H
Hope1960
Guest
What is the EO/OO?
- Status
C
commenter
Guest
Thousands of them did during the Reformation. Still, I don’t see how that proves the Magisterium was less reliable in, say, 1600 than in 1500. Not as accepted in Europe, of course, but still no less acceptable for the average person.
I gave “priests” as an extreme example to make a point. One might also say the Bible is still a reliable guide in 2017, even though far fewer Americans regard it as authoritative than in, say, 50 years ago. Suppose thousands of Protestant ministers - 90% - stopped believing the Bible is the Word of God. Would that decline make it any less authoritative for the next person who picks up the Bible in 2017?
Suppose more Americans trust the Sayings of the Kardashians as authoritative than the Magisterium, Sacred Tradition, or Bible. So what? Decisions are made by individuals.
Last edited:
C
commenter
Guest
Oriental Orthodoxy is a series of churches originating in the Near East, similar to Eastern Orthodoxy. They are not exactly the same, but sometimes grouped with them as somewhat comparable. That is why I wrote EO/OO.
Last edited:
B
BornInMarch
Guest
In general it is wrong because it denies the authority of the Papacy, which Jesus Christ himself gave to Saint Peter when he gave Peter the keys to Heaven and Earth.
Specifically, there are several things the different protestant denominations get wrong. Some get only a few things wrong, others go so far as to deny the Trinity itself.
Specifically, there are several things the different protestant denominations get wrong. Some get only a few things wrong, others go so far as to deny the Trinity itself.
W
Wannano
Guest
Why did so many priests leave in the Reformation?
B
BornInMarch
Guest
Leaving meant they got to keep their positions. There are also many other priests who would rather die than stop being catholic (and who did). Saint John Almond is one example.
W
Wannano
Guest
Please explainthat…keeping their positions.
S
stpurl
Guest
Well, when Henry VIII, for example, decided to make himself the head of the church in England, he kept all the bishops and archbishops who agreed to support him and to reject the Pope as head of the church in England (except for Bishop St. John Fisher, who refused to sign the agreement). So the Archbishop of Canterbury and all the other prelates, who had been baptized Catholic, who had practiced as Catholic, etc., and who like Henry probably still called themselves Catholic but had de facto left the church, kept on being bishops in the Anglican church with all the appurtenances thereto, instead of being like St. John Fisher and winding up dead.
W
Wannano
Guest
Oh ok, I don’t know much about that. That makes sense.
W
Wannano
Guest
I mean sort of doesn’t really make sense!stpurl:
Oh ok, I don’t know much about that. That makes sense.
K
Kei
Guest
True love (or charity) would stand for what is true and not stand by dangerous doctrinal errors as though they are fine.
A
ATraveller
Guest
Last edited:
B
BornInMarch
Guest
Some priests get to manage the church in their parish, and as a result the entire community in that parish looks up to them. Those who converted to Anglicanism got to remain in charge of their parishes.
Meanwhile, those who didn’t convert to Anglicanism were put to death.
Meanwhile, those who didn’t convert to Anglicanism were put to death.
D
daverod
Guest
do you find it strange that a once religious ‘monk’/brother, Martin Luther, turned against his vows, helped several nuns escape a certain convent and then got married to one of them?
B
Benadam
Guest
Since we are discussing Protestantism and not protestants, I say what’s wrong with it is that it introduced the idea that the community that surrounds Jesus since the beginning is no longer a visible tangible reality on earth. A reality one can point to and say, “there it is”
That there is no longer a community on earth that the Truth belongs to. That the community that recieved His promises, that wrote Sacred documents of their beginning, didn’t in fact recieve those promises and are not the people that they document.
That at some arbitrary point in time it began to teach that the bible is about another people that form an invisible community and is not about the people and community that maintained and handed down faith in Jesus from the beginning.
That faith comes through reading and not through hearing.
Protestantism teaches these things, I hear it underpinning the words that come out of the mouths of our seperated brethren.
That there is no longer a community on earth that the Truth belongs to. That the community that recieved His promises, that wrote Sacred documents of their beginning, didn’t in fact recieve those promises and are not the people that they document.
That at some arbitrary point in time it began to teach that the bible is about another people that form an invisible community and is not about the people and community that maintained and handed down faith in Jesus from the beginning.
That faith comes through reading and not through hearing.
Protestantism teaches these things, I hear it underpinning the words that come out of the mouths of our seperated brethren.
C
commenter
Guest
Why did so many people in Europe and North America, including many ministers, abandon belief in the Bible as the Word of God over the past 50 years? Well the answer is complicated. The more relevant issue is whether that decline makes the Bible any less authoritative. Did the Bible itself decline? I would argue no. The authority of the Bible, or the Magisterium (closely interrelated) is not affected by current popularity or unpopularity. For the next individual who picks up Mathew, it has the same credibility it had in 1967. So too the Magisterium.commenter:
Why did so many priests leave in the Reformation?
Intelligent Individuals make decisions based on merits, not opinion polls. If a majority of smokers ignore their doctor’s advice to quit smoking, and keep on smoking as a result of peer pressure, that does not reduce the validity of the medical advice. The next individual who gets that advice should evaluate that advice based on the medical evidence, not based on percentages of people who do this or that.
Many walked away from Christ (see John 6). Did that make the doctrine of the Eucharist less valid because of declining numbers? Or should it be evaluated on its evidence.
Evaluate the Magisterium itself.
Last edited:
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Wrong? I’d say it is incomplete.
Now, it is difficult for cradle Catholics to grasp, but, there is not one set of “Protestant beliefs”. They are from so close to Catholic you could not tell the difference to beliefs that reject the Trinity, Divinity of Christ, to the point where they are pagan.
All of them are incomplete.
Only in the original Church is the fullness of truth.
Now, it is difficult for cradle Catholics to grasp, but, there is not one set of “Protestant beliefs”. They are from so close to Catholic you could not tell the difference to beliefs that reject the Trinity, Divinity of Christ, to the point where they are pagan.
All of them are incomplete.
Only in the original Church is the fullness of truth.
O
omgriley
Guest
A
AnnetteJoan
Guest
Better yet, how is it right?
A
adamhovey1988
Guest
Most Protestants accept the Virgin birth the Bible as the word of God, and the Holy Trinity. Of course, those are things they have in common with Catholics.
- Status