Does God call people to be separate from Catholic Eucharist

  • Thread starter Thread starter rcwitness
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
mcq72 said:
Teach what? Is not the message, the precepts, found in Scipture ? Why do you separate what the Holy Spirit put in Scripture and what He puts on the preachers tongue or wants to write on every heart ?
Click to expand...
There is no separation, certainly. The Sacred Tradition complements the Sacred Scripture.
mcq72 said:
I would think Scripture has not changed but for traditions , even magisteriums and their declarations, they are in flux.
Click to expand...
There is no “flux” Sacred Tradition. The once for all divine deposit of faith was closed at the death of the last Apostle. You have rightly identified that there may be different applications of the Revelation, but there is only one Revelation.

Disciplines may change, and our understanding of the One Revelation may change, but the doctrines of Christ and the Apostles cannot be in “flux” because they are immutable.
mcq72 said:
The Holy Spirit and Scripture hold the key for any tradition and magisterium to be in truth.
Click to expand...
The Sacred Tradition is the work of the HS in the Church, that is why there is no contradiction with Scripture.

While members of the Church, even successors of the Apostles, may be in error, the Holy Spirit preserves the Teaching of the Apostles infallibly in the Church.
 
guanophore said:
There is no “flux” Sacred Tradition. The once for all divine deposit of faith was closed at the death of the last Apostle.
Click to expand...
Thank you for that clarification.The trouble , like our 30,000 denominations, is that the latest revelation, the Assumption of Mary, perhaps may be a fable that Paul warns against. Hard to believe the apostles taught it. The best one can say is that it is possible (assumption) and still not contradict scripture, and therefore be declared as divine deposit of faith. Yet that is a broad interpretation, and many questionable teachings could fit that mold.
 
Depends, can you back up the doctrins with scripture only? You can believe that Jesus came in the flesh and still lack knowledge.
 
mcq72 said:
The trouble … is that the latest revelation, the Assumption of Mary
Click to expand...
A dogmatic pronouncement is not the same as a “revelation”. Pubilc revelation was closed at the death of the last Apostle, so there cannot be a “latest revelation” that is modern.

You seem to believe that the Apostles and early Church members did not know that Mary had no other children, and did not preserve her body, as they did the bodies of all the other saints. Do you honestly believe that the early Christians would not value the remains of the mother of our Lord?
feed_me said:
Depends, can you back up the doctrins with scripture only?
Click to expand...
Where does the Bible say that I am required to “back up the doctrins (sic) with scripture only”?

Do you know when the books of the Bible were assembled?
 
guanophore said:
Do you honestly believe that the early Christians would not value the remains of the mother of our Lord?
Click to expand...
Just honestly believe the apostles would have written about it had it happened.For sure they did not lay the burden upon us to believe it dogmatically, as a must article of faith.
 
If you dont back up the doctrins with scripture then error can enter the church.
 
mcq72 said:
I thought the pope had a “revelation” that indeed it (Assumption) should be declared dogmatically.
Click to expand...
Yes, there are many private revelations, but the faithful are not bound to them as we are to the public revelation. A pope’s conviction that something should be declared at a certain time does not mean that the dogma itself is anything new. If this were the case, then “Trinity” would not have waited until 325 to be adopted. Surely you don’t think that the concept of the Trinity was a "new’ revelation in the fourth century!
 
guanophore said:
While it is true that they carried the Word of God within them, and relied on the Spirit to tell them what to say, the main reason they did not carry a copy of the Scriptures is that they were bulky and expensive! They were copied by hand on parchment or sheepskin, and kept in scrolls, usually in a cool dry location. Travelling with such valuable documents that would have taken years to copy by hand was not reasonable.
Click to expand...
So what were the parchments Paul asked Timothy to bring him?
 
From Wiki’s article on the Assumption of Mary:

"In Munificentissimus Deus - Wikipedia near the end of the review of the doctrine’s history, Pope Pius XII stated : “All these proofs and considerations of the holy Fathers and the theologians are based upon the Sacred Writings as their ultimate foundation.” Precedent to this, he cited many passages that have been offered in support of this teaching.

The pope cited 1st Corinthians 15. In this passage Paul alludes to Genesis 3:15 (in addition to the primary reference of Psalms 8:6), where it is prophesied that the seed of the woman will crush Satan with his feet: “I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.” Since, then, Jesus arose to Heaven to fulfill this prophecy, it follows that the woman would have a similar end, since she shared this enmity with Satan.

The pope also mentioned (in paragraph 26) Psalm 132, a psalm commemorating the return of the Ark of God to Jerusalem and lamenting its subsequent loss. The second half of the psalm says that the loss will be recompensed in the New Covenant, and so it is hopefully prayed, “Arise, O Lord, into thy resting place: thou and the ark, which thou hast sanctified” (v. 8). Since the Church sees this New Covenant ark in Mary, it understands that she was taken into Heaven in the same manner as the Lord – that is, body and soul.

Finally, he mentioned in the next paragraph “that woman clothed with the sun [Revelation 12:1–2] whom John the Apostle contemplated on the Island of Patmos” was support for the creating this dogmatic doctrine for Catholics."
 
Last edited:
Thank you.Just that a few popes before looked at same rationale and scripture but refused the dogma.
 
Refused? How so? Can you provide a source of this?

Jesus told us that the wise and faithful steward is placed over the entire house, and should feed the faithful at the proper time. He doesnt guarantee they always will.
 
rcwitness said:
Since, then, Jesus arose to Heaven to fulfill this prophecy, it follows that the woman would have a similar end, since she shared this enmity with Satan.
Click to expand...
Not sure genesis requires the Lords ascension as prophecy …and y believer will resurrect, for every beluever is at emnity with Satan, not just Mary…
 
Not sure…i thought some dogmas take time and are petitioned more than once, particular some of the Mary doctrines…I believe some are petitioning one more dogma (mediatrix, Queen of Heaven or something.not sure)…and thee scriptures have been around several milennia
 
Last edited:
Jesus’ rising from death is His victory over death. And many Saints were resurrected too.

Matthew 27
And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom; and the earth shook, and the rocks were split; the tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many.
 
Last edited:
The faithful will share everything with His Mother. Yet she is already brought into that perfect union ahead of her offspring
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top