The problem that Pope Francis has at times is that he assumes too much from his audience. And this has been a gripe of many Catholics concerning him, because he will say something, and not clarify what he meant. I think he is trying to force people to think a little on their own, but he just doesn't realize that most people don't take the time to get past the words.
For example for the statement above the question to ask is: What does it mean to do good? You have to look at what or should I say Who good is. All goodness leads to God, because God is the author of all that is good; for God is Good. So if we start living a life seeking to do good and to be good, somewhere along the line you will end up in God's grace. See the point of what he is truly saying here?
Francis is a Jesuit, and Jesuits are thinkers and teachers, and the problem that Francis has is that he forgets who he is teaching to at times.
I see there are no Catholics yet who have taken up your questions.
As a fellow Protestant, my understanding of the Catholic approach is that doctrine is a continuing process of revelation of truth. It did not end in the first century nor with the establishment of the canon of the Bible (which, for Catholics, was finalized at the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century). Rather, God continues to reveal doctrine through the Magesterium of the Catholic Church, of which the Pope, as the Vicar (representative) of Christ is the chief spokesman. Thus it was in 1871 that the Catholic Church established the doctrine of Papal infallibility, that is, the process whereby, under specific conditions, the Pope can make statements which are binding on all Catholics. The most recent use of papal infallibility was in 1950 when the Pope declared the Four Marian doctrines to be dogmas of the Catholic Church.
If you beleive this to be true, maybe you would like to asnwer a couple of questions I asked of Protestants a few pages back that went unanswered.
"So to my Protestant brothers and sisters I would like to ask you a historical church question...... If you beleived as I did as a Protestant, when do you believe the Bible to be codified, and when do you beleive the first writings that would be a part of the New Testament were finally written down? (Chronologized) Thank you for your replies in advance."
What Saint is dead? You don't believe that all the righteous go to heaven to LIVE with God?
No it really doesn't. Not everything that the pope says is infallible. That being said what the pope said when understood in the context of what he intended to say isn't a false statement, as I explained.I hear you and respect your thoughts. However do you not see that what you just said places the Pope in conflict with Vatican II????
"As Vatican II remarked, it is a charism the pope "enjoys in virtue of his office, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith (Luke 22:32), he proclaims by a definitive act some doctrine of faith or morals. Therefore his definitions, of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, are justly held irreformable, for they are pronounced with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, an assistance promised to him in blessed Peter."
Papal Infallibility | Catholic Answers
Yes we do. Its called the Bible. Saul communed with Samuel, Jesus Himself communed with Moses and Elijah, then you throw in all the occurrences in Scripture where men and women communed with angels.Being in China and living in China is one thing. Sitting in my living room in the United States and getting on my knees and folding my hands together and then carrying on a conversation without any telephonic means of communication with someone in China is quite another. We have absolutely no reason to believe that the deceased people in heaven are able to communicate with the non-deceased people on earth.
A few of them were. If it were only those people who were cited whenever someone claims that the early church believed such and such (meaning that we are supposed to do so also), there would not be nearly as much controversy over the ECFs as there is.
But, obviously, when a person who lived as far removed from Christ and the Apostles as the 5th century AD (!) is called an "Early Church Father," we are dealing with someone whose views are colored by what the church had become by that time, not what it was in Apostolic times.
Vital. If you want to know the correct interpretation of doctrine.How important is it to study the Church founders and do you think one can be a proper Catholic (by extension, a proper Christian) if they do not nor have desire to study Church founders and the development of doctrines from a Roman Catholic standpoint?
Lemme know!
No it really doesn't. Not everything that the pope says is infallible. That being said what the pope said when understood in the context of what he intended to say isn't a false statement, as I explained.
Yes we do. Its called the Bible. Saul communed with Samuel, Jesus Himself communed with Moses and Elijah, then you throw in all the occurrences in Scripture where men and women communed with angels.
Here is the point, you have two options here. 1) Are the Saints alive and well in heaven? or 2) Are the SDA correct in your view concerning their doctrine of soul-sleep?
And we would agree, that is why we don't pray to those in hell, for those in hell can't hear our prayers because they are truly dead.
Wouldn't you think that the spirits of the saved in heaven are likely preoccupied with other things such as worshipping God and enjoying the glories of heaven????
Your comment is a little deceptive is it not?
Again Major1, maybe my failing eye site has failed me once more, but I posted these questions back on Page 2; post # 24, of this thread and don't recall seeing a Protestant or for that matter, a Catholic responce. Maybe you could help me out and repost where I disliked or not accepted the answer. Was it your responce, or someone elses? Thanks.I remember your question and I also remember that it was answered. Now I realize the answer was not one you liked or accepted but none the less I am pretty sure it was addressed.
When you say " the canon was a process conducted first by Jewish rabbis" are you speaking of the Palestinian canon, or the Alexandrian canon? Also Major1, from your Protestant/sola scripturists perspective, who do you beleive these scholars/early Christians to be? Do you beleive them to be sola scripturists such as yourself? History proves they couldn't have been Protestant, so who do you believe them to be? Your Historical evidence and sources to back up your argument would be most appreciated.Determining the canon was a process conducted first by Jewish rabbis and scholars and later by early Christians.
Ultimately, it was God who decided what books belonged in the biblical canon.
Okay.......Which again brings up the question......... From a Protestant/sola scripturists (the bible alone) belief, when do you beleive the bible to have been codified? What do sola scripturists like yourself beleive the chronology of the first writings to be? In other words, what year or years do you think Paul’s first and second letter's to the Thessalonians, the Gospel of Luke, or again, Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians writings would be a part of the New Testament? Again, historical evidence and their sources, would be most appreciated.A book of Scripture belonged in the canon from the moment God inspired its writing.
Again, these human followers were who? and when?It was simply a matter of God’s convincing His human followers which books should be included in the Bible.
In what way? I'm just trying to get the historical perspective of those like yourself that adhere to the doctrine of sola scriptura (the bible alone) that the practice of scripture alone was taught and practiced by the early church.?
No. I certainly do not disagree with them..
Wouldn't you think that the spirits of the saved in heaven are likely preoccupied with other things such as worshipping God and enjoying the glories of heaven????
I hear you and respect your thoughts. However do you not see that what you just said places the Pope in conflict with Vatican II????
"As Vatican II remarked, it is a charism the pope "enjoys in virtue of his office, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith (Luke 22:32), he proclaims by a definitive act some doctrine of faith or morals. Therefore his definitions, of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, are justly held irreformable, for they are pronounced with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, an assistance promised to him in blessed Peter."
Papal Infallibility | Catholic Answers