Sola scriptura and corrections?

[JonNC]

JonN, but then it seems you are denying Christ’s humanity.

Only if the entire Church does. Name a communion that interprets it that way.

This reminds me of the scripture Mark 1:5 - Did ALL people of Jerusalem go to him to be baptized…

So, you’re saying it means most, or virtually all. Okay.
So, when Christ said, “he who is without sin, cast the first stone”, there could have been someone there who could have done so ?

I don’t believe RCC interprets it this way. They interpret it as, most fall short, but there are exceptions, Christ, Mary, etc…

Yes, I agree. That said, would you agree that is a tiny few, at best the two you mentioned?

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

We (Catholics) are ALL in complete union with the successor to Peter, the pope of the Church of Rome, Peter’s last see.

Steve - I love your zeal brother, but it’s statements like this that impinge on your credibility. Some of the most important Catholic politicians in the United States publicly support abortion. In many ways on this topic alone, the evangelical Christian movement in the US is more unified with Rome than professing Catholic politicians. And they go to Mass and are permitted to take part in the Eucharist. Complete unity??? C’mon man.

For some reason your post didn’t show up on my screen

anyway

For some clarification,

Any Catholic politician who is pro abortion, is NOT in complete union with the Catholic Church. And they already know that or should know that. Many bishops already do, and it should be ALL bishops should, for the soul’s of those renegade Catholics sake, refuse to give them communion if they are seen in the communion line.

AND

If they (those renegade) Catholics, assist in any way, any person to procure an actual abortion, they don’t get a letter from the pope or bishop, they are on the act,

from the CCC

(Emphasis mine)

2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae ,” “by the very commission of the offense,” and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law. The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

NOW

TULIPed,

Regarding your 2nd point, & Evangelical Christians

It’s good to be pro life. Why not finish the trip. Come home into full communion.

THAT’S what Jesus wants

TULIPed:

Jesus asks us to do many things in unity - to love each other as ourselves, to give sacrificially, to feed His sheep. In many ways, all Christians do this in unity, no?

You make a great point. Re: Unity

love each other as ourselves, True

I’ll just say

Love / Charity, = a distinction without much difference. Would you agree?

HOWEVER

to your other point,

ALL Christians aren’t in union

AND

Division, from Our Lord’s Church is a sin against charity / love… both of God and neighbor.

Just thought I’d make that point

 

[JonNC]

ALL can reject their errors after being warned, and turn around …while still alive here.

Universal justification and infallibility ex cathedra are errors.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

ALL can reject their errors after being warned, and turn around …while still alive here.

Universal justification and infallibility ex cathedra are errors.

Infallibility and ex cathedra statements properly understood = truth.

Universal salvation / universalism = Heresy

 

[JonNC]

Infallibility and ex cathedra statements= truth.

Errors. Not found in scripture or the early Church.

Universal salvation / universalism = Heresy

Agreed

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Infallibility and ex cathedra statements= truth.

Errors. Not found in scripture or the early Church.

Not so

Since the Catholic Church has been there from the beginning, I’d offer this response https://www.catholic.com/qa/did-the-early-church-fathers-espouse-papal-infallibility

AND

to your other point,

Look at Protestantism ,

It is just one of many heresies in history

AND

As far as heresy is concerned, as you know, scripture condemns it as it does those in it.

Titus 3:10-11 “As for a man who is factious αἱρετικὸν , after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him, 11 knowing that such a person is perverted ἐξέστραπται and sinful; he is self-condemned αὐτοκατάκριτος .”

 

[JonNC]

Since the Catholic Church has been there from the beginning,

Universal jurisdiction and infallibility ex cathedra have not.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Since the Catholic Church has been there from the beginning,

Universal jurisdiction and infallibility ex cathedra have not.

Infallibility has already been answered.

Let’s look at universal jurisdiction.

1 of many examples I can. use

When Jesus asked Peter a 2nd time, do you love me? and Peter said YES, what did Jesus say to Peter in return? “ ποίμαινε my sheep"

ποίμαινε = shepherd, tend, rule, govern my sheep (present imperative active 2nd person singular)

Given Jesus gives Peter the keys to the kingdom,

what part of the kingdom is Peter NOT TO shepherd, tend, rule, govern ?

The answer is, Peter is over ALL the Church. That’s how Jesus set up the office Peter holds.

 

[JonNC]

Infallibility has already been answered.

It was never the case.

The answer is, Peter is over ALL the Church. That’s how Jesus set up the office Peter holds.

That office, as described in Nicea canon 6, is comparable to Alexandria. IOW, the Bishop of Rome has jurisdiction in his in his area.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Infallibility has already been answered.

It was never the case.

Like you know?

 

[steve-b]

That office, as described in Nicea canon 6, is comparable to Alexandria. IOW, the Bishop of Rome has jurisdiction in his in his area.

Canon 6 says NOTHING about the pope’s overall authority

 

[JonNC]

Canon 6 says NOTHING about the pope’s overall authority

Let the ancient customs in Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis prevail, that the Bishop of Alexandria have jurisdiction in all these, since the like is customary for the Bishop of Rome also. Likewise in Antioch and the other provinces, let the Churches retain their privileges.

The pope’s jurisdiction is like that of the Bishop of Alexandria.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Canon 6 says NOTHING about the pope’s overall authority

Let the ancient customs in Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis prevail, that the Bishop of Alexandria have jurisdiction in all these, since the like is customary for the Bishop of Rome also. Likewise in Antioch and the other provinces, let the Churches retain their privileges.

The pope’s jurisdiction is like that of the Bishop of Alexandria.

Rome’s custom was clearly the precedent upon which the council based its decision regarding Alexandria, as is adduced by the statement “since the like is customary for the bishop of Rome.” The legitimacy of the Roman custom is the basis, not the result, of the canon. The Roman “custom” is only a reference to a metropolitan or patriarchal jurisdiction, not the universal primacy claimed by Rome.

 

[JonNC]

Rome’s custom was clearly the precedent upon which the council based its decision regarding Alexandria, as is adduced by the statement “since the like is customary for the bishop of Rome.” The legitimacy of the Roman custom is the basis, not the result, of the canon. The Roman “custom” is only a reference to a metropolitan or patriarchal jurisdiction, not the universal primacy claimed by Rome.

That’s because there was no universal primacy

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Rome’s custom was clearly the precedent upon which the council based its decision regarding Alexandria, as is adduced by the statement “since the like is customary for the bishop of Rome.” The legitimacy of the Roman custom is the basis, not the result, of the canon. The Roman “custom” is only a reference to a metropolitan or patriarchal jurisdiction, not the universal primacy claimed by Rome.

That’s because there was no universal primacy

Says who?

Who told Peter he didn’t have universal primacy when that is exactly what Jesus gave him?

The pope is ALSO at the same time all of the following.

a priest, bishop, archbishop of the Roman province, & Patriarch of the West, and the successor of Peter.

Only as successor to St Peter, does the pope hold universal jurisdiction.

That the council took as its precedent one of the lesser jurisdictions of the Roman bishop-his office as Patriarch of the West doesn’t remove papal primacy or contradicts it. Another example, the council said, “Since Rome considers it lawful, we consider it lawful.” Or, put another way, “Since the like is customary for the bishop of Rome,” we “let” Alexandria and Antioch “retain” their jurisdiction and privileges shows, the role Rome, (i.e. the pope) plays

 

[JonNC]

The Council of Nicea also decreed a number of canons (i.e., Church regulations) concerning various issues of order and discipline in the Church. Canon 6 confirmed the jurisdictional authority of Alexandria over Egypt and the neighboring regions of Libya and Pentapolis, “since the like is customary for the Bishop of Rome also [meaning that the Roman Church, in a corresponding way, had jurisdictional authority only over Rome and its neighboring territory—at that time, most likely central Italy]. Likewise in Antioch and the other provinces let the Churches retain their privileges.” This canon clearly ratifies the ancient practice of the Churches in the major cities each having full jurisdictional authority only over the surrounding region.

https://www.oca.org/orthodoxy/the-o...y/fourth-century/the-first-ecumenical-council

 

[TULIPed]

Any Catholic politician who is pro abortion, is NOT in complete union with the Catholic Church.

Fair enough.

Division, from Our Lord’s Church is a sin against charity / love… both of God and neighbor .

Also agreed. Ponder this though. Give me a little rope. I would argue that attending Mass/church services, tacitly agreeing on theological matters, voicing submission to whatever episcopal authority that you subscribe to - these things are relatively easy, no? To my earlier point about pro-abortion “Catholics” - they would argue of course that they’re in complete “unity” with Rome - and yet their actions speak differently we agree.

Are not the harder acts of charity and union those that require actual sacrifice? For example - when Catholics and/or Protestants tithe joyfully - actually give 10% of their gross income - the true “first fruits” to Kingdom work - are they not unified? When they work side by side - in ecumenical Christian small groups - on building homes for those less fortunate (which I’ve done personally) - are they not unified? When those who love Christ - Catholic or Protestant - put themselves second, and sacrifice (some even unto death) - are they not unified?

 

[simspt]

Your assumption that if a doctrine is not explicitly stated in Scripture then it is an error is curious considering the fact of the historical development of many doctrines (which you would agree I think). Inferring from the early silence about a doctrine to claim it is a heretical accretion or error should be done cautiously…

 

[JonNC]

Your assumption that if a doctrine is not explicitly stated in Scripture

I didn’t mention scripture. I mentioned the 325 Council of Nicea.

then it is an error is curious

I haven’t said that either. In fact, it isn’t true.

Inferring from the early silence about a doctrine to claim it is a heretical accretion or error should be done cautiously…

But I’m not inferring from silence. I’m reading the canon. I’ve also provided the analysis of it by a communion other than my own.

 

[brianjmc1]

JonNC - replies…

Only if the entire Church does. Name a communion that interprets it that way.

Not sure what you mean? The RCC believes this…

So, you’re saying it means most, or virtually all. Okay.
So, when Christ said, “he who is without sin, cast the first stone”, there could have been someone there who could have done so ?

Christ and Mary could have thrown a stone, but wouldn’t(2nd commandment he gave us). He was speaking to the group who was going to stone the woman, not a group of disciples. Why would ANY of his followers do that under his ministry and instruction?

Yes, I agree. That said, would you agree that is a tiny few, at best the two you mentioned?

At least them, now could someone have been baptized and had original sin(and previous sins) removed an hour early can be sinless - that could be, but not enough information is known…

This gets back to my response about Romans, if ALL fall short, and Christ is truly Human and Divine(I believe most protestants believe this), how, if using that scripture literally, does it NOT apply to Him? You can’t have it both ways. Either it was figurative or it was literal…

Literal - then that denies Christ Humanity…
Figuratively - Then we agree and are on the same page…

Brian