MacArthur

[PRmerger]

Sola Scriptura is really a form of Gnosticism-salvation through “knowledge.” I don’t need to parse scripture verses to arrive at the Truth. Christ assured I would always have the truth as entrusted to his Church

Indeed. And what MacArthur and other SS advocates never address is the fact that those who have no access to this “knowledge” (i.e. illiterate peasants in the 15th century, literate folks in the 3rd century who had no codex, literate folks in the 10th century who had no Bible) are, apparently out of luck.

Thank goodness that the CC doesn’t exclude them from salvation!

 

[benhur]

The Catholic Church uses the unanimous consent of the Fathers.

There is no such thing, though it is taught to the clergy.

 

[benhur]

As a convert from the Baptist denomination (lots of people love his stuff), this guy really breaks my heart. gty.org/Blog/B150225

Don’t break my heart for reconciliation and tell me what part of your faith are you willing to lay on the table?

 

[Per_Crucem]

There is no such thing, though it is taught to the clergy.

That is because you are taking unanimous consent out of context to how the Church has always used it.

 

[benhur]

Sola Scriptura is really a form of Gnosticism-salvation through “knowledge.”

Well, we both condone knowledge, “For my people perish for lack of knowledge” otherwise.

We just differ a bit on how knowledge is acquired and where it is found. I suppose each side claims the other side to be “gnostic’’, like"we have it and they don’t and we’ll tell you how and where to get it”

Gnosticism- “scripture having a deep, hidden meaning whose true message could only be understood through “secret wisdom”” from wiki

Again we both put in our ending to ,“can only be understood thru…”. One says thru scripture and one says thru scripture as we (church, even Rome) interpret it. See the possible gnosticism ? I hear Catholics more than other churches say some stuff is too hard to understand without us, thru our magisterium.

We both believe in divine illumination, to the individual and to the Church . We both believe in Scripture and a sort of tradition/history/forerunner foundation.

I don’t need to parse scripture verses to arrive at the Truth. Christ assured I would always have the truth as entrusted to his Church

And part of that (church) is scripture. Nothing wrong with digging into scripture, to parse or to harmonize, just as there is nothing wrong with looking into a church/ tradition , to parse and to harmonize. There is a time for everything.

 

[sallybutler]

Well, we both condone knowledge, “For my people perish for lack of knowledge” otherwise.

We just differ a bit on how knowledge is acquired and where it is found. I suppose each side claims the other side to be “gnostic’’, like"we have it and they don’t and we’ll tell you how and where to get it”

Gnosticism- “scripture having a deep, hidden meaning whose true message could only be understood through “secret wisdom”” from wiki

Again we both put in our ending to ,“can only be understood thru…”. One says thru scripture and one says thru scripture as we (church, even Rome) interpret it. See the possible gnosticism ? I hear Catholics more than other churches say some stuff is too hard to understand without us, thru our magisterium.

We both believe in divine illumination, to the individual and to the Church . We both believe in Scripture and a sort of tradition/history/forerunner foundation.
And part of that (church) is scripture. Nothing wrong with digging into scripture, to parse or to harmonize, just as there is nothing wrong with looking into a church/ tradition , to parse and to harmonize. There is a time for everything.

Most of us have a hard time learning without a teacher guide us thru the basics and on into advanced concepts.

Some have chosen MacArthur to be their teacher. Others of us feel the Church is the proper teacher.

I happen to like the Church as a teacher. She taught me, my parents, my grandparents, my great-grandparents, etc. She and her teachings will be there for my children, grandchildren, etc. She helps us with the big questions and the little ones. I can go anywhere in the world and she is there with the same message and the same teachings and the same traditions.

 

[eddie_too]

I never know whether to be perplexed or amused when I read a non-Catholic trying to persuade catholics that the Holy Eucharist is not the Real Presence of Jesus Christ, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.

does it never occur to these non-catholics that what they are trying to do is get catholics to abandon the Real Presence?

they (non-catholics) must never consider the ramifications of what they are asking catholics to do.

they want catholics to abandon the greatest gift ever given to mankind because not every ECF was completely on board with the magisterium of the Church; or, because the non-Catholic simply does not believe Jesus could or would create and work such a miracle as providing His Real Presence for all mankind until the end of the world.

why do the non-catholics never compare the two choices for believing (neither of which choice can be proven because then it would no longer require believing, but we would know) about the Holy Eucharist.

think about it. on the one hand, the non-catholic asserts that the Holy Eucharist is nothing more than bread and wine that the body of believers give significance to because Jesus said to give significance to it; and on the other hand, the catholic asserts that Jesus meant what He said when He gave the consecrated bread and wine to His apostles, “This is MY BODY” and “This is MY BLOOD”.

who in their right mind would give back the Body and Blood of Christ given us by Jesus Himself? yet, non-catholics think their reasoning is sound and that catholics should just give up this supernatural and perfect gift.

 

[JasTromba]

Don’t break my heart for reconciliation and tell me what part of your faith are you willing to lay on the table?

Not sure exactly what you’re talking about. When I said “breaks my heart”, I’m was referring to MacArthur’s over the top misreprestations and his ridiculous, bigoted opinions of the Catholic faith. The fact that he doesn’t even accept us, and many other Trinitarian believers who don’t believe exactly as he does, as true Christians. To me, this is especially sad coming at a time when our Coptic brothers are being beheaded for their faith.

Stuff like this… "The fact is, the most formidable, relentless, and deceptive enemy in Satan’s long war on the truth has been Roman Catholicism. It’s an apostate, corrupt, heretical, false Christianity—a thinly veiled façade for the kingdom of Satan."http://www.gty.org/blog/B130221/a-timely-critique-of-the-catholic-church?Term=catholic

 

[Porknpie]

I would just to point out that unless John MacArthur believed Jesus symbolically died for our sins and rose again, he very much disagrees with Ignatius of Antioch!

Ignatius was of a generation called Apostolic Fathers, which is the generation thought to have had contact with the actual Apostles. No, his writings are no considered canonical, but they are very important and significant.

St Ignatius of Antioch was a disciple of St. John…

Gives great insight to the scripture verse “Those [St. Ignatius] who hear you [St. John], hear me [Christ].”

 

[Eruvande]

I used to love MacArthur to absolute bits and still have quite a few CDs of his, and my best friend simply hangs on his every word. My husband likes him too. I think his heart is in the right place, but his anti-Catholic stuff is not what I recognize when I look at the Church.

 

[benhur]

they (non-catholics) must never consider the ramifications of what they are asking catholics to do.

Hi Eddie,

Correct. Just like Sally’s profoundly and deeply entrenched experience/view (post #141), It is almost an impossibility to see it any other way.

who in their right mind would give back the Body and Blood of Christ given us by Jesus Himself?

Actually you do at every Mass. You even pray that it be acceptable to the Father.

 

[benhur]

Not sure exactly what you’re talking about. When I said “breaks my heart”, I’m was referring to MacArthur’s over the top misreprestations and his ridiculous, bigoted opinions of the Catholic faith. The fact that he doesn’t even accept us, and many other Trinitarian believers who don’t believe exactly as he does, as true Christians. To me, this is especially sad coming at a time when our Coptic brothers are being beheaded for their faith.

Stuff like this… "The fact is, the most formidable, relentless, and deceptive enemy in Satan’s long war on the truth has been Roman Catholicism. It’s an apostate, corrupt, heretical, false Christianity—a thinly veiled façade for the kingdom of Satan."http://www.gty.org/blog/B130221/a-timely-critique-of-the-catholic-church?Term=catholic

My post was referring to MacArthur’s statement, “The only way Catholics and Protestants can come together is if one or the other—or both—renounce their faith.”

I only asked what parts of our faith where we differ are you willing to give up for sake of unity.

I would hope that if MacArthur’s staunch, black and white, no nonsense view saddens one, that so too would the spirit of Trent of its view of “others”.

Thankfully, how “others” are viewed by CC changed at Second Vat.

Myself personally, there is a time and place for hard talk. Even Jesus told St. Peter, “Get behind me Satan”.

I am not so bold, but for sure Christ is in the heart of many Catholics, as He is in all churches, irregardless of their magisterium etc.

 

[estesbob]

My post was referring to MacArthur’s statement, “The only way Catholics and Protestants can come together is if one or the other—or both—renounce their faith.”

I only asked what parts of our faith where we differ are you willing to give up for sake of unity.

I would hope that if MacArthur’s staunch, black and white, no nonsense view saddens one, that so too would the spirit of Trent of its view of “others”.

Thankfully, how “others” are viewed by CC changed at Second Vat.

Myself personally, there is a time and place for hard talk. Even Jesus told St. Peter, “Get behind me Satan”.

I am not so bold, but for sure Christ is in the heart of many Catholics, as He is in all churches, irregardless of their magisterium etc.

And on what authority do protestants base their view on the Eucharist on? When did they adopt this view?

 

[eddie_too]

benhur,

catholics do not give back Jesus in the Holy Eucharist. they consume Him and ask Him, as He resides in their bodies and souls, to present them to the Father. it is true during the Mass we offer the same sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross again and again and again. perhaps that is what you meant by us giving Jesus back?

also, maybe my meaning would have been more clear if I had used the words “give up” rather than “give back”?

 

[eddie_too]

benhur, maybe even the word “forsake” explains what I mean better than either “give up” or “give back”?

I apologize for my lack of clear expression.

 

[commenter]

I am not so bold, but for sure Christ is in the heart of many Catholics, as He is in all churches, irregardless of their magisterium etc.

I think the Catholic Church is the only one that uses the explicit term “Magisterium” (along with Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture). But if you mean other churches have something like a magisterium, I agree.

All of them rely on some kind of visible human authority: these books are the New Testament, those are not canonical; this doctrine or moral teaching is guided by these passages; those other passages don’t apply here. This ambiguous Bible verse is interpreted in this way, those other interpretations are not true. This new situation facing the church is interpreted in the light of this tradition; those other seemingly relevant traditions don’t apply.

So it’s not a question of having, or not having, a magisterium. They all have one. In the Catholic Church it is explicit; its mostly clear who is involved, what kinds of things it addresses, and how it works in relation to Scripture and Tradition. Protestant magisteria are implicit. None of that is clear. Is it the pastor? Denominational president? The TV preacher you watch each week? The best selling author? Even if you can figure out who “my” magisterium is, what function does it play? Same for you as for me?

 

[estesbob]

I am not so bold, but for sure Christ is in the heart of many Catholics, as He is in all churches, irregardless of their magisterium etc.

Not only is he in our Hearts but we actually get to hold his precious body in our hands and follow his command to eat his body and drink his blood. You just can not get a more personal relationship with Jesus than that.

 

[benhur]

And on what authority do protestants base their view on the Eucharist on? When did they adopt this view?

C.S. Lewis wrote a bit about the unity we really show thru out the world and to the world in Eucharisting, by any fashion, by any authority.

 

[benhur]

catholics do not give back Jesus in the Holy Eucharist. they consume Him and ask Him, as He resides in their bodies and souls, to present them to the Father. it is true during the Mass we offer the same sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross again and again and again. perhaps that is what you meant by us giving Jesus back?

Yes

also, maybe my meaning would have been more clear if I had used the words “give up” rather than “give back”?

Not really, I understood your intent, thank you.

 

[benhur]

I think the Catholic Church is the only one that uses the explicit term “Magisterium” (along with Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture). But if you mean other churches have something like a magisterium, I agree.

Thank you

All of them rely on some kind of visible human authority: these books are the New Testament, those are not canonical; this doctrine or moral teaching is guided by these passages; those other passages don’t apply here. This ambiguous Bible verse is interpreted in this way, those other interpretations are not true. This new situation facing the church is interpreted in the light of this tradition; those other seemingly relevant traditions don’t apply.

I do not know of one Magisterium, big or small, that has not done all this.

So it’s not a question of having, or not having, a magisterium. They all have one. In the Catholic Church it is explicit; its mostly clear who is involved, what kinds of things it addresses, and how it works in relation to Scripture and Tradition. Protestant magisteria are implicit. None of that is clear. Is it the pastor? Denominational president? The TV preacher you watch each week? The best selling author? Even if you can figure out who “my” magisterium is, what function does it play? Same for you as for me?

Can’t argue with you there.

Reminds how when the Iron Curtain came down, and the communist states fell, many people were “lost”, some even cried, and not out of happiness. They did not know how to face a future where the government made most decisions for you explicitly (where you worked, lived, what you drove, ate, wore etc., etc.).