The Church has no right to be arbitrary, and heap burdens on people’s backs. What you endorse is the power structure of the Pharisees. They also heaped burdens on the backs of those who were under their authority. But the bishops were supposed to be different. The authority Jesus gave them wasn’t an arbitrary demand for obedience.
Isn’t that what I said? Well, I didn’t stop to hover Martin Luther’s affection for saint Mary the mother of God. But it is the gist of what I said
In the words of a fictional British Prime Minister, “You might very well think that but I could not possibly comment”. His name is Francis Urquhart
I agree with this…Perhaps the only question would be - what constitutes “Arbitrary” and for that matter what constituted “burdens”.
This is an excellent cautionary comment and one we should keep in mind at all times so that we do not become like the Pharisees.
Again - I think that it is necessary to consider what would be considered “arbitrary”.
I’m sorry, but this just really struck me. We begin with the first Christian institution, the Catholic Church, who has consistently taught the doctrines you cite from the beginning. This has always been the faith of the Church. And then we have individuals, centuries later (about 15 centuries later), who flat out reject what the Church has taught from the beginning and replace it with their own opinion based upon their own private judgment and then take us to task for adhering to the Apostolic faith.
As one inquiring I think it would be helpful to clarify a couple things for you.
Here is where we differ.You declare yourself the one true church but in actually the Roman Catholic Church as is now exists is not the original church of the Apostles. While it is true that God used the early councils to assemble scripture it was not that church that Luther had problems with but the highly corrupt institution of his time. If you take a look at the concerns you quoted you will realize that some of the doctrines you refer too are fairly modern in nature such as the Marian dogmas of assumption, co-redemptrix, mediator of all graces as well as papal infallibility. You assume, as well you should since you are Roman Catholic that you are are the true church, but the Orthodox also state the same claim and that you are the church that broke from the one true church which exists in Orthodoxy. Most Protestants would answer your quote by saying that they restored the pure new testament church which over the centuries that had fallen away from the truth of sacred scripture. There is a famous Protestant quote that says “Where the scriptures speak we speak; where the scriptures are silent we are silent”. So many of the man made doctrines that have developed based on the catch all justification of “Tradition” are the concerns.If you take a close look in essentials we agree on more than we differ; it is only in the non-essentials that the problems really occur. It is really very simple; Love the Lord your God with all of your heart, mind, and soul and your neighbor as yourself. Is this not what our Lord said was the sum of the law and the prophets?
The idea of “restoring the true church of the apostles” sounds nice but is in obtainable and wrong. JRR Tolien describes why best so I will just quote him here.
Actually, “Mediatrix of all Grace” is a really tricky title. It is in reference to her bringing forth the Savior (all Grace). As far as I know it has been a doctrinal teaching of many popes and saints but has not been proclaimed dogma. I personally think that if a title causes that much confusion with our separated brethren then let’s just forgo it. Mary has enough titles.
The first Marian doctrine was not dogmatically defined until 1854 I believe. Protestants had been in rebellion against the Church for several hundred years before that.
Yes, but the church had taught on Mary since Apostolic times. It’s interesting that the reformers had no issue with Mary.
This is simply not the case. The infant Church did things no differently than the modern one when it comes to deciding matter of faith and morals. Many externals have changed, but that’s only to be expected after centuries of ministering to the world. It’s rather ironic, really since many people claim the Church is too stuck in the past and needs to “move with the times.”
Corruption comes in many forms, but the Church’s teachings have never been corrupted. Some people misused and abused privileges, which the Church addressed and reformed. As long as the Church is in the world and is run by human beings there is the danger of abuses of many kinds, but the Church’s teachings remain intact.
Again, these statements are not factual.
The Assumption of Mary had been believed from the time of the very early Church. It was merely define as dogma, which is one step above a doctrine, so to speak. As for co-redemptrix and mediatrix of all graces, those titles have not been given to Mary by the Church but by those who would like to see her given those titles. The Church commissioned a group of theologians and clergy to consider those titles, but decided they were not necessary to faith and morals, so the Pope let the matter drop. Papal infallibility was promised by Christ himself, but again, it was not defined as a dogma until later on. Not every teaching of the Church is a dogma. Not even the existence of God is a dogma, but we still believe it.The Catholic Church considers the Orthodox churches apostolic, just as it is. We acknowledge the validity of their sacraments and holy orders. Indeed, the now Orthodox were once part of the Catholic Church but split away in the 12th century.
It’s funny, but many a convert from Evangelical Christianity believed they were in or could find or recreate the “pure NT church” but ended up in the Catholic Church after reading the Church Fathers, such as Augustine and Clement and several others. The Church definitely believes the Scriptures are the word of God, but they are not all that constitutes divine revelation. The Church stands on Sacred Tradition, of which the Bible is one part, the teachings of the Apostles handed down to our bishops, and the living Magisterium, which is all the bishops in union with the Pope. Sola Scriptura was never practiced by the early Church. A careful reading of the First Council of Jerusalem plainly shows that it didn’t. As well as the writings of St. Paul in which the hierarchy is clearly discussed and upheld.
And who gets to define the “essentials”? Who has that authority? Where does true authority lie? I can answer these quite easily. Authority lies in the bishops of the Catholic Church who are the successors of the Apostles to whom Christ gave his authority to: preach in his name all that he had taught them (nothing mentioned about writing any books), to baptize for the remission of sins, to “bind and to loose” sins, and the promise of infallibility in matters of faith and morals (“I will send the Holy Spirit who will guide you into all truth”). Our Protestant brethren cannot even agree is baptism is essential or if marriage is a sacrament or many other important issues. This idea that we share “essentials” is just a fantasy in the minds of those who hold to it, sad to say.
Actually, this is a Catholic quote made by St. Augustine in the 4th-5th century who also said, “Therefore where Peter is, there is the Church…”
While all that you say is true–that people believe what they’ve been taught to believe and so cling to it, what you are advocating, although I’m sure you’re not aware of it, is not ecumenism, but indifference.I think people often forget that most people are “born into” a certain religious denomination, and that they are taught certain ideology and theology from a very young age. What we are taught as children becomes what we believe to be the truth. Different protestant faiths and/or denominations teach children that the Catholics, Methodists, Lutherans, Baptists, etc. do this or that and it is wrong to believe “their” way.
Growing up in a protestant church, I was taught that one prays only to God in the name of Jesus Christ, our Lord. We were taught that praying to anyone else was putting other gods before Him. Therefore, praying to Mary or other Saints was a sin. We didn’t see the need to go through Mary or a Saint of this or that to ask God for help or to praise Him.
We were also taught that the Pope and priests were taking too much upon themselves as men to forgive our sins. Saying “Hail Maries” over and over did not forgive us of our sins because only God can do that.
With regard to the Eucharist (Communion), we were taught that it was a very blessed and honorable thing, and only those baptised in the names of the Holy Trinity could partake. When taking of the bread and wine (body and blood of Christ) we were to pray fervently to God and praise Him for His mercy and grace.
Another big difference was baptism. We were taught that each individual must accept the Lord Jesus Christ as their personal savior, and that only then would they be baptised. They must have gone through strenuous bible study with a learned scholar (minister/elder) in the church to know the importance of this, and how this decision would affect them for the rest of their lives because it is a promise to God to throw out their old sinful ways, be washed clean, and risen again as anew person who is forgiven of all sin.
We were taught to love all people as we love ourselves, and to go out into the world to tell all of the Good News of Christ’s crucifixion and ressurection on their behalf. We were taught that THE CHURCH is comprised of all people who have devoted themselves to Jesus, and to do and act like Christians in everything we do. How else are non-believers supposed to WANT to come to Christ? To me, if all they see is a bunch of people arguing over who’s right and who’s wrong about how we should love the Lord, then they would just say “forget that” and “I don’t need more hate in my life.”
My point is that people are very protective of what they believe to be the Truth based upon what they were taught since childhood, or as adults who had no juvenile training. So we should just love each other, no matter what, and teach everyone about God’s endless love for us. People are going to react to what they see more than to what they hear, just like little children do…and we are all God’s children.
Am I wrong? Or, doesn’t the Bible teach us to love one another and work together?
No. We need not venerate any saint. But we do need to profess belief in all the Church teaches, including all the Marian doctrines and dogmas.