Maybe I've Been Approaching This the Wrong Way

  • Thread starter Thread starter Juxtaposer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Juxtaposer

Guest
We could all argue until we’re blue in the face about Confession, Holy Orders, and what have you. We could both use the Bible to prove our stances, even though our stances may be diametrically opposed. Maybe, instead of figuring out if these things are Biblical (and they are if you accept one side of the argument) I should ask myself the following: would this “sacrament” help my Christian life, or would it bring me further from God? It just seems as though we get hung up on so many things… the pope said this, that book isn’t canonical, etc. Maybe it’s time for a paradigm shift. As long as I’m not Gnostic…
 
How could it be a “sacrament” and NOT help your “Christian life”?
 
Tantum ergo:
How could it be a “sacrament” and NOT help your “Christian life”?
Click to expand...
Good question! It can’t. A sacrament is a direct encounter with Jesus Christ himself. If it draws you away from God it isn’t a sacrament.

In Christ,
Nancy 🙂
 
Juxtaposer: perhaps a way of discovering what you are looking for is this. Think of the very best examples of Christians you know of. Who are they? What did they do? What did they believe?

Request (Juxtaposer): who are some Christians that you think lived the closest to how Jesus would want us to live? Please post your answer(s).
 
Jux, you’re right. You can “prove” your side and I can prove mine, even though they are miles apart, we can still “prove’ our points in Scripture. Can I suggest study on no particular “Church”? study of history. Not Catholic not anti-Catholic? Look for nonbiased history. Don’t look for either point of view, look at everything with an open heart. Don’t be quick to accept either view until looking at the other side. Read Scripture with an open heart. And welcome home.
 
40.png
jmm08:
who are some Christians that you think lived the closest to how Jesus would want us to live? Please post your answer(s).
Click to expand...
Hmmmm… let me think about that.
40.png
Tom:
Can I suggest study on no particular “Church”? study of history. Not Catholic not anti-Catholic? Look for nonbiased history.
Click to expand...
Where can I find this history? All history is biased. It’s written by the victor, and the Catholic Church is just that.
 
40.png
Juxtaposer:
Hmmmm… let me think about that. Where can I find this history? All history is biased. It’s written by the victor, and the Catholic Church is just that.
Click to expand...
Difficult but not impossible. and when you’re reading a “slanted” version, take that into consideration. As an example, i read an excellent piece on the history of Scripture, it took both extremes into view and presented a fairly unbiased picture, until they turned to their conclusion, which reverted to the authors original view and disregarded the “facts” he presented. An excellent piece till the end, just throw away the biased end. (And it was biased in the direction of my opinion). Read the “other side”. get their “biased” side, just understand their prejudice. I enjoy reading Protestant works, it gives me insight into the “other side”.
 
40.png
Juxtaposer:
We could all argue until we’re blue in the face about Confession, Holy Orders, and what have you. We could both use the Bible to prove our stances, even though our stances may be diametrically opposed. Maybe, instead of figuring out if these things are Biblical (and they are if you accept one side of the argument) I should ask myself the following: would this “sacrament” help my Christian life, or would it bring me further from God? It just seems as though we get hung up on so many things… the pope said this, that book isn’t canonical, etc. Maybe it’s time for a paradigm shift. As long as I’m not Gnostic…
Click to expand...
Sounds like you are struggling with the issue of authority. By what authority do you decide if you are doing God’s will, or not?
 
40.png
fix:
Sounds like you are struggling with the issue of authority. By what authority do you decide if you are doing God’s will, or not?
Click to expand...
I bet I could use the Bible to prove that I’m infallible. Maybe I’ll start a heresy…
 
40.png
Juxtaposer:
I bet I could use the Bible to prove that I’m infallible. Maybe I’ll start a heresy…
Click to expand...
Dear Juxtaposer,

Perhaps you can start a new club? Heretics For Christ.

Don’t mind me. I don’t even know what we’re talking about. Evidently this discussion follows from other threads I haven’t seen, or it’s way over my head.

Alan
 
40.png
Juxtaposer:
Hmmmm… let me think about that.
Click to expand...
Yes think about it. Is there some Christian Saint whose story touches you personally? Even if they aren’t canonized by the Catholic Church or a different Christian Church?
40.png
Juxtaposer:
Where can I find this history? All history is biased. It’s written by the victor, and the Catholic Church is just that.
Click to expand...
Is there any unbiased first-hand information regarding the American Civil War? With the American Civil War, the issues of the day were divisive. Some families had children fighting as soldiers on both sides. Even news of battles was covered differently in the North and the South. Regarding battlefields near where I live, the Northern newspapers reported on the First Battle of Bull Run and the Second Battle of Bull Run. While at the same times, the South reported on the First Battle of Manassas and the Second Battle of Manassas.

I think you can discredit some information sources for being inaccurate, internally inconsistent or ranting with an axe to grind (agenda).
 
40.png
Juxtaposer:
All history is biased. It’s written by the victor, and the Catholic Church is just that.
Click to expand...
Juxtaposer- from what I’ve seen you’re too smart to fall back on an old chestnut like “history is written by the victors.” This, in fact, is the same statement the author of the Da Vinci code uses against critcism of his book. It presumes that, once history is written, it is not possible for disinterested historians to verify or, if warranted, even reinterpret the facts. For example. recent responsible scholarship is finding that much of what the English speaking world believes about the Inquisition came out of the severe anti-Catholic rhetoric coming out of the Reformation and that, bad as it was, the horrors have been exagerated.

History may be re-examined and re-evaluated. The facts, however, always remain facts.
 
40.png
Juxtaposer:
Where can I find this history? All history is biased. It’s written by the victor, and the Catholic Church is just that.
Click to expand...
I’d sure like to know why my public school history class was so anti-Catholic. Catholics portrayed as evil invaders and Muslims as noble heroes during the Crusades. Church was portrayed as anti-scientific and failed to mention how the Church funded many scientists. Etc., etc., etc.
 
40.png
Juxtaposer:
Hmmmm… let me think about that.

Where can I find this history? All history is biased. It’s written by the victor, and the Catholic Church is just that.
Click to expand...
Good places to start would be to read Josephus and Eusebius (History of the Church). Both these historians were very objective. Josephus was a Jew. Eusebius, although he was Catholic, is noted for the fact his opinion is almost non-existent in his writings. He simply collected primary sources to write the only surviving contemporaneous historical account of Christianity’s first 300 years. Many Protestants would say the Catholic Church did not exist the first 300 years. Assuming this, you personally could safely say this work did not have CC bias.
😉

Incidently, I’m currently reading Eusebius’ History of the Church.
👍
 
40.png
petra:
Incidently, I’m currently reading Eusebius’ History of the Church.
👍
Click to expand...
Excellant reference book. And for something more current, I would recommend Triumph - the 2000 year history of the Church:thumbsup:

MrS
 
40.png
Juxtaposer:
I bet I could use the Bible to prove that I’m infallible. Maybe I’ll start a heresy…
Click to expand...
Actually, it would be an old heresy. At least as old as Martin Luther. It has been tried and continues to fail. Try finding a new heresy. Heretics for Christ exists now, except they are not really for Christ. They are only for the parts of Christ they “feel” comfortable with. The rest they reject.
 
40.png
fix:
Heretics for Christ exists now, except they are not really for Christ.
Click to expand...
Dear fix,

Aw, shucks. I thought I came up with that name, but I guess it was too obvious for me to have been the first one. Too bad they are not really for Christ.

Actually I thought of the name while discussing some of my questions about Church teachings with a retired priest. It was shortly after I had asked, “if someone can’t come to agreement with the Church, and quit the Church, am that person still considered a heretic?”

He replied, “well, a heretic is someone who has beliefs contrary to the Church, so technically, I’d say ‘yes’. Now Alan, you’re not going to get away from me that easily.”

In case there is any question, this was a friendly exchange. He is my favorite priest because, as my ex-pastor who married us and baptized most of my children, he knows me well and is about the only priest I can really open up to outside the confessional.

Alan
 
juxtaposer] philthy]We could all argue until we’re blue in the face about Confession, Holy Orders, and what have you. Agreed We could both use the Bible to prove our stances, even though our stances may be diametrically opposed. Close, you wouldn’t be able to “prove” your stances, just support them vigorously - there is a difference. Maybe, instead of figuring out if these things are Biblical (and they are if you accept one side of the argument) I should ask myself the following: would this “sacrament” help my Christian life, or would it bring me further from God? A sacrament is a visible sign, instituted by Christ to convey the invisible reality of God’s Grace. It cannot harm you. Only your stubborn opposition to it based on your inablility to understand it can harm you by separationg you from the Grace it is meant to convey.It just seems as though we get hung up on so many things… the pope said this, that book isn’t canonical, etc.I totally agree Maybe it’s time for a paradigm shift. Well, there are a couple of ways to look at it. For me when I came to this point I felt that unless I could absolutely disprove Catholic teaching the Catholic Church deserved the benefit of the doubt over the other Christian churches This became most clear when I heard the earliest Christians (Fathers) discussing elements of the faith, and also when I realized how young most of the other churches are. Also, when you think of some of the doctrine that the RCC has - man it is clearly not part of winning a popularity contest! It’s “miraculous” that it’s around at all. As long as I’m not Gnostic…
In the end it’s faith. We can support our faith with reason and personal experience, but it is still faith. I wish you well…
 
40.png
AlanFromWichita:
Dear fix,

Aw, shucks. I thought I came up with that name, but I guess it was too obvious for me to have been the first one. Too bad they are not really for Christ.

Actually I thought of the name while discussing some of my questions about Church teachings with a retired priest. It was shortly after I had asked, “if someone can’t come to agreement with the Church, and quit the Church, am that person still considered a heretic?”

He replied, “well, a heretic is someone who has beliefs contrary to the Church, so technically, I’d say ‘yes’. Now Alan, you’re not going to get away from me that easily.”

In case there is any question, this was a friendly exchange. He is my favorite priest because, as my ex-pastor who married us and baptized most of my children, he knows me well and is about the only priest I can really open up to outside the confessional.

Alan
Click to expand...
He sounds like a good man. What is it basically that you do not agree with?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top