Why won’t all other Christians recognize the Roman Catholic Pope as their leader?

[mathematician]

So, if we are to follow your logic, we should also not believe in the Transfiguration since this is a physical impossibility that is no longer viable, is that correct?

The Transfiguration, as it occurs in the Bible, does not involve a physical theory which is demonstrably untrue. However, if the RC Church got hold of it, and tried to offer some kind of explanation in terms of essence & accidents, or whatever, then that explanation very likely be untenable (not the Transfiguration itself).

So, are we to suspend belief in God as well? After all, your point here is exactly the same point given by atheists, in that God’s existence is at variance with what we know about the nuclear nature of matter. That is why they reject God–He cannot exist in what we know matter to be.

God’s existence is at variance with what we know about the nuclear structure of matter? How so? Not unless the Roman Catholic Church postulates that God is “made” of the same “stuff” we are.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

This question can also be flipped.

Why won’t all other Christians recognize the head of the Southern Baptist denomination as their leader? Because it was started by a man.

Or the head of the Presbyterian Church USA as their leader? Because it was started by a man.

Or the Patriarch of the Orthodox Church as their leader?

The Patriarch is recognized by Roman Catholic church to be valid and successor of the Apostles. Presently east and west geographically possess their respective authorities. Now when it comes to the successor of Peter, the Pope posseses this authority From Jesus himself. Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition both support this fact.

 

[mozart-250]

The Patriarch is recognized by Roman Catholic church to be valid and successor of the Apostles. Presently east and west geographically possess their respective authorities. Now when it comes to the successor of Peter, the Pope posseses this authority From Jesus himself. Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition both support this fact.

The point is that you don’t recognize the Orthodox Patriarch as your leader by virtue of you being Catholic.

The premise of this thread reduces to why aren’t you Catholic. But that is no more of a valid question than why aren’t you Presbyterian or why aren’t you Baptist or why aren’t you anything else…

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

The point is that you don’t recognize the Orthodox Patriarch as your leader by virtue of you being Catholic.

The premise of this thread reduces to why aren’t you Catholic. But that is no more of a valid question than why aren’t you Presbyterian or why aren’t you Baptist or why aren’t you anything else…

**On the contrary, we are not talking about Catholic we are talking about authority. The Authority that one has. You mentioned Baptist and Presbyterian, I said I cant hold to their authority because their belief comes from a Man.

The east and west Catholilc church come from the line of undisputed authority of the apostles. East has its geographical authority, west has her geographical authority. Now to decide on faith and morals Peter has the keys to the kingdom given him by Jesus himself. The difference in authority is when Peter has to stand for all Catholics when the gates of hell come against her, and they will not prevail.**

 

[Milliardo]

The Transfiguration, as it occurs in the Bible, does not involve a physical theory which is demonstrably untrue.

Yes, nice cop-out; He became dazzlingly white before those around Him. Two entities who have long been gone are with Him. So now you’re copping out with this, and didn’t bother to explain. Very convenient, isn’t it?

However, if the RC Church got hold of it, and tried to offer some kind of explanation in terms of essence & accidents, or whatever, then that explanation very likely be untenable (not the Transfiguration itself).

And now that becomes the fault of the Church. Amazing.

God’s existence is at variance with what we know about the nuclear structure of matter? How so? Not unless the Roman Catholic Church postulates that God is “made” of the same “stuff” we are.

Unless you think being Omnipresent is not in variance with the known laws of physics and matter, then all I can say is that your posts, I am sorry to say, are juvenile. I expected more from a “mathematician”, yet your illogical answers do not impress me.

 

[mathematician]

Yes, nice cop-out; He became dazzlingly white before those around Him. Two entities who have long been gone are with Him. So now you’re copping out with this, and didn’t bother to explain. Very convenient, isn’t it?

You think you can explain divine realities? A kind of physics of God? Well that’s where we differ.

Unless you think being Omnipresent is not in variance with the known laws of physics and matter, then all I can say is that your posts, I am sorry to say, are juvenile. I expected more from a “mathematician”, yet your illogical answers do not impress me.

Physics has got absolutely nothing to say about the nature of God. Physics is about the empirically observable. God is not empirically observable (but a wafer is).

 

[Milliardo]

You think you can explain divine realities? A kind of physics of God? Well that’s where we differ.

Again, as a “mathematician” you do not come across as impressive with your answers.

Physics has got absolutely nothing to say about the nature of God. Physics is about the empirically observable. God is not empirically observable (but a wafer is).

Yet gravity, for instance, cannot be observed. Its effects can be observed, but it in itself cannot be observed. Nor can astronomers completely understand its relation to the solar system and its actual role there. Again, nice cop-out; tired, but nice. And no go. Physics has everything to do with God, for He can indeed transmute what we know it to be to His own liking. Far from not having anything to do with Him, it actually has everything to do with Him. Like I said, you’ll have to do better than that to be a “mathematician”.

 

[AgnosTheist]

Yet gravity, for instance, cannot be observed. Its effects can be observed, but it in itself cannot be observed.

its the same thing. you observe gravity through its behavior:

**The Observation of Gravity by means of Invariable Pendulums **

links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0950-1207(19330703)141%3A843%3C233%3ATOOGBM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-E

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

its the same thing. you observe gravity through its behavior:

**The Observation of Gravity by means of Invariable Pendulums **

links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0950-1207(19330703)141%3A843%3C233%3ATOOGBM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-E

Wow it is amazing how science proves transubstantiation. You can observe the blood and body of Jesus christ in the eucharist by the effects he has to the individual. Fascinating!

 

[mozart-250]

**On the contrary, we are not talking about Catholic we are talking about authority. The Authority that one has. You mentioned Baptist and Presbyterian, I said I cant hold to their authority because their belief comes from a Man.

The east and west Catholilc church come from the line of undisputed authority of the apostles. East has its geographical authority, west has her geographical authority. Now to decide on faith and morals Peter has the keys to the kingdom given him by Jesus himself. The difference in authority is when Peter has to stand for all Catholics when the gates of hell come against her, and they will not prevail.**

That’s nice.

You believe that because you are Catholic, and what you asserted is what Catholic’s believe.

So in essence you don’t recognize the head of the Presbyterian Church USA because you are Catholic. I understand that.

For the very same reasons, Presbyterians do not recognize the head of your denomination.

Note: I have for some time had the same questions on the Eucharist as is being posed here. I hope that what you are not saying is that the molecular structure of bread and wine changes to the molecular structure of the human body and the human blood. That would seem to be easily proven false.

If that is not the case, then in what sense is the bread and wine the body and blood of Christ?

 

[mathematician]

Again, as a “mathematician” you do not come across as impressive with your answers.

Tuff. (And you can remove the quotation marks by the way.)

Yet gravity, for instance, cannot be observed. Its effects can be observed, but it in itself cannot be observed.

 

[reteeks21]

Milliardo;3383396:

Again, as a “mathematician” you do not come across as impressive with your answers.

Tuff. (And you can remove the quotation marks by the way.)

Well if you want to split very fine hairs, if we were standing within a few feet of you I would not be able to observe you; I would only be able to observe the light you were reflecting.

I would say Newton did a pretty good job there.

He could, but would you be brave enough to send consecrated wine along for chemical analysis? (Don’t try the essence/accidents argument on me, because that is what this argument is all about. In the light of what we now know about the nature of matter, that distinction is no longer tenable.)

Is anyone else’s head starting to hurt? This is some deep stuff.

 

[Mystic_Warrior]

Why won’t all other Christians recognize the Roman Catholic Pope as their leader?

Leaders and leadership positions exist in every aspect of our lives.

A “chain of command” with a leader at the top and an upper echelon (central leadership) is essential to any large organization. Any organization without a central command, where authority is not passed down from the top, through a series of steps or positions, with each person accountable to the one(s) directly above them, leads to confusion, chaos and that organization is ultimately doomed to failure.

Christianity has never been a democracy and Christianity has always had leaders.

Decision-making responsibilities always originate from the “top” of any properly structured organization, from the higher levels of authority to the lower levels. This is called leadership.

Leadership encourages compliance without dissension. Most organizations’ have a ‘pyramid” type structure or something very close.

All Governments have various leadership positions.
All Businesses have various leadership positions.
All Militaries have various leadership positions
All Professional Sports Teams have various leadership positions.

They all have a leadership structure or “chain of command", which starts at the top from the higher levels of authority to the lower levels.

I can go on forever with examples of leaders, leadership and various organizations with a “chain of command”.

Leadership is “structure”, that’s all it is. Human beings have always craved “structure” in their lives, going all the way back to tribal leaders, it’s in our nature.

Structure is a good thing, it prevents confusion and chaos.

There are 2500+ Catholic Dioceses worldwide and one billion Catholics. It is unreasonable to expect there not to be a “chain of command” and a leadership structure in the Roman Catholic Church and this would include the head of the Church here on earth, the Pope.

The Pope is the “glue”, which holds it all together.

If it was not for the Roman Catholic Pope and the centrally organized structure of the Roman Catholic Church, there would not be a Bible today, there would not be Christianity today, and we would not be having this discussion.

Christianity would have been wiped from the face of the earth, well before any “Protestant” movement.

Why is it, that there are so many “Christians” who experience a “chain of command” or a hierarchy in ever aspect of their lives cannot accept this concept, when it comes to the Roman Catholic Church and the Pope?

Finally, all families have a “pecking order’ or various levels of authority, with the parents at the top, over their children. there is no democracy in a family. Christianity (Catholicism) is one big family, and our “papa” is the Pope.

Why won’t all other Christians recognize the Roman Catholic Pope as their leader?

Leadership is a good thing if you want an organization to remain together and accomplish outward goals. But, leadership in Christianity doesn’t have to equal the Roman Catholic view (you used Roman, I didn’t - remember that folks). The Orthodox do quite well without one person in authority.

Second, it’s preposterous to think that Christianity and the Bible wouldn’t exist today if it weren’t for as you put it, “If it was not for the Roman Catholic Pope and the centrally organized structure of the Roman Catholic Church, there would not be a Bible today, there would not be Christianity today, and we would not be having this discussion”. It’s apparent to me that the Orthodox structure works equally well or better at preserving the Christian faith with no central structure or Pope.

Nothing is really going to change your mind I’m afraid as you are a staunch Catholic and I don’t think you’re going to change mine or anyone else’s mind either. But, I had to challenge these points you made.

Peace…

MW

 

[thedavidwilson]

It tries to talk about matter as if it was a container for something called its essence, and another lot of things called accidents. It may have been possible to posulate such a distinction once upon a time, but it is no longer. Something is blood if and only if it has the mokecular structure of blood; those molecules are made up of atoms, and those atoms are made up of sub-atomic particles. There is no room in there for a distinction between what something appears to be and what it actually is.

Are you just your molecular makup? If so then I can kill/abuse you since you are just a pile of “stuff” or an animal without a spirit. As humans our accidents are our bodies, shapes, color etc. Out substance is our soul/spirit. OUr soul can be dead or dying while our accidents (molecules) are just fine. The substance of the Eucharist does not refer to the molecules of the bread, they are its accidents. There is something beyond the accidents in the eucharist just as there is something beyond molecules that make up you and me.

 

[AgnosTheist]

Wow it is amazing how science proves transubstantiation. You can observe the blood and body of Jesus christ in the eucharist by the effects he has to the individual. Fascinating!

I think its the exact opposite. Science disproves substantiation by the absence of extraordinary effects on the recipient of the host. At best it only serves as an opiate. A placebo. A psycho-somatic feel good effect that lasts only about an hour. Nothing special.

 

[Mickey]

The Orthodox do quite well without one person in authority.

:tiphat:

 

[mathematician]

There is something beyond the accidents in the eucharist just as there is something beyond molecules that make up you and me.

We are getting close to agreement, except for one thing. Something “beyond molecules” must by definition also be something beyond flesh.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

That’s nice.

You believe that because you are Catholic, and what you asserted is what Catholic’s believe.

So in essence you don’t recognize the head of the Presbyterian Church USA because you are Catholic.

No, I dont recognize the head of the Presbyterian church USA for the reasons I stated above. If he or she was given the keys to the kingdom of God, and the authority to bind and loose, I would recognize him. This has nothing to do with me being Catholic.

For the very same reasons, Presbyterians do not recognize the head of your denomination.

What was the very reason that Presebyterians do not recognize the Pope of the one Holy Catholic Apostlic church? I missed that somewhere, can you clarify this for me as I answered your questions?

Note: I have for some time had the same questions on the Eucharist as is being posed here. I hope that what you are not saying is that the molecular structure of bread and wine changes to the molecular structure of the human body and the human blood. That would seem to be easily proven false.

No I did not speak of molecular bodies only cause and effect, what you stated above does not define Transubstantiation.

If that is not the case, then in what sense is the bread and wine the body and blood of Christ?

**Transubstantiated.The bread and wine are transubstantiated into the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ, in the consecrcated species of bread and wine. To our natural senses it is bread and wine, The Blessed sacrament or consecrated Host becomes the true bread from heaven to our souls.

Hebrews 11:1 Faith is the realization of what is hoped for and evidence of things not seen.
2 Because of it the ancients were well attested.
3 By faith we understand that the universe was ordered by the word of God, 3 so that what is visible came into being through the invisible.

1 Cor.2:12 We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the things freely given us by God.
13 And we speak about them not with words taught by human wisdom, but with words taught by the Spirit, describing spiritual realities in spiritual terms. 7
14 Now the natural person 8 does not accept what pertains to the Spirit of God, for to him it is foolishness, and he cannot understand it, because it is judged spiritually.
15 The spiritual person, however, can judge everything but is not subject to judgment 9 by anyone.
16 For “who has known the mind of the Lord, so as to counsel him?” But we have the mind of Christ.

1 Cor.3:16 Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?
17
If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy that person; for the temple of God, which you are, is holy. 9
18
Let no one deceive himself. If any one among you considers himself wise in this age, let him become a fool so as to become wise.
19
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in the eyes of God, for it is written: “He catches the wise in their own ruses,” 20
and again: “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.”
**

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I think its the exact opposite. Science disproves substantiation by the absence of extraordinary effects on the recipient of the host. At best it only serves as an opiate. A placebo. A psycho-somatic feel good effect that lasts only about an hour. Nothing special.

Ah, Agons the word is transubstantiation, not substantiation, I thought we were being speicific.So you agree, there is a cause and effect from the Eucharist, and according to ones dispostion relates this effect. What negative words you attach to this action does not disqualify the extraordinary effects as you stated.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

:tiphat:

Of course it took the authority of Rome to settle the waves. What takes place when a doctrine is in Question or under attack by Governments and secularism.Who’s your daddy now?