Name one doctrine that is not supported by Scripture.

[Thatgirloncfforums]

The English language is not inspired?
First time hearing of this...
Interesting stuff !
You mean God only speaks aramaic or Hebrew or Greek?

No language is inspired. The original writers were inspired.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Why doesn't most churches accept it?

The Ethiopians accept it, and they were until the 20th century an autonomous church under the Coptic Pope, but the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria, that is to say, the Egyptian part worshipping using the Coptic Rite liturgy, does not.

 

[Valletta]

While what you say is quite true (except for the idea that the Catholic Church is not unchanging), my statement was that there was a major cultural shift among Catholics in the pews during the 1960's engendered primarily by both Vatican II and the rejection of the Church's teachings regarding birth control.

Despite what you might think, there was an enormous visual change as the high altars were removed from the east wall and altars placed toward the nave so that the priest would say mass facing the people rather than the altar alone. Among traditional Catholics, there was much dissension, which continues to this day even as some favor the Latin Tridentine mass only.

One of the standard refrains from Catholics is that they belong to the Church which Christ Himself founded and which has been unchanging (although it is now frequently modified with the addition if "in matters of faith and morals").

Vatican II was wonderful, the problem was the cultural changes of the 1960s. Many of the more radical used Vatican II as an excuse to push their own personal ideas and agendas, saying Vatican II said this or that when it said nothing of the kind. Jesus, the head of the Catholic Church, is unchanging. His Truths, the core of our Catholic Church, are unchanging. But our understanding of His Truths change, those understandings deepen. Language changes, lighting changes. With the standard church elongated structure with the altar area raised, moving the altar some feet from the wall produced little visual change to most. That is, you're at a distance and at some distance it was difficult to even see the altar had been pulled out. For many years our pastor continued to say mass with his back to the people and in Latin, while the younger priests would face the people and use the English liturgy. I have seen a count of Catholics set at over a billion in the world. It should come as no surprise that some are more "traditional" Catholics than others, just like there are some more "traditional" Americans. Some would like to see more Latin masses, people have their own preferences. I prefer an organ to a guitar, others feel the opposite way. A lot of the great lyrics for hymns were written in Latin, and the cadence of the music loses something in English. People have a right to their own preferences with the Catholic Church, that doesn't mean they are all sowing the seeds of "dissent."

 

[GodsGrace101]

No language is inspired. The original writers were inspired.

Right.
But they used language to pass on what they knew and saw and taught.

Maybe I misunderstood your post,,,if so, I'm sorry.

 

[Valletta]

You asked me, "Which theologian is this?" I gave you a Catholic theologian that has published his views on Purgatory. His are not the only views on the doctrine, as he readily acknowledges.

Actually you said "That seems to be what is happening now with Catholic theologians . . ."
"Now" means present tense, you picked some priest (Rev. Fr. Frederick William Faber) who died in 1863! Did you know that? It makes you look like you don't know what modern day Catholic theologians say. I must say your comments seem typical of your misrepresentations of Catholics and the Catholic faith. The Catholic Catechism is available free online, if you wish to continue to post comments against the Catholic faith and Catholic Church how about quoting the Catholic Catechism and going from there?

 

[concretecamper]

What about people who become RC bc the church accords with their beliefs?

what sort of belief do YOU think draws most protestants to His Church?

 

[concretecamper]

Actually you said "That seems to be what is happening now with Catholic theologians . . ."
"Now" means present tense, you picked some priest who died in 1863. Did you know that? I must say your comments are typical of your misrepresentations of Catholics and the Catholic faith.

this is typical of this member. I've seen many disingenuousness statements and claims about His Church from him.

 

[GodsGrace101]

you are focusing on individuals dissenting from what is taught. You will always have that. In protestantism, if I dont agree with something, I go find a place that agrees with what I think. It is SS at its finest.

What I am saying is that Protestant denominations teach their members entirely different gospels depending on what the leadership THINKS the Gospel is teaching. This leads to the 10s of thousands denomination and changing of morals and faith.

The Catholic Church has never changed its morals or faith becasue it relys on what Christ taught His Church and She reliably interprets scripture becasue scripture is part of Her Sacred Tradition.

I've never found a church that agrees with everything I believe!
I do agree with what you state above.
I had to leave the CC many years ago because there was nothing there for me...this is back in the 70's.
Now I live here and I attend a CC and the priests I know are aware of the fact that I don't believe in purgatory and 2 of them don't either. One is a teaching priest and speaks 6 or 7 languages including Greek and reads the N.T. in Greek.

I don't know that this will make much difference in the end since I truly believe our doctrines do not save us. I also had a problem with the idea that the church saves us, but this has changed and they are preaching belief in Jesus.

That the CC teaches works is no problem since this IS what the N.T. teaches, much to the chagrin of many.

Those that believe are all brothers in Christ.

 

[GodsGrace101]

Actually you said "That seems to be what is happening now with Catholic theologians . . ."
"Now" means present tense, you picked some priest who died in 1863. Did you know that? I must say your comments seem typical of your misrepresentations of Catholics and the Catholic faith. The Catholic Catechism is available free online, if you wish to continue to post comments against the Catholic faith and Catholic Church how about quoting the Catholic Catechism and going from there?

Actually Valletta, @bbbbbbb is really not misrepresenting the CC.

The question is this:
Do we want to follow the offical CCC
or
Do we want to follow what is really going on in the "back rooms"?

Did you know that about 10 years ago the CC was considering baptizing only adults?
It's just too difficult to make these changes.
I'm HAPPY the Lord's Prayer was changed...what misunderstandings!

 

[concretecamper]

I've never found a church that agrees with everything I believe!

you hit the nail on the head. It's not about what "I" believe.

You accept what Christ teaches through the Church He established.

 

[GodsGrace101]

you hit the nail on the head. It's not about what "I" believe.

You accept what Christ teaches through the Church He established.

I know what you mean, of course.
So many don't even believe the CC is the original church...if only history were studied.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

what sort of belief do YOU think draws most protestants to His Church?

For me it was Mary. A lot of protestants like the centralized authority. Some, the Sacraments. I also liked JP2. He apologized to Lutherans

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Btw, @concretecamper , Christ came from Israel, from the near East. He thought in and spoke Aramaic and Greek as did all the Apostles. If anyone can lay claim to being the true Church it's the EO, perhaps even the OO.

 

[concretecamper]

Btw, @concretecamper , Christ came from Israel, from the near East. He thought in and spoke Aramaic and Greek as did all the Apostles. If anyone can lay claim to being the true Church it's the EO, perhaps even the OO.

imm, if you see it that simple, I'm not gonna burst your bubble

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

imm, if you see it that simple, I'm not gonna burst your bubble

Not really, I am just messing with you. I wanted to see what your response would be.

 

[GodsGrace101]

For me it was Mary. A lot of protestants like the centralized authority. Some, the Sacraments. I also liked JP2. He apologized to Lutherans

How was it Mary?
I think Protestants have too much of an issue with Mary and don't give the necessary honor and love,,,but I also think the CC goes too far.
I'm not familiar enough with what the Orthodox church believes.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

I have always had a devotion to the Mary as Mother of God. I longed for a church which commemorated her in every Liturgy and understood how important she was in the life of the Church. Unfortunately, my experience as a Roman Catholic did not prove adequate. Yes, they seem to have more doctrinal statements regarding her than the EO or Lutheran and their private devotions are many (which makes me uneasy)...But liturgically?----Nope. Just one of many reasons why I left.

How was it Mary?
I think Protestants have too much of an issue with Mary and don't give the necessary honor and love,,,but I also think the CC goes too far.
I'm not familiar enough with what the Orthodox church believes.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

How was it Mary?
I think Protestants have too much of an issue with Mary and don't give the necessary honor and love,,,but I also think the CC goes too far.
I'm not familiar enough with what the Orthodox church believes.

This is by a former Evangelical, Fr. Peter Gillquist of blessed memory

https://www.protomartyr.org/our-faith/facing-up-to-mary/

 

[GodsGrace101]

This is by a former Evangelical, Fr. Peter Gillquist of blessed memory

https://www.protomartyr.org/our-faith/facing-up-to-mary/

I've read the link and am up to The Old Testament.
I happen to agree with it but want to explain why I dislike the title Mother of God, but I'm not in agreement with that Nestorius fellow.

ITMT thanks for the post.

 

[public hermit]

(For the anti-Sola Scriptura crowd).

Name one doctrine that was held by the Chalcedon affirming Church that is not supported in Scripture.

I contend that one doesn't exist.

Great question. Long thread. Didn't read.

I think there are nuances to some doctrines that can be supported with scripture, but only by way of implication.

Take the distinction between homo-ousia vs. homoi-ousia in the Trinitarian debates. Same essence or like essence between the 1st and 2nd Persons? That is a very fine-grained distinction that is such each could be supported by the scriptures since the scriptures weren't interested in such a fine distinction. We can say the scriptures support the Trinity, but how that breaks down in a fine-tuned way is open for debate (or was), if all we use is scripture. The Trinitarian debate between Augustine and Maximinus (Ulfilan Arianism) is interesting on this account. Whereas earlier debates dealt in both the scriptures and philosophical details, this one was primarily concerned with scriptural support.

One could make a similar point about the two natures of Christ. Once you start fine tuning, the scriptures are less helpful than one might hope, I think.

Just in reading the primary sources of the debates which were settled at councils, one can see both sides using the same scriptures in support. That's telling and explains why the idea that one can make their argument on scripture alone is not tenable.