Why I am not a Catholic - Romans 14:1-4

[maryalene]

Angainor:

Interesting. I would wager that Jesus’ divinity was indisputable far before any Pope made an “authoritative statement” about it.

And that was my point. You said "but doesn’t it kind of imply that a matter was in some way in dispute when the Pope has to come out with a statement saying “I authoritatively declare that this is what Catholics must believe?” And I was pointing out that no, the Pope making an authoritative statement does not necessarily imply that the subject of the statement is a disputable matter. So it looks like we agree on this one.

 

[maryalene]

Angainor:

First of all, it would be wrong according to Romans 14:1-4 for me to suggest that Catholics are binding their consciences wrongly on disputable matters. I hope I have not done that.

I’m so confused - wasn’t this the point of your OP? That you are not Catholic because you believe the Catholic Church violates Romans 14:1-4?

 

[LSK]

Angainor:

Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. One man’s faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

Romans 14:1-4 (NIV)

The very nature of Catholicism is an affront to this principle. Catholicism takes a stand on very nearly every “disputable matter” imaginable and requires conformity of all Christians to its view. Who is Catholicism to judge someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

To quote a small section of Holy Scripture, gathered by the Holy Mother Church, to support why you will not sit and eat at the complete banquet of faith she offers seems so sad and stubborn to me! The Church has stood as a bastion of all that is solid and good in the world - and we all know that what is right and good is not always popular and what is popular is seldom what is right and good.

The very nature of Catholicism is not an afront to the the principle you quote…it is a support to the ENTIRE chapter for it supports the idea that those of us who faith has faltered can find refuge and support in the structure, teachings and love offered in the arms of the Bride of Christ. I know you are here because you are searching for that acceptance. You are on the road of truth, and I pray that it leads you HOME!!!

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Angainor:

Who am I to say what is disputable and indisputable?

I thought that your personal understanding of what is disputable and what is not is the whole point of this thread.

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Angainor:

This is it in a nutshell. If I may be so bold as to paraphrase:

If Catholicism has spoken on a matter (any matter) that matter is no longer a proper subject for debate.Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. One man’s faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

Romans 14:1-4 (NIV)

Can you elaborate on this? What does this passage have to do with your accusations against the Church?

Iin Christ,
Nancy

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Angainor:

First of all, it would be wrong according to Romans 14:1-4 for me to suggest that Catholics are binding their consciences wrongly on disputable matters. I hope I have not done that.

Secondly, on the issue of disputable/indisputable. (Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters.)

I was sort of counting on the consciences of individual Catholics on this forum. As a Protestant, it is nearly beyond reason for me to think that there is not one matter “authoritatively decided” by Catholicism that the individual Catholic’s conscience might tend to categorize as “disputable”.

Maybe I am way off on that. Maybe each Catholic on this forum is clear in his or her own mind that each and every issue decided by Catholicism is indisputable.

Maybe… But it seems to me that if a Catholic were totally clear in their own mind that there are no disputable matters within the whole of Catholic Dogma… this would be a very boring thread. I would think they would take one look at my argument and declare it transparently false.

Maybe it is just my Protestant outlook, but
the lady doth protest too much, methinks.

I’m way confused! You’ve gone on and on about disputable and undisputable, then you said “who am I to say what’s disputable and undisputable”, now you’re going on about disputable things again. That seem contradictory.

Please state plainly how one can be certain what is disputable and what is not. Please cite a few examples of these things as it relates to your accusation against the Church.

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

I don’t think “declare” is the appropriate way to describe it, and I don’t think the Church could be described as having a voice to “speak”.

Sure it does. Luke 10:16 tells us that.

We both do agree that the Church decides what is indisputable.

The Church can “decide” but cannot “speak” that which it has decided? How’s that work?

As you understand “Church” how does the Church “decide” anything?

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Angainor:

Why would the Church need to communicate something it has decided?

So that everyone else could know what was decided.

To whom would it be communicating?

The members of the Body of Christ.

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Angainor:

The Church is comminicating its decision to itself?

The Church leadership (the voice in the world today that we are listen to and not reject lest we be rejecting Christ Himself- Luke 10:16) communicates its decisions to all other Christians, just like in Acts 15.

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Angainor:

So I am answered. I was wrong about the conscience of the individual Catholic. There is no Catholic dogma they would even consider placing into the category of “disputable”.

I find that truly remarkable and to be frank, quite alien to anything in my experience.

!

Absolute truth is quite alien to Protestantism so naturally it would be alien to Protestants.

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[JSmitty2005]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Angainor:

Hello again . I know I sort of signed off, but there is one more thing bothering me.To all in Rome who are loved by God and are called to be saints: Romans 1:7

Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. Romans 14:1

Paul is advising all Christians in Rome to avoid passing judgement on disputable matters. Paul is assuming a Roman Christian will recognize a disputable matter.

Is Paul granting “all in Rome who are loved by God and are called to be saints” some measure of authority to determine what is a disputable matter?

More likely, in my opinion, is that Paul simply expects Roman Christians to be able to recognize a disputable matter when they see one. Paul has gone to great lengths to teach the Church in Rome and churches elsewhere the “indisputables” of Christianity. If a Roman Christian couldn’t tell for himself a disputable matter, Paul wouldn’t have done a good job instructing them.

Ok. Will you answer my question now?

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[Angainor]

Catholic4aReasn:

Absolute truth is quite alien to Protestantism so naturally it would be alien to Protestants.

In Christ,
Nancy

I’m having a very hard time figuring out how to respond to this post. That is a hefty charge you are casually throwing out there with a smile on your face. To accuse me of denying Christ, Truth incarnate*. If you wanted to get my attention, you did.

*See John 1:1, John 14:6

Catholic4aReasn:

I’m way confused! You’ve gone on and on about disputable and undisputable, then you said “who am I to say what’s disputable and undisputable”, now you’re going on about disputable things again. That seem contradictory.

Please state plainly how one can be certain what is disputable and what is not. Please cite a few examples of these things as it relates to your accusation against the Church.

I have been speaking at great length about disputable and indisputable matters, and you are confused. I have said “Who am I to say what’s disputable and what is indisputable?” Am I Truth incarnate? Am I alone the Church?

What is an “indisputable matter”? An indisputable matter is a matter recognized by the Church to be an absolute truth. The Apostle’s Creed contains indisputable matters. The Nicene Creed contains indisputable matters.

What are the Creeds? They are statements of common understanding of Absolute Truths (We believe…). The letter in Acts 15:24 is a statement of common understanding of Absolute Truths (…so we all agreed…)

What is a “disputable matter”? It is a hazy understanding of Absolute Truth.

There is to be no compomise on indisputable matters. About disputable matters, Paul gives us advice (Romans 14:1-4, 1 Corinthians 8,10, Galatians 8).

I believe in Abolute Truth. I believe in an Absolute Truth that exists outside of any authority I, or any other human being could lay claim to. The Church is not, itself, the Truth. The Church is a keeper of the Christian understanding of Absolute Truth.

 

[Hildebrand]

¹I have two words for this: Bologna.

The Bull ‘Decet Romanum’: the Condemnation and Excommunication of Martin Luther, the Heretic, and his Followers, January 1521.

The Bull “Decet Romanum”

I hope you know this is not dogma of the Catholic Church, it is a papal decree and is not subject to infallibility. Many papal bulls resolved disputes between temporal leaders. One papal bull changed another papal bull’s ruling.

Rarely does the pope speak “ex cathedra” and proclaim new doctrine. I don’t think Pope John Paul II ever proclaimed anything new, did he? He taught the existing faith and readily gave his opinion on many matters.

 

[Hildebrand]

Angainor:

Interesting. I would wager that Jesus’ divinity was indisputable far before any Pope made an “authoritative statement” about it.

The bible actually disputes what the Catholic Church teaches about the divinity of Christ.

“For there is One God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus”, (I Timothy 2:5).
**
Jesus admits “…my Father is greater than I”, (John 14:28)

So according to the literal bible, Father is greater than Jesus. Either: The Father is God and Jesus is a lesser god, or The Father is God and Jesus is a superhuman being.

Once you read these scripture passages, maybe Arius was right after all.

I can’t believe the Catholic Church never found these two scripture passages that prove Arius was right and they’re wrong.

 

[Ivornotion]

Hildebrand:

Jesus admits “…my Father is greater than I”,

Jesus also said, " he that has seen Me has seen the Father, for I and the Father are One".

And Emmanuel means God among us !

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Angainor:

I’m having a very hard time figuring out how to respond to this post. That is a hefty charge you are casually throwing out there with a smile on your face. To accuse me of denying Christ, Truth incarnate*. If you wanted to get my attention, you did.

No, I didn’t accuse you of denying Christ. I apologize if my words seemed to convey that accusation.

When I speak of absolute truth (small “t”) I’m speaking of those things which God has revealed to be true, not of Jesus Christ Himself (Truth- big “T”). The Protestant position seems to be broken down into two camps:

1. Absolute truth is, untimately, unknowable in this life therefore it doesn’t really matter what you believe as long as you believe in Christ.
2. Each individual believer is lead by the holy Spirit to all truth therefore I can be confident that whatever I am personally convinced is true IS true because “if our hearts do not condemn us we have confidence before God (1 John 3:21)”.

I have been speaking at great length about disputable and indisputable matters, and you are confused. I have said “Who am I to say what’s disputable and what is indisputable?” Am I Truth incarnate? Am I alone the Church?

What is an “indisputable matter”? An indisputable matter is a matter recognized by the Church to be an absolute truth. The Apostle’s Creed contains indisputable matters. The Nicene Creed contains indisputable matters.

What are the Creeds? They are statements of common understanding of Absolute Truths (We believe…). The letter in Acts 15:24 is a statement of common understanding of Absolute Truths (…so we all agreed…)

What is a “disputable matter”? It is a hazy understanding of Absolute Truth.

There is to be no compomise on indisputable matters. About disputable matters, Paul gives us advice (Romans 14:1-4, 1 Corinthians 8,10, Galatians 8).

I believe in Abolute Truth. I believe in an Absolute Truth that exists outside of any authority I, or any other human being could lay claim to. The Church is not, itself, the Truth. The Church is a keeper of the Christian understanding of Absolute Truth.

I think the point that is being made is that if you cannot say with any certainty what is disputable and what is not how can you accuse the Church of not treating disputable matters correctly?

A few posts ago I had asked for a few examples as to how you believe the Church has erred in her treatment of disputable matters but I think I missed the post in which you gave your examples. Could you please repost them or refer me to the post #?

Thanks!

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Hildebrand:

The bible actually disputes what the Catholic Church teaches about the divinity of Christ.

“For there is One God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus”, (I Timothy 2:5).
**
Jesus admits “…my Father is greater than I”, (John 14:28)

So according to the literal bible, Father is greater than Jesus. Either: The Father is God and Jesus is a lesser god, or The Father is God and Jesus is a superhuman being.

Once you read these scripture passages, maybe Arius was right after all.

I can’t believe the Catholic Church never found these two scripture passages that prove Arius was right and they’re wrong.

This is EXACTLY why an infallible interpreter of scripture is absolutely necessary!

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[Angainor]

Catholic4aReasn:

The Protestant position seems to be broken down into two camps:

1. Absolute truth is, untimately, unknowable in this life therefore it doesn’t really matter what you believe as long as you believe in Christ.
2. Each individual believer is lead by the holy Spirit to all truth therefore I can be confident that whatever I am personally convinced is true IS true because “if our hearts do not condemn us we have confidence before God (1 John 3:21)”.

I would have to say I fall in to camp #1, sort of.

Absolute truth is, ultimately, unknowable if by “unknowable” you mean I can’t possess certain knowledge of Absolute truth like I possess certain knowledge that I have ten fingers. There is faith involved.

To the second half of your statement, “it doesn’t really matter what you believe as long as you believe in Christ.”, I agree with the understanding that “believe in Christ” means more than “acknowledgeing that Christ walked the earth”. True belief in Christ is belief in Absolute truth. I don’t make the distinction you do of small “t” and big “T” Truth.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Angainor:

To the second half of your statement, “it doesn’t really matter what you believe as long as you believe in Christ.”, I agree with the understanding that “believe in Christ” means more than “acknowledgeing that Christ walked the earth”. True belief in Christ is belief in Absolute truth. I don’t make the distinction you do of small “t” and big “T” Truth.

That’s a modern version of the Syncretist heresy. The persecution of ancient Christians was due to their refusal to subscribe to the idea that “it doesn’t really matter what you believe.”