Protestants: Could you please do us all a favor??

[Memaw]

I know of one that had an annulment due to adultery (but I read somewhere in the forum that adultery wasn’t an acceptable cause ? ) and lived with his current wife before they were married.

Others, I don’t know the particulars. But I do have a question…where is annulment permitted in Scripture? In Protestantism there is either remarriage permitted (altogether or depending on circumstance) or not permitted. No one ever declares, or would ever dream of declaring, a marriage as though it “never happened”. Seriously curious here. (want to know about Catholicism, ask a Catholic )

When a Catholic Annulment is granted it means that the marriage was not a Sacramental marriage in the first place. That has to be proven and it goes thru 2 Marriage Tribunals. The attempted marriage would not have been valid. I have worked with a couple of friends thru their Annulments and it is not a simple process. If a Catholic is married out of the Church 5 times, none of those marriages would be valid. You have to know the circumstances in each case before you can point fingers. If a marriage was a Sacramental Marriage in the first place, the Church will not grant an annulment no matter what causes the couple to change their mind about being married to each other.

Just because some Catholics do not live up to the teachings of the Catholic Church, doesn’t make the Catholic Church wrong. The Catholic Church is One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic, The Church is Holy, even if some of its members are not. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Zundrah]

I think the first post was a bit ridiculous - “go to a catholic class before you start arguing about what you don’t know.”…

Well can I say some thing? I went to a roman catholic mass for the first time on Sunday ( I am a former Methodist member) and it was soooooo strange: I couldn’t understand anything…:whacky:

The priest would say something and every one would say some thing back in unison - I didn’t know what was being said!!!

It was a little odd and I felt really out of my depth… No one greeted me…
There was no one to talk to me after wards either… I was really dissapointed!

They were doing Holy Communion - (this is the worse part of my story) Because I went up to the priest to receive the unleavened bread but he said are you catholic? I answered no. He then told me to put my hand over my chest and I think he said some thing but I missed it all because a baby was screaming! Oh the shame of it…

Can some one please explain what went on?

 

[Memaw]

Thank you for recognizing this. But let me ask you, with your doctrine of “infallibility,” how do you personally test for “cheap tricks” within your own religious community?

Infallibility only applies to the Pope and the Bishops in union with him, when teaching about Faith, (what Catholics believe) and Morals, (How we live those beliefs). God Bless. Memaw

 

[Primox]

I see this is a pretty old thread by now but my oh my, what a frightfully ignorant thing to post. The OP is really just a translation away from “Protestants don’t know what they’re talking about; they should leave the forum.” Hostility is all it is, and so few dignified words to even hide it.

 

[PRmerger]

Infallibility only applies to the Pope and the Bishops in union with him, when teaching about Faith, (what Catholics believe) and Morals, (How we live those beliefs). God Bless. Memaw

Yes, and if the Church (i.e. Magisterium) isn’t infallible, how could it have given us the infallible Bible? Simple logic tells us that a fallible cause cannot produce an infallible effect.

 

[sambos671]

Yes, and if the Church (i.e. Magisterium) isn’t infallible, how could it have given us the infallible Bible? Simple logic tells us that a fallible cause cannot produce an infallible effect.

Who put pen to paper to write the bible? Fallible men did they not? Moses sinned against God and could not enter the Holy Land yet we credit him with the Torah. Your argument is a non-sequetur. Vertias.

 

[PRmerger]

Well can I say some thing? I went to a roman catholic mass for the first time on Sunday ( I am a former Methodist member) and it was soooooo strange: I couldn’t understand anything

I’m sorry you felt “out of your depth” at the Mass, Zundrah. Why did you go? Were you with a Catholic friend? Was there no one to explain anything to you?

Incidentally, someone who’s familiar with Scripture should not be unable to understand the words of the Mass–so much of what is said during the Mass is from Scripture! (And I’m not just talking about the 3 readings and responsorial psalms).

They were doing Holy Communion - (this is the worse part of my story) Because I went up to the priest to receive the unleavened bread but he said are you catholic? I answered no. He then told me to put my hand over my chest and I think he said some thing but I missed it all because a baby was screaming!

Interesting that you used the word “Communion”–the word itself indicates union with the Catholic church. If you are not in “communion” with our beliefs, then to receive the Eucharist without being in communion is a lie.

Oh the shame of it…

One ought never be ashamed of being truthful.

 

[PRmerger]

Who put pen to paper to write the bible? Fallible men did they not? Moses sinned against God and could not enter the Holy Land yet we credit him with the Torah. Your argument is a non-sequetur. Vertias.

But who determined what would be the Bible? Is the canon of Scripture infallible? If you believe so, then an infallible cause produced it–the Church!

 

[moondweller]

Infallibility only applies to the Pope and the Bishops in union with him, when teaching about Faith, (what Catholics believe) and Morals, (How we live those beliefs). God Bless. Memaw

I perfectly understand that. But they’re your teaching authority (Magisterium). IOW, all you’re required to believe as a RC comes directly from them. And with the claim of infallibility, and your acceptance of it, all testing and examination of what is being taught by the “infallible” ceases.

Historically, Christian doctrine was formed out of controversy, such as the Trinity. Men had to look intently into the matter by searching the Scriptures to see what was taught within. But when you apply the divine attribute of infallibility to certain men, all controversy is removed causing all questioning to be curtailed and only acceptance is allowed.

This is what is called “Catholic unity.” But in reality its merely “conformity” based on attributing a divine attribute (infallibility) to men who govern over you.

 

[sambos671]

But who determined what would be the Bible? Is the canon of Scripture infallible? If you believe so, then an infallible cause produced it–the Church!

Obvioiusly your confussed. God used fallible men to write the word of God. God used fallible men to cannonize the word of God. The Holy Spirit is the Infallible source not the men. Yet you still can’t minimize their participation just like you can’t minimize Moses participation with the Torah.

 

[moondweller]

But who determined what would be the Bible? Is the canon of Scripture infallible? If you believe so, then an infallible cause produced it–the Church!

No, the canon of Scripture was formed out of controversy. Long before the attribute of “infallibility” was claimed by the RC hierarchy. And as for RCs, the canon of Scripture was not “infallibly” settled until Trent.

 

[PRmerger]

I perfectly understand that. But they’re your teaching authority (Magisterium). IOW, all you’re required to believe as a RC comes directly from them. And with the claim of infallibility, and your acceptance of it, all testing and examination of what is being taught by the “infallible” ceases.

Moondweller, have you read Pope John Paul II’s magnficent encyclical “Fides et Ratio” (Faith and Reason). It’s a treatise on the virtue of using our reason to understand the faith that has been given to us.

Have you read anything by Aquinas whose writings speak to our testing and examination of what is being taught. Incidentally, the Catholic Church canonized him as a saint, so I’m certain his writings are not contrary to her doctrine.

Wasn’t it St. Anselm who described “faith seeking understanding”?

 

[PRmerger]

No, the canon of Scripture was formed out of controversy. Long before the attribute of “infallibility” was claimed by the RC hierarchy. And as for RCs, the canon of Scripture was not “infallibly” settled until Trent.

Indeed!

 

[PRmerger]

Obvioiusly your confussed.

Now, that’s funny. If you’re going to make an insult you should at least spell it correctly to give yourself some credibility.

God used fallible men to write the word of God. God used fallible men to cannonize the word of God. The Holy Spirit is the Infallible source not the men. Yet you still can’t minimize their participation just like you can’t minimize Moses participation with the Torah.

Accepted.

 

[sambos671]

Now, that’s funny. If you’re going to make an insult you should at least spell it correctly to give yourself some credibility.

Accepted.

I’m a bad speller. Its true. Credibility has nothing to do with spelling. Now if this were a paper or a thesis it would be a different story. But I appreciate your Charity.

 

[PRmerger]

I’m a bad speller. Its true. Credibility has nothing to do with spelling. **Now if this were a paper or a thesis it would be a different story. ** But I appreciate your Charity.

Just wondering…why does spelling and grammar matter in a paper or thesis?

 

[Worthy5]

Obvioiusly your confussed. God used fallible men to write the word of God. God used fallible men to cannonize the word of God. The Holy Spirit is the Infallible source not the men. Yet you still can’t minimize their participation just like you can’t minimize Moses participation with the Torah.

Okay can we go further with this, if the HS inspired fallible men to write the word of God and fallible men to cannonize the word of God then given the problems of interpretation of written language, would not it be possible that the HS inspires fallible men to better explain and interpret exactly what that word of God (revelation) means? And if so who are these men, do we have any evidence on who these guys might be? Thanks

 

[sambos671]

Just wondering…why does spelling and grammar matter in a paper or thesis?

Because…well…I guess there has to be continuity for clarity and a certain amount of exactness for Academia.

 

[sambos671]

Okay can we go further with this, if the HS inspired fallible men to write the word of God and fallible men to cannonize the word of God then given the problems of interpretation of written language, would not it be possible that the HS inspires fallible men to better explain and interpret exactly what that word of God (revelation) means? And if so who are these men, do we have any evidence on who these guys might be? Thanks

Yes. and yes. You have 2,000 years of Continuity of teaching. Where you see continuity of teaching you have a good reason to believe that the Holy Spirit inspired this particular understanding of scritpure passages. So “these men” are the very same that maintain the Deposit of Faith. Evidence is supported by the Magesterium of the Church so that the body of believers in unity of teaching with the Catholic church are “these guys”. The Pope maintains the Deposit of Faith as well.

 

[PerryJ]

Actually that is something that many Catholics get wrong. There are only 7 denominations which are in alphabetical order Anglican/Episcopalian, Baptist, Congregational, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, and non denominational. All the churches can be placed under one of those headings.

Sounds nice but that is just an excuse, if the Catholic Church is at it says than practice and doctrine should always be the same. I also left because the Catholic Church places itself above God’s Word and no I won’t leave Christ.

I could say the same and we both would know that I would be lying as we both know you are too. You may not know where to go but there are not ten thousand beliefs, how are we Protestants suppose to interact with you all when you lie like this.

If you want to know core beliefs that Christians believe you just need to study the Westminster Confession of Faith, or London Baptist confession of Faith, or the 39 Articles. If you don’t want to find out what we believe then you shouldn’t debate us as if you know

Historyb

There are not just seven denominations and you can not support that statement. In fact there are many different Baptisit beliefs. I know as I was one. It appears you are attempting to fudge the truth to win a debate instead of seriously discussing religion.

Your statement that Catholics place themselves above Christ is inflammatory and you know it is wrong.

Then you state that I lie. Is that a Christian act?

Your post is in error and it appears that you wish to argue instead of discuss. You know that there is only one Catholic belief. As you refute this it shows that you are being disengenious. As such I will leave this post. I choose not to argue with people over religion today.