Why do you believe in Sola Scriptura?

[joe371]

People in the Church explained the Trinity all the time before the fourth century. Didn’t Eusebius do an entire Apologetic in his ecclesiastical history prior to the Trinity being, “defined”? The idea that Jesus and the Holy Spirit being with God, of God and therefore God, coming to Earth as a human being is defined in John 1, by John.

Agreed, to a degree. We know that that CC church still exists today, as per scripture. Leaving the RCC out of the discussion: identify that CC church (which is not the RCC) that defined the Trinity in the 4th century? The CC (other than the RCC) that was present at the first 4 Ecumenical Councils?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_seven_Ecumenical_Councils

 

[dronald]

Agreed, to a degree. We know that that CC church still exists today, as per scripture. Leaving the RCC out of the discussion: identify that CC church (which is not the RCC) that defined the Trinity in the 4th century? The CC (other than the RCC) that was present at the first 4 Ecumenical Councils?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_seven_Ecumenical_Councils

You’re asking which Catholic Church was present for the first four Ecumenical councils? I just want to clarify; because there were plenty, with plenty different beliefs now.

 

[dronald]

CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.

CANON XI.-If any one saith, that men are justified, either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ, or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema.

CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.

That would be a good start.

I’m sorry, but I’m having troubles understanding; since we are justified by God’s grace through Faith I don’t see where they went wrong here…

 

[joe371]

You’re asking which Catholic Church was present for the first four Ecumenical councils? I just want to clarify; because there were plenty, with plenty different beliefs now.

One: where in the world today can I find the CC (other than the RCC) that was responsible for those Ecumincial councils, in terms of making authoritative decisions on behalf of the people.

Two: You said that there were plenty of churches - other than the RCC- that were present at these councils. What are there names, and do they still exist today?

 

[Per_Crucem]

I’m sorry, but I’m having troubles understanding; since we are justified by God’s grace through Faith I don’t see where they went wrong here…

By denying that is by the merits of Christ alone that we are justified, received through faith alone, by grace alone.

CANON XXIV.-If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema.

CANON XXX.-If any one saith, that, after the grace of Justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted, and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened (to him); let him be anathema.

 

[marywarfield]

Lutherans aren’t really “Lutheran.” Luther was against that idea; but it just sorta stuck.

So why not just put Catholic on all your Church signs?
That way at least St. Thomas Aquinas would be able
to find you.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

I had the pleasure of meeting him about 8 years ago. My old pastor in Green Bay is his nephew.

That’s really cool! Did you get to talk to him much?

I would have loved to meet him and had a chance to talk to him extensively, along with Newman and Pelikan. May they all rest in peace.

 

[joe371]

By denying that is by the merits of Christ alone that we are justified, received through faith alone, by grace alone.

CANON XXIV.-If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema.

CANON XXX.-If any one saith, that, after the grace of Justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted, and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened (to him); let him be anathema.

You might want to gives James a quick perusal…The CC never denies that it is by the merits of Christ alone that we are justified, received through faith alone, by grace alone. It is by God’s grace that our good works are derived. Purgatory is a different thread…

 

[Per_Crucem]

That’s really cool! Did you get to talk to him much?

I would have loved to meet him and had a chance to talk to him extensively, along with Newman and Pelikan. May they all rest in peace.

For about 20 minutes or so. All very casual. I don’t even think the subject of the faith really came up. I talked to him a lot about his commentary on the death of JPII and the election of Benedict, as that was only the year prior at that time. The faith lost a great champion and heaven gained a great saint when he died. The Naked Public Square is still one of my favorite books.

 

[dronald]

One: where in the world today can I find the CC (other than the RCC) that was responsible for those Ecumincial councils, in terms of making authoritative decisions on behalf of the people.

Two: You said that there were plenty of churches - other than the RCC- that were present at these councils. What are there names, and do they still exist today?

All of the Orthodox Church’s consider themselves “Catholic.” Lutheran’s do, likewise I believe Anglicans.

Non-Catholic Christians continue to translate the word to mean that we are all a part of Christ’s universal Church; that is, I’m in His Church, likewise you. I suppose if the Coptic Church had more members they could make the same claim to “making decisions on behalf of the people” as well as other Orthodox Church’s. However, you don’t have to accept all of those decisions, and likewise they don’t accept all decisions made at Vatican 1 and 2.

By denying that is by the merits of Christ alone that we are justified, received through faith alone, by grace alone.

CANON XXIV.-If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema.

CANON XXX.-If any one saith, that, after the grace of Justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted, and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened (to him); let him be anathema.

Who has the authority to say that the Church Schismed at this council?

So why not just put Catholic on all your Church signs?
That way at least St. Thomas Aquinas would be able
to find you.

I wish they would… Can you imagine the mayhem?

Seriously though, ask one of them; I have no clue why they say one thing and do another with regards to what Luther asked of them and what they practice now.

 

[Per_Crucem]

Who has the authority to say that the Church Schismed at this council?

If the doctrine of justification taught by the council of Trent is contrary to the gospel proclaimed by the apostles, then what authority is needed beyond Galatians 1:8?

 

[dronald]

If the doctrine of justification taught by the council of Trent is contrary to the gospel proclaimed by the apostles, then what authority is needed beyond Galatians 1:8?

Perhaps you’re right…

Could you do me a favour and summarize the paragraphs from Trent that you deem contrary to the Apostle’s teachings in plain English please? I don’t know if it’s because I don’t see the contradictions (because perhaps there are none as any Catholic would tell you) or if it’s that I’m having troubles understanding the wording.

 

[joe371]

If the doctrine of justification taught by the council of Trent is contrary to the gospel proclaimed by the apostles, then what authority is needed beyond Galatians 1:8?

My fallible opinion: The doctrine of justification taught by the council of Trent is not contrary to the gospel proclaimed by the apostles! :thumbsup:To say otherwise is merely your fallible opinion. No one should trust my opinion or your opinion on the matter; only the church infallibly guided by God.

When you get the chance, could you please answer the following, based on your other post:

One: where in the world today can I find the CC (other than the RCC) that was responsible for those Ecumincial councils, in terms of making authoritative decisions on behalf of the people.

Two: You said that there were plenty of churches - other than the RCC- that were present at these councils. What are there names, and do they still exist today?

 

[dronald]

When you get the chance, could you please answer the following, based on your other post:

One: where in the world today can I find the CC (other than the RCC) that was responsible for those Ecumincial councils, in terms of making authoritative decisions on behalf of the people.

Two: You said that there were plenty of churches - other than the RCC- that were present at these councils. What are there names, and do they still exist today?

Answered above my friend.

 

[joe371]

Answered above my friend.

Thanks; must have overlooked it…

 

[Per_Crucem]

My fallible opinion: The doctrine of justification taught by the council of Trent is not contrary to the gospel proclaimed by the apostles! :thumbsup:To say otherwise is merely your fallible opinion. No one should trust my opinion or your opinion on the matter; only the church infallibly guided by God.

Since it’s your fallible opinion that the church is infallible and it’s my fallible opinion that Trent was fallible, we’re even. Except for Scripture. So pffft.

When you get the chance, could you please answer the following, based on your other post:

One: where in the world today can I find the CC (other than the RCC) that was responsible for those Ecumincial councils, in terms of making authoritative decisions on behalf of the people.

The church that confesses the Book of Concord.

Two: You said that there were plenty of churches - other than the RCC- that were present at these councils. What are there names, and do they still exist today?

When did I say that?

 

[Per_Crucem]

Perhaps you’re right…

Could you do me a favour and summarize the paragraphs from Trent that you deem contrary to the Apostle’s teachings in plain English please? I don’t know if it’s because I don’t see the contradictions (because perhaps there are none as any Catholic would tell you) or if it’s that I’m having troubles understanding the wording.

Sure. That justification is a process that begins at baptism, continues throughout the Christian life, is increased based on how one cooperates with the grace of the sacraments, and is culminated at death, and perhaps continues in purgatory. It is not based on the merits of Christ alone, nor is grace in and of itself sufficient.

 

[Per_Crucem]

Perhaps you’re right…

Could you do me a favour and summarize the paragraphs from Trent that you deem contrary to the Apostle’s teachings in plain English please? I don’t know if it’s because I don’t see the contradictions (because perhaps there are none as any Catholic would tell you) or if it’s that I’m having troubles understanding the wording.

Although, I should reiterate, that because we believe the church of Rome separated itself formally from historic orthodoxy both prior to and during the Reformation, this in no way means that Catholics are not Christian. It would reflect more on the institution itself and mixing truth with error. She still possesses the word and the sacraments.

 

[joe371]

Although, I should reiterate, that because we believe the church of Rome separated itself formally from historic orthodoxy both prior to and during the Reformation, this in no way means that Catholics are not Christian. It would reflect more on the institution itself and mixing truth with error. She still possesses the word and the sacraments.

Could you define historic orthodoxy, and tell me where it can be found today i.e. is historic orthodoxy sprinkled throughout the various churches, regardless of denomination, or can it be found in one particular church e.g. the Eastern orthodox church, since you already claimed it cannot be found, in total, in the Catholic Church?

 

[dronald]

Sure. That justification is a process that begins at baptism, continues throughout the Christian life, is increased based on how one cooperates with the grace of the sacraments, and is culminated at death, and perhaps continues in purgatory. It is not based on the merits of Christ alone, nor is grace in and of itself sufficient.

I’m going to try to break this one down based on your explanation:

"CANON XXX.-If any one saith, that**, [Directed from the Catholic Church to the bad guys] after the grace of Justification has been received,[Baptism]** to every penitent sinner **[People who are truly sorry for their sin] the guilt is remitted,[Party is no longer in trouble] and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in Purgatory, [Person still must suffer for said sin, in this life or the next]before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened (to him); [No Heaven for you.] let him be anathema." [kicked out]

Is that right?**