Universal Church

[francisdesales]

There is NO Universal Church created by 'men'. There is ONLY one TRUE Church and that was created by Christ and brought to us through the teaching of the apostles. NO, not a succession of apostles, but those ORIGINAL people chosen by God to 'start' The Chruch. NOT to 'maintain' The Church except through their words.

The problem with that is you have YET to prove your case. Your conclusion is based on fantasy.

History has given us ONE Church that claimed to be orthodox and true to the teachings of Christ, as vouched for by historical writings of contemporary men. Men who could trace their own leaders, bishops, to the ORIGINAL Apostles. What have you provided to counter that? Absolutley nothing. You have told us that because the Catholic Church is not perfect, it can't be from God - and that is your "logic" that proves that the history and writings are all "false". That logic you yourself have destroyed because you have admitted that NO human organiziation can be perfect. Since the Church is BOTH a human and a divine organization, we cannot EXPECT perfection in this world. Thus, your logic is faulty. As long as the Church has MEN in it, whether it is an "organization" or just some loose body of MEC's who get together, there STILL will be human faults, shortcomings, and SIN within it. Your quest for perfection OUTSIDE of any "organized religion" is another way of saying "I know better that the pillar and foundation of the truth".

Anyone who cares to study the early Church history will conclude that there WERE a succession of men who followed the Apostles' ministry and continued it. THEY were charged with "hold onto the traditions taught". Paul charged Timothy to continue teaching what Paul taught. This deposit of faith is protected by the Spirit, as Paul writes. And the fact that Paul appointed successors, men whom the elders laid their hands upon and called the Spirit upon them is fact enough for Apostolic succesion. Oh, and common sense proves it as well, since Christ said his COMMUNITY, His Church, would exist for all time. Christ called visible people, not invisible, unknown people, to form a community. Yes, there are people outside that visible community, pagan who have a law onto themselves who are "spiritual Jews" (see Romans 2). But to deny the VISIBLE community is asinine, because it denies what God has ALLOWED to happen - it is the continued light of the world. Invisible lights are not seen, MEC. God didn't create invisible lights to shine through the world. He created a VISIBLE light, the Church, to speak up in each age and defend God's Laws and God's morality and God's doctrine. Can anyone deny that the Catholic Church has defended life, despite the pressures of society? WE are the light of the world. You are as well, to the degree that you remain within the Catholic Church by following her beliefs, her morality, and the teachings of her book, the Bible.

I already offered the comparison of the Jewish 'religion' to that of the CC. They STARTED with the 'Truth' and then decided that they were able to 'add to it' regardless of being told that this was IMPOSSIBLE. For the TRUTH has already been offered through Christ. And there is NOTHING left to 'add'.

ANYONE that is truly filled with The Spirit is WELL aware that The Spirit transends the feeble attempts of man to alter or add to that which has already been offered.

And yet, you claim to do better than the "pillar and foundation of the Truth", the Temple of the Holy Spirit. Basically, what you offer is YOU are "filled" with the Holy Spirit and only YOU have the "truth". Yet, you cannot even defend your point of view. While you may have the Spirit moving you to follow Christ, that doesn't mean you have moved beyond "milk". ALL Christians are not magically filled with all they need to know by the Spirit. That is clear when EVERY Christian denomination, as well as the Catholic Church, stresses READING THE BIBLE. IF the Spirit came to us in the fashion you claim, we wouldn't need the Bible.

We would just receive the Spirit by osmosis and learn everything by the "Spirit" and not from Scriptures or from teachers...

But here we are, with teachers and a Bible and a community. That is God's plan. Your's is just a simple case of trying to justify your continued rebellion. You need to deny history, to deny common sense, and conclude that YOUR thoughts are actually God's thoughts to come up with your position. God is not a God of untruth - and your continued denial of truth and claim to hold it at the same time only suggests that you are not whom you say you are.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

fran - there is a difference with the apostles though...

Christ chose unsavory men prior to their "conversion" in Christ. Yes, Paul still 'sinned' - however, I do not think he resorted back to being Saul.

God chooses unsavory men THROUGHOUT history. Read 1 Cor 6:9-10, for example.

Apostle means one who is sent. It doesn't ONLY refer to the Twelve, as men OTHER than the twelve are called "apostles". The ministry of apostleship continues - although it no longer holds the parallelism to the 12 tribes of Israel as when Christ chose 12 men.

In any case, we are all sinners and needed to be saved by Christ. We weren't born perfect for future ministry in the Church - and I suspect you know that.

Regards

 

[RadicalReformer]

Fran - I never said that we are born perfect, however there is a difference after coming to Christ - you can either walk in the flesh or walk in the Spirit.

We are either to strive for holiness or wallow in the mud - which do you chose?

 

[tblaine74]

FDS’s argument:

Premise 1: “Christ said his COMMUNITY, His Church, would exist for all timeâ€Â

Premise 2: “Christ called visible people…to form a community.â€Â

[Implied] Premise 3: What Christ says is true

[Implied] Conclusion: Christ’s community of visible people will exist for all time.

This is a logically sound argument.

RR’s question:

“We are either to strive for holiness or wallow in the mud - which do you chose?â€Â

While wallowing in the mud is pretty straightforward, how exactly does one strive for holiness? Shall I follow the teaching of Christ? If so, which interpretation of the teaching of Christ?

 

[RadicalReformer]

FDS’s argument:

Premise 1: “Christ said his COMMUNITY, His Church, would exist for all timeâ€Â

Premise 2: “Christ called visible people…to form a community.â€Â

[Implied] Premise 3: What Christ says is true

[Implied] Conclusion: Christ’s community of visible people will exist for all time.

This is a logically sound argument.

RR’s question:

“We are either to strive for holiness or wallow in the mud - which do you chose?â€Â

While wallowing in the mud is pretty straightforward, how exactly does one strive for holiness? Shall I follow the teaching of Christ? If so, which interpretation of the teaching of Christ?

Perhaps we can back up some of these premises with Scripture?

Tblaine, assuming you are Roman Catholic, you have chosen to accepting the interpretations givin to you by the magesterium. How do you know you made the correct choice?

 

[Imagican]

I’m not sure where this thread is going, but, as far as I know, I’m the only one who has issued a serious challenge to my own original post. So after 12 pages I am giving up, I think I’ll just go with the flow here. I don’t know if I can keep up with all the posts, but I’ll start with the last “arguments†and see if I can put things into a logical context.

MEC’s “argumentâ€Â:

Premise 1: Dismissal of the Jubilee was “'alteration' offered in the 'guise' of ORAL traditionâ€Â

Conclusion: ?

There’s a premise. The point, or conclusion, is missing. This is yet to be an argument.

MEC’s “argumentâ€Â:

Premise 1: “we are to discern that offered THROUGH The Spirit and what has been offered by the Prophets, Christ and His apostlesâ€Â

Premise 2: “If it [“that offered THROUGH…â€Â] contradicts what has been offered by These thenâ€Â

Conclusion: “it is to be REJECTED.â€Â

Rephrased: If “that offered THROUGH The Spirit and what has been offered by the Prophets, Christ and His apostles†contradicts “that offered THROUGH The Spirit and what has been offered by the Prophets, Christ and His apostles†then “it is to be REJECTED.â€Â

Rephrased again: If something contradicts itself, then “it is to be REJECTED.â€Â

I think the argument is a little lacking, but I promise, if I ever find something that contradicts itself, I will most certainly reject it.

I am not trying to pick on you MEC. I respect your persistence. I plan to look at everything posted from now on in such a logic context. My thread has been hijacked by bad logic, the penalty is exposure.

Firstly,

A, I am still working on your challenge. Haven't forgotten about it. It will be extensive and has proved to be rather time consuming. I am at the moment taking a 'break' from it.

Now blain,

by all means, pick away. For I did NOT come here in 'weakness'. I am well prepared to be 'picked on'. For I am WELL aware that this 'world' wll find MOST of what I offer to BE but foolishness.

What I have offered is that the prophets DO NOT contradict each other. And the prophets do NOT contradict Christ, and the prophets do not contradict the apostles. But, we can clearly see where the fathers of the CC have offered MUCH contradiction to ALL three of the above mentioned. I know, I know, BUT WHERE IS THE PROOF? Ok, you asked for it;

We were TOLD by the apostles that we are NOT to 'forbid to wed'. We were told by God, Christ AND the apostles NOT to worship graven images. We were told BY Christ Himself NOT to call any man Father. We were TOLD by Christ to LOVE our neighbors. We were told by Christ and His apostles MANY MANY things that the CC has come along and altered to the point that those that follow this 'religion' are no longer even able to recognize that these 'things' have NOT 'always BEEN'.

Now, have I made myself a 'bit' clearer than before?

I can PLAINLY show through scripture that the accusations that I have made here are IN FACT 'truth' and not mearly 'my interpretation of ANYTHING.

Of couse, for the CC to 'make these changes' they had to find WAYS to 'indicate' that what was offered wasn't 'really' MEANT to be interpreted the way it's written, but instead, left up to THEM to interpret in what ever way they saw fit. Hence, their way or the highway, (so to speak).

A perfect example of 'just HOW' to alter the 'truth': We will just 'tell' people that WE have been 'given the Word'. And we will tell them that this word is 'written down' and preserved, (by US). Then we will read to them what we CHOOSE to read to them OUT OF THIS WORD, and simply DENY them access to it EXCEPT through US. Claiming that it's for their OWN GOOD. For they cannot POSSIBLE be responsible enough to understand it themselves.

So, it took over a thousand years before a 'layman' was able to even RECOGNIZE 'the truth'. If not for Martin Luther, there's no telling how much longer the 'truth' would have been 'hidden' from the masses.

Oh, and the reference to Jubilee was to offer example of the Jewish faith, (being empowered to 'carry on' the 'traditions' given by Moses), taking it upon themselves to 'alter' that which didn't PLEASE them into that which did. And then CLAIMING that thier alterations were given to 'them' through ORAL tradition. This is little different than what the CC did in respect to their own 'oral tradition' that they 'claim' to have upheld.

The conclusion that you seemed to 'miss' is that we have NO 'reason' to believe that ANYTHING offered that 'contradicts' the Gospels or epistles is ANYTHING other than 'man-made'. And how do we KNOW this? Through The Spirit. For those that truly have The Spirit as their guide, it is apparent, the 'things' that have been altered. And this we were promised by Christ and His Apostles.

And I offer that those that would follow God and His Son MUST take the responsibility of 'their Salvation' in THEIR OWN HANDS. For there is NOT A MAN on this planet that is able to offer it. It can ONLY come through a 'personal relationship' with God through His Son, (so far as what we have been instructed). And in the SAME respect; NO MAN can 'take that away' from anyone unless they WILLINGLY relinquish it, (the relationship).

So the CC can offer little in regards to the individual attainment of a 'personal relationship' with God through His Son. What they DO offer is 'allegiance' to an 'organization'. I would suggest to any seriously questioning the validity of what is offered by this 'religion' to sort out It's history from independant sources BEFORE allowing themselves to be 'enticed' by their accounts of their OWN history.

And as example: Hitler, Stalin, Mao are but a few examples of those that would alter history to meet their OWN desired effect. Oh, and let's not forget Scientology as well. Heck, our own government for that matter. The point? Let man have his way and he will 'make it' what he WILL. Regardless of The Truth.

MEC

 

[A-Christian]

Christ chose unsavory men prior to their "conversion" in Christ. Yes, Paul still 'sinned' - however, I do not think he resorted back to being Saul.

:smt102

Francis never insinuated that Paul returned to persecuting christians.
What were you trying to say there Rad?

:smt102

 

[A-Christian]

Firstly,

A, I am still working on your challenge. Haven't forgotten about it. It will be extensive and has proved to be rather time consuming. I am at the moment taking a 'break' from it.

I understand. Take your time MEC.

Hey Radical, you seem to be a Sola Scriptura type of person. Would you too be interested in attempting the challenge that MEC has accepted. If you pull it off it could really solidify your positions that you take on this board. Below is the challenge incase you missed it:

You have to prove through scripture that scripture is the sole authority of christianity and that the Bible is the only rule of faith, meaning that it contains all of the material one needs for theology and that this material is so sufficiently clear that one does not need apostolic tradition or the Church’s magisterium (teaching authority) to help one understand it.

Peace

 

[RadicalReformer]

A - Christian, FDS stated:

I have mentioned over and over that the individual leaders of the Catholic Church, through their history, have not been shining examples of God-like men. Nor were the Apostles chosen by Christ HIMSELF.

But there is a difference, no? The apostles, while at one time were not "shining examples of God-like men", they eventually DID BECOME "shining examples of God-like men."

Anticipating a response of something like, Paul was still a sinner... I agreed saying that

Yes, Paul still 'sinned' - however, I do not think he resorted back to being Saul.

Here is the point - I agree noone is perfect this side of Heaven. However, we have the commands of Christ and the testimony of the Scriptures that tell us to walk by the Spirit, because the spirit cannot sin. As a born again believer, it is Christ that dwells within me. It is when I walk of the Flesh that I sin.

I am tired of the excuses for sinful behavior. I am tired of hearing "noone is perfect". Baloney. We are to strive to me Transformed into the image of God.

I guess my question is - how can you have leaders in the Roman Catholic church (the popes for example) who followers admit that they "have not been shining examples of God-like men", and be okay with that?!?

 

[biblecatholic]

What I have offered is that the prophets DO NOT contradict each other. And the prophets do NOT contradict Christ, and the prophets do not contradict the apostles.

We believe the catholic interpretation of the bible does not contradict as you believe that your interpretation does not contradict aswell as the tens of thousands of denominations believe that their interpretation does not contradict.... I have prayed to the Holy Spirit and he has led me to the Catholic Church and has led me to the interpretation I hold to be true

We were TOLD by the apostles that we are NOT to 'forbid to wed'.

we are also told by Christ that there are those who are eunichs for the sake of the kingdom... Priestly celibacy does not mean that the Man is not married, it means that the man has Married God, the Wedding of the Lamb. They were called to this marriage earlier than the rest who will be "married in heaven" I'll pass on to you all the scripture references that explain the call.

We were told by God, Christ AND the apostles NOT to worship graven images.

and you say we do?...I'll assume your not aware that it is our "family album" ..there is a much deeper meaning here too that I think you've missed, how many of us westerners "worship" television, football, sports, porn, cpu, money, possessions, what holds our time

We were told BY Christ Himself NOT to call any man Father.

You are misinterpreting what is being said here. If you want I can show all the scriptures where Jesus says to honor your father, where Paul calls the elders father and much more..(let me know and I'll send them your way)...do you call anybody teacher?

We were TOLD by Christ to LOVE our neighbors.

Amen!

We were told by Christ and His apostles MANY MANY things that the CC has come along and altered to the point that those that follow this 'religion' are no longer even able to recognize that these 'things' have NOT 'always BEEN'.

I can PLAINLY show through scripture that the accusations that I have made here are IN FACT 'truth' and not mearly 'my interpretation of ANYTHING.

this is very inaccurate. You read scripture with your interpretation. You have a problem with the Pope but yet you have made yourself more powerful than the Pope

So, it took over a thousand years before a 'layman' was able to even RECOGNIZE 'the truth'. If not for Martin Luther, there's no telling how much longer the 'truth' would have been 'hidden' from the masses.

He was a Capurnican Friar i.e. Franciscan Priest

The conclusion that you seemed to 'miss' is that we have NO 'reason' to believe that ANYTHING offered that 'contradicts' the Gospels or epistles is ANYTHING other than 'man-made'. And how do we KNOW this? Through The Spirit. For those that truly have The Spirit as their guide, it is apparent, the 'things' that have been altered. And this we were promised by Christ and His Apostles.

How do you know that you don't contradict scripture? To me it seems as you do and to many others do? How is one to know that you have the right interpretation. ....Is all of your interpretation true and correct? Or is there some you might not be right in? If you are not infallible then why should I believe your private interpretation? Just asking



Why do you always seem to argue things we don't believe? You are my brother and I want to disagree in peace with you. As Iron sharpening Iron. I hear you say you Love God so I believe you. I Love God and I ask that you take me at my word. If you would like to know what we really believe maybe we could start another thread and discuss our shared beliefs and our disagreements, the whys and whats of what we believe. You tell me what you believe and I will believe you and we will tell you what we believe.


In Christ
MIke


MEC[/quote]

 

[Imagican]

Firstly,

A, I am still working on your challenge. Haven't forgotten about it. It will be extensive and has proved to be rather time consuming. I am at the moment taking a 'break' from it.

I understand. Take your time MEC.

Hey Radical, you seem to be a Sola Scriptura type of person. Would you too be interested in attempting the challenge that MEC has accepted. If you pull it off it could really solidify your positions that you take on this board. Below is the challenge incase you missed it:

You have to prove through scripture that scripture is the sole authority of christianity and that the Bible is the only rule of faith, meaning that it contains all of the material one needs for theology and that this material is so sufficiently clear that one does not need apostolic tradition or the Church’s magisterium (teaching authority) to help one understand it.

Peace

A,

First of all, I believe, (I haven't done it myself yet but will if you contest what I offer here), if you go back and read what led to this 'challenge', I NEVER stated that the Bible was ALL that there IS to The Word. What I offered is that the Bible is ENOUGH, (that NO man need ANY 'official organization; church, to TEACH them HOW to LOVE). But even the Bible is USELESS without the guidance of The Spirit. And this IS what I will offer along with HOW the CC veered from this teaching and has offered 'something ELSE'. How those that 'believe' what they have been 'taught' through the CC have been led into a 'religion' that was NOT taught by the apostles and surely not what was offered by God through His Son.

MEC

Oh, and I'm almost done.

 

[tblaine74]

The conclusion that you seemed to 'miss' is that we have NO 'reason' to believe that ANYTHING offered that 'contradicts' the Gospels or epistles is ANYTHING other than 'man-made'. And how do we KNOW this? Through The Spirit. For those that truly have The Spirit as their guide, it is apparent, the 'things' that have been altered.

MEC,

How can I know I have the Spirit as my guide, amidst conflicting belief with those who claim to have the Spirit as their guide?

 

[A-Christian]

A,

First of all, I believe, (I haven't done it myself yet but will if you contest what I offer here), if you go back and read what led to this 'challenge', I NEVER stated that the Bible was ALL that there IS to The Word. What I offered is that the Bible is ENOUGH, (that NO man need ANY 'official organization; church, to TEACH them HOW to LOVE). But even the Bible is USELESS without the guidance of The Spirit. And this IS what I will offer along with HOW the CC veered from this teaching and has offered 'something ELSE'. How those that 'believe' what they have been 'taught' through the CC have been led into a 'religion' that was NOT taught by the apostles and surely not what was offered by God through His Son.

MEC

Oh, and I'm almost done.

Ok MEC, i'll accept your round-about addmission that you cannot use the bible to prove Sola Scriptura (bible alone). As far as "the bible is enough" goes, well friend that still sounds like Sola Scriptura to me. How bout you RadicalReformer? MEC just bailed I think. Are you up to the challenge of using the bible to prove Sola Scriptura?

As far as learning how to love goes...there are plenty of pagans that know how to love. It's a built-in thing you know.

Until you can prove your authority, well, I guess you are done.

Peace

 

[RadicalReformer]

A,

First of all, I believe, (I haven't done it myself yet but will if you contest what I offer here), if you go back and read what led to this 'challenge', I NEVER stated that the Bible was ALL that there IS to The Word. What I offered is that the Bible is ENOUGH, (that NO man need ANY 'official organization; church, to TEACH them HOW to LOVE). But even the Bible is USELESS without the guidance of The Spirit. And this IS what I will offer along with HOW the CC veered from this teaching and has offered 'something ELSE'. How those that 'believe' what they have been 'taught' through the CC have been led into a 'religion' that was NOT taught by the apostles and surely not what was offered by God through His Son.

MEC

Oh, and I'm almost done.

Ok MEC, i'll accept your round-about addmission that you cannot use the bible to prove Sola Scriptura (bible alone). As far as "the bible is enough" goes, well friend that still sounds like Sola Scriptura to me. How bout you RadicalReformer? MEC just bailed I think. Are you up to the challenge of using the bible to prove Sola Scriptura?

As far as learning how to love goes...there are plenty of pagans that know how to love. It's a built-in thing you know.

Until you can prove your authority, well, I guess you are done.

Peace

Perhaps when you start your thread on the "deposit of faith"... I will outline a defense of Sola Scriptura.

Oh, and Scripture says that the only reason we know how to Love is because God FIRST loved us. It is not "built in". Or perhaps you like the Joel Olsteen, Hinn, WOF crowd that are all new-agey in their beliefs - Love and flowers.

 

[francisdesales]

Fran - I never said that we are born perfect, however there is a difference after coming to Christ - you can either walk in the flesh or walk in the Spirit.

We are either to strive for holiness or wallow in the mud - which do you chose?

I believe we make these choices daily. There is not a "one-time choice". We sin on Monday and ask for forgiveness on Tuesday. Then, Friday, we sin again, and beg God to forgive us on Sunday. Yes, we can walk in the Spirit or the flesh, but there are days we do one, and other days that we do the other.... Thus, we are told to persevere.

Regards

 

[A-Christian]

Perhaps when you start your thread on the "deposit of faith"... I will outline a defense of Sola Scriptura.

Oh, and Scripture says that the only reason we know how to Love is because God FIRST loved us. It is not "built in"

Ok then Rad. I'll accept you inabilty to prove Sola Scriptura. I'm suprised you guys sunk that easily.

God love us first so that is why we know how to love....well Rad, that sounds like a God Given thing to me, hence the phrase "built-in".

Peace

 

[tblaine74]

Tblaine, assuming you are Roman Catholic, you have chosen to accepting the interpretations givin to you by the magesterium. How do you know you made the correct choice?

RR,

Let me preface my answer by disowning any claim to “know†of the accuracy of my choice, as my belief is based on certain conclusions. I believe that conclusions are only as good as the concepts they are drawn from. As I am open to the likelihood that there are relevant concepts I have yet to consider, belief in the accuracy of my choice is all that I will claim. Thus, I dare not answer how I “knowâ€Â. Though, I can answer why I believe in the accuracy of my choice. I believe in it, because I believe in the history that I have considered, regardless of how difficult it may be to discern. Further, I believe in the logic that it facilitates, as laid out in my posts. It is this logic which forms the basis of my belief. Incidentally, it is logic which is the contrasting element in these posts. You and MEC, and anyone, for that matter, are welcome to address the logic that began this thread, but for some curious reason you don’t. Instead, you appeal to universal concepts like “holinessâ€Â, and theological concepts about divine revelation through the Spirit; concepts that, while intriguing, will in no way serve to advance our debate.

 

[francisdesales]

Here is the point - I agree noone is perfect this side of Heaven. However, we have the commands of Christ and the testimony of the Scriptures that tell us to walk by the Spirit, because the spirit cannot sin. As a born again believer, it is Christ that dwells within me. It is when I walk of the Flesh that I sin.

I am tired of the excuses for sinful behavior. I am tired of hearing "noone is perfect". Baloney. We are to strive to me Transformed into the image of God.

We agree. I am happy to hear that you are striving to transform, with the graces of God. Too many people here ASSUME they are already "transformed", because the 'spirit' told them so. People really need to be HONEST with themselves. We all sin. We all fall short, even AFTER receiving the Spirit. It is a struggle. Paul talks about this in Romans 7. It is frustrating, at times. We want to obey Christ, and at times, we do not. It is good to see you recognize the NEED to transform, to change. I tire, too, of the "I proclaim Jesus as my Savior, and He will bring me to heaven - which implies that they can pretty much continue along the same path as before, except with this new found "knowledge" of salvation. It really is a terrible twisting of the Gospel - and I am glad to see we have common ground there...

I guess my question is - how can you have leaders in the Roman Catholic church (the popes for example) who followers admit that they "have not been shining examples of God-like men", and be okay with that?!?

God has selected numerous men who were not ALWAYS shining examples. I have read the Old Testament with much interest regarding Abraham, Isaac, Moses, Josua and so forth - none perfect - but STILL, works of clay that God CHOOSES to work through. Apparently, God continues to work through imperfect vessels. WHY?

This is my personal opinion. Because God will use even the Church to test us, to test whether we are able to humble ourselves, whether we are able to be obedient in the face of such things. God has, according to Scriptures, always worked this way. He leads men into apparent confusion, He appears to abandon us, He appears to have left our side. God is looking to see HOW MUCH FAITH we have in Him. Oh, RR, it is easy to believe in God when things are going well. But what about when your child dies? Or when you see backbiting among the Church members? Or how about a trusted pastor betraying that trust? God tests US in these cases, using even these "evil" situations to see if we can be humble, obedient, and trusting in God's Providence. Again, that is my opinion - and I believe it is born out by the Scriptures.

God seems to "relish" in testing His chosen ones and watching them turn to Him despite how things appear to be going in their lives. Thus, even during the Catholic priests scandal of a few years ago, as disappointed as I was, as shocked as I was, I still placed my faith in God and that He hadn't abandoned His Church. There was some point to all of this, something good would come from it. Thus, even in the face of scandal, Christians have always placed their faith in God.

As such, while men disappoint, I realize that God has established what God has established - for His OWN reasons - and I will continue to humble myself to God's plan, even if I think I could do things better than my local priest... God has called THEM to lead the Church, not me. God has His reasons, and I firmly believe God desires me to humble myself. Humility is a prime virtue - it was Christ's trademark and something that I need to become.

Regards

 

[tblaine74]

Just as a side note - I have often experienced that when I dedicate my faculties to a particular end, such as seeking to know ABOUT God, or about His Church in this case, I fail to pay particular attention to knowing God. I am exited about tomorrow, and the opportunity to honor and know God in a particular and communal way. Tomorrow, I will be thinking of RadicalReformer, Imagican (MEC), A-Christian, fransisdesales, and biblecatholic. Peace.

 

[RadicalReformer]

Fran - I never said that we are born perfect, however there is a difference after coming to Christ - you can either walk in the flesh or walk in the Spirit.

We are either to strive for holiness or wallow in the mud - which do you chose?

I believe we make these choices daily. There is not a "one-time choice". We sin on Monday and ask for forgiveness on Tuesday. Then, Friday, we sin again, and beg God to forgive us on Sunday. Yes, we can walk in the Spirit or the flesh, but there are days we do one, and other days that we do the other.... Thus, we are told to persevere.

Regards

I am sorry that you feel you need to "beg". Scripture says that God is faithful to forgive, and that He has already forgiven those who are His.