Uncommon Problem with RCC

[ezeekl]

I want to say, that I sense the frustration here with the way that I’m answering. You’ll have to forgive me, for to me, the answers I’m giving from my perspective are fulfilling from my POV, and are what I see in scripture as truth. But I realize that your perspective is different, and applying it to your family is really very personal. I join you in prayers that they come to the Truth.

Itis not so much the answers you are giving as much as it is the questions you are avoiding giving any answer. As for the answers you have given, while you may find them fulfilling, I see them as being generally shallow.

In saying that I am reminded of an old saying about protestantism. I am sure there are variations to this but the one I heard stated that protestantism was like a river that was a thousnd miles wide and only an inch deep. Quite shallow indeed.

 

[Kliska]

Forgiven! and I ask for forgiveness as well as your answers compound my confusion :hypno:

Then perhaps it is time to draw this particular discussion to a close. It is enough, I think, for both of us to know that we each seek truth, and we each believe in God’s grace and guidance, even if the details differ.

Another quote JWs use. Sorry, but the proliferation of protestantism itself proves aginst this.

You’re never going to be free of people using similar arguments despite belief. They also shadow or mimic RCC teaching as well. Our job is to find truth. You believe that the truth is best and fullest as offered by the magisterium of the RCC, and I in scripture. The way we would talk to those who don’t hold to the creeds we do shows our different approaches.

I know they are interpreting correctly because Jesus left us the church and if it were only an invisible church then it is obvious your bible would most probably look much different than it does.

Jesus specifically sent the Spirit. The church is the gathering of His out-called ones. The Bible’s canonization was an organic process and we can trace the process ourselves, I don’t have to just trust that it was right, I can research for myself. The Orthodox churches might also have things to say in that regard.

Now where does that logic take your argument? How does your argument hold up in the year say, 250AD when the canon was very fluid at best and no apostles around to clarify a teaching?

Again, as stated in this thread, tradition and oral teaching were and are extremely important. Scripture provides us a written and objective benchmark with which to compare teaching, OT and NT. I have no problem with tradition that doesn’t contradict scripture. It is indeed apparent that the Apostles went around and taught. It is also apparent that wolves showed up and sowed seeds of false teaching.

This study part…are you not putting a lot of pressure on those who can’t quite grasp theology at the level of say, yourself, your pastor, St. Augustine, or even someone as simple as myself? I know many people that fall into this level of intelligence that will never be able to grasp what the spirit is seeming to be telling all of the different protestant denomination, much less other religions, and then make a reasonable conscience decision that will somehow fulfill unity in John 17. Someone once said “there is simplicity in the gospel message”. What about the ones not hearken to the truth, is this because they didn’t study quite enough? Could it be determined they did not test the spirits enough?

Again, it is a problem of compounding something and making it more complex then it was ever intended. Freedom, peace, love, grace, mercy, the gospel message itself, etc… these things aren’t meant to be a burden or hoops to jump through. Protestants and the RCC, both camps, seem to do similar things. This is also what one can see developing based on Old Covenant teachings that Jesus was dealing with Himself amongst the Jews.

There are always those who don’t hearken to the truth.

The difference is former is a structure made from man and humans bound to it will sin. The later is a structure from God and the humans bound to it will also sin but the truth in its teaching remains from God.

And that is the foundation of our “debate” here; a debate on what is God decreed and what is not. We are not, I’m afraid, going to agree on that here.

BTW how do you know they, JWs, have faulty interpretation of scripture? Yes, we keep ending up here and seem to get nowhere.

Study, prayer, due diligence, looking at teaches from all sides compared to scripture. The Holy Spirit. What can I say? To borrow a phrase, “the Spirit testifies to my spirit.” There are teachings I’m still digging into, but the gospel message and salvation is indeed so simple, I believe children can understand it.

I do understand and think much of my frustration comes from my not understanding not your explaining.

The good thing about what I say is that in the end, I say you don’t hafta listen to me in the slightest.

Peace!!!

And always unto you too.

Itis not so much the answers you are giving as much as it is the questions you are avoiding giving any answer. As for the answers you have given, while you may find them fulfilling, I see them as being generally shallow.

In saying that I am reminded of an old saying about protestantism. I am sure there are variations to this but the one I heard stated that protestantism was like a river that was a thousnd miles wide and only an inch deep. Quite shallow indeed.

Thank you.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Then perhaps it is time to draw this particular discussion to a close.

 

[Kliska]

:tiphat:

 

[adf417]

Then perhaps it is time to draw this particular discussion to a close. It is enough, I think, for both of us to know that we each seek truth, and we each believe in God’s grace and guidance, even if the details differ.

Yes, perhaps, but I do think details like RP or infant baptism do matter.

You’re never going to be free of people using similar arguments despite belief. They also shadow or mimic RCC teaching as well. Our job is to find truth. You believe that the truth is best and fullest as offered by the magisterium of the RCC, and I in scripture. The way we would talk to those who don’t hold to the creeds we do shows our different approaches.

How do you propose we find this truth, for others, if we bring this discussion to a close?

Jesus specifically sent the Spirit. The church is the gathering of His out-called ones. The Bible’s canonization was an organic process and we can trace the process ourselves, I don’t have to just trust that it was right, I can research for myself. The Orthodox churches might also have things to say in that regard.

I don’t think you can trace anything back without going through the councils. As for what the Orthodox churches have to say about the canon, well I don’t have a problem with their canon nor do I have a problem with the way they interpret it. I feel very strongly that protestants have a much better argument for themselves if they were to follow the Orthodox views, beliefs, canon…It would make all the sense in the world to me and we would be well on our way back to the one church Jesus established.

Again, as stated in this thread, tradition and oral teaching were and are extremely important. Scripture provides us a written and objective benchmark with which to compare teaching, OT and NT. I have no problem with tradition that doesn’t contradict scripture. It is indeed apparent that the Apostles went around and taught. It is also apparent that wolves showed up and sowed seeds of false teaching.

Agreed! and thank God for the councils and teachings that put many of these false teachings to rest and gave you and I orthodox teachings like the Trinity and the canon.

And that is the foundation of our “debate” here; a debate on what is God decreed and what is not. We are not, I’m afraid, going to agree on that here.

This is sad because I thought as you said above our job is to find the truth, and I would add…to teach and proclaim this truth to others.

Study, prayer, due diligence, looking at teaches from all sides compared to scripture. The Holy Spirit. What can I say? To borrow a phrase, “the Spirit testifies to my spirit.” There are teachings I’m still digging into, but the gospel message and salvation is indeed so simple, I believe children can understand it.

I do too and all children did understand it equally before the reformation. Now not so much.

The good thing about what I say is that in the end, I say you don’t hafta listen to me in the slightest.

I guess you are right on this one Kliska but it does bring up another thought I am curious about. At what point, after the age of reason, would you think is acceptable to tell ones child this same thing?

It has been a pleasure discussing and I appreciate your kindness and patients. :curtsey:

As always, Peace!!!

 

[zz912]

The issue that I have is that the RCC apparently relies on circular logic in order back up this idea of someone else doing the interpreting. 1. Instead of relying on yourself and God, it seems to be relying on man. You ask how I can interpret and know… the RCC just pushes that question back a notch, in several ways. First, how do you know the magesterium, the pope, etc… are interpreting correctly? 2. Because they say they are based on scripture that they are interpreting and telling you the meaning of? How do you know what their rulings actually mean and how do you apply them personally to your life? That is also interpretation and application.

**

1. God makes His word easy to understand** .

1. Both instances you lay out have you relying on man.
2. The authority of the Church and Magisterium came before the NT was even written. The authority of the Church doesn’t rely on Scripture. That authority was given by Christ Himself.
3. Scripture says different. St Peter warns that much in St Paul’s writings are difficult to understand, and many will twist the words to their own destruction. How are you personally to be assured you are not twisting and erring in your interpretation of Scripture? It should give you some real pause when you get something so wrong like the comment at #3.

 

[Kliska]

Yes, perhaps, but I do think details like RP or infant baptism do matter.

How do you propose we find this truth, for others, if we bring this discussion to a close?

But that’s where we’re kind of in a situation where we can’t go into discussion in a way that I would elsewhere on the net. I’m here on these forums to gain a better understanding of what practicing catholics believe on certain issues. I’d be a pretty poor guest (as well as breaking the rules) to conduct a conversation on the issues at hand through the lens of “protestants are in the right on X, Y, Z… and here’s why.”

Most of us have read and heard arguments back and forth, yet we remain in disagreement on these issues. Of course, conversely, whole church counsels and meetings between all the “big wigs” in all the different denominations have been held and I don’t see them really doing any better than us! I’m kidding of course.

I don’t think you can trace anything back without going through the councils. As for what the Orthodox churches have to say about the canon, well I don’t have a problem with their canon nor do I have a problem with the way they interpret it. I feel very strongly that protestants have a much better argument for themselves if they were to follow the Orthodox views, beliefs, canon…It would make all the sense in the world to me and we would be well on our way back to the one church Jesus established.

Well that is true by definition, but I do believe the RCC teaches that we should not go against our consciences and act as though we believe something when we don’t simply for unity. Though I agree unity would be fantastic.

This is sad because I thought as you said above our job is to find the truth, and I would add…to teach and proclaim this truth to others.

And to me, Truth is a Person, and I proclaim Him and Him crucified to others.

I do too and all children did understand it equally before the reformation. Now not so much.

I don’t think this is necessarily true.

At what point, after the age of reason, would you think is acceptable to tell ones child this same thing?

I’m lost on this point, for I don’t see what you are asking. One’s own child is one’s child for life. If you are asking about religious teaching, I was allowed to determine my own beliefs early on with (name removed by moderator)ut from my parents, and my Bible in hand, of course as a child gets older and grows in experience, knowledge, etc… they will start exploring beliefs. At least in my family it was that way, and we were always told if we take a position we better be able to defend it. I began studying world religions in jr. high and high school, on up through college, now teaching them, and I take others’ claims (including the RCC’s) extremely seriously as it is my soul at stake. So what I share here is indeed what I’ve found to be true, and I know and recognize that opinions vary.

It has been a pleasure discussing and I appreciate your kindness and patients. :curtsey:

As always, Peace!!!

Thank YOU! and thanks for using the :curtsey: smilie, I hadn’t seen it yet here. If I use :tiphat: people think I may be a male!

 

[Kliska]

1. Both instances you lay out have you relying on man.
2. The authority of the Church and Magisterium came before the NT was even written. The authority of the Church doesn’t rely on Scripture. That authority was given by Christ Himself.

That’s not what I see in scripture. I’m not arguing the point, it’s just not what I see.

1. Scripture says different. St Peter warns that much in St Paul’s writings are difficult to understand, and many will twist the words to their own destruction. How are you personally to be assured you are not twisting and erring in your interpretation of Scripture? It should give you some real pause when you get something so wrong like the comment at #3.

It gives me no pause because I’m not relying on man to figure out God’s word, I’m relying on God Himself to figure out His word. BTW, 2 Corinthians 11: 3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. The gospel is so simple a Child can understand it. As we move from salvation through sanctification and from light reading to study we move from milk to meat. The meat is contained in Paul’s writings to be sure.

 

[adf417]

But that’s where we’re kind of in a situation where we can’t go into discussion in a way that I would elsewhere on the net. I’m here on these forums to gain a better understanding of what practicing catholics believe on certain issues. I’d be a pretty poor guest (as well as breaking the rules) to conduct a conversation on the issues at hand through the lens of "protestants are in the right on X, Y, Z… and here’s why."

In most of your writings it is very difficult to see you as just “gaining a better understanding of what Catholics believe” and sense you have proclaimed yourself an apologist, and given the thread topic, I assumed this discussion is perfect for better understanding.

But Kliska, your last sentence here, and statements like this, is the only reason I join these discussions. I do not think I can say anything that would cause you convert or rethink your theology. That’s not what I come here to do. What I, and most of us here, would love for you ,or any protestant, to show us, and the rest of the world, is what are the X, Y, Z’s protestants are right in and which protestant X, Y & Z is the right X, Y & Z? That is simply all I ask. I promise if you can answer that question plainly, clearly and without rhetoric, I wont ask another question.

Most of us have read and heard arguments back and forth, yet we remain in disagreement on these issues. Of course, conversely, whole church counsels and meetings between all the “big wigs” in all the different denominations have been held and I don’t see them really doing any better than us! I’m kidding of course.

Well that is true by definition, but I do believe the RCC teaches that we should not go against our consciences and act as though we believe something when we don’t simply for unity. Though I agree unity would be fantastic.

And to me, Truth is a Person, and I proclaim Him and Him crucified to others.

Thank YOU! and thanks for using the :curtsey: smilie, I hadn’t seen it yet here. If I use :tiphat: people think I may be a male!

Your are truly welcome!

 

[Kliska]

In most of your writings it is very difficult to see you as just “gaining a better understanding of what Catholics believe” and sense you have proclaimed yourself an apologist, and given the thread topic, I assumed this discussion is perfect for better understanding.

It is, but it reaches a point past understanding, to disagreeing with the other person’s perspective, to proselytizing a certain position that is against the RCC. When I say I’m an apologist, I’m an apologist for Christ, not a particular group. I have found just as many brothers and sisters in the RCC as in the other churches.

But Kliska, your last sentence here, and statements like this, is the only reason I join these discussions. I do not think I can say anything that would cause you convert or rethink your theology. That’s not what I come here to do. What I, and most of us here, would love for you ,or any protestant, to show us, and the rest of the world, is what are the X, Y, Z’s protestants are right in and which protestant X, Y & Z is the right X, Y & Z? That is simply all I ask. I promise if you can answer that question plainly, clearly and without rhetoric, I wont ask another question.

What you are asking for is not allowed here. When attempted, or if it were attempted, I’m sure the infractions would flow. As I stated elsewhere, I’ve already been in trouble once, I don’t want to appear disrespectful again. Many forums exist on the net where open debate is allowed, or there is info available from a protestant perspective, coming to an RC board and putting forth those ideas isn’t exactly the point of these boards, or of this thread.

Truly out of curiosity, were you raised in the Roman Catholic Church? I was raised protestant by protestant parents, though, as I said, my curiosity for other beliefs and cultures quickly lead me to delve into other views for study and comparison.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Kliska-

I thought you were saying good-bye to this thread, so I waved.

Are you sticking around?

If so, can we continue the discussion of sola scriptura at some point?

Maybe another thread would be more appropriate.

 

[Randy_Carson]

What you are asking for is not allowed here. When attempted, or if it were attempted, I’m sure the infractions would flow. As I stated elsewhere, I’ve already been in trouble once, I don’t want to appear disrespectful again. Many forums exist on the net where open debate is allowed, or there is info available from a protestant perspective, coming to an RC board and putting forth those ideas isn’t exactly the point of these boards, or of this thread.

Not so.

For example, JonNC is Lutheran, and he posts clear explanations of Lutheran positions regularly, so it’s possible to discuss what a church, your church, believes charitably.

If you are uncertain, simply PM the mod, Michael Francis, for guidance.

 

[Kliska]

Not so.

For example, JonNC is Lutheran, and he posts clear explanations of Lutheran positions regularly, so it’s possible to discuss what a church, your church, believes charitably.

If you are uncertain, simply PM the mod, Michael Francis, for guidance.

Clarifying one’s own position is often accompanied by showing why the opposite position is flawed, that is logical debate. As I understand, that is often interpreted as an attack against the RCC. As I’ve told you privately, it’s already apparently caused others on here angst, so I will refrain. If someone wants to ask a question in PM about my beliefs I have no problem discussing it in private.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Clarifying one’s own position is often accompanied by showing why the opposite position is flawed, that is logical debate. As I understand, that is often interpreted as an attack against the RCC. As I’ve told you privately, it’s already apparently caused others on here angst, so I will refrain. If someone wants to ask a question in PM about my beliefs I have no problem discussing it in private.

Catholic Answers is an apologetics organization, and you’re posting in the Apologetics subforum of their discussion board.

It stands to reason that they are expecting some discussion of differences.

 

[Kliska]

Catholic Answers is an apologetics organization, and you’re posting in the Apologetics subforum of their discussion board.

It stands to reason that they are expecting some discussion of differences.

lol You would expect that. However, it is somewhat hinged on what other members find to be offensive statements, even if not meant in that sense, can cause fellow believers confusion or angst, I want to watch my words, and apparently I failed before without meaning to, so I’ll err on the side of caution.

 

[adf417]

It is, but it reaches a point past understanding, to disagreeing with the other person’s perspective, to proselytizing a certain position that is against the RCC. When I say I’m an apologist, I’m an apologist for Christ, not a particular group. I have found just as many brothers and sisters in the RCC as in the other churches.

What you are asking for is not allowed here. When attempted, or if it were attempted, I’m sure the infractions would flow. As I stated elsewhere, I’ve already been in trouble once, I don’t want to appear disrespectful again. Many forums exist on the net where open debate is allowed, or there is info available from a protestant perspective, coming to an RC board and putting forth those ideas isn’t exactly the point of these boards, or of this thread.

Reading forward as to what you and Randy have discussed, I guess there is no truth to be found here in our quest.

Truly out of curiosity, were you raised in the Roman Catholic Church? I was raised protestant by protestant parents, though, as I said, my curiosity for other beliefs and cultures quickly lead me to delve into other views for study and comparison.

Baptized Catholic but don’t remember setting foot in any church till my 20’s, and really started searching for truth much later.

Peace!!!

 

[Kliska]

Reading forward as to what you and Randy have discussed, I guess there is no truth to be found here in our quest.

I guess I look at it differently. As we’ve been talking Jesus and scripture, I think plenty of truth is in play.

Baptized Catholic but don’t remember setting foot in any church till my 20’s, and really started searching for truth much later.

Peace!!!

Ah! Thank you for sharing.

Grace and Peace,
K

 

[UbiCaritas15]

I am enjoying immensely this non-debate debate.

I do not; however, see how there can ever be a “winner” when so many definitions are up in the air. Not that winning matters, when the truth is really to come to agreements on Truth…

 

[ezeekl]

Time to close this. Will the moderators please stick a fork in this topic because I think it is done!

 

[Miriam1947]

Why close this? It’s a good discussion and if Kliska wishes she can read JonNC’s posts and perhaps understand how he is able to discuss his Lutheran beliefs without causing angst.