It's NOT in the Bible

[Luvtosew]

Sola Scriptura is not in the Sola Biblia. Period.

However,

It would be nice to know the historical background and theological reasoning for the Traditions and traditions of the Church.

Take for example: Lent (From new advent-sorry I dont give the link since I bought the CD and I’m going from my files - you can just visit the site and search for Lent ).

You can’t go around saying something is Apostolic Tradition just because you think it was, or because you think it should be incorporated into a dogmatic matter and you need the Apostolic reputation to sustain your argument.

The Church must be diligent in presenting where these Traditions originated from.

Before Scott Hahn and Fr. Barron, I don’t remember this exposition on Tradition. I’m not saying there wasn’t anyone… I’m saying I don’t remember

Just because I trust the Church doesn’t mean I don’t need to learn and inquire about Its history and development. If anything, I need to know as much as I can in order to better serve the Church.

In this day and age, “Just because I say so” doesn’t cut it anymore. Our Lord has guided us throughout our history and He has been Graceful enough that we have been given signs and reinforcement into His Will and Word. If He can treat us with that love, the Church should only follow.

God Bless,

Jose

so that how lent came about, thanks.

 

[SteveGC]

Not any more no, in some things fine, I know the history of the early beginning of the Church of God and that, and I’m sure the intention was well in the early years and they had to conform to the culture and emperors and then they slowly became very powerful, and well we know what happens when power get involved.

I see.

If you know the history of the “Church of God”, you must know that this was a liturgical, sacramental church, yes? And that there was a rigorous belief in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, right?

Arguably, all of these recorded aspects of early church beliefs and practices are not only Catholic, but were present well before your claim that the church fell into corruption.

So, I’ll ask…do you presently believe in a church that is liturgical, sacramental, and holds a firm belief in the Real Presence of the Eucharist?

Shouldn’t the “necessary reform” have stringently maintained those recorded elements of the earliest beliefs and practices of the church of God?

One other question. What did this power-corrupted Church do which transformed it from a church of God, to a church of man? I’m not suggesting there was no corruption from individuals within the church, mind you. I’m simply asking you how the church itself was stripped of it’s God-led status, to a man-led status overall.

 

[Cat_Herder]

Ok, Marian veneration: Where? Not in the bible. She says we will call her blessed, but that’s about it.

Marian veneration is simply the New Testament fulfillment of the OT veneration of Mother Rachel, which the Jews had and still have been doing for well over 4,000 years. Here is a complete explanation with Scripture cites, see for yourself.

Purgatory: Not mentioned by name in the Bible(though the idea is)

Neither is the word “Trinity” or even the word “Bible,” both of which are perfectly valid doctrines.

The Rosary. There are prayers from the bible used, but, the whole idea itself isn’t.

The Rosary is just a shorthand for praying the Psalms using other prayers from and referencing the Bible so that one doesn’t have to memorize the whole psalter. Because the Psalms are repetitive, the Rosary is also repetitive. (Look at Psalm 136.) So I don’t see what your issue with the Rosary is.

Also, when you read Acts 17:11, you see that the Bereans searched the scriptures to see if what Paul and Silas said was true. Why would they do that? They had to have a rule of faith.

Umm… THE BIBLE DID NOT EXIST YET during Paul’s ministry in Berea. Paul was referring to the Old Testament. The OT is not the complete rule of faith.

The Bible is an accepted rule by most people who believe in Christ.

I look at the ten o’ clock news and all of the divorce, abortion, contraception, murder and adultery and find that quite hard to believe…

It is not Bible alone
It is not Tradition alone
It is not Magesterium (teaching authority) alone.

It is all three, under Christ alone."

That is correct, the thing is, Christ doesn’t set up the Church to fail. Nor does He change His teachings to suit the times. That is why the Catholic Church is infallible–God doesn’t fail in His Will that all men have access to knowledge of the truth.

 

[Luvtosew]

Prove the bold part.

Moreover, how can you say that Sacred Tradition is man made if the Holy Spirit is protecting the Church to allow access to salvation and Scripture to everyone?

I’d like to give you some , not that many are imp. to me

transubstantiation
drinking blood is a no no
Mary is an ever virgin, (I believe she probably is)
Mary assumption
bowing down to the Pope
rosary
confession to a priest ( I like confession by the way)
indulgences
penance
Mary co-redemptrix
praying to angles for intersession
classifying sins mortal and venial, holy days of obligation to attend Mass
no meat on Fridays- not sure if thats still a sin
limbo- not in effect now
purgatory

 

[batman1973]

Oh, I have no issue with the Rosary. It’s just not mentioned in the bible. And, no, the Bereans didnt have the Bible, they had the scriptures. That is, to say, the Law and the Prophets. My whole point is, the Bible is an important book, and shouldnt be dismissed so easily. When I do become a Catholic, I still intend fully to continue to read the Bible as often as I can (daily, I hope)

 

[SteveGC]

Steve GC hit the nail on the head"It is not Bible alone
It is not Tradition alone
It is not Magesterium (teaching authority) alone.

It is all three, under Christ alone."

I appreciate this, but I would have to add that, if you have no problem with this, then you have no problem with the Catholic Church actually being what it claims to be - the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church of Christ.

The tripod of Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium all supporting Christ the Head is characteristic of only the Catholic Church, from Pentecost to today. No other church is fashioned in this way.

 

[Cat_Herder]

I changed the order of your post for clarity’s sake…

I’d like to give you some , not that many are imp. to me

transubstantiation
drinking blood is a no no

Cannibalism is a no no but the Eucharist is not cannibalism but rather metabolism; there is only one body involved, that of Christ. Please review Paul’s teaching on what the Body of Christ is in 1 Corinthians 12. If you as a cell in Christ’s body refuse the blood of the Host, namely Christ, what happens? Full explanation here

praying to angles for intersession

Full explanation here

Mary is an ever virgin, (I believe she probably is)
Mary assumption
Mary co-redemptrix

Full explanation here

rosary

Previous post

confession to a priest ( I like confession by the way)
indulgences
penance
purgatory
bowing down to the Pope

See these FAQs

classifying sins mortal and venial,

[BIBLEDRB]1 John 5:16[/BIBLEDRB]

holy days of obligation to attend Mass

[BIBLEDRB]Hebrews 10:25-29[/BIBLEDRB]

The “assembly” is the Mass.

no meat on Fridays- not sure if thats still a sin

Jesus requires fasting:
[BIBLEDRB]Luke 5:35[/BIBLEDRB]
But the days on which fasting is done is a discipline, not doctrine

limbo- not in effect now

Theory, not even a discipline or doctrine.

 

[SteveGC]

Oh, I have no issue with the Rosary. It’s just not mentioned in the bible. And, no, the Bereans didnt have the Bible, they had the scriptures. That is, to say, the Law and the Prophets. My whole point is, the Bible is an important book, and shouldnt be dismissed so easily. When I do become a Catholic, I still intend fully to continue to read the Bible as often as I can (daily, I hope)

Wonderful to hear that you are coming home. You will soon find that your exposure to the Bible will be deeper, richer and more ubiquitous than you probably now imagine. You simply cannot be a faithful Catholic and not be immersed in Sacred Scripture, like it or not. It’s everywhere, and in everything.

 

[batman1973]

I appreciate this, but I would have to add that, if you have no problem with this, then you have no problem with the Catholic Church actually being what it claims to be - the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church of Christ.

The tripod of Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium all supporting Christ the Head is characteristic of only the Catholic Church, from Pentecost to today. No other church is fashioned in this way.

And, I dont have a problem with The Catholic Church. I just personally feel that the Bible is of importance, and shouldnt be just put off. Or that it, or it’s teachings are “man made”.

 

[Luvtosew]

I changed the order of your post for clarity’s sake…

Cannibalism is a no no but the Eucharist is not cannibalism but rather metabolism; there is only one body involved, that of Christ. Please review Paul’s teaching on what the Body of Christ is in 1 Corinthians 12. If you as a cell in Christ’s body refuse the blood of the Host, namely Christ, what happens? Full explanation here

Full explanation here

Full explanation here

Previous post

See these FAQs

[BIBLEDRB]1 John 5:16[/BIBLEDRB]

[BIBLEDRB]Hebrews 10:25-29[/BIBLEDRB]

The “assembly” is the Mass.

Jesus requires fasting:
[BIBLEDRB]Luke 5:35[/BIBLEDRB]
But the days on which fasting is done is a discipline, not doctrine

Theory, not even a discipline or doctrine.

Sorry I’ve heard the same arguments a million times.

 

[Luvtosew]

I see.

If you know the history of the “Church of God”, you must know that this was a liturgical, sacramental church, yes? And that there was a rigorous belief in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, right?

Arguably, all of these recorded aspects of early church beliefs and practices are not only Catholic, but were present well before your claim that the church fell into corruption.

So, I’ll ask…do you presently believe in a church that is liturgical, sacramental, and holds a firm belief in the Real Presence of the Eucharist?

Shouldn’t the “necessary reform” have stringently maintained those recorded elements of the earliest beliefs and practices of the church of God?

One other question. What did this power-corrupted Church do which transformed it from a church of God, to a church of man? I’m not suggesting there was no corruption from individuals within the church, mind you. I’m simply asking you how the church itself was stripped of it’s God-led status, to a man-led status overall.

I’ll let you read the Catholic part on the Reformation and well lets admit it will be somewhat biased, but so will the Protestant, so in the middle is a good like.

newadvent.org/cathen/12700b.htm#I

about transb and the sacrifice, I believe in the real presence in the spiritual sense.

 

[SteveGC]

And, I dont have a problem with The Catholic Church. I just personally feel that the Bible is of importance, and shouldnt be just put off. Or that it, or it’s teachings are “man made”.

I hear what you’re saying. Realize though, that it is very easy to interpret the Catholic argument against Sola Scriptura as Anti-Scriptura. Don’t make this mistake. Take the argument only for what it intends to do - refute the SOLA. We don’t refute Scriptura. How could we? It is essential to the faith.
The core fundamentals of what we profess, believe and practice comes either directly, or implicitly and contextually, from it.

Have you ever noticed here on CAF and elsewhere around Catholic circles that the Bible is so often referred to as Sacred Scripture? That’s a clue to how reverent we are toward it. Know of any other Christian communities that refer to it in that way? Just a thought.

 

[Luvtosew]

I changed the order of your post for clarity’s sake…

Cannibalism is a no no but the Eucharist is not cannibalism but rather metabolism; there is only one body involved, that of Christ. Please review Paul’s teaching on what the Body of Christ is in 1 Corinthians 12. If you as a cell in Christ’s body refuse the blood of the Host, namely Christ, what happens? Full explanation here

Full explanation here

Full explanation here

Previous post

See these FAQs

[BIBLEDRB]1 John 5:16[/BIBLEDRB]

[BIBLEDRB]Hebrews 10:25-29[/BIBLEDRB]

The “assembly” is the Mass.

Jesus requires fasting:
[BIBLEDRB]Luke 5:35[/BIBLEDRB]
But the days on which fasting is done is a discipline, not doctrine

Theory, not even a discipline or doctrine.

Theres no need to get into Pauls teaching on the body. I don’t believe in the Real presence in the flesh and blood sense, . also you asked for teachings or dogmas and I gave you some. sure I have read the Catholic explanations, and most I’m not even concerned about. About fasting, that verse did not mean we have to fast of meat one day a week, all food is clean and good he said. See you cant pick and choose a verse.
Sorry just don’t see it.

 

[SteveGC]

I’ll let you read the Catholic part on the Reformation and well lets admit it will be somewhat biased, but so will the Protestant, so in the middle is a good like.

newadvent.org/cathen/12700b.htm#I

about transb and the sacrifice, I believe in the real presence in the spiritual sense.

Obviously, I have no problem with that rendition of the history of the Reformation. If you have no problem with that rendition, I’m surprised you have a problem with the Catholic Church.

While it points out the reality of corruption of some of it’s members, it reinforces often the reality that the Church itself remained a doctrinally and authoritatively pure institution.

From that article:

The Reformation destroyed the unity of faith and ecclesiastical organization of the Christian peoples of Europe, cut many millions off from the true Catholic Church, and robbed them of the greatest portion of the salutary means for the cultivation and maintenance of the supernatural life.

Clearly it demonstrates that the reform, while necessary, was erroneously exercised by attempting to create a “new church”, decapitating the authoritative body of the Catholic Church, which is what preserves the doctrine (via the protection of the Holy Spirit) in a pure form through all generations. Once you do this, and create your own unprotected authority, and call it “church”, you set up a doctrinal free-for-all, and this is precisely what happened in the subsequent 500 years. Of course, the Church was not decapitated - it can’t be. But Luther and his ilk, in their ignorance, created the worst type of heretical chasm in Christ’s Church. They laid a foundation which encouraged anyone with a beef against the established authority to separate and in many cases, define their own doctrine, set up their own church, and practice their faith based on their own unprotected, fallible interpretations of the same Scriptures that the Catholic Church canonized.

The Reformers unfortunately didn’t reform what needed to be reformed. They revolted and separated from the One Holy Church, and took thousands upon thousands with them. Of course, the Church Herself eventually correctly reformed, from within.

What exactly is within that account that now makes you against the Church?

 

[Slinger]

In response to the OP…

I am by no means a Bible authority…but more of a Bible scholar (always learning) but I have never been shown scripture saying that everything I believe or do must be from the Bible. However, because I believe that the scripture is truly “God breathed” then I must have faith that it is to serve as my “manual of authority” in life. Men and women inspired by the Holy Spirit serve as a means to help guide me and teach me but I cannot rely on what man says but use it to prayerfully discern what God is wanting to reveal to me through His Word.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

And, I dont have a problem with The Catholic Church. I just personally feel that the Bible is of importance, and shouldnt be just put off. Or that it, or it’s teachings are “man made”.

The importance of Scripture is far from “put off” in Catholicism. Every Mass includes the Liturgy of the Word, and homilies are best constructed when they reinforce the messages of the day’s readings.

In Eastern tradition, we go even deeper, with frequent use of Scripture, especially the Psalms, as elements of the Divine Liturgy.

I agree with others here who have also commented on this specific post - we trust you will find your appreciation of Scripture to be greatly enhanced when complemented with Sacred Tradition and Church teaching.

We pray for you as you prepare to be received into the Church!

 

[Cat_Herder]

Theres no need to get into Pauls teaching on the body. I don’t believe in the Real presence in the flesh and blood sense,

You need to prayerfully read 1 Corinthians 12. You already talk about the Bible, now go read it and see for yourself.

About fasting, that verse did not mean we have to fast of meat one day a week, all food is clean and good he said. See you cant pick and choose a verse.

You just did. Jesus did not say “fast if you feel like it;” He said “when the Bridegroom is taken from them, then they SHALL fast.” It is an obligation.

Sorry just don’t see it.

Just because all food is clean doesn’t mean that you can eat all food all of the time. Cookies are clean, but if you eat nothing but cookies, then you wind up a glutton and have to deal with both the natural consequence of your gluttony (obesity, diabetes, etc.) and the eternal consequence–an attachment to a worldly thing, namely food, and what goes along with that:

[BIBLEDRB]Prov 23:21[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[Cat_Herder]

about transb and the sacrifice, I believe in the real presence in the spiritual sense.

What is “the spiritual sense?”

 

[SteveGC]

In response to the OP…

I am by no means a Bible authority…but more of a Bible scholar (always learning) but I have never been shown scripture saying that everything I believe or do must be from the Bible. However, because I believe that the scripture is truly “God breathed” then I must have faith that it is to serve as my “manual of authority” in life. Men and women inspired by the Holy Spirit serve as a means to help guide me and teach me but I cannot rely on what man says but use it to prayerfully discern what God is wanting to reveal to me through His Word.

Thanks for that (name removed by moderator)ut. I would respond to it by first agreeing in principle to the notion that Sacred Scripture demands our deepest attention, consideration, and prayerful immersion within it.

But then I would have you consider the notion of “authority” a bit more. If a “God-breathed” entity demands your faith that it is a “manual of authority”, then the same logic should apply to the Apostles. They, personally, should also be your “manual of authority”. God breathed on them (John 20:22) as well. And He did this in conjunction with His decree to them that “as the Father has sent me, I also send you”.

The Apostles were sent by Christ JUST AS the Father sent Christ Himself. What does this mean? Well, the Father sent the Son to reveal Himself (God) to the world, to spread the Gospel, to save the world. In like manner, Christ (knowing that future generations could not experience Him directly) sent the Apostles to continue this salvific mission throughout all generations, through the establishment of the Church (the pillar and bulwark of the Truth). This “sending” was actualized by breathing upon them.

Thus, like Scripture, our authority must also lie within the established Church and it’s anointed, successive leaders.

That is why it is the Church, Her Tradition, and Sacred Scripture. All 3 are to be our earthly authority. Ergo, Sacred Scripture must be prayerfully read by us within the precise framework of the Church and Her Tradition. In this way, we can be confident that we are receiving the fullest guidance by the Holy Spirit toward the conduct of our lives.

Just a thought for you.

 

[Slinger]

The Apostles were sent by Christ JUST AS the Father sent Christ Himself. What does this mean? Well, the Father sent the Son to reveal Himself (God) to the world, to spread the Gospel, to save the world. In like manner, Christ (knowing that future generations could not experience Him directly) sent the Apostles to continue this salvific mission throughout all generations, through the establishment of the Church (the pillar and bulwark of the Truth). This “sending” was actualized by breathing upon them.

Thus, like Scripture, our authority must also lie within the established Church and it’s anointed, successive leaders.

That is why it is the Church, Her Tradition, and Sacred Scripture. All 3 are to be our earthly authority. Ergo, Sacred Scripture must be prayerfully read by us within the precise framework of the Church and Her Tradition. In this way, we can be confident that we are receiving the fullest guidance by the Holy Spirit toward the conduct of our lives.

Just a thought for you.

The difference is that the Apostles were men and therefore were not infallible. Sure, they were guided by Christ Himself and by the Holy Spirit but they were not Christ…they were sinners. The Catholic church leaders are no different than any other Holy Spirit guided teachers/pastors in that they are only men.