"Fully acceptable" does not mean that you believe the scriptures to be infallible. In fact, it sounds like a very half hearted response. If my wife got all dressed up and asked me how she looked and I said that she was "fully acceptable", I'm sure she'd slug me.
You stated in post 2093 the scriptures are not infallible or inerrant. The Church states they are. Would any decree coming from Rome be unacceptable? You are endangering your own soul and in peril of being anathematized.
I'm really not trying to put you on the spot. I'm simply pointing out that Catholics really no longer believe the scriptures to be infallible and inerrant. They do not follow the teachings of the early fathers. You are not the first that I've brought up the infallibility of the scriptures to, but you're at least reflective enough to answer this rather interesting question. Most Catholics just clam up. This is an illustration of how one of many doctrines of the Church has changed over the last 500 years.
Catholics should think hard and long about what they actually believe, the inerrant scriptural teachings or someone telling them what to believe.
My source is The Catechismand then pointed out that not only did the Catechism teach contrary to what you said, but also you had incorrectly (I guess you may not have scrolled down) quoted the website you referred to, called to communion, which actually said,"For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous." (Rom 5:19)
By his obedience unto death, Jesus accomplished the substitution of the suffering Servant, who "makes himself an offering for sin", when "he bore the sin of many", and who "shall make many to be accounted righteous", for "he shall bear their iniquities".
Jesus atoned for our faults and made satisfaction for our sins to the Father.
One question, from the Reformed point of view, is: How then were our sins paid for, if Christ was not punished by the Father? Christ made atonement for the sins of all men by offering to God a sacrifice of love that was more pleasing to the Father than the combined sins of all men of all time are displeasing to Him. Hence through the cross Christ merited grace for the salvation of all men. Those who refuse His grace do not do so because Christ did not die for them or did not win sufficient grace for them on the cross, but because of their own free choice.
"Fully acceptable" does not mean that you believe the scriptures to be infallible. In fact, it sounds like a very half hearted response. If my wife got all dressed up and asked me how she looked and I said that she was "fully acceptable", I'm sure she'd slug me.
Your wife is not God. I hope however that you do not tell mine that in person and I will not tell yours that either.
I mean that Scriptures are only meaningful with the interpretation of the Church. The case of the Eunuch is most telling.
You stated in post 2093 the scriptures are not infallible or inerrant. The Church states they are. Would any decree coming from Rome be unacceptable? You are endangering your own soul and in peril of being anathematized.
Negative. I stated that they were not infallible. And I will say that just like the Eunuch, without the Church to interpret, it is as meaningless to anyone as it was to him.
I'm really not trying to put you on the spot. I'm simply pointing out that Catholics really no longer believe the scriptures to be infallible and inerrant. They do not follow the teachings of the early fathers. You are not the first that I've brought up the infallibility of the scriptures to, but you're at least reflective enough to answer this rather interesting question. Most Catholics just clam up. This is an illustration of how one of many doctrines of the Church has changed over the last 500 years.
Scriptures cannot be infallible. Their interpretation can be and is under the Church as Scripture itself illustrates. Do you realize that every major heresy of the first millennium can be defended directly from Scripture - admittedly snippets, but so are many current beliefs.
Catholics should think hard and long about what they actually believe, the inerrant scriptural teachings or someone telling them what to believe.
Even the NT shows the subordination of Jesus to the Father, and without John, almost no indication of the divinity of Jesus - only the status of a super David - the man. Paul did not preach the Trinity in his letters. It is in the Church - who wrote, harmonized, chose and kept publishing and interpreting the Scripture that we must put our trust.