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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Angainor
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hello all:

I’m new to this discussion, but catching up. I have a question for Angainor.

Who decides what is “disputable matter” and what is not?

For example:

(1) JWs and LDS deny the doctrine of the Trinity. Are they allowed to disagree on this matter but still be considered christians? If you condemn them Angainor, aren’t you in violation of your own interpretation of Rom 14:1-4?

(2) Baptists condemn the idea of infant baptism. To a baptist the doctrine concering infant baptism is not a matter for reasonable dispute. Would a baptist violate Rom 14:1-4 if she condemned a Lutheran couple who decided to baptise their infant child?

(3) What about the Real Presence of the Eucharist? Some Reformed churches say yes and others no? Is this a matter upon which christians can hold differing opinions and both be correct, or would one violate Rom 14:1-4 if he proclaimed that the Eucharist was necessary? Why would a doctrine as significant as one involving the body and blood of Christ be one that is disputable?

(4) What about the communion of saints? That’s a doctrine expressly stated in the Apostles Creed - which many reformed churches profess. Why would this doctrine be disputable, given express language in the Creed and Paul’s teaching on the explaining mystical body of Christ.

(5) How about the Resurrection? Some protestant churches say that the belief in the resurrection is not necessary for christian faith. Under your interpretation of Rom 14:1-4, why would this not be disputable?
 
vern humphrey:
We have agreed that the Church has the authority to declare what is “disputable” and not disputable. So why should any of us disagree when the Church speaks
Click to expand...
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”. We both do agree that the Church decides what is indisputable.
 
40.png
Angainor:
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”. We both do agree that the Church decides what is indisputable.
Click to expand...
If the Church can decide but not speak, how will it communicate its decisions?
 
vern humphrey:
If the Church can decide but not speak, how will it communicate its decisions?
Click to expand...
Why would the Church need to communicate something it has decided? To whom would it be communicating?
 
I don’t think the Church could be described as having a voice to “speak”.
Click to expand...
You assert the Church cannot “speak” but Jesus tells us that we are to “listen” to the Church. (Matt 18:17). Hmmmmm. :think:
 
40.png
Angainor:
Why would the Church need to communicate something it has decided? To whom would it be communicating?
Click to expand...
Because of heretical claims to the contrary. When heretics started teaching that the Son was not eternally begotten of the Father, for example, the Church declared otherwise.

When Luther omitted 7 OT books from the Bible, parts of the Book of Daniel, parts of the Book of Esther, the entire Letter of Hebrews, the Letter of James, the Letter of Jude, and the Book of Revelation, then the Church declared otherwise at the Council of Trent, affirming, contrary to the Protestants, that the canon of Sacred Scripture which the universal Church accepted 100+ years prior at the Council of Florence, which was also first canonized in AD 382 at the synod of Rome, was indeed inspired and sacred in all its parts.

Is that which we call the Holy Bible, the contents of Sacred Scripture a disputable matter which Christians may freely differ? If so, then are there any parts of it that are not disputable, like Rom 14:4? And if the Bible is not even something that is indisputable, then how can any teachings within it be indisputable?

You might say the reason I am not Protestant, is because EVERTHING is disputable within Protestantism, even the Word of God.
 
vern humphrey:
40.png
me:
Why would the Church need to communicate something it has decided? To whom would it be communicating?
Click to expand...
To the people of the Church, of course!!
Click to expand...
The Church is comminicating its decision to itself?
 
40.png
Angainor:
The Church is comminicating its decision to itself?
Click to expand...
Certainly!

The decision is made by those authorized to make it, and they must inform all the other members of their decisions.
 
40.png
Angainor:
The Church is comminicating its decision to itself?
Click to expand...
When the Church defines a matter, Catholics believe it is God who has revealed the particular truth through the instrumentality of man. So it is God speaking through the Church, to the members of the Church. Councils are held to settle disputed matters that pertain to doctrine. Heresies are condemned and the truth is proclaimed: That is one of the principle functions of the hierarchy of the Church.

When we say God has revealed the truth through men, we do not mean to suggest that these men were in any way oblivious to what God was about to reveal. No. Rather, God directed them to formulate the truth, according to His will. Just as the writers of the Bible were inspired by God, yet were well aware of what they were writing, so too the Bishops who gather at a council first discuss the doctrine before making a definitive pronouncement. This final pronouncement, after being ratified by the Pope, becomes part of the “deposit of faith”, which all Catholics - even Bishops and Popes - are then bound to believe. These doctrines are nothing new, but based on, at least the implicit, teachings of the Church up to that point.

The Divinity of Jesus was believed during the days of the apostles (obviously), but the finer points of the doctrine were not defined until hundreds of years later, which allowed for many (before those doctrines were defined) to begin to dispute that He was really God, and not just Divine by adoption (as Christians are). The Church held a council to defined the Divinity of Our Lord as well as the finer points of theology that leave no room for later confusion, or question (both of which lead to error). For example, it was not until the 4th century that the Church defined the doctrine of the Trinity (against the errors of Arianism), and not until the 5th century (Council of Chalcedon AD 451) that the Church defined the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union (against the errors of the Nestorian heretics).

God very wisely established the hierarchy of the Church and gave it His authority to settle disputed matters, promising that the Holy Ghost would be with it to guide it.

So, to answer your question: The doctrines defined by the Church are indeed truths that are communicated to the entire Church, including future Bishops and Popes. God did not leave us orphans. He left us with a Church that could tell us, with certainty, what the truth was when disputes arose.

It should be no surprise, however, that many people today do not accept the truth. When God Himself walked the earth proclaiming the truth, many there were who rejected Him.

Yet back then it was more clear; for in those days when someone rejected Jesus “they left Him and walked no more with Him” (John 6:67). Today, however, when people reject the teachings of Jesus, many still believe that they are following Him. They have rejected what He taught, but are often unaware of it. Since they have a different “interpretation” of what Jesus taught, they follow “another Christ, and another Gospel” to use the words of St. Paul. But to follow Christ, we must believe what He taught, and to be sure we are believing what He taught, we must submit to His Church (Mt 18:17). The error of the 16th century heretics (Luther in particular) was that each person could read the scriptures for themselves and immediately know the truth – no need for the Church. Well, almost 500 years and over 33,000 denominations later, proves that “the Bible alone” does not work. Actually, even in Luther’s own day the “Bible alone” produce doctrinal chaos. I will end this post with a few words of Luther himself, as he described the doctrinal confusion that his new teaching of “Sola Scriptura” produced.

Martin Luther: “How many doctors have I made by preaching and writing. Now they say, Be off with you. Go off with you. Go to the devil. Thus it must be. When we preach they laugh. …when we get angry and threaten them, they mock us, snap their fingers at us and laugh in their sleeves”…

“This one will not hear of Baptism, that one denies the Sacraments, another puts a world between this and the last day: some teach that Christ is not God, some say this, some say that: there are about as many sects and creeds as there are heads. No Yokel is so rude but when he has dreams and fancies, he thinks himself inspired by the Holy Ghost and must be a prophet”…

“Noblemen, townsmen, peasants, all classes understand the Evangelium better than I or St. Paul; they are now wise and think themselves more learned than all the ministers”… “There is no smearer but whenever he has heard a sermon or can read a chapter in German, makes a doctor of himself, and crowns his as*s, convincing himself that he knows everything better than all who teach him”…
 
40.png
Angainor:
The Church is comminicating its decision to itself?
Click to expand...
Well, of course! there are 1.1 billion Catholics in the world, so communication is needed.

Don’t you have anouncements at meetings?
 
40.png
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.
Click to expand...
All matters taught by the Church are understood to be truthful. Why would the Church lie?

This is not to say that corrupted men have not been in positions of power in the Church. Martin Luther pointed this out when he brought up the issue of indulgences and thier corruption. The Church heard him and stopped the corrupted practice of selling them at the Council of Trent. There have also been other corrupted men in positions of power in the Church.

But when it comes to issues of doctrine, it is the Holy Spirit that inspires the Councils and the Pope. He is inerrant. Read John 14:15-30 and you will understand this.

Subrosa
 
40.png
Subrosa:
But when it comes to issues of doctrine, it is the Holy Spirit that inspires the Councils and the Pope. He is inerrant.
Click to expand...
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.

I wish you all well. Thanks for the vigorous discussion!
 
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”.
Click to expand...
You are correct, because it is dogma. Dogma is not disputable. For example, the dogma of Christs incarnation, ressurection, sinless, Mary’s virginity, Christ fully human, fully devine are dogmas. Is it disputable within the perview of christianity?

Dogma cannot be changed.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene
 
Thank you Angainor, you have made for a most informative thread, God Bless your questioning nature, it is pretty useful for clearing things up.

In Christ
Scylla
 
Hello again:) . I know I sort of signed off, but there is one more thing bothering me.
40.png
Catholic4aReasn:
But you don’t believe the Church Catholicism*] has the authority to decide what is indisputable. Who then, does? You keep using the words "disputable’ and “indisputable”. Who has the God-given authority to decide what is really, truly and objectively disputable or indisputable?
*Angainor’s note
Click to expand...
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.
 
40.png
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.
Click to expand...
If you have been led to believe that every single Catholic without exception firmly believes all truths taught by the Church with no hesition, then you have been misled. Certainly, some Catholics do waver in their faith, but it is not due to their conscience, but either to their own lack of understanding, or to the deceipt of heresy.

If every Catholic had a firm faith, there would be no fallen away Catholics.
 
I don’t know about it. There are plenty of disputable matters here in Catholicism, and we all know whats disputable and what is indisputable. For example, priestly celibacy is a disputable matter. Although we cannot encourage priests who committed the vow to rebel or leave! Nor can a priest do so without permission. But, it is still a disputable matter.

Just because Catholics know what’s disputable doesn’t mean we have the authority to decide for ourselves what is disputable and not disputable. I think this interpertation fits with Paul.
 
Angianor:

A lot of people including catholics have not studied it enough to differentiate what is DOGMA, DOCTRINE, PRACTICES and DEVOTIONS. A devotion such as the Rosary is not part of dogma yet there’s impressions out there that catholics believe that without saying the Rosary you’re going to hell. Likewise, there are moderns who think that Christ’s Last Supper is symbolic, to us it is literal-that is dogma. It will never change. After all Christ said that it is the “NEW and EVERLASTING COVENANT”. These things are more permanent than the planet earth. So, the church will suffer for these truths and never budge from it. Much confusion arise when one practice is attached to dogma, or a dogma is mistaken as a practice.

Regarding the dynamic relationship between the church and society, I would highly suggest the Compendium of the Social Teachings of the Catholic Church. It is a consice summary of how the Church impacts and her role in society. I think you will get a lot of questions answered from it.

Good thread man! Hope you keep around. And forgive us if we are not answering in complete and utter charity at times. Know that we love our faith and ready to defend. But as far as a sincere search for the beautiful, noble and true we are all of the same spirit.

in XT.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top