On WHAT basis does your Church claim to be the One TRUE-Faith Church of the Bible?

[PJM]

Originally Posted by benhur View Post
Hi CC,

Sometimes I think “Seek and ye shall find” is a truth that goes across the board. .I mean if you want to seek truth in Catholicism , you shall find it, as well as in Protestantism or Orthodoxy. Why you can even find truth in atheism ,Gnosticism.

It is just the nature of our hearts and our vision. The whole point of the verse is that may God grace us to seek His Truth, His vision

The REPLY

Do you believe that it is possible for any one church to have the capital T Truth and others to have elements of truth, or does this imply that different groups have equal elements of truth? If truth can be found even in atheism and Gnosticism why did the early church evangelize? It seems superfluous.

My insert: [PJM]

“A truth” is NOT the same as “THEE TRUTH”.

It is ONLY possible ot have One truth per defined issue; YES:shrug:

 

[PJM]

I suppose denominational churches would not necessarily claim their denomination is the one true church. Although the Church of Christ, which claims they are not a denomination, does think of itself as the true New Testament Church.

But the phrase “Church of the Bible” reveals the difference between Catholic and Protestant mind sets. The Catholic Church does not think of itself as a Church of the Bible. It is a Church of the Apostles, founded directly upon their oral teaching, as directed by Jesus. Christian scripture comes from the Church, not the Church from scripture. Church exists first, then scripture.

Catholics assume Church, and from Church derive scripture. Protestants assume scripture, and from scripture derive Church.

NICELY done THANKS:thumbsup:

We Catholics hold to our position because it is the CC that in a real sense “birthed the bible”

It was the Early CATHOLIC Fathers who CHOOSE, inspired by God, the OT books to be included

It was the Early Catholic Fathers, who AUTHORED the entire NT, again guided by the Holy Spirit.

Hence: It is a literal impossibility that the CC flows from the Bible; RATHER, it is a reality that the Bible Flows from and THROUGH the CC:thumbsup:

 

[PJM]

Patrick, Don Ruggero has kindly responded to me and I realize I asked a question in a manner not conducive to proper dialogue. I apologize for that. After reading his posts of 171 and 172 I was quite elated. When I read your last paragraph above I experienced considerable deflation. It may be that I read to much into the articles Don presented and so I felt your last paragraph countered what the articles were communicating. As to what in your paragraph gives me a problem I have to say…all three sentences.

Thank you my friend!

Both that papal document & the Catholic Catechism say the say thing; only the Catechism does it with an economy of words.

As evidence of this might I ask a few questions, to stimulate further thought?

1. Is it possible that God can hold different position [at times even contradictory] on the same carefully defined issues?
2. It is exceeding clear that Christ intended to do exactly what He, Jesus /God intended to do. Namely to Institute a NEW Faith through a NEW Governing organization, which He termed “MY Church” [Mt 16:18]

John 19:26-30

[26] When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!”
[27] Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home.
[28] After this Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfil the scripture), “I thirst.”
[29] A bowl full of vinegar stood there; so they put a sponge full of the vinegar on hyssop and held it to his mouth
[30] When Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, “It is finished”; and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

While this proclamation has multiple meanings, it certainly includes and concludes at the same time; the “Ministry” Jesus received from the Father.as being fulfilled.

1. How could it be possible that Jesus {GOD} could have waited dome 1,500 years, about 1,400 years AFTER the Bible had been fully authored [yet not fully assembled],for Martin Luther, Calvin and others after that to invent and introduce there faith beliefs; which simply do NOT align with what that One church instituted by Christ founded; based on the beliefs handed on and taught directly to, directly and exclusively, His Apostles and CC?

Mt 28 18-20
[18] And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. [19] Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [20] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

**Douay Catholic Bible which predates the King James by about 50 years in the NT explanation **

“[18] All power: See here the warrant and commission of the apostles and their successors, the bishops and pastors of Christ’s church. He received from his Father all power in heaven and in earth: and in virtue of this power, he sends them (even as his Father sent him, St. John 20. 21) to teach and disciple, not one, but all nations; and instruct them in all truths: and that he may assist them effectually in the execution of this commission, he promises to be with them, not for three or four hundred years only, but all days, even to the consummation of the world. How then could the Catholic Church ever go astray; having always with her pastors, as is here promised, Christ himself, who is the way, the truth, and the life. St. John 14.”

MY friend, I am not trying to be difficult, nor am I being unnecessarily argumentative; BUT truth in order to be truth has to be; can only be; singular per defined issue.

Hence God, will, because He has no other option as GOD, to pass judgment upon each of us based upon what HE God has made possible for each of us to know. God in an absolute sense MUST BE both Fair and Just. Amen!

God Bless you,
Pray much!

Patrick

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Ut Unum Sint:

*48. The relationships which the members of the Catholic Church have established with other Christians since the Council have enabled us to discover what God is bringing about in the members of other Churches and Ecclesial Communities. This direct contact, at a variety of levels, with pastors and with the members of these Communities has made us aware of the witness which other Christians bear to God and to Christ. A vast new field has thus opened up for the whole ecumenical experience, which at the same time is the great challenge of our time. Is not the twentieth century a time of great witness, which extends “even to the shedding of blood”? And does not this witness also involve the various Churches and Ecclesial Communities which take their name from Christ, Crucified and Risen?

Such a joint witness of holiness, as fidelity to the one Lord, has an ecumenical potential extraordinarily rich in grace. The Second Vatican Council made it clear that elements present among other Christians can contribute to the edification of Catholics. Nor should we forget that whatever is wrought by the grace of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of our separated brothers and sisters can contribute to our own edification. "Whatever is truly Christian never conflicts with the genuine interests of the faith; indeed, it can always result in a more ample realization of the very mystery of Christ and the Church" Ecumenical dialogue, as a true dialogue of salvation, will certainly encourage this process, which has already begun well, to advance towards true and full communion.*
It is this growth in realisation – realisation of how communion (koinonia) is present among the baptised – that has helped advance Catholic ecclesiology since Vatican II and contributes to not only how we as Catholics should talk about the Church today but how non-Catholic Christians need to understand where we, as Catholics, are after the Second Vatican Council. We give thanks to God for the prophetic words of Blessed Paul VI, Saint John Paul II, Benedict XVI and, now, Francis.

As John Paul II rightly said, thoughts and attitudes have greatly evolved and we are in a very different place today – theologically and ecclesiologically.

For those who are seeking an authentic understanding of the Church’s mind, the writings and the speeches of the Popes on the theme of Christian unity and relations with non-Catholics is what provides not only the most authoritative insights but, frankly, the most authentic.

 

[steve_b]

What was Clement proposing to do? It says they would be guilty of sin and they would not support the behavior. Don’t Ignatius’ letters also offer strict warnings and commands for proper behavior?

Ignatius wasn’t writing to fix any problem with any Church. Clement in Rome was acting directly to fix sedition in Corinth Greece.

Consider the following

• The apostle John is still alive and living in Ephesus…much closer to Corinth than Clement over in Rome. Why did Corinth not go to a living apostle for help? here is a map bible-history.com/maps/romanempire/
• The Church in Athens is 50 miles away from Corinth. They are mentioned in Acts. Why not go to them for help? They have valid bishops ordained by apostles.
• The Church in Thessolonika, received letters from Paul, is closer to Corinth than Rome, have valid bishops, why not go to them for a solution?
• Even if one took an East West approach to this argument, a Church in the East would seek an Eastern see like the Church in Antioch, they too are closer to Corinth than the Church of Rome. Hey, here’s a thought, why not go to Ignatius, he’s bishop of Antioch at the time, and closer to Corinth than Rome is?
• Corinth went to Rome because that’s the chair of Peter

Corinth needed quick resolve for their sedition among their bishops. By Corinth NOT going to Churches closer to them for help in and of itself, speaks VOLUMES…would you agree? It speaks VOLUMES. (Sans St John of course and the bishop of Rome) the bishops in those cities mentioned, didn’t have the authority to fix the sedition problem with the Corinthian bishops.

As an aside, bishops have no authority outside their own areas. And THAT speaks volumes when it’s bishops in sedition in a city or region, that need correcting by someone that CAN act with authority. Do you see that point? Therefore, It takes someone whose authority is recognized to be over all, to fix the problem.

Since I raised it, then there is that issue one needs to explain, why didn’t Corinth go to John the apostle who is living much closer to them than Clement over in Rome. For a point of historical reference, John hasn’t written the book of revelation yet. He wouldn’t write that book for approx 10 years from this time of Clement’s letter to Corinth…
s:

I think Ignatius writes as much more of an authority in his letters than Clement does. Ignatius doesn’t request to have a messenger send word back - but he was expecting to be martyred.

The issues are completely different.
s:

I am not sure why he was inspired to write that. It sounds like Paul was writing to a church in Rome that was established by someone else. It does not say who. He may have later become involved in this church, but he did not found the church as Irenaeus claims.

Peter was there.
s:

That’s exactly the influence he was requesting.
“Only request in my behalf both inward and outward strength, that I may not only speak, but [truly] will; and that I may not merely be called a Christian, but really be found to be one.”
" I beseech of you not to show an unseasonable good-will towards me. Allow me to become food for the wild beasts, through whose instrumentality it will be granted me to attain to God. I am the wheat of God, and let me be ground by the teeth of the wild beasts, that I may be found the pure bread of Christ."
He is very specifically asking them not to intervene or try to help him. He wants them to help, if at all, that he be found guilty.

He wanted to be martyred and Ignatius uses Eucharistic analogy of what is going to happen to him
s:

I think that the church in Rome to which he was being transported as a Roman prisoner presided in that very region and had members in the church who were involved in some ways with government affairs. History is very sketchy, but he seems to think the church in Rome can have influence over the outcome of what becomes of him in Rome.

You’re confusing Church and state. They are completely contrary to each other. The state was trying to eliminate the Church. There is no collusion between Church matters and state matters.
s:

Jesus did have a 3-fold interaction about sheep. Maybe part of restoring him after denying Christ 3 times. But, how did Peter exercise his authority over the other apostles? Did he step in and intervene in the churches that Paul and others started? I don’t think Peter understood that this was his role. I don’t think the other apostles were seeking direction from Peter for this.

Allow me to bring up just one episode regarding an argument over authority, and how Jesus settles the argument. For space I’ll give a link

Look for Lk 22: 24… in the post

#[153 (http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10914564&postcount=153)

 

[susanlo]

He wanted to be martyred and Ignatius uses Eucharistic analogy of what is going to happen to him

You’re confusing Church and state. They are completely contrary to each other. The state was trying to eliminate the Church. There is no collusion between Church matters and state matters.

I don’t know that it is an important point to the original discussion, but I just wanted to say that I do think he expected the church could influence the decision. Not because I think the church was the actual government, but because they may have had members in the community that had friends in power or what not. I don’t think he was just wasting his ink when writing the letter to the Romans.

“One of his seven extant letters was addressed to the Christians of Rome, whom he passionately entreats to do nothing to prevent his martyrdom. At this time Christianity had a number of influential converts, and some of these highly-placed persons might well have tried to have his sentence mitigated.”
ewtn.com/library/MARY/IGNATIUS.htm

I have read the rest of your post too.

 

[total_Catholic]

Great response. For non-Catholics, this question doesn’t makes sense.

OR, makes them feel uneasy.

 

[Abu]

total Catholic #224

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Sheep
Great response. For non-Catholics, this question doesn’t makes sense.

OR, makes them feel uneasy.

That’s why it is so worth following as Christ was so emphatic as to the authenticity of His One True Church.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

There is no question that the Catholic Church is the One True-Faith Church, the only one established by Christ Himself, and which vetted, collected and authorised the Sacred Scriptures as the Word of God.

4. Extracts:
The term “ecumenical movement” indicates the initiatives and activities planned and undertaken, according to the various needs of the Church and as opportunities offer, to promote Christian unity. These are: first, every effort to avoid expressions, judgments and actions which do not represent the condition of our separated brethren with truth and fairness and so make mutual relations with them more difficult; then, “dialogue” between competent experts from different Churches and Communities. At these meetings, which are organized in a religious spirit, each explains the teaching of his Communion in greater depth and brings out clearly its distinctive features. In such dialogue, everyone gains a truer knowledge and more just appreciation of the teaching and religious life of both Communions. In addition, the way is prepared for cooperation between them in the duties for the common good of humanity which are demanded by every Christian conscience; and, wherever this is allowed, there is prayer in common. Finally, all are led to examine their own faithfulness to Christ’s will for the Church and accordingly to undertake with vigor the task of renewal and reform.

When such actions are undertaken prudently and patiently by the Catholic faithful, with the attentive guidance of their bishops, they promote justice and truth, concord and collaboration, as well as the spirit of brotherly love and unity. This is the way that, when the obstacles to perfect ecclesiastical communion have been gradually overcome, all Christians will at last, in a common celebration of the Eucharist, be gathered into the one and only Church in that unity which Christ bestowed on His Church from the beginning. We believe that this unity subsists in the Catholic Church as something she
can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time.

The ecumenical movement in the past decades has moved us to new places, as is made clear both by the pope in Ut Unum Sint and in the declarations from the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity – the dicastery from which EVERY Catholic must receive their orientation on ecclesiology as it concerns our relations with our beloved brothers and sisters of other Christian traditions, whom we honour and whom esteem and in whom we recognise we can ourselves receive much.

As Saint John Paul II reminded us: “Dialogue is not simply an exchange of ideas. In some way it is always an ‘exchange of gifts’” – and we must be always conscious that our brothers and sisters who are not Catholic have many gifts that we receive from them even as we share with them the insights that are ours.

11. Extracts:
**At the same time, the Catholic faith must be explained more profoundly and precisely, in such a way and in such terms as our separated brethren can also really understand.
**
Moreover, in ecumenical dialogue, Catholic theologians standing fast by the teaching of the Church and investigating the divine mysteries with the separated brethren must proceed with love for the truth, with charity, and with humility.
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html

And Pope Saint John Paul clarifies this point very well, when he says:

29. For this reason, the Council’s Decree on Ecumenism also emphasizes the importance of "every effort to eliminate words, judgments, and actions which do not respond to the condition of separated brethren with truth and fairness and so make mutual relations between them more difficult". The Decree approaches the question from the standpoint of the Catholic Church and refers to the criteria which she must apply in relation to other Christians. In all this, however, reciprocity is required. To follow these criteria is a commitment of each of the parties which desire to enter into dialogue and it is a precondition for starting such dialogue. It is necessary to pass from antagonism and conflict to a situation where each party recognizes the other as a partner. When undertaking dialogue, each side must presuppose in the other a desire for reconciliation, for unity in truth. For this to happen, any display of mutual opposition must disappear. Only thus will dialogue help to overcome division and lead us closer to unity.
Therefore words which I have seen, even in this thread, such as “revolution” are to be repudiated as repugnant to what was reality; such language is rejected by the Holy See today as profoundly offensive. Indeed, words which express any sense of antagonism or conflict have no place in dialogue.

Reciprocity demands that we acknowledge Christians who are not Catholic as not only our brothers and sisters, but consecrated by their baptism – just as we are – and sanctified by the Holy Spirit, as we seek to heal the wounds that have rent the Body of Christ and to promote and dispose for the unity among the disciples of the Lord that He Himself prayed for when He said at the Last Supper “Ut Unum Sint”.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Thank you my friend!

Both that papal document & the Catholic Catechism say the say thing; only the Catechism does it with an economy of words

As evidence of this might I ask a few questions, to stimulate further thought?

1. Is it possible that God can hold different position [at times even contradictory] on the same carefully defined issues?
2. It is exceeding clear that Christ intended to do exactly what He, Jesus /God intended to do. Namely to Institute a NEW Faith through a NEW Governing organization, which He termed “MY Church” [Mt 16:18]

John 19:26-30

[26] When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!”
[27] Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home.
[28] After this Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfil the scripture), “I thirst.”
[29] A bowl full of vinegar stood there; so they put a sponge full of the vinegar on hyssop and held it to his mouth
[30] When Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, “It is finished”; and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

1. How could it be possible that Jesus {GOD} could have waited dome 1,500 years, about 1,400 years AFTER the Bible had been fully authored [yet not fully assembled],for Martin Luther, Calvin and others after that to invent and introduce there faith beliefs; which simply do NOT align with what that One church instituted by Christ founded; based on the beliefs handed on and taught directly to, directly and exclusively, His Apostles and CC?

Mt 28 18-20
[18] And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. [19] Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [20] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

**Douay Catholic Bible which predates the King James by about 50 years in the NT explanation **

“[18] All power: See here the warrant and commission of the apostles and their successors, the bishops and pastors of Christ’s church. He received from his Father all power in heaven and in earth: and in virtue of this power, he sends them (even as his Father sent him, St. John 20. 21) to teach and disciple, not one, but all nations; and instruct them in all truths: and that he may assist them effectually in the execution of this commission, he promises to be with them, not for three or four hundred years only, but all days, even to the consummation of the world. How then could the Catholic Church ever go astray; having always with her pastors, as is here promised, Christ himself, who is the way, the truth, and the life. St. John 14.”

Patrick

It is critical to confess what Pope Saint John Paul II says in Ut Unum Sint:
47. Dialogue does not extend exclusively to matters of doctrine but engages the whole person; it is also a dialogue of love. The Council has stated: "Catholics must joyfully acknowledge and esteem the truly Christian endowments from our common heritage which are to be found among our separated brothers and sisters. It is right and salutary to recognize the riches of Christ and virtuous works in the lives of others who are bearing witness to Christ, sometimes even to the shedding of their blood. For God is always wonderful in his works and worthy of admiration".
The Holy Spirit, at work in and through these other ecclesial communities, is accomplishing marvels of sanctification for which God is to be praised
48. The relationships which the members of the Catholic Church have established with other Christians since the Council have enabled us to discover what God is bringing about in the members of other Churches and Ecclesial Communities. This direct contact, at a variety of levels, with pastors and with the members of these Communities has made us aware of the witness which other Christians bear to God and to Christ
This was a gift of the Holy Spirit to us as Catholics through the Council Fathers who discerned the many ways and the many places in which the Holy Spirit was at work outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church. And thus we acknowledge the work of God occurring in and through “the members of other Churches and Ecclesial Communities.”

Indeed, every Catholic must make his or her own the words of Pope John Paul II in this critical encyclical when he declares:
[Par. 43] I have thanked God “for what he has already accomplished in the other Churches and Ecclesial Communities and through them”, as well as through the Catholic Church. Today I see with satisfaction that the already vast network of ecumenical cooperation is constantly growing. Thanks also to the influence of the World Council of Churches, much is being accomplished in this field.
Where the Gospel is proclaimed, where Jesus Christ is witnessed to…even to the shedding of blood…where the Holy Spirit is present with His gifts and fruits, where grace is at work – there the Lord is to be adored and glorified

May the relations of the Holy See and the World Council of Churches and its constituent members occasion the promotion of Christian unity. Indeed, as one who worked in this field for a very long time, it is hard to praise sufficiently the partnership between the Holy See and the World Council of Churches. One sees over that span of years incredible growth and the paradigm of partnership as a crucial – and already lived – reality

 

[Tomdstone]

May the relations of the Holy See and the World Council of Churches and its constituent members occasion the promotion of Christian unity.

I don’t see how it is possible for the Roman Catholic Church to unite with all the other Christians, except by giving up and compromising on some of its beliefs. For example, the Roman Catholic Church cannot even unite with its own SSPX branch which adheres to the pre-Vatican II theology. It cannot unite with the Eastern Orthodox Church, but in 1054 it excommunicated Cerularius and his followers for such things as married priests, omission of the filioques from the creed and the fact that their priests wear beards. If the Roman Catholic church cannot unite with SSPX or with the Eastern Orthodox Church, how would it be possible to unite with other Christians?

 

[Abu]

The sort of language issuing from Pope Francis too often evokes confusion and uncertainty as exposed again.

The Catholic Church must stop flirting with anti-family ideologies and oppose them: Romanian doctor
Pete Baklinski Mon May 16, 2016
ROME, May 16, 2016 (LifeSiteNews)
Extracts:
Instead of leading faithful Catholics in battle against forces of evil that seek to undermine and erase Christianity’s mark on civilization, the Catholic Church under the leadership of Pope Francis is kowtowing to problematic ideological systems that are opposed to life, family, the well-being of society, and ultimately, to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, said Dr. Anca Cernea of Romania in a talk given at an international life-and-family conference in Rome last week. **She urged conference participants to earnestly pray that Catholic shepherds return to their primary “duty” of saving souls through evangelization and conversion. **[My emphasis].

She expressed concern that the Church under Pope Francis’ direction is aligning herself with ideologically driven agendas and is not only failing to be a source of light to nations worldwide, but is even being used by powerful organizations to push an agenda contrary to the Gospel and to God’s reign on earth.

“Instead of preaching the True God to pagans and convert[ing] them, [Catholic leaders] get used by the pagans against the True God,” she said. One need only recall the “climate change” light show projected on St. Peter’s Basilica on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception to mark the opening of the Year of Mercy last December as an example of Cernea’s point.

For example, life and family leaders have expressed outrage numerous times (here or here) at seeing population control and abortion rights advocates given platforms or positions of prominence at recent Vatican workshops and events.

[Such as Ban Ki Moon and Professor Jeffrey Sachs, noted advocates of abortion who operate at the highest levels of the United Nations].

[Schellnhuber is also associated with the controversial “gaia principle.” The “gaia principle” proposes that both living and non-living beings on Earth interact to form self-regulating system that contributes to maintaining the conditions for life on the planet. This system is considered to be a living being in its own right, with even some degree of consciousness. In “‘Earth system’ analysis and the second Copernican revolution”, (*Nature, 1999) Schellnhuber spoke of “unravelling the mysteries of the Earth’s physique, or “Gaia’s body”.]
lifesitenews.com/news/the-catholic-church-must-stop-flirting-with-anti-family-ideologies-and-oppo?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com+Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=cffac30839-LifeSiteNews_com_Intl_Headlines_06_19_2013&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0caba610ac-cffac30839-326192106

 

[Tomdstone]

The sort of language issuing from Pope Francis too often evokes confusion and uncertainty as exposed again.

The Catholic Church must stop flirting with anti-family ideologies and oppose them: Romanian doctor
Pete Baklinski Mon May 16, 2016
ROME, May 16, 2016 (LifeSiteNews)
Extracts:
Instead of leading faithful Catholics in battle against forces of evil that seek to undermine and erase Christianity’s mark on civilization, the Catholic Church under the leadership of Pope Francis is kowtowing to problematic ideological systems that are opposed to life, family, the well-being of society, and ultimately, to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, said Dr. Anca Cernea of Romania in a talk given at an international life-and-family conference in Rome last week. **She urged conference participants to earnestly pray that Catholic shepherds return to their primary “duty” of saving souls through evangelization and conversion. **[My emphasis].

She expressed concern that the Church under Pope Francis’ direction is aligning herself with ideologically driven agendas and is not only failing to be a source of light to nations worldwide, but is even being used by powerful organizations to push an agenda contrary to the Gospel and to God’s reign on earth.

“Instead of preaching the True God to pagans and convert[ing] them, [Catholic leaders] get used by the pagans against the True God,” she said. One need only recall the “climate change” light show projected on St. Peter’s Basilica on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception to mark the opening of the Year of Mercy last December as an example of Cernea’s point.

For example, life and family leaders have expressed outrage numerous times (here or here) at seeing population control and abortion rights advocates given platforms or positions of prominence at recent Vatican workshops and events.

[Such as Ban Ki Moon and Professor Jeffrey Sachs, noted advocates of abortion who operate at the highest levels of the United Nations].

[Schellnhuber is also associated with the controversial “gaia principle.” The “gaia principle” proposes that both living and non-living beings on Earth interact to form self-regulating system that contributes to maintaining the conditions for life on the planet. This system is considered to be a living being in its own right, with even some degree of consciousness. In “‘Earth system’ analysis and the second Copernican revolution”, (*Nature,

1. Schellnhuber spoke of “unravelling the mysteries of the Earth’s physique, or “Gaia’s body”.]
   lifesitenews.com/news/the-catholic-church-must-stop-flirting-with-anti-family-ideologies-and-oppo?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com+Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=cffac30839-LifeSiteNews_com_Intl_Headlines_06_19_2013&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0caba610ac-cffac30839-326192106Does Dr. Anca Cernea dissent from the leadership of His Holiness Pope Francis?

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I don’t see how it is possible for the Roman Catholic Church to unite with all the other Christians, except by giving up and compromising on some of its beliefs. For example, the Roman Catholic Church cannot even unite with its own SSPX branch which adheres to the pre-Vatican II theology. It cannot unite with the Eastern Orthodox Church, but in 1054 it excommunicated Cerularius and his followers for such things as married priests, omission of the filioques from the creed and the fact that their priests wear beards. If the Roman Catholic church cannot unite with SSPX or with the Eastern Orthodox Church, how would it be possible to unite with other Christians?

Well, that is an interesting question you pose. In the shorter term, promotion of Christian unity is a different reality from “uniting with.”

Thankfully, Blessed Paul VI and Athenagoras I resolved the issue of the mutual excommunications of the past. They are consigned to the past.

In fact, there are advances between Catholicism and some of the Eastern Churches not in full communion that are actually quite advanced in terms of sharing sacraments.

The Eastern Churches in communion with Rome retain their proper liturgical traditions and disciplines regarding clerical life…even the Pope does not always pronounce the Filioque when he prays the creed…and we can all have beards now – except for the odd Roman Rite bishop who keeps a provision against them in particular law. The tragedy of latinization is being remedied more and more with the passage of time.

Married men are being ordained as priests in the United States for the Eastern Churches (without their having to go back to the their ancestral land for the ordination) …something that had been resisted by the Americans in generations past but, thanks to the mindset advanced by Vatican II, is now being done with little objection and a sign of changing mindsets.

As for the present, the joint service of common prayer model, which will be used by the pope, cardinals, bishops, and priests who will co-preside with Lutheran clergy during the year of commemoration on the 500th anniversary of the Reformation will certainly be non-Eucharistic…but it is still an important reality. I look forward to co-presiding at one, if I am still alive. I already have the text in hand and it is quite a remarkable liturgy, actually. I hope it sees much use. Many dioceses are already putting the joint service on their calendar.

Pope John Paul II invited the theological community of all Christian traditions to propose new visions for the exercise of the Petrine ministry and those discussions are still on-going. There are several parallel discussion in progress. I can say the focus is especially on the papacy of the first millennium as a model. The proceedings of the Joint Catholic Orthodox Commission are especially interesting in their reflections and proposals. Much will depend upon the pan-Orthodox meeting.

There is an exploration for an exercise of authority that is much more synodal, which Pope Francis has spoken of frequently as an urgent need for the Occidental Church.

The provision for the Anglicans coming into full communion provides an excellent paradigm of a community preserving its heritage and patrimony – theological, liturgical and spiritual – as a distinct community within Catholicism, with its own jurisdiction and its own liturgy and disciplines.

It was a remarkable thing when the Book of Divine Worship was being crafted that elements from Thomas Cranmer came to be incorporated into Catholic worship…where they remain as part of the missal for that community of Anglicans now in full communion and who now have three personal ordinariates and the prospect of a fourth.

Fifty years ago, I certainly did not expect to see a fraction of the things I have lived. Once upon a time, we wanted nothing to do with the World Council of Churches and Rome was quite clear in saying so…and then Vatican II happened and there was a paradigm shift. Not only on Christian unity but interreligious dialogue as well. To be sure, it was because of the Holy Spirit. Gathering some 3000 of the Church’s greatest minds together in one place at the ecumenical council bore tremendous good fruit.

It has been remarkable journey. In handing it off to the next generation, I have great hope. I won’t see it in this life, of course, but I think in terms of history and historical research and the historical methodology these academics are applying, the thoughts of the past will take on an entirely different hue. I’ve already seen that demonstrated with the run-up to next year’s anniversary of the Reformation.

No less than history and historical methodology, theology and biblical scholarship today are in a new generation, better equipped than what was already 50 years ago and even more. Fifty years from now will be more different from today than what today looks like relative to the reign of Pope Pius XI, 80 years ago, I would venture…in every way.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

The sort of language issuing from Pope Francis too often evokes confusion and uncertainty as exposed again.

The Catholic Church must stop flirting with anti-family ideologies and oppose them: Romanian doctor
Pete Baklinski Mon May 16, 2016
ROME, May 16, 2016 (LifeSiteNews)
Extracts:
Instead of leading faithful Catholics in battle against forces of evil that seek to undermine and erase Christianity’s mark on civilization, the Catholic Church under the leadership of Pope Francis is kowtowing to problematic ideological systems that are opposed to life, family, the well-being of society, and ultimately, to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, said Dr. Anca Cernea of Romania in a talk given at an international life-and-family conference in Rome last week. **She urged conference participants to earnestly pray that Catholic shepherds return to their primary “duty” of saving souls through evangelization and conversion. **[My emphasis].

She expressed concern that the Church under Pope Francis’ direction is aligning herself with ideologically driven agendas and is not only failing to be a source of light to nations worldwide, but is even being used by powerful organizations to push an agenda contrary to the Gospel and to God’s reign on earth.

“Instead of preaching the True God to pagans and convert[ing] them, [Catholic leaders] get used by the pagans against the True God,” she said. One need only recall the “climate change” light show projected on St. Peter’s Basilica on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception to mark the opening of the Year of Mercy last December as an example of Cernea’s point.

For example, life and family leaders have expressed outrage numerous times (here or here) at seeing population control and abortion rights advocates given platforms or positions of prominence at recent Vatican workshops and events.

[Such as Ban Ki Moon and Professor Jeffrey Sachs, noted advocates of abortion who operate at the highest levels of the United Nations].

[Schellnhuber is also associated with the controversial “gaia principle.” The “gaia principle” proposes that both living and non-living beings on Earth interact to form self-regulating system that contributes to maintaining the conditions for life on the planet. This system is considered to be a living being in its own right, with even some degree of consciousness. In “‘Earth system’ analysis and the second Copernican revolution”, (*Nature,

1. Schellnhuber spoke of “unravelling the mysteries of the Earth’s physique, or “Gaia’s body”.]

I most strenuously object to what you post. I remember the intervention of this person at the synod and at no time did she attack the Holy Father as you assert. What you post is little more than a hit piece upon the person of Pope Francis.

It leads another poster to ask whether this person intervening at the synod “dissent from the leadership of His Holiness Pope Francis?”

Dr. Cernea’s intervention was a lovely meditation of a spiritual vision of the tribulations societies are confronting.

At no point does she reference issues such as the sound and light show – which is a next generation production of the grand illuminations of Saint Peter’s Basilica, which were such marvelous spectacles on great occasions in decades long past.

I also object to your references to the United Nations…the Holy See delegation has been part of the United Nations from its early days. Blessed Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis have all addressed the General Assembly, recognising in the United Nations a remarkable force for good among the family of nations. Of course, the General Secretaries of the United Nations – past as well as present – are always received at the Holy See with the protocol that befits their status as illustrious personages of global significance.

Given the unique role the Holy See has in the international community, of course there are people with problematic morals who are received, consulted or conferred with. Long before there was Pope Francis, we had the issue of relating with President Mugabe, President Arafat or, for that matter, Il Duce for the Lateran concordat or even Adolf Hitler for the conclusion of the concordat between the Holy See and post World War I Germany.

I would hope that Catholic Answers will closely examine this matter, both for its veracity and relative to His Holiness, our Pope, but in the interest of integrity, I shall post the English text of Dr. Cernea’s actual remarks at the synod in the following post so that readers may see what she said and how it should be characterized.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

The sort of language issuing from Pope Francis too often evokes confusion and uncertainty as exposed again.

The Catholic Church must stop flirting with anti-family ideologies and oppose them: Romanian doctor
Pete Baklinski Mon May 16, 2016
ROME, May 16, 2016 (LifeSiteNews)

This is the actual text, which has been inappropriately characterized:

*By Dr Anca-Maria Cernea

Doctor at the Center for Diagnosis and Treatment-Victor Babes

President of the Association of Catholic Doctors of Bucharest (Romania)

Presentation to Pope Francis and the Synod bishops

Friday, 16th October 2015

Your Holiness, Synod Fathers, Brothers and Sisters, I represent the Association of Catholic Doctors from Bucharest.

I am from the Romanian Greek Catholic Church.

My father was a Christian political leader, who was imprisoned by the communists for 17 years. My parents were engaged to marry, but their wedding took place 17 years later.

My mother waited all those years for my father, although she didn’t even know if he was still alive. They have been heroically faithful to God and to their engagement.

Their example shows that God’s grace can overcame terrible social circumstances and material poverty.

We, as Catholic doctors, defending life and family, can see this is, first of all, a spiritual battle.

Material poverty and consumerism are not the primary cause of the family crisis.

The primary cause of the sexual and cultural revolution is ideological.

Our Lady of Fatima has said that Russia’s errors would spread all over the world.

It was first done under a violent form, classical Marxism, by killing tens of millions.

Now it’s being done mostly by cultural Marxism. There is continuity from Lenin’s sexual revolution, through Gramsci and the Frankfurt school, to the current-day gay-rights and gender ideology.

Classical Marxism pretended to redesign society, through violent take-over of property.

Now the revolution goes deeper; it pretends to redefine family, sexual identity and human nature.

This ideology calls itself progressive. But it is nothing else than the ancient serpent’s offer, for man to take control, to replace God, to arrange salvation here, in this world.

It’s an error of religious nature, it’s Gnosticism.

It’s the task of the shepherds to recognize it, and warn the flock against this danger.

“Seek ye therefore first the Kingdom of God, and His justice, and all these things shall be added unto you.”

The Church’s mission is to save souls. Evil, in this world, comes from sin. Not from income disparity or “climate change”.

The solution is: Evangelization. Conversion.

Not an ever increasing government control. Not a world government. These are nowadays the main agents imposing cultural Marxism to our nations, under the form of population control, reproductive health, gay rights, gender education, and so on.

What the world needs nowadays is not limitation of freedom, but real freedom, liberation from sin. Salvation.

Our Church was suppressed by the Soviet occupation. But none of our 12 bishops betrayed their communion with the Holy Father. Our Church survived thanks to our bishops’ determination and example in resisting prisons and terror.

Our bishops asked the community not to follow the world. Not to cooperate with the communists.

Now we need Rome to tell the world: “Repent of your sins and turn to God for the Kingdom of Heaven is near.”

Not only us, the Catholic laity, but also many Christian Orthodox are anxiously praying for this Synod. Because, as they say, if the Catholic Church gives in to the spirit of this world, it is going to be very difficult for all the other Christians to resist it.*
Text kindness of Inside the Vatican
insidethevatican.com/news/newsflash/letter-45-2015-the-best-talk-at-the-synod

 

[josephback]

My insert: [PJM]

“A truth” is NOT the same as “THEE TRUTH”.

It is ONLY possible ot have One truth per defined issue; YES:shrug:

What?! I figured as much.
¡¿Qué?! pensaba el mismo.

 

[Wannano]

Well, that is an interesting question you pose. In the shorter term, promotion of Christian unity is a different reality from “uniting with.”

Thankfully, Blessed Paul VI and Athenagoras I resolved the issue of the mutual excommunications of the past. They are consigned to the past.

In fact, there are advances between Catholicism and some of the Eastern Churches not in full communion that are actually quite advanced in terms of sharing sacraments.

The Eastern Churches in communion with Rome retain their proper liturgical traditions and disciplines regarding clerical life…even the Pope does not always pronounce the Filioque when he prays the creed…and we can all have beards now – except for the odd Roman Rite bishop who keeps a provision against them in particular law. The tragedy of latinization is being remedied more and more with the passage of time.

Married men are being ordained as priests in the United States for the Eastern Churches (without their having to go back to the their ancestral land for the ordination) …something that had been resisted by the Americans in generations past but, thanks to the mindset advanced by Vatican II, is now being done with little objection and a sign of changing mindsets.

As for the present, the joint service of common prayer model, which will be used by the pope, cardinals, bishops, and priests who will co-preside with Lutheran clergy during the year of commemoration on the 500th anniversary of the Reformation will certainly be non-Eucharistic…but it is still an important reality. I look forward to co-presiding at one, if I am still alive. I already have the text in hand and it is quite a remarkable liturgy, actually. I hope it sees much use. Many dioceses are already putting the joint service on their calendar.

Pope John Paul II invited the theological community of all Christian traditions to propose new visions for the exercise of the Petrine ministry and those discussions are still on-going. There are several parallel discussion in progress. I can say the focus is especially on the papacy of the first millennium as a model. The proceedings of the Joint Catholic Orthodox Commission are especially interesting in their reflections and proposals. Much will depend upon the pan-Orthodox meeting.

There is an exploration for an exercise of authority that is much more synodal, which Pope Francis has spoken of frequently as an urgent need for the Occidental Church.

The provision for the Anglicans coming into full communion provides an excellent paradigm of a community preserving its heritage and patrimony – theological, liturgical and spiritual – as a distinct community within Catholicism, with its own jurisdiction and its own liturgy and disciplines.

It was a remarkable thing when the Book of Divine Worship was being crafted that elements from Thomas Cranmer came to be incorporated into Catholic worship…where they remain as part of the missal for that community of Anglicans now in full communion and who now have three personal ordinariates and the prospect of a fourth.

Fifty years ago, I certainly did not expect to see a fraction of the things I have lived. Once upon a time, we wanted nothing to do with the World Council of Churches and Rome was quite clear in saying so…and then Vatican II happened and there was a paradigm shift. Not only on Christian unity but interreligious dialogue as well. To be sure, it was because of the Holy Spirit. Gathering some 3000 of the Church’s greatest minds together in one place at the ecumenical council bore tremendous good fruit.

It has been remarkable journey. In handing it off to the next generation, I have great hope. I won’t see it in this life, of course, but I think in terms of history and historical research and the historical methodology these academics are applying, the thoughts of the past will take on an entirely different hue. I’ve already seen that demonstrated with the run-up to next year’s anniversary of the Reformation.

No less than history and historical methodology, theology and biblical scholarship today are in a new generation, better equipped than what was already 50 years ago and even more. Fifty years from now will be more different from today than what today looks like relative to the reign of Pope Pius XI, 80 years ago, I would venture…in every way.

I am finding your contributions so interesting. If in fact the Holy Spirit is in control of all that is formulating then we all have nothing to fear.

 

[steve_b]

I don’t know that it is an important point to the original discussion, but I just wanted to say that I do think he expected the church could influence the decision. Not because I think the church was the actual government, but because they may have had members in the community that had friends in power or what not. I don’t think he was just wasting his ink when writing the letter to the Romans.

Persecution of the Church was fierce, and anyone connected to the Church was made sport in the coliseum. Before the coliseum was built, Nero executed both Peter and Paul. Paul was beheaded and Peter crucified upside down on Vatican hill. Catholics were drenched in oil and tied to stakes and lit on fire to light the Appian way at night.

What Ignatius meant by not interfering, was don’t forcibly rescue me from his captors on the way to Rome, or don’t put yourself in harms way by putting yourself in the same spot he’s in. He is doing this willingly.
s:

"One of his seven extant letters was addressed to the Christians of Rome, whom he passionately entreats to do nothing to prevent his martyrdom.

At this time Christianity had a number of influential converts, and some of these highly-placed persons might well have tried to have his sentence mitigated."
ewtn.com/library/MARY/IGNATIUS.htm

I have read the rest of your post too.

And I’m glad you are doing extra reading on this

As an aside, let’s not forget, the “Christians” you mention are **all **Catholics in the Catholic Church. Ignatius only has to name the Church as the Catholic Church once. He doesn’t have to keep repeating the name over and over again. The reader knows who he is talking about.

They (the Catholic Church he writes to in 6 locations) have a bishop, priests, and deacons as the hierarchy of the Church. So Ignatius in his writing to the Catholic Church in any of those 6 locations, is not going to go against his own teaching, which is “do nothing without the bishop”. As a bishop himself, Ignatius is not going to go against his own teaching and bypass another bishop.

So the question could be asked,

why In Ignatius letter to the Church of Rome, does he not name the bishop? It’s safe to say, due to circumstances, it’s to protect them from the same fate he’s going to have, just in case his letter gets in the wrong hands. I don’t think anyone would disagree, that putting them self into the mind of Ignatius at this time, these letters are going out under HUGE duress for him.

As another aside, Peter also wrote cryptically when writing from Rome. He called it Babylon. At the time he writes, the real Babylon had been in ruins for hundreds of years. And besides, there is no evidence Peter ever went to Babylon. But it was a code name for Rome.

 

[Padres1969]

And WHY do Catholic do this:shrug:

Mt 10: 1-5
And having called his twelve disciples together, he gave THEM power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of diseases, and all manner of infirmities. **And the names of the twelve apostles **are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the publican, and James the son of Alpheus, and Thaddeus, Simon the Cananean, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him. These twelve Jesus sent: commanding them, saying:[YOU} Go[/COLOR] ye not into the way of the Gentiles, and into the city of the Samaritans enter ye not.

Mt 16: 18-19
And I say to YOU: That thou art Peter; and upon {YOU-Peter} this rock I will build MY church, [Singular} **and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to YOU {Peter} the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever YOU shalt bind YOU shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

Jn. 17: 17-20 [jesus praying to the Father / God cannot deny himself as Jesus too Is GOD

Sanctify THEM in truth. Thy word is truth. [18] As thou hast sent me into the world, I also have sent THEM into the world. [19] And for THEM do I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth. [20] And not for THEM only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me;

Mt 28: 19-20
"Going therefore, teach YOU all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded YOU and behold I am with YOU all days, even to the consummation of the world.

ALL singular tense, ALL directed to and exclusively TOO the Apostles and their successors.

HOW can the Bible, How can God have been more precise and specific?

God Bless you

Patrick

And again, this is where definitions of what constitutes the Church come into conflict. The RCC would say as you’ve made clear that it sees itself as the lone church of Christ on Earth. The Orthodox and several other groups make similar claims to being that one true Church. However most Protestants reject that notion of what constitutes the Church as being limited to one denomination.

As for authority being directed to the apostles and their successors personally I agree with you on that aspect. Apostolic succession and connection to the historic Episcopate is an important part of my denomination just as it is for the RCC.