Laundry list for Protestants

[nephilimiyr]

Agreed... Josiah truly does speak with wisdom... he fills in the gaps that other prots can't find the words for.

And that would be me

 

[nephilimiyr]

From a few Protestants saying that we don't understand what Sola Scriptura means to them, I am starting to wonder if it could possibly be the same as what the Catholics complain about how the Protestants don't understand how we use the word pray, which we use it meaning to ask...not to worship. Worship is worship to us, pray is to ask...but you can do both at the same time...but the worship part is to be only to God. So, maybe if you explain Sola Scriptura to me as it is to you...this Catholic will understand more (hopefully, sometimes I'm a little dim about things !)

Thanks for your help!!

I not only think it's possible but I believe that that is what it is. As an ex-Catholic, I don't ever remember being taught that when we pray the Hail Mary, or any of the other prayers to other saints, that what we were doing was worshipping Mary or the other saints. This is where I have always felt alot of Protestants are ignorant of concerning the Catholic way.

I've been in the middle of this for a long time. I don't believe and never have that Catholics worship the saints when they pray to them but have come to believe that it isn't neccessary. I don't believe it's forbidden or damning if Catholics hold to this practise though.

So I think you put your finger right on the button. Both sides have misconceptions of what the other side believes and there are people on both sides who are stubborn enough to not really listen to what the other side is saying.

 

[good4u]

good4u, very nice post by the way, really everything you said was very informative and said in a very Christlike manner!! I love learning about people and what they believe and why they believe what they believe, but only when it is done in a loving manner, like this. I would like to share my own personal thoughts and a question too...

Kindness begets kindness, does it not? Questioning and even challenging as you are about to do, is iron sharping iron...

(please don't take this as an attack, it's not intended to be...) Have you ever talked to these people whom you have seen with your own eyes? I too recall seeing people who seem to really be worshiping a statue of a saint...and have had my doubts then about what I am doing myself. I have talked with a few different people now who are devoutly praying (asking, or requesting for that saint to pray with them to God), to saints. Praying to a statue is wrong and silly to even do, what is a statue going to do for you? But looking at that statue while in prayer does help people (especially people like me) to keep focused on prayer, and not wander off to wonder why the girl walking by has her hair done up, when it would look so much better pulled down, or wonder how you will cook the chicken tonight for dinner.

Praying the rosary can be a lot the same thing as that. It helps us to keep on the prayer that we are meant to be on, without the need to sit there and count. It also allows us to keep our main focus on Jesus, which is right where it always should be. We meditate on mysteries as we pray the rosary and the mysteries focus on the life of Jesus as it was written about Him in the bible.

If you were to talk with someone and they say they are worshipping Mary or one of the saints....then you are absolutely right, they are a very misguided person indeed. And there are certainly people like that, if they are Catholic, they are not following the Catholic faith as taught through the Catechism of the Catholic Church at all. I have been to lots of Catholic churches and have never been told that we are to worship anyone but God. I also am a teacher of Catechism and Director of Religious Ed. at our parish and if any of the other Catechists were to say we are to worship anyone other than God, well, they would have a lot of serious explaining to do and they would probably be told that their services are no longer needed.

This older lady whom I was referring to is what I call a an "old school Catholic" I used to work with her. I do live in a predominantly Catholic town with a Catholic church, it seems, on every corner. Nevertheless, during the work day she would show me this "liturgy" (for lack of a better word) she would pray to a St. Theresa. ??????

She stated that she did indeed pray to this saint. ??????? Of course I did not try and dissuade her from this practice as it was none of my business who she "prayed" to, but she might as well be praying to her computer to get her work done!

I think this is very dangerous spiritually, as it comes very close to becoming idolatrous and forbidden by God. Whether she was worshipping this saint, I do not know, but she said she was praying to this saint. That is all I can tell you about this incident.

(Now my question, (sorry for the length of all this!!) I have read many times on the forum that different people (mostly Catholic) are wrong on the meaning of what most Protestants believe Sola Scriptura to mean. You have such a nice and kind way of explaining things, could you please explain what this means then. This way as a Catholic, I will be able to understand it better what a Protestant beleives Sola Scriptura to mean.

Actually, you have two issues you want answered from protestants. I will be happy to address both from my own protestant worldview, if that's okay.

SOLA SCRIPTURA

I will give you a personal view, not some theological textbook definition which I think you could better relate to as a believer and fellow instructor.

Being a religious catholic instructor yourself, you know that the protestant cannon of Scripture does not contain the Apograha as does the catholic cannon. That being basically the only difference, our cannons contain the exact same books from both the Old Testament and New Testament.

All believers should understand that the Holy Bible is THE inspired Word of God. Because the Bible is inspired (i.e., God-breathed out) meaning the very words of God himself, it is by nature authoritative.

Because it is authoritative, it is the supreme guide for faith and practice for a believer in life. The Bible is our spiritual tool, not something to be worshipped, but our advisor before God and our relations with man. It is our supreme spiritual road map and spiritual tempurature gauge in our relationship to God and man.

Nothing is equal in authority to the Bible in our quest for a relationship with God and love toward man. Nothing.

Now below is really your second question...

(From a few Protestants saying that we don't understand what Sola Scriptura means to them, I am starting to wonder if it could possibly be the same as what the Catholics complain about how the Protestants don't understand how we use the word pray, which we use it meaning to ask...not to worship. Worship is worship to us, pray is to ask...but you can do both at the same time...but the worship part is to be only to God. So, maybe if you explain Sola Scriptura to me as it is to you...this Catholic will understand more (hopefully, sometimes I'm a little dim about things !)

Thanks for your help!!

You do not worship in prayer? Really? But then you do both? I don't understand.

Pray to me is not just a wish list of wants. It is much, much more. It is reconnecting with your LORD daily for refreshing your spiritual relationship. It is praise to God for his attributes when you have had a bad day, it is repentance for forgiveness of daily sin, it is intercessory prayer for others, it is then for your daily needs and asking that his will be done and for his glory. It is much more than asking, it is an on-going relationship to the one who loves you so.

 

[vrunca]

This older lady whom I was referring to is what I call a an "old school Catholic" I used to work with her. I do live in a predominantly Catholic town with a Catholic church, it seems, on every corner. Nevertheless, during the work day she would show me this "liturgy" (for lack of a better word) she would pray to a St. Theresa. ??????

That Saint was probably St. Therese, who'se life was a lovely model of how to live a simple, loving prayerful life. Her life was devoted to Worshiping God and helping others out.

SOLA SCRIPTURA

I will give you a personal view, not some theological textbook definition which I think you could better relate to as a believer and fellow instructor.

Being a religious catholic instructor yourself, you know that the protestant cannon of Scripture does not contain the Apograha as does the catholic cannon. That being basically the only difference, our cannons contain the exact same books from both the Old Testament and New Testament.

All believers should understand that the Holy Bible is THE inspired Word of God. Because the Bible is inspired (i.e., God-breathed out) meaning the very words of God himself, it is by nature authoritative.

Because it is authoritative, it is the supreme guide for faith and practice for a believer in life. The Bible is our spiritual tool, not something to be worshipped, but our advisor before God and our relations with man. It is our supreme spiritual road map and spiritual tempurature gauge in our relationship to God and man.

Nothing is equal in authority to the Bible in our quest for a relationship with God and love toward man. Nothing.

Thank you for explaining this, it is what I have actually understood it to mean.

Now below is really your second question...

You do not worship in prayer? Really? But then you do both? I don't understand.

Pray to me is not just a wish list of wants. It is much, much more. It is reconnecting with your LORD daily for refreshing your spiritual relationship. It is praise to God for his attributes when you have had a bad day, it is repentance for forgiveness of daily sin, it is intercessory prayer for others, it is then for your daily needs and asking that his will be done and for his glory. It is much more than asking, it is an on-going relationship to the one who loves you so.

It really wasn't a question, but that is fine, I was just comparing that possibly we are misunderstanding your meaning of Sola Scriptura the way I feel some (not all) Protestants misunderstand what we mean when we say we pray to the Saints.

Prayer is definately not a wish list of wants, but it is not also only worship. I looked the definition of prayer up in the dictionary:
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/pray
pray

One entry found for pray. Main Entry: pray
Pronunciation: 'prA
Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French prier, praer, preier, from Latin precari, from prec-, prex request, prayer; akin to Old High German frAga question, frAgEn to ask, Sanskrit prcchati he asks
transitive verb
1 : [SIZE=-1]ENTREAT[/SIZE], [SIZE=-1]IMPLORE[/SIZE] -- often used as a function word in introducing a question, request, or plea <pray be careful>
2 : to get or bring by praying
intransitive verb
1 : to make a request in a humble manner
2 : to address God or a god with adoration, confession, supplication, or thanksgiving

We will ask saints to pray for us for a specific need, they are already in Heaven close to God and praying for us anyway. We also pray for our needs to God, but just like praying for our friends here alive on earth with us, we pray to those to pray for us also, who have gone before us and are even more alive than we are right now, because they are in Heaven. (It is part of the Communion of Saints)

If I have a specific need, I may ask my best friend to pray for me, but I may also ask one of the saints to pray for me also. We know (or we should know) that it is not the Saints performing miracles or granting requests, it is God ONLY. But it is nice to have many who are praying for the same thing.

Also, if you look at the last of the definition from Webster, I was suprised to see that they map out a little teaching tool that I use with my youth, when teaching how to pray to God. I use ACTS, which is: Adoration, Confession, Thanksgiving and Supplication.

But if you look at the very first definition under Intransitive verb, it is: To make a request in a humble manner. We are requesting or asking the saints to pray along with us, in our requests to the Father. But we know nothing can be done if it is not God's will and there is not a saint in heaven who can make a miracle happen, that is all God's doing alone.

But to answer your question, you asked: You do not worship in prayer? Only to the Father. But I also give thanks and confess and ask and discuss with the Father, when I pray to Him.

To the saints, I pray they will pray with me also.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

That Saint was probably St. Therese, who'se life was a lovely model of how to live a simple, loving prayerful life. Her life was devoted to Worshiping God and helping others out.

Off topic, but one of the things I like about Catholicism is this embrace of the models of real people in the real world. I suppose it's why I can identify with several biblical figures - they were real people, worts, doubts, sins and all - yet often with some characteristic, some lesson we can learn, and hey, if they could do it, we can too. Models (even heroes) are almost entirely gone in our modern world - and I think we are worse off because of it.

I once had a internet buddy who lives in India. A Hindu, he admired Mother Theresa in a very profound way - and her love, humility and service cause him to reach out to Christians and to want to learn more about the Christ so evident in her. Her love and service are of GREAT value in and of themselves, but her example was/is profound in MANY ways. Frankly, I think we Protestants could learn a lesson there.

Thank you for explaining this, it is what I have actually understood it to mean.

During my years of having one foot in Protestantism and one foot in Catholicism that misunderstandings were plentiful, sometimes being so great I thought of them as "urban myths." Sometimes it was understandable - perhaps the laity of neither not doing a very accurate or thorough job of explaining or maybe some vocabulary issues, the same word being used in different ways. This thread actually touches on several misunderstood ideas some Catholics have about Protestantism. One of the great advantages to an INTER-denominational forum like this is we have this opportunity to clarify, to correct some of those mutual misunderstandings. I very strongly embrace that.

There are those with an agenda to condemn or convert - or just defend. But many come here with a goal of mutual understanding.

It really wasn't a question, but that is fine, I was just comparing that possibly we are misunderstanding your meaning of Sola Scriptura the way I feel some (not all) Protestants misunderstand what we mean when we say we pray to the Saints.

There's a "laundry list" on both sides...

And when there is a GENUINE question and people want to listen and not just talk, progress can be made on that list. Sadly, it often quickly becomes a debate filled with polemics. I confess - repent, that I've sometimes done that, too.

When I completed my Catholic information class for membership, I had a great chat with my priest - who in no way pressured me to anything. I told him that I agreed with the Catholic Church 95% of the time, to which he responded that was probably better than the great majority of Catholics (with a chuckle - but I think he meant it) and added that he agreed with my denomination 95% of the time. I wonder why we can't see that?

There are things we disagree on. I honestly think it has more to do with terminology and epistemology than anything - but those 18 inches getting from our heart (where God put faith) to our head can be a TOUGH 18 inches. I'm convinced (but cannot prove) that my faith and that of my good Catholic friends is the same. In any case, I consider them my FULL UNseparted brothers and sisters in Christ, equally a part of His Body and the church catholic.

Prayer is definately not a wish list of wants, but it is not also only worship. I looked the definition of prayer up in the dictionary:
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/pray
pray

One entry found for pray. Main Entry: pray
Pronunciation: 'prA
Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French prier, praer, preier, from Latin precari, from prec-, prex request, prayer; akin to Old High German frAga question, frAgEn to ask, Sanskrit prcchati he asks
transitive verb
1 : [SIZE=-1]ENTREAT[/SIZE], [SIZE=-1]IMPLORE[/SIZE] -- often used as a function word in introducing a question, request, or plea <pray be careful>
2 : to get or bring by praying
intransitive verb
1 : to make a request in a humble manner
2 : to address God or a god with adoration, confession, supplication, or thanksgiving

We will ask saints to pray for us for a specific need, they are already in Heaven close to God and praying for us anyway. We also pray for our needs to God, but just like praying for our friends here alive on earth with us, we pray to those to pray for us also, who have gone before us and are even more alive than we are right now, because they are in Heaven. (It is part of the Communion of Saints)

If I have a specific need, I may ask my best friend to pray for me, but I may also ask one of the saints to pray for me also. We know (or we should know) that it is not the Saints performing miracles or granting requests, it is God ONLY. But it is nice to have many who are praying for the same thing.

Also, if you look at the last of the definition from Webster, I was suprised to see that they map out a little teaching tool that I use with my youth, when teaching how to pray to God. I use ACTS, which is: Adoration, Confession, Thanksgiving and Supplication.

But if you look at the very first definition under Intransitive verb, it is: To make a request in a humble manner. We are requesting or asking the saints to pray along with us, in our requests to the Father. But we know nothing can be done if it is not God's will and there is not a saint in heaven who can make a miracle happen, that is all God's doing alone.

But to answer your question, you asked: You do not worship in prayer? Only to the Father. But I also give thanks and confess and ask and discuss with the Father, when I pray to Him.

To the saints, I pray they will pray with me also.

Beautifully put...
Thank you.


I think you'll find that very few Protestants have an issue with that, especially in how you so accurately conveyed it. Protestants will be "touchy" any dogma here (rather than framed as a pious faith or Christian practice - that is a kind of 'hot botton' for them) or that they can 'answer' them on their own authority - but as you put it, I doubt many would have any problem at all.


BTW, Protestants use the "ACTS" acrostic, too. In Lutheranism, we often do it as ACTSS - with Sacrament added.


Anyway, just speaking for ONE Protestant, I appreciate your post...


Pax.


- Josiah


.

 

[good4u]

Veronica (is your nick name ronnie?)

Yes, ACTS was the acronym I was using it is a universal principle practice by many believers world wide. To assert my own question to Catholics regarding prayer to saints, which by the way protestants do not practice, generally. It is stated by Solomon in his depressing book, Ecclesiastes, that the dead no nothing. If they did would I have alot to tell my dear, departed mother! That is another story, but how do Catholic reconcile this practice when the Bible clearly states otherwise. This is why Sola Scriptura is so vital to protestants so we do not fall into spiritual error.

Ecclesiastes 9:5 "For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not anything, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten."

Now, Solomon sounds depressed. My mother's memory is not forgotton yet. But when I die, it will be. No where in God's Word says that the saints that have gone on have influence let alone knowledge of things of earth. This is why Sola Scriptura is vital for protestants to guard from error.

How do Catholics reconcile this extra spiritual practice when God's Word says that the dead no nothing? Can you help?

 

[vrunca]

Veronica (is your nick name ronnie?)

Yes, ACTS was the acronym I was using it is a universal principle practice by many believers world wide. To assert my own question to Catholics regarding prayer to saints, which by the way protestants do not practice, generally. It is stated by Solomon in his depressing book, Ecclesiastes, that the dead no nothing. If they did would I have alot to tell my dear, departed mother! That is another story, but how do Catholic reconcile this practice when the Bible clearly states otherwise. This is why Sola Scriptura is so vital to protestants so we do not fall into spiritual error.

Ecclesiastes 9:5 "For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not anything, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten."

Now, Solomon sounds depressed. My mother's memory is not forgotton yet. But when I die, it will be. No where in God's Word says that the saints that have gone on have influence let alone knowledge of things of earth. This is why Sola Scriptura is vital for protestants to guard from error.

How do Catholics reconcile this extra spiritual practice when God's Word says that the dead no nothing? Can you help?

Lol, when I was in pre-school there was a little boy who used to go around pulling my pigtails and calling me a boy because they called me Ronnie and by the way, his name....Ronnie! So from that point on I have only been known as Veronica. Isn't it funny how things stick with us like this...because that was a very, very long time ago!!

As for the rest of my post, I am really not good at explaining things very well, please understand that!! But I will do my best, there are other Catholics that frequent CF, who could do a much better job than me, and at any point that they would like to pop in and take over...I will gladly move aside , where ya at guys I have been sitting here waiting for a couple of hours now!!

First of all I am going to mention and I am sure you realize that as a Catholic, we depend a great deal on sacred tradition. I'm not going to go into that though, I will stick with what is written in the Bible, because....well, because I think that is the only way to do it being that you are Sola Scriptura, we can talk about the sacred traditions some other time!

Ok, let's see, I'm just going to list some of the Scripture that I would use to explain why I believe that the Saints are still alive and aware and praying for us:

Rev 5:8 When he took it, the four living creatures and the 24 elders fell down before the Lamb. Each of the elders held a harp and gold bowls filled with incense, which are the prayers of the Saints. (to me, what I have to ask myself is what would the prayers of the Saints be, if they follow the same ACTS profile as we do? What could they possibly need, they are in Heaven, all is good, so any supplications would have to be for us poor souls still on earth.)

Then there is also: Luke 15:7 I tell you, in just the same way there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over 99 righteous people who have no need of repentance. (Again in heaven they are still conected with us and know what is going on with us still here.)

I am trying to stay with the very obvious, but this one really speaks to me about being surrounded by the Saints: Heb 12:1 Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us rid ourselves of every burden and sin that clings to us and persevere in running the race that lies before us. (and going further on to 2, it sums up how we are to stay always focused on Jesus, which we do) 2 while keeping our eyes fixed on Jesus, the leader and perfecter of faith. For the sake of the joy that lay before him he endured the cross, despising its shame and has taken his seat. (I see this as if we are surrounded by the cloud of witnesses, who would be the angels and saints, then they are still able to pray for us too, they are surrounding us and know what is going on.)

There is three of my thoughts on this...it is very late now and I'm sure that other Catholics could have done much better, maybe tomorrow if no one takes over with this, I will add more, but it is almost 1:30 a.m., so that is it for me, for now. I hope this helps you understand where the Catholic thought on praying to the saints comes from in the Bible.

God Bless!!

 

[vrunca]

I just also wanted to say that I am sorry for your loss of your mother, it is never easy losing a parent, even if it has been a while. I just happened to notice that it is now July 20th, which is the anniversary of the death of my beloved father. He died in 1976 and I miss him dearly, even after 30 years. I speak to him often, it means so much to me knowing that he can hear me. I am not going to say that he talks back to me, he doesn't, or at least I don't hear him talk to me. But I do ask him to pray for me and I know he does.

 

[JCrawf]

No. But having said this, I have seen with my own eyes Catholics who pray with their rosaries, prayers to Saints, I have seen their liturgies to them. Maybe you personally do not pray to saints, but I have seen personally otherwise. Those Catholics, IMO, are misguided.

I think you are mistaking a devotion to a particular saint's practica of piety, or a petition to a Saint (who is alive in Christ) to pray for them. Rosaries are not what many Protestants misinterpret them to be. I pray the rosary (unfortunately, not as often as I ought), and it become a time for me to deeply participate in the mysteries of Christ, in some ways through the lense of his mother Mary. The Gosple unfolds in a unique way through the prayers of the rosary. It is part of meditative prayer, which may even lead to contemplative prayer, wherein even the words cease, and the symbols are no more. This is a hard form of prayer for any Christian to come to, and it is said that very few do come to this contemplative stage of prayer in their lifetime.

Not only do I attend Bible studies in my home church, but attend an interdenominational Bible study with over 60 churches and 20 denominations, including Catholics who attend and are leaders in the study. You see, it is the study of God's Word that unites us regardless of what church you attend. This is key. It is the Holy Spirit who guides as Scripture is studied and leaders are mature Christians who must all agree to what essentials are regarding Christian doctrine at the time of discussion with the Teaching Leader.

So what happens with a Catholic leader, who teaches Scripture and Tradition and a Protestant leader who teaches Sola Scriptura? To a Catholic, Scripture and Tradition is an essential teaching of the faith. To many Protestants, Sola Scriptura is the essential doctrine. How is this dispute settled in a non/interdenominational church?

I am a children's leader and recently recommended a Catholic as a children's leader for her faithful attendance by her and her family. It is irrelevant to me she is Catholic, she is first and foremost Christian and has proved it and recommended for leadership.

So it would not bother you if she began teaching as a leader about Apostolic succession or about the Saints and Mary via Catholic understanding?

It is always personal disciplined study for devoted believers during the week. Discussion with other believers who are more mature than you and correction by the Holy Spirit. And finally, a willing spirit to bend to the truth by submitting to the Word of God.

So being a leader in this particular group of Christains allows for you to have a pwer of discernment over who is more mature in regards to their faith. Do you not think that a bit arrogant?

Again, a internal debate among protestants. It is not something to divide over and sever fellowship, it is not an essential chrisitian doctrine.

And yet there are the divisions, are there not?

Baptism by what? Or more correctly who? If you understand what I am asking then you will see it is clearly not water baptism. However, it is clearly a spiritual baptism by the Holy Spirit.

No Christ made it clear that it is by water AND Spirit. That is in Scripture. And it is also an essential for Catholics and quite a few Protestant denominations.

Not necessarily. OSAS is an internal debate in Christendom. It is nothing to divide over and sever fellowship with other believers.

And yet agan, there are the divisions, are there not?

You are basically asking about age old debate of predestination vs. free will. It will not be settled on earth. Personally, I truly believe both are true. I do not comprehend it, I apprehend it. See?

Predestination in the sense that we are all called by God to His grace, but not in any way that restricts free will. Free will is necessary for the acceptance of God's grace and participation in the newness of life we have in Christ - the life in the Spirit.

I have never met a true protestant who did not believe in Sola Scriptura. Wrong? Maybe. Misguided, definitely.

Then you have never met a Methodist, or an Anglican? They believe themselves to be true Protestants and officially do not believe in Sola Scriptura. I personally don't think them misguided on that view. On Sacred Tradition and Apostolic succession, yes, but not on not believing in Sola Scriptura.

As long as you have humans, you will have a wide range of opinion, just like you have on this board. It should not surprise you that protestants have broad opinions too, just like Catholic and Orthodoxs do. Like I said protestants do agree on the essential christian doctrines, don't ever doubt that.

I doubt that constantly - especially when I see them disagreeing on essenital doctrines all the time in these forums, and even in the protestant Churches I attended when I was a Protestant. Not to mention that you brush aside many of the disputes that indeed one denomination sees something like OSAS as essential as merely an internal dispute. Maybe for you it is, but I doubt it is for the person who believes in OSAS.

I am not offended and we can indeed learn from each other. Remember, not all protestants agree with each other either! Surprise! But if you know the LORD Jesus, then all who know him love and serve him as we are called accordingly regardless if you are Protestant, Catholic or Orthodox -- that is the realm of Christendom. We may not be in total agreement on earth but by the Holy Spirit who gives eternal life unites us all in one spirit.

Indeed, so if a person petitions a Saint or Mary to pray for them, it goes to the one source (God) that unites us all, right?

Pax Tecum,

John

 

[good4u]

Ok, let's see, I'm just going to list some of the Scripture that I would use to explain why I believe that the Saints are still alive and aware and praying for us:

Rev 5:8 When he took it, the four living creatures and the 24 elders fell down before the Lamb. Each of the elders held a harp and gold bowls filled with incense, which are the prayers of the Saints. (to me, what I have to ask myself is what would the prayers of the Saints be, if they follow the same ACTS profile as we do? What could they possibly need, they are in Heaven, all is good, so any supplications would have to be for us poor souls still on earth.)

The incense of bowls of prayers of the Saints from the Book of Revelation, to me indicate living Saints, not departed saints. Tho' to be fair, the verse does not state either living or dead so it may be a matter of interpretation depending on your worldview.

Then there is also: Luke 15:7 I tell you, in just the same way there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over 99 righteous people who have no need of repentance. (Again in heaven they are still conected with us and know what is going on with us still here.)

No specific heavenly audience is mentioned. I don't know, a bit of stretch to interpret as saints. Good try!

I am trying to stay with the very obvious, but this one really speaks to me about being surrounded by the Saints: Heb 12:1 Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us rid ourselves of every burden and sin that clings to us and persevere in running the race that lies before us. (and going further on to 2, it sums up how we are to stay always focused on Jesus, which we do) 2 while keeping our eyes fixed on Jesus, the leader and perfecter of faith. For the sake of the joy that lay before him he endured the cross, despising its shame and has taken his seat. (I see this as if we are surrounded by the cloud of witnesses, who would be the angels and saints, then they are still able to pray for us too, they are surrounding us and know what is going on.)

Well, I understand why you would think this. It is very comforting, but really not what God has said to indicate as such.

[/quote]I hope this helps you understand where the Catholic thought on praying to the saints comes from in the Bible.

God Bless!![/quote]

Yes, I do understand why Catholics practice such things. I do believe it is extra biblical and not what God has said to do based upon Sola Scriptura. Nevertheless, as long as it does not replace God as the only one who truly answers prayers, then I cannot condemn it. But one must be very careful not to fall into idolatry. Okay, enough said from me.

 

[good4u]

So what happens with a Catholic leader, who teaches Scripture and Tradition and a Protestant leader who teaches Sola Scriptura? To a Catholic, Scripture and Tradition is an essential teaching of the faith. To many Protestants, Sola Scriptura is the essential doctrine. How is this dispute settled in a non/interdenominational church?

No, no, your misunderstanding. This is not a "church" in your sense of the word. It is a para church organization, tho' it physically meets in a host church it is in no way affliated with the church it meets in. This para church group has a specfic bibilical lesson leaders must follow as it is discussed among members and children. No deviation is permitted to teach "tradition" or any other type of "faith".

All must agree to a set core essentials of the faith before they are permitted to lead. We have already discussed some of them which you have already agreed to in your previous post, as a Catholic.

So it would not bother you if she began teaching as a leader about Apostolic succession or about the Saints and Mary via Catholic understanding?

This has been answered above.

So being a leader in this particular group of Christains allows for you to have a pwer of discernment over who is more mature in regards to their faith. Do you not think that a bit arrogant?

It is not power. Your being negative. It is service. It is faithfulness to the group, it is doing the lesson, it is spiritual discernment on the qualities of a good leader. Please don't make it sound like some power trip. It is not.

No Christ made it clear that it is by water AND Spirit. That is in Scripture. And it is also an essential for Catholics and quite a few Protestant denominations.

Water is the physical birth and everyone on earth is included in that birth. But not everyone is included in a spiritual birth unless you are born of the Holy Spirit. THAT is Scripture.

And yet agan, there are the divisions, are there not?

OSAS is not cause for division. Sinful people will make it divisive, however. Sin has not been removed from earth until the LORD returns. What is your point?

Predestination in the sense that we are all called by God to His grace, but not in any way that restricts free will. Free will is necessary for the acceptance of God's grace and participation in the newness of life we have in Christ - the life in the Spirit.

Okay...whatever you say....this debate will rage until time ends. I am not going to get into it. It is pointless.

Then you have never met a Methodist, or an Anglican? They believe themselves to be true Protestants and officially do not believe in Sola Scriptura. I personally don't think them misguided on that view. On Sacred Tradition and Apostolic succession, yes, but not on not believing in Sola Scriptura.

I don't agree with them if they do. But that does not mean that they are not believers, just like you.

I doubt that constantly - especially when I see them disagreeing on essenital doctrines all the time in these forums, and even in the protestant Churches I attended when I was a Protestant. Not to mention that you brush aside many of the disputes that indeed one denomination sees something like OSAS as essential as merely an internal dispute. Maybe for you it is, but I doubt it is for the person who believes in OSAS.

Then they don't understand essential christian doctrine. That is not my problem, that is theirs.

Indeed, so if a person petitions a Saint or Mary to pray for them, it goes to the one source (God) that unites us all, right?

Pax Tecum,

John

Leading question. I do not advocate such. All believers belong to the priesthood and therefore should petition directly to God in Christ, our high priest. No one else is necessary. That was the work of the cross, was it not? Did not the heavy temple curtain tear in two from the top down for that very reason by the very hand of God himself at the time of the death of Jesus on the cross?

 

[JCrawf]

No, no, your misunderstanding. This is not a "church" in your sense of the word. It is a para church organization, tho' it physically meets in a host church it is in no way affliated with the church it meets in. This para church group has a specfic bibilical lesson leaders must follow as it is discussed among members and children. No deviation is permitted to teach "tradition" or any other type of "faith".

1. It sounds like what the Methodists were before forming into a denomination, save that they were connected to the Anglican church.

2. No deviation at all? Not even to clarify where there might be differences in interpretation among different Christains. Moreso, there is something discouraging to me about taking away Tradition and saying that there is more than one "faith" than the Christian faith to be had in Christianity. Either we are of one mind as Scripture speaks of, or we are not. And if we are not...?

All must agree to a set core essentials of the faith before they are permitted to lead. We have already discussed some of them which you have already agreed to in your previous post, as a Catholic.

Is sola scriptura among the core essentials?

Previous post: So being a leader in this particular group of Christains allows for you to have a pwer of discernment over who is more mature in regards to their faith. Do you not think that a bit arrogant?

It is not power. Your being negative. It is service. It is faithfulness to the group, it is doing the lesson, it is spiritual discernment on the qualities of a good leader. Please don't make it sound like some power trip. It is not.

Leadership has no power? Now you're asking me to be naieve. Of course there is a form of power in a leadership role. Having authority of any sort denotes a person having a certain ammount of power in that position of authority. There is nothing necessarily negative about the power - though it can be abused. For someone who doesn't even know me to speak of me as being spiritually immature and to indicate him/herself as being "mature", or at least more mature than me does sound quite arrogant. I personally don't know your level of maturity in the Lord, not do I think it is my place to assess that. I'm not a spiritual director, and even then, what I would assess more in such a position is not maturity in spirituality, but what forms of spirituality might be likely to aid the person in their walk in faith and relationship with the Lord.

Water is the physical birth and everyone on earth is included in that birth. But not everyone is included in a spiritual birth unless you are born of the Holy Spirit. THAT is Scripture.

And Scripture also notes how Baptism was performed by water. It still is, for the basic form had been passed on through Sacred Tradition. And everyone can be included into the spiritual birth. The exclusion comes by way of those who do not accept the Lord into their life, whether by not being Baptized or denying their Baptism. Yet for those that are Baptized, the seal still stands, and can be a powerful driving force for reversion back to the Lord. Hence the parable of the Prodical Son.

OSAS is not cause for division.

So the actual division there is is not indicative of the fact that it is?

Sinful people will make it divisive, however.

Well, since we can make that argument, I now contend that, contrary to Protestant opinion, the petitions to Mary and the Saints are not sinful and a cause for division. Rather it is sinful people that make it divisive.

Sin has not been removed from earth until the LORD returns. What is your point?

The point? Well for starters, just because sin is in the world, does that mean we should be complacent to sin? What are we as Christians supposed to do in regards to sin?

Previous Post: Predestination in the sense that we are all called by God to His grace, but not in any way that restricts free will. Free will is necessary for the acceptance of God's grace and participation in the newness of life we have in Christ - the life in the Spirit.

Okay...whatever you say....this debate will rage until time ends. I am not going to get into it. It is pointless.

So there is no point in believing that God calls all people to His Grace? Free will is just a ridiculous notion? And the life in the Spirit is of no validity? Is this what you are saying?

Previous Post: Then you have never met a Methodist, or an Anglican? They believe themselves to be true Protestants and officially do not believe in Sola Scriptura. I personally don't think them misguided on that view. On Sacred Tradition and Apostolic succession, yes, but not on not believing in Sola Scriptura.

I don't agree with them if they do. But that does not mean that they are not believers, just like you.

That's good to know. Yet, it does show that Sola Scriptura is not as universal as many Protestants proclaim it is in Protestantism as a whole.

Then they don't understand essential christian doctrine. That is not my problem, that is theirs.

And what is essential Christian doctrine?

Previous Post: Indeed, so if a person petitions a Saint or Mary to pray for them, it goes to the one source (God) that unites us all, right?

Leading question. I do not advocate such. All believers belong to the priesthood and therefore should petition directly to God in Christ, our high priest.

There is the lay priesthood and the ordained. Even your talk of leadership roles notes that, though all Christans should be able to speak about their faith, there are those who are put in the position of being leaders for fellow Christians. Moreso, if all petition should go directly to God, then do you advocate for Christians to pray for one another? If so, you are, in that sense, advocating petitions that go through those asked to pray for another Christian, and not directly to God. In that case, and because apparently petitions not going directly to God are wrong/sinful, then how is it not wrong/sinful to ask and advocate asking a fellow Christian to pray for you or someone else?

And thus is the major divisiveness that is made by Protestants regarding veneration of the Saints. I advocate it because it is a certain form of devotion wherein they are trying to imitate Christ, even if it be an imitation that the see in the reflection of a Saint and their particular piety, devotion, and connecting with various aspects of the Saint's life. We petition the Saints because we see them as fellow Christians; brethren who have made that journey further into the life of Christ beyond their time of dwelling in this world.

No one else is necessary.

So Christ speaking of the two Great Commandments of loving God with all one's heart, mind, and soul AND loving one's neighbor as one's self; as well as his commandment to us to love one another as He loved us is "not necessary"? Are you saying that the selfless love of agaph/caritas is not necessary? Maybe the teaching about how Christ is in us is ine way that we have traditionally come to realize that we are necessary to each other, because we all have been created in the image of God and are at least important to God. He cared enough to send His only-begotten Son into the world to suffer for the salvation of the whole world. So don't tell me that no one else is necessary. We all are essential and important in the eyes of God.

That was the work of the cross, was it not? Did not the heavy temple curtain tear in two from the top down for that very reason by the very hand of God himself at the time of the death of Jesus on the cross?

It was the work of our Lord upon the cross that brought about salvation. Though the Old Covenant was being loosened, God was preparing the way for the New Covenant in our Lord Christ Jesus. And after the Resurrection, Christ came to the Apostles and made clear what was the basic mission, or Great Commission of the Church:

"Then Jesus came to them and said, 'All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.'" (Matt. 28:18-20)

And moreso, regarding the authority given to the Apostles:

"On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, 'Peace be with you!' After he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord. Again Jesus said, 'Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.' And with that he breathed on them and said, 'Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.'" (John 20:19-23)

Why is there this disconnect with Protestants about the necessity of others and (apparently and as your post seems to imply) that all there is to Christianity is "me and my Bible" or only one's "personal relationship with Jesus" and that no one else matters? Is all this leadership roles and teaching, then, merely to posture as being a good Christain who is doing the will of God and forgetting that part of doing the will of God is to actually care for people under your disipleship as fellow brethren in the Lord? Are the lost souls won over just "bonus" points for holiness and, otherwise, "not necessary"?

Pax Tecum,

John

 

[JCrawf]

This thread actually touches on several misunderstood ideas some Catholics have about Protestantism. One of the great advantages to an INTER-denominational forum like this is we have this opportunity to clarify, to correct some of those mutual misunderstandings. I very strongly embrace that.


There are those with an agenda to condemn or convert - or just defend. But many come here with a goal of mutual understanding.



There's a "laundry list" on both sides...

And when there is a GENUINE question and people want to listen and not just talk, progress can be made on that list. Sadly, it often quickly becomes a debate filled with polemics. I confess - repent, that I've sometimes done that, too.

Thanks Josiah. I put in quotes what I feel best represents this thread. Especially how we both have laundry lists for and misinterpretations of each other. And yes, I confess to going a bit into polemics and being overzealous at times in regards to my beliefs. To err is human?

But anyways, though I don't always agree, there may be some truth in the 95% We do agree on many things, but we have the 5% where we don't and the struggle with overcoming many, many years, decades, and even centuries of misinformation (even disinformation) that has built up and keeps us separated as brethren. But hey, at least were only at about 5% of separation.

Pax Tecum,

John

 

[JCrawf]

Backtracking a bit...

And if the Church, what does the Church rely on for its authority to settle disputes? Itself or God's Word?

The Catholic Church relies on Scripture and Traditon to discern how to settle such disputes. For the problem in the first place is regarding correct interpretation and how to best understand a particular passage/teaching, etc. Therefore, in discerning a passage or teaching, not only does the Church rely on Scripture, but also considered Tradition - that is, the writings of the Church Fathers, Saints, Church Councils, etc. to consider how in the history of the Church the issues in a given passage have been considered and discerned in the past. We don't start from scratch every time there is a new or unique interpretation. Instead, we consider what has been taught and has been believed and, in some cases, the Church has validated as official teaching to see whether the newer interpretation is compadible with the faith, and thus acceptable to incorporate into what is already believed in the universal faith.

That's probably a rather simplistic understanding of how the Church actually does utilize her authority in regards to faith and morals, but I hope it is understandable. If what I say regarding the Church's authority on such matter, I welcome correction from a fellow Catholic that may have a better understanding than I do.

For further information on this, I suggest the following from the Catechism to read:

PROLOGUE
II. Handing on the Faith: Catechesis

CHAPTER TWO: GOD COMES TO MEET MAN
ARTICLE 2: THE TRANSMISSION OF DIVINE REVELATION
ARTICLE 3: SACRED SCRIPTURE

CHAPTER THREE: I BELIEVE IN THE HOLY SPIRIT
ARTICLE 9: "I BELIEVE IN THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH"
Paragraph 1. The Church in God's Plan
Paragraph 2. The Church - People of God, Body of Chrict, Temple of the Holy Spirit
Paragraph 3. The Church is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic
Paragraph 4. Christ's Faithful - Hierarchy, Laity, Consecrated Life

As far as personal understanding of Scripture and why so many protestants have lively discussions regarding it. It is because we are human beings who are at differing spiritual levels of spiritual maturity. There are baby believers, toddlers, small children, teens, young adults, middle-agers, and seniors in the spiritual maturity growth levels. That is why there "appears" to be disagreement amoung believers. It is not that they are disagreeing, it is that spiritual maturity takes a lifetime to achieve and we are never fully complete this side of earth.

As the Catechism states: "Created in the image of the one God and equally endowed with rational souls, all men have the same nature and the same origin. Redeemed by the sacrifice of Christ, all are called to participate in the same divine beatitude: all therefore enjoy an equal dignity" (1934).

Furthermore, it is stated: "On coming into the world, man is not equipped with everything he needs for developing his bodily and spiritual life. He needs others. Differences appear tied to age, physical abilities, intellectual or moral aptitudes, the benefits derived from social commerce, and the distribution of wealth. The "talents" are not distributed equally" (1936) and "These differences belong to God's plan, who wills that each receive what he needs from others, and that those endowed with particular "talents" share the benefits with those who need them" (1937).

You may refer to "maturity" as, in general, age or level of spirituality, but the diversity of believers to me is more that each believer has his or her particular charism, or "talent." Where one may be lacking in a charism, there is a fellow Christian brethren that has that charism that can aid a person in that area. Thus is why I speak of spiritual directors, who are endowed with the charism of discerning what may best help a person in their spiritual growth and journey as a Christian, as well as relationship with God.

However, there exist also sinful inequalities that affect millions of men and women, and are in open contradiction of the Gospel (see 1938). It is these inequalities that concern me most, and the basic aspect and reason for concern relies on the dignity of humanity in general. This has been my personal drive for ecumenism. And yes, there are times I have failed in ecumenism and allowed for overzealousness to become a divisive wedge in communication. I'm sure there are those on this thread that feel that way, for whatever reason. What I feel most you mean by maturity may be sanctification - which indeed a lifelong process. What is important to me here on the matter is not in defining a level of maturity, but what may aid a person in their spiritual growth, even if it may not surface in a believer's life for many years.

Ah yes.... the abberent "Chrisitian" groups who deviate from the essential doctrines. Unfortunately, it does happen and false teaching is everywhere. That is why you must diligently study God's Word to be constantly reminded of essential doctrine. So that if you know the truth you can immediately recognize error and run!

Again, the essential doctrines are mentioned, but have yet to be fully defined. For me, false teaching is in regards to that which deviates from Church teaching in faith and morals. Thus is why I take a strong pro life stance, which includes not only opposing abortion, but also euthanasia, contraceptions, and even the death penalty (save maybe in the few places where an adequate prison system is in place), as well as unjust war (that is, non-defensive and does not conform to just war theology). It is also one reason why I do not believe in Sola Scriptura, as well as comeing to reason that indeed there are times when any given personal interpretation needs to be discerned within the context of what has been taught and believed throughout time among believers in the Catholic and Apostolic tradition.

Not at all. False teaching is not variety. God abhors it and he will judge it someday. Variety in emphazing different aspects of essential doctrine, IMO is fine as long as it does not deviate from God's Word.

In this, I agree, and much of what I have quoted and given links to are reasons why. The whole aspect for me concerning Sacred Tradition and the authority of the Church is to safeguard God's Word.

To err is human. Humans are faliable beings. The Reformation was allowed by God as a result of the corruption of the church at the time.

In part I agree. And I also believe that the Counter (or Catholic) Reformation was allowed by God as a result of the many errors that developed out of the Protestant Reformation. I remember reading how both Catholics and Early Lutherans both opposed the innovations and bringing to life of old herecies (such as Sebellianism via the anti-Trinitarian rationalists, which could be said to be the precursors to the "Oneness" Pentecostals) of the Radical Reformation.

The reformation was a call back to the church to return to essential christian doctrine and to allow the Bible to be in the hands of the laity for their edification.

In part I will agree to the call back to zeal for the universal teaching. However, I do contend that the Catholic Church herself had always strove to have the Bible in the hands of the laity. But there was one thing that made this hard until the greater social, economic, and educational reforms could be made to provide the easier ability to provide for mass-produced Bibles, a laity that would be on average literate, and a society that was ready and able to take on the challenges of making these reforms happen. And of course, the ability to print on paper was one of the innovations during the time of the Reformation that made such reforms possible. Before, teaching and preaching the Bible relied on many other aspects to help the laity to comprehend, such as the use of statues and icons, as well as the rosary, which reflected a particular devotion of the monastic groups and religious leaders who would be more likely to have the Bible and be able to read. Although, there were illiterate Saints in the monastic life, and it would be unfair to say that religious leaders did not try to teach the laity to read. But the facts are that primarily it was the nobility and of the religious or scientific scholars that were literate. So until literacy could become nearly universal in society, giving out a Bible would do little good, at least not unles society is capable and ready to teach literacy. Even today, there are places that are illiterate - and even in the United States, there are people that have fallen into the crack of the education system and are in their later years trying to learn to read (assuming they even have the patience of want to learn and actually go to literacy centers to learn).

Ecumential unity between the protestants, catholics, and orthodoxy probably will not be achieved, sad to say. But it doesn't mean we should not have dialog and understand each other for who they are and what God has called us to for his glory.

Well, part of ecumenism is to get people to sit at the same table. Though we may not come to full unity, we can at least come to fuller understanding of each other.

Pax Tecum,

John

 

[JCrawf]

This older lady whom I was referring to is what I call a an "old school Catholic" I used to work with her. I do live in a predominantly Catholic town with a Catholic church, it seems, on every corner. Nevertheless, during the work day she would show me this "liturgy" (for lack of a better word) she would pray to a St. Theresa. ??????

Did this liturgy look similar to anything in the following links?

LITTLE FLOWER NOVENA
Prayers to St. Therese of the Little Flower
Prayers of Saint Therese of Lisieux, Patroness of Catholic Missions
Novena to St. Theresa of the Child Jesus

If so, I am happy to be called an "old school Catholic," though being a year-old convert.

I personally do not see these prayers and petitions as idolatrous. Though they may petiton St. Therese or St. Theresa, they do so in a rememberance of these saints' piety and love for God. They also teach us a basic history of these particular Saints and what their particular charisms produced in the fruitfulness of their faith in God. In doing so, the intent of the prayer or petition is ultimately to ask God, either directly or through the Saint to come to their aid in these particular charisms.

But speaking on idolatry, I have yet to hear anything back about C.S. Lewis' comment and criticism that Protestantism can fall into Bibliolatry. What do you think C.S. Lewis meant by that?

But moreso, you even say:

Whether she was worshipping this saint, I do not know, but she said she was praying to this saint.

I personally give her the benefit of the doubt that she wasn't worshipping a Saint. And though she said she was praying to a Saint really can be a matter of taking her words out of context. Not every Catholic is likely to utilize ecumenical vocabulary when speaking on what they are doing. It is more in the polemics that Catholics have gone into making the difference of prayer and petition meaning that prayer is directly to God and petition is toward a Saint to pray for them to God. For the woman you are referring to, she may in all likelyhood have meant a prayer of petition.

SOLA SCRIPTURA

...the protestant cannon of Scripture does not contain the Apograha as does the catholic cannon.

Correction, the Catholic canon contains the Deuterocanon, which Protestants sometimes refer to as apocrypha. However, these books in the Catholic canon are not "hidden" as the term apocrypha impplies, and is still part of the text of Catholic Bibles even today. Older Protestant Bible, such as the King James 1611 version had the Deuterocanon printed. Nowadays, the few Protestant bibles that might contain the Deuterocanon/Apocrypha would be the more scholarly Bibles, such as the New Oxford Annotated Bible, which acually contains a few books that are not a part of the Catholic Deterocanon, but still good reads from a historical perspective.

That being basically the only difference, our cannons contain the exact same books from both the Old Testament and New Testament.

Same texts, but from different translations. Being that the Latin Vulgate derived its translation of the Old Testament primarily from the Septuagint and a few other texts, some of the quirks of the Septuagint can be found in older versions of Catholic Bibles, such as the Douay-Rhiems, which has the difference of numbering of the Psalms compared to the Protestant versions. Sometimes there are differences in the numbering of the verses as well due to the differences of texts used for translations.

But a question has to be begged as to why Protestants decided to use the Hebrew translation of the Old Testament that the Jews had made several decades after Christianity had formed as a new religion and because Christians happened to be able to utilize the texts of the time to form compelling arguments for the Christian faith?

All believers should understand that the Holy Bible is THE inspired Word of God. Because the Bible is inspired (i.e., God-breathed out) meaning the very words of God himself, it is by nature authoritative.

Indeed. Tradition, however, recognizes that the Inspired Word of God in Scripture was revealed to certain men (God revealed to Moses the Ten Commandments and such inspiration formed the Pentatuch - the first five books of the Torah/Old Testament; the evangelists St. Like, St. Mark, St. Matther, and St. John (or his disciples) were inspired to write the Gospels) of whom wrote down and taught the Word of God, which they in turn handed on to their successors. And, it was also through Sacred Tradition, and the councils of the Church that the initial and modern formation of the canon of the Bible was formed. Therefore, Tradition shares in the nature of being authoritative because of its nature of handing on and safeguarding Scripture and the teachings of the Christian faith, Catholic and Apostolic.

Pax Tecum,

John

 

[good4u]

JCrawf,

I will just make this real simple: As a seeming zealous Catholic, you should know -- what do you understand essential Christian doctrine to be?

That is enough for now.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Well, part of ecumenism is to get people to sit at the same table. Though we may not come to full unity, we can at least come to fuller understanding of each other.

Pax Tecum,

John

Pretty off topic of me, but I can't resist (cut me some slack, mods!)...


Ecumenism is a huge passion for me. I come by it rather naturally, growing up in the family I did and with my life-experiences, however short.


My optism has faded into great pessimism. At least on any official level. There has not been a true ecumenical council in well over 1,000 years - and I consider the odds of that happening in my lifetime to be slightly less that Junpiter colliding with the Earth. Christianity is AWASH in egoism and self-claims and institutionalism. God gave us the example of humility and service and love in the person and work of His Son, our Lord. God gave us His Holy Scriptures and gifted us with generations of wise, couragious and helpful men and women. Jesus left us with the Great Commandment, the Great Commission and the words, "Do not lording it one another." We've largely forgotten it all. Like the two apostles arguing about which is the greatest or who should reign, like the Pharisee in the Temple condemning his brother and boasting to God about his greatest and the other's sinfulness. IMHO, we're "stuck" in our own egoism, stuck in our own self-claims, stuck in the institutionalizism we created, stuck in nearly 1500 years of ananthmas we can't OR WON'T remove and repent for.



I DO celebrate the unity we share as FULL, UNseparated, EQUAL brothers and sisters in Christ - even though some Christians and enominations deny that it's true.

I DO celebrate that we are "one Lord, one faith, one baptism" even though some Christians and denominations deny that it's true. I DO celebrate that there IS (not was, not should be) "one holy catholic and apostolic church."

I DO celebrate that we ARE of one true faith - faith that trust/relies in Jesus Christ as our Savior. GOD is the author of that faith - not me, not any denomination, not anyone - GOD. It is the Gift of God, placed in our hearts by the Holy Spirit. We may spend a life-time and collectively until our Lord returns to wrap our brains around that faith, to artitulate and understand that faith in the same way, and I STRONGLY encourage that, but I doubt it will ever be complete or absolute - for one thing, big chuncks are mysteries we CANNOT articulate or understand - only celebrate and share.



While I've love for a new ecumenical council (the first is like 1300 years), I don't think anyone even knows how to begin such a process. With all the ego, pride, institutionalization, self-claims.... Who would invite whom? I wrote a paper on the Paris Peace Talks for the Vietnam War, it took the like months just to agree on the shape of the table they would meet at. The problems with a new ecumenical council - after some 1500 YEARS of egoism, institutionalism, anathamas, etc. - well, I'm not optimistic.



I think the BEST we can hope for is an end to the junk that has gone on for centuries - and I consider NONE exempt and NONE to have a monopoly on this. Maybe a little humility (that's likely asking way, WAY too much). Maybe something can happen on an individual level - like the kinds of official Lutheran/Catholic conversations that have begun; there's much of this beginning to happen. BUT, if some are coming to that table with the insistance of "I'M RIGHT BECAUSE I AM AND THEREFORE I AM; I'M INFALLIBLE AND THEREFORE UNACCOUNTABLE" then we're all just wasting our time and we'd be better off just fellowshipping on the beach in Hawaii enjoying many Lava Flow cocktails, we might just become friends and that would at least be some help...


And while I have little hope that our faith traditions will do much, individuals might - individual people. SOME DO seem willing to listen and learn in humility. And a site like CF can help that. Bringing people together. Sharing and celebration our one True Faith and what we share. Asking question, listening to answers. Doing the hard work of defining terms and what we mean. NOT with the goal of converting or convincing (we are already all Christians - there's nothing to convert us from or to), NOT with the goal of convincing or debating - but with the goal of understanding. It might be the first, small step to a growing consensus and display of the unity that we share.


Sorry for the rant and diversion...


Pax.


- Josiah



.

 

[JCrawf]

JCrawf,

I will just make this real simple: As a seeming zealous Catholic, you should know -- what do you understand essential Christian doctrine to be?

Well, the basics are found in the Nicene and Apostle's creeds. They give us a glimpse at the fundamentals of the Catholic and Apostolic faith.

Second, the Sacraments: Baptism, Confirmation, Ordination, Matrimony, Eucharist (that is, Last Supper/Communion), Confession (or Pennance and Reconciliation), and Annointing of the Sick.

(BTW, that some Protestants, especially certain Pentecostals recognize these as very important to faith is something I see as a positive, though I hope some day we can agree that they are all sacraments.)

Other than that, and the the prime Commandment of our Lord to love one another as He loved us, there are things that I think are very important, but ultimately are covered in these of the major essentials of the Christian faith.

Hope that helps to explain things.

Pax Tecum,

John

 

[IgnatiusOfAntioch]

The Catholic Church relies on Scripture and Traditon to discern how to settle such disputes. For the problem in the first place is regarding correct interpretation and how to best understand a particular passage/teaching, etc. Therefore, in discerning a passage or teaching, not only does the Church rely on Scripture, but also considered Tradition - that is, the writings of the Church Fathers, Saints, Church Councils, etc. to consider how in the history of the Church the issues in a given passage have been considered and discerned in the past. We don't start from scratch every time there is a new or unique interpretation. Instead, we consider what has been taught and has been believed and, in some cases, the Church has validated as official teaching to see whether the newer interpretation is compadible with the faith, and thus acceptable to incorporate into what is already believed in the universal faith.
.
.
Well, part of ecumenism is to get people to sit at the same table. Though we may not come to full unity, we can at least come to fuller understanding of each other.

Pax Tecum,

John

I think this is the heart of the matter.

 

[stumpjumper]

(BTW, that some Protestants, especially certain Pentecostals recognize these as very important to faith is something I see as a positive, though I hope some day we can agree that they are all sacraments.)

Hope that helps to explain things.

Pax Tecum,

John

As a Lutheran, I think it might help if you define Sacrament.

Lutherans officially believe in 2 (Baptism and the Lord's Supper) or 3 (confession is in the BOC but is pretty much rolled into the ceremony for the Lord's Supper as we publically confess our sins...)

Anyway, I don't think that Luther viewed Sacraments as something that should be limited... A sacrament (God's unconditional blessing and presence) could be experienced anywhere at anytime but a Sacrament was something that was commanded or instituted by Jesus Christ...

However, I agree that all of those aspects of the faith that are considered Sacramental by the Catholic Faith are important and very Christian but I don't see a set list a requirement.

If we have a set list of Sacraments, does that not then limit God's real presence in the world?

If God can be present elsewhere, do we need a list of Sacraments?