Peter Is Not The Rock!

[archierieus]

I just love it when people tell us our teachings.

When approaching subjects as important as the one under consideration here, evidence does need to be studied and evaluated. Certainly, the beliefs and views of adherents/members of a religious organization are significant. However, by definition, such testimony is presumed to be biased, for the same reason that of family members has a presumption of bias. The official doctrinal statements of an organization provide a greater opportunity for objectivity, while recognizing that typically an organization will also seek to present itself in a favorable light, hence the evidence can be self-serving.

In the case at hand, we see, first, a credible source for the original statement, that is, the head of the organization, the pope. Secondly, he cites other authorities in support of his official doctrinal statement. Thirdly, Church councils have affirmed the statement. Fourthly, the Catholic Encyclopedia, bearing, I would assume, the appropriate Imprimatur, has affirmed that "such has been the constant teaching of the Church." All that is a significant weight of evidence. I fail to see how that could be overcome, from an evidentiary standpoint. Compared with that weight of evidence, an anecdotal comment which is general, abstract in nature and not on point to the issue, would not typically be assigned the same level of credibility. In this case, the organization itself has clearly and definitely stated its own teachings, beliefs of individual members notwithstanding.

Dave

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I don't need a quick lesson on the RC innovation of "infallibility". If I'm going to write my book, surely this must be a point I must be familiar with.

You say I spin myself round things. But surely any reasonable person on the Clapham omnibus must be able to see that you and the RCs in this thread are the ones who worm your way here and there wanting to have your cake and eat it at the same time; not me. The beamishboy is by no stretch of the imagination guilty of this worming and spinning. Answer the question: Is the Unam Sanctam right or wrong. If it's wrong, say so. If not, then be upright enough to accept its contents. Don't skirt round what it says and tell yourself the Catholic Encyclopaedia says this or that. See what the contents of the Unam Sanctam are and READ THEM even if you wish to reject my direct quotation from this Papal Bull of the Holy See.

Don't ya mean the "holy sea"

Btw, why does one version have bulls in Jeremiah 52:20 and another oxen? That word is singular.

[ISA] Jeremiah 52:20 The pillars two, the sea one, and the bull/ox/herd/01241 baqar two-ten copper which under the bases, which the King Solomon made for house of YHWH......
.
NKJV) Jeremiah 52:20 The two pillars, one Sea, the twelve bronze bulls which [were] under [it, and] the carts, which King Solomon had made for the house of the LORD -- the bronze of all these articles was beyond measure.

Rotherham) Jeremiah 52:20 As for the two pillars the one sea, and the twelve oxen of bronze which were under the stands which King Solomon had made for the house of Yahweh, without weight was the bronze of all these things.

01241 baqar {baw-kawr'} from 01239; TWOT - 274a; n m
AV - ox 78, herd 44, beeves 7,

 

[lionroar0]

I have followed with interest the discussion about 'Unam Sanctam.' I also have read the Catholic Encyclopedia article about it, and have cited to that article in another post. Here is what it says:

""In the registers, on the margin of the text of the record, the last sentence is noted as its real definition: "Declaratio quod subesse Romano Pontifici est omni humanae creaturae de necessitate salutis" (It is here stated that for salvation it is necessary that every human creature be subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff). This definition, the meaning and importance of which are clearly evident from the connection with the first part on the necessity of the one Church for salvation, and on the pope as the one supreme head of the Church, expresses the necessity for everyone who wishes to attain salvation of belonging to the Church, and therefore of being subject to the authority of the pope in all religious matters. This has been the constant teaching of the Church, and it was declared in the same sense by the Fifth Ecumenical Council of the Lateran, in 1516: "De necessitate esse salutis omnes Christi fideles Romano Pontifici subesse" (That it is of the necessity of salvation for all Christ's faithful to be subject to the Roman pontiff)."

Apparently, this has been the 'constant teaching of the Church.' Note the reference to the Fifth Ecumenical Council of the Lateran. As well, the text of the Bull is rich with citations to other Church authorities, including Bernard of Clairvaux. The author was not presenting anything new! Fast forward: I also recall statements in recent years by both John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger. The official position of the RCC STILL is that non-Catholics, Protestants like me, are heretics and that in order to have salvation, we must convert to Catholicism and 'accept the supremacy of the Roman pontiff.' That is one of the reasons for the huge concern. Now, if the RCC were to formally recant that teaching, to clearly state that practitioners in other faiths who accept Jesus as Savior may have salvation--which most of the rest of the churches acknowledge, by the way; then perhaps there would be a huge sigh of relief.

Dave

Well let's see here. Is there salvation outside of the Church. Can a person be saved outside of Christ's Church?

The answer is no.

Who belongs the Church?

All those baptised in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Peace

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Well let's see here. Is there salvation outside of the Church. Can a person be saved outside of Christ's Church?

The answer is no.

Who belongs the Church?

All those baptised in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Peace

I can't remember the words I was baptized with in the Gulf. I know a Pentecost minister performed it. Then we had crab and fish later that night.

 

[Annolennar]

Apparently, this has been the 'constant teaching of the Church.' Note the reference to the Fifth Ecumenical Council of the Lateran. As well, the text of the Bull is rich with citations to other Church authorities, including Bernard of Clairvaux. The author was not presenting anything new! Fast forward: I also recall statements in recent years by both John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger. The official position of the RCC STILL is that non-Catholics, Protestants like me, are heretics and that in order to have salvation, we must convert to Catholicism and 'accept the supremacy of the Roman pontiff.' That is one of the reasons for the huge concern. Now, if the RCC were to formally recant that teaching, to clearly state that practitioners in other faiths who accept Jesus as Savior may have salvation--which most of the rest of the churches acknowledge, by the way; then perhaps there would be a huge sigh of relief.

Whoa! Whoa! This is so incredibly the opposite of Catholic teaching that its hard to know where to start!

The Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly states:

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."324


847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337

If people would actually go to the source, and actually know what the "official position" is, then there might not be such a "huge concern".

 

[Mikeb85]

When the Church schismed - it is at that point when the East lost a chief leader to look up to, that all the Bishops [Patriarchs] were lost to define the doctrines as was the custom prior to the schism...when referring to the Pope to make it 'finito' and acceptable.

Funny, many of the definitions of our faith were formulated by Alexandrian theologians, and at several Ecumenical councils the Roman Pope was not even present or had a minor role.

As for why the EO hasn't had anymore Ecumenical councils, the answer is that there hasn't arisen any major heresies in the Orthodox world that needed to be repudiated by an Ecumenical council...

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly states:

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272
​

That is all peachy keen but we still have to profess loyalty to the Pope and His Denomination in order to share the supper. Thanks, but I will pass and wait for the Lord's coming to judge me on my Works and Fruit.

1 corin 11:26 For as often ever ye may be eating the bread, this, and the drink-cup ye may be drinking, the death of the Lord ye are according-messaging until which ever He may be coming/elqh <2064> (5632) [Revelation 19:11]

Reve 19:11 And I perceived the heaven having be opened and Lo! A horse, white and the One sitting on it/him being called Faithful and True and in justice He is judging and is battling.

 

[lionroar0]

That is all peachy keen but we still have to profess loyalty to the Pope and His Denomination in order to share the supper. Thanks, but I will pass and wait for the Lord's coming to judge me on my Works and Fruit.

1 corin 11:26 For as often ever ye may be eating the bread, this, and the drink-cup ye may be drinking, the death of the Lord ye are according-messaging until which ever He may be coming/elqh <2064> (5632) [Revelation 19:11]

Reve 19:11 And I perceived the heaven having be opened and Lo! A horse, white and the One sitting on it/him being called Faithful and True and in justice He is judging and is battling.

Wich supper?

We can share the Word.

Peace

 

[Annolennar]

That is all peachy keen but we still have to profess loyalty to the Pope and His Denomination in order to share the supper. Thanks, but I will pass and wait for the Lord's coming to judge me on my Works and Fruit.

1 corin 11:26 For as often ever ye may be eating the bread, this, and the drink-cup ye may be drinking, the death of the Lord ye are according-messaging until which ever He may be coming/elqh <2064> (5632) [Revelation 19:11]

Reve 19:11 And I perceived the heaven having be opened and Lo! A horse, white and the One sitting on it/him being called Faithful and True and in justice He is judging and is battling.

Wonderful, do what you feel is right.

But the issue was what the Catholic Church teaches regarding salvation, and the viewpoint which was posited as "official" was incredibly off-base.

 

[archierieus]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly states:

If people would actually go to the source, and actually know what the "official position" is, then there might not be such a "huge concern".

Cardinal Ratzinger, in writing that catechism (or editing, I should say, as Prefect of the Congregation of the Faith) did a superb job of wording positions and teachings in such a way as to give a particular impression. I enjoyed reading through it recently. However, go ahead and ask him, or his staff, whether or not the RCC intended by those statements to denounce 'Unam Sanctam,' at least as far as the spiritual content of that document. And, of course, there are other sections in the same catechism which would seem to speak pretty clearly. I would have to dig mine out to give proper cites. KIM that the same Cardinal Ratzinger, and his predecessor John Paul II, both have stated that Protestants are heretics, and that the only true faith is the Roman Catholic Church. And of course, as noted above, the teaching of the RCC is that ONLY Catholics may partake of the Lord's Supper. Protestant churches practice open communion, by contrast.

Would you agree that the Roman Catholic church is the only true faith? Do you believe that to be true? ( Incidentally, so do the Jehovah's Witnesses, as well as the Mormons, Church of Christ, hardshell Southern Baptists, and a few others. Which group is right? Or are they all wrong, including the RCC?)

So please, verify if that is the belief? Is the RCC the only true faith, and practitioners of other faiths are heretics?

Dave

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Cardinal Ratzinger, in writing that catechism (or editing, I should say, as Prefect of the Congregation of the Faith) did a superb job of wording positions and teachings in such a way as to give a particular impression. I enjoyed reading through it recently. However, go ahead and ask him, or his staff, whether or not the RCC intended by those statements to denounce 'Unam Sanctam,' at least as far as the spiritual content of that document. And, of course, there are other sections in the same catechism which would seem to speak pretty clearly. I would have to dig mine out to give proper cites. KIM that the same Cardinal Ratzinger, and his predecessor John Paul II, both have stated that Protestants are heretics, and that the only true faith is the Roman Catholic Church.

Would you agree that the Roman Catholic church is the only true faith? Do you believe that to be true? ( Incidentally, so do the Jehovah's Witnesses, as well as the Mormons, Church of Christ, hardshell Southern Baptists, and a few others. Which group is right? Or all they all wrong, including the RCC?)

So please, verify if that is the belief? Is the RCC the only true faith, and practitioners of other faiths are heretics?

Dave

What's the difference between being a heretic and being defective

On July 10, 2007, Pope Benedict XVI reasserted the "universal primacy" of his Roman Catholic church, approving a document released on Tuesday, July 10, 2007, proclaiming that Orthodox Churches are "defective." This was the Pontiff&#8217;s latest manner of insulting Jesus Christ and His True Church...............

 

[archierieus]

But the issue was what the Catholic Church teaches regarding salvation, and the viewpoint which was posited as "official" was incredibly off-base.

Unam Sanctam deals with salvation, and the Catholic Encyclopedia confirms that:

""Declaratio quod subesse Romano Pontifici est omni humanae creaturae de necessitate salutis" (It is here stated that for salvation it is necessary that every human creature be subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff). This definition, the meaning and importance of which are clearly evident from the connection with the first part on the necessity of the one Church for salvation, and on the pope as the one supreme head of the Church, expresses the necessity for everyone who wishes to attain salvation of belonging to the Church, and therefore of being subject to the authority of the pope in all religious matters. This has been the constant teaching of the Church . . .

Are you saying that the RCC has recanted Unam Sanctam? Is that no longer the official teaching of the Church? Please, yes or no. Thanks. If yes, please cite to an official Church publication to confirm.

Dave

 

[beamishboy]

I just love it when people tell us our teachings.

Peace

You should love it since most RCs don't seem to be able to read the teachings of their church for themselves. What archierieus does is very helpful. He's succinct and clear.

 

[lionroar0]

You should love it since most RCs don't seem to be able to read the teachings of their church for themselves. What archierieus does is very helpful. He's succinct and clear.

He's totally misrepresting something he does not know.

BTW I do know how to read the Churches teachings for myself. As I'm a Catechist and part of our training is to read churches teachings for ourselves. I also hold a BA in religious studies.

<staff edit>

Peace

 

[beamishboy]

Don't ya mean the "holy sea"

Hehe, do you mean as in lost at sea? (Isn't the beamishboy witty?)

 

[archierieus]

He's totally misrepresting something he does not know. [/qote]

So far, my posts on the subject have consisted of RCC materials, published by the RCC church. In regard to Unam Sanctam, I additionally researched publications by the RCC commenting on it. If there is any misrepresentation, then it would be found in the documents published by the RCC.

Your quoted comment is conclusionary. Please provide specific supporting cites.

BTW I do know how to read the Churches teachings for myself. As I'm a Catechist and part of our training is to read churches teachings for ourselves. I also hold a BA in religious studies.

And I have comparable training, and am reasonably familiar with the traditional teachings of the RCC, as well as those of other communions. I still keep the Baltimore Catechism around, as well as other catechetical resources. I also recognize that a Catechist may be expected to be an advocate for his or her Church, and to present the teachings in a light favorable to the Church.

But cut to the chase . . . Since you are a Catechist, please confirm or deny: Has the RCC formally recanted Unam Sanctam? If so, please provide a cite. Thanks.

Dave

 

[lionroar0]

He's totally misrepresting something he does not know. [/qote]

So far, my posts on the subject have consisted of RCC materials, published by the RCC church. In regard to Unam Sanctam, I additionally researched publications by the RCC commenting on it. If there is any misrepresentation, then it would be found in the documents published by the RCC.

Your quoted comment is conclusionary. Please provide specific supporting cites.



And I have comparable training, and am reasonably familiar with the traditional teachings of the RCC, as well as those of other communions. I still keep the Baltimore Catechism around, as well as other catechetical resources. I also recognize that a Catechist may be expected to be an advocate for his or her Church, and to present the teachings in a light favorable to the Church.

But cut to the chase . . . Since you are a Catechist, please confirm or deny: Has the RCC formally recanted Unam Sanctam? If so, please provide a cite. Thanks.

Dave

I have already answered your question. Here is it again


Well let's see here. Is there salvation outside of the Church. Can a person be saved outside of Christ's Church?

The answer is no.

Who belongs the Church?

All those baptised in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Documentation. Already posted but I will posted again.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly states:

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."324


847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337
​

Peace

 

[beamishboy]

He's totally misrepresting something he does not know.

But how can you say that when all he does is to quote the RC sources themselves. Are you telling me the RC encyclopaedia, etc don't mean what they say? He also quotes the Unam Sanctam directly.

BTW I do know how to read the Churches teachings for myself. As I'm a Catechist and part of our training is to read churches teachings for ourselves. I also hold a BA in religious studies.

Is the beamishboy supposed to say wow? The beamishboy is currently in the most famous and most televised school on the planet and will proceed to its affiliated King's College, Oxford to read Divinity. Wow? Hehe.

I do give you alot of slack because you are thirteen yrs old and your brain hasn't completely formed yet. Specially the frontal lobe.

Is that a joke? The beamishboy isn't amused.

 

[Photini]

I also hope Orthodox Christians will read the above carefully and not foolishly defend the RCs the way some of them seem to be doing automatically and without thought. We call a spade a spade. We have irreconcilable differences - let's not pretend otherwise.

http://i247.photobucket.com/albums/gg141/mattridings/1can-of-worms.jpg

 

[archierieus]

I have already answered your question. Here is it again

A few paragraphs later, we find this:

"845 To reunite all his children, scattered and led astray by sin, the Father willed to call the whole of humanity together into his Son's Church. The Church is the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and salvation. The Church is "the world reconciled." She is that bark which "in the full sail of the Lord's cross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in this world." According to another image dear to the Church Fathers, she is prefigured by Noah's ark, which alone saves from the flood.334

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337

848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338 [emphasis added]

The reference to "the Church" above, means the Roman Catholic Church. That is clear from the section. If necessary, I can provide additional cites to the same section.

Dave