"catholic confession"

[isshinwhat]

Sola Scriptura is what GAVE YOU THE NEW TESTAMENT

The scriptures alone gave us the New Testament? Is that what you meant, Vow? Did you mis-type?

Neal

 

[Julie]

"Catholics ARE Bible-believers! Sola Scriptura is what GAVE YOU THE NEW TESTAMENT. Once the New Testament was compiled, it doesn't mean you throw everything else in the trash! "

 

Vow, are you disregarding
 the Old Testament? When I think of the Bible I think of the Old and New T.  Julie

 

[VOW]

To Neal:

ACCCCKKKKKK!!!

My bad. Sacred Tradition is what gave us the New Testament. I stand corrected.....when I get all heated up, I tend to goof.

(and the STOOOOOOOOOPID edit function is out to lunch right now, too!)


Peace,
~VOW

 

[VOW]

To Julie:

You think of the Old Testament and the New Testament together, because the Christian Church PUT them together.

But you would only HAVE the Old Testament if the Church Council had not assembled the New Testament. And that Council used Sacred Tradition to do just that.


Peace be with you,
~VOW

 

[aggie03]

Originally posted by VOW
But you would only HAVE the Old Testament if the Church Council had not assembled the New Testament. And that Council used Sacred Tradition to do just that.

I have seen many people write on the use of sacred traditions to define things - another question that I have is this: What are these sacred traditions that you keep talking about?  It's easy to follow blindly and not ask any questions, simply saying that it's always been done this way so that's the way that we're always going to do it - trust me I know, I did it for a long time (*not anymore though, I'm sure many have noticed that I ask a lot of questions now*).  So what are these sacred traditions? 

 

 

[aggie03]

Originally posted by Wolseley
Well, Aggie, as I myself have mentioned time and again on this board and others, the Roman Catholic Church does not depend on the Bible all by itself as the sole rule for faith, doctrine, and belief. That is a Protestant practice.

But we have scriptural evidence that shows we are to ask questions and verify those questions with the Bible.  In Acts 17:11 the church at Berea was more noble-minded than others because they examined the scriptures daily - they were trying to determine if what Paul and  Silas were teaching about Christ was the truth.  They didn't take their word for it, they didn't follow any traditions, they read the scriptures and compared what they said. 

The Catholic Church takes the Bible in concordance with Apostolic Tradition, and she interprets the Bible through the lens of everything else the Apostles had to say and through the defining statements of the Sacred Magesterium, and the Pontiffs and Councils throughout the last 2,000 years.

How do you know what the aposltes said or did besides what is in the Bible?  What are the sources of these other sayings and/or actions? 

What is the sacred magesterium?  Where does it get its authority from?  Why have there been more councils besides the first one?  Wouldn't the claim that the catholic church is infallible dictate that the very first council would be the only one needed (*some people I have talked to make this claim, others do not, I don't know the official stance of the catholic church*)? 

 

[Annabel Lee]

Aggie, Sacred or apostolic tradition consists of the teachings that the apostles passed on orally through their preaching. They have been handed down and entrusted to the Church.
It still amazes me that some Protestants are not taught anything of Apostolic Tradition. Have you read nothing of the Early Church Fathers?
If you are really interested, here is a good site:
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/

It's easy to follow blindly and not ask any questions

Really..I wouldn't know. I've never blindly followed anything in my entire life. Many Catholics on this board are converts. I was a returning Catholic. I made a decision to come back. My eyes were wide open.

 

[VOW]

To Aggie:

In Acts 17:11 the church at Berea was more noble-minded than others because they examined the scriptures daily - they were trying to determine if what Paul and Silas were teaching about Christ was the truth. They didn't take their word for it, they didn't follow any traditions, they read the scriptures and compared what they said.

Okay. And just WHAT Scriptures did the Bereans use to determine what Paul and Silas were teaching? The Gospels? Paul's letters? The Book of ACTS? They were using the Old Testament, Aggie. There WAS NO NEW TESTAMENT. So again, we're back to the square where the Catholic Church is responsible for GIVING you the New Testament. And how did the Church do that? By using SACRED TRADITION, the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and a whole lotta prayer.

Aggie, you have to understand: you wouldn't have that NEW TESTAMENT to use as your yardstick for everything we're telling you UNLESS SACRED TRADITION EXISTED. And once Sacred Scripture came about, that didn't mean throw Tradition in the trash!

Let's say you are doing a research paper. You go to the library, check out ten books, read through them, and find passages in those ten books that you need for reference to write your paper. After you write your paper, do you burn those library books? By completely dismissing Sacred Tradition, Aggie, you're burning a LOT OF WHAT THE APOSTLES TAUGHT.

www.newadvent.org

There's a link for you, go read some of the writings of the Early Church Fathers. You see people throwing names about: Jerome, Tertullian, Augustine...those guys. READ what they had to say. If you are like I am, when you read that stuff, you'll go, "WOW! This guy really has a handle on what Christianity is all about!" Guess what? There's a REASON why these dead guys are called "Early Church FATHERS."

The Magisterium is the AUTHORITY of the Church. It came about from the Peter Scripture that nobody likes to hear. When Jesus founded His Church on Peter, He gave Peter the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. Now, if you do some research into what that meant in the days of Jesus, you'll find that those Keys were an incredible amount of authority. It was a BIG deal. And the Church considers those Keys to be a BIG deal, too. The descendants of those Keys is the Magisterium of the Church.

Why have there been more Councils? Well, talk to the heretics. It seems every generation wants to re-invent heresy. And they are like little kids. You make a rule, and the kid will sit around and think up twelve different ways to get around it. It finally gets to the point where the Church has to say, "ENOUGH ALREADY!" and make an official proclamation of what Christianity IS and what it is NOT. If you want to get technical, there shouldn't have had to be ANY Council. But humans are a willful bunch, aren't they?



Peace be with you,
~VOW

 

[Wolseley]

But we have scriptural evidence that shows we are to ask questions and verify those questions with the Bible.

We also have Scriptural evidence that we are to accept the Tradition passed on to us by the Apostles--not just Scripture. 1 Cor 11:2 makes that abundantly clear, as does 2 Thes 2:15, which outright states "hold to the traditions we taught you, either by letter or by word of mouth", meaning both written Scripture and Apostolic Tradition. Finally, 2 Thes 3:6 says to shun those not acting in accordance with Tradition.

How do you know what the aposltes said or did besides what is in the Bible?

How do you know what is written in the Bible is correct? Because you believe it is the inerrant Word of God. We believe that Apostolic Tradition is also the inerrant Word of God. The only difference is that it wasn't written down on parchment with ink.

It all boils down to Faith, doesn't it?

What is the sacred magesterium?

It is the collected teachings and theology of the Catholic Church, through its teachers, bishops, popes, theologians, and councils over the last 2,000 years.

Where does it get its authority from?

Jesus Christ.

Why have there been more councils besides the first one? Wouldn't the claim that the catholic church is infallible dictate that the very first council would be the only one needed?

Councils are called to address heresies or deviations in Christian belief that are promulgated from outside the magesterial teachings of the Church, not because the teachings of the Church are flawed and need to be "tweaked" every so often. As long as people keep coming up with screwy ideas, the Church will need to have councils to explain and defend what the Church actually teaches.

Look at it this way: even the Constitution of the United States has a way to attatch amendments to itself. According to your reasoning, why would we need amendments? Isn't the original document good enough? Does the practice of attatching amendments to the Constitution mean that the United States isn't a legitimate country?

SeewhutImean,Vern?

 

[isshinwhat]

I have seen many people write on the use of sacred traditions to define things - another question that I have is this: What are these sacred traditions that you keep talking about? It's easy to follow blindly and not ask any questions, simply saying that it's always been done this way so that's the way that we're always going to do it - trust me I know, I did it for a long time (*not anymore though, I'm sure many have noticed that I ask a lot of questions now*). So what are these sacred traditions?

Let's see if I can put on screen what is in my head

Before the Apostles wrote any of the letters, and before their disciples had written any of the Gospels, the world had nothing but a small group of men to spread the Good News of Christ. Protected by the Holy Spirit, these men went about and taught the Gospel of Christ without error. Jesus Himself would say of them, "Whoever listen to you, listens to Me..." His Apostles didn't teach their own views, but those that had been taught to them by Christ.

What we have now is a written record of the spread of those teachings. If you separate the teachings from the words contained in the letters and biographies that make up the New Teatament, then you have 27 books that can be interpreted in many different ways. If you read those books in the light of the Apostles teachings, though, then there is a cohesiveness that anyone would find amazing.

The Catholic Church has not only kept the original words as recorded in the Bible, but it has kept the original teachings, as well. The written record of Christian teachers throughout history supports this view. Have you read Ignatius's letters? He was ordained a Bishop by the Apostle Peter and was a disciple of the Apostle John, yet many Christians have not read any of his work. He is the first man to call the Church of Christ the Catholic Church, and his writings are a brilliant continuation of the teachings of the Apostles, and in turn Jesus.

To the Catholic Church, it isn't just the words of the Apostles that were to be passed on, it was the teachings, and there is 2000 years worth of writing that shows a continuity of teaching that is nothing short of miraculous.

God Bless,

Neal

 

[isshinwhat]

Here are some quotes from the Early Church Fathers that provide an early mention of several of the beliefs that Catholics hold dear.

The Papacy and Primacy of Rome

Ambrose (340-397)

"It is Peter himself that He says, "You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church.' Where Peter is, there is the Church. And where the Church, no death is there, but life eternal." (Commentaries on Twelve of David's Psalms 40,30)

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM 347-407
"For what purpose did He shed His blood? It was that He might win these sheep which he entrusted to Peter and his successors." (De Sacerdotio, 53)

"Peter himself the chief of the Apostles, the first in the Church, the friend of Christ, who received a revelation not from man, but from the Father, as the Lord bears witness to him, saying, 'Blessed are thou, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and bone hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven'; this very Peter, - and when I name Peter, the great Apostles, I name that unbroken rock, that firm foundation, the great Apostle, the first of the disciples, the first called and the first who obeyed." (Homily 3 de Poenit. 4)

The Sacrifice of the Mass/Eucharist

ST. IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH (c. 110 A.D.)
Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one flesh of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of his blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery... (Letter to Philadelphians 4:1)

They [i.e. the Gnostics] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that THE EUCHARIST IS THE FLESH OF OUR SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again. (Letter to Smyrna 7:1)

ST. JUSTIN THE MARTYR (c. 100 - 165 A.D.)
For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by Him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, IS BOTH THE FLESH AND THE BLOOD OF THAT INCARNATED JESUS. (First Apology 66)

The Immaculate Conception of Mary

Origen
"This Virgin Mother of the Only-begotten of God, is called Mary, worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, one of the one." Homily 1(A.D. 244),

Ephraem
"Thou alone and thy Mother are in all things fair, there is no flaw in thee and no stain in thy Mother."
Nisibene Hymns,27:8(A.D. 370)

O virgin lady, immaculate Mother of God, my lady most glorious, most gracious, higher than heaven, much purer than the sun's splendor, rays or light . . . you bore God and the Word according to the flesh, preserving your virginity before childbirth, a virgin after childbirth.
{"Prayer to the Most Holy Mother of God"}

O Virgin Immaculate, Mother of God and my Mother, from your sublime heights turn your eyes of pity on my. Filled with confidence in your goodness and knowing full well your power, I beg you to extend to me your assistance in the journey of life, which is so full of dangers for my soul. In order that I may never be a slave of the devil through sin, but may ever live with my heart humble and pure, I entrust myself wholly to you. I consecrate my heart to you forever, my only desire being to love your divine Son, Jesus. Mary, none of your devout servants has ever perished; may I, too, be saved. Amen.



Ambrose
"Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin."
Sermon 22:30(A.D. 388)

Each of these quotes came from before the Canon of the New Testament was decided, and each quote is only one of many, from a multitude of different authors that show the consistency of the Faith of the Apostles. There are many more quotes, but I urge each of you to read the works of these men of the Faith for yourselves. These are the men, some of them disciples of the Apostles themselves, who gave their lives that we might know Christ and His Gospel. These are the men who the Holy Spirit led to choose the books of the Canon of Scripture. Please, read all their writings you can find.

www.newadvent.org. Visit the Church Fathers section. Thanks to Dave Armstrong and the many others whose writings led me to search out the Faith of the Apostles.

God Bless,

Neal

 

[aggie03]

Thank you - I have a lot more reading to do, I don't know when I'll be able to post on here again - I guess when I have a question about the things that I read. You have all been very helpful to me, thank you. If you can come up with any thing else that you think I should read to help my understanding, then please let me know about it!