Please, I'd really like to know the answer to this

[Kotton]

Don't know the 80's tunes like you kids do. Only one I remember hearing was a Swing number, 'The Music goes Round and Round'. Believe it was from the 20's. Now I'm not really that old, but my parents told me things.

Kotton

 

[LouisBooth]

"If God really meant for us to be able to discern the truth just by picking up the Bible, how do you defend the fact that prior to the idea of Sola Scriptura being created by Martin Luther"

Umm..he wasn't the first

"We had NO denominations before the 1500's"

whoa whoa whoa...yes there were, catholics just killed, excommunicated, or banished them. First noteable one was the alexadria school who had their own pope Rememeber, back in the day when there were about 5 of them?

"why would you want to lean on your own understanding - alone? "

Common mistakes made by catholics. I don't. I used the writings to guide me as well as peers, but they are not EQUAL to the bible in terms of authority.

"The doctor doesn't allow me to prescribe my own medicine, the police don't allow me to set and interpret my own laws..."

Yes, but we do elect the judges to do so AND a doctor does ask the symtomes, and anyone can become a doctor, not just people that a group of people choose

"then how come there are 30,000 Protestant denominations"

The same reason there are several views on different issues in the catholic church.

"No, no Protestants contributed one ounce of effort to the bible - but they sure snapped it up and decided to tell the authors that they have no idea what the bible is about."

Umm...no catholics did either for that matter but we sure as heck helped out with translations.

"You would not have a bible to interpret if it were not for the Catholic Church"

NOw that is funny. The cannon was set LOONNNGGG before your council said it was right. There were only 2 books in real question that are in it. So try that line on someone who hasn't studied history.

"SHOW me in the Bible where Jesus BREATHED on his followers (NOT just the disciples!) and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit. What you forgive will be forgiven, what you hold bound will be held bound in heaven." (John 20: 19-23)"

Just one question, how many people did he appear to and say go preach and make disciples of? hmm? can a non disciple make a disciple? Funny how in Luke 24:36- it used the word disciples and NOT apposlies huh? Jesus has tons of disciples, for they are the people that believed and followed him..ie christians.

"Further, while Jesus told his parables to everyone, he only EXPLAINED them to his disciples. (Matthew 13: 36; Luke 8: 9-10)"

Actaully he only explained one to them so I guess useing that line of logic we can say you know that one really well but are in the dark on the others huh?

"The entire seventeenth chapter of John is a prayer by Jesus to the Father for his disciples and their journey into the world after he is gone."

Yup, so?Funny how in the last part of that prayer Christ says "and will continue t make you known ..." Funny how also that EVERYONE that was baptised recieves the SAME gift that Jesus gave the apsotlies at penicost (acts 2:3 .

"And Jesus WAS used to preaching to the multitudes."

Yes, the 12 were closest to him, but they made disiciples, many many of them..basically EVERYONE they converted, so there ya have it

 

[KC Catholic]

Ok, I'll give the other side a chance to rebut Louis's comments.

Then we'll close this thread because we're back to square one and we will have to leave this discussion as "agree to disagree".

Peace to all.
KC

 

[VOW52]

Louis,

I'm trying, really TRYING to see your POV. But you seem to dance around the points I discussed. Here goes:


<<"SHOW me in the Bible where Jesus BREATHED on his followers (NOT just the disciples!) and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit. What you forgive will be forgiven, what you hold bound will be held bound in heaven." (John 20: 19-23)"

Just one question, how many people did he appear to and say go preach and make disciples of? hmm? can a non disciple make a disciple? Funny how in Luke 24:36- it used the word disciples and NOT apposlies huh? Jesus has tons of disciples, for they are the people that believed and followed him..ie christians.>>

You STILL didn't show me where Jesus breathed on his "other" disciples and said "Receive the Holy Spirit." I fail to see how your argument answers my request.



<<"Further, while Jesus told his parables to everyone, he only EXPLAINED them to his disciples. (Matthew 13: 36; Luke 8: 9-10)"

Actaully he only explained one to them so I guess useing that line of logic we can say you know that one really well but are in the dark on the others huh?>>

In my Bible, he actually explained two parables. He also explained the PURPOSE of the parables to his disciples ONLY.

(purpose of parables: Matt 13: 10-15; Mark 4: 33-34; Luke 8: 9-10)

(explain parable of sower: Matt 13: 18-23; Luke 8: 11-15)

(explain parable of weeds/wheat: Matt 13: 36-43)


<<"And Jesus WAS used to preaching to the multitudes."

Yes, the 12 were closest to him, but they made disiciples, many many of them..basically EVERYONE they converted, so there ya have it >>

BASICALLY everyone they converted? Why not everyone? I do AGREE that the disciples made more disciples, hence the Apostolic Succession.


Louis, while I was gleaning the above Scriptures for this post, I was astounded (again!) at just how Jesus singled out the Disciples to do his ministry. The miracle of the loaves and fishes jumped off the pages to me. Jesus blessed the bread and fish, and then handed it to his disciples to distribute. Here was a forerunner of the Eucharist, where the Disciples take the bread from Jesus and it miraculously multiplies as they feed the people.

And as a final note, the validity of Sacred Tradition is eloquently displayed in the ending of the Gospel of John, John 21:25

"There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written."

Without Sacred Tradition to preserve these things, and they are NOT written down anywhere....does that mean all of the precious works performed by Jesus are forever LOST?

How heartbreaking!


Peace be with you,
~VOW

 

[The Squalid Wanderer]

 

[The Squalid Wanderer]

it might cut down on this kind of thing while allowing people who don't have an agenda to get answers for their questions.

 

[Schrack]

"You STILL didn't show me where Jesus breathed on his "other" disciples and said "Receive the Holy Spirit." I fail to see how your argument answers my request."

If LouisBooth is unable to show you, you might wish to refer yourself to my post (page 3) to Wolesley. There you will find that Jesus did indeed breath his Spirit upon all his disciples, and not just the eleven.

SchracktheBaptist

[edit] I said page 3 when I should have said page four. Here is the excerpt:

I think a little Bible harmonizing might do well here. Luke says Mary Magdalene and other women came in the morning and told the eleven "and the rest" that Christ rose from the dead (Lk. 24:9-10). This is validated by John in 20:18. Later that same day, the two disciples on the road to Emmaus requested Jesus to abide with them as it was "toward evening, and the day is far spent." (24:29). After Jesus ate and vanished from their sight, they rose up the same hour and returned to Jerusalem (a 7.5 mile trip) and found "the eleven gathered, and those that were with them" (24:33). By this time, it had to be evening, and thus John says "Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst...." Luke ties everything together nicely when he wrote: "And as they [the disciples on the road to Emmaus] thus spoke [to the apostle and all the rest], Jesus stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you" (24:36). And this is where John fills in what Luke left out in verse 36: "as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you" (20:21). So all of Jesus' disciples, Wolesley, were there (except Thomas), and the truth of the matter is, Jesus gave his authority not to any magisterium but to all of his disciples, his church. I realize this will diminish any argument for the special authority of your magisterium, but truth is truth no matter how much one believes to the contrary."

SchracktheBaptist

 

[LouisBooth]

"Just one question, how many people did he appear to and say go preach and make disciples of? "

If you are saying its exclusivly Jesus that does it, then that rules out Paul, the book of James, the book of rev and a ton of others. I take questions differently then other people because of my science background. I assume you're right and see the inconsistancies and the wrongs that result and point them out. Should I go on?

"You STILL didn't show me where Jesus breathed on his "other" disciples and said "Receive the Holy Spirit." I fail to see how your argument answers my request."

See above. That's how your wrong, from the results of your idea.

"In my Bible, he actually explained two parables. He also explained the PURPOSE of the parables to his disciples ONLY."

So I guess on the rest of them they are up a creek huh? we can just cut those parts out because we will never understand them? bah..what foolishness.
I was talking about ones that are present in all the synopics, not just one. My appologies.


"I do AGREE that the disciples made more disciples, hence the Apostolic Succession."

Ahh..so you have to agree that NOT just the pope or the bishops are included here, for the other people at other major towns had their own disciples (whom the catholic church excomminicated) wow..disciples ex communicating other disciples...That's why I don't believe in apostoic succession, its not biblical (in my opinion and reading of scripture with historical support).


"Here was a forerunner of the Eucharist, where the Disciples take the bread from Jesus and it miraculously multiplies as they feed the people."

Funny how nonbelievers took part in it huh? oh, you forget that we have baptism and the Lord's supper as "traditions" guess you didn't know that.

"Without Sacred Tradition to preserve these things, and they are NOT written down anywhere....does that mean all of the precious works performed by Jesus are forever LOST?"

Umm..not really, its called the bible. It was not the catholics that made the bible possible. They helped by keeping it around but it was not solely them, gutenburg was more of a help then they were... As was good ole King James, (not a catholic)...I could go on and on. The catholics are one of the helpers, but not the exclusive, (and I would say) not the best one either.

 

[IRCosmo1]

I would just like to say that enforced celibacy has no meaning other than those who go for it even though they dont have the gift mean well and are obviously committed to God, will inevitably come a croper.
but i bellieve that those who a deffinate gift for celibacy will undoutedly be blessed and fulfilled by it. ( they will still find people whom they are tempted by )

I am about to be married and have been celibate since becomuing a christian about ten years of which four i took a two two year probationary celibate vows as i tried to find out if i had the Gift.
I do recomend seeking celibacy even if you are to be married as it is the higher way (Jesus was a celibate after all) but in scripture it does also say that it is good to marry ...

 

[CopticOrthodox]

Just curious, I thought I remembered reading something about their being some married priests that are active today. Could someone tell me if I this is true, or is my memory failing me again.

Hugs,
Kelly

The Catholic Church is made up of about 23 Churches in Communion under the Pope. The Latin Catholic or Roman Catholic Church is the only one of them that does not have married priests. In all the Eastern Catholic Churches (which are equally Catholic as the Roman Catholics), married men are often ordained preists, although no priest may marry. Roman Catholics and Eastern Catholics can go to each other's Churches & have Communion, they are one. It's just a discipline of the west.

All the Orthodox Churches also have married priests, and have since the time of the Apostles.

A person can be a single man, a married man, a celebate man, or a monk, and men can be selected from all these categories to be ordained to the priesthood. If a man has lost his wife & remarried, he cannot be a priest since St. Paul says a priest must be the husband of only one wife. One a person is a priest they can not marry, if they are unmarried to start with or if their wife dies, the reason being 1. St. Paul said husband of one wife & 2. a person should not become romantically involved with someone who's confessions they have been hearing, if the priest could marry, it would seriously impair his ability to be trusted by the female members of the congregation.

It is only in the Western part of the Catholic Church that the priesthood is restricted by discipline & not doctrine to celebate men and monks only, all other Apostolic Churches do not follow this practice. Married Anglican priests and Luthern ministers who convert to Roman Catholicism often receive special permission, are ordained, and serve as married Roman Catholic priests.

 

[Credo]

I would just like to say that enforced celibacy has no meaning other than those who go for it even though they dont have the gift mean well and are obviously committed to God, will inevitably come a croper.
but i bellieve that those who a deffinate gift for celibacy will undoutedly be blessed and fulfilled by it. ( they will still find people whom they are tempted by )

I am about to be married and have been celibate since becomuing a christian about ten years of which four i took a two two year probationary celibate vows as i tried to find out if i had the Gift.
I do recomend seeking celibacy even if you are to be married as it is the higher way (Jesus was a celibate after all) but in scripture it does also say that it is good to marry ...

I'm not sure if you completely understand the meaning of the word "celibate". Historically, celibate means "unmarried" - celibate meaning "abstaining from sexual intercourse" is a 20th-century development. I think the word you're looking for is "chaste" which we're all called to be unless and until we're married.

 

[MariaRegina]

The Catholic Church is made up of about 23 Churches in Communion under the Pope. The Latin Catholic or Roman Catholic Church is the only one of them that does not have married priests. In all the Eastern Catholic Churches (which are equally Catholic as the Roman Catholics), married men are often ordained preists, although no priest may marry. ... It's just a discipline of the west.

All the Orthodox Churches also have married priests, and have since the time of the Apostles. ...

July 4, 2003 Happy Independence Day!

Dearest Coptic Brother in Christ and all readers in this forum:

Christ is in our midst!

Thank you for clarifying that married men (married to only one wife) may be ordained to the Priesthood within the Orthodox Church. Once they are ordained, they cannot remarry if their wife dies or divorces them. In fact, many of those priests are encouraged, not forced, by their bishops to become monks. Some of those widowed priests are then indeed consecrated to the episcopacy.

The same holds true for Deacons. If a married man is ordained to the diaconate, then he cannot remarry once his wife dies. Neither can a celibate deacon marry once he is ordained to the diaconate. This is true for both Catholic and Orthodox deacons, as the Catholic Church now has a married and celibate diaconate.

In the Melkite Eastern Catholic Church, Bishop John Elya recently ordained a married man to the Catholic Priesthood without Vatican approval. They probably grimaced, I'm sure! This priest is currently serving a parish here in the USA from the last I heard. The Byzantine Catholic Church, headquartered in Pennsylvania, has petitioned Rome to allow for a married clergy in the late 1990's. I don't know the outcome of that petition. Have any of you readers out in cyberspace heard of any recent news?

Is this decision to marry made before the man is ordained to the subdiaconate. Or can a subdeacon marry after his ordination?

Your sister in Christ,

Elizabeth

 

[CopticOrthodox]

"The Byzantine Catholic Church, headquartered in Pennsylvania, has petitioned Rome to allow for a married clergy in the late 1990's. I don't know the outcome of that petition."

I believe the Eastern Catholics in USA can now ordain married men, but there is a lot of paper work involved in getting approval, so it is happening slowly at best. This may be out of date now, I'm not sure.

"Is this decision to marry made before the man is ordained to the subdiaconate. Or can a subdeacon marry after his ordination?"

In the East, a subdeacon can marry after being ordained. I'm not sure about the West where the rule for a subdeacon are most strict.

 

[MariaRegina]

My dearest joy in Christ: Christ is in our midst!

Thank you for that information.
YSIC
Elizabeth

 

[Jose]

Ah, methinks you mean Titus, not "Titans". Unless you're talking about Greek mythology.

The text in question is Titus 1:6, in which Paul directs Titus to appoint presbyters (priests) in every town who are "blameless and married only once". 1 Timothy 3:2 says the same thing about bishops, and 1 Timothy 3:12 says likewise concerning deacons.

In the early years of the Christian Faith, clergy did marry. As time went on, however, celibacy became more and more the norm, based in no small part on Paul's advice in 1 Corinthians 7:32-35, in which he imparts that if a man is unmarried, he is free of marital distractions and is able to work full-time for the Lord. Celibacy was imposed Church-wide in the Catholic Church by the 2nd Lateran Council in 1139. Since the Church imposed this law, she could just as easily abolish it----but that's extremely unlikey to happen.

That having been said, keep in mind that in the Catholic Faith, the bottom line for rules pertaining to faith and doctrine is the Magesterium of the Church, not the Bible.

Blessings,
---Wols.

Please remeber that the Magisterium is excecised in a way that cannot be contrary to the Scriptures. Also the issue of celibacy is one of Discipline , not Faith or Dogma.

That said; the celibacy requirement holds only for the Latin Rite of the Roman Catholic Church; in the Eastern Rite Catholics in communion with the See of Peter, a married priest are allowed.

As to Deacons, there are thousands of married Deacons in the Latin Rite: as Paul VI reinstituted the Office of the Permanent Deacons.

Also in certain situations Married Priests are allowed ordination in the Latin Rite.


Viva Cristo Rey!!!