Protestant saying hello

[jmcrae]

I agree. Trying to discuss these kinds of things without getting them on defensive is one difficult task. I think part of the problem is that when you have been taught your church cannot be wrong in matters of faith and morals and that Jesus Himself is present in their church the idea that they could be misled is unthinkable even when faced with the facts that show otherwise.

When you guys can make a list of the characteristics of Western Civlization, maybe we’ll talk. But no - the Holy Tradition doesn’t come in lists. It comes in stories, rituals, and as a way of life. Until you actually live the life (or until you open your mind to the possibility that there is a lifestyle to be lived, here), it will not be possible for you to understand it.

The Catechism is a starting place; it’s not the be-all and end-all. It’s a good place to find the teachings of the Church. But a better way to get in touch with the Holy Tradition is to take a group of elderly Catholic women out for coffee after Rosary or else after Mass, and then just open your ears and listen.

 

[reteeks21]

I agree. Trying to discuss these kinds of things without getting them on defensive is one difficult task. I think part of the problem is that when you have been taught your church cannot be wrong in matters of faith and morals and that Jesus Himself is present in their church the idea that they could be misled is unthinkable even when faced with the facts that show otherwise.

juskasking4, how do discuss with RC’s the idea of tradition? When they quote Paul and his words regarding tradition, what is a counter-arguement? It is funny to me how RC’s use some of Paul’s words, but they ignore the ones that Protestants stand on. Is that not a contradiction?

 

[thebishop_sc]

Hello,
I am also a Protestant/Pentecostal Minister and I am really interested in the Catholic faith. Although I don’t agree with all the teachings, doctrines, etc… I will admit that the Catholic Church has a lock on Church history. 2000 years of tradition, wow!
Anyway, I would appreciate fellowshipping with anyone who desires the same with me. One thing I will not do is to argue or contend as to who is right or who is wrong.
I know that we all believe in the Jesus of The Bible and that is what really matters.
BTW, I was raised Latter-day Saint (Mormon) so if anyone has any questions about them, contact me by PM and maybe I can answer them. I have a lot of training in Apologetics conerning the LDS Church.
God Bless…

 

[jmcrae]

Hello,
I am also a Protestant/Pentecostal Minister and I am really interested in the Catholic faith. Although I don’t agree with all the teachings, doctrines, etc… I will admit that the Catholic Church has a lock on Church history. 2000 years of tradition, wow!

All started by Jesus Himself!!

 

[Lampo]

They won’t give you a specific list. I have been asking them for a long time.

How many times do you and JA4 need to be told that there is no list before you quit asking for a list? Just like there is no list in the Bible of what books should be in the Bible. This has not been a problem for the Church for 2,000 years. You want it to be a problem for the Church, but it just ain’t.

 

[justasking4]

jmcrae;3437826]When you guys can make a list of the characteristics of Western Civlization, maybe we’ll talk. But no - the Holy Tradition doesn’t come in lists. It comes in stories, rituals, and as a way of life. Until you actually live the life (or until you open your mind to the possibility that there is a lifestyle to be lived, here), it will not be possible for you to understand it.

i know Holy Tradition does not come in lists. What i’m asking is that do you or anyone else know Sacred Tradition well enough to make such a list? For example if you wanted a list of all the sins mentioned in Scripture i could do that.
Why can’t this be done for Sacred Tradition?

The Catechism is a starting place; it’s not the be-all and end-all. It’s a good place to find the teachings of the Church. But a better way to get in touch with the Holy Tradition is to take a group of elderly Catholic women out for coffee after Rosary or else after Mass, and then just open your ears and listen.

i’m suprised by your last comment. All the older catholics i know are not very knowledgeable of catholicism. Maybe its just my limited expierence but most catholics i know only go to mass and that is about it. Getrting into deeper discussions on catholic theology can be dicey and highly emotional. Just like here

 

[justasking4]

reteeks21;3437850]juskasking4, how do discuss with RC’s the idea of tradition? When they quote Paul and his words regarding tradition, what is a counter-arguement?

In regards to Paul’s tradition we need to know exactly what traditions he is referring to. Secondly, are we to believe that his traditions were the same as the catholic church of today?
For example did Paul believe the marian doctrines? What is the evidence that he did?

It is funny to me how RC’s use some of Paul’s words, but they ignore the ones that Protestants stand on. Is that not a contradiction?

Not so much a contradiction but they come at with a different view with their theology already in place that determines what the scriptures mean.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

Nonsense. i suspect even you don’t know what they are. If you are going to use them to defend your church then you might want to know exactly what they are. Calling something “Sacred Tradtion” may sound impressive but if you don’t know what they are then all they are but speculations that can’t even be verified.

Sacred Tradition encompasses the Living Magisterium (all of the bishops in union with the Pope), decrees from Ecumenical Councils, Papal Encyclicals, etc. The Catechism is the ‘list’ of these Sacred Traditions in a research format, although all Sacred Traditions may not be found in there. There is no Sacred Tradition which contradicts the Bible, they compliment the Bible.

Protestants, specifically SDAs, have many traditions of their own.

1. That Ellen G White is a prophetess.
2. That church should be held on sabbath instead of the Lord’s day.
3. That services should follow no form and should be wherever the pastor leads them.
4. That communion doesn’t need to be held at least once a week.
5. That communion is a symbol and not a sacrament.
6. That the Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon.
7. A Once Saved Always Saved philosophy.
8. A Christian Dispensationalist view of the end times.
9. Proclamation in the belief of Sola Scriptura.
10. A history coinciding with that of the Mormons and the Jehovahs Witnesses.

Our Sacred Tradition is not “nonsense”.

 

[pismopal]

Before you became a catholic were your aware of all the different doctrines and practices of the catholic church?
How did you deal with the marian doctrines and praying to her?
Do you find going to a priest to be forgiven instead of God directly a benefit?

I apologize for the untimely reply…I have been away from my laptop. RCIA is instruction that one takes before you make the decision. The Church is such a rich tapestry of history and organization that it will take a lot of study just to scratch the surface. There are not a huge amount " of all the doctrines and practises" however, just the fullness of Christ’s Church with a history like nothing else in the western world…awesome and beautiful.
Marian doctrine: It is different at first just like a pair of skis when you make your first exit from a ski lift. Understanding the role of Mary in the salvation miracle will open one’s eyes and make it understandable. Asking Mary to pray for you " to the Lord our God " makes a lot of sense and is certainly more efficacious than asking a sinner that you may not even know very well to do the same thing…doesn’t it? You use the term " praying to Her" in a sense that seems to imply that one is worshipping Her. The original sense of the word means “to ask or request”. When I lift a request to the recipient…I am praying aren’t I? " The prayers of the righteous are very powerful " and I know the prayers of Mary are very powerful.
The Sacrament of Reconcilliation is one of the most beautiful experiences in my catholic life. To directly confront one’s sin with the help of an understanding and loving priest is like having a heavy and cumbersome load taken off one’s back. To hear the words of absolution ( I do it on my knees ) will bring tears to my eyes just about every time. If one is really serious about confronting sin and having the assurance of forgiveness there is nothing like it as far as I am concerned. I would want to do it even if it wasn’t a Sacrament. I hope my anwers have been helpfull even if not timely. Private letters are welcome if I can help.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

i know Holy Tradition does not come in lists. What i’m asking is that do you or anyone else know Sacred Tradition well enough to make such a list? For example if you wanted a list of all the sins mentioned in Scripture i could do that.

Why can’t this be done for Sacred Tradition?

Because Sacred Tradition is that tradition that is passed onto us by the Apostles and their direct successors. It may not necessarily be found in the Bible alone but compliments the Bible. Where in the Bible does it say that it is the sole rule of faith?

 

[justasking4]

How many times do you and JA4 need to be told that there is no list before you quit asking for a list? Just like there is no list in the Bible of what books should be in the Bible. This has not been a problem for the Church for 2,000 years. You want it to be a problem for the Church, but it just ain’t.

I have responded to this issue in an earlier post. Would you not agree that it would be possible to look at speciifc church documents and make a list of Sacred Traditions? Is this possible?

For example, if you were to ask me for a list of all the sins mentioned in the Bible i could do that. Or if you wanted a list of the prayers of the Bible i could do that also.
Could this not be done for a list of Sacred Traditions for the past 2000 years?

 

[justasking4]

Semper Fi;3438075]
Originally Posted by justasking4
i know Holy Tradition does not come in lists. What i’m asking is that do you or anyone else know Sacred Tradition well enough to make such a list? For example if you wanted a list of all the sins mentioned in Scripture i could do that.

Why can’t this be done for Sacred Tradition?

Semper Fi
Because Sacred Tradition is that tradition that is passed onto us by the Apostles and their direct successors. It may not necessarily be found in the Bible alone but compliments the Bible.

I’m not expecting it to be found in the Bible but in church documents etc.

Where in the Bible does it say that it is the sole rule of faith?

It doesn’t. However since the Scriptures alone are inspired-inerrant they are sufficent and adequate in which to base all doctrines and practices on.

 

[justasking4]

pismopal;3438068]
Originally Posted by justasking4
Before you became a catholic were your aware of all the different doctrines and practices of the catholic church?
How did you deal with the marian doctrines and praying to her?
Do you find going to a priest to be forgiven instead of God directly a benefit?

pismopal
I apologize for the untimely reply…I have been away from my laptop. RCIA is instruction that one takes before you make the decision. The Church is such a rich tapestry of history and organization that it will take a lot of study just to scratch the surface. There are not a huge amount " of all the doctrines and practises" however, just the fullness of Christ’s Church with a history like nothing else in the western world…awesome and beautiful.

Marian doctrine: It is different at first just like a pair of skis when you make your first exit from a ski lift. Understanding the role of Mary in the salvation miracle will open one’s eyes and make it understandable. Asking Mary to pray for you " to the Lord our God " makes a lot of sense and is certainly more efficacious than asking a sinner that you may not even know very well to do the same thing…doesn’t it? You use the term " praying to Her" in a sense that seems to imply that one is worshipping Her. The original sense of the word means “to ask or request”. When I lift a request to the recipient…I am praying aren’t I? " The prayers of the righteous are very powerful " and I know the prayers of Mary are very powerful.

Have you looked for any prayers to dead saints or Mary in the Scriptures? Are there any examples or exhortations in the New Testament itself that tells us to pray to Mary or dead saints? Let me encourage you to ask your RCIA instructor about this. I’d be curious what he-she says.

The Sacrament of Reconcilliation is one of the most beautiful experiences in my catholic life. To directly confront one’s sin with the help of an understanding and loving priest is like having a heavy and cumbersome load taken off one’s back. To hear the words of absolution ( I do it on my knees ) will bring tears to my eyes just about every time. If one is really serious about confronting sin and having the assurance of forgiveness there is nothing like it as far as I am concerned. I would want to do it even if it wasn’t a Sacrament. I hope my anwers have been helpfull even if not timely. Private letters are welcome if I can help.

I have another question for your RCIA instructor. Does a person have to go to a priest to be forgiven? If he-she says yes, ask where is this taught by the Scriptures.

 

[guanophore]

I was hoping that there might be some catholic out of the millions might know what these are. Thats why i will usually ask a catholic who claims these Sacred-Holy Traditions might know exactly what they are. Sadly i have been so disappointed…:crying:

Jesus taught a lifestyle, ja4. It is a perception, a way of looking at things. A world view and a lifestyle cannot be acquired by reading a “list”.

If you want to study the Catholic Faith, you should join an RCIA program.

He doesnt’ really want to study them, jmcrae. Notice how he says “we can study”. What he wants is to demonstrate to Catholics that their beliefs are not biblical, so that he can convert us into “true” Christians. At least, this is what he has said in other threads.

Nonsense. i suspect even you don’t know what they are. If you are going to use them to defend your church then you might want to know exactly what they are. Calling something “Sacred Tradtion” may sound impressive but if you don’t know what they are then all they are but speculations that can’t even be verified.

See? You just proved the point I made to jmcrae. You don’t see how these beliefs are “proved” in your bible, so for you they have no merit.

Actually i would think you would be bothered since it appears by your responses you don't know either.

It is true that I learn new things daily. I recently watched a documentary on a Protestant channel about the Coptic (Egyptian) Christians. They had many stories about the “lost years” of Jesus when he was there as boy.

Something is wrong with my post here. Do you know why “kinnon06” is quoted instead of me? Perhaps your copy-paste buttom is not working properly.

My apologies. I did not see I had done that until it was too late to edit. I will be more attentive!

You misunderstand what slander means. Trying to understand something is not slander.

I think that might depend upon HOW one goes about trying to understand it. Saying are beliefs are “speculations of men” because you don’t share them is pejorative. Anyway, you have made it quite clear that you are not asking this question to understand Sacred Tradition, which you have already made up your mind does not really exist. You are asking because you want to try to convince all of us “lost” Catholics of the same.

You and others have given me good reasons they don’t really exist by your responses. O’ well—

Ok, so why keep at it? Surely you can see that we are not going to trade our world view, shaped by 2000 years of faith, for your new wave world view of fundamentalism?

Since this is a discussiong formn and people who use the terminology would at least know what it is they are talking about would be quite able to tell me exactly what this is. Again i was sadly disappointed and insulted for asking----:crying:

How are you insulted? Are you not proud of being a “bible christian”? Did you not state that people that believe as you do are the “true” christians? In your case, it is a disingenous “question”, since you only ask it to engage the reader so you can then turn and point out that “it’s not in the bible” and therefore, is only “speculation of men”. You are not trying to learn anything by asking the question. Maybe that is why you were disappointed?

The catechism as i understand it is essentially a summary of catholic teachings. Does the catechism claim to be Sacred Traditions?

No, just a summary of Catholic Teaching. It is called “a sure norm”.

The Didache claims to have been authored by the twelve apostles. While this is unlikely, the work could be a direct result of the first Apostolic Council, c.50 C.E. (Acts 15:28). Similarities to the Apostolic Decree are apparent, and the given structure of the church is quite primitive. Also, the description of the Eucharist (bread and wine) carefully avoids mention of the “body and blood of Christ,” obviously being regarded as one of the secret mysteries of eary Christianity. Most scholars agree that the work, in its earliest form, may have circulated as early as the 60’s C.E., though additions and modifications may have taken place well into the third century. The work was never officially rejected by the Church, but was excluded from the canon for its lack of literary value.

This is good, you did some research. Were you intending to make a comment?

 

[6YRSHOME]

It doesn’t. However since the Scriptures alone are inspired-inerrant they are sufficent and adequate in which to base all doctrines and practices on.

If this is what you truely believe, then why are you so insistant on understanding Sacred Tradition? You cannot prove that the Bible is the only infallible rule of Christian faith. You believe it, but that does not make it fact. I don’t think anyone here is requiring you to believe in Sacred Tradition, but your condecending attitude is unchristian to say the least.

You may continue to believe whatever you wish as far as God’s revelation, but you are not going to convince the Catholics on this board in the Bible alone approach that you embrace.

If you want to learn, then you must ask the questions with an open heart and a humble mind, not an arrogant agjenda.

 

[Lampo]

I have responded to this issue in an earlier post. Would you not agree that it would be possible to look at speciifc church documents and make a list of Sacred Traditions? Is this possible?

For example, if you were to ask me for a list of all the sins mentioned in the Bible i could do that. Or if you wanted a list of the prayers of the Bible i could do that also.
Could this not be done for a list of Sacred Traditions for the past 2000 years?

I’m not sure if it’s possible to come up with such a list. Just because I don’t know doesn’t mean Catholic theologians haven’t or couldn’t.

 

[Lampo]

However since the Scriptures alone are inspired-inerrant they are sufficent and adequate in which to base all doctrines and practices on.

Who’s interpretation is this?

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;3438120]
Originally Posted by justasking4
The Didache claims to have been authored by the twelve apostles. While this is unlikely, the work could be a direct result of the first Apostolic Council, c.50 C.E. (Acts 15:28). Similarities to the Apostolic Decree are apparent, and the given structure of the church is quite primitive. Also, the description of the Eucharist (bread and wine) carefully avoids mention of the “body and blood of Christ,” obviously being regarded as one of the secret mysteries of eary Christianity. Most scholars agree that the work, in its earliest form, may have circulated as early as the 60’s C.E., though additions and modifications may have taken place well into the third century. The work was never officially rejected by the Church, but was excluded from the canon for its lack of literary value.

guanophore
This is good, you did some research. Were you intending to make a comment?

Yes. Notice what is says about this being the work of the apostles:" The Didache claims to have been authored by the twelve apostles. While this is unlikely, the work could be a direct result of the first Apostolic Council, c.50 C.E. (Acts 15:28)."
Again no evidence of any of the apostles teachings outside the NT. All we are left with is specualtions.

 

[Lampo]

I have another question for your RCIA instructor. Does a person have to go to a priest to be forgiven? If he-she says yes, ask where is this taught by the Scriptures.

He/she might possibly say right here:

John 20:21 - before He grants them the authority to forgive sins, Jesus says to the apostles, “as the Father sent me, so I send you.” As Christ was sent by the Father to forgive sins, so Christ sends the apostles and their successors forgive sins.

John 20:22 - the Lord “breathes” on the apostles, and then gives them the power to forgive and retain sins. The only other moment in Scripture where God breathes on man is in Gen. 2:7, when the Lord “breathes” divine life into man. When this happens, a significant transformation takes place.

John 20:23 - Jesus says, “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven. If you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” In order for the apostles to exercise this gift of forgiving sins, the penitents must orally confess their sins to them because the apostles are not mind readers. The text makes this very clear.

Matt. 9:8 - this verse shows that God has given the authority to forgive sins to “men.” Hence, those Protestants who acknowledge that the apostles had the authority to forgive sins (which this verse demonstrates) must prove that this gift ended with the apostles. Otherwise, the apostles’ successors still possess this gift. Where in Scripture is the gift of authority to forgive sins taken away from the apostles or their successors?

Matt. 9:6; Mark 2:10 - Christ forgave sins as a man (not God) to convince us that the “Son of man” has authority to forgive sins on earth.

Luke 5:24 - Luke also points out that Jesus’ authority to forgive sins is as a man, not God. The Gospel writers record this to convince us that God has given this authority to men. This authority has been transferred from Christ to the apostles and their successors.

Matt. 18:18 - the apostles are given authority to bind and loose. The authority to bind and loose includes administering and removing the temporal penalties due to sin. The Jews understood this since the birth of the Church.

John 20:22-23; Matt. 18:18 - the power to remit/retain sin is also the power to remit/retain punishment due to sin. If Christ’s ministers can forgive the eternal penalty of sin, they can certainly remit the temporal penalty of sin (which is called an “indulgence”).

2 Cor. 2:10 - Paul forgives in the presence of Christ (some translations refer to the presences of Christ as “in persona Christi”). Some say that this may also be a reference to sins.

2 Cor. 5:18 - the ministry of reconciliation was given to the ambassadors of the Church. This ministry of reconciliation refers to the sacrament of reconciliation, also called the sacrament of confession or penance.

J

 

[Lampo]

(con’t)

ames 5:15-16 - in verse 15 we see that sins are forgiven by the priests in the sacrament of the sick. This is another example of man’s authority to forgive sins on earth. Then in verse 16, James says “Therefore, confess our sins to one another,” in reference to the men referred to in verse 15, the priests of the Church.

1 Tim. 2:5 - Christ is the only mediator, but He was free to decide how His mediation would be applied to us. The Lord chose to use priests of God to carry out His work of forgiveness.

Lev. 5:4-6; 19:21-22 - even under the Old Covenant, God used priests to forgive and atone for the sins of others.

James 5:16 - James clearly teaches us that we must “confess our sins to one another,” not just privately to God. James 5:16 must be read in the context of James 5:14-15, which is referring to the healing power (both physical and spiritual) of the priests of the Church. Hence, when James says “therefore” in verse 16, he must be referring to the men he was writing about in verses 14 and 15 – these men are the ordained priests of the Church, to whom we must confess our sins.

Acts 19:18 - many came to orally confess sins and divulge their sinful practices. Oral confession was the practice of the early Church just as it is today.

Matt. 3:6; Mark 1:5 - again, this shows people confessing their sins before others as an historical practice (here to John the Baptist).

1 Tim. 6:12 - this verse also refers to the historical practice of confessing both faith and sins in the presence of many witnesses.

1 John 1:9 - if we confess are sins, God is faithful to us and forgives us and cleanse us. But we must confess our sins to one another.

Num. 5:7 - this shows the historical practice of publicly confessing sins, and making public restitution.

2 Sam. 12:14 - even though the sin is forgiven, there is punishment due for the forgiven sin. David is forgiven but his child was still taken (the consequence of his sin).

Neh. 9:2-3 - the Israelites stood before the assembly and confessed sins publicly and interceded for each other.

Sir. 4:26 - God tells us not to be ashamed to confess our sins, and not to try to stop the current of a river. Anyone who has experienced the sacrament of reconciliation understands the import of this verse.

Baruch 1:14 - again, this shows that the people made confession in the house of the Lord, before the assembly.

1 John 5:16-17; Luke 12:47-48 - there is a distinction between mortal and venial sins. This has been the teaching of the Catholic Church for 2,000 years, but, today, most Protestants no longer agree that there is such a distinction. Mortal sins lead to death and must be absolved in the sacrament of reconciliation. Venial sins do not have to be confessed to a priest, but the pious Catholic practice is to do so in order to advance in our journey to holiness.

Matt. 5:19 - Jesus teaches that breaking the least of commandments is venial sin (the person is still saved but is least in the kingdom), versus mortal sin (the person is not saved).

Found here.