Doctrine that Adds to Scripture

[bbbbbbb]

There is no set list of ex cathedra teachings, but that’s because there are only two, and both are about Mary: her Immaculate Conception (declared by Pope Pius IX in 1854 and grandfathered in after the First Vatican Council’s declaration of papal infallibility in 1870) and her bodily Assumption into heaven (declared by Pope Pius XII in 1950).

But neither of these was earth-shattering to Catholics, because these beliefs had been nurtured through devotion, prayer, and local teaching for centuries before becoming official papal teaching.
Is there a list of infallible teachings?

You have put your finger on one of the problematic issues within Catholicism - the relative significance of teaching. Most Catholics look to the Catechism of the Catholic Church as defining Catholic doctrine, but, as we all know, the Catechism was not carved in stone and is subject to alteration over time. It also skims over various teachings such as Purgatory and Limbo, leaving the door wide open to various understandings.

Things worked out in the early Church Councils have yet to be declared to be infallible while relatively insignificant doctrines, such as the two Marian dogmas you mentioned, have been elevated to the highest level in the spectrum

 

[concretecamper]

.

 

[concretecamper]

I think you're conflating two unrelated things.

It was dogmatically defined in the 19th century as you say.

But it was SOP in the Church starting in the first century as per the sources I've cited.

It's not uncommon for the Church to define something dogmatically only when there's need to do so. Papal infallibility is one example but there are others.

Considering the Church has always looked to Rome to settle argumnet on matters of faith, I would say that is pretty strong evidence of infallibility. Why would the Universal Church, if it did not believe that the Bishop of Rome was infallible in matters of faith, look to Rome to settle these matters.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Considering the Church has always looked to Rome to settle argumnet on matters of faith, I would say that is pretty strong evidence of infallibility. Why would the Universal Church, if it did not believe that the Bishop of Rome was infallible in matters of faith, look to Rome to settle these matters.

I love this post. The Roman Church, naturally, looks to Rome. Duh!!!

 

[concretecamper]

I love this post. The Roman Church, naturally, looks to Rome. Duh!!!

So you consider the Universal Church the Roman Catholic Church? That's a first.

 

[bbbbbbb]

So you consider the Universal Church the Roman Catholic Church? That's a first.

Well, you obviously do. Why would I?

 

[concretecamper]

Why would I?

Either you are becoming more aware or screwed up a chance for you to be witty. You pick.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Either you are becoming more aware or screwed up a chance for you to be witty. You pick.

Yes. I agree.

 

[Major1]

I love this post. The Roman Church, naturally, looks to Rome. Duh!!!

That is circular reasoning. It would be the same as the Police investigating the Police.

 

[Major1]

So you consider the Universal Church the Roman Catholic Church? That's a first.

The Protestant Reformation burst from Catholicism, and it was the same Catholic Church that all the reformers thought of as the true church gone corrupt. But the truth of the matter is that the Catholic Church was NEVER the true church, and the Protestant Reformation did not re-establish the true religion. The Catholic Church is exactly what it has always publicly called itself: the Roman Catholic (Universal) Church.
It stands identified by its own words! It is not the Christian church, but the Roman Universal Church. It is a syncretistic religion, having its roots in Babylon.

The Protestant Reformation simply established more forms of the Roman Catholic Church. It established denominations of false religion masquerading as the true religion. The Reformation simply reformed the Roman Universal Church into many varieties without a Pope.

 

[Major1]

You have put your finger on one of the problematic issues within Catholicism - the relative significance of teaching. Most Catholics look to the Catechism of the Catholic Church as defining Catholic doctrine, but, as we all know, the Catechism was not carved in stone and is subject to alteration over time. It also skims over various teachings such as Purgatory and Limbo, leaving the door wide open to various understandings.

Things worked out in the early Church Councils have yet to be declared to be infallible while relatively insignificant doctrines, such as the two Marian dogmas you mentioned, have been elevated to the highest level in the spectrum

Consider where we are today. Today, Christianity has lost its cutting edge. In many cases, the church and the RCC is nothing more than entertaining paganism. In other cases, it is a Sunday-morning fraternal organization. We are seeing its effects on the streets and in our society today everywhere we look.

Morality has fallen in the market place, in the business area, and in the streets. America especially is being swept away in a homosexual and inappropriate contentographic tsunami. There is NO respect for authority and as a result police are being killed daily, and now athletes will not honor the flag of the great country.

 

[Phil 1:21]

Consider where we are today. Today, Christianity has lost its cutting edge. In many cases, the church and the RCC is nothing more than entertaining paganism. In other cases, it is a Sunday-morning fraternal organization. We are seeing its effects on the streets and in our society today everywhere we look.

That's a very sad reality. I heard a sermon this morning where the preacher made a very solid case that the reason why the church (universal, not specific) makes such a poor impact is that it stopped working for Jesus and now works for itself. It stopped seeking to glorify God and now looks to glorify itself. It's lost it's way, and society is reaping the whirlwind.

How many churches are actively, visibly present in their community? I'm not talking about having a fancy building and a nice sign out front. How many leave the confines of their four walls and venture out to help the people around them, to spread the good news? The church I grew up in had zero community impact...nothing. They had bingo once a week and a carnival every summer, both of which were fund raisers.

Some folks are big on saying "The (insert denomination here) build hospitals, schools, food banks, whatever." That's great, but what has your individual church or parish done? And more importantly, what has been your personal part in that outreach? Do they host programs for people struggling with marital issues, substance abuse, or financial difficulties? Do they offer youth programs to help keep kids engaged in walking with Christ? Do they open their doors and feed the poor in their own neighborhoods? Do they council pregnant teens? Do they actually represent the hands and feet of Jesus Christ in their community? Or do they just host worship services every week and pass the collection plate?

At the end of the day, WE are the church. And we need to start acting like it.

 

[concretecamper]

The Protestant Reformation burst from Catholicism, and it was the same Catholic Church that all the reformers thought of as the true church gone corrupt.

Great, we have you proving that up until 1500, the VAST VAST majority of Christian believed the RCC as the One True Church. All we need to work on now is the last 500 years.

The Catholic Church is exactly what it has always publicly called itself: the Roman Catholic (Universal) Churh

It is so frustrating when people make comments that show their lack of knowledge. I would encourage you to research when the term "Roman Catholic" was first used, Who first used it and why, and then report back to us all and correct this comment.

The Protestant Reformation simply established more forms of the Roman Catholic Church. It established denominations of false religion masquerading as the true religion. The Reformation simply reformed the Roman Universal Church into many varieties without a Pope.

I see, so you are an equally opportunity hater.....so Christian of you.

 

[Major1]

That's a very sad reality. I heard a sermon this morning where the preacher made a very solid case that the reason why the church (universal, not specific) makes such a poor impact is that it stopped working for Jesus and now works for itself. It stopped seeking to glorify God and now looks to glorify itself. It's lost it's way, and society is reaping the whirlwind.

How many churches are actively, visibly present in their community? I'm not talking about having a fancy building and a nice sign out front. How many leave the confines of their four walls and venture out to help the people around them, to spread the good news? The church I grew up in had zero community impact...nothing. They had bingo once a week and a carnival every summer, both of which were fund raisers.

Some folks are big on saying "The (insert denomination here) build hospitals, schools, food banks, whatever." That's great, but what has your individual church or parish done? And more importantly, what has been your personal part in that outreach? Do they host programs for people struggling with marital issues, substance abuse, or financial difficulties? Do they offer youth programs to help keep kids engaged in walking with Christ? Do they open their doors and feed the poor in their own neighborhoods? Do they council pregnant teens? Do they actually represent the hands and feet of Jesus Christ in their community? Or do they just host worship services every week and pass the collection plate?

At the end of the day, WE are the church. And we need to start acting like it.

Agreed.

And the perfect example happened in Huston Tx. when Joel Osteen's church did not open their church to help others in any way they could, "because the city did not ask them".

I believe if that was my excuse......I would have said nothing at all.

 

[Phil 1:21]

Great, we have you proving that up until 1500, every Christian believed the RCC as the One True Church.

I'm going to go out on a limb and respectfully suggest the Orthodox community would strongly disagree with you on that opinion.

 

[concretecamper]

I'm going to go out on a limb and respectfully suggest the Orthodox community would strongly disagree with you on that opinion.

Major said it not me. Correct him if you feel you need to correct someone.

Ok...I'll edit my original post to reflfect what he was trying to say

 

[Major1]

Great, we have you proving that up until 1500, every Christian believed the RCC as the One True Church. All we need to work on now is the last 500 years.



It is so frustrating when people make comments that show their lack of knowledge. I would encourage you to research when the term "Roman Catholic" was first used, Who first used it and why, and then report back to us all and correct this comment.



I see, so you are an equally opportunity hater.....so Christian of you.

If I need your help in knowledge I will certainly ask you.

I am not a hater of anyone. I just tell the truth and sometimes people, like you for example do not like to here it. You see you have been brainwashed for so long you can not grasp the reality all around you.

People in the church find justification for idolatry, for Sabbath-breaking, for murder, lying, stealing, homosexual activity and inappropriate contentography and when confronted with the facts of reality........."it is what others have been doing for 500 years".

It was no accident that James writes in James 4:1, "From whence come wars. . . ." ?
God's people making war? They were. Those things can creep into the church and into us individually if we allow them. We are seeing that right here in our conversations with each other as they are progressively becoming more and more personal and confrontational.

Did you ever hear of Jesus using any of those methods to solve His problems?

He said, "I always do the will of My Father."

He did not resort to aggressive behavior and slander.

The gospels say that "He trusted no man," and He kept Himself separate from them spiritually even though He was among them constantly, healing, teaching, and receiving abuse and persecution because He was peculiar to them and a threat. How did He threaten them? By making them face up to their justifications, and their lies to themselves.

 

[Major1]

I'm going to go out on a limb and respectfully suggest the Orthodox community would strongly disagree with you on that opinion.

I think that you can go a long way out on that limb with out any worries!!!!

 

[Major1]

Major said it not me. Correct him if you feel you need to correct someone.

Ok...I'll edit my original post to reflfect what he was trying to say

I said..................
"The Protestant Reformation burst from Catholicism, and it was the same Catholic Church that all the reformers thought of as the true church gone corrupt.

You then said.........
"Great, we have you proving that up until 1500, every Christian believed the RCC as the One True Church. All we need to work on now is the last 500 years."

 

[bbbbbbb]

That's a very sad reality. I heard a sermon this morning where the preacher made a very solid case that the reason why the church (universal, not specific) makes such a poor impact is that it stopped working for Jesus and now works for itself. It stopped seeking to glorify God and now looks to glorify itself. It's lost it's way, and society is reaping the whirlwind.

How many churches are actively, visibly present in their community? I'm not talking about having a fancy building and a nice sign out front. How many leave the confines of their four walls and venture out to help the people around them, to spread the good news? The church I grew up in had zero community impact...nothing. They had bingo once a week and a carnival every summer, both of which were fund raisers.

Some folks are big on saying "The (insert denomination here) build hospitals, schools, food banks, whatever." That's great, but what has your individual church or parish done? And more importantly, what has been your personal part in that outreach? Do they host programs for people struggling with marital issues, substance abuse, or financial difficulties? Do they offer youth programs to help keep kids engaged in walking with Christ? Do they open their doors and feed the poor in their own neighborhoods? Do they council pregnant teens? Do they actually represent the hands and feet of Jesus Christ in their community? Or do they just host worship services every week and pass the collection plate?

At the end of the day, WE are the church. And we need to start acting like it.

To this I would also add the retrenchment from foreign missions. In the nineteenth century the Protestant churches, especially those in Great Britain and the United States effectively developed an outreach for the gospel that actively engaged most of the world. It was no exaggeration when Reginald Heber wrote the stirring hymn, "From Greenland's Icy Mountains to India's Coral Strand".

Today foreign outreach is minimal, at best, in most churches. When one examines their budgets, the vast amount goes to paying for lavish facilities and the salaries of a bloated staff of ministers. Typically, missions get the last scraps of the budget as a sop to history. In most cases it is significantly less than 1% of the budget.

Do we actually believe that "there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name given among men by which we must be saved"? Or, have we succumbed to the fuzzy sort of universalism which earnestly hopes that God will not send those good, sincere heathen who worship to the best of their ability and knowledge a god who may actually be God? Even the Catholic Church has caved into this mentality. It is all-pervasive.