Catechism vs Scripture

[PJM]

lm- Thank you for your comments and challenging 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

***Your base understanding of the bible is vastly incomplete.READ Jn. 20:30-21 and 2 Thess. 1: 15-16, 3: 6-7. and 1 Cor. 11:1.

NOT everything is in the bible. Read Mt. 16:15-19. Key in on the extensive use of singular tense words * keys to THE Kingdom, bind and loose]
This is further supported by Eph. 4: 4-7. Again note the singular use of “one” referencing Christ ONE Catholic Church, One Faith = only ONE set of beliefs!**

**Priestly Celebacy **is NOT a biblical command, is is only accepted practice given by THEE Church to “bind and loose” [make and enforce law] and couls be changed by the Pope.

Womens Ordination is prohibited by the bible. See Mt. 26:26-28, Mk. 14:22-24, Lk. 22:19-21, John Chapter 6, Paul 1 Cor. 11: 23-26. “This IS MY BODY!” This IS MY BLOOD"… Jesus was male gender so only a male can with and through the Holy Spirit make Chrsit REALLY Present.

Reason 2: Ordination is A Sacrament isntituted by Christ and the Church has NO POWER to set it asside.

Reason 3: Sacred Tradition.

Limbo is not a mandatory teaching. Its origin is before the time of Christ on earth, access to heaven was not possible as a consequence of “Orginal Sin.” Then and now there were people worthy of eternal happiness, and eternal damination.

Because God is all and everything good Perfectly, in Divine Justice God could not permit Just souls to suffer, nor could He permit access to Heaven until Christ act of Redeemption. Thus the term “Limbo” was created to describe a place of no suffering, and was used in conjunction with the period of time before Redeemption, and also for “the holy innocents” who may have died before being Baptized, and therefore [Jn.3:5] may??? not be in heaven? Current belief seems to contend that they are.

Purgatory is for those who died with Confessed but remaining effects of necessary retributation of Mortal Sins on their souls.

Mt. 5:48 “You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect” Mt.5:8 " 8"Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God"

Only those who die without unconfessed, unrepented Mortal sin can attain Heaven. Because God is perfect, we must be perfected. That is the reason in Divine Justice and Mercy, God desires as many as possible to get to heaven, created purgatory, a place of purification, a place to be MADE perfect through the Mercy of God.[Jn. 20:21-23, 1 Jn.1:8-10, 1 Jn. 5:15-16]

2 Mac. 12:39 "On the next day, as by that time it had become necessary, Judas and his men went to take up the bodies of the fallen and to bring them back to lie with their kinsmen in the sepulchres of their fathers. Then under the tunic of every one of the dead they found sacred tokens of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. And it became clear to all that this was why these men had fallen. So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous Judge, who reveals the things that are hidden; and they turned to prayer, beseeching that the sin which had been committed might be wholly blotted out. And the noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen.He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably, taking account of the resurrection. For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead.

Sir. 7:33 “33 Give graciously to all the living, and withhold not kindness from the dead.”

Love and prayers,**

 

[Anna_Scott]

Thanks, I hope that after the emotion of their visceral attacks against what Catholics believe that a little seed of light was planted. Some Protestants come here claiming to seek an understanding of the Catholic faith, and when an explanation is given as to why we believe the way that we do, the onslaught begins. We are wrong, we are not following Christ, and how dare we do this or that, or any number of other jabs that they can come up with. The problem is they are not here to learn about the Catholic faith, they are here to “Reform” us. Then it gets heated and when we provide massive amounts of references to refute their fallible interpretations, they drop out, deflect it, change the subject, or obstinately continue in blissful ignorance. Either way, the agenda is based on hatred of what they think the Catholic faith is, and all they want to do is argue and try to tell us how wrong we are. Vivat Jesus! Brother

Is that really how you see Protestants, as having an agenda based on hatred of the Catholic faith, and having a hidden agenda of reforming Catholics?

Anna

 

[wmscott]

Is that really how you see Protestants, as having an agenda based on hatred of the Catholic faith, and having a hidden agenda of reforming Catholics?

Anna

You will notice I said “some Protestants” not all. There are many Protestants here that are here to learn, and although they do not agree with Catholic doctrine, they are none the less respectful and very charitable. As anote, I am a convert, all of my family is Protestant, and all but my sister are quite level headed and respectful of my Catholic faith. My sister on the other hand is very anti-Catholic to the point of being down right hateful and this has caused a massive rift in our relationship.

 

[allhers]

Is that really how you see Protestants, as having an agenda based on hatred of the Catholic faith, and having a hidden agenda of reforming Catholics?

Anna

Certainly not all or even most, but some, unfortunately are like that. We have seen it far too often in our personal lives and on this and other forumns, sadly.

Too often we do much research, sincerely seeking to answer all their questions and then are often smacked up side the head with the Bible and told how wrong we are.

I think it just amazes us over and over since we know who compiled the Bible to begin with and often, those that are like that, often have no clue.

I sure don’t look at you that way, but…it would be good to slow down on the questions until one is fully answered first, some people know the answer off the top of their head, and some research it throughly in order to provide links and documentation for their answers. (credit is due for the answers given when one doesn’t have this information at their fingertips, so to speak.)

By the way, I forget who even asked now, but here is an excellent link:

Apostolic Letter- ORDINATIO SACERDOTALIS-OF JOHN PAUL II, to the Bishops of the CatholicChurch on reserving Priestly ordination to men alone.
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html

 

[SteveGC]

I have a question for Catholic Forum Members:

Do you believe the Holy Spirit speaks to Christians–as individuals–or just to the Pope or other Catholic leaders?

I believe the Spirit speaks to everyone…not even just Chrisitians, and certainly not just the Pope. It is the Spirit that leads one to Christ. It is baptism that infuses the Spirit in one’s soul, making us adopted children of God.

However, the origins of the Holy Spirit’s presence on earth points to the Church, because the Apostles were the first designated leaders of the Church, and with Christ’s breath, they received the Spirit. And so, the entire world is capable of interacting with the Spirit because He came through the Church. (The Church is the conduit of the Spirit…He comes into the world through the Church, but is not limited to Her faithful members).

Being unified with the Church, He provides protection of the Truth which comes forth from Christ through the Church. This preservation is unique to the Church, and exists nowhere else. Hence, if a non-Catholic Christian community mimics the teaching of the Catholic Church, it is not so much due to the influence or protection by the Spirit, but rather a Catholic Church influence which has successfully been promulgated within the origins and history of that community. In this way, a non-Catholic community can “possess” some absolute truths of Christ’s teachings, but in an imperfect way…and certainly not in a protected way.

The Spirit does help us interpret Scripture…in a certain limited sense. He helps us acquire understanding and application of doctrines that have already been revealed to the Church…called the sacred deposit of faith. If we attempt to discern (or discover) doctrine on our own from a prayerful reading of Scripture, our success is not guaranteed, and indeed we are quite apt to be led astray…not because it’s based on our level of faith, but because nothing is hidden within the pages of Scripture, waiting to be revealed…it has already been revealed 2000 years ago. That’s why the authentic way of approaching Scripture is through the authentic framework and lens of genuine apostolic teaching…preserved and protected by the Spirit. In approaching it in this way, one can most fully and appropriately be guided by the Spirit through Scripture to grow in spiritual wisdom and strength on the path to sainthood and salvation.

 

[Philthy]

My question regards how Catholics view the scriptures, catechisms, and other church teachings/documents.

 

[nlm]

***Your base understanding of the bible is vastly incomplete.READ Jn. 20:30-21 and 2 Thess. 1: 15-16, 3: 6-7. and 1 Cor. 11:1.

NOT everything is in the bible. Read Mt. 16:15-19. Key in on the extensive use of singular tense words * keys to THE Kingdom, bind and loose]
This is further supported by Eph. 4: 4-7. Again note the singular use of “one” referencing Christ ONE Catholic Church, One Faith = only ONE set of beliefs!****

**Priestly Celebacy **is NOT a biblical command, is is only accepted practice given by THEE Church to “bind and loose” [make and enforce law] and couls be changed by the Pope.

Womens Ordination is prohibited by the bible. See Mt. 26:26-28, Mk. 14:22-24, Lk. 22:19-21, John Chapter 6, Paul 1 Cor. 11: 23-26. “This IS MY BODY!” This IS MY BLOOD"… Jesus was male gender so only a male can with and through the Holy Spirit make Chrsit REALLY Present.

Reason 2: Ordination is A Sacrament isntituted by Christ and the Church has NO POWER to set it asside.

Reason 3: Sacred Tradition.

Limbo is not a mandatory teaching. Its origin is before the time of Christ on earth, access to heaven was not possible as a consequence of “Orginal Sin.” Then and now there were people worthy of eternal happiness, and eternal damination.

Because God is all and everything good Perfectly, in Divine Justice God could not permit Just souls to suffer, nor could He permit access to Heaven until Christ act of Redeemption. Thus the term “Limbo” was created to describe a place of no suffering, and was used in conjunction with the period of time before Redeemption, and also for “the holy innocents” who may have died before being Baptized, and therefore [Jn.3:5] may??? not be in heaven? Current belief seems to contend that they are.

Purgatory is for those who died with Confessed but remaining effects of necessary retributation of Mortal Sins on their souls.

Mt. 5:48 “You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect” Mt.5:8 " 8"Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God"

Only those who die without unconfessed, unrepented Mortal sin can attain Heaven. Because God is perfect, we must be perfected. That is the reason in Divine Justice and Mercy, God desires as many as possible to get to heaven, created purgatory, a place of purification, a place to be MADE perfect through the Mercy of God.[Jn. 20:21-23, 1 Jn.1:8-10, 1 Jn. 5:15-16]

2 Mac. 12:39 "On the next day, as by that time it had become necessary, Judas and his men went to take up the bodies of the fallen and to bring them back to lie with their kinsmen in the sepulchres of their fathers. Then under the tunic of every one of the dead they found sacred tokens of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. And it became clear to all that this was why these men had fallen. So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous Judge, who reveals the things that are hidden; and they turned to prayer, beseeching that the sin which had been committed might be wholly blotted out. And the noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen.He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably, taking account of the resurrection. For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead.

Sir. 7:33 “33 Give graciously to all the living, and withhold not kindness from the dead.”

Love and prayers,
Mt 16:19 can be the explanation for everything the church decides. You are using it here to explain celibate priests.I have heard it used in conjunction with confession and forgiving or not forgiving sins.This must be THE most important passage in the entire Bible.
I looked at your references concerning women priests.They all tell of the institution of the Eucharist. I have difficulty believing that the Holy Spirit which permits a man to make," Christ really present" could not do the same via a women. In my opinion the person, male or female, is simply the instrument used by the Holy Spirit to cause the transubstantiation to occur.Your references speak of the last supper of course. It would be interesting to know if by chance any women may have been present for that last meal. That would mean when Jesus said to do this in memory of Him, He would have been speaking to women as well as men. Interesting thought.
The explanation for Limbo is interesting.The Limbo I speak of is the Limbo of infants. It may not have been a, " Mandatory" teaching of the church but it was non the less a teaching of the church.AS far back as the early 1900’s and in the 1960’s the church taught that infants who died without baptism went to Limbo,"… and were shut out from life everlasting which consists essentially in the vision of God face to face.This has been defined by several councils." Sounds as though it was the teaching of the church if it was defined by ," several councils". One of my aunts loss 4 infant sons who were stillborn.No opportunity for them to be baptised. The priest explained to her that her children were in Limbo.She still cries over the fact they will NEVER be in heaven.She cannot understand what they did wrong.What would warrant them being punished in this way. It is very difficult for a parent to accept such a thing.NLM

 

[Anna_Scott]

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

I’ve been looking back over the posts on this Thread.

I’ve received some very helpful insights into the Catholic faith from Catholic Forum Members, and other Christians, as well. I’ve even changed some of my ideas, as a result of discussions on the Forums.

I am studying Church history, acknowledging that this is an area lacking in much of the Protestant Sector. I do realize that many Catholic Forum Members spend a great deal of effort explaining the beliefs of the Catholic Church and the importance of “tradition” in the interpretation of Scripture. I am very grateful for your efforts, and I weigh them very carefully. I have received many excellent suggestions regarding books and links-all very helpful.

But—(there is always a “but”) there is something I have noticed on this Thread that does concern me–some of the responses to NLM seem less than “charitable,” less than “compassionate.”

I can understand that Catholics would not agree with NLM’s decision to leave the Catholic Church, and would understandably disagree with his view of doctrines, Scripture, Church authority, etc.

Yet, as I read ***some ***of your responses to NLM, and the obvious tone of those responses, my first impression was, “Wow. They’re not giving this guy much incentive to return to the Catholic Church.” This was my immediate, “gut” reaction–which, subsequently, caused me to take a few steps back, myself.

I think NLM is truly seeking God. I, also, think that if we read between the lines, it is clear that some of his posts, are less about disagreeing with Catholicism, and more about working through his decision to leave the Catholic Church and experience Christianity from an entirely different viewpoint. It takes a lot of courage to change religions mid-life. You can see by his posts that he has gone through some bad experiences. Some of you say that he should not judge the Church based on experiences with people. I agree–in theory.

At the same time, I ask that you not discard the human element here. I know what it is like to have bad, even traumatic experiences in a Church. I went through some things with a Church a few years back, that nearly drove me away from organized religion altogether.

In theory, I should not have reacted that way. Yet, some experiences strike us on such a deep level, that it is hard to imagine recovering from the hurt or the state of discouragement–much less imagine continuing in the Church associated with the bad experience.

NLM: please correct me if I have misunderstood your writing-especially in “reading between the lines.” Know that I am praying for you and your journey. I hope that you will not be discouraged by anything that any of us have said in our responses to you. I pray that God will lead you to become the person He created you to be, and that you will walk with the Lord–holding fast to His commandments–whether your remain in the Protestant Sector or return to the Catholic Church (I am in no way trying to proselytize.)

For all of us, I pray that we will love one another, as we are called by God to do; and that our discussions will continue in compassion and respect.

I remain grateful to participate in the Catholic Forums,
Anna

 

[nlm]

I’ve been looking back over the posts on this Thread.

I’ve received some very helpful insights into the Catholic faith from Catholic Forum Members, and other Christians, as well. I’ve even changed some of my ideas, as a result of discussions on the Forums.

I am studying Church history, acknowledging that this is an area lacking in much of the Protestant Sector. I do realize that many Catholic Forum Members spend a great deal of effort explaining the beliefs of the Catholic Church and the importance of “tradition” in the interpretation of Scripture. I am very grateful for your efforts, and I weigh them very carefully. I have received many excellent suggestions regarding books and links-all very helpful.

But—(there is always a “but”) there is something I have noticed on this Thread that does concern me–some of the responses to NLM seem less than “charitable,” less than “compassionate.”

I can understand that Catholics would not agree with NLM’s decision to leave the Catholic Church, and would understandably disagree with his view of doctrines, Scripture, Church authority, etc.

Yet, as I read ***some ***of your responses to NLM, and the obvious tone of those responses, my first impression was, “Wow. They’re not giving this guy much incentive to return to the Catholic Church.” This was my immediate, “gut” reaction–which, subsequently, caused me to take a few steps back, myself.

I think NLM is truly seeking God. I, also, think that if we read between the lines, it is clear that some of his posts, are less about disagreeing with Catholicism, and more about working through his decision to leave the Catholic Church and experience Christianity from an entirely different viewpoint. It takes a lot of courage to change religions mid-life. You can see by his posts that he has gone through some bad experiences. Some of you say that he should not judge the Church based on experiences with people. I agree–in theory.

At the same time, I ask that you not discard the human element here. I know what it is like to have bad, even traumatic experiences in a Church. I went through some things with a Church a few years back, that nearly drove me away from organized religion altogether.

In theory, I should not have reacted that way. Yet, some experiences strike us on such a deep level, that it is hard to imagine recovering from the hurt or the state of discouragement–much less imagine continuing in the Church associated with the bad experience.

NLM: please correct me if I have misunderstood your writing-especially in “reading between the lines.” Know that I am praying for you and your journey. I hope that you will not be discouraged by anything that any of us have said in our responses to you. I pray that God will lead you to become the person He created you to be, and that you will walk with the Lord–holding fast to His commandments–whether your remain in the Protestant Sector or return to the Catholic Church (I am in no way trying to proselytize.)

For all of us, I pray that we will love one another, as we are called by God to do; and that our discussions will continue in compassion and respect.

I remain grateful to participate in the Catholic Forums,
Anna

There is NO question in my mind that your comments were inspired by the Holy Spirit. Your comments indeed reflect my situation.Let me tell you that I spent some time wrestling with the question of would I or would I not return to organized religion. During that “wrestle” I loss a friend, not a close friend but a friend none the less. I decided to attend his funeral. I had to ask someone where that particular church was located as I had never heard of it. Although I was not hit by lightning nor did anything miraculous occur, I left that service knowing it was the answer to my prayers as to what should I do in terms of my journey. I have now been a member of that church for 6 years. God does indeed work in mysterious ways. He used my friend’s death to guide me where He wanted me. I have NEVER been happier nor more peaceful within.For some reason I have not been surprised by the tone of SOME of the responses to my questions.It is the same reaction I have experienced here. Anna, thank you for your Christian approach to all this. He REALLY has used you to enlighten others on the forum.I will also tell you that in a few weeks I will become a Commissioned Lay Person( similar to a Deacon) dealing with Visitation of the sick and shut in within our church.God bless.NLM

 

[allhers]

Mt 16:19 can be the explanation for everything the church decides. You are using it here to explain celibate priests.I have heard it used in conjunction with confession and forgiving or not forgiving sins.This must be THE most important passage in the entire Bible.
I looked at your references concerning women priests.They all tell of the institution of the Eucharist. I have difficulty believing that the Holy Spirit which permits a man to make," Christ really present" could not do the same via a women. In my opinion the person, male or female, is simply the instrument used by the Holy Spirit to cause the transubstantiation to occur.Your references speak of the last supper of course. It would be interesting to know if by chance any women may have been present for that last meal. That would mean when Jesus said to do this in memory of Him, He would have been speaking to women as well as men. Interesting thought.
The explanation for Limbo is interesting.The Limbo I speak of is the Limbo of infants. It may not have been a, " Mandatory" teaching of the church but it was non the less a teaching of the church.AS far back as the early 1900’s and in the 1960’s the church taught that infants who died without baptism went to Limbo,"… and were shut out from life everlasting which consists essentially in the vision of God face to face.This has been defined by several councils." Sounds as though it was the teaching of the church if it was defined by ," several councils". One of my aunts loss 4 infant sons who were stillborn.No opportunity for them to be baptised. The priest explained to her that her children were in Limbo.She still cries over the fact they will NEVER be in heaven.She cannot understand what they did wrong.What would warrant them being punished in this way. It is very difficult for a parent to accept such a thing.NLM

I realize it wasn’t me you were quoting here, when you answered this.

However, I must speak up.

The vision of God face to face is called the Beatific Vision. I learned that in grade school.

To say that someone would be shut off from life everlasting would also be wrong, I asked
some Catholics, older than I about limbo and they said that they were told that it was not
a teaching of the Church but that it was presented to them as a theological theory, one
whereby they were told that an unbaptized infant would be perfectly happy. None of them thought, as you did, that they were shut out from life everlasting.

As it turns out, I was told that we entrust them to the mercy of our loving God.

If you’ll look above at post # 136, you will find a link to the Vatican web site on the
Priestly ordination to men alone. Jesus was a man/(although God the Son, on earth), as a former Monk, I would have thought that you would understand that. He choose all men and they are in Persona Christi, (the person of Christ.) A woman can’t be one for obvious reasons.

 

[allhers]

Also, did you read my post to you nlm, 118 120 and 121?

 

[CWBetts]

There is NO question in my mind that your comments were inspired by the Holy Spirit. Your comments indeed reflect my situation.Let me tell you that I spent some time wrestling with the question of would I or would I not return to organized religion. During that “wrestle” I loss a friend, not a close friend but a friend none the less. I decided to attend his funeral. I had to ask someone where that particular church was located as I had never heard of it. Although I was not hit by lightning nor did anything miraculous occur, I left that service knowing it was the answer to my prayers as to what should I do in terms of my journey. I have now been a member of that church for 6 years. God does indeed work in mysterious ways. He used my friend’s death to guide me where He wanted me. I have NEVER been happier nor more peaceful within.For some reason I have not been surprised by the tone of SOME of the responses to my questions.It is the same reaction I have experienced here. Anna, thank you for your Christian approach to all this. He REALLY has used you to enlighten others on the forum.I will also tell you that in a few weeks I will become a Commissioned Lay Person( similar to a Deacon) dealing with Visitation of the sick and shut in within our church.God bless.NLM

Is till fail to see why you left the intersection of Heaven and Earth (The Mass)…

 

[grannymh]

Hello,

My question regards how Catholics view the scriptures, catechisms, and other church teachings/documents.

From reading forums and Q&A’s, it seems to me that Catholics view the catechism as their primary or first rule/authority in life. (The catechisms being the church’s interpretation of the Bible, which of course makes the Bible the ultimate authority.)

From what I can tell, a Catholic usually first goes to the catechisms to answer questions regarding life, theology, etc.

As a protestant, I would usually go to the Bible first, and perhaps use a catechism or commentary to help me understand the scriptures. But I would usually go directly to the Bible first to answer a question. It seems that Catholics tend to do the opposite, though - go to the catechism first and foremost.

Is this an accurate perception? In the Catholic view, what are the positions of the Bible and the catechisms/church documents?

Thanks,
Adam

These are my view and actions:

1. The Catechism is based on Scripture.
2. When checking the Catechism for a teaching, I also check the footnotes which often give the Scripture foundation. At times there is a reference to a Church Council whose teachings are based on Scripture or a reference to another Church document which usually contains Scripture references.

On line copy of the Catholic Catechism –

Blessings,
granny

All human life is sacred from the moment of conception.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Hello,

My question regards how Catholics view the scriptures, catechisms, and other church teachings/documents.

From reading forums and Q&A’s, it seems to me that Catholics view the catechism as their primary or first rule/authority in life. (The catechisms being the church’s interpretation of the Bible, which of course makes the Bible the ultimate authority.)

From what I can tell, a Catholic usually first goes to the catechisms to answer questions regarding life, theology, etc.

As a protestant, I would usually go to the Bible first, and perhaps use a catechism or commentary to help me understand the scriptures. But I would usually go directly to the Bible first to answer a question. It seems that Catholics tend to do the opposite, though - go to the catechism first and foremost.

Is this an accurate perception? In the Catholic view, what are the positions of the Bible and the catechisms/church documents?

Thanks,
Adam

Adam-

I think this may be a distorted view of things based upon your observation of this forum.

Catholics believe that the Bible is the Word of God. The Catechism is not.
Catholics read from the Bible during every mass. We do not read from the Catechism at mass.

etc., etc.

However, in the course of answering questions posed to us about Catholic theology in this forum, it is common to reference the words of the Catechism in response. The Catechism presents the Catholic understanding of the Bible.

As an apologist, I prefer to work primarily from scripture since that is what you, a Protestant, can accept most easily. However, I will refer to the Catechism, other church documents, the Early Church Fathers, historical works and even enlightened Protestants whenever necessary.

Hope that helps. :tiphat:

 

[Philthy]

Mt 16:19 can be the explanation for everything the church decides… this must be THE most important passage in the entire Bible.
I have difficulty believing that the Holy Spirit which permits a man to make," Christ really present" could not do the same via a women. In my opinion the person, male or female, is simply the instrument used by the Holy Spirit… … It would be interesting to know …Interesting thought…

This is a perfect example of why the Bible - alone - simply doesnt provide the means for determining some very basic stuff for the practicing Christian. Can women be “pastors”, or “presbyters” or receive the “laying on of hands”??? Its such a basic question - how can it not be addressed in Scripture if Scripture was meant to stand - alone - as the sole rule of faith?

 

[allhers]

These are my view and actions:

1. The Catechism is based on Scripture.
2. When checking the Catechism for a teaching, I also check the footnotes which often give the Scripture foundation. At times there is a reference to a Church Council whose teachings are based on Scripture or a reference to another Church document which usually contains Scripture references.

On line copy of the Catholic Catechism –

Blessings,
granny

All human life is sacred from the moment of conception.

Exactly, and sometimes you can’t get some to read the Church Council whose teachings are based on Scripture or a reference to another Church document which usually contains Scripture references because they are too busy with this business of Bible alone and they won’t even bother to go and read the truth.

Its sad, it really is, so much misinformation out there, the blind leading the blind.

 

[cazayoux]

Of course people should be encouraged to read the bible; my point is that they don’t, and the Catholic Church did not really publicly encourage it until the time of Pius XII. And even then it took a while to change ingrained habits within the laity. I would say that bible literacy is improving, but still has a long way to go.

But we study SO much scripture every time we go to mass.
The Sunday mass, which parts are taken almost 100% from scripture also has…

• a reading from the old testament
• a psalm
• a new testament letter
• a gospel reading

The reading have a theme that the priest expounds upon and helps us to understand how to apply it in our lives today.

Let’s not discount how much scripture is read and studied at mass.

michel

 

[Anna_Scott]

These are my view and actions:

1. The Catechism is based on Scripture.
2. When checking the Catechism for a teaching, I also check the footnotes which often give the Scripture foundation. At times there is a reference to a Church Council whose teachings are based on Scripture or a reference to another Church document which usually contains Scripture references.

On line copy of the Catholic Catechism –

Blessings,
granny

All human life is sacred from the moment of conception.

Granny,

I really appreciate this link-it is very easy to navigate and search for different topics in Catechism.

Though I am Protestant, I do rely upon a number of Catholic resources. The Encyclopedia Tab and Faith Tab on this website are also great resources.

Thanks,
Anna

 

[allhers]

Another good passage for Baptism with water…
Acts 8:35-39
Then Philip opened his mouth and, beginning with this scripture passage, he proclaimed Jesus to him.

As they traveled along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, “Look, there is water. What is to prevent my being baptized?”

Then he ordered the chariot to stop, and Philip and the eunuch both went down into the water and he baptized him.

When they came out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away, and the eunuch saw him no more, but continued on his way rejoicing…

 

[JRKH]

Anna,
Naturally our simple questions will quickly evolve into complex answers so I have split up my reply a bit. First I will give some direct answers to your questions, from a catholic perspective naturally, and then in my next post I want to share with you a bit of how I worked through these questions for myself.

James,
I guess I didn’t answer your question. You are asking if multiple persons who have a valid “Spirit Led Journey and interpretation of The Bible” can come to different and conflicting conclusions on matters of faith and morals?

I do not believe that God’s truth can be conflicting or contradictive. How could God contradict Himself? So, that would mean that those led by the Spirit in matters of faith and morals should be in harmony.

I too believe that those on a genuine “Spirit Led Journey” will be in harmony for this is what it means to be “Of One Mind”. I do think though that you have hit the nail on the head when you say it comes down to “Authority”. The questions you pose really speak to that issue of authority.
Before launching unto addressing the questions you posed, I want to recommend to you the program “The Journey Home” on EWTN. It’s on Monday nights at 8 pm, with repeats on Tuesdays 10 am and Wednesday 1 pm. Very often in the conversion stories that people tell on this program the issue of authority comes up as a major reason that people come home to the Catholic Church. Perhaps if you watch some of these shows it might help you answer your question about authority.

I do realize that it appears that I have just backed myself into a corner; and before me is the issue of the authority of the Catholic Church vs. the authority of the many Protestant Churches—that do, in fact, hold conflicting beliefs in matters of faith and morals.
Before, you do the victory dance :extrahappy:, consider these questions:

No need to worry. Any victory would not be mine but the Holy Spirit. You have posed some wonderful questions below that I will try and answer in a way that is either dogmatic or offensive but rather provokes additional thought and reflection.

1. Who has it right?

In trying to determine who is right one must begin by determining what constitutes valid authority. Martin Luther and other reformers, in taking the “Spirit Led and Sola Scriptura” approach believed that, if the Holy Spirit is truly leading then Scripture can be understood. It was, I believe a noble idea, but one that was doomed for lack of authority and one which Christ addressed with his Apostles in Mt 18:15-19

1. Does the Catholic Church, alone, hold the “Spirit led” answers in matters of faith and morals?

I believe that the catholic Church holds the Fullness of Truth, with the recognition, that other churches can and do hold parts of the Truth. This is a decision I had to come to after many years away from the Church. The reason for this is precisely because of the authority issue. Every western, non-catholic, Christian faith community traces its roots back to the reformation, either directly or indirectly. Before that the Church was Catholic and can trace it’s roots back through consistent writings and teachings all the way to the Apostles. I’m not talking about a list of Popes here but rather the writings of the Church Fathers. Such lineage, along with Christ’s promises to “not leave us orphans “, and “The gates of Hell will not Prevail” and “Whatever you bind…” and “Tell it to the Church” signal that Christ intended His Church to be both united AND authoritative from the beginning.

1. Does the fact that Protestant Churches are not all in agreement in matters of faith and morals, necessarily mean that no Protestant Church can hold the “Spirit led” truth in matters of faith and morals?

1. Are there Protestant Churches, in agreement with one another that hold the “Spirit led” truth in matters of faith and morals?

As I mentioned above, the Catholic Church holds that other Christian faith communities do indeed hold parts of the Truth but that these parts are not complete. The question that Christian must ask is, even if I accept that many protestant denominations agree on doctrine, how do I know if they are right when other protestant denominations do not agree?

1. Is the Catholic Church wrong and lacking any “Spirit led” truth in the matters of faith and morals?

The Catholic Church is demonstrably the Oldest of the Christian Churches. If the Catholic Church is not Spirit Led, then what of Christ’s Promises as outlined above?

1. Are all Protestant Churches wrong and lacking any “Spirit led” truth in the matters of faith and morals?

No – Not necessarily wrong, but lacking as I mentioned above.

1. Do Protestant Churches, in agreement with one another–and in agree with the Catholic Church–on the matters of faith and morals, hold the “Spirit led” truth, along with the Catholic Church?

I think question #7 is the most important to consider.

Naturally where the Protestants agree with the Catholic Church, the Catholic Church says that they hold that part of the Truth correctly.

Continued Below.