It seems to me that many of the lay apologists in Catholicism are teachers or evangelists. I recall that Jimmy Akin introduced himself to Jack Chick as an evangelist I believe.
The Magesterium, which is the Pope and the bishops around him, are the true teachers of the faith. Jimmy Akin or anyone else can teach the faith, and in order to do so legitimately, they must listen to the bishop and not go against him.It seems to me that many of the lay apologists in Catholicism are teachers or evangelists. I recall that Jimmy Akin introduced himself to Jack Chick as an evangelist I believe.
Ok so very broad and undefined question. Are their guidelines for lay apologists or teachers within Catholicism? To what extent to they have the Catholic Churches authority?
I may follow up my question.
Thanks for any replies. It is a different topic I know.
Not setting a trap. I promise
Trishie !Well, books used for teaching in schools and colleges do have to have the approvals, (called the ‘nihil obstat’ and the ‘imprimatur’).
Can you show me what authority supports that notion? I didn’t see anything like that in Scripture so I’ll need to know where else it is written. I’m sort of made that way. I need to see where God is in the midst of something like that, I can’t just take man’s word for it if you know what I mean. After all, the Bible tells us not to take man’s word for it.
I think others can help out here a little, but basically Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven and said whatever you lose on earth shall be loosed in heaven, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven. he said he is building his church upon peter, and throughout scripture peter always has the final say if there is a dispute. Jesus also gives authority to the apostles, to bind and lose, but we still see that the church is built on peter and he has the final say. bishops are directly descended spiritually from the apostles. the pope is the spiritual descendant of the pope because the reason Jesus instituted Peter in the first place was for a continuation and that the church would be lead in all truth. So this is where Jesus instituted the Pope and the Magesterium.
The church is not built on Peter the church is built on his confession. Christ said who do you say that I am. Peter said you are the messiah the son of GOD, to which Christ responds upon this rock I will build my church. The keys to the kingdom were the keys to open up the Gospel to everyone Jew and Gentile which we see Peter doing in Acts. Binding and loosing is the authority to bind someone to sin or loosen them from sin. This has deep Jewish roots and needs to be properly understood before using it in an argument.
Let me see here; wrong, wrong, wrong and finally wrong. Jesus gave a leadership role of the Church to Peter, he did NOT found his Church upon Peter but rather upon himself. Check the Greek on Petros and Petras and you might see it there. Secondly Peter didn’t have the final say on everything and in fact Scripture tells us that Paul opposed him to his face on at least one occasion. Also, while you are learning Greek, check out what bind and loose means. Aww what the heck, I might as well be a nice guy and just tell you; they are literally legal terms. They have nothing to do with creating or denying truths. If you read the Acts of the Apostles (hence the name) you will see just exactly what the power of binding and loosing was that Jesus gave to the Apostles. And as far as pope goes, the is no basis whatsoever for it in Scripture. Paul was in Rome teaching and preaching about the same time that Peter was martyed there (about 25AD) and the funniest thing is that Paul never mentioned it once in his letters that Peter was the pope of Rome and was martyred there. Things that make you go hmmm…
Jesus changed Simon’s name to Peter, which means Rock. And Jesus said You are Rock and upon this Rock I will build my church. These biblical interpretation theatrics are the only way to deny the authority given to Peter by Christ and which justifies the whole universal or Catholic Church. Everyone accepted it until a few dissenters had to think up something else in order to justify their split from the Church.Let me see here; wrong, wrong, wrong and finally wrong. Jesus gave a leadership role of the Church to Peter, he did NOT found his Church upon Peter but rather upon himself. Check the Greek on Petros and Petras and you might see it there. Secondly Peter didn’t have the final say on everything and in fact Scripture tells us that Paul opposed him to his face on at least one occasion. Also, while you are learning Greek, check out what bind and loose means. Aww what the heck, I might as well be a nice guy and just tell you; they are literally legal terms. They have nothing to do with creating or denying truths. If you read the Acts of the Apostles (hence the name) you will see just exactly what the power of binding and loosing was that Jesus gave to the Apostles. And as far as pope goes, the is no basis whatsoever for it in Scripture. Paul was in Rome teaching and preaching about the same time that Peter was martyed there (about 25AD) and the funniest thing is that Paul never mentioned it once in his letters that Peter was the pope of Rome and was martyred there. Things that make you go hmmm…
Please tell me that you are NOT a religious history teacher.
as long as you teach math or English or something, that’s ok.