V
VociMike
Guest
Not being a Jew, I don’t know. What I do know is that they have failed to recognize the entire New Testament, which hardly makes their methods a model for Christians to follow.
- Status
G
guanophore
Guest
Why do you believe this. Do you not think that Jesus would consider it important that we have all the Holy Writings we need?
Why do you say there was no infallible guide? Jesus spoke of the ‘Seat of Moses’. Just because the persons in the seat were corrupt, that does not mean the teaching itself was wrong. Jesus admonished people to “do as they teach” because it was essential to submit to the Seat of Moses.
The Church has no need to proclaim things by infallible council until heresies make it necessary. This is why many of the doctrines always held were not proclaimed for centuries. The duty of the Church is to hold and to teach the faith. For example, it was not necesary to speak about the hypostatic union of Christ until heresey arose. Same for the Trinity.
It was not until Reformers wanted to change the canon that it became necessary to make a proclamation of what was always believed.
G
guanophore
Guest
Your post made it sound as if the Church (people) had nothing to do with defining the canon, and that the Church cannot claim any ownership in the process. I see now that you know there is a proccess that is applied. Men, working together with the HS determined which books should be included. In another post, you indicated you thought the canon was a fallible list of infallible books. Do you think that the HS cannot guide people into infallible decisions?
G
guanophore
Guest
By Divine inspiration, through the Seat of Moses
N
Nino
Guest
These above are not really new attacks…just in this format.and typed in blue! St.Paul also said that women must be quiet in church…when a female protestant minister goes up to the pulpit does she just stand there and make faces or what? Its easy to critize our ancestors…we are so much smarter then they are…check out the presidents we have elected since the departure of Theodore Roosevelt!!! The RCC has always been under attack by its enemies…the so called ‘rationalists’ who can see straight thru the fog of 'Romanism". From 1939 to 1945 I found in the pages of the NYTImes some 38 articles headlining the Vaticans defense of Truth ,Justice and Righteousness against the forces of evil…the left wing Nazis,Communists and Fascists…Italy thus had the lowest percentage of Jewish people lost to the ‘rationalists’…85% were saved as compared to other Europeon nations,under protestant control where in 85%were executed! The Partisans in Italy,a communist organization,killed some 30 German troopers one day in a bomb attack and immediately the rationalists arrested over 300 innocents Italians ,men,women and children and machine gunned then at the caves outside of Rome…how brave and smart these rationalists were to kill 30 soldiers and thus provoke their former buddies to kill 300 innocent Italian civilians in retaliation! and so it has gone down thru the ages…the RCC is stronger then ever…while these new thinkers,secular humanists write books,make movies…re: Vinci code nonsense etc etc all true Christains should bow with reverence and awe at those Irish monks who copied and thus saved the holy writings for us to try and follow rather then call them ignorant etc…Jesus,Mary and Joseph pray for us…and help light the way for those who follow the path of darkness…
C
CentralFLJames
Guest
Good point. If anyone doubts have them recall the Jewish history of King David or Solomon.
God chooses His earthly leaders who are very human and have very human weakness. This proves that necessity of partnering with God for the grace to persevere and to repent when in error and pray for His continuous guidance and help.
James
P
Pwrlftr
Guest
What exactly do you believe the seat of Moses to be? Was it an infallible office?
P
Pwrlftr
Guest
Since I reject the notion of infallibility, how else could I describe it?
guanaphore:
I think Jesus did that, I just don’t think an “infallible” body was involved.
guanaphore:
What exactly were the people told to “do”? Do we know the limits of this command?
I agree that the Pharisees held the seat of Moses (maybe the Sadducees too?) and that they had authority but in the NT, we see clearly that authority doesn’t equal infallibility. Slaves are told to obey their masters, children are told to obey their parents, citizens the government, etc. so there is no need to read infallibility into the seat of Moses.
If the seat of Moses was an infallible office (for lack of a better way to describe it) one has to overcome several problems:
a.) Why did they mis-use the corban rule? In Mark and Matthew as well we see Jesus discussing this issue and telling the Pharisees that:
i.) They were teaching as doctrine the precepts of man.
ii.) They were invalidating the word of God by their tradition which they were handing down.
iii.) They set aside the commandment of God in order to keep their tradition.
So if in a matter of morality and faith an “infallible” body can be so wrong, what good does it do? Their are other problems with the seat of Moses having in infallibility attached to it as well.
If the seat of Moses gave it’s holder the charism of infallibility, why didn’t they recognize Jesus as who He said He was?
Additionally, the Pharisees who held the seat did not accept the deutero’s as being canonical yet your church says they are. The council fo Jamnia according to FF Bruce and Beckwith just passed along the canon as they had received it with no discussion whatsoever of the deutero’s and we know from Josephus the books called the deutero’s weren’t laid up in the temple. So, if the occupier of the seat of Moses was infallible, why didn’t they accept the deutero’s as canonical?
There are other issues as well but I will be interested in seeing you response.
P
Pwrlftr
Guest
I didn’t mean to imply the list of canonical books fell out of the sky.
P
Pax
Guest
Then please give the appropriate credit to the Catholic Church.
J
juliamajor
Guest
Nonsense-Sirach was commonly used by the early Christian church that it was known as"THE CHURCH BOOK".:
J
juliamajor
Guest
TRADITION!
G
GKC
Guest
T
Tomster
Guest
As a matter of fact, we see how the Fathers, Doctors and theologians endeavored to compare Mary’s Assumption with other prerogatives and even with the divine truths conveyed to us in Sacred Scripture.
From the time of St. John Damascene (d. 753), who was pre-eminently the great herald of tradition concerning this truth onwards, we find the following privileges of Mary’s brought forward as answer to the question regarding the reason for her bodily assumption:
Mary was taken bodily up to heaven because:
1.) She is God’s Mother.
2.) Mary’s flesh and Jesus’ flesh are one.
3.) Mary’s body is united to the principal of life.
4.) Mary is a virgin.
5.) Mary is unstained by sin.
6.) Mary is Blessed among women.
7.) Mary is the New Eve.
The Church can propose a truth to us as being divinely revealed in two ways: by her ordinary teaching authority in the unanimous preaching of her bishops, and by a solemn declaration, things which are unheard of in protestantism.
For if, in spite of the bishops’ almost unanimous agreement, we grant the hypothesis that Mary’s assumption into heaven has not been revealed, it would be definitely established that both the teaching Church and the Church taught, that is to say the entire Church, was in error, and that therefore also the infallibility in questions of faith and morals promised to her by Christ was an illusion.
Therefore the Pope had firm ground, firm even as rock, under his feet when he granted the innumerable petitions, and proposed to the Church as doctrine by a solemn assertion of dogma, what she already accepted as divinely revealed truth.
T
Tomster
Guest
If you would care to discuss the above mentioned seven points I used as a beginning outline for you then let us begin.
T
Tomster
Guest
BTW - For further study on your part you might want to delve into the writings of not only St. John Damascene but also those of St. Germanus of Constantinople and St. Modestus of Jerusalem, seventh and eighth century Patristic writers. Additionally, the explicit belief in the Assumption of the Blessed Mother by the faithful is, of course, traceable to a much earlier date as the witness of the Sacred Liturgy, something eradicated by the reformers, shows.
T
Tomster
Guest
Errors? Such as . . .
P
Pwrlftr
Guest
That’s a mighty fine answer but was that tradition infallible?TRADITION!
T
Tomster
Guest
“. . . your church . . .”? There is only One.
- Status