Does God call people to be separate from Catholic Eucharist

[guanophore]

and those that are Christlike (leaders) should be obeyed…in as much as they have the mind of Christ (His word) thy should be obeyed, even imitated…and we are even to submit one to another, as Christ submitted to the Father

You are adding some criteria that are not in Scripture. This is a method of disqualifying the authority appointed by Christ. Jesus made Peter the Rock, and gave him certain gifts that he did not give to the others. Yet, Peter was not always Christlike. He denied Christ at the crucifixion, and he later behaved hypocritally in Galatia.

What you are saying is that the authority appointed by Christ should only be obeyed to the extent that you believe they are behaving according to your standards, and that if they are not, their authority should be jettisoned. If this were a valid principle of obedience, then all the Apostles would be disqualified!

Well, challenging papacy authority, when it goes beyond being “first amongst equals”, is from the beginning of such innovation (of there being such a bishop).

Certainly this is what you have been taught to believe, so that you can easily reject what Christ structured for His Church. This is the attitude that creates the splinters that exist. Each man becomes his own standard of what is a good “role model” as a leader, then one can reject any person who does not model the leadership that one expects. One can then go down to the corner, rent a storefront, and start another church.

When Jesus gave Peter the responsibility of confirming his brethren, He did so prior to Peter falling from faith. Jesus knew that Peter would deny Him, but that did not stop Jesus from making Peter Cephas, and giving him the gift of feeding and caring for His flock.

 

[Nicene]

Why do you separate that quote of Barnabas in 21 from what he wrote in 19 and 20, the two ways? From Protestant theologians/translators:

Barnabas 21:1
It is good therefore to learn the ordinances of the Lord, as many as
have been written above, and to walk in them.

21:1 |It is therefore right that he who has learned
the ordinances of the Lord, even as many as have been
written beforehand, should walk in them.

and a sampling of those:from
19:1 |Now, the path of life is this: If any one
wishes to travel to the appointed place, let him
hasten by means of his works. Now, the knowledge of
walking in it that is given unto us is of this kind:
19:2 Thou shalt love him that made thee, thou shalt
fear him that formed thee, thou shalt glorify him that
redeemed thee from death. Thou shalt be simple in
heart, and rich in spirit; thou shalt not cleave unto
them that go in the path of death. Thou shalt hate
whatever is not pleasing unto God; thou shalt hate all
hypocrisy; thou shalt not abandon the commandments of
the Lord; continues to

19:12 Thou shalt not make a schism, but shalt make
peace by bringing adversaries together. Thou shalt
make confession of thy sins. Thou shalt not go unto
prayer with an evil conscience. This is the way of
life, either labouring by means of the word and
proceeding to exhort, and practising to save the soul
by the word, or thou shalt work by thy hands for the
redemption of thy sins.

Chap 20 continues with the dark way. the church translates it as is just assuming the reader is smart enough to figure out the text. However it doesn’t say “the bible” it says whatever is written, which would also have to include the epistle of Polycarp, 1 Clement, the Didache, which Barnabas quotes, Ignatius. Projecting onto it a preconceived notion is dishonest, assuming you have actually read any of the above material. It’s pretty obvious. Of course you can always disagree with the protestant theologians and translators.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[Nicene]

Redefining what catholic means by capitalizing on the word “Universal” is not how the church defined catholic from the beginning:

Ignatius to the Smyrnaens in this section against the gnostics of his time:

They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that you should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion [of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.
Chapter 8. Let nothing be done without the bishop

See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[mcq72]

You are adding some criteria that are not in Scripture

Perhaps my wording misled…when they are Christ like, have His mind/word/doctrine u obey…dont obey something contrary, as u point out…dont follow peter in denying christ, or acting hypocritical with gentiles (doctrine that gentiles still unclean) etc…“beware of the leaven of bad doctrine”…why? because we can, have the ability, to discern, to “beware” and are commanded to do so…if we can discern to obey, we can discern when inappropriate…just following orders doesn’t cut it with God (making it necesary for some to prequalify their authority with infallibility, or abuse of bible only or special revelation, etc)

 

[Benadam]

Yes, but we are talking about their roles after Scriptures have “caught up” to oral.Unless of course one says revelation is still ongoing, and more to be written (and while technically not calling it “scripture”, still same as far as from God, and that infallibly, to be obeyed/believed).

Revelation stopped at the ascension… The Public Witness began at Pentecost and ended when the last Apostle died. The baton of Oral Tradition (teaching infallibly)was passed from God to human witnesses. who passed it on who passed it on. The written Testimony is the Gospel and acts of the Apostles ie; the Public Witness .From the Public Witness the Oral Tradition was handed on by the laying on of hands… If there were a determined end to the Oral Tradition with the Public Witness one would think the laying on of hands would have ended too.

 

[mcq72]

Revelation stopped at the ascension…

Respectfully disagree. Surely what we commonly refer to as His earthly ministry yes, that was obviously over. But His revelation to the apostles was not over, His Revelation to authors of Scripture was not.

 

[Nicene]

You have to remember they haven’t been taught that so don’t believe scripture, that’s not a dig, just fact. They also don’t understand for example in Timothy before laying on hands ensuring the apostolic way of transmitting the gospel, through typology, as we can see for example in Barnabas, since mcq72 keeps bringing up. We find that same witness of all the catholic fathers. It’s out of their wheelhouse so to speak, so unlike their fore fathers in the 1600’s, rebellion, it’s not their fault they haven’t been taught so.

Peace and God bless
Nicene

 

[Nicene]

Just to illuminate further, there is no discernment if they should be a preacher, rather only if they want to, also no insurance they are preaching in an apostolic manner, just has to draw crowds like Joel osteen. Again, not a dig, just an observation.

Peace and God bless
Nicene

 

[guanophore]

Perhaps my wording misled…when they are Christ like, have His mind/word/doctrine u obey…dont obey something contrary, as u point out…dont follow peter in denying christ, or acting hypocritical with gentiles

Yes, we are in agreement on this point. But this is why it is so important that we distinguish between infalliblity and impeccability. God can use someone to teach His infallible Truth who is imperfect. This is how all the Scriptures were produced, how Peter’s shadow healed people, etc. It is not the individual, but the HS at work through them that accomplishes infallible acts.

we can, have the ability, to discern, to “beware” and are commanded to do so…if we can discern to obey, we can discern when inappropriate…just following orders doesn’t cut it with God (making it necesary for some to prequalify their authority with infallibility, or abuse of bible only or special revelation, etc)

Yes, we are each responsible for developing our conscience and discerning good and evil.

The Public Witness began at Pentecost and ended when the last Apostle died.

I think that mcq72 has a burr in the saddle about the Marian doctrines, and the fact that the Pope made the infallible dogma based on a private revelation from God that it was time. This is somehow getting confused with the faith of the Church, which is not based on a private revelation.

 

[guanophore]

Just to illuminate further, there is no discernment if they should be a preacher, rather only if they want to,

I think this is true in some cases, but in most, they discern vocations much as we do, and those who believe they are called to ministry, especially of pastoring and teaching, will attend seminary. There are many years of spiritual formation and discernment, not just for the individual, but by the community and the leadership.

also no insurance they are preaching in an apostolic manner, just has to draw crowds like Joel osteen.

From their point of view, the “insurance” is the Scripture itself, and the consensus of how it should be understood. Joel draws large crowds because people like what he has to say, and they feel that the Spirit bears witness within them that it is true.

20 But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all know. I Jn. 2

but the anointing which you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that any one should teach you; as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie, just as it has taught you, abide in him. 1 Jn 2:27

They read this and believe that they have the power to discern the Truth themselves, and do not need anything but Scripture.

 

[mcq72]

The baton of Oral Tradition (teaching infallibly)

In my opinion the idea of oral teaching being infallible and that thru laying on of hands is quite a twist of truth, at least in perspective. For sure we know of speaking/teaching being filled with the Holy Ghost, or of an annointing, gifting from the Holy Ghost

 

[Ken94]

I’d say yes. As someone who used to be athiest, and who after one night at 1am coming across and listening to a broadcast from Andy Stanley which led to me realize God was true and then first thing the next morning asking Christ into my heart on my bedroom floor and experiencing what I know with out a doubt was the receiving of the Holy Spirit. So I got saved not being in a catholic church and currently still not a catholic and after getting saved everyone I got connected with was non denominational, no one who was catholic came into the picture what so ever.

 

[mcq72]

But this is why it is so important that we distinguish between infalliblity and impeccability. G

Correct, have only been addressing what one teaches or commands, and not assume infallibilty, or else there would be no need to beware

 

[mcq72]

Yes, we are each responsible for developing our conscience and discerning good and evil.

The Spirit discerns all things.

 

[guanophore]

Correct, have only been addressing what one teaches or commands, and not assume infallibilty, or else there would be no need to beware

Then said Jesus to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; 3 so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice. Mat 23

Jesus instructed that the faithful should obey the truth taught by the authorities, even if they were hypocrites. He transferred the Seat of Moses (teaching Authority) to His Apostles, and the same principle applies.

The Spirit discerns all things.

Indeed. But each person has a different perception of what the Spirit is saying. This is why we have so many divisions.

 

[jcrichton]

Yet, it is not a lie.

A broken mind is an ill mind.

A diseased mind can be both a broken mind or an evil/twisted mind.

Yet, just like Love, pride, envy, sadness, happiness, all of these are active agents in the mind/heart of man; some are readily felt/displayed in a physical manner while others are hidden or controlled just underneath the surface. That is the way of mental illness.

Sadly because mental illness is intangible (not something that always translates physically) some people abuse it by claiming it as an excuse or by claiming to know how to treat it or by claiming to be able to control it or raze it.

The disease is not the lie; the lie is the manipulation of the disease.

As for “people that know Scriptures,” that’s just as malleable as the claims to know, have or treat/cure mental illness–mentalists and other shysters capitalize on such claims.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Now would you be like some P folk and say that is not true in “our church”(CC) but just for those “other” churches, down the road?

I don’t know what p folk are; but can you name those ‘feel good’ teachings that the Catholic Church offers?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Wow, thank you for your concern (“feeling sorry”); however, are you following this exchange?

You’ve offered that if Baptism is so fundamental to the Faith the NT would be specific about the practice of infant Baptism.

Your assertion is that: a) Baptism is not fundamental and/or b) since infant Baptism remained, to your mind (non-Catholics), ambiguous then it was not practiced by the Church.

I attempted to engage you using other subjects which were very lightly mentioned by Christ or not engaged at all. I counter with these to illuminate your mind so that you can observe that Jesus and the Church did not need to engage every single thing in the Written Tradition since it was being practiced and upheld in the Oral Tradition.

I apologize if you feel belittled; that is never my intention. I am forceful in my presentations only to make people (both those that I am replying to and those who read through the threads) stop and think.

…as for superiority… I’m well versed on nothing, have no scholastic degree past hs, and I’m not even a weekend theologian/philosopher–my reach is far below superiority.

I apologize for giving you the wrong impression.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

The verses are not specific to salvation thru a particular church, nor do they deal with when one part of church says one thing on Assumption and the other something else. “Us” is “us”, the Spirit leading all in one direction on the matter.

Well, it is not I who makes the connection it is God.

The verses are not about “us” as in humanity; just take a look at what transpired at Pentecost–all thought all of Israel was claimed by Yahweh God as His people, and while Scriptures tells us that on the Day of Pentecost there were holy people in Jerusalem, the Holy Spirit was not poured on all flesh (as the prophecy states) but on only 200: the Apostles and those with them.

The Church is the “us” where the Deposit of Authority and Truth is found. Yet, since you (your and your forebearer/s) have divested yourself from Succession of the Apostles (continuity of the Body of Christ throughout time and geography) you are not able to connect what God has Revealed with what God has Constructed: One Body, with Christ as the Head and the Holy Spirit as the Paraclete that Guides her.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Sorry, I misread your statement on persuasion–please disregard my previous post.

Maran atha!

Angel