So, one thousand posts later, where are we …
Good question. . .
There are none so blind as those who will not see, and none so deaf as those who will not hear.
I sincerely wish Leeann and ron well, though I am saddened that they have embraced error as truth and have closed eyes, ears, and minds when many, many Catholics such as I have given them legitimate, authoritative answers to their errors. I know that of course they must feel about their own ‘beliefs’ much as I do. . . despite all their attempts to make me accept THEIR beliefs as truth I never would. The only difference is that my Catholic beliefs don’t just rest on me (I’m just a fallible human). They rest on Christ, and not just because I ‘think’ they do. . .because I can actually look to a legitimate authority, the Church established by Christ and given that authority. That’s why along with St. Paul I can be sure that the gospel I know is the ‘real’ one, and that those who preach against it, even if they claim theirs is from God, even if they ‘look’ or sound like ‘angels of light’, are preaching error. And that’s why if I were in Leeann’s shoes, at some point, intellectual honesty and the Holy Spirit would have me saying, “on what authority am I denying the Catholic Church and how can I be sure I’m right?” And again, intellectual honesty and the Holy Spirit would, at some point, have me (were I Leeann) acknowledging that a person in denying the Catholic Church is actually denying Christ’s authority and elevating his or her own self to be the ultimate authority. Leeann is saying then not only that the Catholic Church is wrong, but that she, somehow, is ‘right’. . .and thus, she is claiming herself as ultimate authority, but not giving any proof of that authority other than that on HER Scriptural cherry picking, or opinions regarding her friends words or actions, she ‘feels’ that she is right.
Now see, I couldn’t do that. Lord knows as a younger woman struggling with church teachings (specificially Humanae Vitae) I often ‘felt’ that the teachings went against the intellectual climate of the day, but it was obvious to me that the ‘intellectual climate’ was not any kind of ultimate authority. "intellectual climates’ are relative, not absolute. And they can be wrong (and were). The more I examined the Church’s teachings, the more obvious it was that any ‘difficulty’ I had in accepting their authority was due to MY lack, not THEIRs.
If one has no authority other than one’s ‘relative’ feelings and ‘beliefs’, one is building on a foundation of sand. Because any ‘difficulties’ with things like Scriptural texts (John 6) don’t rest on the TRUTH of the Scripture, as they do for Catholics, but on an ‘interpretation’ which can differ from individual to individual, as they do for Protestants. Thus one given Protestant can believe in consubstantiation, another can feel Jesus is present in ‘some kind of way’, yet another can feel it’s symbolic, and yet another can find the whole subject ultimately not important enough to even mention at a service. Same Scripture but many DIFFERENT interpretations, and not just different but actually CONTRADICATORY. . .and all claiming ‘authority’.
Protestant theology and teachings which contradict Catholic theology and teachings ultimately just don’t make sense, Biblically or otherwise.
