Misconceptions about Protestants

[Catherineanne]

I don't think I am misunderstanding the teachings of the Catholic Church. I've taken some care in thinking about them.

As I said before - the possibility that there is a "true" Church is an argument that is plausible from the standpoint of Christian history, but of course if one can't find a Church with actual correct teachings, that rather suggests that no one has the authority.

There is one glaring great problem with this approach. Basically, you appoint yourself as judge, and then seek to identify God's Church on earth.

Who exactly gave you this role?

Roman Catholics accept what the church teaches them for the simple reason that they do NOT feel authorised to stand in judgement of their own Church. And rightly so.

I hear Catholics (and others to really) argue that if one determines that a church has authority, we should just accept it's teachings.

I think you misunderstand why they do this. This is the understandable result of RCs declining to judge their own Church. God has established that church, and they are called to be members of it. They are not authorised to stand in judgement of the Church, and by extension of Christ himself. It is not about arrogance, therefore, but about humility before God and his church.

I agree the Anglicans will probably fall apart.

The Communion may lose some of its unity, but rest assured, the Anglicans are not about to fall apart.

 

[Catherineanne]

Fanaticism is contrary to reason. The Catholic religion is the only one entirely conformable to reason.

....

It still does and heretics who are actually guilty of the crime of heresy and are reprobate do deserve punishment on earth and will be punished for eternity, just as reprobate homosexuals deserve punishment on earth and will be punished for eternity. It is the State's duty to enforce the Natural Law and to provide for the well-being of its subjects so that they can save their soul, the State now no longer cares about the souls of its subjects and often endorses grave sin.

A manifesto to put all apostate Catholics into prison, or worse.

How reasonable.

Fanaticism is indeed contrary to reason. And this kind of comment is the reason why sensible nations will not appoint zealots to political office. It is rarely a good move.

 

[Catherineanne]

Well I've got to tell you, if I can locate even one RC here in the US that thinks restoring the ... "punishment" of heretics would be a good thing, that makes me suspect there are MANY more in "the old country."

Do you mean in Britain? No, I don't think there are many, if indeed any, who would think that way. The memory of heretics burned at the stake are still far too real, for anyone to want to go that way again. Remember, we have not repealed our law forbidding any Roman Catholic from becoming the Monarch, which is why we have an essentially Hanovarian monarchy, rather than Stuart one.

Anyone who looks back on such days as some kind of Golden Age simply doesn't know enough history.

 

[Catherineanne]

Not far from the truth considering most may take it once or twice a year.

The early christian church took communion as often as every day.

Have you conducted a poll on this one?

Anglicans commune every week, and high Anglicans such as myself would commune every day, if we could. I generally manage three times a week, health permitting.

 

[Standing Up]

-snip-
Of course, the fact that we don't live under a Catholic government means that religious liberty is an unfortunately reality that we have to deal with, even if we don't believe in it. We can no longer turn heretics over to the State to be tried and punished for treason.
-snip-

You should rejoice that certain sects within EO are not in charge for they'd have RCers turned over.

Many don't seem to get the concept "vengence is mine, sayeth the LORD". They live and die by the sword.

 

[Standing Up]

That is up to the people in charge of the government (and, in a democracy -- that's us).

USA is a Republic, a nation of laws.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

Those particular sects would have the rest of the EOC turned over as well.

Brian

You should rejoice that certain sects within EO are not in charge for they'd have RCers turned over.

Many don't seem to get the concept "vengence is mine, sayeth the LORD". They live and die by the sword.

 

[MKJ]

There is one glaring great problem with this approach. Basically, you appoint yourself as judge, and then seek to identify God's Church on earth.

Who exactly gave you this role?

Roman Catholics accept what the church teaches them for the simple reason that they do NOT feel authorised to stand in judgement of their own Church. And rightly so.

I think you misunderstand why they do this. This is the understandable result of RCs declining to judge their own Church. God has established that church, and they are called to be members of it. They are not authorised to stand in judgement of the Church, and by extension of Christ himself. It is not about arrogance, therefore, but about humility before God and his church.

You've missed the entire point of what i said. I think I was fairly clear, but perhaps you didn't bother to read the posts leading up to my comments.

One ought not cannot accept authority until it has been determined that it is legitimate. Many groups claim the same authority; the CC, the Eo, the OO, the mormons, the JWs, and any number of others. Every individual in the end assents, in his own conscience, to accepting or dismissing these claims of authority - even not making any decision is a decision.

Occasionally one meets members of groups, including Catholics, who make just the false argument you are suggesting here. All you need do is ask these people why they are not Mormons and you will see that they do not actually believe what they are saying - they are Catholic rather than Mormon because they think the CC is a legitimate authority, and the Church of Latter Day Saints is not - they have judged that to be the case.

The Communion may lose some of its unity, but rest assured, the Anglicans are not about to fall apart.

I had no idea you could tell the future. Amazing! I am so reassured.

 

[Meepy]

Wow, it's almost like you're saying a Christian needs to check his brain at the door ...

This isn't a false dichotomy you're positing here, it's a false unending series of dilemmas

I come to Jesus and He says "pick a denom?" That's not the Jesus I know.

"For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I [am] of Apollos; are ye not carnal?" (1 Cor 3:4)

You are of Rome, he is of Luther, she is of Calvin ... same-same.

come on, you think non-denominationalism is not a denomination? Every group after the reformation and parts beforehand started with a man.

 

[Meepy]

Quite right; hence, we have to acknowledge the role of Traditions of men. That's why we have RC, EO, OO, P, and others. The misconception about P is that the other sects are different from it

So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.. - 2 Thessalonians 2:15


P are different, as well as the sects that come from it, like baptists and independents.

Traditions of men, lol. I think its funny how some of these sects think anything with an apostolic deposit is a "tradition of men", essentially nullifying and imputing against the actions and guidance of the Holy Spirit after the apostles(which includes the canon of the NT and the 4 core ecumenical councils)

One ought not cannot accept authority until it has been determined that it is legitimate. Many groups claim the same authority; the CC, the Eo, the OO, the mormons, the JWs, and any number of others. Every individual in the end assents, in his own conscience, to accepting or dismissing these claims of authority - even not making any decision is a decision.

I think this can be easily answered in Matt 16:18. As Jesus gives a specific concurring of leadership authority to Peter as well as an authority of binding and loosing.

Of course, and the early fathers gave us an answer to this. The tracing of ones bishops back to the apostles. Mormons cannot trace their bishops back to the apostles, hence they have a false authority. True authority comes from the Apostolic See's and the tracing back to the apostolic deposit.

 

[Meepy]

What if they were to pray thus:
"Dear Father and author of my faith, you said that if i asked for anything in faith, that I would have what I asked of you. I ask you to help me to understand this passage."

I think it reminds me of the Ethiopian and Phillip. Where the Ethiopian didn't understand scripture and the apostle Phillip helped him to understand.

Here is a clear example of deferring to an apostolic authority to learn the scriptures.

 

[sunlover1]

I think it reminds me of the Ethiopian and Phillip. Where the Ethiopian didn't understand scripture and the apostle Phillip helped him to understand.

Here is a clear example of deferring to an apostolic authority to learn the scriptures.

OR,... it means exactly what it seems to mean. and I am NOT the ethiopian who btw didn't have the Holy Spirit in him to help guide Him internally... (among other things)

“I tell you the truth, if you have faith and don’t doubt, you can do things like this and much more.
You can even say to this mountain, ‘May you be lifted up and thrown into the sea,’ and it will happen.
You can pray for anything, and if you have faith, you will receive it.”

Yeah, the only stipulation here is IF you have faith and DO NOT doubt...

JESUS said I can pray for anything and I will receive it. I'm going with Jesus for the win, no offense to you Meepy

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I think it reminds me of the Ethiopian and Phillip. Where the Ethiopian didn't understand scripture and the apostle Phillip helped him to understand.

Here is a clear example of deferring to an apostolic authority to learn the scriptures.

Then why shouldn't Protestants just defer to the apostolic authority of the EOC instead of the RCC

http://www.christianforums.com/t7213672-200/#post46646526
Is Catholicism the same Church that the Apostles set up

 

[Standing Up]

So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.. - 2 Thessalonians 2:15


P are different, as well as the sects that come from it, like baptists and independents.

Traditions of men, lol. I think its funny how some of these sects think anything with an apostolic deposit is a "tradition of men", essentially nullifying and imputing against the actions and guidance of the Holy Spirit after the apostles(which includes the canon of the NT and the 4 core ecumenical councils)

Teach the same to faithful men. Hold to the traditions. By definition, things that came later were additions. What things qualify as coming after c100ad?

I think this can be easily answered in Matt 16:18. As Jesus gives a specific concurring of leadership authority to Peter as well as an authority of binding and loosing.

Of course, and the early fathers gave us an answer to this. The tracing of ones bishops back to the apostles. Mormons cannot trace their bishops back to the apostles, hence they have a false authority. True authority comes from the Apostolic See's and the tracing back to the apostolic deposit.

Some ECFS taught that tracing the bishops was one of two answers. The second was having the same gospel, teaching the truth. A church rises up and teaches the same, then it is by definition apostolic. The ones who taught that the physical lineage was all that was necessary fell into error.

Having said that, RC cannot prove its lineage (nor can any other group, except Polycarp).

As Christians, we are left with the "rule of faith". The scripture.

 

[simonthezealot]

I think it reminds me of the Ethiopian and Phillip. Where the Ethiopian didn't understand scripture and the apostle Phillip helped him to understand.

Here is a clear example of deferring to an apostolic authority to learn the scriptures.

The eunuch had no clue that Phillip was an apostle, God puts people in our path to help us get to a right understanding if we are truly seeking...That's what this story tells us.

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

Many don't seem to get the concept "vengence is mine, sayeth the LORD". They live and die by the sword.

Revenge not yourselves, my dearly beloved; but give place unto wrath, for it is written: Revenge is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord.

Which has to do with revenge, not with the execution of justice. There is a difference between executing a murderer and going out and killing him vigilante-style. This verse and the following do not apply to the judicial system.

Then Jesus saith to him: Put up again thy sword into its place: for all that take the sword shall perish with the sword.

Crime is crime and deserves punishment, some crimes should be punished not only in eternity by God but also on earth by the State. We put robbers, murderers, rapists and prostitutes in prison, don't we? Sometimes we even execute criminals. This is not forbidden but is part of having a healthy society. An atheistic government is what is unhealthy.


I should start working metal into my GT posts again:
Saxon - Live by the Sword

 

[Gregory Thompson]

yes by the time of the Roman empire the whole "avenger of blood" theology would have caused anarchy if applied across the board .

 

[Standing Up]

Which has to do with revenge, not with the execution of justice. There is a difference between executing a murderer and going out and killing him vigilante-style. This verse and the following do not apply to the judicial system.

Crime is crime and deserves punishment, some crimes should be punished not only in eternity by God but also on earth by the State. We put robbers, murderers, rapists and prostitutes in prison, don't we? Sometimes we even execute criminals. This is not forbidden but is part of having a healthy society. An atheistic government is what is unhealthy.

We're talking about people with differing beliefs. It's not the Church's job to execute judgment on them, but rather to love them.

Rom. 12:19-21 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but [rather] give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance [is] mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

You know Mt. 25 stuff, else off to purgatory or worse you go. Whoops, the Church killed the enemies, rather than feed and cloth them.

 

[Catherineanne]

You've missed the entire point of what i said. I think I was fairly clear, but perhaps you didn't bother to read the posts leading up to my comments.

One ought not cannot accept authority until it has been determined that it is legitimate.

So, how did you determine the authority of your police force, judiciary and legislature, exactly? When you went to school, how did you determine that the teachers deserved their authority? Or did you not accept them because you were brought up knowing them, and came to a gradual understanding of how they worked?

In the majority of cases Roman Catholics trust the church because they are brought up in the church. It is the same for Baptist children, and evangelicals and all other denominations; Christian children are taught to believe in the church as part of growing up.

Many groups claim the same authority; the CC, the Eo, the OO, the mormons, the JWs, and any number of others. Every individual in the end assents, in his own conscience, to accepting or dismissing these claims of authority - even not making any decision is a decision.

Occasionally one meets members of groups, including Catholics, who make just the false argument you are suggesting here.

All you need do is ask these people why they are not Mormons and you will see that they do not actually believe what they are saying - they are Catholic rather than Mormon because they think the CC is a legitimate authority, and the Church of Latter Day Saints is not - they have judged that to be the case.

The majority of RCs are RC because they are born into the faith, and brought up in it. They accept that it is legitimate long before they even know what legitimacy is and so they believe it. And why not? It makes no difference if Mormon children are brought up the same way.

But you can continue to consider it a matter of decision if you prefer. Doesn't bother me.

I had no idea you could tell the future. Amazing! I am so reassured.

Telling the future is not so hard. If you want to know what someone will do tomorrow, just look at what he did yesterday.

 

[Meepy]

Then why shouldn't Protestants just defer to the apostolic authority of the EOC instead of the RCC

http://www.christianforums.com/t7213672-200/#post46646526
Is Catholicism the same Church that the Apostles set up

Matt Chap 16.