C
Catholic4aReasn
Guest
Nah, it wasn’t a financial thing. It was an effort to avoid what ended up happening…the splintering and re-splintering of Christianity with conflicting and contradictory interpretations.
In Christ,
Nancy
What is the standard against which you measure your understanding of Scripture?
- Status
In Christ,
Nancy
C
Catholic4aReasn
Guest
Disagreements happen. They happened in Acts 15. The difference between Catholics and Protestants in this regard is that Catholic have an authority to whom they can appeal for assurance that there is no error being taught. Protestants are each, individually, their own authorities so truth becomes whatever the individual believes it is.
Disagreements within sects aren’t the problem. It’s the disagreement among sects that is. Please see post # 48.
In Christ,
Nancy
C
Catholic4aReasn
Guest
People stay because they are afraid they will go to “hell” if they leave. They also stay because they don’t want to upset family members.
QUOTE]
Is this really what you’ve been taught ahimsaman72?? :bigyikes:
In Christ,
Nancy
M
michaelp
Guest
It seems to me that an institutional authority only creates a “said” unity. This is much different than a true unity.
C
Catholic4aReasn
Guest
This raises an interesting question for our Protestant brothers and sisters.
To whom do Jesus’ words refer in the world today?
In Christ,
Nancy
C
Catholic4aReasn
Guest
Wil Peregrin:
In Christ,
Nancy
How do you account for the many conflicting and contradictory interpertations of scripture reached by, not only “any person who can read the languages involved”, but learned scripture scholars who spend their lives studying scripture?
In Christ,
Nancy
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
Which is so readily apparent outside of the Catholic Church.
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_1_5.gif
C
Catholic4aReasn
Guest
The Magesterium aren’t translators, they are teachers.
In Christ,
Nancy
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Yes, yes very good. Now, who had copies of these foreign language Bibles? Was it laypeople or the clergy? To say that Catholics had printed the Bible in other languages doesn’t help to solve the issue. The heart of the issue is who had these. Even if they were in the language of the people, they were not available to the people on a mass scale. Of course, the printing press sped this along - I realize.
Peace…
Not angry at all…
Since Bibles…and all books at that time were a very expensive item…and the FACT that most common people could not read, (as is STILL the case in a great many countries) the clergy had them and perhaps those who could afford them…but the point is that the Bible was (and IS) read in every Mass and that is where all of us anawim hear the Gospel. (Though today we come home & read the Bible as well…Thank God for printing…).
Look…the FACT is that the so-called Reformers came up with doctrines that had never existed before in the entire history of Christianity and the result is the mass confusion of some 33,830 (plus!) non-Catholic denoms. The resulting schisms have done irreparable (except by divine intervention) harm to Christianity.
I checked it out in depth and found that the reformers were wrong. In all the years that I was a Protestant I had to “read around” passages like John 6, John 20:21-23, and 1st Cor 11:26-30 because they just don’t jive w/the non-Catholic belief system and clearly support Catholic teaching. No one among the churches I was part of had any reasonable answers to them and would get bent outta shape if you pointed out that they support Catholicism. It all fits in the context of the whole Bible, including and especially the authority of the church to interpret what is really Christian and what is not. (For instance the change from sabbath worship as Jews to the Sunday celebration of the breaking of bread in Acts of the Apostles. Something that our SDA friends allege the Catholic Church did…in this they are both right & wrong
)
Anyway, despite the sometimes divergent views you may get from Catholics on this forum…the final authority is our church (Biblical according to 1st Timothy 3:15, “The pillar and bulwark of the truth”). American Catholics in particular can be a dissenting lot, but what I as an individual may think about the decrees of the church is not the final authority. I do not have to check up on the church to insure that she teaches the truth, that job belongs to the Holy Spirit of God and He has done a perfect job to date (w/o any help from me or anyone else). So really…you will get your very best answers from the CCC and good clarifications from the AAA forum on this site. There are others as well, but this is where I hang out because I am familiar w/these folks.
God be good to you!
Peace…
Not angry at all…
Since Bibles…and all books at that time were a very expensive item…and the FACT that most common people could not read, (as is STILL the case in a great many countries) the clergy had them and perhaps those who could afford them…but the point is that the Bible was (and IS) read in every Mass and that is where all of us anawim hear the Gospel. (Though today we come home & read the Bible as well…Thank God for printing…).
Look…the FACT is that the so-called Reformers came up with doctrines that had never existed before in the entire history of Christianity and the result is the mass confusion of some 33,830 (plus!) non-Catholic denoms. The resulting schisms have done irreparable (except by divine intervention) harm to Christianity.
I checked it out in depth and found that the reformers were wrong. In all the years that I was a Protestant I had to “read around” passages like John 6, John 20:21-23, and 1st Cor 11:26-30 because they just don’t jive w/the non-Catholic belief system and clearly support Catholic teaching. No one among the churches I was part of had any reasonable answers to them and would get bent outta shape if you pointed out that they support Catholicism. It all fits in the context of the whole Bible, including and especially the authority of the church to interpret what is really Christian and what is not. (For instance the change from sabbath worship as Jews to the Sunday celebration of the breaking of bread in Acts of the Apostles. Something that our SDA friends allege the Catholic Church did…in this they are both right & wrong
)Anyway, despite the sometimes divergent views you may get from Catholics on this forum…the final authority is our church (Biblical according to 1st Timothy 3:15, “The pillar and bulwark of the truth”). American Catholics in particular can be a dissenting lot, but what I as an individual may think about the decrees of the church is not the final authority. I do not have to check up on the church to insure that she teaches the truth, that job belongs to the Holy Spirit of God and He has done a perfect job to date (w/o any help from me or anyone else). So really…you will get your very best answers from the CCC and good clarifications from the AAA forum on this site. There are others as well, but this is where I hang out because I am familiar w/these folks.
God be good to you!
M
michaelp
Guest
I did not say that it was. But, it looks as if we both have this problem. At least we have that clear.
M
michaelp
Guest
I will repost this then:The Magesterium aren’t translators, they are teachers.
In Christ,
Nancy
You obviously have not done much translating. I have. All the time. All translating involves interpretation; it is sometimes very difficult to make decisions about the translation because there could be multiple meanings. But, in the end, you have to make up your mind based on the evidence. As you have said, the Magisterium does not translate, so they leave the interpretation decision in the hands of the trained individuals. I like that. You need to recognize this** (if, indeed, the Magisterium does not translate your scriptures; if they don’t, your system fails from the beginning).**
I hope you see the force of this. Again, not absolutely conclusive, but, to me, very hard to explain if it is true (but nobody seems to know).
Michael
M
michaelp
Guest
Church Militant:
Go here . . . quick forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=26434
I am playing Protestant police again!!
Michael
Militant, I am not sure who or what you are responding to but I did see the number 33,000!!!Yes, yes very good. Now, who had copies of these foreign language Bibles? Was it laypeople or the clergy? To say that Catholics had printed the Bible in other languages doesn’t help to solve the issue. The heart of the issue is who had these. Even if they were in the language of the people, they were not available to the people on a mass scale. Of course, the printing press sped this along - I realize.
Peace…
Not angry at all…
Since Bibles…and all books at that time were a very expensive item…and the FACT that most common people could not read, (as is STILL the case in a great many countries) the clergy had them and perhaps those who could afford them…but the point is that the Bible was (and IS) read in every Mass and that is where all of us anawim hear the Gospel. (Though today we come home & read the Bible as well…Thank God for printing…).
Look…the FACT is that the so-called Reformers came up with doctrines that had never existed before in the entire history of Christianity and the result is the mass confusion of some 33,830 (plus!) non-Catholic denoms. The resulting schisms have done irreparable (except by divine intervention) harm to Christianity.
I checked it out in depth and found that the reformers were wrong. In all the years that I was a Protestant I had to “read around” passages like John 6, John 20:21-23, and 1st Cor 11:26-30 because they just don’t jive w/the non-Catholic belief system and clearly support Catholic teaching. No one among the churches I was part of had any reasonable answers to them and would get bent outta shape if you pointed out that they support Catholicism. It all fits in the context of the whole Bible, including and especially the authority of the church to interpret what is really Christian and what is not. (For instance the change from sabbath worship as Jews to the Sunday celebration of the breaking of bread in Acts of the Apostles. Something that our SDA friends allege the Catholic Church did…in this they are both right & wrong
Anyway, despite the sometimes divergent views you may get from Catholics on this forum…the final authority is our church (Biblical according to 1st Timothy 3:15, “The pillar and bulwark of the truth”). American Catholics in particular can be a dissenting lot, but what I as an individual may think about the decrees of the church is not the final authority. I do not have to check up on the church to insure that she teaches the truth, that job belongs to the Holy Spirit of God and He has done a perfect job to date (w/o any help from me or anyone else). So really…you will get your very best answers from the CCC and good clarifications from the AAA forum on this site. There are others as well, but this is where I hang out because I am familiar w/these folks.
God be good to you!
Go here . . . quick forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=26434
I am playing Protestant police again!!
Michael
D
dennisknapp
Guest
michaelp
“I believe that the Church represents Christ–though imperfectly.
I also believe that the Church represents Truth–though imperfectly.”
Where does it say this in Scripture, Tradition and history? It seems like you are view this passage through tainted shades.
“But again, I have the freedom to question the system . . . you don’t, since the very questioning of the system would be a denial of it (although this is not true, but I think some of you think it is). I just don’t find very many people who truly have stuggled with these issues without letting their presuppositions dictate the outcome of their studies.”
This is not true. To struggle with the issue is to immerse ones self in the all the complexities of the issue. The Church does not say to us, “Thou shalt not question Our teaching or thou will suffer in hell!” It encourages us to learn, grow and understand. And in order to do this one must question. But at our disposal is the Magistarium and all the Christians that have preceded us.
And what of those who came to the church with presupposition simular to yours? If you take as your context the history of the Church and do not look at it through tainted shades, you will discover what Newman meant when he said, “To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.”
“I believe that the Church represents Christ–though imperfectly.
I also believe that the Church represents Truth–though imperfectly.”
Where does it say this in Scripture, Tradition and history? It seems like you are view this passage through tainted shades.
“But again, I have the freedom to question the system . . . you don’t, since the very questioning of the system would be a denial of it (although this is not true, but I think some of you think it is). I just don’t find very many people who truly have stuggled with these issues without letting their presuppositions dictate the outcome of their studies.”
This is not true. To struggle with the issue is to immerse ones self in the all the complexities of the issue. The Church does not say to us, “Thou shalt not question Our teaching or thou will suffer in hell!” It encourages us to learn, grow and understand. And in order to do this one must question. But at our disposal is the Magistarium and all the Christians that have preceded us.
And what of those who came to the church with presupposition simular to yours? If you take as your context the history of the Church and do not look at it through tainted shades, you will discover what Newman meant when he said, “To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.”
D
dennisknapp
Guest
michaelp
“I am talking about justification for the system. It is question begging to say that the Church is the authority because it says it is. It would be irresponsible for me to accept such a system based upon this. You can do, and I respect your leap of faith, but all religions have simular leaps of faith. Who is to say that your question begging leap of faith is any better than theirs?”
What gives? You believe Scripture is the Authority because it says it is? Is this not circular? Is this not irresponsible? Is this not a leap of faith?
I hope all is well in Texas.
Peace
“I am talking about justification for the system. It is question begging to say that the Church is the authority because it says it is. It would be irresponsible for me to accept such a system based upon this. You can do, and I respect your leap of faith, but all religions have simular leaps of faith. Who is to say that your question begging leap of faith is any better than theirs?”
What gives? You believe Scripture is the Authority because it says it is? Is this not circular? Is this not irresponsible? Is this not a leap of faith?
I hope all is well in Texas.
Peace
M
michaelp
Guest
I know that we ALL look through our tainted glasses. What do we do? The first step is to recognize and admit it. I do admit this. The next step is to do the best you can to evaluate objectively. I try.
I don’t think you want to assume of me and other Protestants that I don’t dig deep in history. Believe me, you don’t want to make that assumption with me.
Michael
M
michaelp
Guest
Things are going well. I am a Sooner by birth. Things are going to be going great once we take home another championship!! (Pray that we do!)
Actually, I don’t accept Scripture because it says it is inspired. I really think that this would be irresponsible. I think it is justified to believe Scripture is inspired for many reasons. The primary reason is preditive prophecy and the Resurrection of Christ when looked at historically. Everytime I doubt Scripture, I do not go to Tim 3:16 (that would be circular), I go to Isa 40-48 and 53. They compel me that God was involved. I also go to the historical fact of the Resurrection. In my mind, if Christ rose from the grave, the Old Testament he used is true because the one who rose from the grave said it was true (who am I to doubt someone who rose from the grave and fulfilled prophecy?). He also gave the authority to the apostles to write the NT. It all comes down to the Resurrection and Prophecy. Circular reasoning and question begging are misleading, irresponible, and destructive to base such important information in my opinion.
Hope this clarifies.
Michael
M
michaelp
Guest
To struggle with the issues is to open yourself up to the possibility that you are wrong. If you don’t do this, you cannot truly struggle.
Come on . . . this is not what I said. I would not mischaraterize you all this way. Maybe before Vatican II, but not now.
I hope that you are having a good day. I am always glad to see that it is you responding. Contrary to what you might think, I do think that you think well (that is more than can be said by many Protestant and RCs!!)
Mcihael
C
Catholic_Mike
Guest
Michael, you’ve been saying a lot this thread about how Catholics do not all believe the same things either. There are different intrepretations of the CCC or other media Rome uses to communicate with Catholics.
There is a difference, though. If there is a significant difference in opinion about something in the CCC, we can expect that the Vatican will clear it up. We have a way to settle these matters.
As time goes on, people come up with new ideas and make new controversies. Within both Catholicism and Protestantism, new issues arise which leads to more and more differences of opinion. But, like I said, there is a force in Catholicism that works in the opposite direction. So while there will always be some difference of opinion among Catholics, I think it will be less than among Protestants.
I’ve only been disputing a small part of what you said; don’t think what I’ve written above is an attempt to disprove sola scriptura. There are a couple more general comments I want to make though:
Some of the differences that come up are probably unimportant in a sense because they are only theoretical, but I think some are important because they have implications for things we’re supposed to do (moral controversies that arise, for example).
There is a difference, though. If there is a significant difference in opinion about something in the CCC, we can expect that the Vatican will clear it up. We have a way to settle these matters.
As time goes on, people come up with new ideas and make new controversies. Within both Catholicism and Protestantism, new issues arise which leads to more and more differences of opinion. But, like I said, there is a force in Catholicism that works in the opposite direction. So while there will always be some difference of opinion among Catholics, I think it will be less than among Protestants.
I’ve only been disputing a small part of what you said; don’t think what I’ve written above is an attempt to disprove sola scriptura. There are a couple more general comments I want to make though:
Some of the differences that come up are probably unimportant in a sense because they are only theoretical, but I think some are important because they have implications for things we’re supposed to do (moral controversies that arise, for example).
A
ahimsaman72
Guest
ahimsaman72:
what you’ve been taught ahimsaman72?? :bigyikes:
In Christ,
Nancy
It’s just an observation based on the posts I’ve seen since I’ve been here. The fear of hell is a driving force in keeping people in line. It’s explicitly stated, “outside the Catholic Church, there is no salvation” (paraphrased). So, one knows when they leave - down to the gallows. Isn’t this true? Isn’t this what this statement (infallibly made) means? You leave - you suffer hell. That’s my understanding on it.
Peace…
A
ahimsaman72
Guest
Church Militant:
I totally disagree that irreparable harm has been done to Christianity. On the contrary, more people have come to know Christ and hear the gospel through the preaching and teaching of protestants over the world. It’s undeniable that Catholics have a very low rate of conversion worldwide and that they are losing people fast. The missionary efforts of protestants (including Mormons and JW’s for this example) have kept Christianity going for the past 400 years into areas previously untouched.
The Catholic Church has a long way to go in missionary efforts.
So, I think there have been great strides since the split from the Catholic Church. And, there’s more Scripture available to a great many more people because of the missionary efforts of prots.
Something to think about. God has worked all things according to His will and used the split to further His message.
The 33,800 is a ridiculous number. Anybody can cook the books to make this appear true (taking IRS records as evidence for example).Look…the FACT is that the so-called Reformers came up with doctrines that had never existed before in the entire history of Christianity and the result is the mass confusion of some 33,830 (plus!) non-Catholic denoms. The resulting schisms have done irreparable (except by divine intervention) harm to Christianity.
God be good to you!
I totally disagree that irreparable harm has been done to Christianity. On the contrary, more people have come to know Christ and hear the gospel through the preaching and teaching of protestants over the world. It’s undeniable that Catholics have a very low rate of conversion worldwide and that they are losing people fast. The missionary efforts of protestants (including Mormons and JW’s for this example) have kept Christianity going for the past 400 years into areas previously untouched.
The Catholic Church has a long way to go in missionary efforts.
So, I think there have been great strides since the split from the Catholic Church. And, there’s more Scripture available to a great many more people because of the missionary efforts of prots.
Something to think about. God has worked all things according to His will and used the split to further His message.
- Status