Posted on 01/18/2012 3:19:15 PM PST by NYer
.- Pope Benedict XVI said today that achieving Christian unity requires more than “cordiality and cooperation” and that it must be accompanied by interior conversion.
“Faith in Christ and interior conversion, both individual and communal, must constantly accompany our prayer for Christian unity,” said the Pope to over 8,000 pilgrims gathered in the Vatican’s Paul VI Audience Hall on Jan. 18.
The Pope’s comments mark the start of the 2012 Week of Prayer for Christian Unity that runs until Jan. 25. It will be observed by over 300 Christian churches and ecclesial communities around the globe.
The Pope asked for “the Lord in a particular way to strengthen the faith of all Christians, to change our hearts and to enable us to bear united witness to the Gospel.”
In this way, he said, they “will contribute to the new evangelization and respond ever more fully to the spiritual hunger of the men and women of our time.”
The Pope explained that the concept of a week of prayer for Christian unity was initiated in 1908 by Paul Wattson, an Episcopalian minister from Maryland. One year later, he became a Catholic and was subsequently ordained to the priesthood.
Pope Benedict recalled how the initiative was supported by his predecessors Pope St. Pius X and Pope Benedict XV. It was then “developed and perfected” in the 1930s by the Frenchman Abbé Paul Couturier, who promoted prayer “for the unity of the Church as Christ wishes and according to the means he wills.”
The mandate for the week of prayer, the Pope underscored, comes from the wish of Christ himself at the Last Supper “that they may all be one.” He observed that this mission was given a particular impetus by the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) but added that “the unity we strive for cannot result merely from our own efforts.” Rather, “it is a gift we receive and must constantly invoke from on high.”
The theme for 2012 Week of Prayer – “All shall be changed by the victory of Jesus Christ our Lord” – was crafted by the Polish Ecumenical Council. Pope Benedict said it reflects “their own experience as a nation,” which stayed faithful to Christ “in the midst of trials and upheavals,” including years of occupation by the Nazis and later the Communists.
The Pope tied the victory the Polish people experienced over their oppressors to overcoming the disunity that marks Christians.
He said that the “unity for which we pray requires inner conversion, both shared and individual,” and it cannot be “limited to cordiality and cooperation.” Instead, Christians must accept “all the elements of unity which God has conserved for us.”
Ecumenism, the Pope stated, is not an optional extra for Catholics but is “the responsibility of the entire Church and of all the baptized.” Christians, he said, must make praying for unity an “integral part” of their prayer life, “especially when people from different traditions come together to work for victory in Christ over sin, evil, injustice and the violation of human dignity.”
Pope Benedict then touched on the lack of unity in the Christian community, which he said “hinders the effective announcement of the Gospel and endangers our credibility.” Evangelizing formerly Christian countries and spreading the Gospel to new places will be “more fruitful if all Christians together announce the truth of the Gospel and Jesus Christ, and give a joint response to the spiritual thirst of our times,” he explained.
The Pope concluded his comments with the hope that this year’s Week of Prayer for Christian Unity will lead to “increased shared witness, solidarity and collaboration among Christians, in expectation of that glorious day when together we will all be able to celebrate the Sacraments and profess the faith transmitted by the Apostles.”
The general audience finished with Pope Benedict addressing pilgrims in various languages, including greeting a group of men and women from the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps, before leading the crowd in the Our Father and imparting his apostolic blessing.
Think about accepting YHVH as he revealed himself in his word. Hard for a catholic to do, after a lifetime of listening to Satan’s representative in a black skirt, but it has been done, through prayer.
There is only one verse, but that verse suffices as it is Jesus renaming Simon to reflect his mission.
But, that is not the only verse on which the Church bases this belief. That verse is merely the capstone of many passages in the Bible where it is clear that Peter was singled out for a specific purpose and in the ONE verse that protestants cannot rationally explain away, Jesus tells Peter and us what his purpose is.
This fairy tale that protestants desperately cling to, that the entire Catholic Church is built around ONE verse is just that, a fairy tale.
****Your argument isn’t with us. It’s with scripture.****
There is a difference, though a protestant might never accede it, between what you think those Scriptures say and what they actually do say.
There is difference, though a protestant might never accede it, between the believer who is given the grace of the Spirit and the authority which Jesus gave His Apostles, especially Peter.
When we put on the mind of Christ, and Christ lives in us it is to do the will of the Father, which is that we love Him and are obedient to Him, even unto to death. Christ, alive in us, works through us and in us so that we love God with all our heart, mind, soul and strength and love our neighbor as He loves us and we love ourselves.
Christ living in us is a call to action, to be humble, merciful, compassionate, giving and forgiving.
We do not and cannot know the mind of God. We are given the Spirit so that we may believe, do the work for which He calls us and so that we can know what is His truth.
One of His truths, which the protestant rejects, is that Jesus left His Apostles with authority and with Peter as their leader. As their guide, He sent the Holy Spirit.
We have Scripture, which is His inspired word, as a guide, but we also have the Church and both are protected by the Spirit.
Protestants who believe that they and they alone can infallibly interpret Scripture and doctrine are taking upon themselves an authority that is not given them.
This “three-legged stool” is a Roman Catholic Church construct
There is no doubt that protestantism falls on its face without the authority of the Church, just as a two legged stool will stand only as long as no one tries to sit on it.
In protestantism there is no authority and it shows in the fact that one man can find his own interpretation to be the only one acceptable and begin his own brand of Christianity, making the claim that the Holy Spirit has led him to it. Those who agree with him also claim the Holy Spirit has led them to “this truth”.
Before long, we have so called Christian congregations allowing all manner of things that are spelled out clearly in Scripture as sin.
The Church, unfortunately, is not immune to this with Catholics adopting a quasi protestant stance with regard to these things.
Ah, another breathtaking example of a yawning void in your knowledge of the Church.
I would have thought after so many years here some of it might have reached you.
But, parrots only mimic what they are taught.
Mark! Learned as thou may be, and however broadly applicable you think your Wilde quote is to Prots (despite the more variant views of many Catholics), i hardly think your bisexual source simply had Prots in mind in the quoted expression of his natural mixed up mind, even if he did have a fascination with Catholicism and convert debilitated on his deathbed in dying destitute.
And who also said,
“It is the confession, not the priest, that gives us absolution.”
I'm not arguing with you about the point that the "church" is intended to be the buttress and support of the truth of the Gospel, just that what you call The Church, as a separate institution with a hierarchy - your "Magesterium" - and the way Scripture defines it, are different. Of course, Peter was referred to as the "first" among the Apostles and he, as the elder of sorts, was a leader among them in the early years after Christ's ascension. But his ministry was not, contrary to some traditions, as a stay-at-home "bishop" or "pope" of the church which was there in Rome, but an itinerant evangelist whose job was leading others to saving faith in Christ and helping them establish local congregations where believers gathered to worship, share worldly goods, take care of each other and grow in their faith.
It seems that some want to pretend that Jesus gave his commission to Peter alone, but we know he sent out seventy at one time and probably many more on other occasions. To each he gave the Holy Spirit and instills them with various "sign" gifts to enhance the authority of their message. When Paul was given his commission by Jesus himself he journeyed to Jerusalem to partner with the other Apostles and to join up with them in their shared ministry. Scripture even says they agreed together that Peter's emphasis was to the House of Israel and Paul's to the Gentiles. It's all there clearly in Scripture and even writings of some of the ECFs attest to the same continuing. The teachings they shared, they later wrote down so that we have today access to the same truths they taught through Holy Scripture and God made sure it was kept and preserved for us today as our authority.
Nobody is in favor of what you call a "rogue" leader going out and starting some cult where everyone follows HIM alone and swallow everything and anything he tells them the Bible says. Nowhere in Scripture is anyone ever given license to do that. We are commended to fellowship with those of the faith in Christ just as the early Christians did in local congregations - some even met in homes. I don't think there is anything wrong with that today and nothing mandates that meetings MUST take place in a formal "church" building. I like the idea of informal gatherings to study Scripture and praise and worship the Lord together. Maybe if going to church hadn't gotten so stuffy and snooty, more people would still be meeting.
This "authority" that you claim is only given to The Church and, by it, the presumed ability to infallibly interpret Holy Scripture, misses out on the facts that this organized body has not always been correct in many areas; they have contradicted each other from Pope to Pope; they have committed atrocities in the name of Christ; they have persecuted genuine Christians; they have destroyed writings that went against them and they have made into dogma doctrines which have no Scriptural support or go against Scripture. Not the kind of behavior Peter spoke about that should be shown in the "household of God". We are all part of the Spiritual House, living stones, Peter said, and we all have the responsibility to speak the truth and demonstrate holy lives that honor and glorify our Savior.
So, if you want to relinquish your ability to reason and to investigate Scriptural truths to see if these things be so, then go right ahead. Go ahead and ignore the still small voice of the Holy Spirit that speaks to your heart when you see a Bible passage made to say what you can't see it saying. Go ahead and trust that others will take full responsibility for your soul and hand its keeping to those who demand fealty to THEIR interpretation under penalty of anathema. But shouldn't you at least wonder why they NEED to demand such if Scripture really backs them up? No, I choose the Divinely-inspired Holy Scriptures as my infallible authority and I trust the indwelling Holy Spirit to lead me unto all truth - just as Jesus promised. I don't claim to be infallible, but God's word is and I can trust it. I sincerely pray you see the truth.
What they actually say? Non Catholics are the only ones who use scripture to interpret scripture. We don’t inject meaning. Time and time again we quote scripture to show that what Catholics believe is incorrect. We don’t use books that contradict each other and history. We don’t make up new dogma not taught by scripture.
>>There is difference, though a protestant might never accede it, between the believer who is given the grace of the Spirit and the authority which Jesus gave His Apostles, especially Peter.<<
Acts 15:8 And God, who knows the heart, bore witness by granting them the holy Spirit just as he did us. 9 He made no distinction between us and them, for by faith he purified their hearts.
Luke 22:24 And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest. 25 And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. 26 But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve.
If Catholics are Jews there might be an argument to be made that Peter was the leader of the apostles to them but not if they are gentiles.
Galatians 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; 8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:) 9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.
Paul would have been the leader as far as Gentiles are concerned. The whole papacy is built on myth and fallacy.
Exactly!
Rom. 11:6, "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace."
Gal. 2:21, I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.
Jvette, jumping in here, is your premise that without an assuredly infallible magisterium, specifically that of Rome, then man cannot know truth for certain from the Scriptures, due to reliance on fallible human reasoning, and could never correct said magisterium which is protected from that infirmity, whereby you are certain of the truth of all that you believe and practice (or some)?
Thanks
'Tis more prudent to remain silent and be thought a fool than to post with abandon and confirm it.
Abaddon (the destroyer) was the driving force behind the very folks that thought that they could invent God in their own image. The destroyer was after Christianity. The very fact that the children of the Reformation speak for and as God accomplishes his ends very nicely. When a body of men invent their own gods to replace Him and try to insist that that topsy turvy theology is the real thing, why that simply advances his goals that much further.
Fortunately, the ruins ofthe Reformation are increasingly revealed as what they are. Ruins. Believers are crowding the Tiber or stampeding East. The non believers are heading in the other direction.
St. Paul repeatedly admonished his flock to only believe what the Church taught them. He did not allow Christians to believe whatever they wanted or to create their own theology.
The Reformation created a kind of 'opposite day'. Good becomes bad. God becomes one's self. Submission to God becomes God's submission to you. Salvation from God as His gift becomes a demand by the individual who insists that God has to honour his demand.
The only thing that you guys have in common with Christianity is some of the names and terms. None of the definitions seem to match at all.
Appreciate the compliment, but I'm only an engineer.
and however broadly applicable you think your Wilde quote is to Prots (despite the more variant views of many Catholics)
THere is only one Church; however there are many Protestant churches and even more churches of one.
i hardly think your bisexual source simply had Prots in mind in the quoted expression of his natural mixed up mind, even if he did have a fascination with Catholicism and convert debilitated on his deathbed in dying destitute.
He scarcely would have converted then, would he?
And who also said, “It is the confession, not the priest, that gives us absolution.”
Actually, God does. The priest is the servant of God. He is no different than the 12 or the 70 or any of the other servants of God identified in the Bible.
But in a way, he's right. It is the intention of the one confessing, coupled with the forgiveness of God that gives us absolution. The priest simply acts in the middle, much like the priest confers baptism. The Holy Spirit is the means of baptism. The priest is just the physical hands in this physical world. Without God, the priest is nothing. With that said, without God, we all are nothing...
Step one: - Buy a Bible.
Step two: - Read it.
Step one: Mark 12: 28One of the scribes,i when he came forward and heard them disputing and saw how well he had answered them, asked him, “Which is the first of all the commandments?” 29Jesus replied, “The first is this: ‘Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God is Lord alone! 30You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.’j 31The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”k
Step two: - Read it.
Step 2: John 6: 26Jesus answered them and said, “Amen, amen, I say to you, you are looking for me not because you saw signs but because you ate the loaves and were filled. 27Do not work for food that perishes but for the food that endures for eternal life,* which the Son of Man will give you. For on him the Father, God, has set his seal.”l 28So they said to him, “What can we do to accomplish the works of God?” 29Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in the one he sent.”
Jesus never told anyone to buy a Bible. He told us to love Him, to love our neighbour, and to believe in Him. I thank you for yet another opportunity to show the difference between we Christians and the folks who think that they are either God or speaking for God.
OK, your hatred of God’s word is duly noted.
Luke 11:28 - “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.”
I worship the Word of God. I don't claim to be it.
Those who claim to be Christian might follow the instructions of Jesus and the Apostles instead of being Mormon knockoffs and becoming their own god.
It’s not up to me or CB to do the work ourselves to prove or disprove a point you made.
Not asking you to do the work. If you're still so confident, just say yes, you have nothing to lose. If you know I'm right, better keep avoiding it. So, what will it be?
I don’t know about metmom but as for me continuing with discussing this with you has gotten rather futile. If you can’t provide the proof just say so or discontinue bothering me about it. K?
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.