S
SteveGC
Guest
And not only the readings, but the ENTIRE Mass is biblical.
- Status
N
nlm
Guest
Hello James, Thank you for your comments and challenging discussion.My definition of “reasonable” is to find an answer based on scripture.After all, we are dealing with matters of faith. The scripture I am referring to is the Bible I had at the time, the Bible of Jerusalem. I considered myself a good catholic and yes, these things did create much confusion for me as I am a product of the 60’s and early 70’s you refer to. All I would have expected were answers which would have started with," See, Scripture says…Like most laypersons in any denomination I was not and am not an expert in scripture. I respect that your experience as a protestant saw “making it fit” happen.I have to honestly say, to date I have not.I have been protestant for 6 years.May I ask how long your were? No, I have not seen the new Catachism. It has obviously improved greatly. I do not believe that having scripture explained to you is being spoon fed. One has to believe in purgatory for that priest’s explanation to make sense. I do not. You mention that to your knowledge, all catholic beliefs can be supported by scripture. May I then ask for biblical references from the catholic bible for the following: The existence of limbo and purgatory. The necessity for Priestly celibacy and the ineligibility of women to be ordained to the Priesthood.have a good day. NLM
S
SteveGC
Guest
Hi nlm…
Based on which interpretation of Scripture? Your own? If so, what were the origins of that interpretation you possess? And how can you guarantee it’s veracity to yourself, such that it now enables it to be your litmus test for your acceptance, or denial, of all future theologies you are exposed to?
C
CWBetts
Guest
It is generally not acceptible to “prrof text” and pull a single verse out of context, but rather look at overarching themes and see how the Scriptureds work together. That being said, there are no Biblical occurances of ordained women. Jesus ordained the APostles who were all men, so I would then ask for your precedent for the ordination of women. Priestly celibacy is a practice, and not a dogma, and therefore can change. But in Lukes’s Gospel, Jesus speaks about “eunuchs for the Kingdom” this could be taken as an endorsement (though not a command) for priestly celibacy. At any rate there are some married priests in the Latin Rite, and I believe the Eastern Rites allow married priests, but only for those who were married before ordination. Limbo was never dogmaticly defined. Purgatory is inferred by numerous passages that speak of the faithful being judged by their works. Also it is inferred in Revelation that nothing impure can enter heaven, which would indicate the necessity for a purifiaction process for those of us who have not obtaind saintly perfection in this life.
N
nlm
Guest
No not my own. I was given a copy of the" Bible of Jerusalem" when I was a Catholic. THAT was my point of reference I keep referring to and where I kept looking for answers. Was I wrong in looking there? Should I have been directed to another interpretation?NLM
D
davidv
Guest
I think you are confusing translation with interpretation.
Interpretation is what you do every time you read words or hear speach. Interpretation is finding the meaning in the words. So the question is, how can you be sure that you derived that correct meaning from the words you read?
S
SteveGC
Guest
Yes, this was my point. interpretation…not translation. thanks davidv.
N
nlm
Guest
Not being an expert in any of this and having been even less of an expert a few years ago when I was questionning all of this, I consulted the priests and religious leaders of the various catholic churches I attended when the questions came up and during the times when I wrestled with much of this.I knew enough however to recognize my inability to " interprete" the “translation” of the Bible I was reading.NLM
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
NLM: I appreciate all the time you spent responding to my question about so many conversions.
Your response to me started quite a discussion. The dialogue between you—as a Catholic turned Protestant–and Catholic Forum Members is very interesting. I want to follow the discussion for awhile, if you don’t mind.
Anna
P
PJM
Guest
***So friend when Jesus Christ said in John 3: verse 5 "***Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. Mk.16:16 “16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.” ******
***So “A” Jesus didn’t understand what He was saying?
“B” Jesus was just kidding?
“C” It does not mean what it say’s?
“D” Hmmmmm, maybe I was wrong about the “womb thing?”
***Love and prayers friend
J
JRKH
Guest
The answer to your question is “Yes”. A person outside of the Catholic Church can have a valid “Spirit Led Journey and interpretation of the Bible”.
Now let me ask you one back.
Can multiple persons who have a valid “Spirit Led Journey and interpretation of The Bible” and come to different and conflicting conclusions on matters of faith and morals?
Peace
James
N
nlm
Guest
My answer to that is as follows. No, I am not an expert but a humble pilgrim here on earth. MY experience in the Catholic Church, a 50 year experience was not a good one for many reasons.I am not the first person to leave the Catholic Church nor will I be the last. I am quite certain that many who profess to be Catholic simply sit in the pews and listen. I at least stopped living a lie and did something about it. If I am wrong with my choice, I will be accountable no one else. I can tell you I am very happy where I am now. Living a lie I believe is worse than moving on. Let me ask you this. Am I correct that the Catholic Church forbids the use of birthcontrol pills? If I am, then why are so many Catholic women on it? Is this living a lie. Have you noticed how few people go to confession, but still go to communion? Is that living a lie? I could go on but i won’t. I look forward to you reply.NLM
J
JRKH
Guest
As was I a product of that time. Looking back on it I can’t believe how poorly we were educated in our faith. I can understand your confusion. However, that being said, a priest or preacher simply pointing to a scripture and saying that is why we believe this or that isn’t always the best answer either. Just look at all of the varying beliefs in Protestantism and all “based no scripture”. Consider for instance that the very belief system that promoted Sola Scriptura started out by changing the Bible. It doesn’t matter whether you consider the changes improtant or not, it is the mere fact of the change that rattled me.
I was away from the Church for some 35 years but never did join another specific denomination. I studies the beliefs of many different systems both Christian and non. Finally, after much prayer and reflection I arrived that he inescapable conclusion that I needed to return th the Catholic Church because that is the Church Christ Founded.
Yes it has. It would be well worth your looking at.
Yes, but that also flies in the face of the “Spirit Led” journey of “Me and Thee and the KJV”.
If you are led by The Spirit, why do you need a preacher? If you need a preacher then you automatically submit YOUR will to the interpretation of another.
I see others are addressing these so I will not comment.
Peace
James
P
PJM
Guest
That is not what the very Word of God say’s and teaches!
- Additional biblical support for “One Church” and Primacy of Peter
The “power of the keys” has to do with ecclesiastical discipline and administrative authority with regard to the requirements of the faith, as in Isaiah 22:22 (cf. Is 9:6; Job 12:14; Rev 3:7). From this power flows the use of censures, excommunication, absolution, baptismal discipline, the imposition of penances, and legislative powers. In the Old Testament a steward, or prime minister is a man who is “over a house”
- Mt: 16:19 " whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
- Peter’s name occurs first in all lists of apostles (Mt 10:2; Mk 3:16; Lk 6:14; Acts 1:13). Matthew even calls him the “first” (10:2). Judas Iscariot is invariably mentioned last.
- Peter alone among the apostles receives a new name, “Rock,” solemnly conferred (Jn 1:42: Mt 16:18).
- Peter is regarded by Jesus as the Chief Shepherd after Himself (Jn 21:15-17), singularly by name, and over the universal Church, even though others have a similar but subordinate role (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet 5:2).
- Peter alone among the apostles is mentioned by name as having been prayed for by Jesus Christ in order that his “faith may not fail” (Lk 22:32).
- Peter alone among the apostles is exhorted by Jesus to “strengthen your brethren” (Lk 22:32).
- Peter first confesses Christ’s divinity (Mt 16:16).
- Peter is regarded by the Jews (Acts 4:1-13) as the leader and spokesman of Christianity.
- Peter is specified by an angel as the leader and representative of the apostles (Mk 16:7).
- Peter leads the apostles in fishing (Jn 21:2-3,11). The “bark” (boat) of Peter has been regarded by Catholics as a figure of the Church, with Peter at the helm.
- Peter’s words are the first recorded and most important in the upper room before Pentecost (Acts 1:15-22).
- Peter takes the lead in calling for a replacement for Judas (Acts 1:22).
- Peter is the first person to speak (and only one recorded) after Pentecost, so he was the first Christian to “preach the gospel” in the Church era (Acts 2:14-36).
- Peter works the first miracle of the Church Age, healing a lame man (Acts 3:6-12).
- Peter utters the first anathema (Ananias and Sapphira) emphatically affirmed by God (Acts 5:2-11)!
- Peter is the first person after Christ to raise the dead (Acts 9:40).
- Cornelius is told by an angel to seek Peter for instruction in Christianity (Acts 10:1-6).
- Peter is the first to receive the Gentiles, after a revelation from God (Acts 10:9-48).
- Peter instructs the other apostles on the catholicity (universality) of the Church (Acts 11:5-17).
- Peter is the object of the first divine interposition on behalf of an individual in the Church Age (an angel delivers him from prison - Acts 12:1-17).
- Peter presides over and opens the first Council of Christianity, and lays down principles afterwards accepted by it (Acts 15:7-11).
- Peter is the first to recognize and refute heresy, in Simon Magus (Acts 8:14-24).
- Peter’s name is mentioned more often than all the other disciples put together: 191 times (162 as Peter or Simon Peter, 23 as Simon, and 6 as Cephas). John is next in frequency with only 48 appearances, and Peter is present 50% of the time we find John in the Bible! Archbishop Fulton Sheen reckoned that all the other disciples combined were mentioned 130 times. If this is correct, Peter is named a remarkable 60% of the time any disciple is referred to!
- Peter’s proclamation at Pentecost (Acts 2:14-41) contains a fully authoritative interpretation of Scripture, a doctrinal decision and a disciplinary decree concerning members of the “House of Israel” (2:36) - an example of “binding and loosing.”
- Peter commanded the first Gentile Christians to be baptized (Acts 10:44-48).
- Paul went to Jerusalem specifically to see Peter for fifteen days in the beginning of his ministry (Gal 1:18), and was commissioned by Peter, James and John (Gal 2:9) to preach to the Gentiles.
Note: While the bible does not speak specifically of the “ Chair of Peter,” this term gets it’s origin from “the Chair of Moses,” which EVERYONE KNEW WAS THE “SEAT OF RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY.”
- Peter corrects those who misuse Paul’s writings (2 Pet 3:15-16). ‘In conclusion, it strains credulity to think that God would present St. Peter with such prominence in the Bible, without some meaning and import for later Christian history; in particular, Church government.
A
allhers
Guest
***So friend when Jesus Christ said in John 3: verse 5 "***Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. Mk.16:16 “16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.” ******
***So “A” Jesus didn’t understand what He was saying?
“B” Jesus was just kidding?
“C” It does not mean what it say’s?
“D” Hmmmmm, maybe I was wrong about the “womb thing?”
Love and prayers friend
Good, and this:
Mark 1:9,10
It happened in those days that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized in the Jordan by John.
On coming up out of the water he saw the heavens being torn open and the Spirit, like a
dove, descending upon him.
Another question that needs to be asked is why would Jesus Himself allow St. John the
Baptist to Baptize Him (Jesus), in the Jordan River (which is clearly water), and why, as
the Bible clearly says in Mark chapter 1:9,10 would Jesus be rising up out of the water if
water need not be used?
S
SteveGC
Guest
I respect your honest answer regarding your capacity to interpret Scripture. You acknowledge a fundamental truth, which is that you yourself, like the vast majority of us all, are not gifted with that charism of the Holy Spirit which grants protection from error and the preservation of the one true deposit of faith given by Christ Himself. My suggestion is that you ask yourself the next question, which is…does such a charism exist for some entity on earth? …or are we all just supposed to keep reading the Bible faithfully until we all agree on doctrines of the faith and can perhaps know that we have it right?
As for the remainder of your post above, this speaks to obedience, and not to authenticity of apostolic teaching. If we judge (and choose our discipleship) according to which “school” of Christianity possesses the most obedient members, then not only are we coming to Christianity in an errant way, but we are also running in circles leading nowhere. Authentic apostolic teaching is not influenced by the obedience of its disciples. Teaching is teaching…and it is either 100% accurate (as guided by the Spirit of God) or it is something less than accurate, and in jeopardy of leading souls astray.
T
TristanCross
Guest
The Bible, for example, says nothing about abortion, which is clearly the greatest evil of today, and surely existed in biblical times.
The greatest evil is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.
C
CWBetts
Guest
Judging a religion by the failures of its human participants is in error. I was Baptist in the past. Funadmental Baptists forbid drinkin, yet I knew a great many who drank regularly, often to excess. Does this make Baptist thheology wrong? No. It means that some of its adherants take “liberties” with which strictures they choose to follow. Every faith tradition has those who merely show up on sundays, or worse, only a couple of times a year. (When I was a Baptist, we called them “Two-timers”) What I am getting at is that your search for truth should not be baseed on the garden-variety parishoner (church member, whatever) but on the theology. It is not up to us to determine who is or is not “living a lie”, buit to pray for our fellow CHristians, because we are all at different places on our spiritual journey.
A
allhers
Guest
Jesus founded the Church. One Church. Denominations are not the Church that Jesus founded, they are man made. They may contain parts of the truth, such as the Word of God, Jesus Himself is the Word Himself, but they do not have Jesus Himself, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity as in the Eucharist.
I’ll answer to the rest later, I have to go for now.
- Status