J
justasking4
Guest
Lets say a catholic decides that this matter of not eating meat is just plain silly but tries to follow church teaching on everything else would that be considered a mortal sin?
If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you not being a Catholic?
- Status
J
justasking4
Guest
This is another false statement by you. There is no such teaching of Jesus like this in the NT which are the only teachings of Jesus we have.
You have erred twice now. Jesus never taught this kind of thing. Please study scriptures and don’t misrepresent them with these kinds of statements. Jesus never taught that if you eat meat on a Fridays during lent it would be a mortal sin.
I thought the Roman Catholic church was unified whole and yet there different rites. In your rite is it a mortal sin that would cut you off from Christ and condemn you to hell if you ate meat on Fridays during lent?
G
guanophore
Guest
Actually, this is a form of Protestantism commonly called “Cafeteria” Catholicism. Jesus told the Apostles “he who hears you, hears me”. Now, if Jesus were to command something, and a person did not do it, would it be considered a sin?
ja4, it seems that you are so quick to find fault, to jump at the opportunity to tear and rip at the Body of Christ, that you are not even reading! My statement was not false. You asked the question, are devotional practices based on doctrine. I answered yes, they are. They are not considered doctrine in themselves, but they are based on the doctrine, which is the Teaching of Jesus.
“Bible Christians” limit their understanding of the Teachings of Jesus to the Bible. That is certainly your perogative. Those who belong to Apostolic faiths adhere to the Sacred Traditions that were handed down to us, an from which the NT was created. God never “discontinued” Sacred Tradition just because some of it was written down and canonized.
I guess you are misunderstanding me, ja4. Jesus told the Apostles that “he who hears you, hears me”. This is Jesus empowering the Church to create disciplines. Jesus also stated that HIs disciples would fast when He was taken away from them. These are, indeed, the Teachings of Jesus. Why should it bother you so much if Catholics fast in this manner? You reject Catholicism, so you don’t believe it applies to you! What would happen if you just decided to tolerate that other people have devotional practices that you do not? Why tear at your brethren in Christ who practice differently?
There are many and various fasting practices throughout the world. Each of the faithful are bound by the Rite in which they exist/reside. It might be of interest to you to explore the fasting practices of the Eastern Church, which are much more stringent than the Roman Rite.
J
justasking4
Guest
Are these “Cafeteria” catholics real catholics in the eyes of the church?
Since all we know what Jesus commanded is to be found in the Scriptures then yes. If its a church that tries to unsurp His authority then no. Thats why it is not a sin to eat meat on Fridays since Jesus never taught such a thing for example. He never taught such a thing in the NT.
G
guanophore
Guest
I have heard it said "once a Catholic, always a Catholic. Most of these people are in a state of mortal sin.
No, ja4, Jesus never said anything about all His commandments being found in the Scripture. He commissioned His disciples “teach them all that I have commanded”. The commission to teach the commandments was given to the Apostles.
The Church does not “usurp” any authority. On the contrary, Jesus was given all authority, and that is the authority by which He commissions the Apostles. So, you didn’t answer my question. If Catholics wish to observe fasting in this manner, why does that bother you so much?
J
justasking4
Guest
You make my point. Jesus commissioned “His disciples” (His immediate disciples) to "“teach them all that I have commanded”. The “I” in this part is Jesus Himself instructing His “immediate disciples” to teach what is recorded in the NT. Jesus was not referring to all the teachings of the catholic church that would come much later.
Good point. This “all authority” was given only to the disciples and not to future church leaders to teach things that the Scriptures never command nor speak of.
What i have an issue with is when a church makes a command not taught in scripture and if that person that if violates it is guilty of a sin that can condemn them for breaking it.
To think that eating meat on a Friday could be a sin at the same level as adultery or murder is mind boogling.
G
guanophore
Guest
No, ja4. the NT had not yet begun to be written. He was instructing them to teach “all that I have commanded”, which is not contained entirely in scripture. The purpose of scripture was never to be a “complete” recording.
Of course He was! Jesus had already told them that the mustard seed would grow into a great tree, unrecognizable as the product of the smallest seed. Jesus was clear that they were not ready to undersstand all the Teachings yet.
The authority does not come from Scripture, but from Christ. The Apostles passed on their authority to the bishops, and they to their successors, up until the present day.
Ok, but why should that bother YOU!? You don’t believe in Lent, do you? You don’t espouse the traditions of fasting, do you? So why would another person’s devotion or lack of it upset you so much? Jesus said the disciples would fast after the bridegroom was taken. How can you say that is not scriptural?
Disobedience is sin, ja4, whatever it’s context. Failure to listen to those that Jesus empowered with “all authority” is failure to listen to Him. This is scriptural. If the Church did not have this authority, then the dietary laws could not have been changed at the Council of Jerusalem. Remember what they said when they made the rules? “It seemed right to the HS and to us”.
J
justasking4
Guest
.
You are right in part. The only things we know what Jesus taught is found in the NT. He may have taught other things but we don’t know what they were since we have no record of them.
Think about what you are saying here. There were centuries that Christians were totally unaware of the marian doctrines. Secondly, if what you say is true then the statement that catholics use about the “fullness of the truth being in the catholic church” is also false since there will be further “Divine Revelations” that are unknown to catholics today. Spouse of the Spirit and mother of all mankind come to mind.
G
guanophore
Guest
The “we” who are "Bible only " Christians don’t have a record, but those who have been careful to preserve all the Traditions as they were delivered do have other sources.
No, this is not the case, ja4. We see these Marian beliefs already present in the NT, so we know they predated the death of the Apostles.
No, the Divine Deposit of Faith was given “once and for all” as scripture states. It is only our understanding of that revelation that develops over time. We understand more about Mary’s ministry today than the first century Christians did, because we have been able to observe it for longer. Her ministry has not changed, but our understanding of it has.
O
onmyknees
Guest
Hi JustAsking4,
Please read Matt 16 on Peter’s authority given to him by Jesus. “On this rock I will build my Church, (Peter means rock). I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven and what you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” Jesus put Peter in charge of His church. The first pope. His apostles were the first bishops and priests. Decisions made by the Church are by men guided by the Holy Spirit- please read 2 Peter 1:20-21. About oral tradition teachings please see John 21:25. About devotions to Mary our Mother. Please read John 19:27 when Jesus on the cross gives Mary to John as his mother. Also we don’t worship Mary we honor her as the Mother of God and we ask her to pray for us just like we ask our friends to pray for us but she is the right up there in heaven next to Jesus, the greatest saint. Mary was full of grace which means sinless. Please read Luke1:26-48. Would Jesus choose to dwell in someone who was not clean? The Apparitions of Mary are not doctrines of the church you may believe in them and have devotions ,example the Brown Scapular devotion.
J
justasking4
Guest
If you read the NT you don’t see any references to Peter being the supreme leader of the church. Actually there is a plurality of leaders. Read Acts 15 for example and see who has the final say. Its not Peter.
Would you happen to have some references in the NT for this assertion?
What does your reference here have to do with church leadership?
Do you know specifically what these other things were? Can you give me a couple of examples?
Jesus gives the care of His mother to John. To say more than this is going on is to read catholic doctrine into the verse. The apostles thems did not have any marian devotions and don’t mention her in any way that anyone was to be devoted her.
The scriptures never teach such a thing as this. You won’t find anyone in the NT advocating any prayers to the deceased. Here is what Jesus says about prayer in john 16:22-24
22 “Therefore you too have grief now; but I will see you again, and your heart will rejoice, and no one will take your joy away from you.
23 “In that day you will not question Me about anything. Truly, truly, I say to you, if you ask the Father for anything in My name, He will give it to you.
24 “Until now you have asked for nothing in My name; ask and you will receive, so that your joy may be made full.
As you can see we are to ask in the name of Christ and not in Mary’s name or anyone else.
Secondly we have only one High Priest Who intercedes before the Father for us. You can see this in Hebrews 4:14-16 which says:
14 Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession.
15 For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin.
16 Therefore let us draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.
Mary and the deceased saints are never spoken of as being high priests. Only Jesus is. Only He can intercede for us.
Another related passage is found in Ephesians 2:18 which says:
**for through Him **we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father.
It is only through Christ we have access. There is no such need for others to give us access to Christ. We can go directly to Him without the aid of Mary or the saints.
Look up the term “full of grace or favored one” in a Greek lexicon and you won’t find any idea that this means she was without sin. For those that claim such things are reading into the meaning of the word what is not there.
Why not? He lived among sinners and touched them. Secondly, in Philippians 2:6-7 where it speaks of Christ “emptying” Himself of His right of being equal with God. This made it possible for Him to live among us without destroying the people.
But are they true? Are the devotions based on Truth?
R
RedSoxFan
Guest
Can we add a barfing icon to the smilies list?
G
guanophore
Guest
Indeed not! such an attitude represents a secular misunderstanding of the nature of leadership in the Kingdom. Jesus taught that those who are greatest ought to wash the feet of all. Why on earth would we see Peter acting “supreme”? Do you think he did not understand the Lord? No, what we see is a very humble man, who does not think more highly of himself than he ought.
Well, perhaps we read it differently?
However, we have the same plurality of leadership today. It is called the “college of Bishops”.The Apostles passed on the authority that was given to them. Their successors are called “bishops”.
This is how the magesterium works. The bishops, together in union with the Pope discern the HS, just as they did at the council of Jerusalem. This is how the Chu
rch still functions today.
Do you know specifically what these other things were? Can you give me a couple of examples?
One example is that the Sacred Scripture was not to be separated from the Sacred Tradition that produced it! Another is that there was no “expiration date” on I Cor 11:2.
justasking4;3398808:
ja, ja4…It was Catholic doctrine that CREATED the verse! The context of the NT is the Catholic Church! John knew exactly what he was writing. Jesus was completely devoted to HIs mother, and so were all the Apostles. I am sure none of them passed up an opportunity to honor her, out of love for their Lord.
Indeed, on the contrary, we see in the NT that “all are alive unto Him”. We read that He is “not the God of the dead, but of the living”, and we read that those who believe those who have gone to their heavenly reward are dead are told by Jesus “you are quite wrong”. He is talking to you, too, ja4. “you are quite wrong”, if you think that those who are in Christ are not alive forevermore. There is no such thing as “soul sleep”, as you seem to have been taught. Catholics do not ask “the dead” for prayers, but those who are alive, and have gone on before us. We are all part of One Body. They cannot be separated by death, because death has no dominion over those who are in Christ.
We ask Mary and the saints to pray for us, in the name of Christ. Why should it scandalize you?
Just so, and He is generous, and shares His priestly ministry with His unworthy servants.
Or do you not believe that we are partakers of His Grace?
If this is true, then why does Paul bother to ask people for prayers? Do you really believe we cannot pray for one another?
Another related passage is found in Ephesians 2:18 which says:
**for through Him **we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father.
It is only through Christ we have access. There is no such need for others to give us access to Christ. We can go directly to Him without the aid of Mary or the saints.
Not possible, ja4. It was Catholics who believed this that wrote the verse. It is the Teaching we received from them that allows us to understand what was meant.
This is true, but living among us is one thing, and taking flesh to Himself is another. He could not take any flesh that was tainted by sin.
I would have to consider the devotion, I suppose. I would venture that most of them are. However, I think people get excessive with their devotions. In the part of the country where I live, every year somone has himself nailed to a cross on Good Friday. I find this devotional practice excessive, though it is based on truth. This is one of the main reasons that devotional practices are no part of binding doctrine.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
:coffeeread:
J
Jimmy_B
Guest
…
…
H
Huguenot
Guest
what does “barfing” mean ?
I want a cuddle …
C
c659smith
Guest
Indeed not! such an attitude represents a secular misunderstanding of the nature of leadership in the Kingdom. Jesus taught that those who are greatest ought to wash the feet of all. Why on earth would we see Peter acting “supreme”? Do you think he did not understand the Lord? No, what we see is a very humble man, who does not think more highly of himself than he ought.
Well, perhaps we read it differently?
The Apostles passed on the authority that was given to them. Their successors are called “bishops”.
This is how the magesterium works. The bishops, together in union with the Pope discern the HS, just as they did at the council of Jerusalem. This is how the Chu
rch still functions today.
justasking4;3398808:
we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father.Do you know specifically what these other things were? Can you give me a couple of examples?
One example is that the Sacred Scripture was not to be separated from the Sacred Tradition that produced it! Another is that there was no “expiration date” on I Cor 11:2.
ja, ja4…It was Catholic doctrine that CREATED the verse! The context of the NT is the Catholic Church! John knew exactly what he was writing. Jesus was completely devoted to HIs mother, and so were all the Apostles. I am sure none of them passed up an opportunity to honor her, out of love for their Lord.
Indeed, on the contrary, we see in the NT that “all are alive unto Him”. We read that He is “not the God of the dead, but of the living”, and we read that those who believe those who have gone to their heavenly reward are dead are told by Jesus “you are quite wrong”. He is talking to you, too, ja4. “you are quite wrong”, if you think that those who are in Christ are not alive forevermore. There is no such thing as “soul sleep”, as you seem to have been taught. Catholics do not ask “the dead” for prayers, but those who are alive, and have gone on before us. We are all part of One Body. They cannot be separated by death, because death has no dominion over those who are in Christ.
We ask Mary and the saints to pray for us, in the name of Christ. Why should it scandalize you?
Just so, and He is generous, and shares His priestly ministry with His unworthy servants.
Or do you not believe that we are partakers of His Grace?
If this is true, then why does Paul bother to ask people for prayers? Do you really believe we cannot pray for one another?
Another related passage is found in Ephesians 2:18 which says:
**for through Him **
It is only through Christ we have access. There is no such need for others to give us access to Christ. We can go directly to Him without the aid of Mary or the saints.
Not possible, ja4. It was Catholics who believed this that wrote the verse. It is the Teaching we received from them that allows us to understand what was meant.
This is true, but living among us is one thing, and taking flesh to Himself is another. He could not take any flesh that was tainted by sin.
I would have to consider the devotion, I suppose. I would venture that most of them are. However, I think people get excessive with their devotions. In the part of the country where I live, every year somone has himself nailed to a cross on Good Friday. I find this devotional practice excessive, though it is based on truth. This is one of the main reasons that devotional practices are no part of binding doctrine.
YOUR QUOTE:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Actually there is a plurality of leaders. Read Acts 15 for example and see who has the final say. Its not Peter.
If Christ did not give Peter and the Apostles a final say then how would you translate :
“[Jesus] said to them again, ‘Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.’ And then he breathed on them and said to them, ‘Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained’” (John 20:21-23).
“Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me” (Luke 10:16).
That is a final say in my book
R
Rachel_Malloy
Guest
This thread has reached it’s limit in posts.
Thank you to all who participated, please feel free to continue the discussion in a new thread.
God bless-
Rachel
Thank you to all who participated, please feel free to continue the discussion in a new thread.
God bless-
Rachel
- Status