Posted on 06/06/2013 3:50:50 PM PDT by NYer
The words in the bible aren't visible?
It’s weird but I’m a crazy Fundie and don’t grok everything Roman Catholic I guess. All those rosaries outweighed his sins huh. Who set up this para-economy next to the Cross?
I am a small c catholic Christian, however. I believe that Christianity can be carried out in the Roman church. An earthly church doesn’t have to carry it on perfectly to be useful (i.e. they can have a LOT of problems and still function as long as there are Christians there who actually accept the spirit of Jesus directly).
Though I agree that there are genuine, born-again believers in Jesus Christ in the Roman Catholic Church, I cannot agree that REAL Christianity can be carried out in the Roman Catholic Church, at least not how it exists and rules today. I was reading a website yesterday from a former Roman Catholic who was studying in a Franciscan monastery and who planned on being ordained a priest. He converted to Orthodoxy after a long and painful study of the origins of Roman Catholicism and its history of the development of the Papacy along with the "rules" that governed how the Pope was to be obeyed by all Christians or be damned. I doubt that many Catholics have any idea how the Pope was defined and his ultimate rule was established and carried out in the past. He said:
The monarchic authority of the Pope as supreme leader and the visible head of the Church, cornerstone, Universal Infallible Teacher of the Faith, Representative (Vicar) of God on earth, shepherd of shepherds and Supreme Hierarch, `is totally dynamic and dominant and embraces all the teachings and legal rights that the Church has. "Divine right " is extended on all and individually on each baptized man across the whole world. This dictatorial authority can be exercised at any time, over anything and on any Christian across the world, whether lay or clergy, and in any church of any denomination and language it may be, in consideration of the Pope being the supreme bishop of every ecclesiastical diocese in the world.
People who refuse to recognize all this authority and do not submit blindly, are schismatic, heretic, impious and sacrilegious and their souls are already destined to eternal damnation, for it is essential for our salvation that we believe in the institution of Papism and submit to it and its representatives. This way the Pope incarnates that imaginary Leader, prophesied by Cicero, writing that all must recognize him to be holy.
Always in the roman teaching, "accepting that the Pope has the right to intervene and judge all spiritual issues of everyone and each Christian separately, that much more does he have the right to do the same in their worldly affairs. He cannot be limited to judging only through spiritual penalties, denying the eternal salvation to those who do not submit to him, but also he has the right to exercise authority over the faithful. For the Church has two knives, symbol of her spiritual and worldly power. The first of these is in the hands of the clergy, the other in the hands of Kings and soldiers, who though they too are under the will and service of the clergy".
The Pope, maintaining that he is the representative of Him whose "kingdom is not of this world", of Him who forbade the Apostles to imitate the kings of the world who "conquer the nations" and nominates himself as a worldly king, thus continuing the imperialism of Rome. At different periods he in fact had become lord over great expanses, he declared bloody wars against other Christian kings, to acquire other land expanses, or even to satisfy his thirst for more wealth and power. He owned a great number of slaves. He played a central role and many times a decisive role in political history. The duty of the Christian lords is to retreat in the face "of the divine right king" surrendering to him their kingdom and their politico-ecclesiastic throne, "that was created to ennoble and anchor all the other thrones of the world". To day the worldly capital of the pope is confined to the Vatican City. It concerns an autonomous nation with diplomatic representations in the governments of both hemispheres, with army, weapons police, jails, currency etc.
And as crown and peak of the almightiness of the Pope, he has one more faithful privilege that even the most ignoble idolaters could not even imagine- the infallible divine right, according to the dogmatic rule of the Vatican Synod that took place on 1870. Since then on "humanity ought to address to him whatever it addresses to the Lord: you have words of eternal life". From now on, there is no need of the Holy Spirit to guide the Church "to all the truth". There is no more need of the Holy Bible nor of the Sacred Tradition for thus there is a god on earth, based on the infallible, the Pope is the only canon of Truth who can even express things contrary to the judgment of all the Church, declare new dogmas, which the faithful ought to accept if they do not wish to be cut off from their salvation. "It depends only on his will and intention to deem whatever he wishes, as sacred and holy within the Church" and the decratalian letters must be deemed, believed and obeyed "as canonical epistles". Since he is an infallible Pope, he must receive blind obedience. Cardinal Bellarmine, who was declared saint by the Roman Church, says this simply: "If the Pope some day imposed sins and forbade virtues, the Church is obliged to believe that these sins are good and these virtues are bad".
However I did not stop there. I had already started to "skid due to the skid" of my Church. I had taken a road that I was not allowed to stop until I found a positive solution. The drama of those days was that I had estranged myself from Papism, but I did not accost any other ecclesiastical reality. Orthodoxy and Protestantism then were for me vague ideas and I had not reached the time and opportunity to ascertain that they could offer something to soothe my agony. Despite all this I continued to love my Church that made me a Christian and I bore her symbol. I still needed more profound thinking to reach slowly, with trouble and grief to the conclusion that the Church I loved was not part of the papist system.
Truly, against the monocracy of the Pope, the authority of the Church and of the bishopric body, is not intrinsically subordinate. Because according to the Roman theology "the authority of the Church exists only when it is characterized and harmonized by the Pope. In all other cases it is nullified". This way it is the same thing whether the Pope is with the Church or the Pope is without the Church, in other words, the Pope is everything and the Church is nothing. Very correctly did the bishop Maren write, "It would have been more accurate if the Roman Catholics when they recite the "I believe" would say "And in one Pope" instead of "And in one .......Church".
The importance and function of the bishops in the Roman Church is no more than that of representatives of the papist authority to which the bishops submit like the lay faithful. This regime they try to uphold under the 22nd chapter of St John's gospel, which according to the Roman interpretation "the Lord entrusts the Apostle Peter, the first Pope, the shepherding of His lambs and of His sheep", namely, He bestows on him the job of the Chief Shepherd with exclusive rights on all the faithful, who are the lambs and all the others, Apostles and Bishops, namely, the sheep.
However, the bishops in the Roman Church, are not even successors to the Apostles, for as it dogmatizes, this Church "the apostolic authority was lacking with the Apostles and was not passed down her successors, the bishops. Only the Papist authority of Peter, namely the Popes. The bishops then, having not inherited any apostolic authority, have no other authority but the one given to them, not directly from God but by the Extreme Pontiff of Rome.
And the Ecumenical synods also have no other value than the one given to them by the Bishop of Rome, "for they cannot be anything else except conferences of Christianity that are called under the authenticity and authority of the Pope". Suffice the Pope to exit the hall of the Synod saying "I am not in there anymore" to stop from that moment on the Ecumenical Synod from having any validity, if it is not authorized and validated by the Pope, who could impose through his authority on the faithful. (Why I abandoned Papism)
It was a very interesting testimony if you want to read the whole thing.
It is very good, though I wish he had not converted to the EO. I often hear of Catholics who, by too much studying of the Early Church Fathers on the question of the Papacy, end up converting to the Eastern Orthodox, since the idea of a strong local church is quite obvious in their writings. Not that the “Fathers” were Eastern Orthodox or anything, but it’s easy to see how a Catholic would trade in his monarchy for a Republic of Bishops. Notice how the focus of his study was on “the structure and organization of the early Church, straight from the apostolic and patristic sources,” but not on the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles, and of the Christians within the first few centuries. He was trying to figure out who the head of the Bishop really is; whether the Bishop’s head is God, as Polycarp tells us, or if the Bishop’s head is the Pope, as Rome tells us. But he should have read the Bible where it says “that the head of every man is Christ” (1 Col 11:3). And again, that we are not to listen to “words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual” (1 Co 2:13). The tyranny of their tradition is just as bad as any Pope, and perhaps even more frightful, because it believes it has been freed from the shackles of the devil after rejecting Rome!
So they end up in Roman Catholicism lite, with all the same outward pomp, but with a different version of the same problems.
Thanks for the book references.
There are also quite a few of his talks and debates on YouTube.
Thank you for the recommended reading! I will add them to my list. God bless you on your journey!
” — it depends whether He knows me — not whether I know Him.”
Jesus is God. He knows everyone. According to your logic - or maybe you’re just not saying things well enough - everyone is then saved. Everyone.
When I read “Mere Christianity” I too felt that it expressed the faith of my family when I was growing up. And my parents (esp. my dad) were devout and knowledgeable Roman Catholics.
And Lewis was neither a Catholic nor a Calvinist so I guess his book lives up to its title pretty well.
But the one of his that is truly a must read is “The Abolition of Man”, and it’s very short. Most people could probably read it in an afternoon.
Yes, my post did sound that way. And that is not what I was intending to say.
Let me try again. There is nothing I can do to save myself. Only God can save me & because of his great love He has reached out to all of us. It is only by Jesus’ sacrifice. He loves his enemies.
Yes, the first and most important commandment is to love Him w/ our whole heart, mind, soul, and strength. And to love one another, including our enemies.
1. How deep the Father’s love for us,
How vast beyond all measure
That He should give His only Son
To make a wretch His treasure
How great the pain of searing loss,
The Father turns His face away
As wounds which mar the chosen One,
Bring many sons to glory
2. Behold the Man upon a cross,
My sin upon His shoulders
Ashamed I hear my mocking voice,
Call out among the scoffers
It was my sin that held Him there
Until it was accomplished
His dying breath has brought me life
I know that it is finished
3. I will not boast in anything
No gifts, no power, no wisdom
But I will boast in Jesus Christ
His death and resurrection
Why should I gain from His reward?
I cannot give an answer
But this I know with all my heart
His wounds have paid my ransom
But this I know with all my heart
His wounds have paid my ransom
“Abolition of Man” is a great book. If anyone hasn’t read it, really recommend it.
And yes, Lewis was an Anglican and most definitely not a Calvinist.
Okay, I understand.
Dream of the Rood (8th century Old English poem) beginning with Cross’ telling of its own story at line 30:
30 “It was long past - I still remember it -
That I was cut down at the copse’s end,
Moved from my root. Strong enemies there took me,
Told me to hold aloft their criminals,
Made me a spectacle. Men carried me
35 Upon their shoulders, set me on a hill,
A host of enemies there fastened me.
And then I saw the Lord of all mankind
Hasten with eager zeal that He might mount
Upon me. I durst not against God’s word
40 Bend down or break, when I saw tremble all
The surface of the earth. Although I might
Have struck down all the foes, yet stood I fast.
(OE 39) Then the young hero (who was God almighty)
Got ready, resolute and strong in heart.
45 He climbed onto the lofty gallows-tree,
Bold in the sight of many watching men,
When He intended to redeem mankind.
I trembled as the warrior embraced me.
But still I dared not bend down to the earth,
50 Fall to the ground. Upright I had to stand.
(OE 44) A rood I was raised up; and I held high
The noble King, the Lord of heaven above.
I dared not stoop. They pierced me with dark nails;
The scars can still be clearly seen on me,
55 The open wounds of malice. yet might I
Not harm them. They reviled us both together.
I was made wet all over with the blood
Which poured out from his side, after He had Sent forth His spirit. And I underwent
60 Full many a dire experience on that hill.
I saw the God of hosts stretched grimly out.
Darkness covered the Ruler’s corpse with clouds
His shining beauty; shadows passed across,
Black in the darkness. All creation wept,
65 Bewailed the King’s death; Christ was on the cross.
(OE 57) And yet I saw men coming from afar,
Hastening to the Prince. I watched it all.
With sorrows I was grievously oppressed,
Yet willingly I bent to those men’s hands,
70 Humbly. They took up there Almighty God,
And from the heavy torment lifted Him.
The soldiers left me standing drenched with moisture,
Wounded all over with the metal points.
They laid Him down limb-weary; then they stood
75 Beside the corpse’s head, there they beheld
The Lord of heaven, and He rested there
A while, tired after the great agony.
The men then made a sepulchre for Him
In sight of me. They carved it of bright stone,
80 And set therein the Lord of victories.
Next, wretched in the eveningtide, they sang
A dirge for Him; and when they went away,
Weary from that great Prince, He stayed alone.
(OE 70) Yet we remained there weeping in our places
85 A good long time after the warriors’ voices
Had passed away from us. The corpse grew cold,
The fair abode of life. Then men began
To cut us down. That was a dreadful fate.
In a deep pit they buried us. But friends
90 And servants of the Lord learnt where I was,
And decorated me with gold and silver.
(OE 78) Now you may understand, dear warrior,
That I have suffered deeds of wicked men
And grievous sorrows. Now the time has come
95 That far and wide on earth men honour me,
And all this great and glorious creation,
And to this beacon offers prayers. On me
The Son of God once suffered; therefore now
I tower mighty underneath the heavens,
100 And I may heal all those in awe of me.
Once I became the cruellest of tortures,
Most hateful to all nations, till the time
I opened the right way of life for men.
(OE 90) So then the prince of glory honoured me,
105 And heaven’s King exalted me above
All other trees, just as Almighty God
Raised up His mother Mary for all men
Above all other women in the world.
(OE 95) Now, my dear warrior, I order you
110 That you reveal this vision to mankind,
Declare in words this is the tree of glory
On which Almighty God once suffered torments
For mankind’s many sins, and for the deeds
Of Adam long ago. He tasted death
115 Thereon; and yet the Lord arose again
By his great might to come to human aid.
He rose to heaven. And the Lord Himself,
Almighty God and all His angels with Him,
Will come onto this earth again to seek
120 Mankind on Doomsday, when the final Judge
Will give His verdict upon every man,
What in this fleeting life he shall have earned.
(OE 110)Nor then may any man be without fear
About the words the Lord shall say to him.
125 Before all He shall ask where that man is
Who for God’s name would suffer bitter death
As formerly He did upon the cross.
Then they will be afraid, and few will know
What they may say to Christ. But there need none
130 Be fearful if he bears upon his breast
The best of tokens. Through the cross each soul
Nay journey to the heavens from this earth,
Who with the Ruler thinks to go and dwell.”
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Matthew 7:23)
Again, if Jesus is God, and He is, then He knows everyone. What Jesus says in Matthew 7:23 is hyperbole for effect - just like in Matthew 18:8. Remember, 7:23 comes at the end of Jesus’ warning against false prophets.
Yes, I know that. My point had to do with Kay’s post about being known by Jesus and your not-so-kind retort.
Well, from any evangelical viewpoint, there’s a lot of junk in the doctrine. But I got to ask just 2 things: first are there people in the worship who actually still accept Jesus’ spirit through all the clutter, and second are their sins forgivable. If the answer is yes and yes... then they can carry on. It’s sheer logic to me... we accept a gospel of grace as evangelicals; it’s simply wrong that we should deny the same grace exists to the Christ-believing Roman Catholics, as if it took human acceptance of the DOCTRINES of the gospel of grace to make it be true to the humans in question! Or, if you will, the Blood is thicker than the mud.
If we’re concerned about the souls of people going there, we should... share with them Christ crucified for their sins... working hard (but for the sake of the love of the Father, not for our own egos’ sake) to make that same gospel shine through our own lives. Our lives are the best witness that Christ could have.
It sure looks like Kreeft missed the point, and even missed the reason for the joyful witness of those Baptists!
Those Baptists believed Jesus in their hearts. They welcomed His spirit in. They rejoiced in it, luxuriated in it. THAT was worship with a hey nonny nonny and a ha-cha-cha, if I can put it thus....
The idea that God is spartan with His spirit might come from some strains of Calvinism, but the truth is that His right hand there are pleasures evermore. Heaven would be a drag if that was not true!
And to think that Kreeft apparently deemed it took place because of the little bitty Catholic-esque cross heading a flag pole... or else thought that worship had to be something OTHER than what those singers were doing... that God was not COMPLETELY portable because of the Holy Spirit and doesn’t need any crosses today (though He may use crosses to remind people of His work)...
Well, I don’t want to say it to be gratuitously rude, but doctrines of demons come to mind. Idolatry, or an enslaving fetish (rather than a helpful sacramental item).
This makes no sense. Gratitude leads to signing up for obligations, in virtually every aspect of life. It is God who forms and cultivates Gratitude in our hearts, not "the self." To dismiss Gratitude as a mere passing and unreliable fancy is entirely unwarranted.
From my observation, Evangelical Protestant church members significantly outstrip their Catholic counterparts in willingness to volunteer their time and money for the cause of Christ (notwithstanding that many Catholics do act on their faith).
Evangelical love is mighty thick when it has a chance to grow. Human gratitude my mortal derriere! This is getting caught up in the great spiritual circuit of the Trinity.
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.