Gates of hell question

[djrakowski]

Fredricks:

Are you suggesting that the church used a system early on that differed from the one in the Bible?! What does this say about your particular belief in the accuracy of the Bible??

No, I’m simply suggesting that, if the earliest churches had only the Bible as their source of faith and practice, then they had an incomplete source, for only the Old Testament existed in any sort of accepted canon. Furthermore, there was nobody to tell them authoritatively what was contained in the Bible until a complete canon containing a New Testament was settled upon in 4th century councils, which, in your theology, left them incomplete for roughly 3 centuries. The Bible is 100% infallibe, sir, and you KNOW we agree on that fact. Where we’re disagreeing is in the role of Sacred Tradition.

 

[Mickey]

Fredricks:

Catholics and Orthodox, who both used Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, split prior to the reformation. You claim your church is infallible but do not seem bothered that the same people who use the same things as you are not united as well.

The Churches are united by Apostolic succession.

It will be a glorious day when the great schism is finally healed. And I believe it will happen. I also believe that the Anglican Church will unite with Catholicism and Orthodoxy increasing the membership of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church. Lutherans may follow!

These events will convert droves of other protestant groups to the Church. But satan will work overtime to prevent all of this.

I have a dream!

 

[Lazerlike42]

Fredricks:

Are you suggesting that the church used a system early on that differed from the one in the Bible?! What does this say about your particular belief in the accuracy of the Bible??

What was being suggested is simply the historical fact that no Bible existed until the later half of the 4th century, so by the system you are suggesting, after John died around 100, no Christians could exist for another 300 years.

 

[Fredricks]

SemperJase:

I actually meant to say a discipline. Oops.

Now when Paul was writing to Timothy, do you think he forgot what he had written to the Corinthians about seven years earlier?

1 Cor 7:8
Yet I wish that all men were even as I myself am. However, each man has his own gift from God, one in this manner, and another in that.
But I say to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I.

So it would seem that according to Paul catholics agree with scripture, being celibate is best.

But clearly your interpretation is different. So how do you explain 1 Cor 7?

What part of this do you guys not see?! He wishes people were like him but then says that each has its own gift? Do you just read the first sentence of a passage? Show me where it is required to be celibate. I do not care actually how you guys do it, if you think that works for you, I will not be uncharitable BUT, I went to graduate school/seminary and shared classes with many of the future priests in seminary when we had an exchange between schools, and IF YOU GUYS THINK it is working, Suit yourself. In the real world, well, rest assured, I was there and know what that whole scene was like. Like I said, its your belief system, if you think it is working, I could care less, it sure is not mine. This topic is starting to give me the creeps as I recall and I will not reply to the whole “celibacy” thing anymore. New topic PLEASE.

 

[djrakowski]

Lazerlike42:

What was being suggested is simply the historical fact that no Bible existed until the later half of the 4th century, so by the system you are suggesting, after John died around 100, no Christians could exist for another 300 years.

Thanks, you’ve said it more clearly than I did

 

[djrakowski]

Fredricks:

This topic is starting to give me the creeps as I recall and I will not reply to the whole “celibacy” thing anymore. New topic PLEASE.

If men choosing a celibate life in service and dedication to the Church and their Lord gives you the ‘creeps,’ then you have deeper problems that need to be addressed. This is a very strange objection indeed. Even in my evangelical Protestant days, I admired those priests (and male and female religious) who would give up the pleasure and company of a spouse in complete dedication to the Lord, and I’m still in awe of those who’ve responded to such a call. Simply amazing to me that it creeps you out!

 

[Mickey]

djrakowski:

If men choosing a celibate life in service and dedication to the Church and their Lord gives you the ‘creeps,’ then you have deeper problems that need to be addressed. This is a very strange objection indeed. Even in my evangelical Protestant days, I admired those priests (and male and female religious) who would give up the pleasure and company of a spouse in complete dedication to the Lord, and I’m still in awe of those who’ve responded to such a call. Simply amazing to me that it creeps you out!

Ditto!

 

[Lazerlike42]

Fredricks:

What part of this do you guys not see?! He wishes people were like him but then says that each has its own gift? Do you just read the first sentence of a passage? Show me where it is required to be celibate. I do not care actually how you guys do it, if you think that works for you, I will not be uncharitable BUT, I went to graduate school/seminary and shared classes with many of the future priests in seminary when we had an exchange between schools, and IF YOU GUYS THINK it is working, Suit yourself. In the real world, well, rest assured, I was there and know what that whole scene was like. Like I said, its your belief system, if you think it is working, I could care less, it sure is not mine. This topic is starting to give me the creeps as I recall and I will not reply to the whole “celibacy” thing anymore. New topic PLEASE.

Celibacy is not required. Nobody forces anybody to be a priest. In fact, there is a very critical step here that is being missed. There is more than just the discernment to be a priest or not to be. The first vocational discernment every person needs to make is to discern if he or she is going to be celibate or if marriage is the path for them. As Paul said, celibacy is given to some people, not just as something they can tolerate, but as a gift. For some people, celibacy is a beautiful God given gift, and to ignore it would be to ignore a gift of God. It is not less of a gift than marriage, and Paul makes it clear that it is more of a gift, because it allows a person to be completely dedicated to the Lord always. A person is only supposed to try to discern if he ought to be a priest after he has already discerned that he ought to be celibate. If a person shortcuts this step, he only has himself to blame if he finds that he can’t take it. If a person truly feels called to be a priest *and * to be married, there are plenty of other rites for him to go to.

Your being creeped out by something St. Paul strongly recommended for all people, Fredericks, not just clergy. There is something wrong with that. We don’t mean this to say that there is something wrong with you, but we think that if you feel this way you have something that is a little deeper in your spiritual life that needs some help. We’d love to be of service if we can.

 

[JaneFrances]

What part of this do you guys not see?! He wishes people were like him but then says that each has its own gift? Do you just read the first sentence of a passage? Show me where it is required to be celibate. I do not care actually how you guys do it, if you think that works for you, I will not be uncharitable

BUT, I went to graduate school/seminary and shared classes with many of the future priests in seminary when we had an exchange between schools, and IF YOU GUYS THINK it is working, Suit yourself. In the real world, well, rest assured, I was there and know what that whole scene was like. Like I said, its your belief system, if you think it is working, I could care less, it sure is not mine. This topic is starting to give me the creeps as I recall and I will not reply to the whole “celibacy” thing anymore. New topic PLEASE.

WHOA, Fred. . .that’s a hit and run sort of post if ever I saw one!

Basically, you have made a very strong statement opposing the Latin Rite’s discipline of priestly celibacy based on your anecdotal experience in “shared classes with many of the future priests” and your own visceral response to a GIFT that you apparently do not have!!! This is quite beneath you, Fred.

“I do not care actually how you guys do it, if you think that works for you. . .”

“IF YOU GUYS THINK it is working, Suit yourself.”

Since when has following God’s will for one’s life been an issue of what “works for you” or “suiting yourself”???

I’m pretty sure when the rich young man (Matt. 19: 16-24) received Jesus’ instruction to follow him by selling all he owned and giving it ALL to the poor, he wasn’t so hip to that idea. I don’t have the impression that this instruction was based on “what worked for him.” Obviously it didn’t “suit him” and the consequences may have been eternal.

“In the real world, rest assured, I was there and know what that whole scene was like”

In the real world, there are also innumerable broken and hurting families of Protestant ministers who are doing “what works for them”—adultery, neglect, etc. In the real world, there are those men, graced with the gifts of preaching and teaching and ministry, who have wives who sit at home with small children who never see their father because he’s on the mission trip du jour or leading prayer groups and scripture studies every other day of the week. In the real world, there are Protestant pastors who spend every waking moment away from their home and families to focus all their time and energy in someone else’s home and on someone else’s family. . .

Don’t preach to us, Fredricks, about the real world as if we don’t live there. We all live in that daily struggle of choosing God’s will over our own. Priests are no different. Consecrated virgins are no different. Married people are no different. A church that asks a man, who feels called to the priesthood, to consider a life entirely devoted to the Lord shouldn’t give you the creeps. In the real world, for some, it is the very way a camel goes through the eye of a needle.

 

[SemperJase]

Fredricks:

What part of this do you guys not see?! He wishes people were like him but then says that each has its own gift? Do you just read the first sentence of a passage? Show me where it is required to be celibate.

As we have said, the Bible does not require a Bishop to be celibate. It does show a prefereence for being celibate.

Your argument is based on the assumption that the catholic church should be a sola scriptura church. Thankfully we are not because that leads to misinterpretation. Your sola scriptura interpretation says that bishops MUST be married. That is just not what scirpture says.

Yes, each has his own gift. And the church wants men with the gift of celibacy to be priests. The church has the authority to set that standard. If celibacy creeps you out, take it up with God. He inspired the scripture.

 

[Eden]

Fredricks:

What part of this do you guys not see?! He wishes people were like him but then says that each has its own gift? Do you just read the first sentence of a passage? Show me where it is required to be celibate.

“Not all men can accept this precept, but only those to whom it is given. . . . There are those who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to receive this let him receive it” (Matt. 19:11–12).

Celibacy is a gift yet you reject it and the possibility that anyone can live that way. You ask for a passage where celibacy is required yet you cannot show me a passage where it says priests or bishops are required not to be.

Where are your celibate bishops or ministers per Matt. 19:11-12?

Do you find it creepy that Jesus and St. Paul were celibate?

Do you find it creepy that celibacy on earth is a reflection of the way the saints in heaven live in the next life?

I do not care actually how you guys do it, if you think that works for you, I will not be uncharitable BUT, I went to graduate school/seminary and shared classes with many of the future priests in seminary when we had an exchange between schools, and IF YOU GUYS THINK it is working, Suit yourself.

You are talking about an exchange with seminary students, not priests or bishops. These are men who were discerning whether or not they had the calling to priesthood.

Please leave your hang-ups at home.

In the real world, well, rest assured, I was there and know what that whole scene was like. Like I said, its your belief system, if you think it is working, I could care less, it sure is not mine. This topic is starting to give me the creeps as I recall and I will not reply to the whole “celibacy” thing anymore. New topic PLEASE.

Yikes! Let’s not talk about Jesus’ celibacy anymore either. I don’t want to “creep” you out.

 

[Eden]

By the way, I’m sure there is nothing more Christ-like when you are in spiritual trouble than to have a minister who can’t talk at the moment because his kids have basketball practice and his wife needs him to pick her up on the way because her car broke down. Real commitment to the church and the flock there.

I’m grateful that we do not have “part-time” clergy.

 

[Fredricks]

I apologize for being offensive
I should not cast stones.
I do not find celeibacy creepy.
I found people who were supposed to be celeibate creepy who engaged in perverse acts.
That could happen anywhere and I should not project my personal experiences onto this.
I have no interest in discussing celeibacy, it was a distraction anyway.
I sincerely apologize. I do think most priests take their vows seriously.
Fredricks

 

[Eden]

Fredricks:

I apologize for being offensive
I should not cast stones.
I do not find celeibacy creepy.
I found people who were supposed to be celeibate creepy who engaged in perverse acts.
That could happen anywhere and I should not project my personal experiences onto this.
I have no interest in discussing celeibacy, it was a distraction anyway.
I sincerely apologize. I do think most priests take their vows seriously.
Fredricks

O.K. Thanks. Then let’s move on…

 

[JaneFrances]

Fredricks:

I apologize for being offensive
I should not cast stones.
I do not find celeibacy creepy.
I found people who were supposed to be celeibate creepy who engaged in perverse acts.
That could happen anywhere and I should not project my personal experiences onto this.
I have no interest in discussing celeibacy, it was a distraction anyway.
I sincerely apologize. I do think most priests take their vows seriously.
Fredricks

Apology sincerely accepted. Well done, Fred!

 

[JaneFrances]

I was just rereading some past posts. . .to get back on track, as it were. This one stood out to me.

I am not Catholic, if you have traditions that came from Jesus or the Apostles, that you knew about, I would think you would WANT me to have them.

I have said that I would refrain from giving you some convenient listing of all that which the Church holds as Tradition, because I believe that this is your responsibility as an honest (and intelligent) seeker of truth. But, with some reflection, I would offer you this:

Absolutely. 100%. I agree. I DO want you to have the fullness of the faith! I WANT you to have Tradition, so that your faith may be full. I want desperately for you to know Christ’s Body, the Church, in the most intimate and real way. This would be the first Tradition. Christ founded a Church. I have no idea what that means to you—I would expect that you would have a good listing of Scripture passages, though. But even with the over 100 references to Church in Sacred Scripture, modern Christianity has a very wide spectrum of opinion of what this word actually means—and most claim their authoritative source to be the Bible. This is precisely where Tradition comes into play. Through the teaching of the Apostles—witnessed by those whom they taught, I know very well what the Tradition of the Church is and how I am to function as member of it.

Another Tradition that I would hope you would “have,” especially as Easter approaches, is a firm and clear understanding of Christ’s resurrection. This is one of the most fundamental elements in all of Christian Tradition. While an historical event, to be sure, the scandal of the cross and the empty tomb plagued the Church from her earliest days. Those who were not witnesses to this and even those who claimed to rely entirely upon the prophecies held in the Scriptures (Old Testament, of course), often found this Tradition too difficult to accept. While others were instructed by the Church in the Tradition of Christ’s resurrection for the salvation of their souls. No one in the days, weeks, months, and even years following Christ’s rising from the dead were able to reference a New Testament text, yet they believed. That is Tradition.

Another Tradition you need to “have” regards something that continues to be touched upon in this thread and those in which you have previously participated. It’s the teaching authority of the Church. This is a very real and central Tradition which managed to produce the canon of Sacred Scripture that you claim as your only authority.

Then, of course, there is the holy Tradition of the Sacraments. There is no listing in Sacred Scripture of what these are. They are Tradition. They are essential to the fullness of faith and have been since the earliest days of Christianity. Each Sacrament has a special and necessary function in the life of the Church and each Sacrament allows us to share the fullness of life according to our human capacities.

These are the ones I would hope you “have”. . .and if you do not, I pray that you will. God’s grace is enough for you and he graciously offers you the fullness of the faith in his one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

 

[Church_Militant]

So then, The original question still stands…did the promise of Christ fail and the gates of hell prevail?

I say NO!

 

[Fredricks]

Church Militant:

So then, The original question still stands…did the promise of Christ fail and the gates of hell prevail?

I say NO!

That sure was not my original question.

 

[Eden]

But are you going to present to us what “the gates of hell” means to you and why you believe we are misunderstanding this verse?