Posted on 10/31/2010 6:58:53 AM PDT by RnMomof7
I am not a Lutheran but I hold Martin Luther in great respect, it is always a trial to go against any authority ... I too am praying for pro life, pro family and pro religious freedom election .
SS does not mean Solo Scriptura, but that all that it provides for, including the magisterium, are subject to the Scriptures.
And what is found in Scripture is
That the word of God was progressively written down Scripture and became the authority that new revelation as well as doctrine was examined by.
That the instruments and stewards of the Scriptures are to be subject to it.
That when men assumed to teach for doctrines the commandments of men, they were reproved by the Scriptures.
That is was Scriptural faith that the church exists by and overcomes.
That the authenticity of the church is based upon upon Scriptural; faith, not a claim to formal historical lineage.
That the church is grounded in and supportive of the truth, but nowhere is it stated that all the teaching office will teach will be infallible, based upon their formulaic declaration.
That the Lord invoked the Scriptures to correct false doctrine as well as establish that He was the Messiah and work, and that the N.T. teaching was grounded in the Scriptures.
That noble souls examined the preaching of the very apostles by the Scriptures.
That the Scriptures are the only objective authority that is affirmed to be 100% inspired by God.
That the Scriptures are able to make one wise to salvation and "perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."
See http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Sola_Scriptura.html for texts and more. Thanks be to God.
OK, so Sola Scriptura doesn't mean Sola Scriptura, riiiiiiigghht. Can you elaborate on what the definition of is is?
While there is not universally precise statement as to what SS means (nor is there an infallible list of all infallible defined texts, but which are few) it basically entails what i said, that the Scriptures are the supreme and only infallible authority for doctrine, versus “sola ecclesia,” which places an assuredly infallible magisterium as supreme.
In addition, the Scriptures, being able to make the wise unto salvation, are normally formally sufficient for that, so one could read a sermon in Acts and be saved, and that the Scriptures also materially provide for the teaching office, and for God “speaking” to a believers heart, as well as using secular sources, but the key is all are subject the only objective authority we have, that being the Scriptures. And which has the testimony to prove its inspiration.
The obvious problem here is that this method makes obedience subject to the qualified assent of each believer, thus promoting disunity, versus a unity by “assent of faith,” by implicit confidence in an assuredly infallible magisterium (AIM). However, unity itself is not a goal of Godliness, and division because of truth is necessary and better than unity in error. (Ex. 23:2; Lk. 12:51-53; 1Cor. 11:19) And the quality of the unity resulting from Berean type hearts and its method is greater in quality, (Acts 4:32) even if not in quantity, than that which is based upon confidence in men.
Meanwhile, it is those who do not hold the Scriptures as supreme who deviate the most from core foundational truths which SS churches contend for, or they hold to such Scripturally unwarranted doctrines such as praying to the departed.
For more see the link i posted.
Except that the Scriptures are utterly authoritative, but they are not an authority. An authority would have to be a person*, capable of an exercise of will and judgement, who could come back to you and say:
I agree with you that the Magisterium is bound by the Scriptures (so does the Magisterium), but they are bound by the Church's interpretation of the Scriptures throughout her history (= tradition), not by my own or any individual's understanding of them.
*I'm using the word "person" in the metaphysical sense, not as a synonym for "human being". God is a person (in fact, he's Three Persons), and so He can be an authority, and in fact he is the ultimate authority.
Thank you for a serious reply. Better for me to say then that Scripture is the only objective (tangible) authoritative source which is assuredly inspired by God, so that SS supremely rests on “the authority of Holy Scriptures” and that men have not the same “authority as Scripture.”
I do know that the divine and infallible magisterium of the Church is said to rest also on the authority of Holy Scripture, but as the only assuredly infallible interpreter of it, and what its revelation consists of, the IM is effectively holding to sola ecclesia.
The question is, upon what basis is one to have assurance that the magisterium is assuredly infallible (according to its criteria), and thus cannot be wrong?
I agree 100% with what you said about our freedom to celebrate holidays. And I’m not arguing the appropriateness of the day here, obviously if you think the Reformation was a good thing for the Church you will commemorate it—that’s not hard for me to understand in the least.
My point is to ask whether the same people that get on our case about feast days are also getting on yours about Reformation Day
I should research whether the Puritans celebrated it...they were generally anti-holiday. Hmmm....
St. Paul teaches purification of the elect after death by the process similar to fire in 1 Cor. 3:9-15. The need to do penance is all over the Bible, starting with Matthew 4:17. How exactly to do penance is for the Church to decide (Mt 16:19).
I join Natural Law in his question, more precisely, where did Jesus taught that we are saved by faith alone (this is not the same as praising faith or saying that faith is necessary) or that everything that the Church should ever teach should be recorded in the yet-to-be-written New Testament?
Mind you this is a serious question that goes to the cornerstone of the Protestant error. Your confession is based on a lie. Reformation started the lie. Strange that anyone feels like celebrating.
Believe it or not, some do. Blesed are those who have the freedom to do so, and thank God for the monks and nuns. Most of us, however, have families to feed, and no, praying instead of doing the necessary work is not a Catholic virtue.
[post 39] Say there's a (hypothetical) Catholic that trusts in Christ's work through the Church to remit the eternal punishment for his sins. However, his attitude regarding temporal punishment is completely different. Far from taking advantage of indulgences to remit this punishment, he avoids them. [...] Anything wrong with this attitude? Would it be sinful?
It would be stupid, I think. The objective is to go to heaven, and the only way to get to heaven is to become a saint. If that is your desire, God will provide the way, as you live or at death. Prayers of others, when answered, are also divine will; it is stupid and serves no purpose to reject it.
Faith Alone directly from Jesus Christ Himself.
Luke 23:39-43 ESV
39 One of the criminals who were hanged railed at him, saying, “Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!” 40 But the other rebuked him, saying, “Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly, for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.” 42 And he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” 43 And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”
I’ve never heard of Purgatory described as paradise... What good work could the criminal possibly have done to aid in his single statement of Faith to earn paradise, rebuke the other criminal?
The Church does not teach that everyone goes through purgatory. Neither does the Church teach that the stay in purgatory is measurable in units of time, as the purgatorial cleansing occurs outside of time. So it was entirely possible for the Good Thief to go through purgatory and yet arrive in heaven on the same day.
It is also possible that he was ready for heaven as he died. Remember that he did everything a good Catohlic death requires: he repented of his sin, suffered for it in lifetime, did the work of mercy by defending the innocent, and asked Christ to save him. He died a good death; may we all be so lucky.
Regarding “faith alone”, where’s the chapter and verse on that? I can show you chapter end verse on the exact opposite, “not by faith alone”, James 2:24, in context.
Ephesians 2:8-9, “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.”
Oh, it is absolutely a good idea to pray at all times whether or not there is an indulgence attached to it. Whenever your mind is on it, pray. I pray the Rosary in the car, for example, on my way to work.
Regarding “taking the penalty”, it is certainly something one can celebrate. The way your worded it, it looked like you siggested to sort of turn down prayers of others, and that would go agaist God’s will. But onse any form of chastisement comes down, we should have the wisdom to offer it up to Jesus.
[4] But God, (who is rich in mercy,) for his exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, [5] Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together in Christ, (by whose grace you are saved,) [6] And hath raised us up together, and hath made us sit together in the heavenly places, through Christ Jesus. [7] That he might shew in the ages to come the abundant riches of his grace, in his bounty towards us in Christ Jesus. [8] For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God; [9] Not of works, that no man may glory. [10] For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus in good works, which God hath prepared that we should walk in them. (Eph. 2)
The passage teaches the Catholic teaching: we are saved by grace alone, which is not a result of our works. We are saved through both faith and good works, which are our response to grace. We are not saved by faith alone.
[26] ...For we know not what we should pray for as we ought; but the Spirit himself asketh for us with unspeakable groanings. [27] And he that searcheth the hearts, knoweth what the Spirit desireth; because he asketh for the saints according to God. [28] And we know that to them that love God, all things work together unto good, to such as, according to his purpose, are called to be saints (Romans 8)
may celebrate the thought that you can pay the penalty for your own sins to attain salvation
The penalty was paid by Christ. Our suffering, however, can be done in imitation of Christ for our good and the good of the Church, as it can sanctify us:
[I] now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the church (Col 1:24)
Catholics indeed part company with the Protestants, but we stay faithful to the Holy Scripture and you invent theologies not found in it, to suit your own tastes.
Never, ever do it again...
That's NOT what the Catholic Church teaches!
You are a Catholic bishop to know that?
The purgatorial suffering is not paying for any sin. It is a residual effect of a sin already confessed to and absolved by Christ.
Har.
Well, you may find it amusing, but the situation is this. The Church, after she gave you the Holy Scripture, never stopped in her teaching authority. So it is true that there are things that the Church teaches that do not have a direct description in the scripture. For example, the exact manner of worship, veneration of saints, social teaching in the modern world are all things outside of the immediate scope of the Scripture. However, if the scripture teaches something, so does the Catholic Church. Our beliefs are in harmony with the scripture. The Protestant nonsense, however, proclaims itself a consequence of the scripture alone. Yet, the foundational Protestant doctrines of Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura are themselves not in the scripture and in fact contradict it. They are traditions of men Jesus warned against. It is indeed quite comical.
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.