W
workingman
Guest
Yes read it but still seems a long way from total agreement.
- Status
J
Jon_Hus
Guest
crazzeto,
Before I answer your question, I have two questions to ask you.
- You say you have studied the Bible and History and conclude that the (Roman) Catholic Church is your home for life. Fair enough, but according to your profile on this forum you post on average 25.97 posts per day. My question to you is how do you find the time to study the Bible, History, make a living, attend Mass and perform the normal functions of life? You are amazing!
- How do you make the historic connection between (lets say for example) the dogmas of Mary as taught in the modern RCC and the Bible and the ANFs? But feel free to pick any other teaching such as AS or Infalibility of the Bishop of Rome. As a professed lover of history this should be easy. You don’t have to write a book on this, simple will do for now.
C
crazzeto
Guest
Desn’t take long to write a post, particularly if you know how to touch type. This is a bit of a straw man argument isn’t it though?
History books, selcular ones actually. I’ve always loved history, even though I’m a computer programer I love history so much I minored in it. I’m always studying history, and yes I know something of the concept of reading objective sources of information for history.
I would suggest to you that you read the early church fathers, you can find a very good collection of them, particularly considering it’s free to you over at www.earlychristianwritings.com. Study the fathers, and you’ll stop protesting.
Edit
One more piece of advice on your search, always seek the truth and nothing but the truth.
J
Jon_Hus
Guest
I asked a question. It’s a question, not an arguement. But I understand you feel you must say something, so something will have to do I suppose.
I likewise have my minor in history and I likewise love history and I likewise spend much time studying it. I’m not offended by you infering that you know how to be objective in your studies while I’m possibly not. Why, because I know what I know.
I have mentioned before but will repeat it for the sake of this discussion, My personal library is fairy large, I have roughly 900 print books on theology and Christian history. Part of that collection is the 10 volume ANF plus numerous early christian writers. So you could answer my question by saying “this is what Clement of Rome had to say about Mary” or what ever, but instead you chose to avoid answering me. So this tells me much about your desire to…
seek out the truth…
Have a great day crazzeto.
Jon
W
wanner47
Guest
E
Erich
Guest
I’m a cradle Catholic, but my wife used to be Lutheran (ALC → ELCA); she swam the Tiber two and a half years ago (twenty years after we were married)
She didn’t talk much about it at the time, but the first seeds of doubt came back when she learned that the ELCA’s health insurance that is provided to its employees pays for abortion on demand. Ultimately, the two “biggies” were the Eucharist and the authority of the Church. She knows, of course, that there are cafeteria Catholics who don’t believe everything the Church teaches… but she likes the fact that there is an “official Church position” on all the major issues of our time (indeed, of all times) and that there is a Pope who is the visible head of the Church on Earth.
Also, something I quoted offhand in passing years ago stuck with her and I’ve even heard her repeat it: “The Church should be a thermostat, not a thermometer.”
J
Jon_Hus
Guest
Dear wanner47,
I understand your good intentions. While I’m not a professional theologian and church history researcher, I’ve tried to drop hints that I have read and studied quite a bit on church history, dogma development and theology. Part of that learning, and I’m sure crazzeto if pressed would agree, is putting the historic writers in context, understanding what they say and what they are not saying. The gap between 95 AD and 345 AD is no little thing, do you disagree?
As you know (I hope), the Israelites saw God do a mighty work in freeing them from Egyptians and yet as soon as Moses turned his back on them (in the wilderness), they (the Israelites) turned their back on God. How long after the parting of the Red Sea did the Israelites take to loose their faith? Days, weeks months, a few years? You may not agree with me but I think there is an important lesson here on the nature of man. That is why I asked historian crazzeto to fill in the 275 year gap so to speak.
Modern Roman Catholics spend much time discussing the dogmas of Mary and so forth, why would the ANFs be any different? I think this is a valid question to ask and while you may not agree, which is your right, it is had to make the argurment that you have studied the historic evidence in pursuit of truth and have thus concluded that this should be settled fact for all.
Take care,
Jon
I understand your good intentions. While I’m not a professional theologian and church history researcher, I’ve tried to drop hints that I have read and studied quite a bit on church history, dogma development and theology. Part of that learning, and I’m sure crazzeto if pressed would agree, is putting the historic writers in context, understanding what they say and what they are not saying. The gap between 95 AD and 345 AD is no little thing, do you disagree?
As you know (I hope), the Israelites saw God do a mighty work in freeing them from Egyptians and yet as soon as Moses turned his back on them (in the wilderness), they (the Israelites) turned their back on God. How long after the parting of the Red Sea did the Israelites take to loose their faith? Days, weeks months, a few years? You may not agree with me but I think there is an important lesson here on the nature of man. That is why I asked historian crazzeto to fill in the 275 year gap so to speak.
Modern Roman Catholics spend much time discussing the dogmas of Mary and so forth, why would the ANFs be any different? I think this is a valid question to ask and while you may not agree, which is your right, it is had to make the argurment that you have studied the historic evidence in pursuit of truth and have thus concluded that this should be settled fact for all.
Take care,
Jon
C
crazzeto
Guest
I have a feeling Jon is reading history with Evangelical glasses on, so I’m not sure these will help him much particularly since they come from catholic.com. Hopefully one day he’ll take me up on my offer to read the Fathers, and actually read them just not selective quotes, or with protestant blinders on. When you sit down, and fairly evaluate the church, there is only one conclusion one can come to. The Catholic Church is everything she says she is, given this peice of information, and the scriptual promises of Christ regarding the Church he built upon the rock Kepa…
R
Reuben_J
Guest
Thank you very much for this thread and for those of you who share what made you decided to become Catholics. I have soft spot for conversion stories but what you have shared was more than that but an education for me.
I am cradle Catholic, at one time did not practice much though the faith and belief has never truly left me. Now a devoted and die-hard Catholic, my only regret is that I could never boast to have experienced having to live another religion. At times we cradle Catholics seem to be inexperience and unexposed that make us at a disadvantage to understand other denominations (Protestantism) like how you all do.
Listening to you all has been very edifying and reassuring. So it is the authority and the Eucharist of the Catholic Church. What irony because these seem to be the very issues that are often attacked by Protestants.
God bless.
W
wanner47
Guest
And if you actually read the articles posted you’d see that some of the fathers spoke on this issue between 100- 200 A.D.
Did you know that Martin Luther firmly believed in the Marian dogmas? You seem to be an admirer of his; why do you agree with his other beliefs but not the Marian ones?
You asked for ECF quotes about Mary; I gave them. Now do your homework instead of rambling on about the Israelites while ignoring the evidence in favor of your own preconceived notions.
J
Jon_Hus
Guest
Basically wanner47, you prove my point better than I do. I assume that you don’t understand this but that’s ok with me. While not a professional historian, I take pride in my dilligent study.
Did you know that Martin Luther was at one time a Roman Catholic priest? Trained in Roman Catholic Seminary? A really interesting read for a truth seaker as yourself is his book bondage of the will. Even though it was written by the german bumkin, it is a challanging read so I would’t blame you if you took a pass. How about his 7 volume sermon collection?Not much about the dogmas of Mary in those, but no doubt it was edited out right?
By the way wanner47, I assumed that you knew but perhaps you don’t, the ANFs are the first of the ECFs. What do you mean by your do your homework comment?
W
wanner47
Guest
I have a college degree in English; my cumulative GPA was 3.5. I also did everything in my power to prove the Catholic Church wrong prior to my conversion. I found I could not.
Yes, I did know that. (By the way, it’s “seeker,” not “seaker.”) Luther’s theses don’t mention Mary because he DIDN’T DISPUTE Marian dogmas. His theses dealt with disputes he had with the CC, not matters he considered theologically sound.
I’ve read many of Luther’s writings. During my youth I memorized the Small Catechism. Have you ever read Luther’s “On the Jews and their Lies”? I have. Quite illuminating. Do you agree with his views as expressed in that work?
You need to ask yourself why the “ANFs” were “silent” about Mary. Could it possibly be because (a) she was still alive at the time of their writings, and/or (b) Marian doctrines were not in dispute, thus there was no reason to write about them? If you were the historian you claim to be, you’d know that in the time immediately following Christ’s ascension writing materials were rare and expensive. The ANFs (and ECFs) didn’t waste valuable writing materials to rhapsodize about accepted doctrine. Rather, they wrote to clear up disputes, admonish heretics, and promulgate/clarify teachings.
Doctrines about Mary were not in dispute until well after the death of the Apostles, at which time the ECFs began to write about her in order to clear up misconceptions that were being spread about her.
J
Jon_Hus
Guest
wanner47,
All I need to know about you and your ability to figure out the clear message of the Bible is summed up in this comment: *You asked for ECF quotes about Mary; I gave them. Now do your homework instead of rambling on about the Israelites while ignoring the evidence in favor of your own preconceived notions. *
Luther was not perfect, but aren’t you glad the popes no longer are able to burn people who dare to speak out against them? One of the clergy at the catholic church I attended with my friends when I was in high school went to jail for improper behavior around children. You want to talk about that or do you want to keep the discussion academic?
So where did Luther (or any of the other reformers) claim to be spokesman for Jesus like the popes do? Or claim to be the sole keeper of all faith and virtue like the popes do? Which one of them claimed to have the key to the pearly gates like the popes claim? And of course the RCC has done everything possible to protect the Jewish people throughout history, right? Kept them safe from those nasty protestants right? And maybe you think a little inquisition now and then is good for the soul, purify the one true church and all that?
Look wanner47, some catholics here are well read I will admit. But so are some non-catholics. You post your little links to catholic answers and then call someone who disagrees with you guilty of as you say “ignoring the evidence in favor of your own preconceived notions”. Is that the way you think and reason?
Take care,
Jon
All I need to know about you and your ability to figure out the clear message of the Bible is summed up in this comment: *You asked for ECF quotes about Mary; I gave them. Now do your homework instead of rambling on about the Israelites while ignoring the evidence in favor of your own preconceived notions. *
Luther was not perfect, but aren’t you glad the popes no longer are able to burn people who dare to speak out against them? One of the clergy at the catholic church I attended with my friends when I was in high school went to jail for improper behavior around children. You want to talk about that or do you want to keep the discussion academic?
So where did Luther (or any of the other reformers) claim to be spokesman for Jesus like the popes do? Or claim to be the sole keeper of all faith and virtue like the popes do? Which one of them claimed to have the key to the pearly gates like the popes claim? And of course the RCC has done everything possible to protect the Jewish people throughout history, right? Kept them safe from those nasty protestants right? And maybe you think a little inquisition now and then is good for the soul, purify the one true church and all that?
Look wanner47, some catholics here are well read I will admit. But so are some non-catholics. You post your little links to catholic answers and then call someone who disagrees with you guilty of as you say “ignoring the evidence in favor of your own preconceived notions”. Is that the way you think and reason?
Take care,
Jon
R
Roman_Catholic_1
Guest
That’s funny Jon because I had you measured in this thread (see post #75) where you agree with the “clear message of the Bible” presented by someone who stated that the Bible had “weaknesses” denied that the Bible was error free, considered the stories of Noah and Adam and Eve as “fables” and “false history”, stated that there were anti-Christian messages in the Bible and considered the Bible “unacceptable”. You even stated that the poster who said this took the Bible just as seriously as Jon Hus
Jon Hus:
So, if I may speak for wanner, I don’t think he/she will be overly concerned with not measuring up to your, “clear message of the Bible” considering what you believe that message to be.
BTW I graduated* Summa Cum Laude *(4.0 GPA) with double Majors in History and Criminal Justice… looks like I win
God bless you Jon
I
IowaJay
Guest
I think you could put all of our knowledge about church history and doctrine together and still only have a fraction of the knowledge that the late Jaroslav Pelikan had, and he left Lutheranism for Orthodoxy.
So maybe we’re both wrong
So maybe we’re both wrong
R
ralphinal
Guest
So many of the issues that Luther had were missing in Orthodoxy. Has anyone ever wondered why more Lutherans don’t go that route?I think you could put all of our knowledge about church history and doctrine together and still only have a fraction of the knowledge that the late Jaroslav Pelikan had, and he left Lutheranism for Orthodoxy.
So maybe we’re both wrong
I can understand why he did not.
Hey workingman,
I’d love to hear you expand on these two topics a little bit. if you are willing. Either here on in a PM.
Thanks in advance,
Jon
I
IowaJay
Guest
I agree.
I can tell you why more Lutherans don’t go that route, though:
- Orthodox parishes are few and far between in the upper midwest where most Lutherans are;
- A resulting lack of knowledge of Orthodoxy;
- Even those who know quite a bit about Orthodoxy are still perplexed. I won’t go into my story in detail, but I find Orthodoxy to be very interesting, to say the least. However, they speak a different language. I have read several books and have become friends with an Orthodox priest, and I still find many areas where they will use some of the same words we do, but they have different meanings. I think this comes from 1,000 years of separation. Easterns and Westerns just think differently.
As to Orthodoxy, as you say, I don’t think I really have those kinds of fundamental differences that I know of******. I might, but I don’t know due to a lack of understanding. It will take me a lot longer to even come to a point where I will think I can even grasp what they are saying about many things.
R
ralphinal
Guest
I think that you are dead on it. Add to it that most of the Orthodox Churches that you come in contact with here are ethnic-based, and some can feel left out.
W
wanner47
Guest
Thank you, Jon, for ably demonstrating your ignorance of Church history and teaching. It shows, better than I ever could, the quality and caliber of your alleged “research.”
Do I examine the evidence presented to me, being careful to take into account historical and societal context (i.e., utilizing proper exegesis), and research what other learned theologians (Catholic or otherwise) have said before forming an opinion?
Why yes, I do – and did, prior to my conversion. Therefore, I can post those thinks with confidence, knowing they contain correct information.
- Status