R
rcwitness
Guest
Peace
You should share what the Spirit leads you to share. That’s what we all want to hear.
Do you consider yourself seeking full communion in Jesus?
- Status
Peace
You should share what the Spirit leads you to share. That’s what we all want to hear.
Do you consider yourself seeking full communion in Jesus?
I don’t know about membership cards, but we typically refer to this a self-exclusion, when one for a rather long period of time chooses to not avail themselves of word and sacrament. That said, if you are receiving them both someplace else, then I thank God they are there for you.
I agree with my friend rcwitness. The whole idea of the forum is to share and discuss beliefs. To paraphrase Sybok, we all benefit in the sharing.
Jon
E
edkw55
Guest
Ok.
Peace
You should share what the Spirit leads you to share. That’s what we all want to hear.
Do you consider yourself seeking full communion in Jesus?
As for your question it depends what you mean by “full communion in Jesus”.
I miss the LCMS and their Sacrements…especially Holy Communion. I’m in a predicament however. My wife is a cradle Catholic and will never leave her Church and I do respect that. We always go to Mass together.
Ed
Are you open to becoming Catholic? They have the sacraments, too, and you’re already going to mass.
Jon
S
SteveVH
Guest
And the Church confirmed at Trent what the it had always held since Rome and Carthage and what Luther and the others rejected in spite of the Church’s judgment. But yes, your point is well taken.
E
edkw55
Guest
I wasn’t serious about membership cards (guess i have a strange sense of humor).
You and rcwitness are right.
It gets frustrating when the starting point for discussion I hear over and over seems to be:
Either
The one true Church established by Jesus Christ is the Roman Catholic Church (and those in full union with Her)
Or
The Church has never existed and Jesus was a false Messiah.
There Is Another
Or
??? anyone ???
and round and round in circles we go…but i agree…discussion is a good thing
Ed
E
edkw55
Guest
Hi Jon,
Not at this point and I did sincerely try. At the heart of the whole matter…the issue of Authority. Guess that is what this thread is all about…SS…Authority…the bottom line for me.
Ed
B
benhur
Guest
Well yes and maybe we use our canon traditions today but back to the original recipients your statement certainly applies. It is like the Corinthians didn’t say, "Well Paul we like your letter, but we aren’t sure it is inspired, even though you say it is. I think we better have a meeting, or maybe ask other churches, or is Peter around so we can ask him ? " No, to have a section or copy of the letter could put you in grave danger due to persecution, and their tradition was to value his letter as gold, and upon reception. Divinely written, divinely received, divinely understood and kept.
B
benhur
Guest
Well no more than half a part. The Didache, " Thou shalt not make a schism but pacify them that contend".
E
ezeekl
Guest
Try prayers for the dead which is related to the concept of Purgatory. That is contained in Maccabees. Martin Luther disliked portions which contradicted sola fide (such as James, which Luther called “an epistle of straw”). It is to the credit of later Protestants, showing admirable restraint, in their refusal to omit anything from the already-established New Testament Canon. They were content to distinguish themselves from the Pope by tossing out the stuff in the Old Testament that St. Jerome had considered suspect.
Jerome, however, had his own problem. He received his education from Jews and thus was never exposed to the deuterocanonical books as these had been expunged from the Jewish scriptures before his time. Jerome entered into a discussion with Augustine and I think Ambrose as well on the matter. In the end Jerome accepted the deuteros and they were included in his Vulgate.
E
ezeekl
Guest
Yes but only because they not only knew who wrote it but also knew that the writer had authority that others did not. Would they receive a letter from anyone else and give it value as well? Well, actually yes, for they received a letter from Clement who was Bishop of Rome and treasured it because almost a century later they were still reading it in their churches. This is attested to by the letter of Dionysius (Bishop) of Corinth to Soter (Bishop) of Rome in the late second century.
E
ezeekl
Guest
Doctrinally, no. Do not confuse infallibility with impeccability. No one ever claimed that the people in the church, no matter what their station, are sinless or incapable of committing sin. In the Book of Acts we read that Paul stood up to Peter not for what Peter was preaching but for how he was acting. The Church’s mission, given to it by Christ, is to preach the gospel and to baptize. It is up to us to live up to the gospel. But the very fact that we do not is an indictment of our nature and not an indictment that the gospel that is preached is problematical. The Catholic Church has never preached error because if it did then Jesus was a liar when he said the forces of hell would not prevail over it. In addition if the church preached error then Jesus lied when He said the Holy Spirit would lead the church into all truth and when Jesus said He would remain with His Church until the end of the age.
E
ezeekl
Guest
Your post defies scripture. Jesus Himself said that what you posted would not happen.
E
ezeekl
Guest
Why not start with the scriptural basis for sola scriptura. You seem to have conveniently forgotten it.
T
traillius
Guest
how can one espouse scripture on the basis of a theory violatory of scripture. Excellence, since I know 2 Timothy quotations, doesn’t equate to supremacy. Christianity, and Catholicism Specifically is not a book based religion, but a Person based one. Jesus Christ to be specific, and from his authority the popes, bishops. priests, religious, and even lay people. The bible is the inspired word of God, but sola scriptura violates the bible, and the words of Jesus, not to mention not actually being practiced by most churches claiming to espouse it. ( The last supper being taken figuratively, for one. )
E
ezeekl
Guest
True. If you disagreed with Luther you were indeed not one of his allies. Private interpretation works well as long as it was Luther’s private interpretation. Too bad Luther could not see the eventual problem that he was creating. But I think later in life he actually did but by then it was too late to do anything. The fracturing and division of the protestant world had begun and is still going on.
S
steido01
Guest
Reading what others write is easy enough. Sadly, understanding others is often difficult.
I’m sorry I failed to clearly explain Sola Scriptura to you.
G
Good_Fella
Guest
Regardless, Jesus gave his apostles and thereby their valid succe**ssors in the episcopate the power to legislate and to discipline.
“Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
Matthew 18, 18**
“If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.”
*Matthew 18. 17 *
So when they had appointed elders in every church, and prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed.
Acts 14, 23
For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I comman**ded you.
Titus 1, 5
PAX
H
House_Harkonnen
Guest
No. Jesus stated that false teachers would come In from within almost immediately. That happened.
- Status