As I see it, no not necessarily. Humans may have failed. But if Christ transferred authority, I simply view it as a continuation of His Church as He wants it to be. Where He wants the authority at any given time of His choosing. God can use whoever it is He wants for His purposes. Really just depends on what one believes or has faith in.
Hey, I never said Catholics put him before God. I was just saying that I think they look to the Church for more than just guidance. For instance, when it comes to forgiveness from sin, I’m going straight to God because he is ultimately the one I have sinned against. If we sin against our Father in His presence, should we not go to the Him instead of our brother?
First, let’s not confuse wisdom with truth, as the two aren’t necessarily the same. To repeat a true statement doesn’t make the statement true by reason of the person who says it. The statement is true because it comes from God, who is the First Truth. So if an Atheist tells you, “God is a Trinity of Persons,” the Atheist has told the truth, even if he doesn’t believe in it. Similarly, a Protestant minister who says, “God is a Trinity of Persons,” also tells the truth, and even believes it (as an opinion). Thus, both the Atheist and the Protestant speak the same truth, which shares in the fullness of truth over which our Blessed Lord set his Church as the guardian of truth and of the faith. So yes, while others may at times speak truthfully regarding the Catholic Faith, theirs is a wisdom which they inherited, a wisdom enlightened by the truth which God has revealed. Indeed, “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally.” Thus let him ask of God’s Catholic Church, which alone possesses the fullness of the truth.
Forgiveness always and ultimately comes from God. A man in his own right cannot forgive sins; but a man who has authority from Christ to forgive in His name can forgive sins. Why? Because that is the way Jesus configured His earthly society and wished to dispense His grace of forgiveness for mortal sins. The Church on earth is a real society that was called into being by a real man, the Lord Jesus Christ. In secular society, we have the tribunal of vengeance, in which evidence is weighed to establish the guilt of a person who has been accused of a serious crime and punished accordingly. In the perfect society of the Church Militant, in which the faithful are obligated by divine law to confess their sins and do penance for their salvation, out of contrition and love for our Creator, there is the tribunal of mercy: the Sacrament of Reconciliation.
I believe the answer is “Yes.” A sincere desire for the Sacrament is effective, although sincere sorrow for sins is still necessary.
The analogy of the family is truly an inexhaustible resource for theological reflection. However, I would challenge the conclusions you draw from it.
Well, even the consideration of the Catholic faith as the only faith is an opinion, and I agree, it’s not as simple as saying “I believe in you, Jesus!” Muslims believe in Jesus and that he was crucified, but they are not saved as they don’t believe he was the Messiah. But I do attribute the teaching in the Word of God to my own salvation as the Word dictates. No man may enter Heaven with a cloak of sin, and the soul of the man that believes that God sent His Son to earth for our salvation and accepts such sacrifice shall not truly die.
Okay then what about what the Bible says about asking and indefinitely receiving (I assume with an open heart and faith that you will in fact receive what you ask for)? Now, I doubt that translates to material desires, although I suppose it could if God saw fit for you to have it. But, the only thing I can fit in that verse that makes sense than anything is asking to know the Truth. So, if God gives wisdom *and *truth freely, then what about the people of non-Catholic faith and have found the “Truth” because the opened up to him and asked? Is their truth invalid?
Having a hard time finding where someone get his “Authority” from what you referenced.
They did not make the same argument. You see, they did not affirm Jesus as God. I do. They did not attribute the power of forgiveness and healing to Jesus. I do. They also made an inference, not a hypothetical allusion.
This is not true. The virtue of faith is something entirely different from an opinion.
The only reason you can “affirm Jesus as God” is because some infallible source of living truth has proposed this to you. (I assume the Eternal God has not spoken to you directly.) The Jews denied the divinity of Jesus to His face. You accept the divinity of Jesus, but deny His messenger (the Church) which has taught you that Jesus is divine. Thus you accept that Jesus is God, not with the virtue of faith, but only as an opinion (which just happens to be true).
And on earth at least made up of believers all human. Walking by faith to the best of our understandings. As you said in another post none of us are perfect. But God knows why we tick as we do and as imperfect beings, we all are dependent on His mercy. The Church is not a building reminded me of a local church whose sanctuary was demolished due to structural problems caused by weather. And the pastor told them they would have to learn how to be a church. That the church "is not the building, the church is wherever we are.” And today where they are to worship together is in their small social hall and at homes of members.You appeal to relativism then?
The Church is not only human, but divine. It is after all the mystical body of Christ, guided by the HS. So even if/when humans fail, the HS will not.
Sure, God has the authority to change who He gives authority too. When the Jewish leaders fell short, He gave authority to His NT Church. The difference is He made absolute statements about that Church. To say that He transfers from one group to another, automatically implies a failure of the first. If it is continuation, then why the need to shift to a new group, while the former still remains present?
And I say you don’t understand…the Pope heads the worldwide church…ie… the Catholic (universal) church…and has done so for 2000 years…he was given that authority by Jesus Christ…and the Holy Spirit has guided the Pope and the church from error in matters of dogma…how many times has the Pentecostal church split over the last couple hundred years over scriptural interpretation…or even over a single verse…are you implying that the Holy Spirit is not guiding the church…because you would be denying what Jesus said…and if you are saying that the Holy Spirit is guiding the church then what church is he guiding…one Holy Catholic and Apostolic church for the last 2000 years…or tens of thousands of individual Protestant churches over the last 500 years who can’t agree…unfortunately you seem to have fallen into the trap of many fundamentalist Protestants into believing that the Pope has replaced Jesus Christ…and/or we worship the Pope…( and Mary…can’t forget that one)…I understand because I heard and read the same propaganda when I was a Pentecostal…to give just one example …I read one article from the Pentecostal church that I attened that warned that when a Catholic was confirmed he /she was sealed in the name of the Catholic church which was the whore of Babylon…therefore condemning you to eternal damnation…when I was confirmed in the Catholic Church I was actually sealed by the Holy Spirit…just one small example of the misunderstanding and outright lies spread about Catholicism…when I started to read and learn and seek advice on what the Catholic Church actually taught and believed I saw it was all scriptural…as have many others who have entered the church…which continues to grow throughout the world…you may see the truth one day yourself if enough Catholics here pray for you…so wach out…I said people head the local church; Jesus heads the Church. Again, the pope heads one group of people, my pastor heads another, and there are many more personheads. The pope is a person, he heads a single congregation (regardless of how big it is), but Jesus Christ heads the entire worldwide congregation of followers that believe in him, and that, my friend, is the actual Church. I know you say it’s not, but it is
“Solely apocryphal”? Hardly!
Of course “the Church” is not a building, just as the “United States of America” is not a building. But that doesn’t change the fact that both are real societies with real attributes and real constitutions and real citizens governed by real authorities, the former being instituted by Christ, the latter instituted by men.
I think the take away from Mark 2, in terms of authority, is that Jesus came with the authority to forgive sins. Jesus in turn sends the disciples as the Father sent him (with authority) and then grants the disciples authority to forgive or retain sins (cf. Jn 20: 21-23). Just as Jesus did in Mark 2.
I will assume that you are (mistakenly) referring to the Deuterocanonicals as Apocrypha… because there are actually of references*plenty * to the Old Testament made by Jesus and the NT authors that refer to the DeuterocanonThe point is, there was Scripture long before the canon was defined at Trent. Just because the Pharisees abused the text to satisfy their own selfish curiosities does not denounce it. This set of Scriptures was used during Christ’s ministry in Palestine and they did not include the Apocrypha. Furthermore, in the NT, there are over 600 quotations and references to the Old Testament made by Jesus and the NT authors and not a single one refers to the Apocrypha.
Amen. I get the feeling that people who deny the authority of Christ’s Church have some hangup with authority in general. I think it’s a pride thing.
Yes…but in the OT, God does something different:
Christ established one Church with one set of beliefs (Eph. 4:4–5). He did not establish numerous churches with contradictory beliefs.
So you think that Scripture is the mustard seed and the Catholic Church is the mustard plant?Hey, you say the Catholic Church and I say Scripture. You say ‘mustard plant’ and I say ‘mustard seed’