Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: PetroniusMaximus
And the work of many of your buggering priests.

Well that's just the thing, isn't it?

The ones in our ranks don't even bother to argue that what they are doing is defensible according to Church teaching. They either publicly denounce Church teaching or they hide.

They can't really argue that they are following the Church's interpretation of Scripture or that they are following the Church's tradition.

They are forced to either be non-Catholics or disobedient Catholics.

What Vines is doing is quite different. He is insisting on two core Reformation principles: the sufficiency of Scripture alone and private judgment of Scripture.

He is arguing that traditional morality is not sufficiently supported by Scripture alone and he is also arguing that his own prayerful, deliberate searching of the Scriptures supports his view.

There Matthew Vines, he can do no other.

And who can refute him on these grounds? Albert Mohler - a very intelligent and learned theologian of a thoroughly reformed background falls back on a 2,000 year interpretive tradition to refute Vines.

As well he should, because he cannot fight Vines on either sufficiency or private judgment grounds.

18 posted on 04/23/2014 9:10:08 AM PDT by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: wideawake

RE: The ones in our ranks don’t even bother to argue that what they are doing is defensible according to Church teaching. They either publicly denounce Church teaching or they hide.

I refer you to the likes of Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, Andrew Cuomo and many other Pro-gay, pro-abortion Roman Catholics who are shaping the future of this country. I don’t see them hiding.

In fact, they are setting PUBLIC POLICY.


25 posted on 04/23/2014 9:26:11 AM PDT by SeekAndFind (If at first you don't succeed, put it out for beta test.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: wideawake

I don’t see anyone disciplining Bishop Ackermann...


26 posted on 04/23/2014 9:31:09 AM PDT by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: wideawake

RE: The ones in our ranks don’t even bother to argue that what they are doing is defensible according to Church teaching. They either publicly denounce Church teaching or they hide.

Not all of them..

See here:

http://www.christianpost.com/news/radical-nuns-supporting-abortion-gay-marriage-meet-with-us-bishops-84887/

‘Radical’ Nuns Supporting Abortion, Gay Marriage Meet With US Bishops

EXCERPT:

An “open” and “cordial” meeting was held this past weekend by three U.S. Catholic bishops and the Catholic sisters whom the Vatican has called “radical” and “feminist” for their support of same-sex marriage and abortion.

The Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) officers met with Seattle Archbishop J. Peter Sartain, Springfield, Ill., Bishop Thomas Paprocki and Toledo, Ohio, Bishop Leonard Blair, all members of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).

Annmarie Sanders, Director for Communications for the LCWR, shared with The Christian Post the full statement from the group, which was said to address the doctrinal assessment of the LCWR by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF). Sanders noted that further discussions were planned for a later date, although the specific issues that might have been brought up with were not revealed.

MORE HERE:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/12/father-bob-pierson-gay-marriage-minnesota_n_1589996.html

Father Bob Pierson, Gay Priest, On Why Catholics Should Support Same-Sex Marriage (VIDEO)


31 posted on 04/23/2014 9:52:30 AM PDT by SeekAndFind (If at first you don't succeed, put it out for beta test.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: wideawake; PetroniusMaximus; Resolute Conservative

I believe that part of the problem is that you don’t understand what many Protestants believe about scriptural interpretation.

“The Church” is not only the one headed by The Pope. “The Church” includes all of us who have believed on the Lord Jesus Christ as our Savior.

None of the Southern Baptists I know believe that we have the only true interpretation of Scripture because we have some private privilege of our own convenient interpretation. And your statement/insinuation that we do may make you feel justified in your beliefs, but it is false.

The “Protest” part of Protestant is more about someone telling us we don’t have access to God, and must go through someone else. It is more about the past injustices of the Church leadership (sort of like Jesus viewed the Pharisees).

In the past, it was mighty convenient that only priests and church officials could read. That way, “The Church” could be told anything the leaders wanted to tell them, and Christians had to bow down. Indulgences, anyone?

So stop your attacks on us because someone does believe he has a private interpretation (VERY contrary to plain scripture, by the way). Most of us don’t.


67 posted on 04/23/2014 12:29:21 PM PDT by HeadOn (God resists the proud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: wideawake
What Vines is doing is quite different. He is insisting on two core Reformation principles: the sufficiency of Scripture alone and private judgment of Scripture. He is arguing that traditional morality is not sufficiently supported by Scripture alone and he is also arguing that his own prayerful, deliberate searching of the Scriptures supports his view. There Matthew Vines, he can do no other. And who can refute him on these grounds? Albert Mohler - a very intelligent and learned theologian of a thoroughly reformed background falls back on a 2,000 year interpretive tradition to refute Vines. As well he should, because he cannot fight Vines on either sufficiency or private judgment grounds.

Mohler can fight Vines on EXACTLY Scriptural sufficiency grounds because even two thousand years ago - heck, thousands of years before THAT - God had ALREADY spoken about what is sinful conduct. The way you put it, it took the Catholic church to decide what God was saying. Instead, we know that all along people of God KNEW what was and wasn't pleasing to God and He condemned homosexual sin as well as heterosexual sin from the start. Had the Bible been hazy or nebulous on the matter, you would have some grounds for your argument, but it wasn't and you don't.

76 posted on 04/23/2014 10:44:08 PM PDT by boatbums (Simul justis et peccator.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

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