Hence, the papacy is meaningless to ALL RC followers,
however, there are some who adhere to it's tenets.
It cannot be said that the RCC is catholic...it isn't.
There is millions of mini-popes on their mini-thrones.
_____________________________
A swine may see an acorn under a tree, but he cannot see a star.
It is a destructive addition to add anything to Christ.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/12/2008 10:11:38 AM
|
|
|
JesKlu
Posts: 352
Joined: 4/16/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Doghouse
quote:
Surprisingly, the senior pastor said "I can't do anything about it. I wil not change it because of the quota." He was worried about that there could be a drop in church attendance and of course, less money. I do remember attending a few services and this pastor would preach long sermons on money and the need for it in the church, to support this local parish.
If you understood the finances in a Roman Catholic Parish and the relationship of the Parish to the Diocese, you would re-examine this piece of the story...this isn't how local parish support works. Parishes are not neccessarily "stand-alone"; they are supported by other Parishes with higher attendence or more generous parishioners. This is done through a system that is a lot like a "tax" that is paid to the Diocese by the Parish.
Somebody mis-understood somebody here.
The Dog serves on his Parish Council in his local Parish - and has done so for several years. I deal with the subjects your post addresses all the time. It doesn't work as you have described it, in my opinion.
Doghouse, you weren't there. You cannot judge this. When Peter and I were there, at that meeting, one of the moms addressed the issue of modesty for the girls. The pastor said he would not do anything about it, because of the quota. Then, the mother could not say anything else, to her distress call. Then what is the response? How can this priest respond to the needs of the community, when they are giving him something, really urgent, like modesty, in front of his face, in front of two other priests at that meeting!?
These are the very kinds of issues that the Pope must be hearing about from his Priests, Bishops, Cardinals. Because through clothing, of various kinds, comes moms who make these kinds of concerns. And Church is not a place for this kind of immodest dress. Showing off your skin.
This reminds of Padre Pio, he would not even allow a woman to have Communion if she dressed immodestly. That is quite admirable. The Catholic Church should re-introduce the issue of modesty. Why? Because the protestants follow what the Catholic Churc allows. If modesty is re-introduced in the Catholic Church, it will spill over into the Protestants, and that would be great!
Your sister in Christ Jesus,
Jessica
_____________________________
And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them and said, "Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/13/2008 7:07:36 AM
|
|
|
Doghouse
Posts: 1144
Joined: 8/25/2007
From: The Buckle of the Bible Belt
Status: offline
|
quote:
Doghouse, you weren't there. You cannot judge this. When Peter and I were there, at that meeting, one of the moms addressed the issue of modesty for the girls. The pastor said he would not do anything about it, because of the quota. Then, the mother could not say anything else, to her distress call. Then what is the response? How can this priest respond to the needs of the community, when they are giving him something, really urgent, like modesty, in front of his face, in front of two other priests at that meeting!? I agree - I was not there. And neither was anybody else here (except PeterD). So, we have to rely on your testimony of the event. I am simply sharing a different experience with the limitations of what a Priest can and cannot do to "enforce" something like a dress code. You don't appear to have participated in Parish leadership by serving on a Parish Council, so I am simply sharing my differing point of view, and describing from where I developed that differing point of view.
In my Parish, if anybody showed up in something indecent, they would be asked to leave or cover up by other parishioners before the Priest ever had to say anything. We have a number of poor parishioners who do the best they can with dress - to have a dress code would be difficult for some of these folks to follow.
While I shudder at some of things young people are calling "fashionable" these days (we have raised a generation of children who do not know where to properly wear a waistline on a decent set of trousers...), I have never seen anyone attend a Mass where I was at that I would describe as "immodest". Maybe in poor taste, but not immodest. I suppose we all have different definitions of "modest" - which one do we choose as the standard?
quote:
If modesty is re-introduced in the Catholic Church, it will spill over into the Protestants, and that would be great! I find this to hardly ever be the case...the Catholics have a number of things going for them that should spill over into Protestant Churches, but much of that was rejected in 1517...
_____________________________
I, then, urge you to live in a manner worthy of the call you have received, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another through love, striving to preserve the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/14/2008 9:13:39 AM
|
|
|
Odeliya
Posts: 3110
Joined: 8/10/2005
Status: offline
|
As much as I love pulling the Dog by the tail periodically I think right now we can put aside the differences and my prayers are for the safe and fruitful visit of Pope Benedict to USA.
A couple of catholic friends of mine expressed concern about his safety and asked for prayers also for his trip not create division /hostility but rather promote good will between brothers of different faiths. So I do understand your worries and may we (P-s) assure you of our support and love.
All criticism aside for now,I admire Pope's bravery and decision to visit and hope that all goes well. He is our brother in Christ and while we disagree on theological points, i admit he is extremely intellectual. Clinically liberal environment if my school generally makes that scarce these days:)
Being pro Pope and strongly anti-infallibiity I would appreciate your thoughts on infall. issue later, after his safe return back to Rome. (As in why dont CC do away with infall-ty? I will remind you if you forget.)
_____________________________
Don't tell me what to do and I won't tell you were you should go.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/14/2008 9:46:57 AM
|
|
|
Mannamuncher
Posts: 4280
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Odeliya
All criticism aside for now, I admire Pope's bravery and decision to visit and hope that all goes well.
Yes, we wish him well.
The American Catholic Church is diverse.
According to polls taken recently, the stance
of many RC is not very RC. With dissent over
euthanasia, stem cell research, death penalty,
commumion, confession, baptism, unity both
within and without, and the question of papal
authority, the cry of individualism rings loudly.
Someone has to be in charge, ergo the pope.
For whatever reason, the members of the RCC
do not adhere to apostolic succession, or have
simply ignored the pretense as others have.
Isn't it rather silly to call oneself RC, then ignore
the leader of the RC ? What level of adherence and
compliance does the RC have towards the pope ? Many
will say, " the pope is a good man", but truthfully
neary zero in the laity say, "the apostolic succession..."
My point is the pope is pope essentially of clergy.
The layered infrastructure of the RCC agrees
with the pope, and support him entirely. Don't they?
No defiant whispers in the hallways or dissent ?
We have no clear-cut job description of the pope.
We really don't know what he does, do we ?
More importantly, is he productive in his pursuits-
what has he done as pope that no one else can do ?
_____________________________
A swine may see an acorn under a tree, but he cannot see a star.
It is a destructive addition to add anything to Christ.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/14/2008 6:40:27 PM
|
|
|
Doghouse
Posts: 1144
Joined: 8/25/2007
From: The Buckle of the Bible Belt
Status: offline
|
quote:
Being pro Pope and strongly anti-infallibiity I would appreciate your thoughts on infall. issue later, after his safe return back to Rome. (As in why dont CC do away with infall-ty? I will remind you if you forget.) I thnik if more people understood just what this actually is and means, the conversation would be easier to have.
Any faith (Protestant, Catholic, EO) is ultimately "infallibly" defined by a discerner and authorized by an authority. If it is not, then we are just chasing dust in the wind; we cannot hope to practice a valid faith if we cannot define just what that faith is and how it is practiced.
So having defined "infallible" in a context of an understanding of "true and valid faith", the question most really have is "discerned by whom" and "authorized by whom". The Protestant playbook on this is that Scripture authorizes faith and that Scripture authorizes itself. To which I challenge - it doesn't, because you have Baptists and you have Pentecostals (for that matter, you have Southern Baptists and Freewill Baptists). Scripture does not define Scripture as the definition of anything cannot contain the definition itself (I can't tell you what a "carrot" is by using a sentence containing the word "carrot"...)
So to say that a notion of infallibility does not exist in Protestant faith is to play delusional deniability in my opinion. If your faith is not infallibly defined, then it is not absolute, but relative - relative to the discernment of the faithful, and indivdual gifts.
More on that later. I am waiting to see how Benedict deals with the American Church - which provides enormous fincial support, while enjoying a degree of latitude not enjoyed anywhere else in the world. I am wondering if the hammer is going to fall. My bet is - no.
By the way, did anybody see Bill Maher's prologue about the Catholic Church after his show last week? Holy smokes...it was really something.
_____________________________
I, then, urge you to live in a manner worthy of the call you have received, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another through love, striving to preserve the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/14/2008 7:00:16 PM
|
|
|
Zhi
Posts: 1063
Joined: 7/31/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
So having defined "infallible" in a context of an understanding of "true and valid faith", the question most really have is "discerned by whom" and "authorized by whom". The Protestant playbook on this is that Scripture authorizes faith and that Scripture authorizes itself. To which I challenge - it doesn't, because you have Baptists and you have Pentecostals (for that matter, you have Southern Baptists and Freewill Baptists). Scripture does not define Scripture as the definition of anything cannot contain the definition itself (I can't tell you what a "carrot" is by using a sentence containing the word "carrot"...)
I am not sure what you mean by this.
Most of the differences in denominations have to do with differences in worship styles and church organization, not in differences in actual faith. The vast majority of Protestants still believe that the other types of Protestants are, for the most part, going to Heaven and real churches. Many of the denominations are even interchangeable. As such, they are basically no different from the various sects and rites within the Catholic church.
Scripture does not define scripture, scripture defines Christianity and the practice thereof. Just as "well, we just do it that way, it's tradition, disregard the manual" is a bad thing to hear from the people running a nuclear power plant, I would think it's a bad way to hear from people running a religion.
_____________________________
The optimist says the glass is half full. The pessimist says the glass is half empty. The engineer says the glass is twice as large as it needs to be.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/14/2008 7:20:11 PM
|
|
|
Papa-san
Posts: 730
Joined: 4/12/2006
Status: offline
|
If you are going to claim infallibility you need to make sure that when you show up for that soccer game, you haven't brought your bat and mitt! lol Heck, papal infallibility seems closer to showing up to a soccer game with a broken wood splitter! sheesh!
_____________________________
"Discernment demands that we should hold biblical convictions with the most fervent tenacity" John MacArthur
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/15/2008 3:37:22 AM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 5030
Status: offline
|
quote:
The Protestant playbook on this is that Scripture authorizes faith and that Scripture authorizes itself. To which I challenge - it doesn't, because...... To which I ask: Is there a God? Has He revealed Himself? Has He established a church? Is that church an infallible teacher? Is private judgment a blind leader? Which of all pretended churches is the true one? Every one of these questions evidently must be settled in the Private Judgment of the inquirer, before he can, rationally or irrationally, give up his private judgment to the direction of the self-asserting church.
RC appeals to Scripture to prove that Scripture cannot be understood, and they address arguments to the private judgment of men to prove that private judgment is incompetent. Thereby basing an argument upon that which it is the object of the argument to prove is baseless.
quote:
So having defined "infallible" in a context of an understanding of "true and valid faith", the question most really have is "discerned by whom" and "authorized by whom". So how does RC prove its infallible self? Can it provide an infallible external confirmation which is a prerequisite for any claim to "know for sure" that a chosen ultimate authority is the correct one?
quote:
So to say that a notion of infallibility does not exist in Protestant faith is to play delusional deniability in my opinion. The only one playing the "delusional deniability" game is you. Biblical Protestants do claim Scripture is the only infallible voice in the church. They fully understand, though, that there is no body of men who are either qualified, or authorized, to interpret the Scriptures, or apply their principles to the decision of particular questions, in a sense binding upon the faith of their fellow Christians.
1. The Scriptures always speak in the name of God, and command faith and obedience.
2. Christ and his apostles always refer to the written Scriptures, then existing, as authority, and to no other rule of faith whatsoever.--Luke 16:29; 10:26; John 5:39; Rom. 4:3;2 Tim. 3:15.
3. The Bereans are commended for bringing all questions, even apostolic teaching, to this test.--Acts 17:11; see also Isa. 8:16.
4. Christ rebukes the Pharisees for adding to and perverting the Scriptures.--Matt. 15:7-9; Mark 7:5-8; see also Rev. 22:18, 19, and Deut. 4:2; 12:32; Josh. 1:7.
Religion is essentially a personal matter. Each Christian must know and believe the truth explicitly for himself; on the direct ground of its own moral and spiritual evidence, and not on the mere ground of blind authority. Otherwise faith could not be a moral act, nor could it "purify the heart." Faith derives its sanctifying power from the truth which it immediately apprehends on its own experimental evidence.--John 17:17, 19; James 1:18; 1 Pet. 1:22. AA Hodge
_____________________________
"We do not have a single sentence that is authoritatively from the Lord, outside of what is in the written word of the New Testament. To appeal to a tradition for authority when Holy God did not give it is futile."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/15/2008 3:49:17 AM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 5030
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Zhi
Most of the differences in denominations have to do with differences in worship styles and church organization, not in differences in actual faith. The vast majority of Protestants still believe that the other types of Protestants are, for the most part, going to Heaven and real churches. Many of the denominations are even interchangeable. As such, they are basically no different from the various sects and rites within the Catholic church. Absolutely true. Bible Protestants, in spite of all their circumstantial differences, are, to a wonderful degree, agreed upon the essentials of faith and practice. We can see this even in their hymns and devotional literature.
_____________________________
"We do not have a single sentence that is authoritatively from the Lord, outside of what is in the written word of the New Testament. To appeal to a tradition for authority when Holy God did not give it is futile."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/15/2008 4:01:58 AM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 5030
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Papa-san
If you are going to claim infallibility you need to make sure that when you show up for that soccer game, you haven't brought your bat and mitt! lol Heck, papal infallibility seems closer to showing up to a soccer game with a broken wood splitter! sheesh!
There can be no infallibility where there is no self-consistency. But as a matter of fact RC has not been self-consistent in its teaching. It has taught different doctrines in different sections and ages. It affirms the infallibility of Scripture, and at the same time teaches a system plainly and radically inconsistent with their manifest sense - the doctrines of the priesthood, the mass, penance, of works, and its Marian cult.
_____________________________
"We do not have a single sentence that is authoritatively from the Lord, outside of what is in the written word of the New Testament. To appeal to a tradition for authority when Holy God did not give it is futile."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/15/2008 9:34:00 AM
|
|
|
Soxfan
Posts: 1558
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Connecticut
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Doghouse
quote:
They don't have a leader that oversees the world's largest child exploitation ring.
So, just what are you saying here...that the Protestants have the largest child exploitation ring, and they don't need a leader for that? (Go back and read your post)
I wouldn't know...I am not a Protestant
_____________________________
"This would be the first step in apostasy; men first forget the true, and then adore the false.".......C.H. Spurgeon
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/15/2008 10:11:48 AM
|
|
|
Papa-san
Posts: 730
Joined: 4/12/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
quote:
Every one of these questions evidently must be settled in the Private Judgment of the inquirer, before he can, rationally or irrationally, give up his private judgment to the direction of the self-asserting church. Ideally, this would happen. Unfortunately, way too many people just blindly follow those who have gone before... This is the 'Lemming' effect I have spoken of before. You are only going to find this 'private judgment' in persons who were either taught effectively, or who know that what they currently have is failing them...
quote:
...
quote:
So having defined "infallible" in a context of an understanding of "true and valid faith", the question most really have is "discerned by whom" and "authorized by whom". This doesn't come into question when the following is blind. It only begins to be asked after the quest for truth has begun. In the case of th "E-C" Christian, (Those who show up at a Mass on Easter and Christmas - Like a significant number of the Catholics I worked with at St. Jerome Hospital) it doesn't matter who 'authorized' anything. It simply has to be right because "Mom-n-Dad believed it". Nobody would even think about the fact that 'Mom-n-Dad' never thought to question it, nor their parents, grandparents, and on, and on... Where there is no spiritual discernment (instituted by teaching) there is no need to move forward... Hence the 'Lemming Factor'. Yet they'll defend the pope as their infallible leader, even though they have no clue how far from the teachings of Christ and His apostles that this 'leadership' has moved. They have no clue that they were failed by popes LONG ago... That's the secret of the longevity of the RCC... Blind followership because they haven't been exposed to the truth...quote:
The only one playing the "delusional deniability" game is you. Biblical Protestants do claim Scripture is the only infallible voice in the church. They fully understand, though, that there is no body of men who are either qualified, or authorized, to interpret the Scriptures, or apply their principles to the decision of particular questions, in a sense binding upon the faith of their fellow Christians. From Papa-san: (Because scripture specifically states that understanding of the scriptures will come from the Holy Spirit... NOT the pope!)
1. The Scriptures always speak in the name of God, and command faith and obedience.
2. Christ and his apostles always refer to the written Scriptures, then existing, as authority, and to no other rule of faith whatsoever.--Luke 16:29; 10:26; John 5:39; Rom. 4:3;2 Tim. 3:15.
3. The Bereans are commended for bringing all questions, even apostolic teaching, to this test.--Acts 17:11; see also Isa. 8:16.
4. Christ rebukes the Pharisees for adding to and perverting the Scriptures.--Matt. 15:7-9; Mark 7:5-8; see also Rev. 22:18, 19, and Deut. 4:2; 12:32; Josh. 1:7. AMEN!
< Message edited by Papa-san -- 4/15/2008 10:25:22 AM >
_____________________________
"Discernment demands that we should hold biblical convictions with the most fervent tenacity" John MacArthur
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/15/2008 10:21:21 AM
|
|
|
Odeliya
Posts: 3110
Joined: 8/10/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mannamuncher
The American Catholic Church is diverse.
According to polls taken recently, the stance
of many RC is not very RC. With dissent over
euthanasia, stem cell research, death penalty,
commumion, confession, baptism, unity both
within and without, and the question of papal
authority, the cry of individualism rings loudly.
Cafeteria catholics ? That is what i hear EWTN complains and individual catholics and priests, that there is no doctrinal unity.
_____________________________
Don't tell me what to do and I won't tell you were you should go.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/15/2008 10:31:57 AM
|
|
|
Odeliya
Posts: 3110
Joined: 8/10/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Soxfan
I wouldn't know...I am not a Protestant
cant resist the urge to gossip:
I tried fighting this one big time, but to catholic brethren all, who are not catholics are Protestants. Not that i mind be called that at all - just don't call me late for dinner
- but the fact remains...
I never quite got that one, but agree to disagree with CCs ...
_____________________________
Don't tell me what to do and I won't tell you were you should go.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/15/2008 10:38:53 AM
|
|
|
Odeliya
Posts: 3110
Joined: 8/10/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
More on that later. I am waiting to see how Benedict deals with the American Church - which provides enormous fincial support, while enjoying a degree of latitude not enjoyed anywhere else in the world. I am wondering if the hammer is going to fall. My bet is - no.
Elaborate , DH. I am interested to hear the position on this from Catholic brothers,
Generally, to me as a layperson and non Cath, I dont quite understand why JP2 is seen superior to Benedict?
Is our culture that Hollywood based and cinema/television culture brainwashed ? Do we really value celebrities more then substance?
quote:
By the way, did anybody see Bill Maher's prologue about the Catholic Church after his show last week? Holy smokes...it was really something.
What did he say? He generally have a dirtiest mouth, i wouldt take that to heart. Not that i am a quiet one, but he and Sarah Silverman makes me feel ashamed of my nationality..
_____________________________
Don't tell me what to do and I won't tell you were you should go.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/15/2008 10:41:57 AM
|
|
|
Odeliya
Posts: 3110
Joined: 8/10/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Is our culture that Hollywood based and cinema/television culture brainwashed ? Do we really value celebrities more then substance?
Duuh. Why did the Terminator got elected , you think?
_____________________________
Don't tell me what to do and I won't tell you were you should go.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/15/2008 10:53:18 AM
|
|
|
Odeliya
Posts: 3110
Joined: 8/10/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Is private judgment a blind leader? Which of all pretended churches is the true one? Every one of these questions evidently must be settled in the Private Judgment of the inquirer, before he can, rationally or irrationally, give up his private judgment to the direction of the self-asserting church.
Oh, K-man,do i love you. once we get you going and angry enough, you just produce priceless things, God bless you. YES, that is it !!
quote:
RC appeals to Scripture to prove that Scripture cannot be understood, and they address arguments to the private judgment of men to prove that private judgment is incompetent. Thereby basing an argument upon that which it is the object of the argument to prove is baseless.
Sure, that's the whole point.
quote:
Religion is essentially a personal matter. Each Christian must know and believe the truth explicitly for himself; on the direct ground of its own moral and spiritual evidence, and not on the mere ground of blind authority. Otherwise faith could not be a moral act, nor could it "purify the heart." Faith derives its sanctifying power from the truth which it immediately apprehends on its own experimental evidence.--John 17:17, 19; James 1:18; 1 Pet. 1:22. AA Hodge
Amen again.
DH, to me it looks like if CC were to denounce the infallibiliy they would help themselves majorly. Because humans can not be infallible in doctrine, only God. PEople would really start warming up to CC, if it admits that it can make doctrinal mistakes...
When we asked why popes of the 2,3 cent. are different from recent Popes, i was told by you, btw: " Why should I care what the Pope from the 3 century said? He is not the boss of me now!" THat is very honest and commandable of you
You actually admitted that Pope was wrong, damning non catholic brothers and sisters, naming them heretics, etc.
- which words, translated from BS to English, mean : "catholic elitism in it's purest form" SOme popes were really godly men. SOme were real donkeys. Why not distinguish and honeslty admit that we humans are not and can not be infallible in our doctrines?
< Message edited by Odeliya -- 4/15/2008 11:05:44 AM >
_____________________________
Don't tell me what to do and I won't tell you were you should go.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/15/2008 11:23:19 AM
|
|
|
mcleod
Posts: 774
Joined: 4/4/2006
Status: offline
|
Doghouse you wrote this;
quote:
Any faith (Protestant, Catholic, EO) is ultimately "infallibly" defined by a discerner and authorized by an authority. If it is not, then we are just chasing dust in the wind; we cannot hope to practice a valid faith if we cannot define just what that faith is and how it is practiced.
So having defined "infallible" in a context of an understanding of "true and valid faith", the question most really have is "discerned by whom" and "authorized by whom". The Protestant playbook on this is that Scripture authorizes faith and that Scripture authorizes itself. To which I challenge - it doesn't, because you have Baptists and you have Pentecostals (for that matter, you have Southern Baptists and Freewill Baptists). Scripture does not define Scripture as the definition of anything cannot contain the definition itself (I can't tell you what a "carrot" is by using a sentence containing the word "carrot"...)
So to say that a notion of infallibility does not exist in Protestant faith is to play delusional deniability in my opinion. If your faith is not infallibly defined, then it is not absolute, but relative - relative to the discernment of the faithful, and indivdual gifts.
This sounds like one of your brethern talking on EWTN channel. That all people who disagree with them are heretics.
Sounds like the trash your fore fathers or popes were saying and were KILLING other people whom they called heretics. Is it not true that in the 1500's and 1600's your religion would go on manhunts and try to find somone who disagreed with your church statements and have them put to death.
This was not taught by Jesus, Peter, and Paul in the new testament writings to have a spirit of that kind. Sounds a lot like the Roman Empire in the day of those fore mention men's lifes. The ways of your church are and still thinks in those ways even today.
This why it is hard for me to believe that the pope wants us to come to the dark side of life.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/15/2008 1:57:37 PM
|
|
|
JesKlu
Posts: 352
Joined: 4/16/2007
Status: offline
|
Hello everyone
Has any one heard that Pope Benedict said that Martin Luther wasn't so bad after all.
Here is the article on times.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article3492299.ece
Any comments?
Your sister in Christ Jesus,
Jessica
_____________________________
And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them and said, "Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/15/2008 1:58:49 PM
|
|
|
Doghouse
Posts: 1144
Joined: 8/25/2007
From: The Buckle of the Bible Belt
Status: offline
|
quote:
This sounds like one of your brethern talking on EWTN channel. That all people who disagree with them are heretics. ...Even I don't watch EWTN...
quote:
This was not taught by Jesus, Peter, and Paul in the new testament writings to have a spirit of that kind. Sounds a lot like the Roman Empire in the day of those fore mention men's lifes. The ways of your church are and still thinks in those ways even today. This would be an opinion that one could have, I suppose. It doesn't mean it has authority, or rings of truth.
_____________________________
I, then, urge you to live in a manner worthy of the call you have received, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another through love, striving to preserve the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/15/2008 2:13:11 PM
|
|
|
Doghouse
Posts: 1144
Joined: 8/25/2007
From: The Buckle of the Bible Belt
Status: offline
|
quote:
Every one of these questions evidently must be settled in the Private Judgment of the inquirer, before he can, rationally or irrationally, give up his private judgment to the direction of the self-asserting church. Uhhh...amen to this.
Completely true - the individual must make a decision as to the authority in which trust will be placed.
So - I then question the authority chosen by many on this website - described by some as "Scriptural", but ultimately being "self-discernment of Scriptures". The only thing I have to know in my choice of this authority for my faith is that I have trained my whole life for the vocation in which I currently find myself, and this vocation is not discerning Scriptures, while noting that there are those who have dedicated their entire lives to this vocation and pursuit, and I am subjecting myself to the authority of their learning and their wisdom, just like they do to me when dealing with something within my vocation (we don't see Priests on airplanes jumping up and taking the controls out the hands of the pilot, do we...?)
When we fly in a plane - we realize that the pilot has been trained and prepared to deal with anything that might have to do with the plane while we are flying. We trust the airline and the FAA who tells us that this total stranger is fit to fly us from city to city. So - we are capable of submitting to authority.
But somehow - when it comes to faith - everybody is the pilot. Regardless of the amount of training, the amount of simulator hours, the tests taken, etc., anybody can hop behind the controls, fire up the plane - and fly.
_____________________________
I, then, urge you to live in a manner worthy of the call you have received, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another through love, striving to preserve the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Why do we need a Pope? - 4/15/2008 2:15:57 PM
|
|
|
Doghouse
Posts: 1144
Joined: 8/25/2007
From: The Buckle of the Bible Belt
Status: offline
|
quote:
DH, to me it looks like if CC were to denounce the infallibiliy they would help themselves majorly. Christianity would be a lot easier if someone were to denounce charity, as well.
I'll get back to you on your two sets of questions - I have some things to say about infallibility. I just don't think this is being explained correctly or received correctly.
quote:
RC appeals to Scripture to prove that Scripture cannot be understood, and they address arguments to the private judgment of men to prove that private judgment is incompetent. Thereby basing an argument upon that which it is the object of the argument to prove is baseless. The RC appeals to empirical evidence to prove that some Scripture cannot be understood by some people. That some of these people would set themselves up as authoritative teachers and pastoral leaders over others, and mislead them as well - is what gets people labled as "heretics". There was some empirical evidence of the fallacy of self-discernment before the Reformation - now there is oodles of it (snake handing and poison drinking...remember a few posts back...).
This is the fault of congregants as much as anybody. I again would cite the airplane example - how many people would climb aboard a plane with a pilot certified by the FAA and Delta airlines, and how many would climb aborad a plane with a guy in pilot hat certified by nobody?
Apparently - many are comfortable with flying in the plane piloted by a guy with no pedigree. We can talk about degrees of pedigree or authority, I suppose (a PhD from a top seminary has to be more authoritative than a guy who didn't finish the tenth grade in the local school system...)
< Message edited by Doghouse -- 4/15/2008 2:29:21 PM >
_____________________________
I, then, urge you to live in a manner worthy of the call you have received, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another through love, striving to preserve the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
