Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Vanity of Their Minds: Sola Scriptura
www.archangelsbooks.com ^ | Fr. John Whiteford

Posted on 10/04/2005 7:51:36 PM PDT by JohnRoss

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-188 next last
To: Gamecock

Context. Context. Context. The Council of Trent ended in 1563. It was largely a response to the *first generation* and early *second generation* of Protestantism. No Protestant of the time could possibly plead "invincible ignorance" about Catholicism, the debates were ubiquitous and all-consuming. Millions of Catholics still existed in now-Protestant lands as witnesses to the true Faith, and they were a living sign of contradiction that no Protestant could yet ignore.

Hundreds of years and dozens of generations later, we don't have a living *first generation* of Protestants who made a conscious choice to rebel against the Church. Nearly all adherents of the various Protestant denominations have had family ties to them for many generations. They have developed self-contained theologies that ignore or are not even aware of the Catholic patrimony of their more diatant ancestors. Such people *do* labor, in many, many cases, under the "invincible ignorance" that Pius IX spoke about.

God is not a monster who condemns people for things they have not reasonable expectation of knowing. The Church knows this, and it does not anathematize modern Protestants who are so long cut off from the true Church that they don't realize their error.

I should point out, however, two qualifiers to this. For a catechized Catholic to renounce his or her Faith in favor of anything else (including any variety of Protestantism), and subsequently to die in this state of affairs, is courting spiritual disaster. They are in no different position here than the original "Reformers," all of whom were once Catholic. The other qualifier involves any non-Catholic, today or in any other time, who, knowing the truth of the Catholic Faith, refuses to embrace it.

God *may* cut a lot of slack to non-Catholic Christians (and, by virtue of their baptisms, the Church acknowledges that they ARE Christians, believe it or not!) who labor in His vineyard even while handicapped, but only to the extent that their consciences truly tell them the Catholic Church is false. The Church, which teaches in truth, is the Body of Christ; indeed, the Truth IS Christ, and its fullness cannot be renounced consciously without consequences.

All of this is not just some academic exercise. Unity in faith was quite evidently important to Jesus. On the night He was betrayed, doubtless somewhat preoccupied with facing a heinous death that He already knew the full scope of and dealing with the human fear that engendered, He managed to focus His prayer to His Father on the unity of faith His followers should have. "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me." (John 17:20-21, but read the whole chapter in context.)


161 posted on 10/06/2005 6:58:27 AM PDT by magisterium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: TheClintons-STILLAnti-American
My mother-in-law, a lifelong devoted Catholic who began reading the Bible for herself in the last years before her death, and came to a saving knowledge of Christ, was hurt and perplexed because she had been discouraged...told that Bible interpretation would be done for her...from reading the Bible for herself.

I am a lifelong Catholic and no one has ever discouraged me from Bible reading. We have three readings from the Bible every Sunday. The church ought to maintain the authority of interpretation because the alternative is sectarianism (which Jesus didn't seem too crazy about) and folks believing that their sin ain't really sin, i.e. homosexuals. The church was given the authority by Christ to state authoritavely what is canon and what is not.

162 posted on 10/06/2005 7:03:12 AM PDT by TradicalRC (Benedicamus Domino.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: magisterium
If it is no longer valid, what would it hurt to say we have rescinded the teaching?

Other "doctrines" have been tossed out, why is that still on the books?
163 posted on 10/06/2005 7:04:16 AM PDT by Gamecock (Crystal meth is not a fruit of the Spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
Likewise, any authority that the Roman Catholic Church or any other Church would have would derive from Scripture. Any authority usurped from outside the authority of Scripture would be invalid.

The authority of the Church comes from Scripture. The Catholic Church gave us the canon of Scripture, Martin Luther came up with the abridged edition which most protestants are familiar with. Here's some questions I would like answered: By what authority could Luther claim to determine canon? And if he could determine canon, what's to stop anyone from adding or subtracting whatever books they like? Why should people be allowed to determine which books they will recognize as Scripture?

164 posted on 10/06/2005 7:10:42 AM PDT by TradicalRC (Benedicamus Domino.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

What would be the need? Anyone sufficiently interested in feeling persecuted by the Catholic Church to dig-up the verbiage of a 440-year-old Ecumenical Council can certainly dig-up more modern slants on the same themes.

There have been 21 Ecumenical Councils in Church history. Every one of them has disciplinary canons that have been superseded once, twice or more. The only aspects of these councils that the Church considers infallible involve doctrine. The doctrines cited in the canons you bring-up are infallible. Those doctrines are still in force. But the canons you cite, while mentioning a doctrinal point in each, are actually disciplinary, since their whole purpose is to anathematize. But those circumstances active in 1563 no longer apply in the same way today. The Church does not rewrite history and edit Council documents. The Church's teaching is clear enough through subsequent pronouncements that revisionist history is not needed.


165 posted on 10/06/2005 7:17:34 AM PDT by magisterium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
I merely pointed out that there are some 300 Catholic sectlets out there.

Right. It seems to me that you define different orders such as Franciscan or Dominican as a "sectlet", whatever that is. Truth is they are all part of the One Holy and Apostolic Church. They are either in the Catholic Church or they are not.

Protestants on the other hand do not have a Protestant Church, they have Many Protestant Churches with many different Sects. As to the number, I have not read anything that seems authoritavely conclusive.

I find it funny that many Protestants bristle at the word protestant the same way liberals bristle at the word liberal. So much so that they deny the "label".

166 posted on 10/06/2005 7:20:46 AM PDT by TradicalRC (Benedicamus Domino.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
The hundreds of Catholic churches who claim to be the true Church.

There is only one Catholic Church. One and only one.

167 posted on 10/06/2005 7:36:28 AM PDT by Sam the Sham (A conservative party tough on illegal immigration could carry California in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: TradicalRC

Who's bristling at the term Protestant? I wear it proudly.

As far as the Catholic Sectlets, I'm no talking about the Orders (thougt if you were being totally honest, you would admit that many of the Protestant demoninations would qualify as one)

I'm talking about:

Catholic Apostolic Church in North America (CACINA)
Liberal Catholic Church
One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church
Holy Catholic Church - Western Rite

And others, some of which have their own Pope.


168 posted on 10/06/2005 7:41:29 AM PDT by Gamecock (Crystal meth is not a fruit of the Spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

Just because these tiny churches call themselves Catholic doesn't make them so. They are schismatics and are outside of the Catholic Church. Most of them have more bishops than faithful anyways.

Also, they don't have their own popes because they reject papal authority.


169 posted on 10/06/2005 7:52:33 AM PDT by JohnRoss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: .30Carbine

I sincerely doubt the pope was endorsing your sort of pseudo-Biblicism. We define things considerably different than you do.


170 posted on 10/06/2005 7:59:04 AM PDT by JohnRoss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
"Jesus appealed to scripture as his authority."

Jesus' authority was innate, not derived from Scripture. He is God, Scripture does not reside above God.

171 posted on 10/06/2005 8:23:02 AM PDT by Romish_Papist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD
"...as well as Protestants albeit probably not as many."

Not as many???? There are less than 30 churches that fall under the authority of the Pope. There are some 30,000 varying Protestant groups. At leats be accurate with your assertions.

172 posted on 10/06/2005 8:32:36 AM PDT by Romish_Papist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: JohnRoss

What ever you say.


173 posted on 10/06/2005 8:44:28 AM PDT by Gamecock (Crystal meth is not a fruit of the Spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: JohnRoss

What ever you say.


174 posted on 10/06/2005 8:44:36 AM PDT by Gamecock (Crystal meth is not a fruit of the Spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: bondserv

Interesting quotes, except that ours are NOT traditions of men.


175 posted on 10/06/2005 10:22:56 AM PDT by Romish_Papist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Lord_Calvinus
"We upheld that God gave us the word and that the church derived it's authority from the Bible."

The Church was founded by Christ, not the Bible. The Church therefore derives it's authority from Christ, not the Bible. You upheld an error.

176 posted on 10/06/2005 10:24:41 AM PDT by Romish_Papist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
Who's bristling at the term Protestant? I wear it proudly.

Good, I like that. Protestants that are evangalical in nature or belong to a denomination called "non-denominational" are the ones that either bristle at the term or simply do not know that they are protestant. (in my experience).

As far as the Catholic Sectlets, I'm no talking about the Orders (thougt if you were being totally honest, you would admit that many of the Protestant demoninations would qualify as one)

I agree, I'm not going to count every church as a separate sect, I would limit it to doctrinal differences before I would recognize it as a separate sect. That is why I steered clear of the number factor, I have not seen a list of the various sects and why they qualify as being in a distinct sect. As untarians were considered protestant at one point, (they certainly came out of protestantism,)but they are barely Christian, if at all. They could call themselves protestant, but as they no longer even profess Christ or the unique status of Scripture, why bother? The point being that I could decide that I am the Pope and call myself Catholic but it ain't necessarily so.

177 posted on 10/06/2005 10:38:07 AM PDT by TradicalRC (Benedicamus Domino.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
I tried to make my way through the long, long diatribe of Fr.John Whiteford but kept being interrupted by the Holy Spirit, who was reminding me that it is He who instructs through the means of the Word and we can trust Him to speak the truth to those He has called. He is the Author and Finisher of our faith.

Where can truth be found? Only the bible is incapable of error in defining doctrines touching faith or morals. The Word of God is incapable of misleading, deceiving, or disappointing unlike institutions of men.

Why do men believe that other men put together the canon of Scripture? If holy men of God were moved by the Holy Spirit to write, wouldn't the same Holy Spirit preserve that Word?

Fr.Whiteford discounts the "invisible church", and that, it seems to me, pushes the Holy Spirit to one side and subordinates His work to the institution of the Orthodox church.

178 posted on 10/06/2005 11:47:28 AM PDT by suzyjaruki (The husband was and still is the head of the wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Romish_Papist; Dr. Eckleburg; Gamecock; HarleyD

***The Church was founded by Christ, not the Bible. The Church therefore derives it's authority from Christ, not the Bible. You upheld an error.***

I find your implication that to derive authority from the Word of God is not the same as deriving authority from the one who gave that Word rather disturbing.

I know that, according to Catholics, the ultimate authority on earth is an old man sitting in a chair. You are free to believe that. As for we Reformers:

No king but Christ.


179 posted on 10/06/2005 3:10:18 PM PDT by Lord_Calvinus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: ByGraceThroughFaith

Anyone who is following a religion has got it all wrong from the get go.

And I say this as a Christian.


180 posted on 10/06/2005 3:49:53 PM PDT by k2blader (Hic sunt dracones..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-188 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson