R
runandsew
Guest
Yes it does !!!And just because you say it does does not mean that it is so.
Actually in this Scott Hahn article, some Protestant biblical scholars also thing it does.
catholic-pages.com/pope/hahn.asp
Yes it does !!!And just because you say it does does not mean that it is so.
And some equally prominant Bible scholars think it doesnât. How are we to know?Yes it does !!!
Actually in this Scott Hahn article, some Protestant biblical scholars also thing it does.
Yeah, but do any prominant Catholic bible scholars think that it doesnât?And some equally prominant Bible scholars think it doesnât. How are we to know?
Asheeha, thank you for your thoughtful contribution and welcome to the forum. :tiphat:Noma,
Being at a spiritual crossroads is very difficult. I am experiencing something very similar in that respect.
The Pope, I wonder why our Lord didnât state things more clearlyâŚbut I wonder if we wouldnât just try to change the meaning of His words anyway.
I believe quite fundamentally that Christ desires that the Church be one and that oneness passes over not only to the spiritual but to the physical. The Church has been expressed as the family of God. In my nuclear family He has set an authority structure. And that structure has a defined âhead,â the husband, not to be a tyrant but to maintain unity and foster peace and love. I cannot imagine that God would call so many millions of people to be one without giving them the gift of a leader. How is unity (with fallible men) possible without the first among equals? Certainly this dogma wasnât as clearly defined by the ECF but neither did it probably need to be.
Reading Ignatius of Antioch I realized that unity was of great importance and that he called the Church to follow their Bishop as they would Christ. So, wouldnât it make sense that the Bishops too would have some sort of leader? Someone that represents the universal Church and not just a jurisdiction of it? How is the body of Christ to have hope of unity without a shepherd? I do realize that Christ is ultimately The Shepherd but I am coming to understand that He is gracing us with His presence through the leaders of the Church.
I am by no means a great scholar nor a Catholic one. Maybe my understanding does not line up with official Catholic doctrine, I hope to be corrected if I need to be, but this is how my Protestant mind came to understand the great gift of the Pope which offends so many of my Protestant brothers and sisters.
May you rest in the grace and peace of the Lord Jesus Christ as He draws you closer to Himself.
This is a very important distinction, and arises when we speak of the difference between reasoning and rationalizing. Reasoning is open to truth, and rationalizing is figuring out a way to make oneâs current behavior sound like truth. The problem is, often, even those rationalizing believe that they are reasoning. I am unsure where I fall in this regard.Noma,
Being at a spiritual crossroads is very difficult. I am experiencing something very similar in that respect.
The Pope, I wonder why our Lord didnât state things more clearlyâŚbut I wonder if we wouldnât just try to change the meaning of His words anyway.
Do you then believe that there is salvation outside the Church? If you believe, rather, that salvation is only within the Church, there must either be, in a sense, some type of invisible Church, or only Roman Catholics (and Byzantineâs, etc.) will go to heaven.I believe quite fundamentally that Christ desires that the Church be one and that oneness passes over not only to the spiritual but to the physical.
There is no evidence it would be possible even with this first among equals, if one existed.How is unity (with fallible men) possible without the first among equals?
Should not the ideal shepherd be one without sin, in that case?So, wouldnât it make sense that the Bishops too would have some sort of leader? Someone that represents the universal Church and not just a jurisdiction of it? How is the body of Christ to have hope of unity without a shepherd?
This is an excellent spirit to have. I, also, am looking to ultimately be corrected (though maybe in a different way, and by different temporal authorities). I will pray that, should the Roman Catholic Church be the True Church of Christ, you are never led astray from it. And that if the Roman Church is not True, you be shown that as well. Take your time before joining the Roman Church. I wish I had.I am by no means a great scholar nor a Catholic one. Maybe my understanding does not line up with official Catholic doctrine, I hope to be corrected if I need to beâŚ
Thank you, for your concern, your kind words, and your prayers.May you rest in the grace and peace of the Lord Jesus Christ as He draws you closer to Himself.
But then we need to question why the Roman Church split (or why people split from the Roman Church). True, it doesnât happen as often, but it does happen. It is convenient to say that there are no Roman denominations, and this is true, but true trivially, true by definition. I can define a certain Church Body, any body, and claim that it has never split, simply by saying that any break is a break not of this Church Body, but a break away from this Church Body.Since there is no infallible court of appeals to settle this dispute on the correct interpretation of Scripture in Protestantism, the result is the formation of new denominations and more confusion.
A magisterium does not ensure universal agreement, but it serves to drastically minimize the confusion found in Protestantism. One of the premise of the Protestant Reformation was that the Bible is self-interpreting. Weâve already seen the confusion caused by that idea.But then we need to question why the Roman Church split (or why people split from the Roman Church). True, it doesnât happen as often, but it does happen. It is convenient to say that there are no Roman denominations, and this is true, but true trivially, true by definition. I can define a certain Church Body, any body, and claim that it has never split, simply by saying that any break is a break not of this Church Body, but a break away from this Church Body.
So it seems as though the Magisterial teachings of the Roman Church do not guarantee people will interpret them correctly, or even accept them. They do not guarantee that people will not leave from the teaching. The denominational split could be as much a fault of Roman thinking as it is of Protestant thinking.
Some may claim that it is the fault of not truly accepting Sola Scriptura, and that all those who have accept the exact same essential doctrine, and that those who do not therefore have this Scriptural doctrine have implicitely rejected Sola Scriptura.
We could call the denominationalism a Latin problem.
With this I have no quarrel, and through further study I find it impossible but to accept that Sola Scriptura is a deception from Satan. For, though it is consistent within itself, and though it may not be inconsistent with observable reality, it is inconsistent with the Nature of Christ, who would want to be with us to guide us in a way more intimate and imminent than by leaving only a manual.A magisterium does not ensure universal agreement, but it serves to drastically minimize the confusion found in Protestantism. One of the premise of the Protestant Reformation was that the Bible is self-interpreting. Weâve already seen the confusion caused by that idea.
AhhhâŚI have done my homework or been VERY challenged in another thread. What is meant by âoutside the Churchâ? It seems that Baptism puts you in partial communion with the Church and the Church recognizes all those who are Baptized in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit regardless who actually performs this sacrament. There is a âno faultâ clause in lumin gentium. So the answer is yes, I do believe there is some type of invisible Church, but that is because we have such a gracious God and Savior. I believe the heart of the Church should be Christâs and that heart is that we be one as He and the Father are oneâŚthat seems a bit more than spiritually so to me.Do you then believe that there is salvation outside the Church? If you believe, rather, that salvation is only within the Church, there must either be, in a sense, some type of invisible Church, or only Roman Catholics (and Byzantineâs, etc.) will go to heaven.
TrueâŚbut where is the hope? We must persevere and we must strive for the glorious riches that are ours in Christ Jesus. It is clear that Jesus gave as an authority structure. He didnât give us just any discipleâŚHe gave us the ones that He specifically called that he specifically challenged, taught, etc. Is it just coincidence that Peter is always mentioned first? Is it coincidence he is given Keys and that his name was actually changed to âRock?â Is it just coincidence that Jesus specifically told Peter to feed His sheep; is it just coincidence that this man is represented as having messed up even to the point of denying the Lord?There is no evidence it would be possible even with this first among equals, if one existed.
Jesus is THE SHEPHERD! If Catholicism teaches that He is not then I want no part of it! But even in Evangelical land our pastors refer to themselves as shepherds. You as a married man, is Christ not the head of your home? But you are still called to be the head of that home. (and even still as imperfect as you are you are still given the call) And what does that meanâŚyou are to love your wife as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for it! Pretty mighty call. Many Evangelicals have robbed ourselves of the amazing gift God gives through His Church. We get it in part but not in full. We have changed the meaning of Church to the âlocal body of believersâ itâs very convenient and some of the churches are run more like democracies. But I will say that I have known what it means to be a part of the family of God in those simple Evangelical churches more than I have experienced in the Catholic Church so far, at least on a fellowship level.Should not the ideal shepherd be one without sin, in that case?
My views on Sola Scriptura have somewhat evolved through this thread. Beyond that, most of what you have said is addressed in my thread.Noma:
Thank you for your thoughts. I am testing the Spirit still trying to see truth. I appreciate your prayers too and you have given me great food for thought.
I wish I knew. I am exploring it currently. I would strongly suggest, before you become Roman Catholic, to go to an Orthodox service or two, and ask an Orthodox Priest what the difference between Orthodox and Roman Catholics are. It is always good to be informed.Is the Orthodox way really better?
duhâŚI didnât think of thatâŚI will learn in time.Beyond that, most of what you have said is addressed in my thread.
dessert