Common Protestant Misunderstandings.


 St Peter's

Pastor Karsten:  Sorry, Catholicview, you are wrong believing there is no change Roman doctrine concerning sacraments. The Roman Church changed a lot about the sacraments and itnroduce new ones. Around the year 1000 they started to withhold the wine from believers AGAINST Christ’s explicit words: «Drink from it, all of you;” (Mt 26:27) or according to Luke: Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he said, «Take this and divide it among yourselves;

BFHU: This is not a change in DOCTRINE. It is a change in practice. Similar to the former practice of eating fish on Friday/ no meat, in union with the Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross. That was not a Doctrine either. I am not sure when the Blood of Christ tended to be reserved to the priest, but it was not to save money, as you assert below, but to prevent desecration of the Blood of Christ. And technically Jesus did not give His Body and Blood to EVERYONE  but only to the future Priests and Bishops of His One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church. I do not believe that the Catholic Church ever had a doctrine  that all the faithful MUST receive BOTH the Host and the Cup. And,  that they then changed for a while, only allowing the Host to the faithful, and then changed again to allow reception under both species, by everyone.. If you think so please prove your assertion with ancient authoritative documents.

images-4 Pastor Karsten: They also introduced celibacy for priests around that time, because the priests’ wives became a strong influence “undermining” the mind-control of the hierarchy. To increase their power they just forced many good people (priests and their partners) into “out of Wedlock” relationships and they still reap the consequences because the priesthood became a magnet for pedophiles and homosexuals. Even the first pope (Peter) was married (Jesus healed his mother in law). Then the Roman church made the priesthood a elective sacrament.

BFHU: It is true that Peter was married. However, we don’t know if he was still married at the time of his apostleship and later or if his wife seems to have already died. There is historical evidence that the apostles were celibate from the beginning. Even St. Paul exhorts  that all can serve Our Lord better if unmarried. And, it is just much more practical for a busy priest to be unmarried in order to fulfill his duties. Protestant pastors have a very difficult row-to- hoe attending to the flock and his family.

But you will be happy to know that Celibacy is also not a Doctrine. It too is a discipline/practice of the the Church. And this discipline can be changed in the future and allowances made to it. Therefore, we happen to have married priests. In the Eastern Roman Rites married men can become priests. But priests cannot get married after ordination. And probably like the Eastern Orthodox Churches, who also with married priests, the married priests cannot be considered for the office of bishop. So, we have both celibate and married priests. Contrary to the common Protestant accusation no one has ever been forced to become a celibate priest or forbidden to marry. Anyone who wishes to marry certainly may. And marriage is also a sacament. But if a young man feels called to the priesthood, in general, in the Roman Rite he must be willing to give up marriage.

All priests are to be chaste/celibate. They are not to enter the priesthood and keep a sexual partner of any sex or age on the side. This happens because we are all sinners. If only priests committed these sins, you might have a point, but marriage does not cure rapists, pedophiles, adulterers, or homosexuals. If the Church attracts these, it is because the Church is known to be forgiving and merciful and loving. They are not attracted to the Church because the Church approves of these sins, but in hope of overcoming them. Unfortunately they often fail to control their passions. 

 Pastor Karsten: This could have been the end of the Christian church if it was a human institution, but Christ promised to protect it and in his good time he called reformers to bring the church back on track.

BFHU: You are certainly correct that the Church Christ established on Peter would have long since disappeared into the mists of time, if He had not protected it as he said he would, so that even the Gates of Hell would not prevail against her. To Luther and the others it looked like they were just trying to get the Church back on track. There were abuses then and there always will be some b/c men sin. Even Churchmen. However, the reformers did a great disservice to Christ. They did not reform the Church, they shattered it into 30,000+ denominations diametrically opposed to Christ’s desire that we all be one.Jn17. However, the Church founded by Jesus is the Catholic Chruch, still going strong and with doctrine and sacraments in perfect alignment with Sacred Scripture. BTW, the Catholic Church was beginning her own reformation even as Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses on the door.

 Pastor Karsten:We should praise God for his wisdom daily and thank him for Luther, Melanchthon, Zwingli, Huss, Bucer, Calvin, Bonhoeffer, Drevermann (former Roman Catholic Priest and Professor in Paderborn, excommunicated) and the many true believers who listen to God’s Word more than to human tradition and selfelected “authorities”.

BFHU: We need to listen to God’s word in union with the Catholic Church. The problem with Sola Scriptura, born of the Protest-ant Reformation, is that everyone thinks they can infallibly interpret scripture. This breeds pride and arrogance to the point that the more strong-willed break away and start their own “churches”, further splintering Christ, in direct opposition to Christ’s desire for unity but also nullifying the scriptures that say:

Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.

 
i Peter 1: 20 First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, 21 because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God

 Pastor Karsten: Indeed, the Roman church changed doctrine again and again, that is what councils where held for. There is a hole that the new pope will actually pick up on that tradition and reform some of the worst heresies within the Roman Church.

BFHU: You are very mistaken. So far you have only given us changes to practices and disciplines; which are perfectly legitimate. We have changed NO DOCTRINE since the birth of Christianity. But I understand the confusion; b/c in Protestantism there are not uniform practices. That is left totally up to each church/ individual. All Protestants have are doctrines (which are different in various denominations) so I understand why you have not discerned the differences in the Catholic Church between doctrine (Unchanging) and disciplines (changeable)

The councils, contrary to Protestant misunderstandings, were NOT held to create changes in doctrine or make up new ones or get rid of old ones. Councils were held to determine precisely and then teach, what was TRUTH and what was ERROR. Most of the early councils dealt with the nature of Jesus. There was much confusion owing to the difficulty of understanding the Trinity, pagan influences, and appearances. The councils hammered out the nature of the Trinity and that Jesus was true God and true Man in a hypostatic union. That is why the concept of the Holy Trinity is absent in Scripture. So technically, believers in Sola Scriptura should reject the Doctrine of the Trinity. It was taught and the Apostles knew what was true but over time and distance, confusion seeped in. So when councils pronounced a teaching, It was never New Teaching. It was always old teaching but clarified teaching to counteract misunderstandings.

To help you understand this I will give a modern explanation. Marriage has always been between a man and a woman ONLY. However the Catholic Church does not have a Dogma on this, promulgated by a Church Council b/c everyone knew and accepted this. There was no confusion. However, today, in the Western cultures, marriage is being redefined and confusion and rebellion are rampant even among Christians. Therefore, at some point in time the Catholic Church may have to have a council to once-and-for-all define marriage as only between a man and a woman. This will be a new dogma but NOT A NEW TEACHING. The teaching has always and everywhere been believed. But for the sake of clarity this Dogma may eventually need to be proclaimed.

About these ads

51 Responses

  1. BFHU said: “It is true that Peter was married. However, we don’t know if he was still married at the time of his apostleship and later or if his wife seems to have already died. There is historical evidence that the apostles were celibate from the beginning. Even St. Paul exhorts people that they can serve Our Lord better if unmarried. And it is just much more practical for a busy priest to be unmarried in order to fulfill his duties. Protestant pastors have a very difficult row to hoe attending to the flock and his family.”

    This is simply an observation and my opinion, but it seems that it would be easier to just accept that Peter was married as a fact, instead of trying to introduce something that is impossible to validate or invalidate. This is a common political move to validate ones own stance, without actually having to validate anything, and without the chance for invalidation on the part of your opponent. It is a common move in politics and in the court room. Just enough words, that may or may not be true, to plant a seed of thought or doubt. In politics and the court room, this is generally practiced if one has a weak case that needs strengthening.

    As to the “historical evidence” you mentioned, I would love a link to some reading materials on that please.

    Finally, Paul’s statements should be used in full and not in part.( For any curious readers, a few places to read about this topic in the Bible can be found in 1 Corinthians 7, 1 Timothy 3, & Titus 1.) 1 Corinthians 7:7 “For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.” I would argue, and with Scripture to back me, that some men may serve Him better single, but there are those who do much better if they are married. Wouldn’t forbidding to marry would be in contradiction to the will of God at creation. Did not He invent marriage when He created Eve for Adam? Adam was created without sin and God blessed him by giving him the gift of a wife. There are definite pro’s to celibacy when it comes to living and working for God, only a fool would deny that. However, forbidding someone to marry should never be an option. (1 Tim 4:1-3)

    • Well said!!!!

    • The Church does NOT forbid anyone to marry – rather the Latin Rite in particular made the decision to select from those who would serve as priests only those who are called to the discipline of celibacy, as you noted for both spiritual and practical reasons. Those who want to serve as ministers AND be married have plenty of roles where they can serve within the Church as well – just not the priesthood (unless they want to change Rites which is also feasible in theory).

      The advantage is that a priest is “married” solely to the Church and his parish, and not pulled between the families he is called to serve and his own family. There are married priests within the Eastern Rite, as well as Anglican priests who have been granted a dispensation, etc. They confirm that it makes it more difficult to donate oneself fully to the mission of the Church.

      It was also the norm from the time of the Apostles that (following the example of the Apostles) once a man became a priest he either did not marry, or if he was already married, did not remarry if his spouse died.

  2. bfhu – why are you still misreading what Peter 2 : 1 means .-

    He is not saying dont interpret scripture for yourself but that scripture was written by the Holy Spirit – not man – so you can trust it to be true.

    Many disciples and apostles were married :-

    “Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas?”

    When I first went to the CC the wine was denied – this was around 1980’s 90’s.
    The Bible is to be read by all in the church not just priests.

    The wife of a married priest or pastor can actually free up his time and assist him in his duties.
    Celibacy should be the choice of only those who are gifted with this control.

    • Charles,

      no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation,

      • But since all Christians are commanded to read scripture and it is impossible to read without interpretation then what you say cannot be true and would mean the bible is contradicting itself.
        Paul complimented the Berean’s for checking what he said to scripture
        and this would involve interpretation.

        • Where are christians COMMANDED to read scripture? What if one cannot read? What if they do not own a Bible? You have a very demanding god.

          • “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.” Then Luke’s account of the Berean converts in Acts 17:11, “Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.”

            “Have you never read…?” and “This happened that scripture might be fulfilled….” And “Don’t you know what scripture says….?”

            In the book 1 John the apostle writes, “And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments.

            Whoever says ‘I know him’ but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked” (1 John 2:3-5).
            How are we to know how Christ walked and how are we to imitate Him if we do not study the record of His life? How are we to be obedient to Him but by studying the rule He has given to direct us?

            The Bible is the primary means God uses to teach us about Himself and to challenge us by the Holy Spirit. “And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual” (1 Corinthians 2:13). So to be people who are obedient to God and who do His will, we must first know His will as given to us in the Bible.

            There are bibles everywhere in america yet many are unread – it is the same in Europe and russia – bible societies are vigorous in this.

            The WORD can also be heard in the churches. About 5 – 10 minutes in the C.C. once a week. Over 20 years to get through some but not all of the bible.

            “Man cannot live by bread alone but by EVERY word that proceeds from God .” That means the whole bible. It is the people who have easiest access to the bible that often dont read it.

            • Actually, Charles we hear nearly the whole Bible every 3 years in the Catholic Church and every 2 years if you go to daily mass.

              • It is only 3 years if you attend every day x 6 – 7 for 20 years if you go once a week .

                Without reading or hearing the WORD daily you will not know and grow with Jesus – since we have to keep reminding ourselves of sin and pride.
                Football, baseball , newspapers, magazines, cinema, music, TV games sports unholy holidays , shows , bars and clubs, pop idols , violent sports and games.

                This is the problem – not lack of bibles or illiteracy or time.
                Bible societies (that the Pope condemned) do a great job of spreading the Word. God is capable of giving the word to anyone who seeks him with all their heart. God hates abominable pantheism but is merciful and patient – but God still hates false worship.
                You will find only very few who do not know about Jesus .

                Only a few , a remnant , a tiny flock will find the “way” that is described
                in the bible. Thats why only 8 survived the flood and 3 survived Sodom.
                There would be maybe even 20 billion souls on the earth at the time of the flood – and only 8 saved ?
                Jesus saw them in Hell and took out only the righteous in the good part of Hades.

                So a Christian should never promote presumption or OSAS – the opposite is proclaimed when Paul said he knew the terror of the Lord.

                • Charles you are wrong. Sundays have a 3 year cycle. Daily has a 2 year cycle.

                  • They might have a three year cycle but that does not mean the whole bible is covered. Plus if you say one day – Sunday- covers the bible in three years but on the other 6 days per week covers the whole bible in two years this would not make arithmetical sense.

                    • There is probably some repeat due to the fact that the Sunday readings are the same of course. It is not every single word of the Bible but the vast majority of the most important parts. More that a Protestant will hear at church in three years however.

                    • No it was about the same readings in the Episcopalian church and English churches and Protestant churches – plus much longer sermons and commentaries of up to 3/4 of an hour – not a few minutes.
                      Also the protestant churches have a history of bible study – they always have bible fellowships.

                    • Just picked this up on email :-

                      “The Archbishop of Fiji wants to get Catholics back to the Bible
                      Archbishop Peter Loy Chong, the head of the Catholic Church in Fiji, says: ‘People in the church have shifted away to prayers such as devotions, novena, rosary and these are good but we need to keep the fundamental of faith which is the Word of God first above other things.” I totally agree with this one .

          • In the book 1 John the apostle writes, “And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says ‘I know him’ but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked” (1 John 2:3-5). How are we to know how Christ walked and how are we to imitate Him if we do not study the record of His life? How are we to be obedient to Him but by studying the rule He has given to direct us? The Bible is the primary means God uses to teach us about Himself and to challenge us by the Holy Spirit. “And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual” (1 Corinthians 2:13). So to be people who are obedient to God and who do His will, we must first know His will as given to us in the Bible.

            Deuteronomy 6:4-9, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.” Then Luke’s account of the Berean converts in Acts 17:11, “Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.”

        • The protestant model of Christianity demands that every Christian must be able to read, become a Bible scholar, and discern for themselves (ie each person does what is right in their own eyes – taking us back to the time of the Judges instead of to the Davidic Kingdom). It leaves every illiterate, mentally disabled or time-strapped soul wailing and gnashing their teeth in the wilderness. Apparently, in their view, the Lord did leave us orphaned after all…

          • No it does not – some have to hear if they cant read – the protestants have millions of commentaries and audio bible studies as do the catholics.

            What you are trying to say I think gives catholics a false sense of security – eg you dont need the bible since some people cant read or are disabled , once a week for 5 minutes is enough.
            Then never read the bible , go to football on a Sunday , watch TV , have a good drink , idolise sports and movies – but you dont need scripture or any thinking for yourselves – the priest will get you in.

            The priest will meet you at the Sunday horse racing.
            God will judge the illiterate and disabled with the knowledge they have this is not an excuse for ALL to avoid bible study – the most important leg of Christianity.

            I know because this was me. This anti bible thing is right through the CC – many in the CC dont go to any service or even open a bible .

            • All I know is that most Catholics grow up in the Church with a very GOOD SENSE of the gospel and its essentials. They got it from various sources including personal bible study, listening attentively to what’s proclaimed during Mass, meditating on the mysteries of the rosaries, novenas, and stations of the cross, and drawing inspiration from all the religious arts, paintings and sculptures which tell the story of salvation.

              Some biblio-fanatics would like to boast about how much they know and read the scripture and how much holier-than-thou they are because of it. I have serious doubts because these are the same people who oftentimes demonstrate a very poor ability to read and think critically. I never think that the bible is ever designed to be read and interpreted by every Tom, Dick and Harry who places his or her private judgments above that of the Church established by Christ.

              I always wonder about the dichotomy between a “lowly” believer who is living out the Christian life by following the holy precepts of the Church and quietly cultivating virtues, verus a bible-bashing Christian who is loud and boisterous but showing very little restraint in the good order and discipline in the Church. I ask which is the greater sin: 1) for the sinner who is always humble and contrite, or 2) for the sinner who claims to be bible religious and should know BETTER but not following the prescriptions of the bible (like the “obedience of faith”).

              Mr. C. Allan was Presbyterian. I doubt that he’s a genuine converted Catholic although he claims to judge all Catholics and their inner spiritual dispositions which belong to the privy of God alone.

              • No I was not born a Presbyterian – I was not brought up in any church – just hatches , matches and dispatches in the Episcopalian church.

                You cant seem to hide your antipathy to reading the bible but think 5 minutes a week is enough. You always equate bible study with “bad”
                protestants as if there were no bad catholics.

                Studying the bible constantly and living your life by its precepts is the only way to know God. Going into a church building is OK but does not necessarily lead to heaven or holiness without which no one will see the Lord.
                In my 25 years in the CC I never went to one bible study
                – looking back this was an appalling mistake on my part and for my family.

                There is no shortage of bibles and commentaries – 2000 congregants
                cannot possibly inquire of their priests the interpretation.of scripture.
                The bible is easy to understand and the Holy Spirit will “lead you into all truth ” if you are of a humble spirit and seek God with all your heart.

                There is more than 100 commands in the NT that must be kept – how will anyone know them without “study so that one can be approved in handling scripture ” .

                Getting drunk and going to football matches especially on a Sunday is unholy , as are drinking dances , etc etc.

                There must have been some catholics that were “into” the bible but I never met them.

                • The term bibliolatory is invented just for the fanatics who think that pastime of bible reading is the end of all and everything. You come across as someone who is worshipping a book rather than the living Christ, the Word incarnated in the world. I’m sorry that you cannot see God in all His creation except in the pages of a book. What make you think that I’m not “into” the Bible as if that’s so important to you? Since you are so knowledgeable about the bible, how many of the “more than 100 commands” have you kept? I don’t see you observing the direct command to be of “obedience” as a rule of faith?

                  Growing up Catholic, I have been taught the “good sense” of worshipping and doing homage to my God, respecting Church Authority, and living out my life faithfully in the spirit of the Gospel. I don’t drink (liquor), smoke, gamble, swear or curse … and is not lazy. But you want to judge me because I don’t read enough scripture according to your biased perception. This looks a lot like a gospel of works to me.

                  • Yes I think studying the Bible and trying to keep ALL its commandments is the most important thing that a Christian can do.

                    You dont seem to realise that the WORD is the same as the Bible.
                    To keep the WORD the bible must take precedence above all things.

                    To meditate on how Holy God name is and the fact that He says He exalts his WORD , which is scripture above his name shows how important His word is.

                    “As the psalmist turns to the temple to worship he writes in Ps. 138:2: “For You have magnified Your word above all Your name.”

                    God’s Word is His communication, His promise, the revelation of Himself to His people. It is to be a lamp to our feet in a dark and fallen world, without it we would have no way to know God or how to do God’s will. Throughout scripture we have a consistent theme of the dichotomy of light versus darkness. The world we live in is darkness reserved for judgment. John the apostle in 1 John 1:5 tells us God is light. Light is God’s very nature, it represents to us Holiness and perfection. This is why we often read that a physical manifestation of God ‘s glory is light or fire. Sin is associated with darkness and judgment. It implies imperfection, and principally ignorance, sinfulness, and misery.”

                    The Psalmist asks Ps 119:9 “How can a young man cleanse his way? He answers, “By taking heed according to Your Word. Just a few more verses later v:11 “Your word I have hidden in my heart, That I might not sin against You.” God’s word keeps us from sin and keeps us on his path, as the Word is a lamp to our feet and a light to our path (Ps.119:105) in a dark world.

                    If you were an engineer foreman would you tell your workers not to bother reading the health and safety manual?

                    You keep building straw men by attacking my motives or changing what I say.

                    Jesus even said to His Mother that those who keep all the commandments are His mother , brother and sister. How can we keep the commandments without constant bible study.
                    This was my fatal mistake.

                    You wont find a single chapter in the bible discouraging bible study – personal or by congregation – eg by calling it a form of idolatry which you have done – a crazy thing to do .

                    But you will find plenty of commands not to make statues and worship them.

                    • Therein lies the crux of your problem: By simply equating unequivocally Christ the Living Word with a book, albeit the bible. Sorry (and we have been down this road many times before) not to offend you, but you are just not sophisticated enough to think clearly and critically, and has no business discussing theology. I don’t know if anyone can reason with you. Bibliolatry and Pride are your great sins, Charles. Take care!

                    • If Christ is the living word made flesh – how will we know Jesus without reading it. The Bible is not a dead letter as some catholics maintained.
                      Hebrews 4 : 12
                      “For the word of God is LIVING and ACTIVE and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. 13 And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do.”
                      The WORD actually has power to change the heart – God gives it a power to do this. With bibles all around us we need constant study of the WORD (the Bible)

      • Once again you are not understanding what Peter is saying in plain English. He is saying that scripture did not come from the thoughts or interpretations of mere men – but the writings came from the Holy Spirit.
        It is nothing to do with not being allowed to interpret scripture by reading it.

      • Dear Mr. C. Allan: If you are right, then Protestantism will be united in “one Lord, one faith, and one Baptism” since every Protestant Christian presumes to be guided by same Holy Spirit of Truth. As it is, the contrary is true, and so is our God of chaos? The bible is full of dire warnings about unbridled private interpretations. When Peter spoke of “one’s own (meaning “individualistic”) interpretation”, it means what it says: Private interpretation. Reading further in context, one will be warned of “false prophets, false teachers” arising among these Christians who “secretly bring in destructive heresies … bringing upon themselves swift destruction.” Later, Peter would again reiterate (commending on Paul’s writings) how the “ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures” ( 2 Pet 3:16). Let’s think this way, for something to be called “heresies,” they must be able to compare to authentic faith. So if according to you, how is one to discern orthodoxy from the thousands upon thousands of conflicting and contradicting private interpretations by individual Protestants?

        But maybe Our God has an original plan which is orderly and peaceful. He sent Christ to establish “a” Church with the authority to govern and teach Christians to “observe all that I have commanded.” This is the same entity which gathered in Acts 15 to interpret the OT and establish prescriptions pertaining to the new Gentile Christians for the universal Church. Even Paul had to test his orthodoxy by checking in with Peter and the Church “lest somehow I should be running, or had run in vain” (Gal 2:1-2). This is the Church which the bible calls “the pillar and foundation of truth” (1 Tm 3:15). This is the same Church which the bible instructs Christians to take their disputes to and obey or risk excommunication. It is the same Church which Christ commands all Christians to submit their assents: “He who hears you, hears me; and he who rejects you rejects me” (Lk 10:16).

        Very sadly, many Christians never mature to “obedience of faith” (Rom 1:5) which requires us to submit to Authority in humility as commanded by Christ. Such undisciplined Christians will obstinately continue to further divide and spread errors (heresies) of Private Interpretation by ignoring to do God’s will of “One Fold, One Shepherd” (Jn 10:16) and “that all may be one … so the world may believe” (Jn 17:21).

        Lastly, I’ve never quite understood when a Christian would claim to be able to interpret the bible privately and beget strange doctrines (agnosticism and heterodoxy) contrary to the bible and clear teachings of the Church established by Christ. Is there no fear of God?

        • You are still confusing people who twist scripture as meaning no one should read scripture – there will always be people who twist scripture but no where in the Bible will you find a single prohibition of reading scripture but it is always commanded that we read scripture – and to think you can read any writings without interpreting them in one’s mind is ludicrous.
          Listen to what Jesus says to the churches in Asia. These were seven churches founded by the apostles and their delegates. They were corrected by Jesus in different ways. The 7 letters were not written to Rome.
          The only way scripture interpretation differences were solved by church fathers was by reference to the scriptures as you can see in their writings.
          I mean how could you correct John Paul II on his pantheistic worship practices other than by reference to scripture which calls it an abomination.

          The 30,000 different protestant denominations is fantasy – many have less differences than the 7 churches of Asia.
          There are probably 1000’s of different belief systems calling themselves catholic such as in demon worshipping Haiti and also spirit worship in africa . There are also hundreds of different visionary followers in the CC – seeking signs and wonders.

          You will not be able to name one chapter that prohibits interpretation by reading scriptures as the Bereans were doing.
          The scriptures are the plumbline and debate is necessary to find the true doctrine.

          • A. Charles: As usual, you are in a no man land where you don’t know enough of your own Protestant beliefs in order to even defend them coherently. The doctrine of Private Interpretation is not about normal private bible reading for spiritual growth of the knowledge, virtues and holiness (which is encouraged for all Christians). In that sense, we all “privately interpret” the text and sense of a passage but a good disciple of Christ will and must balance one’s spiritual and critical faculties in a spirit of humility and docility to Authority in the biblical prescription of “taking to the church” in “obedience of faith” in submitting our interpretations to the judgment of the teaching Church as commanded by our Lord. It’s not about individuals running amok with a divisive and factious spirit of unbridled private interpretation in stark contradiction to defined Christian doctrines and direct affront to Christ’s Church.

            Don’t be a corinthianized Christian: “I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment” (1 Cor 1:10).

            • The Corinthian church was one of seven major churches in Asia which had many differences and some faults – thats why there was seven letters to them individually and not one letter to Rome at that time.
              Paul wanted unity but never at the price of true doctrine such as the acceptance of syncretistic pantheism that started in the CC after 1958. The hierarchy would not listen to the catholic Berean’s .
              The keys of salvation in scripture are easy even for a child to understand and can be found in the bible. So even your own church doctors preached against following heresy even by a Pope.

              • Who are you siding with, all the corinthianized distractors and dissentors or the faithful Christians who follow Christ’s commandment to “obey” in obedience of faith to the Church? There were corinthianized Christians in all ages of the Church, and they will always be a faction of them until Christ’s return. The question is, as Christ would put so succinctly, will there be faith on the earth when He returns in glory. It is to Peter (and his successors) only whom Christ has entrusted to “tend (his) lamb and feed (his) sheep” and to whom only Christ prayed that his faith will never fail and to confirm his brethren (Lk 22:32). I will rather put my faith on Christ and His promises than to all the malcontents and recalcitrants in the Church.

                • But who are the true church ? – the most commended was the Philadelphian church which had a clean report card – it was not the Roman church. So we can see that the promises to Peter were in action in this church which is even promised to escape all the judgements in the last days.

                  • You should go straight to the gospel in the only place where “church” is mentioned. The true church is the one (and there is only “one”) which Christ established personally in Matt 16:18: “You are Kepha (Rock-Peter) and upon this kepha (rock-peter) I will build my church, and the the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of kingdom of heaven …” Christ did not lie and the Church did not go into apostasy in 1958 since Christ promised that it would survive in spite of all the doom and nay sayers of the far leftists and ultra-traditionalist faction … You seem to have bought into all the anti-Catholic literature put out by the enemies of Christ uncritically. If you want to be Protestant, then be a good holy Protestant. If you want to remain Catholic, you owe your honesty, integrity and obedience to an authoritative Church on earth established by Christ. And until you take Christ at His words, you will never find peace and rest in your heart, Charles.

                    • So are you saying that the 7 churches in Asia do not have Peter’s promises as well. It is your own CC’s sedevacantists that say the the Popes were in error – not protestants.
                      If you believe that Jesus is the only way to heaven but also believe what John Paul says about buddists hindoos spiritists and moslems etc
                      can get there without Jesus then we have a problem.

                      The prophets predicted apostasy and a great delusion which is so cunning it can deceive the elect.

                    • A Charles: Indeed, there’s always apostasy of individual or groups of Christians who delude themselves into thinking that they can put private interpretations above Christ and his Church thus making themselves like gods.

                      As far as the salvation of non-Christians, Pope JP 2 was simply being scriptural by Rom 2:14-16 which states: “When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. Pope JP 2 nor the Church did not ever say that non-Christians would get to heaven without Christ. But that as all God’s children, we all merit the infinite mercy of God by Christ whether directly or indirectly. A pagan may not have the knowledge of Christ through no fault of his own (living in a remote jungle with no contact with the outside world thus not evangelized by the gospel message yet) but this fact will not change the reality that Christ died and has reconciled man to God. God has no partiality. Thus Christians and righteous pagans will enter heaven via Christ. The mystery of how God does it is no concern of us. We just have to be mindful that there is no automatic pass for Christians on Judgment Day, that Christ does not ask if a person had recited a sinner prayer at one point of time but if we do the will of the Father by taking care of all God’s children who are poor, sick and visiting those in prisons. This standard is for Christians and non-Christians alike. In fact, the bible is quite plain in saying that Christians will be judge even harsher because they claim to know the truths. Let’s not neglect to evangelize to non-Christians through preaching and by our actions and deeds. Let’s not scandalize Christ to the world by our division and disunity.

  3. Dear Steve,
    You are correct that we could just accept that Peter and all the apostles were married as well as priests for decades. But that does not change anything. No one is obliged to be married. You are not relegated to a lower class if you are not married. Marriage is a gift and a sacrament.

    But whether all the first century priests were married or not changes nothing. As I said in my post a celibate priesthood has practical benefits but spiritual ones as well. Our priests, when performing our sacraments are in Persona Christi (stand ins for Jesus). Jesus was not married so our priests more closely imitate Jesus when celibate than when married. Also, our celibate priests point us toward Heaven where no one is married or given in marriage.

    In addition to this, in Persona Christi, the priest has the Church as his bride and fathers children of faith, just like St. Paul. (this also has implications as to why women cannot be priests)

    The Catholic Church does NOT FORBID MARRIAGE. Neither does the Church command that everyone MUST BE MARRIED. No one has a right to be married and no one has a right to be a priest. The Church has the right to make the rules governing the faithful as long as they are in union with Scripture and the Teaching of the Apostles. In order to be a Catholic priest there are rules and qualifications just like to be a doctor there are rules and qualifications. People can then chose to fulfill them or not. No one is forbidden to marry.

    There is no scripture that forbids celibacy on the part of anyone. In fact everyone who is not married is supposed to be celibate. So she chooses her priests from those who are willing to give up marriage and family for Christ.

    Let’s take a look at the scriptures you mentioned.

    I Corinthians 7 It is well for a man not to touch a woman. 2 But because of the temptation to immorality, each man should have his own wife … 6 I say this by way of concession, not of command. 7 I wish that all were as I myself am. (unmarried)

    8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do….

    25 Now concerning the unmarried, … I give my opinion as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy. 26 I think that in view of the present distress it is well for a person to remain as he is. 27 Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be free. Are you free from a wife? Do not seek marriage. 28…. Yet those who marry will have worldly troubles, and I would spare you that. 29 I mean, brethren, the appointed time has grown very short; from now on, let those who have wives live as though they had none,

    32 I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; 33 but the married man is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, 34 and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman or girl[f] is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit; but the married woman is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please her husband. 35 I say this for your own benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion to the Lord….

    37 But whoever is firmly established in his heart, being under no necessity but having his desire under control, and has determined this in his heart, to keep her as his betrothed, he will do well. 38 So that he who marries his betrothed does well; and he who refrains from marriage will do better.

    39 …If the husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord. 40 But in my judgment she is happier if she remains as she is.

    According to this passage of Scripture St. Paul definely favors celibacy over marriage but advocates marriage for those who cannot control their passions etc. So marriage is fine but celibacy is better according to Paul.

    1 Timothy 3:1 The saying is sure: If any one aspires to the office of bishop, he desires a noble task. 2 Now a bishop must be above reproach, the husband of one wife,

    Titus 1:5 This is why I left you in Crete, that you might amend what was defective, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you, 6 if any man is blameless, the husband of one wife,

    These two passages could be interpreted to mean that bishops and elders MUST be married but it does not actually say that. What it does say is that a bishop or elder may not have more than one wife. So, at the time this was written it is obvious that many priests were married. But as I said before celibacy is only a discipline for priests. Marriage for everyone else is perfectly fine.

    Steve: I would argue, and with Scripture to back me, that some men may serve Him better single, but there are those who do much better if they are married.

    BFHU: Paul says they do better to marry if they cannot control their passions. He clearly says that the unmarried can serve Christ with undivided devotion and he who refrains from marriage will do better. I think you have clearly contradicted Scripture.

  4. Charles, Our Father loves everyone, even Buddhists, Hindus, Spiritists, and Muslims. John Paul II never taught that they all WILL go to Heaven but that they MAY according to the merciful judgement of God. Our very best chance at Heaven comes with the teaching and sacraments of the Catholic Church but God and God alone will decide who goes to Heaven.

    Do you think that all of the Indians on the American Continent who lived before any Christian missionaries arrived will go to Hell? or the Chinese? or the Europeans? or the Africans?

    Do you think that all the people who lived after Christ’s advent and resurrection, but who could not read or afford a $20,000 Bible, before the printing press was invented, are going to Hell also?

    Do you think that the 20% of people living today who cannot read are going to Hell?

    Do you think only Christians will go to Heaven? If so, which ones?

    Thank you for the verses in my response to my question about where does scripture command that we read the Bible.

    Jn 2:3-5 says contains NO COMMAND TO READ SCRIPTURE. Your interpretation attempts to understand it this way but one may find out how to “walk as He walked” and obey His commands by being taught orally.

    Jn 2:3-5 And by this we may be sure that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 He who says “I know him” but disobeys his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him; 5 but whoever keeps his word, in him truly love for God is perfected. By this we may be sure that we are in him: 6 he who says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.

    So, lets look at your next verse:

    “And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual” (1 Corinthians 2:13)

    Again, I see no command to READ Scripture in this verse either. Attaching you “own interpretation” and asserting it is as true as Scripture is NOT Sola Scriptura. It is authoritarian. On what ground am I to be convinced that you interpretation is infallible?

    Now on to the next scripture.

    Deuteronomy 6:4-9, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.”

    Again, there is NO COMMANDMENT to READ scripture. I see a command to love God. I see we are commanded to teach our children diligently. Could anyone have the whole Bible ON their hand, between their eyes, and on the doorpost of their house? Do you? There is absolutely nothing about reading scripture b/c God knew everyone did not have their personal copy of the OT Scriptures.

    As regards the Bereans it is true that they examined the scriptures daily and tested the teaching of what Paul taught. And testing a new teaching with a known authority is much more noble than trying to kill a person b/c you did like what they said with no concern for examining it to see if perhaps they were right and you were wrong. Yes they used the scriptures and this is still a good idea but once again and finally there actually is NO COMMAND TO READ scripture.

    This would have been impossible for the Jews and for everyone for millennia afterwards. God DOES NOT COMMAND THE IMPOSSIBLE.

  5. BFHU:”However, the Church founded by Jesus is the Catholic Chruch, still going strong and with doctrine and sacraments in perfect alignment with Sacred Scripture.”

    BFHU:”Marriage is a gift and a sacrament.”

    BFHU:”Our priests, when performing our sacraments are in Persona Christi (stand ins for Jesus).”

    BFHU:”Our very best chance at Heaven comes with the teaching and sacraments of the Catholic Church but God and God alone will decide who goes to Heaven.”

    BFHU:”Marriage has always been between a man and a woman ONLY. However the Catholic Church does not have a Dogma on this, promulgated by a Church Council b/c everyone knew and accepted this. There was no confusion.”

    So, there’s no dogma associated with the establishment of sacraments? To me, your sacrament of marriage would be more than enough to cover the issue of marriage between a man and a woman.

    But, sacraments are in “perfect alignment with Sacred Scripture” as doctrine of the Roman-Catholic Church? If doctrine defines the sacraments, for which marriage is one in the case of the Roman-Catholic Church, then the issue of marriage is elevated above any discipline of the Church.

    • Daniel: So, there’s no dogma associated with the establishment of sacraments?

      BFHU: I didn’t say that. Marriage is a sacrament but as far as I know, there is no Dogma defined by a Church Council that marriage is between one man and one woman.

      Daniel: To me, your sacrament of marriage would be more than enough to cover the issue of marriage between a man and a woman.

      BFHU: Perhaps it is.

      Daniel: But, sacraments are in “perfect alignment with Sacred Scripture” as doctrine of the Roman-Catholic Church? If doctrine defines the sacraments, for which marriage is one in the case of the Roman-Catholic Church, then the issue of marriage is elevated above any discipline of the Church.

      BFHU:Absolutely! Sacraments do not change. Disciplines may change.Doctrine does not change. Pious practices may change. Dogmas do not change. Prayers may change, etc.

      Daniel:So, St. Paul “definitely” prefers the discipline of celibacy to be practiced above and beyond the doctrinal sacrament of marriage? After all, as a sacrament, marriage is “our very best chance at Heaven comes with the teaching and sacraments”, for which marriage is one.

      BFHU: What do you think? How do you read St. Paul? We don’t need to partake of all the sacraments. An unmarried person may partake of 2 one-time sacraments and 3 repeatable sacraments. That is more than enough grace, especially if celibacy allows one undivided devotion to God.

      Daniel:So, is the Roman-Catholic Church saying discipline supersedes the establishment of doctrinal sacraments?

      BFHU: Absolutely not.

      Daniel:So, the “very best chance at Heaven comes with the teaching and sacraments”, for married priest, because they participate in the actual sacrament itself; whereby bishops are of lower rank, because they lack such a sacrament, by being unmarried?

      BFHU: Marriage and priesthood is generally a one-time sacrament. But a person can receive communion daily and the sacrament of confession weekly. A person is not ranked by God or the church according to how many sacraments they have received. No one keeps score and this way of thinking is totally foreign to the Catholic Faith. Sacraments give us grace according to our disposition at the time.

  6. BFHU:”So, at the time this was written it is obvious that many priests were married. But as I said before celibacy is only a discipline for priests. Marriage for everyone else is perfectly fine.”

    BFHU:”According to this passage of Scripture (1 Cor. 7) St. Paul definely favors celibacy over marriage but advocates marriage for those who cannot control their passions etc. So marriage is fine but celibacy is better according to Paul.”

    BFHU:”There is no scripture that forbids celibacy on the part of anyone. In fact everyone who is not married is supposed to be celibate.”

    BFHU:”But you will be happy to know that Celibacy is also not a Doctrine. It too is a discipline/practice of the the Church.”

    BFHU:”Our very best chance at Heaven comes with the teaching and sacraments of the Catholic Church but God and God alone will decide who goes to Heaven.”

    BFHU:”And probably like the Eastern Orthodox Churches, who also with married priests, the married priests cannot be considered for the office of bishop. ”

    So, St. Paul “definitely” prefers the discipline of celibacy to be practiced above and beyond the doctrinal sacrament of marriage? After all, as a sacrament, marriage is “our very best chance at Heaven comes with the teaching and sacraments”, for which marriage is one.

    So, is the Roman-Catholic Church saying discipline supersedes the establishment of doctrinal sacraments?

    So, the “very best chance at Heaven comes with the teaching and sacraments”, for married priest, because they participate in the actual sacrament itself; whereby bishops are of lower rank, because they lack such a sacrament, by being unmarried?

  7. The Bishop of Paris, and scholastic theologian Petrus Lombardus, a magister of dogmatic theology at Notre Dame, authored The Sentences. The Scholastics believed it’s necessary to integrate philosophy into theology in order to deal with Biblical contradictions.

    circa AD 1150, (Libri Quattuor Sententiarum) The Sentences:
    The Sentences, Book One: The Mystery of the Trinity
    The Sentences, Book Two: On Creation
    The Sentences, Book Three: On the Incarnation of the Word
    The Sentences, Book Four: The Doctrine of Signs

    The Roman-Catholic Church has bounced between 2 and 12 rites as being sacramental. It wasn’t until The Sentences, Book Four: The Doctrine of Signs was published that the fixed number of Seven Sacraments became universally accepted in Western Christendom. The 16th century, Council of Trent codified Seven Sacraments in its Tridentine Creed “A Sacrament is a visible sign of an invisible grace”.

    Martin Luther completed his Doctorate from “The Sentences” in 1512. In 1517, Augustinian theologian and professor, Martin Luther, Doctor of Catholicism, wrote a “Disputation Against Scholastic Theology”, which is sometimes better known as the 97 Theses. Not to be confused with the October 31st, 1517, 95 Theses, which appeared 7-months after Pope Leo X initiated the Protestant Reformation, on March 16th, 1517.

  8. C Allan: You haven’t been paying attention in your religious formation classes. Christ the Logos is Eternal God, who was at the beginning when the word of creation was spoken, and is eternally present in the Eucharistic Mystery, in his Church who acts as his mouthpiece, in all the anonymous faces encountered in all the spiritual and corporal works of mercy performed by Christian people in his Name, et cetera, et cetera. The Bible, albeit a very special library of inspired books, is not Eternal God Logos, the Second Person in the Holy Trinity. We should never put God in a box set of books, or risk committing serious idolatry or bibliolatry. I think that you really need to think through this with some critical and crucial distinctions.

    • I think you need to read what the bible says about God’s WORD and believe it. Jesus is the WORD made flesh. God Himself says HE will exalt his WORD above His Name. Why cant you get the scriptures I am giving you. It is the LIVING WORD OF GOD.
      The Catholics do put Jesus (the bread) in a box.
      You cannot commit bibliolatry by reading the Bible – God is always pleased when we read his Word and perform it.

      A Christian following what you imply would be frightened to read the bible – the most important book in the universe. Christianity started with the scriptures which Jesus and the rest of the pious Jews would have known by heart. You ignore scriptures by your “critical and crucial distinctions” ??? It is as plain as day.
      “Man cannot live by bread alone but by EVERY WORD that proceedeth from the mouth of God” = the whole bible.

      • @charles allan, Catholics do revere the Word of God as well as the Word of God Made Flesh – if you actually took the time to learn about the Mass instead of just what others have told you about it, it would be obvious but trying to show you is casting pearls as you only seek to trample everything we say under your feet. Even if everything you believe about Catholicism were true, St Paul would clearly not approve of your “outreach”.

        I have known many God-fearing Christians who were not Catholic but tried to live by the Bible as honestly as a person can without someone to interpret it for them [Acts 8:26-40] – they do not sound at all like you – they are more humble and virtuous than average, living examples of the fruit of the Spirit; whereas you are arrogant and judgmentally critical, approaching others with an argumentative spirit, uncharitably uninterested in giving others a fair hearing to find out where they are coming from – so even within your own limited ability to understand Scripture because you have made yourself your own infallible authority, you are not following the Word of God as a Christian should.

        Did you not notice that when the Ethiopian eunuch referenced in my 2nd paragraph said ‘how can I [understand Scripture] without someone to interpret for me?’, Philip did not respond, “pray to the Holy Spirit to enlighten you as He did for us”? No, Philip instead passed on the teaching & the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit granted to the Apostles – so given that Catholicism is built on that (and the New Testament as well), our passing on the Apostolic teaching of God’s Word is very much Scriptural — whereas you cannot find a single person in the New Testament that follows your man-made approach.

        You can in Numbers 16 [Korah’s rebellion referenced as a warning against same in Jude 1:11] and the Book of Judges [Judges 21:25], though…

        • You and Surkiko are the Pharisees here – putting words in my mouth and using straw men to pretend things which I do not say or attitudes which I have not had.

          You are arguing with what God says since I base the things I say on scripture. There is nothing wrong with someone interpreting scripture especially to a new believer – but the focus is scripture not man’s thoughts .
          The Ethiopian was reading Isaiah maybe for the first time.

          Since the CC is now saying that there is many roads to God eg through Hindoo , Islam , Voodoo and all sorts of Pantheism then this is certainly not scriptural – but heresy since the only road to God is the narrow way of following Jesus – and the most logical way of doing this is to study the Bible more than 5 minutes a week.
          But since you cannot argue with the little scripture I have given you the debate is diverted such as “man made approach” – the approach I am using is from scripture which all debate must be focused on .
          It is you and Surkiko that are using man made approaches to argue with scripture.

          • 1. I have not put any words into your mouth – I faulted you for your un-Scriptural, un-Christian lack of virtue.

            2. Your 2nd paragraph offers no Scriptural proof whatsoever, just your very human opinions regarding Scripture – while ignoring St Jude’s very Scriptural warning following in Korah’s footsteps, and the fact that Jesus ushers in the New Davidic Kingdom – while you insist that we should instead return to the time of the Judges.

            3. Provide the reference (an official teaching as opposed to Jack Chick or Dave Hunt or some other anti-catholic pope) by which you accuse the Church of saying all roads (religions) lead to God.

            I have not read everything you wrote to surkiko, but you have given me no Scripture to argue with – just a lot of your personal opinions about Scripture.

            Apparently, you in your wisdom have decided that God has condemned the illiterate, the mentally disabled and the time challenged – only the Scripture scholars will be saved. What is the amount of time one must spend studying Scripture in order to be saved? How much must one know? Stop giving your words – give us the answers from God’s Word.

            Bonus questions:
            What is the Church’s teaching on the study of Scripture?
            Hint: Who was it who said that “Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ”?

            • “Ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ” – It was St Jerome – I have posted this repeatedly on this site – so you dont read other posts.

              “What have I said that demonstrates my lack of virtue.” ?

              Your 2nd paragraph is incomprehensible in the light of what I said.

              I dont want to fill up the site with heresies from CC leaders – the web is full of them – ON CC websites. So here is just one :-

              Pope again endorses “Spirit of Assisi” heresy of relativism
              Pope Benedict XVI has sent his greetings to this year’s Inter-religious Gathering of Prayer for World Peace, held at Mount Hiel, in Japan. The Pontiff noted that the meeting evokes “the spirit of the 1986 historic meeting in Assisi” convened by Pope John Paul II.

              The Pope expressed confidence that the meeting would produce positive results for “inter-religious amity”, which is a Vatican code-phrase for the false ecumenism condemned by Archbishop Lefebvre and others who hold to the traditional Catholic Faith. Properly understood, the “spirit of Assisi” is an expression of relativism — the heretical notion that one religion is as good as another, because all roads lead to God.

              Relativism (or indifferentism) is a form or subset of the heresy of modernism, condemned in 1907 in the syllabus Lamentabili sane exitu, which distinguished sixty-five propositions as modernist heresies. In the same year Pope Saint Pius X promulgated the encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis. This was followed in 1910 by the introduction of an anti-Modernist oath to be taken by all Catholic bishops, priests and academic teachers of religion. Presumably Pope Ratzinger took this oath, but perhaps he has forgotten it.

              Writing in Catholic Family News, John Vennari comments:
              The new ecumenical orientation, such as manifested in the “Spirit of Assisi” threatens the salvation of countless souls, as it effectively tells non-Catholics to remain in the darkness of their false religions. It also threatens to bring with it a great chastisement.

              In the early 20th Century, the eminent European churchman Cardinal Mercier, citing the consistent teaching of the Popes, stated that the Great War was actually a punishment for the crime of nations placing the one True Religion on the same level as false creeds, as does the “Spirit of Assisi”.

              The photographs say it all on many catholic websites

              If you ever read my posts I do not consider myself righteous and I hope I would have never rebelled against Moses had I lived in that era.

              Your capitals in par 12 have been made up by you – you are trying to make out that if you study scripture you will end up self righteous by default – this is nonsense as you are posting against yourself in your St Jerome quote.
              The scriptures I quote are easily understood and cannot be misinterpreted as to mean we should not read the bible constantly.
              I dont even need to give my interpretation they are as plain as the day.

  9. C Allan: As you wish, you can put your bible in the high altar and worship the book to your heart’s content. You take care. Bye.

    • No I wont – the bible is to be read – since it is the WORD OF GOD – although the WORD is to be worshiped the way this is to be done is to read it and perform its commandments – not worshiped as a dead statue of plaster.
      “I will exalt MY WORD above MY NAME” ….God

      Why do you argue with what God says ?

      • Scripture itself makes it clear that God’s Word was referring to Jesus the Word of God. One of the most notable qualities of a true Christian is humility. How incredibly arrogant to claim that your interpretation of God’s Word is what God says (since it is your understanding of Scripture we are arguing with not Scripture itself).

        Luke 18
        [9] He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous and despised others:
        [10] “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector.
        [11] The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, `God, I thank thee that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like [THESE CATHOLICS]
        [12] I fast twice a week, I give tithes of all that I get.’ [I STUDY SCRIPTURE MORE THAN THOSE PEOPLE EVEN THOUGH I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THEY STUDY & IN FACT KNOW NOTHING BUT OLD ANTI-CATHOLIC CANARDS ABOUT THEM & HAVE MADE NO EFFORT WHATSOEVER TO TRY TO LEARN ABOUT THEM FROM THEIR OWN WORDS AS OPPOSED TO THOSE OF THEIR OPPONENTS]
        [13] But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, `God, be merciful to me a sinner!’
        [14] I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for every one who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

        • Nothing you have said relates to anything I have said. If you ever read my posts you will see that but you prefer to be the very things that you are posting against.
          Can you give any back up to what you are saying – I was promoting bible study by using scripture – I have already answered about the illiterate etc but you are so eager to condemn me and my motives that you dont read my posts about my wasted christian walk caused by not reading scripture and being a member of a worldly church which I admitted to everyone I led the worldly practices.
          I notice that you always use scripture to reply to other debaters but then you display the anti scripture policy – you need the humility that you propound.

          • On the contrary, I have directly responded to your words. Nor should you expect me to go back and read all your posts to others – first, it’s not your blog & I don’t come here to seek out your writing; second, wordpress’s comment section is not particularly visually agreeable for longer exchanges; third, I’ve only been seeing what recently showed up in my inbox & it was more than enough to see that you’re just another echo from a very old anti-catholic canyon – there is nothing new under that sun; fourth, my posts discuss issues that you were not discussing with surkiko.

            Eager to condemn you? How much more ironic can this get? You’re the one who is posting here about the evils of Catholicism (while refusing to listen to what Catholics actually believe).

            Now, since you’re the one claiming that you speak for the Holy Spirit and that you know Scripture better than us – not me – the onus is on you, not me. I’m just challenging you to walk the walk that you talk.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 305 other followers

%d bloggers like this: