Sola Scriptura--now I get

[Angainor]

mmortal03:

I think your definition of the Body of Christ, or at least its role, is wrong. You are creating your own definition of the Body of Christ to fit your beliefs, instead of the other way around, in this case letting the Bible define the role of the Body of Christ. Can anyone please give the proper Catholic definition of the Body of Christ and its role, and what the Bible says on it?

Thanks

Let me try. I will try to stick to the facts. If anyone disputes any facts, please let me know what’s wrong.

Membership in the Church: “The membership of which we speak, is incorporation in the visible body of Christ. … Three conditions are requisite for a man to be a member of the Church…”

Role of the Church: if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

However you want to word it, I don’t see how the facts can be avoided.

The Catholic Church is defined as all Catholics, laypeople and clergy, but it is only the clergy that are stewards of the truth.

The Church is not the pillar and foundation of the truth, but rather 0.08%* of the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth.

99.92%* of the body of Christ plays no active role in the primary function of the Church, which is upholding the truth.

I find this odd.

*As of 2004 the ratio of laity to clergy was 1,305 to 1.

 

[mmortal03]

Angainor:

Let me try. I will try to stick to the facts. If anyone disputes any facts, please let me know what’s wrong.

Membership in the Church: “The membership of which we speak, is incorporation in the visible body of Christ. … Three conditions are requisite for a man to be a member of the Church…”

Role of the Church: if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

However you want to word it, I don’t see how the facts can be avoided.

The Catholic Church is defined as all Catholics, laypeople and clergy, but it is only the clergy that are stewards of the truth.

The Church is not the pillar and foundation of the truth, but rather 0.08%* of the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth.

99.92%* of the body of Christ plays no active role in the primary function of the Church, which is upholding the truth.

I find this odd.

*As of 2004 the ratio of laity to clergy was 1,305 to 1.

You find this odd because you don’t want to believe that they have an infallible say in upholding of truth. Your numbers and ratios don’t mean anything with regards to truth. What matters is truth, not numbers. You look at it as if the 0.08 percent is corrupt or something. Alright, how about this, Look at the ratio of practicing Christians in the world to everyone else. There is a large percentage of people that are not practicing Christians. Are we wrong just because they happen to have a majority?

Look at the President of the United States, or Judges in the Supreme Court. They are both elected officials, and have authority that you or I don’t have, but the ratio of the President of the United States to the US Population is 1 / 295,734,134 . The ratio of other cabinets and bodies of the government will have a similarly close ratio. The Supreme court justices is 9 / 295,734,134.

What matters isn’t the ratio of clergy to laity, but whether or not the clergy is defining what is truth when they are in the specific cases where they are infallible. In any other case, if they aren’t representing and professing the truth, than it isn’t like the laity can’t discuss their problem with it with them.

Contrary to popular belief, doctrine CAN be changed in the Catholic Church. Dogma can’t, but doctrine can.

 

[Angainor]

mmortal03:

You find this odd because you don’t want to believe that they have an infallible say in upholding of truth. Your numbers and ratios don’t mean anything with regards to truth.

I find it odd because I believe it is the Church’s job to uphold the truth. Do you agree or disagree?
When Catholics claim that only 0.08% of the Church that plays any role in upholding the truth I find that odd. What are the other 99.92%, dead-weight?

mmortal03:

Look at the President of the United States, or Judges in the Supreme Court. They are both elected officials, and have authority that you or I don’t have, but the ratio of the President of the United States to the US Population is 1 / 295,734,134 . The ratio of other cabinets and bodies of the government will have a similarly close ratio. The Supreme court justices is 9 / 295,734,134.

Hello! This is interesting. I do think the 295,734,134 have a role in preserving and upholding the law, even if their role is different from their representatives. This isn’t supposed to be a totalitarian government we are talking about here. Can’t we at least pretend it is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people?

 

[mmortal03]

Angainor:

I find it odd because I believe it is the Church’s job to uphold the truth. Do you agree or disagree?
When Catholics claim that only 0.08% of the Church that plays any role in upholding the truth I find that odd. What are the other 99.92%, dead-weight?

Again, you are using your definition of “the Church” in your first sentence here. I agree that it is “the Church’s” job to uphold the truth. Do I believe that every member has an equal role in this? No. Also, the laity DOES have a role in upholding the truth. Vatican II documents explicitly discuss the role of the laity. I don’t have a copy of the specific concillar document that refers to this at the moment, but maybe someone else does?

Angainor:

Hello! This is interesting. I do think the 295,734,134 have a role in preserving and upholding the law, even if their role is different from their representatives. This isn’t supposed to be a totalitarian government we are talking about here. Can’t we at least pretend it is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people?

In the same light as your discription of the US government, I will describe my opinion on the Catholic Church’s heirarchy.

I do think the** 1,305 laity per clergy **have a role in preserving and upholding the law, even if their role is different from the clergy. This isn’t supposed to be a totalitarian government we are talking about here. Can’t we at least pretend it is a Church of the people, by the people, and for the people?

 

[Angainor]

mmortal03:

In the same light as your discription of the US government, I will describe my opinion on the Catholic Church’s heirarchy.

*(“http://constitution.org/civ/civildis.htm”) doubt that.

But… I may stand corrected. I shall wait and see.

mmortal03:

Also, the laity DOES have a role in upholding the truth. Vatican II documents explicitly discuss the role of the laity. I don’t have a copy of the specific concillar document that refers to this at the moment, but maybe someone else does?

What is the laity’s role?

 

[mmortal03]

*(“http://constitution.org/civ/civildis.htm”) doubt that.

But… I may stand corrected. I shall wait and see.What is the laity’s role?

By those links, without any (name removed by moderator)ut, I can only guess at what you are getting at. Are you making note of the jury in our legal system? Please further describe what you are trying to say here.

As for the role of the laity, here is a good start. vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html

That is a link to Lumen Gentium, a Vatican II document that the Catechism of the Catholic Church makes great use of when describing the role of the laity in the Church.

Please go to Chapter IV of that document by searching the page for “The Laity”. It is a very extensive definiton.

 

[Angainor]

mmortal03:

By those links, without any (name removed by moderator)ut, I can only guess at what you are getting at. Are you making note of the jury in our legal system? Please further describe what you are trying to say here.

A jury can judge a law to be unjust and set an accused person free who would otherwise be convicted under the law. A law is deemed unjust if it is against higher law (the constitution) or the highest law (natural law).

The other links are similar examples of the people finding a law unjust and not obeying it.

The point is that American Constitutionalism is not like Catholicism. The clergy proclaim the truth. The laity cannot dissent, that is, the laity cannot judge for themselves if the clergy’s proclamations are in accordance with highest law.

 

[volzcpa]

Angainor:

Let me try. I will try to stick to the facts. If anyone disputes any facts, please let me know what’s wrong.

Membership in the Church: “The membership of which we speak, is incorporation in the visible body of Christ. … Three conditions are requisite for a man to be a member of the Church…”

Role of the Church: if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

However you want to word it, I don’t see how the facts can be avoided.

The Catholic Church is defined as all Catholics, laypeople and clergy, but it is only the clergy that are stewards of the truth.

The Church is not the pillar and foundation of the truth, but rather 0.08%* of the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth.

99.92%* of the body of Christ plays no active role in the primary function of the Church, which is upholding the truth.

I find this odd.

*As of 2004 the ratio of laity to clergy was 1,305 to 1.

Let us go back to the basics and we will stick to facts. Let’s begin with definitions of terms.

Truth = Christ and his teachings – John 14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me.”

Infallibility of the church = A guarantee given by Christ that the truth will be protected till the end of time. *“…whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven…” * Given to Peter in Matt 16:19 and to all of the apostles in Matt 18:18. Infallibility applies only to the truth of Christ’s teachings (faith and morals) and this protection is for all time, Matt 28:20 “…I am with you always, to the close of the age.” This can be viewed as a negative protection in that, like a guardrail, it keeps the Church from going off the road (the way of Christ). Infallibility is not protection from sin – popes and bishops are mortal men and can, and do, sin just like the rest of us. It is not a form of inspiration by the Holy Spirit or that the church will always say the right thing at the right time.

Disciple = One who embraces and assists in spreading the teachings of another

Since Christ did not choose to stay on earth to personally teach the truth to the nations, by his authority, he delegated this teaching ministry to the apostles and to all those who were taught by the apostles. Matt 28:18-20 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”

The apostles were to “make disciples” and a disciple is one who not only believes the truth but teaches it to others. The church is the teacher of the truth and the members of the Body of Christ are also to be teachers of the truth. All the baptized are in the Body of Christ (and by default members of the Catholic Church) as disciples and, thus, are all to be evangelizers; teachers of the truth. However, the protection of the truth, the binding and loosing, was given only to Peter and the apostles, so the rest of the Body of Christ, are to be stewards of and upholders of and teachers of the truth, the truth of Christ as affirmed and confirmed by the apostles.

Christ also shows us that his church was to be a hierarchy and that it would continue after the apostles died. He made Peter the head of his church – *Matt 16:18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. * If Christ would not have meant his church to have apostolic succession, of ministry and authority, there would be no protection to keep the church from capitulating to the “powers of death”. A chain of command structure is also shown in Matt 18:15-18 as noted in a previous post. First correct your brother one on one and if that doesn’t work, have a group of disciples correct the sinner and if that does not work, go to the church.

We are all stewards of the truth in that we are to treasure it and nourish it in our hearts and in that we are to share it with others and we are all to defend it from the attacks of the followers of Satan. We are stewards of the truth as given to us by Christ and as protected from human error by the Church.

 

[Giver]

(Acts 4:32) “The whole group of believers was united, heart and soul; no one claimed for his own use anything that he had, as everything they owned was held in common.”

(John 10:16) “And there are other sheep I have that are not of this fold, and these I have to lead as well. They too will listen to my voice, and there will be only one flock, and one shepherd.”

Everyone needs to develop a relationship with Jesus and the Holy Spirit, one where they know that it is God and not some evil spirit. After a person knows Jesus’ voice then they can be assured of the teachings they receive. In the end everyone will be united, heart and soul.

My observations of what has happened to many Christians are: people don’t trust their relationship with Jesus and the Holy Spirit. The teachings of the Christians Churches have deviated from what Jesus originally taught, and when Jesus (Holy Spirit) tells them a truth that doesn’t agree with what has been taught to them, they become confused. Instead of going to the Bible to see if what they are being taught is right, many people go to their churches teachings or teachers.

Remember, no matter who tells you anything about God you are to go to Jesus to see if it is right or wrong.

 

[gracelife]

Angainor:

Let me try. I will try to stick to the facts. If anyone disputes any facts, please let me know what’s wrong.

Membership in the Church: “The membership of which we speak, is incorporation in the visible body of Christ. … Three conditions are requisite for a man to be a member of the Church…”

Role of the Church: if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

.

If we step back from the Roman Catholic “world” at bit and see how Leadership/Teaching Authority plays out in other Christian groups.

What is the role of LCMS or WELS leadership? Does it not function in a similar manner as the Magesterium, that is to guide it’s members.

For example: to approve what is taught in LCMS or WELS churches and schools? To give guidelines for what is to be published by Concordia or Northwestern publishing (they don’t just publish anything).

Certainly two brances of Lutheranism, LCMS & WELS, both upholding the Book of Concord & Scripture, come to different practices.

Who has the truth then?

May a woman vote in a WELS congregation? no.
In a LCMS congregation? yes.

Who’s right? They both think they are. So where is the absolute truth? Both are using the Scriptures afterall.

EXAMPLE: How are we to *conduct ourselves in the household of God *with even the simple matter of voting?

There is an earthly governing authority to determine these things, not only in the RC, but in WELS and LCMS too.

 

[ethant]

Humility

 

[Pax]

Giver:

My observations of what has happened to many Christians are: people don’t trust their relationship with Jesus and the Holy Spirit. The teachings of the Christians Churches have deviated from what Jesus originally taught, and when Jesus (Holy Spirit) tells them a truth that doesn’t agree with what has been taught to them, they become confused. Instead of going to the Bible to see if what they are being taught is right, many people go to their churches teachings or teachers.

Remember, no matter who tells you anything about God you are to go to Jesus to see if it is right or wrong.

Actually, your suggestion to ignore the Church and to simply follow what “you” personally believe is from Holy Spirit is precisely what is causing all of the division.

Simply ask people that “claim to follow the bible alone while being led by the Holy Spirit” what they believe about baptism. If you ask ten different people in ten different towns you’re likely to get a variety of ideas on baptism. In each case the individuals believe they are following scripture and being led by the Holy Spirit.

Your idea as to what is causing all of the division is backward. It isn’t the churches. It is instead the individuals that leave the flock to start their own church which explains why there are so many denominations today.

This is one of the reasons the apostle John says: " They went out from us, but they were not of us;** for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us;** but they went out, that it might be plain that they all are not of us."[1 John 2:19]

There is but one Church and all of the others are splinters.

 

[Angainor]

volzcpa:

We are stewards of the truth as given to us by Christ and as protected from human error by the Church.

“Protected from human error by the Church.”

You are once again pointing to 0.08% of the Church, you should say Protected from human error by 0.08% of the Church, unless you don’t think the laity is part of the Chruch.

volzcpa:

We are all stewards of the truth in that we are to treasure it and nourish it in our hearts and in that we are to share it with others and we are all to defend it from the attacks of the followers of Satan.

Treasuring and nourishing the truth in your heart is fine, lovely, but I don’t see how treasuring and nourishing the truth in your heart can reasonably be called acting as a foundation of truth, which the Church is called to be. Again, only 0.08% of the Catholic Church acts anything like a foundation of truth.

 

[Giver]

Pax:

Actually, your suggestion to ignore the Church and to simply follow what “you” personally believe is from Holy Spirit is precisely what is causing all of the division.

Simply ask people that “claim to follow the bible alone while being led by the Holy Spirit” what they believe about baptism. If you ask ten different people in ten different towns you’re likely to get a variety of ideas on baptism. In each case the individuals believe they are following scripture and being led by the Holy Spirit.

Your idea as to what is causing all of the division is backward. It isn’t the churches. It is instead the individuals that leave the flock to start their own church which explains why there are so many denominations today.

This is one of the reasons the apostle John says: " They went out from us, but they were not of us;** for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us;** but they went out, that it might be plain that they all are not of us."[1 John 2:19]

There is but one Church and all of the others are splinters.

Pax, You should read what I wrote with a little more care. I didn’t say; think the Holy Spirit is leading them. I said; Everyone needs to develop a relationship with Jesus and the Holy Spirit, one where they know that it is God and not some evil spirit.

The trouble is, many people think they know God and all they know is about him.

 

[Angainor]

gracelife:

What is the role of LCMS or WELS leadership? Does it not function in a similar manner as the Magesterium, that is to guide it’s members.

Members of the LCMS accept the leadership because they agree with the leadership. They agree with the statements of faith of the Lutheran Church. It is a voluntary relationship. The leadership is not seen as anything like a foundation of truth. If a congregation disagrees with the leadership it can leave the LCMS and form an independant congregation.

gracelife:

Who has the truth then?

May a woman vote in a WELS congregation? no.
In a LCMS congregation? yes.

Who’s right? They both think they are. So where is the absolute truth? Both are using the Scriptures afterall.

I follow my conscience, I can do no other. The rest, I defer to Paul.
I care very little if I am judged by you or by any human court; indeed, I do not even judge myself. My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me. Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men’s hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God. 1 Corinthians 4:3-5

 

[Pax]

Giver:

Pax, You should read what I wrote with a little more care. I didn’t say; think the Holy Spirit is leading them. I said; Everyone needs to develop a relationship with Jesus and the Holy Spirit, one where they know that it is God and not some evil spirit.

The trouble is, many people think they know God and all they know is about him.

I got it right the first time. I read everything you write very carefully. I stand by my comments. They pertain to you just as they pertain to anyone else that thinks that they can go it alone without the church. Many of your unique and errant theological ideas are part of the data that demonstrate my point.

I would suggest that you study scripture to find out all that it has to say about the Church.

 

[JezCat]

These are good questions. Jesus is the way the truth and the life. We could ask him but he is no longer incarnate on the Earth. The Apostles are the next best thing. Jesus tought them the truth and the Holy Spirit decended on them at Pentecost. We can find absolute truth in their surviving writings.

The problem with this is that you are relying on the “absolute truth” of writers who wern’t Apostles. Who wrote Matthew?? Mark wasn’t an Apostle. Neither was Luke. Etc…

My point is…your “absolute truth” comes in the same manner as ours does…through Sacred Tradition. In your own words, “Jesus taught (the Apostles) the truth” and we accept their teachings as authoratative right? Shouldn’t we therefore accept the same teachings that come from the disciples of the Apostles themselves? After all, who wrote the NT? The disciples of the Apostles perhaps? It’s quite probable that the Gospels were written by 3rd generation disciples.

Keep in mind that Jesus didn’t pen the NT himself. In fact, what Apostles, besides Paul did?

 

[Pedro]

“Protected from human error by the Church.”
You are once again pointing to 0.08% of the Church, you should say Protected from human error by 0.08% of the Church, unless you don’t think the laity is part of the Chruch.Treasuring .

I find it kind of funny that you are fixated on this ratio thing. In Acts 15 you will see only a very small fraction of Christians at that time met in the Jerusalem council to discuss the circumcision issue. There was a lot of arguing going on until one man (Peter) spoke and the entire Church followed.

It is likely there were at least 10,000 Christians already at that time. That means the decision to do away with circumcision was made by .001% of the Church. But not only that, this decision went against scripture (the OT) which clearly required circumcision. Why do you accept this teaching as true?

If your answer is because it is in scripture, why do you accept Acts as scripture when it was not written by an apostle and only .08% of the Church were involved in canonizing it?

 

[Angainor]

Pedro:

It is likely there were at least 10,000 Christians already at that time. That means the decision to do away with circumcision was made by .001% of the Church.

What decision? The Gentile Christians already weren’t circumcising. The only decision made was that the Jewish Christians wouldn’t bug them about it anymore.

Do you think if Peter decreed that they must circumcise they would start doing it? Doubtful, considering they ignored the verse 29 prohibition against eating meat sacrificed to idols.

 

[mmortal03]

“Protected from human error by the Church.”

You are once again pointing to 0.08% of the Church, you should say Protected from human error by 0.08% of the Church, unless you don’t think the laity is part of the Chruch.Treasuring and nourishing the truth in your heart is fine, lovely, but I don’t see how treasuring and nourishing the truth in your heart can reasonably be called acting as a foundation of truth, which the Church is called to be. Again, only 0.08% of the Catholic Church acts anything like a foundation of truth.

Just because what he said isn’t specific doesn’t mean that it is wrong. Also, the word “Church” can be used in a lot of different ways. Even though the Church contains everyone, the word is also used to refer to the Magisterium. So, actually, you could also say “Protected from human error by the Magisterium, in those certain cases.” Also, you could say, “Protected from human error by the structure of the Church (or how the Church is set up.)” I really don’t follow your gripe with the 0.08% here…the numbers don’t matter, unless you are looking at it from a Protestant viewpoint where this is ingrained in people as being offensive.

As an aside, it is amazing how many people I have met spreading misconceptions about the Catholic Church, not to say that anyone here is. I just wish everybody could just take a step back and try to look at it unbiasedly. While I have been raised in the Catholic Church, I personally have always felt like I was on the fence, because not everyone in my family is Catholic. But the more and more I study this stuff, the more the Catholic way of thinking just makes sense, and the less I see it through these biased views that others have spread around. I actually am involved with a good bit of Protestant related events, and many of my friends (all good people) are Protestant. So, while not all Protestants are Christian Fundamentalists attacking the Catholic Church, it still is amazing to me how many of their views somehow rub off on others.