What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Comming to an agreement

Then there seems to an inconsistancy in the practices of the RCC across the board. Several years ago, my sister asked me to be "Godfather" to her youngest son. Sure, he poured water over the child's forehead, into a bowl under his head, then preceded to dip his hand into the water in the bowl three times, allowing it to drip off his fingertips, back onto the child's forehead. If that's not part of the Christening ritual, then what is it?
Click to expand...

Once again you show a lack of understanding of Catholicism. If the priest did this it is what is called liturgical abuse. They can't just do whatever they want in these things. The ruberics, Catechism and canon law are the legitimate governing authorities of matters of liturgy, such as a baptism. What he did is simply not allowed. We have authority and discipline in the Catholic Church but I guess I shouldn't expect you to understand that. I've been to lots of baptisms and have never seen any sort of sprinkling. It is simply illicit to do such a thing.

There also seems to be some revisions to the catechism since the late 60's/early 70's that I am not aware of. Maybe it is ignorance on my part but the question begges to be asked, if they needed to revise their catechism, doesn't that mean some-thing(s) in it were wrong?
Click to expand...

Well actually the Catechism is not considered an infallible per se document. It's not scripture. But I have not ever heard anyone present any blatant error from the catechism. Could be many reasons for a revision that don't have to be error however. Could be that a way of stating something was causing misunderstanding. Could be that the english language changed. Also the Catechism does contain matters of discipline that are not doctrine. For instance the practice/discipline of not eating meat on fridays used to be fore the whole year. I am not sure when it changed but matters of discipline do change from time to time. So, no, a change does not neccessarily indicate an actual error. If there was one I would think the trads who say things went awry after Vatican II would have hammered on it by now. I've never heard of such a thing.


As for my ignoring what Christine said, I do think the way this thread's op was laid out it is not for us Catholics to be a part of trying to resolve the issues that divide those who hold to sola scriptura. That is why I did not comment on what she said. You guys need to get together and first of all decide what Acts 15 says. Now if Christine was trying to apply acts 15 by posting her views and opening them for discussion she violated the passage by saying don't debate. There was much debate in Acts 15. Unless of course she sees herself as having the authority of Peter and silencing the debate. Or is it James? You guys will have to resolve that I guess. I see Mr. V has presented an OPINION about authority. Perhaps that should be the starting point and we'll see if we can get you guys to come to an agreement. I think your going to have problems with the house church folks however.

BLessings
 
Stop discussing me. I hate that, it makes me uncomfortable.

I am sorry I went off topic, I sometimes do that without thinking about it. I stay close to the subject, as I did this time. Next time you have a problem with my post, PM me or something. I am very shy and I have social anxiety problems. I never mentioned it before because I am ashamed of it.
If you want you can remove my post, and this one too.
 
Christine,

We all go off topic from time to time and I was not really being critical of you. I didn't mind your post. Just stating the facts surrounding it as it applies to my thread. Please do not take offense to the discussion about your post. We are simply having a friendly discussion about it. I do believe that issue has been exhausted now.

God bless
 
Very true... we DO stray often. It happens when one gets something in their head and must talk it out, as we did here.

I will refrain from further RC debating and leave it to the experts. I agree with Thess, let's get back to Acts 15, namely Acts 15:28-29.

"... to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; ..." etc, etc, etc.

For starters:

http://users.aristotle.net/~bhuie/acts15.htm
 
Thess,

I'm quite amazed by 1 statement you just made:-

'Well actually the Catechism is not considered an infallible per se document. It's not scripture. But I have not ever heard anyone present any blatant error from the catechism'

Vatican staff put the 'new' catechism on their website just recently - so that musta been authorised by the pope - just as other popes had to approve that statement of RC teachings

But God authorises no-one to teach false doctrine

I'm sure I'm outa PC time, but any Bible-believer can google it & expose its MANY heretical errors

CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
A complete online version of the 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church. Can be searched by keywords, phrases, or paragraph number. Viewing results in context, however, requires JavaScript.

http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/ccc.html Cached page

English Translation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church with ...
This searchable online version includes the corrections promulgated by Pope John Paul II on 8 September 1997. Also two ways to view the table of contents. Search returns links to a list of paragraphs ...

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm Cached page

Ian
 
Ok, I waited long enough. My turn.

Thess,

You are a funny guy. Now that yall have had your fun. Let's get down to the 'truth'.

This thread started as a gig by you that the Protestant churches are unable to agree on the most basics of theology. Agreed.

Now, I can point out that throughout the history of the RCC, there has been just as much disagreement as in the Protestant churches. Much of it was stiffled by those in power so we don't even have the records of these disagreements, but on to the ones that we DO have records of.

Let us start with the 'trinity'. The Nicene Creed is a PRIME example of the differences in the RC. A complete split between two different factions of the RC, BOTH claiming different views of the Godhead, but BOTH claiming to be RIGHT. It took a pagan Emperor to stop this schism of the RCC.

It goes on and on. Even to the present day, one is able to find that there are many areas that the RCC does not agree upon even within it's upper ranks.

When one is able to study the history of the RCC it becomes crystal clear that their major weapon used to 'keep the church together' was threat, torture, and murder of those that threatned to separate themselves from the main body. Even now there are a number, (I'm not really sure if the Catholics even know the number), of different forms of Catholocism that have different understandings as far as doctrine is concerned.

So, Thess, all you've managed to do is offer that the Protestant faith is no more capable of coming to general agreements than the Catholic Church. But, let us not forget that the most powerful weapon that the RCC used for centuries to keep the schism to a miniimum was the threat of violence against those that threatned it's doctrine. Torture and murder are certainly powerful tools one can use to force a common understanding of ANYTHING, even if it's WRONG.
 
Iam,

Heretical in your mind. Put on the mind of Christ my friend and then you will see them in a whole different light.
 
Imigican,

Lot's of handwaving in your post. You've shown that you have no clue of what Catholicism is because you have no understanding of authority and reject it. You missed part of the point. The trinity question for instance was resolved long ago by those who had the authority to do so. They did it the Acts 15 way. They met in council and let the Holy Spirit speak through them. Do Protestants have anything close to the Catechism that Mr. V speaks about above? Once again your post is ignorance on displaye.

What differences are you talking about? Eastern Rite Catholics/orders? It is quite clear that you have no idea what the Catholic Church is all about. You favor the me and my Bible aproach which makes you Pope over the Bible. Nothing ever gets settled with that. In fact Christians just keep dividing and dividing and division is not of God.

I do love how your first post goes right away from the Bible and heads for dirt. Distorted dirt at that. Your post is little better than the divinci code with a mind filled with historical revisionism and lack of understanding of Christianity in times where the world was a much harsher place and captial punishment was for what we would today consider to be lower crimes such as stealing a man's horse. Societies had a much more difficult time keeping order in those days and yes, they did get in to regulating the disruption that heresy and promoting false doctrine in an antagonistic manner caused. Protestant and Catholic Governments did this as a matter of fact.

That you reject the trinity is no testimony to it's truth. You have proven time and time again that you cannot rightly divide the word of God on your own. Christ built a Church with leaders imigican, Matt 16:18, Matt 18, Heb 13:17. But you try to go it alone. You are nothing but a man blowing about in every wind of doctrine. You will not find the fullness of the truth until you find Christ's Church. Keep looking.
 
thessalonian said:
Imigican,

Lot's of handwaving in your post. You've shown that you have no clue of what Catholicism is because you have no understanding of authority and reject it. You missed part of the point. The trinity question for instance was resolved long ago by those who had the authority to do so. They did it the Acts 15 way. They met in council and let the Holy Spirit speak through them. Come on Thess, I suppose next you'll try and tell us that the pagan Emperor was 'being led by the Spirit' when HE decided that there 'WAS' a 'trinity'. This Emperor who never even accepted Christ as his Savior until on his death bed many years later. Do Protestants have anything close to the Catechism that Mr. V speaks about above? Once again your post is ignorance on displaye.

What differences are you talking about? Eastern Rite Catholics/orders? It is quite clear that you have no idea what the Catholic Church is all about. You favor the me and my Bible aproach which makes you Pope over the Bible. Nothing ever gets settled with that. In fact Christians just keep dividing and dividing and division is not of God.

No, Thess, my understanding of God and His Son NEEDS NO POPE, in me or someone else. I am plenty capable of reading and praying my friend. I receive revalations on a 'daily' basis, therefor understanding that the Spirit IS present in my life. And, I NEED NO ONE to 'tell' me what I am 'supposed' to believe. I believe in the Word and it is sufficient.

I do love how your first post goes right away from the Bible and heads for dirt. Distorted dirt at that. Your post is little better than the divinci code with a mind filled with historical revisionism and lack of understanding of Christianity in times where the world was a much harsher place and captial punishment was for what we would today consider to be lower crimes such as stealing a man's horse. Societies had a much more difficult time keeping order in those days and yes, they did get in to regulating the disruption that heresy and promoting false doctrine in an antagonistic manner caused. Protestant and Catholic Governments did this as a matter of fact.

And I suppose that you would defend this behavior as they did and state that it was all done, 'in the name of God'. No doubt, my friend, but what god were they truly serving? And these are those that you would claim to be 'filled with the Spirit'. A spirit, no doubt.
That you reject the trinity is no testimony to it's truth. You have proven time and time again that you cannot rightly divide the word of God on your own. Christ built a Church with leaders imigican, Matt 16:18, Matt 18, Heb 13:17. But you try to go it alone. You are nothing but a man blowing about in every wind of doctrine. You will not find the fullness of the truth until you find Christ's Church. Keep looking.
Click to expand...

No, Thess, wrong again. I simply accept what has been offered by God and let men who seek their own do such. I am here to try and let them know that it need not be this way, but for some, they will always need to follow men rather than God.

I accept NO 'trinity' because in my mind and my heart I know that there IS NO 'trinity' except in the minds of men and those to which they have perpetuated this 'myth'. Your church commanding that there IS 'trinity' means absoulutely nothing to me, you are right. And there is NO doctrine on the planet made by men that must kill in order for it to be received that's worth it's weight in salt.

Man-made tradition and theology is capable of offering nothing but death. I choose life and the only means by which I may receive such is by the Father through His Son. i accept the simplicity that IS Jesus Christ and none of the silly teachings of men that would have me worship them instead of the Father.

A 'one man show' indeed my friend. But, like Christ and the apostles and all the 'true' Saints since, I try and offer what I have been given to any that may be willing to accept it.

I am not perfect by any means Thess. In my living or understanding I'm sure. But I know what I know and am satisfied that it is NOT tainted by the teachings of men who would rather that I follow them instead of Christ to the Father. My relationship with God through His Son came NOT at the expense of compromising what is stated in the Word. But based ON the Word itself without the greedy influence of others that would enslave me to 'their doctrine'.

I trust God and I trust Christ and I trust the Holy Spirit, but I trust in NO MAN to charge me for the gift that has been offered freely from above. I don't buy 'snake oil' either. i am just a heretical, (according to those that lead you), lost soul that is in need of 'your church' to 'show me the way'. Unfortunately for those that feel this way, man is no longer under the control of the Romans and we are now free from it's bonds of slavery to other gods. Those of the past had to 'give up' their lives in order to worship in truth. I thank God that it is no longer this way.

And Thess, I pray that one day you too will be set free as you witness my freeom today. Free to love God and His Son and through this love to learn to pass it on to others that you encounter in this life. Free from all the 'man-made' tradition that leads to bondage and servitude to powers that are NOT from above. This I do pray for you and all others that may have bought into that which favors darkness rather than light, slavery instead of freedom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top