If we are wrong....?....i guess

[plitedextrosity]

I’ve been wondering these past couple days about the return of Christ, and the authority he gave the church before he left last time. Since then many matters have come up which he didn’t speak of directly, ie council of Jerusalem gentile circumcision and such. What I’m curious to at least contemplate is whether or not we (the church) could have fallen off judgement here or there. Now I do understand the power of bind n loose, retain n forgive, and his promise to honor such decisions, but that wouldn’t necessarily mean that he agrees or is completely satisfied. So what does or would the church say about the idea we missed the ideal here or there?..I read a document that seemed to appease my twitch, but I just reread it two days later and feel not as content as I led myself to believe…

Any comments thoughts and personal ideas are always fun, so bring em on, but if anyone can give me links, or sources, books, n encyclicals that would be superb…thanks guy!..

 

[migueltojose]

I’ve been wondering these past couple days about the return of Christ, and the authority he gave the church before he left last time. Since then many matters have come up which he didn’t speak of directly, ie council of Jerusalem gentile circumcision and such. What I’m curious to at least contemplate is whether or not we (the church) could have fallen off judgement here or there. Now I do understand the power of bind n loose, retain n forgive, and his promise to honor such decisions, but that wouldn’t necessarily mean that he agrees or is completely satisfied. So what does or would the church say about the idea we missed the ideal here or there?..I read a document that seemed to appease my twitch, but I just reread it two days later and feel not as content as I led myself to believe…

Any comments thoughts and personal ideas are always fun, so bring em on, but if anyone can give me links, or sources, books, n encyclicals that would be superb…thanks guy!..

In the many documented and approved apparitions of Mary and Jesus and countless other apparitions of angels and Saints (documented and undocumented) their recorded comments always seem to support Church teaching. Two examples I think of often is St. Faustina having us recite the creed per Jesus’ instructions in the Chaplet of Divine Mercy. Well, if Jesus is still supporting the creed in the 1930’s I guess it’s still all good. And Mary imploring us repeatedly to say the Rosary. Then every word of the Rosary must be good, right? To me, the evidence supporting the Church is strong. However, they also warn that the Church is imperfect. Apparently that is ours to discern (the Church is more than the Pope and it is a human institution… albeit led by the vicar of Christ) but Church doctrine seems solid.

However, we shouldn’t really need “proof”. The circumstantial and spiritual evidence should be enough. At the same time, doubt is a natural derivitive of Faith.

“The road goes on forever and the party never ends.” --Robert Earl Keen

 

[mab23]

In the many documented and approved apparitions of Mary and Jesus and countless other apparitions of angels and Saints (documented and undocumented) their recorded comments always seem to support Church teaching. Two examples I think of often is St. Faustina having us recite the creed per Jesus’ instructions in the Chaplet of Divine Mercy. Well, if Jesus is still supporting the creed in the 1930’s I guess it’s still all good. And Mary imploring us repeatedly to say the Rosary. Then every word of the Rosary must be good, right? To me, the evidence supporting the Church is strong. However, they also warn that the Church is imperfect. Apparently that is ours to discern (the Church is more than the Pope and it is a human institution… albeit led by the vicar of Christ) but Church doctrine seems solid.

However, we shouldn’t really need “proof”. The circumstantial and spiritual evidence should be enough. At the same time, doubt is a natural derivitive of Faith.

“The road goes on forever and the party never ends.” --Robert Earl Keen

AMEN!

 

[vsedriver]

The Church teaches Truth. Truth can’t be true one day and not the next. Members of the Church commit sin but that doesn’t affect the teaching of the Truth. The Church can only teach Truth because to lead the faithful in a falsehood is the realm of the father of lies, the devil, and Jesus promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against His Church.

 

[plitedextrosity]

Alright, so in what ways is the church imperfect?..doctrine may be sound, but imperfect is less than, and less than must be corrected…so the only fault would be in the community of the church (you and I)?..but pre Vatican II protestants were heretics and bound for hell, this was truth, but now this truth is not under the same perspective, this is more along the lines of my question…

But forgive me if I came across as opposing or contradicting out religion, this is in no way an attack…

 

[vsedriver]

Alright, so in what ways is the church imperfect?..doctrine may be sound, but imperfect is less than, and less than must be corrected…so the only fault would be in the community of the church (you and I)?..but pre Vatican II protestants were heretics and bound for hell, this was truth, but now this truth is not under the same perspective, this is more along the lines of my question…

But forgive me if I came across as opposing or contradicting out religion, this is in no way an attack…

What Vatican II said was protestants at the time of the Reformation who left the Church knowing it was the one true faith were heretics. But those who have grown up outside of the Church since then aren’t heretics since they didn’t have the benefit of knowing the CC was the one true faith to begin with.

 

[Arturo_Ortiz]

In the many documented and approved apparitions of Mary and Jesus and countless other apparitions of angels and Saints (documented and undocumented) their recorded comments always seem to support Church teaching. Two examples I think of often is St. Faustina having us recite the creed per Jesus’ instructions in the Chaplet of Divine Mercy. Well, if Jesus is still supporting the creed in the 1930’s I guess it’s still all good. And Mary imploring us repeatedly to say the Rosary. Then every word of the Rosary must be good, right? To me, the evidence supporting the Church is strong. However, they also warn that the Church is imperfect. Apparently that is ours to discern (the Church is more than the Pope and it is a human institution… albeit led by the vicar of Christ) but Church doctrine seems solid.

However, we shouldn’t really need “proof”. The circumstantial and spiritual evidence should be enough. At the same time, doubt is a natural derivitive of Faith.

“The road goes on forever and the party never ends.” --Robert Earl Keen

Amen

 

[Arturo_Ortiz]

What Vatican II said was protestants at the time of the Reformation who left the Church knowing it was the one true faith were heretics. But those who have grown up outside of the Church since then aren’t heretics since they didn’t have the benefit of knowing the CC was the one true faith to begin with.

This makes sense. The problem with the first protestants that left the Catholic Church grew up with the true faith. They chose to leave the truth and this was a personal decision. most pf the protestants today did’t grow up in the Catholic faith. Thus they did not choose to leave the truth as they were not brought into the Catholic faith.

 

[plitedextrosity]

However, we shouldn’t really need “proof”. The circumstantial and spiritual evidence should be enough. At the same time, doubt is a natural derivitive of Faith.

“The road goes on forever and the party never ends.” --Robert Earl Keen

I hope i didn’t lead anyone here to believe that this was a topic about me doubting, I don’t like the feeling I get when I defend my faith as if I have something to prove, when I see or hear others do this I pick up on a sense of insecurity, as if they are more so trying to price to themselves what they believe than the tryin to convince the other.

That being said I do confess my confidence in what our church teaches in whole presentation, this thread was only started only bc I did read where the church stated that she will be imperfect until our brothers return. I was just curious to what extent this could be measured.

But I am glad to hear that her perspective on protestants before Vatican II was only limited to tthe ones who left and not to the ones raised in the ways of their parents, this was a misconception I held that all were guilty until Vatican II…

But please understand I have no doubts and trust her completely, its this mistrust in my own interpretation and lack of doctrine for certain scriptures from various pastors of multiple denominations, that and a full interpretation of scripture and solid doctrine to back it up, (I mean the church of England split, n when their priests return the church recognises the faulted yet still present apostolic succession, protestants believe if you leave you leave the resr as well, but not so with where I stand today, how much more serious can a community take their faith?..ya know?..) Which has brought me home…

Blessings…