New ‘Declaration of Truths’ Affirms Key Church Teachings

  • Thread starter Thread starter Genesis315
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Emeraldlady said:
They [Paul and Stephen] weren’t teaching a renunciation of their Jewish faith to a new religion. They were teaching an acceptance that Christ was the awaited Messiah.
Click to expand...
And the Church today does not teach Jews to renounce Judaism, but rather that acceptance of Jesus as the awaited Messiah as the fulfillment of the Old Covenant. And yes, the Jews are beloved for the sake of their fathers. Theirs the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants , the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. God still calls them to faithfulness to the Abrahamic Covenant that they may attain the fullness of redemption. Certainly, with the abuse by some who call themselves Christians makes our witness to the Jews a delicate and sensitive situation.
 
Last edited:
Emeraldlady said:
Why are they different? There are still many today who don’t accept the reformulation referring to invincible ignorance and citing the Council of Trent as proof.
Click to expand...
They are different because one position states that a person can be saved by the law apart from Christ, and the other position says that a person cannot.
 
irenaeus1 said:
40.png
Emeraldlady:
Why are they different? There are still many today who don’t accept the reformulation referring to invincible ignorance and citing the Council of Trent as proof.
Click to expand...
They are different because one position states that a person can be saved by the law apart from Christ, and the other position says that a person cannot.
Click to expand...
I was actually meaning what is the difference between the reformulation concerning invincible ignorance and the reformulation of salvation under the law. But as you point out that the statement of Burke is the opposite of the Papal position, your are essentially admitting that Burke is teaching in opposition to the Church.

This was the problem the Pharisees had though. The letter of the law was all there was in their opinion. There was no room for it to be animated by grace so that people could rise above division and judgement to let the grace of God move unbelievers and sinners by means of love. Speaking of the final Judgement the CCC says:

678 Following in the steps of the prophets and John the Baptist, Jesus announced the judgment of the Last Day in his preaching.582 Then will the conduct of each one and the secrets of hearts be brought to light.583 Then will the culpable unbelief that counted the offer of God’s grace as nothing be condemned.584 Our attitude to our neighbor will disclose acceptance or refusal of grace and divine love.585 On the Last Day Jesus will say: "Truly I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me."586

679 Christ is Lord of eternal life. Full right to pass definitive judgment on the works and hearts of men belongs to him as redeemer of the world. He “acquired” this right by his cross. The Father has given “all judgment to the Son”.587 Yet the Son did not come to judge, but to save and to give the life he has in himself.588 By rejecting grace in this life, one already judges oneself, receives according to one’s works, and can even condemn oneself for all eternity by rejecting the Spirit of love.589

Burke doesn’t seem to care how important it is to understand the place of Israel and the Jews today and at the Second Coming. Or of how grace works through the love of neighbour. He seems happy to let the judgement and prejudice that people have regarding the Jews continue unabated.
 
Emeraldlady said:
I was actually meaning what is the difference between the reformulation concerning invincible ignorance and the reformulation of salvation under the law. But as you point out that the statement of Burke is the opposite of the Papal position, your are essentially admitting that Burke is teaching in opposition to the Church.
Click to expand...
You lost me there. There is no reformulation of salvation under the law; scripture and apostolic tradition are quite clear that under the law (i.e., by the law apart from grace), no person is saved.

Cardinal Burke is not teaching in opposition to the Church; he merely reiterated the fundamental basis of the teaching that Jesus is the savior of all mankind. In fact, this is essentially what Avery Cardinal Dulles states in the very article you linked above (which was an excellent read, by the way; thanks for sharing).
 
Last edited:
So Burke publicaly opposes Church teachings (as shown in this thread) and tries to get people to follow him. Yet Catholic Answers has ads promoting him at the top of the forum. Interesting.
 
It’s not calumny if it is true.
He is denying current church teaching and helping to divide the Church even more.
 
Accusing a cardinal of denying Church teaching is a serious charge. But of course trashing Cardinal Burke is always acceptable on these fora.
 
He did it himself when he denied the teaching of the Jews and the Old Covenant and in the comments about clerical celibacy.
On top of the fact that it is not his place publish a “Declaration of Truth”. By doing so he set himself up as an “alternate Magisterium”.
Where are the calls for him and the others to practice “obedience” to the successor of Peter?
 
Last edited:
ALL bishops have a right and indeed duty to preach the truth.

Nothing in what these bishops wrote is contrary to perennial Catholic doctrine.

“Obedience” is not blind. Catholics are not obliged blindly to obey the pope.
 
As a cleric, +Burke owes his loyalty and obedience to the Holy Father. It is not up to him to make a “Declaration of truth”. We have a catechism and a Magisterium to do that.
 
Again, all bishops have a right and duty to preach the truth.

And bishops don’t need to clear such statements in advance with Francis.
 
Shakuhachi said:
So Jews cannot be saved.
Click to expand...
It didn’t technically say that. We have to allow for the possibility that at the moment a Jewish person or a Muslim dies, Jesus appears, they suddenly understand everything, accept Christ and are saved. Which would fit in with the Declaration.
 
Last edited:
KMG said:
Again, all bishops have a right and duty to preach the truth
Click to expand...
Provided that the “truth” is also in line with the esablished teaching of the current Magisterium. If it is not, you are setting yourself up as an alternate source of truth and revelation, therefore removing yourself from the one, true Church.
 
Last edited:
The pope is a servant of tradition. If he invents novelties, no one is obligated to follow his “teaching.”
 
Catholic teaching is quite clear that salvation is through Christ alone.
Anyone who is saved accepts Christ at some point. Either they accept him during their life or they accept him after death before or at the time of judgment.
No people are “rejected” or “accursed” by God, but if you don’t accept Christ, you don’t get into heaven.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
No people are “rejected” or “accursed” by God, but if you don’t accept Christ, you don’t get into heaven.
Click to expand...
No one can say who gets into heaven or not. As Christians we believe salvation is through Christ, but we cannot limit what God may choose to do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top