Yes, that’s certainly what you’re told and as a RC you must believe it. It’s what makes you distinctly a RC
Which today your self-proclaimed infallible Magisterium asserts to be the RCC, under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome; and you must believe it because it’s what makes you distinctly RC.
Tom, did you write this yourself?
Yes, and to be truly accurate RCs are told only your “infallible” Magisterium (which is what you define as “the Church”) has the right to form and teach doctrines based on its interpretation of Scripture and whatever extra-biblical “tradition” it has accepted as “valid.” And as a RC you must believe all the doctrines they set before you.
Yes, that is certainly what you’re told, and as a RC you must believe it.
That is not entirely accurate… the different sects of protestants and other non-Catholic and non-Christian faith communities do not agree on much. Even “Church of Christ” only uses the NT.
No, it is not. the Orthodox also believe in the gift of infallibility.
No, moon, you are posting falsehoods again. Perhaps you are truly ignorant about Catholicism, and you do not realize that all 23 Rites of the CAtholic Church, only one of them “Roman” (Latin) all espouse the teaching of the apostles that the Magesterium is infallible. This was what the Apostles meant when they passed on the promise of Christ that He would lead the Church into all Truth.
Thank you guanophore; I don’t think ND is ready to hear the truth of Christ’s Church. Really, it’s kind of demeaning toward the non-latin rites. In fact, I’m rather fond of the Byzantine rite myself.Catholicism is not “Roman” either.
Of the Magisterium of the RCC?
That’s right. Only those who place themselves under the authority of the Roman Pontiff (Pope/Bishop of Rome).Catholicism is not “Roman” either.
It’s the Magisterium of the RCC that asserts its own infallibility. All under the authority of the Roman Pontiff must believe it. It’s what connects them to the Roman Vatican.
So you’re told. It’s what makes you RC.
One must accept the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff and the Magisterium of the RCC in order to be in communion with the church of Rome. It’s this belief that puts you under that authority.
That RC teaching was jettisoned by the Reformers because it could not be found in the Apostolic teaching as revealed in the Scriptures.
Your church has “rites” we have denominations. No difference.
Yes there is. The different rites are all under the same Pope. Rites have to with Liturgy rather than doctrine. Your denominations have differing doctrines. Your denominations all sprouted because of a person’s pride thinking he can do better than the church he was in before. It really has all to do with I/Me/Myself and not so much the Gospel.
Your anti- “Romanism” is leaking, moon, and this spriit of hostillity seems to be urging you to post these falsehoods.
[/QUOTE]
No, moon, the Catholic Church, and it’s Magesterium, is not “Roman”. It seems that you enjoy using this terminology so that you can be deliberately insulting to Catholics.
No again moon. The 22 Catholic Rites that are not Latin are also in unity with the Successor of Peter.
No again, moon. First, the Magesterium is not “Roman”. Second, no authority can come from oneself and be valid. “For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.” Rom. 13:1
Actually, this is not true either. You, as well as all other members of the Body of Christ are also under the authority of the Successor of Peter. You reject the authority that was appointed by Christ, which means that you are a rebellious subject of the Roman Pontiff.
No, moon, your hostility is leading you amok. I do not accept the Authority of the Successor of Peter because I was “told do to so”, as you imply. I am no longer a child, in need of blind compliance. I embrace this because it is the Teaching of the Apostles, and the HS has borne witness in my heart to this Truth.
No, actually, my belief cannot “put me under authority”. All authority is appointed by God. I have recognized that I am under His authority, and therefore, I receive those whom He has sent. I decided to stop kicking against the goads.
Actually, there is complete difference. The Rites are distinguished by culture, language and disciplines, yet are unified in doctrine. They are like the Churches in Revelation, separate communities, one in Doctrine and faith.
Please, you’re being offensive. The Catholic Church is indeed not “Roman,” and to say it is devalues and insults the members of the 22 non-Latin (non-Roman) rites of the Church. And I would like to state that none of us are blind followers of the Pope, and certainly we do not believe what we do because we were simply told to. Most of us have reached our conclusions about the truth of Catholicism after much intellectual study and academic research. If you would like to participate here, I suggest that you listen before you misrepresent the Church and its members. After sincere listening and studying, perhaps you can come back here and raise your objections to Catholicism with integrity.
Your anti- “Romanism” is leaking, moon, and this spriit of hostillity seems to be urging you to post these falsehoods.
The majority of us Catholics on CAF don’t believe anything about our faith “because that is what we are told”. On the contrary, most of us have done years of research and exploration, and many of us are recovering Protestants. Your phrase “you must believe it” is both untrue, and insulting. Catholics choose to embrace these things because we have become pursuaded that this is the Teaching that has come down to us from the Apostles.
The infallible Magesterium is not “self proclaimed”, but was appointed by Christ,and is only infallible because Jesus is their Head, and the Holy Spirit is the Soul of the Church founded by Christ.
Acts 15:28: “For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us…”
This has been the way the Magesterium has functioned from the beginning. The successors of the Apostles meet, pray, discern, and make a decision that seems right to the HS and to them. It is the HS that makes these decisions infallible.
And again, Catholicism is not Roman. Your persistent use of this term, when you have been corrected repeatedly, constitutes a deliberately insulting remark. Have you decided that you no longer wish to post on CAF? Is that why you are disregarding the forum rules with your deliberate insults?
moondweller;5271989:
" Magisterium (which is what you define as “the Church”)
Yes. This is one of the most fundamental, and probably the most damaging doctrines of the Reformation. Attributes were ascribed to Scripture that it does not posess. An attempt has been made to force the Scriptures in to the role of “authority” which Scripture cannot fulfill, because scripture lacks the qualities necessary for this.
And the doctrine of SS, because everyone who reads the scripture interprets, makes each one his own authority.
I am reminded of an episode from the old television show Columbo where the detective was stymied by a homicidal magician. Columbo enlisted the aid of a youngster whose hobby was magic. The youngster reminded Columbo that what you always have to remember is that it’s a trick. Well, in the case of Moondweller, what we have to remember is that it’s a trick. What we also have to remember is that Moondweller, and all Protestants to a greater or lesser degree for that matter, have fallen for the trick.
Protestantism repudiates the infallibility of the Vicar of Christ, while it puts forth its own false dogmas clothed in infallibility. The replacement of Revelation with the interpreter of that Revelation, and then the appropriation of the divine authority of Revelation by that interpreter, was absolutely necessary to Luther, and it is no less so to Protestants today.
It’s the slight of hand perpetrated by the John MacArthurs of today. On the one hand they will stand in their pool-pits and tell their guilable listeners that it’s the Bible and nothing but the Bible. They will then procede to expound their [MacArthur, et. al.] own interpretion of the Bible onto their listeners and expect them to believe it as the “Gospel truth.”
Let us analyze how legitimate authority is made to disappear, and self appointed authority conjured up and put in its place. Like all tricks, this one depends for its success on patter and distraction. At the same time the dogmatic pronouncement of some “reformer” is being recited, the speaker points away from himself to the Bible. The switch is concealed behind a rebuke to those who might quarrel with this revised Revelation. “It is true. God cannot lie,” says the reformer. This conjurer may or may not be conscious of any deceit; he/she is merely repeating a trick which deceives others just as it deceived him/her. Witnessing, preaching, Bible study - it is all the same. They simply announce the opinions they have received through Protestant tradition and quote a few texts from here and there, while holding up the Bible. This conjures up the requisite air of authority. This conceals the truth from souls locked in error.
Eternal salvation, and even order and peace of mind in this life, depend on the right understanding of God’s revelation to mankind. No one has a right to play tricks with it, and no one can afford to be tricked out of it.
In fact, Protestants do unite in bodies of believers. They choose a body whose teaching (oral traditon) is agreeable with them, and many remain in the same sect their entire lives. Others move about, for any number of reasons, they are less settled, and may be inclined to move from the familiar to the novel, of which there is always a representative nearby.
I’ve said nothing hostile on this forum toward the RCC. Actually, guranophore, it’s you who sound extremely "anti-“Romanism.” You’re the one here who considers it “insulting” to be recognized as RC based on your Rite’s submissive association to the authority of the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops of the Roman church. Why is it you find it sooooo insulting? Even degrading? It’s not my hostility that’s coming through, guanophore, it’s yours. And to be honest, I was quite taken aback by your words of seeming disgust in your posts.
I didn’t say you don’t believe it. But the truth is you must believe all that is presented to you from the Vatican to be considered “Catholic” under the authority of Roman Pontiff and the Magesterium (the teaching authority). Why is it so difficult for you to admit this? What makes you so hostile toward it??? It’s wrong for you to accuse and threaten me based on your own inward hostility.
The inherent authority of the Scriptures is the attribute of theopneustos (God-breathed). That attribute gives them the authority of God Himself. Men didn’t claim that attribute for them, the Scriptures themselves do. Their authority doesn’t come from men, but God. Theopneustos Scriptures is the way God has preserved His Word in this fallen world system (kosmos) since Moses. And since Moses the doctrinal teaching of men and angels have been tested by them. Even the Son of Man used their inherent authority against the falsehoods of Satan as well as the traditions of the religious leaders of His day.
No, the authority resides in the Scriptures alone. No interpreter of the Scriptures has the authority of the Scriptures. But certain men have given themselves the same authority of the Scriptures by proclaiming themselves “infallible.” And other men have believe their claim. The SS’ist simply refuses to accept such a claim and insists that all the teachings of men must be tested by the inherent, divine authority of the theopneustos Written Word of God.
And I suppose that you are going to tell us that you, personally, can give us the final word on the Word?
I can tell you what I personally believe based on the authority of thepneustos Word of God alone. And I can do this because of the bravery of certain men to get the Scriptures back into the hands of the “laity” for whom they were written.And I suppose that you are going to tell us that you, personally, can give us the final word on the Word?
