Why would the Catholic Church put together a Book that disproves thier own doctrine?

[benjohnson]

The other point missing in Protestant/Catholic relations is the loss of fraternal charity.

It’s getting better! I don’t think I’ve even chased a Catholic in the last year!

Recent encyclicals have been quite charitable - I may not be dammed according to Catholic teaching. This is a change from previous “no salvation outside the Church” in my opinion, though my Catholic friends tell me that I’m just mistaken about what I think they said about the definition of Church was.

 

[LegoGE1947]

It’s getting better! I don’t think I’ve even chased a Catholic in the last year!

Recent encyclicals have been quite charitable - I may not be dammed according to Catholic teaching. This is a change from previous “no salvation outside the Church” in my opinion, though my Catholic friends tell me that I’m just mistaken about what I think they said about the definition of Church was.

It seems one of the biggest things that is bringing different churches together is the common concern over contraception and abortion and such. We no longer have an abortion clinic in Rockford, IL thanks to the combined prayer-efforts of both Catholics and Evangelicals. They also picketed that place shoulder to shoulder while it was open. Yesterday at the rally against the HHS mandate there were people of all faiths that were lining the main street of our city.

 

[GLam8833]

hi, mind if I jump in?
I see a need for a “New Pentecost” in the Catholic Church
indeed ALL the popes since Paul VI(1972) have called for
it!
It will be that THEN the Catholic Church will LIVE OUT the
Bible, and FULFILL it!
The Truth has been and will always be reposited in the
Catholic Church the
“pillar and support of the Truth”(1 Tim. 3:15)
But through “Lack of Spiritual fervor”(Ralph Martin, A New
Pentecost pg 1) Evangelism has been put on hold!

Those interested please check out my member`s profile.

 

[reyjacobs]

Asked this question today to a fundamentalist up in the apologetics playground. He is trying to disprove a Catholic teaching by using the “neutral source” of the Bible.
I thought I would ask both Catholics and non-Catholics this simple quesion.
It begins with the premise of course that the Catholic Church put together the Bible we have.
Why would the Catholic Church put together a Book that disproves thier own doctrine?

Because the Catholic church of the 2nd century put the Bible together. At that time they believed exactly what they put into the Bible. Later on, they changed their mind. It shows that the Catholic church DOES change.

 

[Patavium]

Because the Catholic church of the 2nd century put the Bible together. At that time they believed exactly what they put into the Bible. Later on, they changed their mind. It shows that the Catholic church DOES change.

**Proof **?

 

[Church_Militant]

They wouldn’t and didn’t, but sadly, many modern new winds of doctrines of men are blowing through n-C Christianity.

 

[KathleenGee]

Oh my…St. Irenaeus was not Sola Scriptura…but focused on the tradition of intent…understanding the Sacred Scriptures in light of the Holy Spirit in union with the Ecclesia…

He also firmly believed the Eucharist as the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, soul and divinity…the Word Made Flesh!!!

St. Irenaeus was a most profound theologian and addressed primarily all of the heresies that continue today…and spoke in the spirit of the Church.

Every early church father did not speak perfectly, every single one had some of their own ideas that were heretical…remember the Church is like a seed that grew into formation…

Considering culture and language, geography, politics and power, economic resources, the state of the world and its ongoing profound complexity…one can say that it was truly the Holy Spirit at work in the Church where the common liturgy was formed and practiced through the ancient world at that time, as well as practically all the books chosen for public revelation…along with the choice of the bishop as head vs the conciliar model…and the Creed…one ancient refers to the Creed as composed by Peter and Paul while in Rome…

Which brings us to the next point for unity and communion…that Christ did indeed establish His Church that interpreted Scripture in light of our times…so you must look at Catholic events in context…that the Church and its believers were animated by the Holy Spirit and not the spirit of man which brings division.

One looks at the Holy Spirit at work in the papacy, not looking at the carnate man.

Finally, if you want to seek the truth, go to objective and academic sources rather than believe the misrepresentation that is ongoing by certain fundamentalist preachers who themselves are not well educated but very biased.

I read one post here by a former Baptist who was studying the early church fathers at a Baptist college, and the teaching in itself was without bias…but it led him into the universal and apostolic church.

 

[benjohnson]

Brother, Why don’t we open a thread specifically on this? See if we can help each other understand. I am a cradle Catholic, and thus for me it is harder to understand you as a Lutheran. However, I am empathic to the cries of Luther, and how he was treated by the Pope of that time period.

God Bless!

The history of our squabbles makes for fascinating history, but frankly I see hope for eventual understanding, if not reconciliation.

The good news is that I think what separates us now is much less significant that what separated us in the past. On a personal level, after vigorous debate and the eventual blessing with my pastor, the Godparents of my third child are Catholic, and I could be happier with how they are helping us with our duties. On a larger level, the some Lutheran churches and the Catholic churches have agree on the what Justification means: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Declaration_on_the_Doctrine_of_Justification

Sadly, my Synod rejected the Joint Declaration. But do think that at some point, we’ll get there!

 

[benjohnson]

It seems one of the biggest things that is bringing different churches together is the common concern over contraception and abortion and such. We no longer have an abortion clinic in Rockford, IL thanks to the combined prayer-efforts of both Catholics and Evangelicals. They also picketed that place shoulder to shoulder while it was open. Yesterday at the rally against the HHS mandate there were people of all faiths that were lining the main street of our city.

I agree fully! We can push each other apart of esoteric minutia or we can come together and protect the unborn. I pray that we take the opportunity to be brothers in Christ.

 

[JonNC]

The history of our squabbles makes for fascinating history, but frankly I see hope for eventual understanding, if not reconciliation.

The good news is that I think what separates us now is much less significant that what separated us in the past. On a personal level, after vigorous debate and the eventual blessing with my pastor, the Godparents of my third child are Catholic, and I could be happier with how they are helping us with our duties. On a larger level, the some Lutheran churches and the Catholic churches have agree on the what Justification means: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Declaration_on_the_Doctrine_of_Justification

Sadly, my Synod rejected the Joint Declaration. But do think that at some point, we’ll get there!

Perhaps if good Missouri Synod Lutherans like us continue to push for the JDDJ’s acceptance, it will come to pass. I’ve read some of the arguments against it, and I’m not convinced. It is a wonderfully catholic document which, as far as it goes, Lutherans can and should accept.

Jon

 

[Patavium]

The history of our squabbles makes for fascinating history, but frankly I see hope for eventual understanding, if not reconciliation.

The good news is that I think what separates us now is much less significant that what separated us in the past. On a personal level, after vigorous debate and the eventual blessing with my pastor, the Godparents of my third child are Catholic, and I could be happier with how they are helping us with our duties. On a larger level, the some Lutheran churches and the Catholic churches have agree on the what Justification means: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Declaration_on_the_Doctrine_of_Justification

Sadly, my Synod rejected the Joint Declaration. But do think that at some point, we’ll get there!

Thanks for sharing these GREAT news!!!.

May God help us be One Church, and stop continuing splintering the body of Christ.

Very happy to read this.

God bless!

 

[zz912]

zz,

You have heard it all from other protestants. No Pope,

1. You are Kepha, and on this Kepha I will build My Church. To you will be given the Keys to the Kingdom. Strengthen your brethren. Feed My sheep, tend My sheep, feed My sheep. - All these were said by Christ to Peter.
2. The church of God which sojourns at Rome to the church of God which sojourns at Corinth … But if any disobey the words spoken by him through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger."
   Clement of Rome,Pope,1st Epistle to the Corinthians,1,59:1 (c.A.D. 96) - All this while the Apostle John was still alive. The Corinthians didn’t appeal to John, who was closer, but to the Pope. And his word was final.
3. "Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Mast High God the Father, and of Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son; the Church which is sanctified and enlightened by the will of God, who farmed all things that are according to the faith and love of Jesus Christ, our God and Saviour; the Church which presides in the place of the region of the Romans, and which is worthy of God, worthy of honour, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of credit, worthy of being deemed holy, and which presides over love…"Ignatius of Antioch,Epistle to the Romans, Prologue (A.D. 110)
4. “Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre- eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.”
   Irenaeus,Against Heresies,3:3:2 (A.D. 180)

No Magesterium,

1. Council of Jerusalem in Acts…
2. First Council of Nicaea (325) repudiated Arianism, declared that Christ is “homoousios with the Father” (of the same substance as the Father), and adopted the original Nicene Creed, fixed Easter date; recognized primacy of the sees of Rome, Alexandria and Antioch and granted the See of Jerusalem a position of honor.

3.First Council of Constantinople (381) repudiated Arianism and Macedonianism, declared that Christ is “born of the Father before all time”, revised the Nicene Creed in regard to the Holy Spirit.

4.Council of Ephesus (431) repudiated Nestorianism, proclaimed the Virgin Mary as the Theotokos (“Birth-giver to God”, “God-bearer”, “Mother of God”), repudiated Pelagianism, and reaffirmed the Nicene Creed.

No which of these council(s) do you reject and why? On what basis? Why do you have issues with the teaching authority of Christ’s Church? Do you beleive the words of Jesus when He said “he who hears you, hears Me”?

No priests,

1. Read James again, he tells you to call for the priests if anyone is sick.
2. St. Paul writes to Timothy about how he had laid hands on him, and annointed him, and made him a priest and bishop. He instructs him in how to select me to confer the priesthood on.

there are many more…

No seven sacraments,

1. Baptism - Jesus was baptized, had the Apostles baptize, and commanded that everyone be baptized.
2. Confirmation - Couple times written about in Scripture of annointing and laying on of hands. Some is Holy Orders, but others are Confirmation. Re-read the versus about putting on the armor of God in light of Confirmation.
3. Eucharist - John 6, Paul’s letter to Corinth, the Didache (But let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist, unless they have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, “Give not that which is holy to the dogs.” )
4. Marriage - Wedding of Cana (His first miracle), Jesus teaching on marriage and His strengthening of the rules for marriage.
5. Annointing of the Sick - Book of James
6. Confession - James again, several others
7. Holy Orders - mentioned above.

No sacrifice of Christ ini the eucharist.

1. Reread John 6. He is explicit that it is His Body. He re-emphasizes it three times.
2. And this food is called among us Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. - Justin Martyr (AD 150)
3. Reread St. Paul’s teaching that you eat and drink JUDGEMENT on yourself if you do not discern the Body and Blood.
4. Try and find ONE Church Father who DIDN’T believe in the Real Presence.

No praying to Saints and on and on. Protestants see none of this in scripture or the ECFs although some began in the 3rd century.

1. St. Paul specifically asks for prayers for a friend who had died.
2. In Revelation, the saints hold the prayers of those on earth and present them to God. Not sure how much more specific you can be.

They see the purpose of the Reformation was to return the church to the NT and the ECFs.

Then they did a very poor job of it, because they completely ignored what the ECF’s and the Bible actually say.

 

[zz912]

If that worked, we’d not be in the condition we are in. Look back at the history of “there is no salvation outside of the church”.

I just don’t see how any Christian could really argue against that. While some may disagree over the definition of “church”, the statement itself shouldn’t be a problem. The Church is the Body of Christ. I don’t know of any Christian denomination that thinks people will be saved apart from Christ or His Body. Even those who never heard about Christ, but Christ still wishes to save, will be saved by Him through His Church in ways we don’t understand.

 

[zz912]

Even Catholic historians do not accept the history Irenaeus provides about Peter and Paul. Read the book Antioc and Rome by Fr Raymond E. Brown and John Meier (Imprimatur) and you will see. Irenaeus believed the story he had heard but he had no way to know if it was true or not. Even so he was a great thologian.

Rob

Fr. Raymond Brown won’t earn you many points on this website. He’s just wrong on so many things that it is painful to even begin laying out the corrections.

But as to Irenaeus and the history about Peter and Paul. Are you suggesting that Peter and Paul did not go to Rome, did not found the Church there? Are you suggesting they didn’t get martyred there?

St. Peter tells us in Scripture that he is in Rome.

1 Peter 5:12 I write you this briefly through Silvanus, whom I consider a faithful brother, exhorting you and testifying that this is the true grace of God. Remain firm in it. 13 The chosen one at Babylon sends you greeting, as does Mark, my son. 14 Greet one another with a loving kiss. Peace to all of you who are in Christ.

 

[Nicea325]

Quote: Originally Posted by submariner2 No Magesterium

Yep! And what has been the end results of NO church with authority? Thousands of different denominations with end in sight! Is that the Church you truly believe Jesus founded?

Quote:
Originally Posted by submariner2
They see the purpose of the Reformation was to return the church to the NT and the ECFs.

And did it? Tell me which Protestant church out of hundreds has fufilled such a task? Which fundamentalist church? Evangelical church?

BTW: The church fathers did not encourage nor advocated the founding of denominations,if so give me names.

 

[GLam8833]

The idea of “New Pentecost” did not originate with
my n-C background! It was Ralph Martin, the Pontifical
advisor for the New Evangelization, in his free pamphlet
(get one at www.renewalministries.net)“A New Pentecost”
It is a call to a much deeper and loving discipleship
for the Catholic Church, not only for the Charismatic
movements, which are emphasizing the “baptism of the
Holy Spirit”, which up to now the Catholic Church as
far as I know, does not acknowledge.

Those interested can visit my
member’s profile page.

 

[Stilldreamn]

Perhaps if good Missouri Synod Lutherans like us continue to push for the JDDJ’s acceptance, it will come to pass. I’ve read some of the arguments against it, and I’m not convinced. It is a wonderfully catholic document which, as far as it goes, Lutherans can and should accept.

Jon

I agree. I sometimes think the rejection had more to do with the fact that the ELCA signed off on it than anything else. When you are determined to “not be like them” perhaps you search overzealously for points of disagreement.

 

[Contarini]

Fr. Raymond Brown won’t earn you many points on this website. He’s just wrong on so many things that it is painful to even begin laying out the corrections.

And hopefully that will help submariner and other Protestants here see that you guys represent, in many ways, a sectarian version of Catholicism, and they will stop judging Catholicism based on the opinions expressed on this forum.

Edwin

 

[submariner2]

Oh my…St. Irenaeus was not Sola Scriptura…but focused on the tradition of intent…understanding the Sacred Scriptures in light of the Holy Spirit in union with the Ecclesia…

He also firmly believed the Eucharist as the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, soul and divinity…the Word Made Flesh!!!

St. Irenaeus was a most profound theologian and addressed primarily all of the heresies that continue today…and spoke in the spirit of the Church.

Kathleen,

Ireaneus said plainly he was sola scriptura. I dont know how you could miss that.

one ancient refers to the Creed as composed by Peter and Paul while in Rome…

No historians take that story seriously.

Finally, if you want to seek the truth, go to objective and academic sources rather than believe the misrepresentation that is ongoing by certain fundamentalist preachers who themselves are not well educated but very biased.

I agree. The top Catholic scholars and historians are the place to look for real church history and bible knowledge. I read them a lot.

Rob

 

[guanophore]

You have heard it all from other protestants. No Pope, No Magesterium, No priests, No seven sacraments, No sacrifice of Christ ini the eucharist. No praying to Saints and on and on. Protestants see none of this in scripture or the ECFs although some began in the 3rd century.

There are Protestants who do not have such strong anti-catholic lenses, and so they DO see these things in Scripture and the ECF’s.

It is a lot harder to see it if 1) You have your mind made up in advance it is not there
2) You have a vested interest in not seeing it

They see the purpose of the Reformation was to return the church to the NT and the ECFs.

Amen

People are always in need of reform, thought the doctrines of Christ are not.

I dont intend to make an argument on this, Just pointing out the differences that Protestants see as happening centuries after the bible was written and in use among christians.

Rob

Except that a “bible” did not exist until 382 AD, at which time all of these other Sacred Traditions had been in practice for 350 years.

Hence the topic question. Since the Church was already practicing all those things you listed above, why would they publish a book that refuted what they had received from the Apostles?