J
jabelltulsa
Guest
I don’t gamble with my soul. But, yes, I do believe with my whole heart that the Church is infallable when speaking from the chair.
Who is infallable to you?
- Status
Who is infallable to you?
L
LilyM
Guest
When he teaches from the chair of Peter, I believe that he is infallible. Not because of himself, not because I’m ‘betting my soul’, but because I believe in Christ’s promise to Peter and the Apostles to preserve their Church in all truth. You think Christ and the Holy Spirit will fail to deliver???
There are several examples of this protection in action in Church history. One Pope died just before he was about to publish and make compulsory a dodgy Bible translation done by himself.
Another was a heretic who had been put on the Papal throne by the equally heretical Empress of Constantinople. Upon getting his behind on the Papal throne he did a COMPLETE 180 on his heretical views, and defied the Empress who had made him Pope.
Then there are the numerous Popes who personally were great and notorious sinners - somehow not a one of them managed to make any erroneous infallible teaching on faith and morals!
You’d think if Satan wanted to get a hold of the Church the reign of Alexander VI would’ve been the ideal time, yet that Pope was too busy about his private vices to declare fornication and poisoning (both of which he indulged in) no longer sinful.
What an opportunity - and I’m sure if Satan could’ve taken advantage of it to destroy the Church he would have, no? Yet he didn’t.
Y
YADA
Guest
I actually disagree that a MODERN understanding of the word UNTIL is different than the past.
Today, the word UNTIL only restricts the past and has no affect [effect] upon the future…
I can say that “I will not take you to dinner until after work.”
Clearly, I have made a statement [condition] about what happens during my work day…however, if I get into a car wreck on the way home, I am not obligated to still take you to dinner…
Again, even if I return home from work tired and have just decided that going to dinner has lost its appeal, I am not forced to take you to dinner just becasue I said.
my “grandson did not study until his friend arrived” does not mean he studied when the frind came. They could have studued or just as well began playing video games or gone bike riding!
Also, in jewish tradition, there was a single and married [celebate] state…Father [and husband] remained bound to honor the vow a woman made to live a life dedicated to God…
Today, the word UNTIL only restricts the past and has no affect [effect] upon the future…
I can say that “I will not take you to dinner until after work.”
Clearly, I have made a statement [condition] about what happens during my work day…however, if I get into a car wreck on the way home, I am not obligated to still take you to dinner…
Again, even if I return home from work tired and have just decided that going to dinner has lost its appeal, I am not forced to take you to dinner just becasue I said.
my “grandson did not study until his friend arrived” does not mean he studied when the frind came. They could have studued or just as well began playing video games or gone bike riding!
Also, in jewish tradition, there was a single and married [celebate] state…Father [and husband] remained bound to honor the vow a woman made to live a life dedicated to God…
J
JIMMY68
Guest
Nella-
What’s your point to all this anyway?
Do you come here to educate yourself or to simply stir the pot?
After reading through ALL the threads, your heart doesn’t seem sincere. You don’t want to subject yourself to hear anything because your heart and soul doesn’t sincerely desire it.
If you truly had a desire to learn Catholic theology, then you would, it would take more than 12 pages of threads to learn, that’s for sure.
What is it you’re looking for my friend? It comes down to free will and choice…you decide. Nothing new being said here that hasn’t been said for the last 2000 years.
Catholicisim, too good to be true, too hard to live. Right?
Peace.
J.
What’s your point to all this anyway?
Do you come here to educate yourself or to simply stir the pot?
After reading through ALL the threads, your heart doesn’t seem sincere. You don’t want to subject yourself to hear anything because your heart and soul doesn’t sincerely desire it.
If you truly had a desire to learn Catholic theology, then you would, it would take more than 12 pages of threads to learn, that’s for sure.
What is it you’re looking for my friend? It comes down to free will and choice…you decide. Nothing new being said here that hasn’t been said for the last 2000 years.
Catholicisim, too good to be true, too hard to live. Right?
Peace.
J.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Nella, Benedict XVI is not ‘impeccable’. If you remember from your catechism class, that means he is not ‘sinless’. It means he is capable of personal sin or personal error.
He is also not infallible on sports, on the weather, or in general parlance. He does not walk around with a sign on his back, “I’m infallible, get over it”. Every word out of his mouth in a normal conversation is not necessarily an infallible statement.
However. . .when it comes to teaching on faith and morals, when speaking ex cathedra and in teaching or reiterating the faith and moral teaching held by the ordinary magesterium, he can be infallible. There are certain infallible teachings–for example, the Trinity is Three Divine Persons in one God (not two, or four)–that cannot be changed because they are a deposit of the Faith. The Nicene Creed is an example.
So, do I ‘bet my soul’ that, in accordance with the teaching of Christ’s own Church, in the circumstances where infallibility of the Pope is concerned, our Benedict XVI will be infallible? Well, I ‘bet’ a long time ago when I was baptized a Catholic that I would follow Christ and His Church, and all its teachings, because they are from God, scripturally based (“You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”), authoritatively given through the Holy Spirit whom Christ promised to send us “to guide to all truth”.
He is also not infallible on sports, on the weather, or in general parlance. He does not walk around with a sign on his back, “I’m infallible, get over it”. Every word out of his mouth in a normal conversation is not necessarily an infallible statement.
However. . .when it comes to teaching on faith and morals, when speaking ex cathedra and in teaching or reiterating the faith and moral teaching held by the ordinary magesterium, he can be infallible. There are certain infallible teachings–for example, the Trinity is Three Divine Persons in one God (not two, or four)–that cannot be changed because they are a deposit of the Faith. The Nicene Creed is an example.
So, do I ‘bet my soul’ that, in accordance with the teaching of Christ’s own Church, in the circumstances where infallibility of the Pope is concerned, our Benedict XVI will be infallible? Well, I ‘bet’ a long time ago when I was baptized a Catholic that I would follow Christ and His Church, and all its teachings, because they are from God, scripturally based (“You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”), authoritatively given through the Holy Spirit whom Christ promised to send us “to guide to all truth”.
I
Indyann
Guest
I do not gamble with my soul either.
I pray that you will drop your anger and pride and return to Holy Mother Church. I do not who or how the Church has angered you so, but it is certainly not worth “betting your soul”.
N
Nella
Guest
These are all your opinions and clearly those of many others as well. Not mine however. The eucharist does not exist in the RCC alone and more importantly God DOES exist elsewhere as well. I have come to know this well. Jesus encourages us to seek him, not seek the obediences of the RCC. Seek Jesus and his truths. Stop giving Mary what she doesn’t want and give that glory and praise to Jesus Christ our king and our God!
L
LilyM
Guest
Good point
My mother is fond of saying that her great-grandmother (who she knew as a child) never raised her voice to anyone - ‘not until the day she died’. Does that mean that on her last day great-granny all of a sudden started raising the roof? Of course not.
S
sandusky
Guest
P
patrick457
Guest
I also won’t bet (let my yes be yes and my no be no) but here’s what I believe:
The Pope ISN’T impeccable (meaning he can’t sin).
The Pope IS infallible on matters of faith and morals, i.e. speaking Ex Cathedra.
The Pope is human like the rest of us, i.e. not God in the flesh.
But he IS the Vicar (someone who represents, representative, ambassador) of Christ.
Jesus said, ‘I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one cometh to the Father but by Me.’ The Church is Christ’s Body so it is the only way. The FULLNESS of Truth resides here; why seek other paths?
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Well, in a Catholic forum one does expect to find Catholic truth.
The Real Presence exists in the Orthodox Church but it doesn’t sound as though you are Orthodox. Lutheran consubstantiation is still not the same as transubstantiation, and Episcopal Churches do not have valid orders and cannot have valid sacraments, so any other ‘eucharist’ you are thinking of does not have the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ, as Scripturally given to us in John 6, where His flesh is real food and His blood real drink.
Since St. Paul specifically commends us to submit ourselves to the authority of the Church, and Jesus gave Peter the command to ‘feed the sheep’, I think that most certainly Jesus, who established the Catholic Church, intends us to seek Him through that Church as Scripture and Tradition tell us. Why, St. Peter himself discourages ‘private interpretation’ of Scripture, doesn’t he?
Finally, we DO seek Jesus and it is rather condescending and insulting of you–especially as a ‘once’ Catholic who should know better–to tell us not only to seek Him (as though we don’t) but also to tell us that we are ‘giving Mary what she does not want’. Since when do you presume, on your private interpretation of Scripture, to tell us what “Mary wants” when it defies not only her words “All generations shall call me blessed” as well as all Scripture itself, as well as the teachings of Christendom for 2000 years??
S
Sabda
Guest
Jesus said “If you love me you will obey my commands”, and “if you love God keep the commandments”.
Jesus asked for our obedience because in being obedient we are showing that we really do love him.
The Catholic Church does not teach that God only exist in the Catholic Church. The Church also teaches that the Orthodox Churches also have a valid Eucharist. Jesus never said not to seek the obedience of the Catholic Church and you know that!
I’m sorry you feel such anger that you need to belittle the Church. Please keep in mind the Church does not hurt. It is individual people who hurt. I pray that God will grant you peace.
J
JIMMY68
Guest
The Catholic Church doesn’t exhonorate Mary, Jesus beat us to it![SIGN]Amen Nella
Welcome to the land of badgering.
Jesus obeyed the law perfectly right? Right.
The first commandment that deals with human nature is the third commandment…Honor your mother and father.
We imitate Jesus!
N
Nella
Guest
Ah, God has granted me peace. All in all, I enjoy my conversations and debate here with you all. I have no resentment against the RCC. If they would let my wife, son and I receive communion, we would probably visit my parents in their Catholic parish once in a while.
L
LilyM
Guest
You know what Mary wants and doesn’t want now? Congratulations, you know much more than I or the Church then! Can I have her phone number if you have it?
We know what the Holy Spirit has revealed as truth about Mary’s status, which is in every instance inextricably linked to Christ’s own status.
We call her Mother of God to emphasise that He is in fact Man and God hypostatically united in the one person, of whom Mary was the mother. Some heretics have denied even this.
We call her Perpetually Virgin and conceived without sin AGAIN to emphasise HIS sacredness and the importance of her body as being HIS Temple, Ark and dwelling place which had of necessity to be as perfect as humanity can be.
We call her Queen of Heaven because He is King, and Heaven is a Kingdom (He said so often enough!) and He followed perfectly the commandment to honour His mother as He did all the others. So she logically must be Queen-Mother, He could have done nothing less for her without disobeying the Commandment.
We call her Assumed - because we ALL hope to be assumed into heaven one day! Isn’t that what the whole idea of the Rapture is about? That some will be taken bodily into heaven without death? Enoch and Elijah, both dear to the heart of God, also had this distinction.
Who would be dearer to God’s heart and more deserving of the honour than Mary - the perfect woman and mother He planned for Himself from all eternity, the necessarily perfect human from whom alone He could take HIS perfect humanity. And again, He wouldn’t be honouring His mother propery if Enoch and Elijah were assumed bodily and she left to rot in a grave!
N
Nella
Guest
Not one thing you have said here is Biblical. Again in your last paragraph, you assume everything about God. Maybe he assumed Enoch into Heaven and not Mary, you don’t know any different.You know what Mary wants and doesn’t want now? Congratulations, you know much more than I or the Church then! Can I have her phone number if you have it?
We know what the Holy Spirit has revealed as truth about Mary’s status, which is in every instance inextricably linked to Christ’s own status.
We call her Mother of God to emphasise that He is in fact Man and God hypostatically united in the one person, of whom Mary was the mother. Some heretics have denied even this.
We call her Perpetually Virgin and conceived without sin AGAIN to emphasise HIS sacredness and the importance of her body as being HIS Temple, Ark and dwelling place.
We call her Queen of Heaven because He is King, and Heaven is a Kingdom (He said so often enough!) and He followed perfectly the commandment to honour His mother as He did all the others.
So she logically must be Queen-Mother, He could have done nothing less for her without disobeying the Commandment.
We call her Assumed - because we ALL hope to be assumed into heaven one day! Isn’t that what the whole idea of the Rapture is about? That some will be taken bodily into heaven without death?
Enoch and Elijah, both dear to the heart of God, also had this distinction. Who would be dearer to God’s heart and more deserving of the honour than Mary - the perfect woman and mother He planned for Himself from all eternity, the necessarily perfect human from whom alone He could take HIS perfect humanity. And again, He wouldn’t be honouring His mother if Enoch and Elijah were more honoured than she!
L
LilyM
Guest
Not biblical? Kingdom of Heaven not biblical? Enoch and Elijah not biblical? Honour thy mother not biblical? ‘Like us in all ways but sin’ (meaning He perfectly obeyed the commandments) not biblical?
Logical? Absolutely. Are you saying God is illogical? Beyond logic maybe, but never contrary to it.
And I know He honours His mother! THAT is Biblical enough for anyone. Which means He doesn’t leave her to rot in a grave while assuming others bodily.
P
patrick457
Guest
To this I have only a story:
Imagine a beautiful painting in front of you. The painting was so perfect; the colors, the balance, everything. You praise it, saying, ‘What a beautiftul painting this is! So absolutely perfect.’ Can you imagine the artist suddenly being offended and shouting, ‘You should be praising me and not that painting!!’
Whenever the painting gets praised, the artist is praised as well. The painter receives the praise (and criticisms) given to it.
I’m not saying we should notpraise Jesus (something that we SHOULD do always). Rather, I’m just saying is that there’s nothing wrong with honoring Mary as being the one who bore God Himself. I think God would not be offended by honoring her; So if we say Mary was unworthy of praise, that’s like saying ‘That creature of Yours is not good enough.’ God is the only one who created His own Mother.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
I’m still waiting, Nella, for you to provide the Scripture that gives the listing of all the works to be found in Scripture, as well as the Scripture that tells us that all Christian teaching is to be found ONLY in Scripture.
And what Lily said was indeed Biblical. Everything (including the links I provided earlier to Scripture Catholic) that is taught by the Church is found implicitly or explicitly in Scripture. Where it is found implicitly, the Church has authority from the Scripture to teach and interpret those implicit teachings and through Tradition and through the works of many great writers, from the early Church Fathers through St. Thomas Acquinas, St. Louis de Montfort, and today our own Holy Father, Benedict XVI, we see these teachings, none of which contradict explicit Scripture and all of which are based on either implicit or explicit Scriptural teachings.
Sinlessness? It is Scriptural. Assumption? Scriptural as well. An immaculate conception? Yes, it is in there. Read through the rich texts of Old and New Testament and see how the Old foreshadows the New and the New brings the Old to Fruition.
And what Lily said was indeed Biblical. Everything (including the links I provided earlier to Scripture Catholic) that is taught by the Church is found implicitly or explicitly in Scripture. Where it is found implicitly, the Church has authority from the Scripture to teach and interpret those implicit teachings and through Tradition and through the works of many great writers, from the early Church Fathers through St. Thomas Acquinas, St. Louis de Montfort, and today our own Holy Father, Benedict XVI, we see these teachings, none of which contradict explicit Scripture and all of which are based on either implicit or explicit Scriptural teachings.
Sinlessness? It is Scriptural. Assumption? Scriptural as well. An immaculate conception? Yes, it is in there. Read through the rich texts of Old and New Testament and see how the Old foreshadows the New and the New brings the Old to Fruition.
N
Nella
Guest
Here we go around the bush again. These things are NOT Biblical. There has to be a spin put to scripture to get these ideas to square with truth. Where does it say that Mary WAS certainly taken up to heaven body and spirit as it DOES certainly say that exact thing about Enoch?? Where is it in black and white?? Where does scripture say that Mary was sinless?? Where?? It’s not there. Be honest with yourselves. At least for the sake of your souls be honest.
- Status