"Why" is sola scriptura important?

[illuminator]

OK one of you (Jimmy I think it is) is confused about what I am saying. I am NOT saying that the Protestants were keeping Saturday at the Council of Trent and got condemed for it. I am saying that the protestants were keeping SUNDAY (the first day of the week, the one before Monday, the one after Saturday - yes Sunday) and were condemed for it. The reson is, again, because they, at the time, held to sola scriptura. The protestants, kept Sunday and said they believed in teh Bible and the Bible alone. The Catholics at the Council of Trent said in effect. YOu are inconsistent because there is no New Testament (this is in the 1500-1600s now) basis for this. The only basis for this, they said, is the Tradition of the Church. They went on to say that since you keep Sunday, you are in effect, hippocrites because on this issue you are not following the Bible and the Bible alone. Please Jimmy don’t accuse me again of saying that the Protestants at the Council of Trent kept Saturday (THEY MOST CERTAINLY DIDN’T).

Now with that I will answer De Fide.
You said:

Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that a Catholic thought that Christ’s divinity was not indicated in scripture. This means nothing other than he didn’t do his homework very well. He is not the Pope, and it has no reflection on authentic Catholic teaching. All it indicates is sloppy apologetics.

If you are trying to show that some apologists are sloppy, I don’t see the point of your trying.

Well then I guess your list of sloppy apologists must include:
(see post # 21 and #22)

1. Catholic Press Sydney, Australia, August 1900
2. New York Weekly Tribune [Roman Catholic], May 24, 1900.
3. ."–Martin J. Scott, Things Catholics are Asked About, 1927, p. 236 [Scott (1865-1954) was a Jesuit theologian and one of the foremost Catholic defenders of his time].
4. John Gilmary Shea, “The Observance of Sunday and Civil Laws for its Enforcement,” in The American Catholic Quarterly Review, Jan. 1883, p. 152 [Shea (1824-1892), a Catholic priest, wrote an important history of American Catholicism].
5. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism, 1846 edition, p. 176 [Keenan was a Scottish priest, whose catechism has been widely used in Roman Catholic schools and academies].
6. Peter Geiermann, The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, 1957 edition, p. 50 [Geiermann (1870-1929) received the “apostolic blessing” of pope Pius X on this book, January 26, 1910].
7. James Cardinal Gibbons, The Faith of Our Fathers, 92nd ed., rev., p. 89 [Cardinal Gibbons (1834-1921) was archbishop of Baltimore. This book was the most famous Catholic book in America a hundred years ago].
8. Priest Brady, in an address at Elizabeth, N.J. on March 17, 1903, reported in the Elizabeth, N.J. News of March 18, 1903.
9. The Catholic Mirror, December 23, 1893 [The Mirror is a Baltimore Roman Catholic weekly newspaper].
10. John Gilmary Shea, in The American Catholic Quarterly Review, January 1883, p. 139 [Shea (1824-1892) was an important Catholic historian, of his time].

and the list goes on and on. Thay all agree that there is no Biblical basis (hint: OT or NT) for the change from Saturday to Sunday. Here are a couple more if you want more:

“We observe Sunday Instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.”

—Peter Geiermann, CSSR, A Doctrinal Catechism, 1957 edition, page 50.

“We Catholics, then, have precisely the same authority for keeping Sunday holy instead of Saturday as we have for every other article of our creed, namely, the authority of the Church. . .whereas you who are Protestants have really no authority for it whatever; for there is no authority for it (Sunday sacredness) in the Bible, and you will not allow that there can be authority for it anywhere else. Both you and we do, in fact, follow tradition in this matter; but we follow it, believing it to be a part of God’s word, and the (Catholic) Church to be its divinely appointed guardian and interpreter; you follow it (the Catholic Church), denouncing it all the time as a fallible and treacherous guide, which often ‘makes the commandments of God of none effect’ quoting Matthew 15:6.”

—The Brotherhood of St. Paul, The Clifton Tracts, Vol. 4, tract 4, page 15.

“The Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by right of the divine, infallible authority given to her by her founder, Jesus Christ. The Protestant claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh-day Adventist is the only consistent Protestant.”

—The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942, page 4.

Are you really trying to say that all these ordained priests are sloppy apologists. You can’t convince me of this.

 

[illuminator]

You also said this:

And, once again, the Council of Trent did not condemn Protestantism on the basis of Sunday worship. Condemnation of Sola Scriptura is quite another issue, entirely.

Again please read the site (which is from the Catholic web site “Mary Online”

amazingdiscoveries.org/research/maryonline.htm
Other sites that might be helpful:
biblelight.net/bssb-1443-1444.htm
yashanet.com/library/reformf.htm

These are historical documents that cannot be refuted. This happened. The Mary Online is a Catholic Journal that was peer reviewed and was one of a major city (Baltimore). This is not a “sloppy apologist”

You also said:
When the first Christians, on the divinely-given authority of the Church, worshipped on Sunday, guess what “The Scriptures” were.

Hint: Its initials are The Old Testament. So, Sunday worship is indicated in the NT, but not the OT. This is to be expected. The Church didn’t resort to Sola Scriptura then, and it doesn’t now.

Are you saying we should go by the Old Testament alone?

First of all, the chruch fathers didn’t worship on Sunday until a about 100 years after Christ and by then most if not all of the NT was written (which by the way shows no evidence of Sunday worship - see Mary Online article by Catholic Mirror). And the reason why they did as postulated in the thesis by S. Bacchiocchi “From Saturday to Sunday” is because of regio-political reasons (i.e. anti-sematism and persecution of the Jews in the Roman era). Indeed, at least some Christians continued to keep the Sabbath day (Saturday) afterward.

Here is the full copy of his thesis which was sealed by the Pope in 1975 and published by the THE PONTIFICAL GREGORIAN UNIVERSITY PRESS ROME, ITALY 1977. It got a IMPRIMATUR in 1975. I hope you decide that this is not a “sloppy apologist”

http://english.sdaglobal.org/dnl/bacchi/books/sab2sun.pdf#search=‘Bacchiocchi%20thesis’

I seem to be quoting more Catholic texts then anyone else.

 

[DeFide]

illuminator:

…

Here is the full copy of his thesis which was sealed by the Pope in 1975 and published by the THE PONTIFICAL GREGORIAN UNIVERSITY PRESS ROME, ITALY 1977. It got a IMPRIMATUR in 1975. I hope you decide that this is not a “sloppy apologist”

http://english.sdaglobal.org/dnl/bacchi/books/sab2sun.pdf#search=‘Bacchiocchi%20thesis’

I seem to be quoting more Catholic texts then anyone else.

Your link backfired on you badly. He has a whole section on New Testament references to Sunday worship. Maybe you should look for Catholic teachings from the Catechism and not a Seventh Day Adventist website. (sdaglobal)

Do you have a point with all this?

 

[illuminator]

it most certainly does not. Did you actually read the texts? He says
“These attempts to extrapolate from Paul’s fund-raising plan a regular
pattern of Sunday observance reveal inventiveness and originality, but they
seem to rest more on construed arguments than on the actual information the
text provides.”

“In the light of these considerations the probative value of Acts 20:7-
12 for regular Sunday”keeping seems rather insignificant.”

He is quoting these text that are in the Bible and are used as “evidence” for Sabbath. Then he shows how they are wrong.

I already told you my point - my question actually.Here it is again.

Does the Catholic Church believe that there is biblical evidence for the Sunday observance or is it all by Tradition.

Remember the order of things chronologically

1. OT
2. Christ Birth, Death, and Resurrection
3. Christian Church Born
4. New testament (NT) written

Based on this thesis, there is good evidence that between 3 and 4, Christians were keeping Saturday as the Sabbth (the Pope agrees - hence the IMPRIMATUR on the front cover of the doctoral thesis[and Dr. Bacchiocchi’s Ph.D degree])

Further, after 4, there is no evidence for the in the NT (or OT for that matter) for a Sunday Sabbath. (if you disagree please look at the Catholic apologetic web site of Mary Online above and the present thesis that I have presented to you as this MUST have been the case or else Protestantism would not have been rejected at the Counsil of Trent.

Some time after 4, “the venerable day of the Sun” was chosen as the new sabbath by the Catholic church. They say that “the church saw fit to change the day” -

Fine, it the church saw fit - then just say that! Why waste time giving Bible texts to support why Sunday is the sabbath when it really doesn’t matter to the catholic anyway. Right? Remember the sola scriptura is wrong in the eyes of the Catholic. “If the church fathers said it - that’s good enough for me.” It shouldn’t matter what the bible says regarding the sabbath. In fact, as I’ve already shown in the previous quotes from Catholic literature - they boast that the bible says something different than it taught. But, they say, the Catholic church has the right to change things that God has set in motion.

“The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, but he is Jesus Christ Himself, hidden under veil of flesh.”–The Catholic National, July, 1895.

[When the pope is crowned, he is reminded that he is] “the father of princes, and kings, and the Supreme Judge of the Universe, and on earth the Vicar of Jesus Christ our Savior, and the Governor of the world.” --Ferraris, Ecclesiastical Dictionary, art. “Pope” [Lucius Ferraris (d. before 1763) was an Italian Catholic canonist of the Franciscan order and consultor of the Holy Office in Rome].

"Ques. --By what authority did the Church substitute Sunday for Saturday?
“Ans. --The Church substituted Sunday for Saturday by the plenitude of that divine power which Jesus Christ bestowed upon her.” --Peter F. Geiermann, The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, 1923 edition, p. 59 [Priest Geiermann (1870-1929) was a well-known Catholic writer].

"Ques. --When Protestants do profane work [regular employment] upon Saturday, or the seventh day of the week, do they follow the Scripture as their only rule of faith–do they find this permission clearly laid down in the Sacred Volume?
"Ans. --On the contrary, they have only the authority of [Catholic] tradition for this practice. In profaning Saturday, they violate one of God’s commandments, which He has never abrogated,–‘Remember thou keep holy the Sabbath day.’
"Ques. --Is the observance of Sunday, as the day of rest, a matter clearly laid down in Scripture?
“Ans. --It certainly is not; and yet all Protestants consider the observance of this particular day as essentially necessary to salvation. To say, we observe the Sunday, because Christ rose from the dead on that day is to say we act without warrant of Scripture; and we might as well [incorrectly] say, that we should rest on Thursday because Christ ascended to heaven on that day.”–Priest Steven Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism, pp. 252, 254 [The catechism of this Scottish priest is widely used in Catholic schools to instruct children into their beliefs].

I especially like the above text.

 

[illuminator]

I must plainly state that all [ALL] the quotes and information that I have presented was written and approved by the Catholic Church. I have presented NO Seventh-day Adventist material. Please look at the above post and notice that it IS from the Catholic Catechism. Don’t get mad at me. It’s your chruch’s writings.

 

[jimmy]

Based on this thesis, there is good evidence that between 3 and 4, Christians were keeping Saturday as the Sabbth (the Pope agrees - hence the IMPRIMATUR on the front cover of the doctoral thesis[and Dr. Bacchiocchi’s Ph.D degree])

There is no mention of worship on saturday in the NT or in the early Christian writings. The only mentions are of gathering on Sunday and collecting money then. You were shown the earliest Christian authors witness to when worship was done. I would like to see the Imprimatur that this guy supposedly has.

When you post quotes like the one below you lose all credibility.

“The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, but he is Jesus Christ Himself, hidden under veil of flesh.”–The Catholic National, July, 1895.

Courteous of mercygate.

I found this in Radio Replies, Vol. 2, p. 84:

310. Pope Pius X. made the blasphemous claim that he was “Jesus Christ hidden under the veil of the flesh. Does the Pope speak? It is Jesus Christ who speaks.”**

A Protestant paper, the “Church Review,” in England, Oct. 3, 1895, charged cardinal Sarto, Archbishop of Venice, with having uttered those words at Venice. Cardinal Sarto was elected Pope in 1903. But as soon as the charge was made in 1895 that Cardinal Sarto had said those words, inquiries were sent from England to Venice, and Cardinal Sarto produced the manuscript of his discourse. And this is what he actually did say: "The Pope represents Jesus Christ Himself, and therefore is a loving father. The life of the Pope is a holocaust of love for the human family. His word is love; love, his weapon; love, the answer he gives to all who hate him; love, his flag, i.e., the Cross, which signed the greatest triumph on earth and in heaven.

The only places online where this quote is found is in SDA websites, you would think all protestants would use it. Unless you give more exact references they will be ignored. There are six or seven volumes of the Catholic National Reader. I will not trust the quotes untill I can check them and I am not going to read through seven volumes of it to find a quote. Give volume number and page number so that I can find it. Give authoritative sources like encyclicals, the catechism and the councils. I would like some sources.

Regarding your earlier post that refered to me. You were the one who said that the protestants were condemned for holding Saturday as a day of worship. The quote that is given is not a part of the documents of Trent, it is part of the debates. There were a lot more than just that one line in the debates.

 

[jimmy]

illuminator:

I must plainly state that all [ALL] the quotes and information that I have presented was written and approved by the Catholic Church. I have presented NO Seventh-day Adventist material. Please look at the above post and notice that it IS from the Catholic Catechism. Don’t get mad at me. It’s your chruch’s writings.

The only places online that I have found a reference to the catechism you reference are on SDA sites. Can you please give a source that is worth reading? If it is only on SDA sites its credibility is not too strong. Here are three links to three different catechisms. Two of these were written by popes when they were pope and the current pope was very important in the writing of the third. It doesn’t get more authoritative than that.

The Roman Catechism (Also called the Catechism of Trent)

The Catechism of Pius X

The Catechism of The Catholic Church

Please find some quotes supporting your ideas from these catechisms, which are far more authoritative than a scottish catechism that is only referenced on SDA sites.

Here are some links to councils and encyclicals that you can read through and quote for us.

Councils of The Catholic Church

Papal Encyclicals

Here is a little quote I found in the catechism of Trent.

The Apostles therefore resolved to consecrate the first day of the week to the divine worship, and called it the Lord’s day. St. John in the Apocalypse makes mention of the Lord’s day; and the Apostle commands collections to be made on the first day of the week, that is, according to the interpretation of St. Chrysostom, on the Lord’s day. From all this we learn that even then the Lord’s day was kept holy in the Church. The Roman Catechism, The Third Commandment, The Jewish Sabbath Changed to Sunday By The Apostles

Here is a quote from the Catechism of St. Pius X.

3 Q: Why is Sunday sanctified instead of Saturday in the New Law?

A: Sunday, which means the Lord’s Day, was substituted for Saturday, because it was on that day that our Lord rose from the dead. Catechism of Pius X, The Third Commandment

Here is a quote from the modern catechism

2175

Sunday is expressly distinguished from the sabbath which it follows chronologically every week; for Christians its ceremonial observance replaces that of the sabbath. In Christ’s Passover, Sunday fulfills the spiritual truth of the Jewish sabbath and announces man’s eternal rest in God. For worship under the Law prepared for the mystery of Christ, and what was done there prefigured some aspects of Christ:107

Those who lived according to the old order of things have come to a new hope, no longer keeping the sabbath, but the Lord’s Day, in which our life is blessed by him and by his death.108

2176 The celebration of Sunday observes the moral commandment inscribed by nature in the human heart to render to God an outward, visible, public, and regular worship "as a sign of his universal beneficence to all."109 Sunday worship fulfills the moral command of the Old Covenant, taking up its rhythm and spirit in the weekly celebration of the Creator and Redeemer of his people. Part 3, Section3, Article3

As you can see the above catechism quotes one of the earliest of Christians, Ignatius of Antioch, who was the disciple of John the apostle and knew Paul and the other apostles. He died in 107AD. I have given you some authoritative sources showing what the Catholic Church thinks of your claims that it is unscriptural.

 

[jimmy]

I find it funny that you have to go to the most obscure sources to find something that is wrong with our statements. You can’t just quote one of our main catechisms, instead you quote a set of books that nobody has ever heard of(The Catholic National Review) and you quote a Catechism that is peculiar to Scotland and is only referenced by SDA people.

 

[jimmy]

Here is another well known catechism, the Baltimore Catechism. Not quite as authoritative as the others though.

The Baltimore Catechism

Another version of Baltimore Catechism

Q. 1250. Why does the Church command us to keep the Sunday holy instead of the Sabbath?

A. The Church commands us to keep the Sunday holy instead of the Sabbath because on Sunday Christ rose from the dead, and on Sunday He sent the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles.

**Q. 1251. Do we keep Sunday instead of Saturday holy for any other reason? **

A. We keep Sunday instead of Saturday holy also to teach that the Old Law is not now binding upon us, but that we must keep the New Law, which takes its place. The Baltimore Catechism Part 3, Lesson 32

Here is a master Catechism index that shows the headings of sections with links to that section in the various catechisms listed above plus the Aquinas Catechism. It is a pretty good source.

Master Catechism Index

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

montanaman:

It’s a serious question. I know WE know why it is, but I’m finding that our single-minded loathing of this man-made tradition mystifies Protestants. Our repeated refutations of it seem, to them, like an attack on the Bible even though that is nowhere near our intention.

So, I wanted to open up a discussion on WHY we zero in on this false doctrine rather than, say, “baptism is a symbol only.” For many of us, SS is just the easiest one to refute, and it has the added benefit of being the Achilles’ Heel of Protestantism. But I also loathe this doctrine because it’s untrue, and I’m a fanatic when it comes to truth and falsehood. I think SS is also our favorite target because of all the other false doctrines, it seems to be the wellspring from which all other errors flow.

So, any other thoughts, or am I just stating the obvious?

I think we don’t bicker about “baptism is only a symbol,” because that is not a tenent of being a Protestant. Many Protestants do not believe in “baptism is a symbol only” but do not come close to believing it is a sacrament either. Some will just say it is necessary for salvation without elaborating, others will agree wholeheartedly with the Catholic view. Sola Scriptura undermines almost all sects of Protestantism, because it is one creed almost all “Evangelicals” hold. When I tell my Protestant friends to prove Sola Scriptura to me from the Scriptures, most quote the same verses that the original Protestants did, without showing other substantial proof. Sola Scriptura is unbiblical and is a gross error, which is why it is best to show them the error of this first and let them contemplate it. A lot of Protestants don’t even know the solas, and when they hear about them and the other solas, most are usually more open to the Catholic interpretation.

This is my experience anyway.

God bless!

 

[jimmy]

To get back to the original topic, sola scriptura undermines all of protestantism as so many others have said. If you destroy this tradition of men then you destroy the whole base for protestantism. A protestant could admit that both faith and works are important and remain a protestant, they just have to re-interpret the scriptures to fit their view. But if scripture is not the only source then they are missing something and in order to have the full truth they must find what they are missing.

 

[kleary]

"Israelites and Adventists both appeal to the Bible for the divine command, persistently obliging the strict observance of Saturday. The Israelite respects the authority of the Old Testament only, but the Adventist, who is a Christian, accepts the New Testament on the same ground as the Old: viz., an inspired record also. He finds that the Bible, his teacher, is consistent in both parts, that the Redeemer, during His mortal life, never kept any other day than Saturday. The Gospels plainly evince to him this fact; whilst, in the pages of the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles, and the Apocalypse, not the vestige of an act canceling the Saturday arrangement can be found. " Catholic Mirror Sept 2 1893

Wrong. Seventh Day Adventists are NOT CHRISTIANS.- In order to be a Christian you MUST believe in the Trinity and the Divinity of Jesus Christ and they DO NOT.

Ken

 

[illuminator]

First to kleary:

You are Wrong: Seventh-day Adventist are Christian. First lets assume that you are correct in stating that to be a Christian you must believe in the Trinity and the Divinity of Jesus Christ.

Well then, lets look at their 28 Fundamental Beliefs. It’s quite easy. You could read them all in about 10 minutes but for the sake of this argument all we really need to look at is the first 4:

Taken from their offical web site:
adventist.org/beliefs/fundamental/index.html

1. The Holy Scriptures:
   The Holy Scriptures, Old and New Testaments, are the written Word of God, given by divine inspiration through holy men of God who spoke and wrote as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. In this Word, God has committed to man the knowledge necessary for salvation. The Holy Scriptures are the infallible revelation of His will. They are the standard of character, the test of experience, the authoritative revealer of doctrines, and the trustworthy record of God’s acts in history. (2 Peter 1:20, 21; 2 Tim. 3:16, 17; Ps. 119:105; Prov. 30:5, 6; Isa. 8:20; John 17:17; 1 Thess. 2:13; Heb. 4:12.)
2. The Trinity:
   There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal Persons. God is immortal, all-powerful, all-knowing, above all, and ever present. He is infinite and beyond human comprehension, yet known through His self-revelation. He is forever worthy of worship, adoration, and service by the whole creation. (Deut. 6:4; Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14; Eph. 4:4-6; 1 Peter 1:2; 1 Tim. 1:17; Rev. 14:7.)
3. The Father:
   God the eternal Father is the Creator, Source, Sustainer, and Sovereign of all creation. He is just and holy, merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness. The qualities and powers exhibited in the Son and the Holy Spirit are also revelations of the Father. (Gen. 1:1; Rev. 4:11; 1 Cor. 15:28; John 3:16; 1 John 4:8; 1 Tim. 1:17; Ex. 34:6, 7; John 14:9.)
4. The Son:
   God the eternal Son became incarnate in Jesus Christ. Through Him all things were created, the character of God is revealed, the salvation of humanity is accomplished, and the world is judged. Forever truly God, He became also truly man, Jesus the Christ. He was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary. He lived and experienced temptation as a human being, but perfectly exemplified the righteousness and love of God. By His miracles He manifested God’s power and was attested as God’s promised Messiah. He suffered and died voluntarily on the cross for our sins and in our place, was raised from the dead, and ascended to minister in the heavenly sanctuary in our behalf. He will come again in glory for the final deliverance of His people and the restoration of all things. (John 1:1-3, 14; Col. 1:15-19; John 10:30; 14:9; Rom. 6:23; 2 Cor. 5:17-19; John 5:22; Luke 1:35; Phil. 2:5-11; Heb. 2:9-18; 1 Cor. 15:3, 4; Heb. 8:1, 2; John 14:1-3.)

So I guess according to Kleary, SDAs are Christian!

 

[illuminator]

Thanks to Jimmy for that wonderful reference to the Cathecisms. If you look at all of them refering to the 3rd (4th for me) Commandment, it says something like:

cin.org/users/james/ebooks/master/master2.htm

"356. Q. Are the Sabbath day and the Sunday the same?
A. The Sabbath day and the Sunday are not the same. The Sabbath is the seventh day of the week, and is the day which was kept holy in the Old . Law; the Sunday is the first day of the week, and is the day which is kept holy in the New Law.

“Old Law” means the law that God gave to the Jews, the New Law, the law that Our Lord gave to Christians.

1. Q. Why does the Church command us to keep the Sunday holy instead of the Sabbath?
   A. The Church commands us to keep the Sunday holy instead of the Sabbath because on Sunday Christ rose from the dead, and on Sunday He sent the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles.

We keep Sunday instead of Saturday also to teach that the Old Law is not now binding upon us, but that we must keep the New Law, which takes its place.

I mean, this is not some off the wall thing guys. This is YOUR literature. I don’t have to go to Scotland or elsewhere or anything else. I can go anywhere and find it.

Please note that it doesn’t say something like this:
Question: Why do we worship on Sunday?
Answer: Because of [this text] or because of [that text] found in the book of Acts or the book of John.

It plainly says in just about every reference: IT is this way because the church saw fit or because Jesus rose on Sunday or because we need to rememebr not to follow the old law - etc… In other words, stuff that has no basis in the Bible.

And, guys, I think you are missing the point. If there was a Biblical basis for the keeping of Sunday, don’t you think the Protestants at Trent would have rebuttled with those arguments? In fact they did not because they could not. There was no way of getting around this because of the Protestants own oath: The Augsburg Confession, 1530 – had clearly admitted that “the observation of the Lord’s day” had been appointed by “the Church” only. (i.e. -no biblical basis)

By the way The Augsburg Confession of 1530 (A Protestant Confession and also a good historical document) also sheads light onto the controversy. Here is an excerpt from it (they is refering to the Catholic Church)

"They refer to the Sabbath-day as having been changed into the Lord’s Day, contrary to the Decalog, as it seems. Neither is there any example whereof they make more than concerning the changing of the Sabbath-day. Great, say they, is the power of the Church, since it has dispensed with one of the Ten Commandments! "

carm.org/creeds/augsburg.htm

Is there still anyone out there that wants to dispute that Sunday Observance in the Catholic Church is not based on Biblical evidence but only on Tradition?

I have shown you major main stream evidence. You pick the Catechism, and look up the “Third Commandment.”

So my question is why don’t you make that your argument on this and other web sites. Why don’t you simply say, “We changed the rest day because we can. Don’t worry looking in the Bible for a reason - you won’t find it”

 

[jimmy]

No one has claimed that sunday is the sabbath. What they have claimed is that Sunday was chosen by the apostles as the feast of the Lord. It is the day of the celebration of our reformation. God formed us and it was commemorated on the sixth day. Man fell, the Christ reformed us on the 8th day and we celebrate that. If you don’t like that we celebrate the ressurection that is fine by us, but you will not change our mind.

The reason why I quote these is because you post obscure quotes and try to say that ‘the Catholic Church teaches that there is no scriptural support for sunday worship.’ You post this obscure statement from a source no body knows and try to use this as your source. Here is your quote.

–It certainly is not; and yet all Protestants consider the observance of this particular day as essentially necessary to salvation. To say, we observe the Sunday, because Christ rose from the dead on that day is to say we act without warrant of Scripture; and we might as well [incorrectly] say, that we should rest on Thursday because Christ ascended to heaven on that day."–Priest Steven Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism, pp. 252, 254 [The catechism of this Scottish priest is widely used in Catholic schools to instruct children into their beliefs].

 

[jimmy]

Is there still anyone out there that wants to dispute that Sunday Observance in the Catholic Church is not based on Biblical evidence but only on Tradition?

I have shown you major main stream evidence. You pick the Catechism, and look up the “Third Commandment.”

So my question is why don’t you make that your argument on this and other web sites. Why don’t you simply say, “We changed the rest day because we can. Don’t worry looking in the Bible for a reason - you won’t find it”

OK, if you do not want to think about what has been given to you then I am done with this thread. You have a problem of not reading what is said and completely dismissing it.

 

[illuminator]

Jimmy.

These “obscure quotes” are Catholic obscure quotes. Please tell me what is so obscure about the following quotes:

“If you follow the Bible alone there can be no question that you are obliged to keep Saturday holy, since that is the day especially prescribed by Almighty God to be kept holy to the Lord.”–Priest F.G. Lentz, The Question Box, 1900, p. 98 [Lentz (d. 1917) was a Catholic priest and writer, based in the Illinois area].

The following statement comes from a tract written to the Protestants of England, by John Milner (1752-1826), the English Vicar Apostolic of the Roman Catholic Church. The entire tract is an appeal for Protestants to return fully to the Church of Rome:
"The first precept in the Bible, is that of sanctifying the seventh day: ‘God blessed the SEVENTH DAY, and sanctified it.’ Gen. 2:3. This precept was confirmed by God, in the Ten Commandments: ‘Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy’. ‘The SEVENTH DAY is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.’ [Ex. 20:8-11]. On the other hand, Christ declares that he is ‘not come to destroy the law, but to fulfil it.’ Matt. 5:17. He himself observed the [Seventh-day] Sabbath: ‘And as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day.’ Lk. 4:16. His disciples likewise observed it, after His death: ‘They rested on the Sabbath day according to the commandment.’ Lk. 23:56.
“Yet, with all this weight of Scripture authority for keeping the Sabbath, or seventh day holy, Protestants, of all denominations, make this a profane day and transfer the obligation of it to the first day of the week, or the Sunday. Now what authority have they for doing this? None at all, but the unwritten Word, or Tradition of the Catholic church, which declares that the apostles made the change in honor of Christ’s resurrection, and the descent of the Holy Ghost, on that day of the week.”–John Milner, The End of Religious Controversy, in a Friendly Correspondence Between a Religious Society of Protestants, and a Roman Catholic Divine, “Letter 11, To James Brown, Esq,” 1897, p. 89.

"Ques. --What Bible authority is there for changing the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week? Who gave the Pope the authority to change a command of God?
“Ans. --If the Bible is the only guide for the Christian, then the Seventh-day Adventist is right, in observing the Saturday with the Jew . . . Is it not strange that those who make the Bible their only teacher, should inconsistently follow in this matter the tradition of the Catholic Church?”–Bertrand Conway, The Question Box, 1903 ed., pp. 254-255; 1915 ed., p. 179 [Conway (1872-1959) was a Paulist father in the Catholic Church].

“The Adventists are the only body of Christians with the Bible as their teacher, who can find no warrant in its pages for the change of day from the seventh to the first . . . Reason and common sense demand the acceptance of one or the other of these alternatives: either Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday, or Catholicity and the keeping holy of Sunday. Compromise is impossible.”–Catholic Mirror, September 2 and December 23, 1893 [The Catholic Mirror, a Baltimore journal was at this time the official organ of Cardinal Gibbons].

“Prove to me from the Bible alone that I am bound to keep Sunday holy. There is no such law in the Bible. It is a law of the holy Catholic Church alone. The Bible says ‘Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.’ The Catholic Church says, No. By my divine power I abolish the Sabbath day and command you to keep holy the first day of the week. And ho! The entire civilized world bows down in reverent obedience to the command of the Holy Catholic Church.”–Priest Thomas Enright, CSSR, President of Redemptorist College, Kansas City, Mo., in a lecture at Hartford, Kansas, February 18, 1884, and printed in the Hartford Kansas Weekly Call, February 22, 1884, and the American Sentinel, a New York Roman Catholic journal in June 1893, page 173.

What do you mean to say about the following obscure quotes? That they are not right? That all these are imposters. That they all gathered together in some sort of conspiracy?

I must have given you 30 quotes in the last two days. All of them Catholic. All of them referenced. And none of them contrary to the Catechism (pick which one). So why are you mad at me?

Let’s assume that they are all wrong. Then that’s a lot of Father’s Traditions that are inconsistent with Rome. You and I know that that just doesn’t happen.

If you don’t like what they are saying - take it up with your Priest.

Why would I make this stuff up?

 

[illuminator]

Here’s another main stream quote for you:

newadvent.org/library/almanac_thisrock94.htm

BEGINNING OF QUOTE:
In ancient Judaism the sabbath was from sundown on Friday to sundown on Saturday. If Sunday is the Christian sabbath, should we celebrate it from sundown on Saturday to sundown on Sunday? Is this why attending an anticipatory Mass on Saturday evening fulfills our Sunday obligation?

The Sunday obligation applies to the modern Sunday, reckoned from midnight to midnight. This was established by canon 1246 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law.

The ancient Jews reckoned days from sundown to sundown, meaning that for them the first part of the day was evening. This is why Genesis 1 says things like, “And there was evening, and there was morning–the first day” (Gen. 1:5). The same custom was observed by the ancient Phoenicians, Athenians, Arabs, Germans, and Gauls. Today Jews and other groups who keep the sabbath, such as the Seventh-Day Adventists, continue to celebrate it from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday. This way of reckoning time was not the only one in the ancient world. For example, the Romans reckoned days from midnight to midnight–the system we use today.

The option of attending an anticipatory Mass on Saturday evening has nothing to do with the fact the sabbath began at sundown. This provision was originally introduced for Catholics who had to miss Sunday Mass for a good reason (for example, because they had to work). The 1983 Code of Canon Law simply states: "The precept of participating in the Mass is satisfied by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere at a Catholic rite either on the holy day or on the evening of the preceding day.

Sunday is often spoken of as “the Christian sabbath,” but this is not a technical description. Sunday is not a strict replacement for the sabbath (which has been abolished), but a day the Church instituted to fulfill a parallel function. Thus Ignatius of Antioch, the earliest Church Father to address this question, states that Christian converts “have given up keeping the sabbath and now order their lives by the Lord’s Day instead, the day when life first dawned for us, thanks to him [Christ] and his death.” (Letter to the Magnesians 9 [A.D. 107]). 3
END OF QUOTE

You see, it says that the “church instituted to fulfill a parallel function” Just like I’ve been telling you all along. No Biblical evidence, no quotes, no texts - just Tradition.

 

[Church_Militant]

Is there still anyone out there that wants to dispute that Sunday Observance in the Catholic Church is not based on Biblical evidence but only on Tradition?

I have shown you major main stream evidence. You pick the Catechism, and look up the “Third Commandment.”

So my question is why don’t you make that your argument on this and other web sites. Why don’t you simply say, “We changed the rest day because we can. Don’t worry looking in the Bible for a reason - you won’t find it”

You see, it says that the “church instituted to fulfill a parallel function” Just like I’ve been telling you all along. No Biblical evidence, no quotes, no texts - just Tradition.

Uh yeah…How many times does the NT say that the church met on the 1st day of the week?

Acts Of Apostles:7 And on the first day of the week, when we were assembled to break bread, Paul discoursed with them, being to depart on the morrow: and he continued his speech until midnight.

1st Corinthians 16:2 On the first day of the week let every one of you put apart with himself, laying up what it shall well please him; that when I come, the collections be not then to be made.

Why?

Matthew 28:1 And in the end of the sabbath, when it began to dawn towards the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalen and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre.

Mark 16:2 And very early in the morning, the first day of the week, they come to the sepulchre, the sun being now risen.

Mark 16:9 But he rising early the first day of the week, appeared first to Mary Magdalen, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

Luke 24:1 And on the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came to the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared.

John 20:1 And on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalen cometh early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre; and she saw the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

This has nothing to do with tradition one way or the other, it is is based upon the FACT that Christians celebrate the resurrection of Christ and not the Jewish Sabbath. Initially they considered themeselves still Jews but that came to an early on and the NT records that we met on the 1st day of the week.

SDA sources are not worth reading since they have every manner of SS abuse and disorder in their teachings, up to and including that Michael the Archangel is Jesus and predicting the day and hour of Christ’s return.

Now if there is tradition involved here then those who have issues with it need to take that up with the early church, but the basis for Sunday Mass is New Testament and the scriptural practice is there as are the reasons why.

As for the sources that you have quoted THIS covers it very throrughly. The fact that the writings of the early church fathers support the scriptural points that I have made summarize that we Catholics simply point out that the real New Testament Christians took it upon their own authority to cease Jewish observance of the Sabbath and worship on Sunday. This is just another aspect of the Sacred Tradition clarifying and reinforcing the New Testament teachings.
Pax vobiscum,

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

illuminator:

If you follow the Bible alone there can be no question that you are obliged to keep Saturday holy, since that is the day especially prescribed by Almighty God to be kept holy to the Lord."–Priest F.G. Lentz, The Question Box, 1900, p. 98 [Lentz (d. 1917) was a Catholic priest and writer, based in the Illinois area].

illuminator (“nice” name, satan’s name was the lucifer or, light bearer).

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Sabbath remains sundown Friday to sunup Sunday. The Lord’s day is the day on which we worship because the Lord rose from the dead on Sunday.