S
- Status
D
Darron_Steele
Guest
Schaick: no reasonable person is alleging that you are anti-Catholic. It is a retaliatory slur for `daring’ to express disagreement with the person who said it.
Here is what is evident: the person who called you that is not serving Jesus Christ. He is acting totally out of harmony with His standards for our conduct; he knows it and just makes excuses for it, even quoting irrelevant Scriptures to cover that up.
He is not serving the Catholic Church. The Decree on Ecumenicism came from Vatican II, and in chapter 2 section 11 it urges that Catholics “searching together with separated brethren into the divine mysteries, should act with love for truth, with charity, and with humility.”*
The Vatican II document says “and” in regards to the virtues Catholics should be acting with when doing this stuff – and he shows no interest in following it. He is not serving Jesus Christ, and he is not serving the Catholic Church, so despite pretensions, it is apparent that he is really only serving himself when he says things like that to people.
*In Abbott, The Documents of Vatican II. New York: Corpus Books, 1966 page 354.
A
adrift
Guest
No one but God can tell you that you are going to hell. You cannot judge a person. You can however judge an action. The Church says that you must attend mass on a Holy Day. Jesus said what you bind on earth will bound. That is the authority given to the Church by Jesus. So we know that the Church has bound us to attend Mass and Jesus will uphold it. That does not mean that someone can tell you are going to hell. But they can say that such action is not good and your are putting yourself in danger.
A
adrift
Guest
This surprises me. My family has so many mixed marriages and I have never heard of anyone asked not to come Church. Did they marry in the Catholic Church because if they didn’t that would explain the actions you describe. Not excuse it but explain it. Oh I see you are from Denver which makes it more mysterious to me since that is where my family is too.
T
TedDC
Guest
Actually, that was the authority given to Peter by Jesus.
A
adrift
Guest
Actually the authority was given to Peter and his successors.
T
TedDC
Guest
Where does the Bible say that?
A
adrift
Guest
Since I work with children in our parish, I know that this statement is FALSE. The current practice is that even if there is just an innuendo a priest is removed from service. We lost a pastor this way. He had been accused and cleared but while he was accused he was not allowed near children. Any suspected abuse must be reported to the law immediately. Everyone must have a background check done by the law. That is the TRUE current practice. But you want to hold on to the past. Something else that is never stated. The current thought of psychiatry at that time was that through counseling they could be cured. These priest received such council and were pronounced cured by the psychiatrist. The Bishops relied on this advise. Unfortunately, it was not the case. Who got blamed the psychiatrist for their wrong advice? They have yet to come forward and admit their part. That doesn’t mean the Bishops are not at fault. They are. However, they have implemented changes that will not allow a repeat. I am not excusing the Bishops but I think we also need to bring to task the people who gave the bad advise as well.
R
Roblox84
Guest
I believe that God didn’t yell down from heaven saying pick this canon or pick that canon. As this passage states “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16)." What this means is that at one point in history God did “breathe” certain passages in the gospels at his people, but he did not breathe what is to be in the bible at the exact second that it was being compiled. God picked the canons of the bible by setting a priority on his teachings while on earth. Some teachings he definitely would stress more then others and the apostles would realize this. So when the bible was being assembled into it’s current form, the successors who were doing the assembling knew what would be the inspired scriptures due to the priority placed on certain gospels by Christ when he was on earth. And the successors of the apostles knew what was inspired and what wasn’t because of the previous priests or bishops that would hand down these teachings. So it was because of the Church that God used that we now have the bible. And through that Church is where we get the real meaning of the bible.
R
Roblox84
Guest
I don’t know the page number, but the bible does tell us to not follow preachers that weren’t given proper authority.
T
tomylee1
Guest
i agree with you.
E
elvisman
Guest
That’s easy. As an RCIA teacher – you should know this. Maybe it’s time to study before you teach . . .
Jesus established ONE single Church – not many splintered sects. In John 17, he prayed fervently for the UNITY of that ONE Church – that they remain ONE – as he and the Father are ONE.
Jesus gave his Church the Supreme authority on earth and the power to forgive sins. He said that this power would be recognized in Heaven – as well as earth because they would be guided by the Holy Spirit to ALL truth:
Matt. 16:15-19, 18:15-18, John 16:12-15, 20:21-23**.**
Jesus equates the Church with his very self:
Acts 9:4-5
**He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?" **
He said, “Who are you, sir?” The reply came, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.
To reject the church is to reject Jesus himself:
Luke 10:16
**Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me." **
Matt. 10:32-33
Everyone who acknowledges me before others I will acknowledge before my heavenly Father. But whoever denies me before others, I will deny before my heavenly Father.
E
elvisman
Guest
Acts 15:23-29 is a really good example.
E
elvisman
Guest
You most certainly are.
Start reading more closely, pal. That’s not what I said.
Here is what I said:
"… nobody knew what the Bible was until the Catholic Church declared what the Holy Spirit revealed."
In John 16:12-15, Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would guide his Church to ALL truth about the things that were coming (which includes the Bible).
WRONG.
Ignatius used the word, katholikos (καθολικός). Scholars agree that because of the way he used it, this was already a long-established and widely-used name.
**Do your homework before making such silly statements. **
It’s embarassing.
And that is wonderful. It shows that the collective works of the Bible were in circulation.
What you failed to mention is the other books were included in these collections that were rejected as canonical by the Catholic Church, such aas The Shepherd of Hermas, The Gospel of Peter, the Epistle of Barnabas and others.
The Catholic Church, my friend - guided by the Holy Spirit.
That is why they ain’t in your Protestant Bible.
E
elvisman
Guest
Who said they were? They weren’t.
**However, we MUST look to the Fathers to see how the Church progressed after the Apostolic Age. **This is basic Christianity-101.
How could you not know this?
Then, put your money where your mouth is and show me where it says that in the Holy Bible.
IF you truly adhere to Sola Scriptura, then you MUST have evidence that this is what Scripture claims about itself.
**1 Tim. 3:15 tells us that the CHURCH is “…the pillar and foundation of truth” - NOT the Bible. **
The Bible came from the Church - not the other way around. It didn’t fall from the sky - it was written, compiled and declared canon by Christ’s Catholic Church and that, my anti-Catholic friend is an historical fact.
**It CERTAINLY is useful teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness. I agree 100%. **
**I also know that this verse says nothing about it being sufficient and being ALL that we need because it is only the written word. God’s word transcends what is written on paper (**2 Thess. 2:15, ****2 Tim. 2:2, ****1 Cor. 11:2, 2 Tim. 12:14).
D
Darron_Steele
Guest
Actually, not so.
Thank you for the updated information. This is good news.
When were these changes made?
E
elvisman
Guest
I’ll show you where - in the Old Testament as well as the New.
Acts 1:20 says, "For it is written in the Book of Psalms (referring to Psalm 109:8): ‘Let his encampment become desolate, and may no one dwell in it.’ And: ‘May another take his office.’"
This clearly speaks to the reality of Apostolic Succession.
Barnabas was considered an Apostle. Tell me something - WHO appointed him? Jesus?
NOPE - the Apostles did.
P
PORATH
Guest
elvisman,
I do not disagree with anything you have said. Your words, I believe, are accurate and necessary. You have justification for correcting those speaking either out of ignorance, impatience or what have you. The Truth of Catholic Teaching must be declared and ultimately welcomed so that the unified Church that Christ created may yet again be ONE. All this said, my only concern about your postings is the condescending attitude and aggressive nature. The written word, particularly electronic communications, often lacks the subtlties of the spoken word so forgive me if I am misreading your tone. I believe it is possible and proper to admonish those claiming to be faithful to Christ in a charitable and kind manner. Would you yell and demean a blind person for stumbling over obstacles they cannot see? Your treatment of those you correct seems very much like the Elephant trainers using sharp hooks to punish the animal and force its compliance. The Elephant will comply only for so long before it begins a rampage that is both vicious and massively distructive. I don’t mean to equate those you correct with animals but the principle, I believe, holds. There can be no doubt that firmness in our faith and teaching is indIspensible but our delivery can destroy or obscure the message.
Your brother in Christ
I do not disagree with anything you have said. Your words, I believe, are accurate and necessary. You have justification for correcting those speaking either out of ignorance, impatience or what have you. The Truth of Catholic Teaching must be declared and ultimately welcomed so that the unified Church that Christ created may yet again be ONE. All this said, my only concern about your postings is the condescending attitude and aggressive nature. The written word, particularly electronic communications, often lacks the subtlties of the spoken word so forgive me if I am misreading your tone. I believe it is possible and proper to admonish those claiming to be faithful to Christ in a charitable and kind manner. Would you yell and demean a blind person for stumbling over obstacles they cannot see? Your treatment of those you correct seems very much like the Elephant trainers using sharp hooks to punish the animal and force its compliance. The Elephant will comply only for so long before it begins a rampage that is both vicious and massively distructive. I don’t mean to equate those you correct with animals but the principle, I believe, holds. There can be no doubt that firmness in our faith and teaching is indIspensible but our delivery can destroy or obscure the message.
Your brother in Christ
E
elvisman
Guest
Whereas, I appreciate your concern, I also see that you are very new to this forum and may have only read a limited number of threads.
I have been here for 6 years and have read the most vile accusations launched at our Church - some by so-called Catholics.
I don’t “yell” at anyone. I set them straight when they are uncharitable.
I don’t get angry on this forum - I simply speak (or write) in a no-nonsense manner. **
If I sometimes appear condescending, it is usually a retort to an uincharitable poster and/or anti-Catholic, who, like a spoiled child, must be scolded as one.
See you on the forums.
In Christ,
Elvisman
D
Darron_Steele
Guest
You seem to be a very insightful person; based on the answer you got, you can see that you were right.
- Status