N
NotWorthy
Guest
Amen, Brother Gen!!!
- Status
B
blessedtoo
Guest
Carol, you are wrong here. These issues are completely clear within the Catholic Church and anyone who claims abiguity is either ignorant or willfully disobedient. Obviously, in other denominations there is still debate, as we are witnessing now in the Anglican Church.
Forgive me, but this sounds like the Hallmark card version of faith, Christ and religion. Let’s take the early Christians as an example. The doctrine they defended TO THE DEATH was the divinity of Christ. Who gets to decide which doctrines fall into the category of minutiae? How can you know the truth of what you believe if the details are inconsequential? I studied piano for 20 years. You can’t imagine the “minutiae” I had to learn, understand, and internalize. How else would I have come to a full understanding, love, and appreciation for the music I played? Being interested in “whatever faith” is admirable as an academic pursuit, but as means to the truth, it falls short.
You really need to clarify before making blanket statements like this one. There have been no changes made regarding divorce and decrees of nullity. The process that the Church has allowed for centuries is the same, albeit more widespread. This has to do with the number of applications increasing, not a change in policy.
C
Contarini
Guest
What’s so great about the last two people on that list? Peter the Great in particular–the “Enlightenment” he brought to Russia was a bloody and demonic monstrosity that killed thousands directly and millions upon millions indirectly. He is one of the most evil figures in human history, in my opinion. Why do you see him as a hero?
People can do good humanitarian work in spite of lacking doctrinal clarity, and it’s far better to have a warm heart than a clear head. But that doesn’t make doctrinal clarity a bad thing. It’s better to have both doctrinal clarity and a humanitarian conscience.
Edwin
F
fix
Guest
Truth cannot contradict truth. Everyone cannot be right.
89 There is an organic connection between our spiritual life and the dogmas. Dogmas are lights along the path of faith; they illuminate it and make it secure. Conversely, if our life is upright, our intellect and heart will be open to welcome the light shed by the dogmas of faith.50
http://javascript<b></b>:openWindow('cr/90.htm');
R
rwoehmke
Guest
The common thread here would seem to be that the normal human being must believe in something outside of and greater than himself as an individual. It is obvious from observation that this need is met by a wide spectrum of outside content whether it be another person(s), an ideology, or a system of belief in some higher being or purpose. The question arises when one faces a need to choose between what is available. It becomes apparent that one cannot just accept everything because that amounts in the end to believing in nothing. I would suppose that for the Christian it is of primary importance to believe in Christ and God and to have a personal relationship with them. After that comes the what and how one believes. To accept everything as having equal value and truth leads to chaos. Unfortunately it is not only the Muslims who are split and can be quite nasty, but history shows we all have this tendency. It soon becomes my way or no way. There is no point in time either in pre-history or historical times when we humans have not been at each others throats somewhere in the world. Heaven on earth just does not exist. In this world one ends up having to chose who they will serve and how.
A
adrift
Guest
Am I understanding you correctly, are you saying the Jesus planed on this diversity? I would say that such would lead to division as we can see that is what happened. Everything that Jesus did points not to diversity but to a narrow road. Jesus being God knows all but it does not follow that He desires all. He knew that Judas would betray Him and He knew that Judas would not be the only betrayer.
C
Carol_Coombe
Guest
Bless you and thank you for this insight.
C
Carol_Coombe
Guest
Dear One, No I did not say that Christ planned this diversity. I am saying that because Christ is divine, and because his is omniscient, he sees what happened, what happens and what will happen. He therefore must have known, during his time on this small planet, that His church would not always be unified.
Whether or not He thought this was a Good Idea is not for us to know. What we do know is that neither He, nor God the Father, chose to intervene in the divergence of faith, and the diffusion of Christian belief through various routes to all of humanity globally. That is not to say that He did not intervene in ways that we are not aware of; but he certainly did not intervene (or has not done so yet) to keep His church unified.
How does that relate to doctrinal minutiae? For me it means that while it is important for one Church (at present the Catholic Church) to archive the history of the universal church established by Christ (someone has to do it), it is not the prerogative of that church, or denomination of Christendom, to insist that all other Christians follow the detail of its interpretation of the Scriptures etc. The RCC does not own the scriptures, nor does if have the sole prerogative to interpret the meaning of the scriptures.
I don’t find this difficult: the same is true of all other great religions, those that are with us now, and those that have died out in the past. (We should not assume that our great religion, Christianity, will live forever.)
F
Fidelis
Guest
If I thought this were true, I would say along with Flannery O’Connor, “Then the hell with it!”
F
fix
Guest
You call it minutiae, but does Christ think it that way?
G
Genesis315
Guest
Are you Catholic? If so, or for the edification of Catholics here is the truth:
Furthermore, to check unbridled spirits, it decrees that no one relying on his own judgment shall, in matters of faith and morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, distorting the Holy Scriptures in accordance with his own conceptions,[5] presume to interpret them contrary to that sense which holy mother Church, to whom it belongs to judge of their true sense and interpretation,[6] has held and holds, or even contrary to the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, even though such interpretations should never at any time be published.
Vatican I:
So that we could fulfill our duty of embracing the true faith and of persevering unwaveringly in it, God, through his only begotten Son, founded the Church, and he endowed his institution with clear notes to the end that she might be recognized by all as the guardian and teacher of the revealed word.
Vatican II:
But the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, (8) has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, (9) whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.
For all of what has been said about the way of interpreting Scripture is subject finally to the judgment of the Church, which carries out the divine commission and ministry of guarding and interpreting the word of God. (10)
Matt. 28:18 And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. 19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.
Trent:
Furthermore, to check unbridled spirits, it decrees that no one relying on his own judgment shall, in matters of faith and morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, distorting the Holy Scriptures in accordance with his own conceptions,[5] presume to interpret them contrary to that sense which holy mother Church, to whom it belongs to judge of their true sense and interpretation,[6] has held and holds, or even contrary to the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, even though such interpretations should never at any time be published.
Vatican I:
So that we could fulfill our duty of embracing the true faith and of persevering unwaveringly in it, God, through his only begotten Son, founded the Church, and he endowed his institution with clear notes to the end that she might be recognized by all as the guardian and teacher of the revealed word.
- Now since the decree on the interpretation of Holy Scripture, profitably made by the Council of Trent, with the intention of constraining rash speculation, has been wrongly interpreted by some, we renew that decree and declare its meaning to be as follows: that in matters of faith and morals, belonging as they do to the establishing of Christian doctrine, that meaning of Holy Scripture must be held to be the true one, which Holy mother Church held and holds, since it is her right to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of Holy Scripture.
- In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret Holy Scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the fathers.
Vatican II:
But the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, (8) has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, (9) whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.
For all of what has been said about the way of interpreting Scripture is subject finally to the judgment of the Church, which carries out the divine commission and ministry of guarding and interpreting the word of God. (10)
Matt. 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Matt. 28:18 And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. 19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.
C
Carol_Coombe
Guest
I suspect he would think there are far more important things to think about. I am amazed that on this Forum, at least on the threads I have participated in, there has not been one mention of Christ, his nature, mission and what that means for our lives as Christians (and there has been a lot of what some would judge to be unChristian behaviour around).
We look to have faith in our Church, yes, but before that faith in our God and in His Son Jesus Christ, faith in ourselves as Christians and showing that faith daily in our relationship to others, to God and to ourselves. And in this we are guided by our church.
I would much prefer to deal with issues of faith - I find the minutiae are not relevant to many real human beings because they do not know about them, they do not live by them, and they cannot apply them - people particularly who are undereducated, live in difficult places (outside the US for example), and who may have priests who are likewise undereducated and perhaps attitudinally out of synch with the church. This does happen, ne?
Perhaps this is just the wrong thread for me. But if we are talking doctrinal minutiae then we can talk about it in terms of how else we could be spending our time. And in that regard, I think that there are not many people on the Forum who are well versed either in doctrinal minutiae, or in the history of the Church’s interpretations which lead to its doctrinal beliefs, or in the Catholic thinkers through the ages who have contributed - positively or negatively - to the Church’s mission in defining doctrine, particularly through the Magisterium.
Much of what we see on the Forum is perhaps personal opinion and quoting of scripture, and very little of recourse to Vatican or other authoritative materials with regard to doctrine.
C
Carol_Coombe
Guest
Thank you. I have just written that few on the Forum refer to authorities to answer doctrinal questions. Now you have done so, and this is helpful for me.
However, what you have proven is that the Catholic Church believes that it has the sole prerogative to determine doctrine. There are many others who would disagree, although some would agree that the Catholic Church has been pre-eminent in interpretation of scripture and other authorities, and has kept or archived the history of Church doctrine. This role has been vital for all of Christendom.
When we come to the beliefs of various mainline Christian traditions - and their interpretation of authoritative sources - Christ speaks to all and for all. It is not incumbent on any of them (and please do not refer to cafeterias if you reply) to apply the interpretations of the Catholic Church to their own practices, unless they wish to do so.
I have argued elsewhere that all denominations, including the Catholic Church, have a place within Christendom, the universal church of Christ, the catholic church of christ, the one, holy, catholics and apostolic church which straddles the globe.
C
Carol_Coombe
Guest
I wonder if there are any Catholics out there who would like to take on the challenge offered here by Randy?
F
fix
Guest
Did He not found the Church for the salvation of souls?
168 It is the Church that believes first, and so bears, nourishes and sustains my faith. Everywhere, it is the Church that first confesses the Lord: “Throughout the world the holy Church acclaims you”, as we sing in the hymn “Te Deum”; with her and in her, we are won over and brought to confess: “I believe”, “We believe”. It is through the Church that we receive faith and new life in Christ by Baptism. In the Rituale Romanum, the minister of Baptism asks the catechumen: “What do you ask of God’s Church?” And the answer is: “Faith.” “What does faith offer you?” "Eternal life."54
169 Salvation comes from God alone; but because we receive the life of faith through the Church, she is our mother: "We believe the Church as the mother of our new birth, and not in the Church as if she were the author of our salvation."55 Because she is our mother, she is also our teacher in the faith.
I think it is mistaken to view things this way. The minutiae as you call it is not that at all.
173 "Indeed, the Church, though scattered throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, having received the faith from the apostles and their disciples. . . guards [this preaching and faith] with care, as dwelling in but a single house, and similarly believes as if having but one soul and a single heart, and preaches, teaches and hands on this faith with a unanimous voice, as if possessing only one mouth."59
I see plenty of authoritative sources linked in this forum. It is not a contest between doctrines and doing good deeds.
C
Carol_Coombe
Guest
Thank you for these references, and your insights.
I think also that it is sometimes the minutiae that have prevented meaningful rapprochement with other faiths, other denominations.
I am sure He did. I have no doubt you are right about that. But that was not the only reason: His Teaching in the scriptures, in the Beatitudes in particular, the example of His life, and the meaning of his stories and allegories suggest that He also expected during this lifetime, His followers would reflect His Teaching. For me, salvation is what comes after I die. I cannot know what afterlife will be like, and can only trust that God will care for me, that I will not be separated from Him. More importantly is how I live my life as a Christian, reflecting the principles of Christ in my daily life. For me, that is what matters.
I think you are right - as far as the Church is concerned. I have indicated however that I think that in practice, the minutiae (especially as I have seen them projected on the Forum) are not applicable to the daily lives of real people. They may be useful to the College of Cardinals or the Magisterium or the Pope, but for the ordinary Catholic, they are not a matter of real concern, except as they are reflected within a much fuller paradigm which represents the Teachings of the Church.
I think also that it is sometimes the minutiae that have prevented meaningful rapprochement with other faiths, other denominations.
I have been disappointed that there is not a broader range of authorities, as we see in the CCC itself, for example on the issue of informed conscience, where John Cardinal Newman, the Bible and St Augustine are individually referred to in support of various aspects of development of conscience.
M
MrS
Guest
M
MrS
Guest
C
Cam-masta
Guest
C
Cam-masta
Guest
… within the context of the authorised interpretation of Christian resources, but not necessarily as members of a so-called Single Church of the Absolute Truth.
I can’t help but to see a bit of satire in that last part of the sentence. The “so called Single Church” is the one you read in the historic Creeds “One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church”. These four pillars belong to what the Creed refers to as “Catholic” and says there is only “One” of them. In fact it even uses the word “Holy”! The “Absolute Truth” is our Lord Jesus Christ who founded this Church on the Rock of St. Peter over 2,000 years ago (Matt 16:18). God Bless.
I can’t help but to see a bit of satire in that last part of the sentence. The “so called Single Church” is the one you read in the historic Creeds “One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church”. These four pillars belong to what the Creed refers to as “Catholic” and says there is only “One” of them. In fact it even uses the word “Holy”! The “Absolute Truth” is our Lord Jesus Christ who founded this Church on the Rock of St. Peter over 2,000 years ago (Matt 16:18). God Bless.
- Status