The Clergy

[StrawberryJam]

I know what the graces are in baptism, I was reffering back to the topic of the thread regarding the clergy.

The Clergy.

Who are they? Are they also a part of those who gather, or seperate? Or both?
I say both.

What is the big deal here anyway my friend?

We should be working on big time problems. Not asking people to sit and agree with us about things no one is arguing against.

This is a distraction from what good can be done in a short time.

 

[Psychotheosophy]

We should be working on big time problems. Not asking people to sit and agree with us about things no one is arguing against.

“If genuine doubt leads us to test out the faith with argument, this is clearly a sin of disbelief; but arguing to repel error, or even as an exercise, can be praised.”

For me,
Arguing against the true teachings of the Church
(as if a heretic in post #13, but not my last one),
Has helped me the most understand and explain them.
Forgive me if I offended you.

St. Paul stated, “Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations.”

Romans 1:4-5

We say that the Church is Apostolic,
Meaning that the teachings come from to the Apostles.

We say that the Church is Catholic,
Meaning its teachings are directed toward all the nations.

But for the teachings to expand to the rest of the world,
Is ultimately by God’s grace, not the Apostles.

The less that I can be,
The more God can be.

The Clergy.
Who are they?

I was mainly referring to the ordained,
But can refer to nuns, brothers, etc.

Are they also a part of those who gather, or seperate? Or both?
I say both.

I agree but,
What do you mean by “gather” and “separate.”
Because I might disagree with you.

I infallibly say that the dogmas related to material,
Which are deliberately and stubbornly rejected by any baptized person,
Should no longer consider themselves,
Members of the Church.

I should clarify,
The baptized person
Should no longer consider themselves
Members of the Church,
Not the dogmas.

 

[Psychotheosophy]

I agree but,
What do you mean by “gather” and “separate.”
Because I might disagree with you.

I want to explain how it makes sense to you,
Without contradicting the dogmas of the Church,
With which I agree.

“Careless expressions lead to heresies. The Arians said that Christ was a creature, subordinate to the Father not only in virtue of his human nature, but also a a divine person. So nowadays, when we say that Christ is a creature or subordinate to the Father, we have to add the qualifying phrase: in virtue of his human nature.”

Summa Theologica: A Concise Translation

I want to be clear so as to not mislead you accidently.

For example,

If we are directed to care for the needs of the poor,
(Something the Catholic Church supports),
We can not also be directed
(Explicitly or implicitly),
To accept communism,
(Which has been explained as actually reducing the innate value of human beings.)

Since Popes have condemned communism,
For the sake of Unity of Communion,
(Part of the Unity of the Church)
We also condemn communism.

It is dogma that, “Mary also was redeemed ‘by the grace of Christ’ but in a more perfect manner than other human beings.”

“The Fourth Lateran Council (1215) declared: '‘The universal Church of the faithful is one outside of which none is saved.’”

Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma

Even if a new “Teaching Authority,”
Stated that we should accept communism,
It would also contradict the Unity of Catholic Church.
Mary, in an approved apparition at Fatima,
Also condemned communism,
And by her Immaculate Conception,
Mary can not be not part of the Catholic Church,
(Since we are baptized into the one body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:12-13),
Which is in heaven and on earth (Romans 8:38)).
We would also need to question,
This new “Teaching Authority’s,”
Ability to approve marian apparitions,
And the directives according to them.

(Again, this may be a false Teaching Authority)

 

[Psychotheosophy]

I agree but,
What do you mean by “gather” and “separate.”
Because I might disagree with you.

I want to explain how it makes sense to you,
Without contradicting the dogmas of the Church,
With which I agree.

“Careless expressions lead to heresies. The Arians said that Christ was a creature, subordinate to the Father not only in virtue of his human nature, but also a a divine person. So nowadays, when we say that Christ is a creature or subordinate to the Father, we have to add the qualifying phrase: in virtue of his human nature.”

Summa Theologica: A Concise Translation

I want to be clear so as to not mislead you accidently.

For example,

If we are directed to care for the needs of the poor,
(Something the Catholic Church supports),
We can not also be directed
(Explicitly or implicitly),
To accept communism,
(Which has been explained as actually reducing the innate value of human beings.)

Since Popes have condemned communism,
For the sake of Unity of Communion,
(Part of the Unity of the Church)
We also condemn communism.

It is dogma that, “Mary also was redeemed ‘by the grace of Christ’ but in a more perfect manner than other human beings.”

“The Fourth Lateran Council (1215) declared: '‘The universal Church of the faithful is one outside of which none is saved.’”

Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma

Even if a new “Teaching Authority,”
Stated that we should accept communism,
It would also contradict the Unity of Catholic Church.
Mary, in an approved apparition at Fatima,
Also condemned communism,
And by her Immaculate Conception,
Mary can not be not part of the Catholic Church,
(Since we are baptized into the one body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:12-13),
Which is in heaven and on earth (Romans 8:38)).
We would also need to question,
This new “Teaching Authority’s,”
Ability to approve marian apparitions,
And the directives according to them.

(Again, this may be a false Teaching Authority)

 

[StrawberryJam]

I keep asking, and you know I love your questions. I like your questions more than I like mine,
For you have thought more about them than I ever did or will.
Yet you make me ask more than I cared to ask.
I thank you for that. No matter where it goes from here.

 

[Psychotheosophy]

I keep asking, and you know I love your questions. I like your questions more than I like mine,
For you have thought more about them than I ever did or will.
Yet you make me ask more than I cared to ask.
I thank you for that. No matter where it goes from here.

Then, it sounds like,
Catholic teachings make sense to you,
(At least in Principle),
And something inside you,
Makes you feel compelled to it,
Even if there is something,
You disagree with.

If so,

All catholics try to follow,
Poverty (in spirit),
Chastity (according to their state in life, single, married, etc.)
Obedience (to God)

The clergy try to follow these as vows,
In a much deeper sense,
And are thus held,
In higher regard.

“Positive dogmatic theology is concerned with doctrines that have been proposed to our belief by Teaching Authority of the Church and that are contained in the sources of Revelation, Scripture, and Tradition.”

Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma

Even the Pope has taken a vow of obedience,
He must submit to Revelation,
(From apparitions of Mary),
Holy Scripture,
And Apostolic Tradition,
Or he may be held in less regard.

“The 4th Lateran Council and the Vatican Council teach that God is immutable. Holy Scripture excludes all change from God and positively ascribes to Him absolute immutability. James 1:17: ‘With whom there is no change nor shadow of alteration’”

Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma

And each of these,
Work together.
For example,
What God reveals (Revelation),
Doesn’t change (Apostolic Tradition).

 

[Psychotheosophy]

Then, it sounds like,
Catholic teachings make sense to you,
(At least in Principle),
And something inside you,
Makes you feel compelled to it,
Even if there is something,
You disagree with.

This compelled feeling,
May be common among those,
Considering to be baptized,
And those who have been baptized.

Catholic teachings follow the Principle of Love,
Love is selfless and self-sacrificial.
Therefore, persevering in following Catholic teachings
With which we disagree,
Can actually perfect us in Love (Perfect Happiness).

Some non-catholics think,
Obeying a teaching with which we disagree,
Is unwise.
But they don’t understand,
The paradox of Love (The Cross).

 

[Psychotheosophy]

Love is selfless and self-sacrificial.

Understanding the paradox of Love is found in Principle.

To love ourselves,
We must first love Love itself,

Since we can lack love,
And Love can not lack love,
Then we are not Love,

So loving is selfless,
In loving ourselves, and others.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Understanding the paradox of Love is found in Principle.

To love ourselves,
We must first love Love itself,

Since we can lack love,
And Love can not lack love,
Then we are not Love,

So loving is selfless,
In loving ourselves, and others.

I agree with that.

 

[Psychotheosophy]

And so,

Since Goodness = Love,

The goodness of people,
Is not determined by,
How much or less,
Material wealth they have,
But by how much they love,
(Which is selfless).

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Just a note to correct somethings.

In the Latin Church the Deacon also baptizes.

In the Byzantine Churches a priest’s belessing is required for the validity of the sacrament.

That’s the main difference as far as the Catholic laity is concerned. Priests are also under sacred vows, and are subject to various rules
(Canon Law, etc) that are not binding on laypeople.

Only priests who are also a member of a religious order are under vows. Secular clergy make promises of celibacy and obedience to their bishop, they take no vows.

 

[StrawberryJam]

And so,

Since Goodness = Love,

The goodness of people,
Is not determined by,
How much or less,
Material wealth they have,
But by how much they love,
(Which is selfless).

Agree again.

 

[Psychotheosophy]

Just a note to correct somethings.

In the Latin Church the Deacon also baptizes.

In the Byzantine Churches a priest’s belessing is required for the validity of the sacrament.

Only priests who are also a member of a religious order are under vows. Secular clergy make promises of celibacy and obedience to their bishop, they take no vows.

Thanks ByzCath

 

[Psychotheosophy]

Thanks ByzCath

“Christ appointed the Apostle Peter to be the first of all the Apostles and the visible Head of the whole Church, by appointing him immediately and personally to the primacy of jurisdiction.”

We should add,

St. Peter was married,
And not chosen by a conclave,
Rather he was chosen by God directly.

It is dogma that,
Issues regarding “vows,”
And is ultimately under the jurisdiction of the Pope.

 

[StrawberryJam]

We should add,

St. Peter was married,
And not chosen by a conclave,
Rather he was chosen by God directly.

It is dogma that,
Issues regarding “vows,”
And is ultimately under the jurisdiction of the Pope.

I thought Peter was a widow at the time he met Jesus?

 

[Psychotheosophy]

I thought Peter was a widow at the time he met Jesus?

Actually,
I don’t think we know for sure.
He did have a mother-in-law (Mt 8:14).

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Actually,
I don’t think we know for sure.
He did have a mother-in-law (Mt 8:14).

The Church has not spoken dogmatticly on this subject. We are free to believe either.

 

[Psychotheosophy]

The Church has not spoken dogmatticly on this subject. We are free to believe either.

Popes have allowed married non-catholic converts to be ordained as priests,
And Pope John Paul II also put a freeze on such dispensations.

Would you say that,
How vows of chastity are implemented,
Is governed by the principle of detachment,
Since detachment logically follows dogma?

It would seem that,
The spiritual needs of the Church,
Would assume priority over the material needs.
Christian perfection over priestly shortage.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Popes have allowed married non-catholic converts to be ordained as priests,
And Pope John Paul II also put a freeze on such dispensations.

Would you say that,
How vows of chastity are implemented,
Is governed by the principle of detachment,
Since detachment logically follows dogma?

It would seem that,
The spiritual needs of the Church,
Would assume priority over the material needs.
Christian perfection over priestly shortage.

The vow of Chastity is not dispensable. A secular priest makes no vows, he make promises of celibacy and obedience.

 

[Psychotheosophy]

The vow of Chastity is not dispensable

. A secular priest makes no vows, he make promises of celibacy and obedience.

Twentieth Century

Sorry,

I got the word, “dispensation,”
From a site called “futurechurch.org”
Which promotes women and married priests.
I wonder if there is anything else misleading.

Is marriage equal to virginity?
Are married people equal to virgins?
Is there a difference between these two questions?

Aren’t people who love more (which is selfless),
Are people with more value (Love = Value (Goodness))?

Second and Third Century (of the Catholic Church)
Age of Gnosticism: light and spirit are good, darkness and material things are evil. A person cannot be married and be perfect. However, most priests were married."

futurechurch.org/fpm/history.htm

It seems to say that,
Things which have material value (goodness),
Have equal spiritual value (goodness),
Which contradicts unchanging dogma.

We can can say that something is good,
Then distort what that means.

How do you distinguish between,
Chastity and celibacy?