Developing Dogmas and Doctrines

[PRmerger]

No, schaick, they are not “bible based”. They are REFLECTED in Scripture because the NT is the PRODUCT of the Church. The basis of Catholic Doctrine is Christ Himself.

Indeed.

When the early Catholic Church was discerning which “Christian” texts were theopneuestos what they asked was, “Is what is written here (fill in the blank with these documents) what has been taught by the Apostles?” That is, do these writings conform to the Sacred Tradition of the Church?

Those that did not were rejected.

 

[KathleenGee]

Yes, the faith of Apostolic Christians, Catholics, come from Jesus Christ Himself through the Holy Spirit.

Schaick, being human and knowing the future are two separate things. Every moment, rather, in the Catholic mind, is a matter of choice…either we chose God or we do not.

Mary was sinless because of her conception, a most unique creation…and such a gift to mankind! But she was no fortune teller and had to live out her life in mystery like the rest of us. And yet she did not sin, her constitution different than ours, but as God’s gift to the Church, she is mother to us.

There is the spirituality of the sinless – only two people were conceived that way…Jesus and Mary…but Mary is also for us, our mother, the bridge, the transmitter of grace.

 

[schaick]

Schaik,

The Protestants and Catholics share the same spirituality of the Holy Spirit, but you not have the spirituality of the Eucharist, of the sacraments, of the Mother of God and the communion of saints, all that come from the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ.

Now the Protestants come on here at times to invalidate our faith and make us out to be a man made religion.

I have gone to and heard teachings at Protestant services, on radio and television, but it is devoid of mysticism, of deep spirituality that gives life and connects to the depth of one’s soul. So in essence, I hear all the same Gospel passages, I will hear a phrase or two that lights a spark in me, but the rest of it is only touching on the surface with a sweeping brush.

The other thing I notice in Fundamentalist churches is that you only reflect on the Old Testament. There is no witness, except day to day ordinary experiences, or extraordinary ones about people in combat or a healing. You don’t have the spirituality and the living out of faith by Catholic saints. These people, found in every generation, that are the counterpoint, or fulfillment if you wish to say as they have found Jesus, to the figures of the Old Testament.

Just today I finished a case for a woman who is the epitome of the woman of God in Scripture. She raised 10 kids, 5 boys and 5 girls, her husband a nationally known professional sports player who had to be gone part of the year. Her home is meticulous, she has to this day her canning area in the basement, she has sown clothes for all her children, she made bridal dresses for various weddings of nieces, she even made clothes for her husband. I have never been in such a meticulous home as hers and her children’s pictures, and that of her husband adorn her walls… As well as pictures of Christ, the Last Supper and the Blessed Mother.

Certainly there are Protestant women like her. There is a Catholic woman from Italy who has become a saint…she was single, then married, then widowed and I will come back with her life story. Our saints have alot to share with us in living out our faith nurtured and sustained by the Eucharist, and in enduring the Cross.

LOL!! To think I have been accused of being closed minded.

So Catholics believe that their level of spirituality does not exist outside the Catholic Church. All I have experienced spiritually in my Church during Communion, the Real Presence in the Eucharist, prayers, praising, singing, my baptizm, my close encounters with the Holy Spirit, all is lacking, incomplete?

LOL! I am sure no Christian could ever would ever match up to the Catholic woman you describe.

 

[schaick]

I did not realize this myself until I learned it here on CAF. As a former “bible christian” I can assure you that I found the concept shocking and appalling at first.

You can see, though, from the point of view that the Church preceeded the NT, how it is that Catholics do not attempt to extract doctrine from the pages of Scripture. On the contrary, the pages of Scripture reflect the doctrine that Jesus left with the Church.

Yes, and it is taken this way by many fundamentalists, who have been taught that the Catholic Church has apostacized, integrated paganism, become the whore of Babylon, etc, etc. some people hate the Catholic Church so much they can’t even receive Christ from her.

Many people think they are following God’s Word, but the reality is that they are following their perception of His Word.

And, people even question concrete evidence, like miracles performed by the saints through the centuries, including eucharistic miracles. There are signs like the incorruptible saints, and yet, people still question the authenticity of CAtholicism.

No, schaick, they are not “bible based”. They are REFLECTED in Scripture because the NT is the PRODUCT of the Church. The basis of Catholic Doctrine is Christ Himself.

Yes, but this disagreement did not emerge until the errant doctrine of Sola Scriptura was invented. The Apostles did not teach that Christian doctrine is “bible based”.

You don’t think the Aposltes believed the HS was guiding them into all Truth?

Don’t you think it would take a lot of cheek to start a letter by saying “it seemed right to the HS and to us”…if they did not believe their decision was in perfect unity with the infallible HS?

Yes. His Word has never been confined to the Holy Scriptures.

Yes. And it was whole and entire before a word of the NT was ever written. Jesus is just as able to preserve His Word in the Church as He is on parchment.

What you are doing is using your own perceptions of what you are reading, and calling it God’s opinion. This is your perogative, of course, and has been exercised since SS was invented. However, your conclusions represent a significant departure from what the Apostles believed and taught, resulting in “a different gospel” than the one they delivered.

ok so Catholics believe that the Church created and then wrote the New Testament.

How about the Gospel message?

Do the doctrines about Jesus reflect the Gospel message?

Did the Gospel message exist before the Church was built by Jesus, that first Church in Jerusalem?

 

[KathleenGee]

Schaick,

I also wonder how her sons get along with their wives…can they live up to their mother-in-law??? I am also using some more bleach around the house now.

I don’t see how anything can compare to the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of the Word Made Flesh…but it also depends on our reception and how open we are to the graces given.

And I am not insinuating anything about you being closed minded…it is just that fundamentalists see us as lacking the Word of God when it has been part of our liturgy since the beginnings…as well as the Eucharist.

 

[KathleenGee]

It was the Evangelists who wrote the Gospels…but there were many other ‘books’ out as well as other gospels…someone had a list showing all the books…but it was the Holy Spirit --again – people continually miss this working of God…in those chosen to serve the Church in spirit and truth.

Jesus gave us the concrete – His church, as another here well described – the sacraments are concrete…all work to serve the weakness of human frailty and the problem of Babel. The most common use of the meaning of Church is communion.

I would prefer communion in following Jesus’ continual prayer that we be one…and put up with alot of humanity, than to be without the sacraments and the communion of saints.

 

[PRmerger]

LOL!! To think I have been accused of being closed minded.

Interesting…

So Catholics believe that their level of spirituality does not exist outside the Catholic Church. All I have experienced spiritually in my Church during Communion, the Real Presence in the Eucharist, prayers, praising, singing, my baptizm, my close encounters with the Holy Spirit, all is lacking, incomplete?

Without the Eucharist (which one cannot have without a valid priesthood), there is no way for a Christian to obtain the One Flesh Union.

Thus, while many Christians have a wonderful friendship with their Lord, they lack the ability to achieve the highest form of intimacy. :sad_yes:

 

[PRmerger]

ok so Catholics believe that the Church created and then wrote the New Testament.

How about the Gospel message?

Do the doctrines about Jesus reflect the Gospel message?

Did the Gospel message exist before the Church was built by Jesus, that first Church in Jerusalem?

What Gospel message do you mean, shaick? The Gospel of Thomas? The Gospel of Phillip? The Gospel of Mark?

Only through the CC’s discernment were you able to know to reject the Gospel of Thomas and believe in the Gospel of Mark.

 

[schaick]

“All that Jesus began to do and to teach” as Luke opens his history. As you can see in Acts 2 the new converts devoted themselves to the Sacraments, the prayers, and the Teachings of the Apostles. This is a summary of what is contained in Sacred Tradition.

I notice you left out the authority that Jesus gave to His Apostles to govern and resolve disputes.

There are many of our separated brethren that embrace the Apostolic Teaching on the communion of saints (also included in the creed).

Besides, Christians who reject parts of the Apostolic faith only nullify their existence to themselves. The refusal to believe in the communion of the saints does not make them go away for the rest of us, or make them somehow into “no communion of saints”.

This is a very important insight schaick!

Since all the Marian doctrines were developed through Christology, this insight reveals that there is a serious deficiency in your Christology. It is one of the reasons that the Marian doctrines are so important. Mary’s soul 'magnifies the Lord". When we look through her soul, Jesus should appear bigger (magnified). If for some reason he does not, then there is something wrong with the perspective of the one looking.

In fact, Jesus wants us all to be as sinless as Mary, and if you cannot grasp this, then your understanding of the Faith committed to the saints is in need of repair. God did not create man with sin, but immaculately. It is His intention that we be immaculate with Him in heaven for eternity. Therefore, if you cannot relate yourself to sinlessness, then you are missing the boat.

I think you are confusing walking in grace to not being human. Mary clearly worried, as is evidenced by the story of getting separated from Jesus in the Temple. She suffered, as a sword pierced her own heart also. These aspects of humanity are not sinful, they are part of who we are.

You are right, though, concupiscence, or the sin nature that Mary did not have does make it more difficult for us to believe and obey. However, where sin abouts, grace abounds even more.

Can you show a verse that says Mary was “born a sinner”.

Also, the Church teaches that John the Baptist was filled with the HS (saved) while he was still in the womb, so was also born without original sin.

For some reason you seem to relate better to people who fall short of God’s plan than those who do not? This is a strange phenomenon.

It is not a sin to be greatly troubled. Jesus also suffered this way in the Garden of Gethesemane. Do you believe He sinned?

Joseph was able to accept her special status because of a revelation from God. Her community, however, was not so generous. When they called Jesus “the son of Mary” it was really a slur. It meant they believed he was the product of fornication or adultery.

Well, schaick, you do have at least a portion of the Divine Revelation. It is my prayer that you will come to the part you are missing. May the Blessed Mary, ever virgin, pray for you.

LOL! This has gone off topic of what I wanted my thread to be- ** Doctrines and Dogmas about Jesus.**

Could Mary have lived for eternity without the aid of GOD?

No, because she was human and as a falls short of the perfection of sinlessness.

We do not carry the sins of our fathers, but sin entered the world through Adam and Eve’s disobedience. A legacy for every human- the potential for sin.

That doesnt mean that we can’t walk in grace just as Stephan did:
Acts 6
8Now Stephen, a man full of God’s grace and power, did great wonders and miraculous signs among the people

So Mary and Stephan are full of grace - did Stephan also never sin?

Every human dies so we all carry the stain of the original sin:
1 Corinthians 15
22For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

The human condition is that we carry the pontential of sinning and so does Mary.

OK, I am really freaked now!

No, GOD wants us to be as sinless as Jesus.

How about some Jesus dogmas and doctrines?

 

[PRmerger]

Could Mary have lived for eternity without the aid of GOD?

No.

No, because she was human and as a falls short of the perfection of sinlessness.

Except through the grace of God, of course. Which is why your question above reflects Catholic teaching.

We do not carry the sins of our fathers, but sin entered the world through Adam and Eve’s disobedience. A legacy for every human- the potential for sin.

Amen! That’s very Catholic of you to say that. It’s called “concupiscence”.

So Mary and Stephan are full of grace - did Stephan also never sin?

I dunno. Do you have a verse in Scripture that says he did?

Every human dies so we all carry the stain of the original sin:

So do you think Jesus, fully human, who DIED, carried the stain of original sin as well?

The human condition is that we carry the pontential of sinning and so does Mary.

Yes, she had the free will to sin. She just never did.

How about some Jesus dogmas and doctrines?

All Catholic dogmas and doctrines are about Jesus.

You made that point above, in talking about Mary but mentioning Christ. It’s *impossible *to understand Marian dogmas and doctrines without having a correct theology regarding Jesus.

 

[schaick]

What Gospel message do you mean, shaick? The Gospel of Thomas? The Gospel of Phillip? The Gospel of Mark?

Only through the CC’s discernment were you able to know to reject the Gospel of Thomas and believe in the Gospel of Mark.

The Disciples were able to discern that Jesus was the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy simply by hearing Jesus message. Actually they strayed from their “Church” to follow Jesus, learn and hear HIS message.

 

[simspt]

What Gospel message do you mean, shaick? The Gospel of Thomas? The Gospel of Phillip? The Gospel of Mark?

Only through the CC’s discernment were you able to know to reject the Gospel of Thomas and believe in the Gospel of Mark.

I dont think most Protestants reject the early Church tradition that shaped the NT canon, however some take if for granted as you imply. The development of Doctrine and how one views that seems to be more the issue with the OP. Some don’t acknowledge just how many doctrinres have extra Biblical elements that led to their development. Obviously this doesnt negate that the truths of these doctrines antedated thier full articulation by the Church aided by philosophy and tradition.

 

[schaick]

No.

Except through the grace of God, of course. Which is why your question above reflects Catholic teaching.

Amen! That’s very Catholic of you to say that. It’s called “concupiscence”.

I dunno. Do you have a verse in Scripture that says he did?

So do you think Jesus, fully human, who DIED, carried the stain of original sin as well?

Yes, she had the free will to sin. She just never did.

All Catholic dogmas and doctrines are about Jesus.

You made that point above, in talking about Mary but mentioning Christ. It’s *impossible *to understand Marian dogmas and doctrines without having a correct theology regarding Jesus.

*What new dogmas or doctrines have been developed about Jesus that was not laid out first in the Bible?

A Sacred Tradition that was passed down through just the Catholic Church from the time of the Apostles, something that must be believe for our salvation.*

Maybe I should have used a different example:

Example, developed Mary Dogmas - we know absolutely from the Bible that she was a virgin when she concieved Jesus. What developed later and not in the Bible is that she was concieved immaculately, remained forever a virgin and was assumed to heaven.

No the Mary Dogmas are all about Mary. Her sinlessness, her assumption, what she does for you, how she prays for you, etc,

Where are the dogmas about Jesus? What HE does for you, HIS sinlessness, how HE interceeds for us, etc. How to have a relationship with HIM? How to receive our salvation through HIM?

 

[PRmerger]

The Disciples were able to discern that Jesus was the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy simply by hearing Jesus message.
Actually they strayed from their “Church” to follow Jesus, learn and hear HIS message.

Exactly! That’s called Sacred Tradition!

 

[PRmerger]

What new dogmas or doctrines have been developed about Jesus that was not laid out first in the Bible?
The canon of Scripture.

The Trinity.

The hypostatic union.

A Sacred Tradition that was passed down through just the Catholic Church from the time of the Apostles, something that must be believe for our salvation.

As above.

Example, developed Mary Dogmas - we know absolutely f-]rom the Bible /-] (but* first*** from Sacred Tradition) that she was a virgin when she concieved Jesus. What developed later and not in the Bible is that she was concieved immaculately, remained forever a virgin and was assumed to heaven.

What was solemnly pronounced, declared and defined a certain point of time is not an indication that it only came to be believed at that point.

It has been the “constant teaching” in our house that when the kids come home from school they are to do certain things: hang up their backpacks, put their shoes away, wash their hands, take off their uniforms, eat their snack, finish their chores, practice their piano, etc etc etc.

Despite the fact that they have been doing this every school day for 2-11 years every once in a while we need to have a “family meeting” to pronounce, declare and define exactly who should be doing which job and how it is to be done. (Note: I try to ignore their incredulous looks that say, “What? We’re supposed to hang up our backpacks again this year?” or “What? You’ve never said that we had to take off our uniforms and hang them up!” )

At this council we recall what’s been done in the past, review the current norms and define again exactly what’s the expectation. Sometimes the kids complain that we are “making up new rules”, claiming we’ve “never done it this way before” when in actuality we are just pronouncing, declaring and defining a standard norm of our family.

Thus, the solemn declaration of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception was not newly formed in 1854. It was a constant belief held and spoken of for many years, sometimes correctly, sometimes incorrectly. Perhaps in order to alleviate any doubt and to correct any wrong information, God chose 1854 as the time to pronounce, declare and define this belief and practice.

However, this dogma was ancient, dating back to the times of the apostles.

 

[PRmerger]

No the Mary Dogmas are all about Mary. Her sinlessness,

Because of the divinity of Christ it was fitting that she be sinless. Her sinlessness only magnifies the divinity of Him whom she carried.

her assumption, what she does for you, how she prays for you, etc,

All understood because of our Christology–assumption because she was sinless (see above regarding Christ) and praying for you because of Christ’s Body–we are one.

Where are the dogmas about Jesus? What HE does for you, HIS sinlessness, how HE interceeds for us, etc. How to have a relationship with HIM? How to receive our salvation through HIM?

See the Catechism for the above. If you type in “Jesus” in the search engine you will get hit with an overload of references!

 

[PRmerger]

What was solemnly pronounced, declared and defined a certain point of time is not an indication that it only came to be believed at that point.

It has been the “constant teaching” in our house that when the kids come home from school they are to do certain things: hang up their backpacks, put their shoes away, wash their hands, take off their uniforms, eat their snack, finish their chores, practice their piano, etc etc etc.

Despite the fact that they have been doing this every school day for 2-11 years every once in a while we need to have a “family meeting” to pronounce, declare and define exactly who should be doing which job and how it is to be done. (Note: I try to ignore their incredulous looks that say, “What? We’re supposed to hang up our backpacks again this year?” or “What? You’ve never said that we had to take off our uniforms and hang them up!” )

At this council we recall what’s been done in the past, review the current norms and define again exactly what’s the expectation. Sometimes the kids complain that we are “making up new rules”, claiming we’ve “never done it this way before” when in actuality we are just pronouncing, declaring and defining a standard norm of our family.

Thus, the solemn declaration of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception was not newly formed in 1854. It was a constant belief held and spoken of for many years, sometimes correctly, sometimes incorrectly. Perhaps in order to alleviate any doubt and to correct any wrong information, God chose 1854 as the time to pronounce, declare and define this belief and practice.

However, this dogma was ancient, dating back to the times of the apostles.

I also might add in this metaphor that sometimes things “come up” that did not need defining earlier, but because of the development of our family requires further refinement.

Example: for the first 4 years of my children’s schooling they did not use a backpack.

Thus, when they started in the upper grades coming home and throwing their backpacks on the floor we had to have a “council” to announce: ALL BACKPACKS NEED TO BE HUNG ON THEIR RESPECTIVE HOOKS.

Now, this is not a new command. The ever-present command was: ALL SCHOOL SUPPLIES NEED TO BE PUT AWAY WHEN YOU COME HOME.

However, as there were no backpacks for the first 4 years, there was no need to say, “And that includes backpacks, of course!”

Now, they can try (and they did!) to say, “Hey, that never was a rule before!”

But we, of course, are too smart for them.

 

[schaick]

Yes I had the wrong verse and wording- it is not full of grace but favor. I still don’t see how this word means sinless.

Here is a long list of verses where that word 5485 charis and forms of it are used:
blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G5485&t=KJV

Thank:
Luke 6:32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.

Favor:
Acts 7:10 And delivered him out of all his afflictions, and gave him favour and wisdom in the sight of Pharaoh king of Egypt; and he made him governor over Egypt and all his house.

Grace:
Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved

LOL!! I am helping keep this off topic!!

Look at same word in this verse-
Grace:
Gal 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called [me] by his grace,

GOD’S favor towards a person - not sinlessness. GOD showed favor to Mary a fellow sinner to carry our Saviour. WOW!! Not so wow if she wasn’t.

Makes me wonder why do Catholics believe it is so horrible, impossible to believe that GOD would call on the sinner Mary by HIS grace to become the mother of Christ?

 

[PRmerger]

Makes me wonder why do Catholics believe it is so horrible, impossible to believe that GOD would call on the sinner Mary by HIS grace to become the mother of Christ?

You misunderstand Catholic teaching, schaick. We don’t believe “it is so horrible” that God could have called on a sinner to become the mother of God.

We believe it because it’s true. God has said it. We believe it.

Amen!

 

[KathleenGee]

If you do not believe in the Eucharist and the presence of God within, you would not believe in Mary’s perpetual virginity…remember, it took the church 1850 some years to define this dogma after continuous witness of catholic spirituality of the communion of saints and much reflection and debate.