S
- Status
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
Ah, I see. Then your probably at the beginning of your faith journey.
That’s great news. However, the author of the Epistle of Hebrews understood his Christianity in context of a hierarchical community, some of whom were indeed leaders that were charged with the care of Christian souls (cf. Heb 13:17). If your ecclesiology consists of “just me, my Bible, and Jesus” then I suggest you have misunderstood the Christian religion in a significant way, as compared to the inerrant truth of Sacred Scripture.
The Bible states, “Come now, let us reason together.” (Is 1:18) I suggest that your opposition to reason is not in accord with Sacred Scripture.
It is reasonable to understand that in the OT, the Davidic Kingdom had succession, as well as a successorship of the the King’s chief steward (cf. Is 22). The King had many ministers, but just one guy was in charge of all the ministers in the Household of the Lord, the chief steward. All knew who that was, because he was the one who held the “keys to the kingdom.” Now, the last and eternal Davidic King is Jesus Christ. But, he gave the keys of the kingdom to Peter. Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox scholars agree that Peter was the chief apostle.
Consequently, the NT Church was hierarchical, and the apostles had successors (remember, Matthias took the office of Judas). Why did they have successors? Because this was God’s providence, even during OT times for his Davidic Kingdom, as supported by the Word of God. The NT Church was hierarchical and had one guy as chief minister. There’s one Christian Church like that still today throughout the world, and that is the Catholic Church.
The NT Church ministers were appointed by those NT ministers appointed by Christ. There’s historical succession in the Bible, and so their’s historical succession today, with one guy as chief minister. Heb 13:17 commands us to obey them. You wanna be a Bible Christian? Then tell me how you obey Heb 13:17? Tell me how your pastor was ordained by the ministers who were ordained by Jesus, through the “laying of hands.” If you obey no earthly minister, then you make nonesense of Heb 13:17.
Reason and faith. Pope John Paul II was ordained by one who was ordained by another, who can trace his ordination to the apostles, who were ordained by Jesus. Even protestant historians admits this as fact. So to do secular historians. It is reasonable to believe that he is in fact the true successor to Peter, the chief apostle. The holy martyr, Ignatius (AD 50-110), who was the first century Bishop of Antioch, where they were first called Christian, says that the Church in Rome “presides” over the others. The Church in Rome did so in the first century (as testified to by the first century Bishop of Antioch), as it does today. Those that deny this have not offered compelling evidence to the contrary, and so it is unreasonable for me to conclude otherwise. And as Scripture states, we ought to “reason together.”
I have no worries for me, as I faithfully submit to my pastor as Heb 13:17 commands. But I do regret that your understanding of the Church and its unity, its authority as “pillar and foundation of truth” is quite contrary to Sacred Scripture. And Scripture is profitable for correction.
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
Ah, I see. Then your probably at the beginning of your faith journey and your questions make much more sense.
That’s great news. However, the author of the Epistle of Hebrews undestood his Christianity in context of a community, some of whom were indeed leaders that were charged with the care of his soul (cf. Heb 13:17). If your ecclesiology consists of “just me, my Bible, and Jesus” then I suggest you have misunderstood the Christian religion in a significant way.
The Bible states, “come, let us reason together.” I suggest that your opposition to reason is not in accord with Scripture.
It is reasonable to understand that in the OT, the Davidic Kingdom had succesion, as well as a successorship of the the King’s chief steward (cf. Is 22). The King had many ministers, but just one guy was win charge of all the ministers in the Household of the Lord. All knew who that was, because he was the one who held the “keys to the kingdom.” The last and eternal Davidic King is Jesus Christ. He gave the keys to Peter. Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox scholars agree that Peter was the chief apostle. The NT Church was hierarchical, and the apostles had successors (remember, Matthias took the office of Judas). Why did they have successors? The providence of God, as supported by the Word of God. The NT Church was hierarchical and had one guy as chief minister. The NT Church ministers were appointed by those NT ministers appointed by Christ. There’s historical succession in the Bible, and so their historical succession today, with one guy as chief minister. Heb 13:17 commands us to obey them. You wanna be a Bible Christian? Then tell me how you obey Heb 13:17? Tell me how your pastor was ordained by the ministers who were ordained by Jesus, through the “laying of hands.”
Pope John Paul II was ordained by one who was ordained by another, who can trace his ordination to the apostles, who were ordained by Jesus. Even protestant historians admits this as fact. So to do secular historians.
I have no worries for me, as I faithfully submit to my pastor as Heb 13:17 command. But I do regret that your understanding of the Church and its authority as “pillar and foundation of truth” is quite contrary to Sacred Scripture. And Scripture is profitable for correction.
M
mercygate
Guest
You’re reading R. C. Sproul? I LOVE R. C. Sproul.
He’s a closet Catholic.
I’m hoping he’ll figure it out before it’s too late – because he always ends his sentences just before drawing the inescapable conclusion that the Catholic position (which he never misrepresents) is unavoidable.
He’s a closet Catholic.
I’m hoping he’ll figure it out before it’s too late – because he always ends his sentences just before drawing the inescapable conclusion that the Catholic position (which he never misrepresents) is unavoidable.
F
Fergal
Guest
The Catholic Church makes claims about herself that are easily misunderstood, especially in the modern atmosphere of pluralism and ecumenism. Among these claims, the most fundamental is the doctrine of the Church’s necessity for salvation. Not unlike other dogmas of the faith, this one has seen some remarkable development, and the dogmatic progress has been especially marked since the definition of papal infallibility. It seems that as the Church further clarified her own identity as regards the papacy and collegiality, she also deepened (without changing) her self-understanding as the mediator of salvation to mankind. The New Testament makes it plain that Christ founded the Church to be a society for the salvation of all men. The ancient Fathers held the unanimous conviction that salvation cannot be achieved outside the Church. St. Ireneus taught that “where the Church is, there is the spirit of God, and where the spirit of God is, there is the Church and all grace.” (35 ) Origen simply declared, “Outside the Church nobody will be saved.” (36) And the favorite simile in patristic literature for the Church’s absolute need to be saved is the Ark of Noah, outside of which there is no prospect of deliverance from the deluge of sin.
Cont.
Cont.
F
Fergal
Guest
Thomas Aquinas restated the constant teaching about the general necessity of the Church. But he also conceded that a person may be saved extra sacramentally by a baptism of desire and therefore without actual membership by reason of his at least implicit desire to belong to the Church.
It would be inaccurate, however, to look upon these two traditions as in opposition. They represent the single mystery of the Church as universal sacrament of salvation, which the Church’s magisterium has explained in such a way that what seems to be a contradiction is really a paradox.
Since the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 defined that “The universal Church of the faithful is one, outside of which no one is saved,” there have been two solemn definitions of the same doctrine, by Pope Boniface VIII in 1302 and at the Council of Florence in 1442. At the Council of Trent, which is commonly looked upon as a symbol of Catholic unwillingness to compromise, the now familiar dogma of baptism by desire was solemnly defined; and it was this Tridentine teaching that supported all subsequent recognition that actual membership in the Church is not required to reach one’s eternal destiny.
At the Second Council of the Vatican, both streams of doctrine were delicately welded into a composite whole:
[The Council] relies on sacred Scripture and Tradition in teaching that this pilgrim Church is necessary for salvation. Christ alone is the mediator of salvation and the way of salvation. He presents himself to us in his Body, which is the Church. When he insisted expressly on the necessity for faith and baptism, he asserted at the same time the necessity for the Church which men would enter by the gateway of baptism. This means that it would be impossible for men to be saved if they refused to enter or to remain in the Catholic Church, unless they were unaware that her foundation by God through Jesus Christ made it a necessity. Full incorporation in the society of the Church belongs to those who are in possession of the Holy Spirit, accept its order in its entirety with all its established means of salvation, and are united to Christ, who rules it by the agency of the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops, within its visible framework. The bonds of their union are the profession of faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government and fellowship. Despite incorporation in the Church, that man is not saved who fails to persevere in charity, and remains in the bosom of the Church “with his body” but not “with his heart.” All the Church’s children must be sure to ascribe their distinguished rank to Christ’s special grace and not to their own deserts. If they fail to correspond with that grace in thought, word and deed, so far from being saved, their judgment will be the more severe. (38)
It would be inaccurate, however, to look upon these two traditions as in opposition. They represent the single mystery of the Church as universal sacrament of salvation, which the Church’s magisterium has explained in such a way that what seems to be a contradiction is really a paradox.
Since the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 defined that “The universal Church of the faithful is one, outside of which no one is saved,” there have been two solemn definitions of the same doctrine, by Pope Boniface VIII in 1302 and at the Council of Florence in 1442. At the Council of Trent, which is commonly looked upon as a symbol of Catholic unwillingness to compromise, the now familiar dogma of baptism by desire was solemnly defined; and it was this Tridentine teaching that supported all subsequent recognition that actual membership in the Church is not required to reach one’s eternal destiny.
At the Second Council of the Vatican, both streams of doctrine were delicately welded into a composite whole:
[The Council] relies on sacred Scripture and Tradition in teaching that this pilgrim Church is necessary for salvation. Christ alone is the mediator of salvation and the way of salvation. He presents himself to us in his Body, which is the Church. When he insisted expressly on the necessity for faith and baptism, he asserted at the same time the necessity for the Church which men would enter by the gateway of baptism. This means that it would be impossible for men to be saved if they refused to enter or to remain in the Catholic Church, unless they were unaware that her foundation by God through Jesus Christ made it a necessity. Full incorporation in the society of the Church belongs to those who are in possession of the Holy Spirit, accept its order in its entirety with all its established means of salvation, and are united to Christ, who rules it by the agency of the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops, within its visible framework. The bonds of their union are the profession of faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government and fellowship. Despite incorporation in the Church, that man is not saved who fails to persevere in charity, and remains in the bosom of the Church “with his body” but not “with his heart.” All the Church’s children must be sure to ascribe their distinguished rank to Christ’s special grace and not to their own deserts. If they fail to correspond with that grace in thought, word and deed, so far from being saved, their judgment will be the more severe. (38)
F
Fergal
Guest
Using this conciliar doctrine as guide, we see that the Church is (in its way) as indispensable as Christ for man’s salvation. The reason is that, since his ascension and the descent of the Spirit, the Church is Christ active on earth performing the salvific work for which he was sent into the world by the Father. Accordingly, the Church is necessary not only as a matter of precept but as a divinely instituted means, provided a person knows that he must use this means to be saved.
Actual incorporation into the Church takes place by baptism of water. Those who are not actually baptized may, nevertheless, be saved through the Church according to their faith in whatever historical revelation they come to know and in their adequate cooperation with the internal graces of the Spirit they receive.
On both counts, however, whoever is saved owes his salvation to the one Catholic Church founded by Christ. It is to this Church alone that Christ entrusted the truths of revelation which have by now, though often dimly, penetrated all the cultures of mankind. It is this Church alone that communicates the merits won for the whole world on the cross. Those who are privileged to share in the fullness of the Church’s riches of revealed wisdom, sacramental power, divinely assured guidance, and blessings of community life cannot pride themselves on having deserved what they possess. Rather they should humbly recognize their chosen position and gratefully live up to the covenant to which they have been called. Otherwise what began as a sign of God’s special favor on earth may end as a witness to his justice in the life to come.
Actual incorporation into the Church takes place by baptism of water. Those who are not actually baptized may, nevertheless, be saved through the Church according to their faith in whatever historical revelation they come to know and in their adequate cooperation with the internal graces of the Spirit they receive.
On both counts, however, whoever is saved owes his salvation to the one Catholic Church founded by Christ. It is to this Church alone that Christ entrusted the truths of revelation which have by now, though often dimly, penetrated all the cultures of mankind. It is this Church alone that communicates the merits won for the whole world on the cross. Those who are privileged to share in the fullness of the Church’s riches of revealed wisdom, sacramental power, divinely assured guidance, and blessings of community life cannot pride themselves on having deserved what they possess. Rather they should humbly recognize their chosen position and gratefully live up to the covenant to which they have been called. Otherwise what began as a sign of God’s special favor on earth may end as a witness to his justice in the life to come.
G
Gene_C
Guest
Hi Mercygate,
You’re so right about R.C. (Sproul). Hey, look at that! Even his initials are telling where the truth is deposited! By the way, do you know what his initials stand for?
He always states what the correct teaching of the Catholic Church is before disputing it. And he will usually say that the teaching is misunderstood.
Gene C.
You’re so right about R.C. (Sproul). Hey, look at that! Even his initials are telling where the truth is deposited! By the way, do you know what his initials stand for?
He always states what the correct teaching of the Catholic Church is before disputing it. And he will usually say that the teaching is misunderstood.
Gene C.
M
MarkInOregon
Guest
Edwin,
It doesn’t sound as if you have any idea what the Church teaches re purgatory. I’m not quite sure what you are saying above–but purgatory is not a place or learning or correction. When we die we will be judged and go either to Heaven or to Hell. It our life warrants and we are to go to Heaven–if we are not pure enough to go to directly to the presence of God–we will go to purgatory will we will be purified/cleaned so that we can be in the presence of God. I have noticed on this thread that you have mistated a several Catholic positions–please take the time to learn the Catholic position–so that you can accurately state it. If you accurately state it and still disagree with it - a much more profitable discussion can occur.
Thank you,
Mark
J
J.R
Guest
First EdwinG did you read the document “Dominus Jesus”? Second I also have a relationship with Christ, my prayer life, through scipture, and most intimate of all the Blessed Sacramant. May God Bless all here.
M
mercygate
Guest
Gene C.:
Chuckle. I have NO idea what R. C. stands for – other than what you suggest!
R
RBushlow
Guest
Edwin,
Spouting false teachings in not going to convince anyone. Backup your statements by citing chapter and verse proving what you said. Nowhere does scripture state that there was false teaching from Peter. Please try to keep to the Truth in these discussions.
.
R
rayray81
Guest
Looks like your staying a Catholic Wohoo!
Peace!
M
MariaG
Guest
Earthly wisdom? The apostles thought it was important too.
2Tim 2:2
Acts 14:23
Titus 1:5
1Tim 5:22
1Tim 3:1, 8; 5:17
Acts 1:25-26
Your sister in Christ,
Maria
J
J.R
Guest
EdwinG you speak of having the Holy Spirit in you in all of your replies but you seem not wanting to answer any of them. Why is that?
Also, you state that you strongly doubt that the Holy Spirit would lead you to the Catholic church but what if it did? If you are convinced that the Catholic church is not the true church then how do you know which one of the 30,000 protestant denominations is?
M
mercygate
Guest
I like to look at it this way. Nothing can detract from what Christ did on the Cross for us. Nothing. But God made us and he made us good! He made us with free will. Without free will, sin would be impossible but so also would love be impossible. Somewhere, even with all of the grace he pours out on us to enable us to accept him, to love him, to respond to his supreme goodness and love – in spite of both original and actual sin – there is a little place in each of us that he leaves in total freedom.
So? Without that freedom there can be no merit of any kind. This is where the “total depravity of man” and all that five-point Calvinist stuff breaks down. The critical thing to keep in mind is that although our works may keep us close to God, they do not earn our salvation:
But let’s go on to see the Catholic view of how God, who cherishes the dignity of man as he created us, views our works (Bold is mine):
Note carefully that the canons do not say that man is justified by works, but only that works contribute to, and maintain, the justification. If you think of justification as a feature of our relationship with God, then this whole idea makes more sense. The freedom of the human will requires that good works be in some small way credited to us, although the absolute sovereignty of God must be acknowledged and upheld.
Yet God, in the wideness of his mercy, allows and requires us to cooperate in his plan of salvation. Again,** where man is not free, he cannot love; and where he cannot love, he cannot obey.** Christ commands us to both love and to obedience.
And Who is the author of love?
O Bonitas!
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
jurist12,
The terms used in Catholic theology are condign merit and congruous merit. Condign merit is like a just wage for equal to the work. To withhold the wage would be unjust. Congruous merit is not like a wage for equal work, but more like a gratuity or like a military decoration. It is given from the goodness of the giver, but it is not truly owed by the giver…
Our salvation is due solely to the condign merit of Christ alone. Any congruous merit is derived from the condign merit of Christ. Think of congruous merit as a channel and condign merit as the source of grace.
There are two kinds of merit. One kind, the kind that Christ merited is merit properly so-called. The other is referred to as quasi-merit, as it is more a gift from the gift giver than anything deserved.
The terms used in Catholic theology are condign merit and congruous merit. Condign merit is like a just wage for equal to the work. To withhold the wage would be unjust. Congruous merit is not like a wage for equal work, but more like a gratuity or like a military decoration. It is given from the goodness of the giver, but it is not truly owed by the giver…
Our salvation is due solely to the condign merit of Christ alone. Any congruous merit is derived from the condign merit of Christ. Think of congruous merit as a channel and condign merit as the source of grace.
A
All4lifetoo
Guest
Many people claim that the Holy Spirit lives in them, but at the same time they claim that only they or their Church speaks the truth. How is it that the Holy Spirit can live in two different people and speak two different truths? Does the Holy Spirit contradict Himself? How can God contradict Himself? It is self-evident that God does not contradict Himself because God is Truth, and there is only one Truth. Therefore the fact is that many of those who claim to have the truth and the Holy Spirit in fact do not have the Holy Spirit, but have a lying spirit leading them astray. They are deceived.
God knew this would happen and He gave us a sure norm of the faith. He gave us an authority that speaks for Him on Earth. That authority is the Church that Jesus Christ founded and no other Church. That Church is the Catholic Church with the successor of Peter as its visible head on Earth. Peter who was given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. He and no other.
If you are not willing to invest your time reading a book with which you disagree, (note: no one is entitled to disagree or critize the writings of others when they have not bothered to read and understand those writings) then why are you willing to invest your time conversing with others who espouse the same teaching here on this forum? Faithful Catholics here are going to give you the Church’s teaching and it seems to me that if you are willing to invest your time here, you should be willing to invest your time reading the official teachings/documents of the Church.
A
All4lifetoo
Guest
Any person who knows that the Catholic Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ for the salvation of all men, and who refuses to enter into Her or refuses to remain in Her, will not be saved. That is the teaching of the Church.
I might add that the Church also teaches about vincible and invincible ignorance. Vincible ignorance is ignorance that one is capable of overcoming by diligent study and use of one’s intellect. Invincible ignorance is ignorance that one is not capable of overcoming by diligent study or use of one’s intellect. One who has vincible ignorance is culpable for one’s actions as if one knew that one’s actions are wrong.
So a person who has vincible ignorance and who stays outside the Catholic Church or refuses to remain in Her may be culpable for his actions. In other words guilt attaches to him as if he knew, because he should have known. Thus a person who claims that he does not know that the Catholic Church is the Church founded by Christ, may only be deceiving himself, because the Catholic Church proclaims to the World that She is the Church that Christ founded for the salvation of all men. The Lord knows who has vincible and who has invincible ignorance because the Lord knows the hearts of all men. The Lord cannot be fooled.
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
EdwinG,
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
[846](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/846.htm’)
How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337
[848](javascript
- Status