Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

I support Patricia Jannuzzi's right to express her Catholic mind without fear of retribution
Vivificat - From Contemplation to Action ^ | 25 Mar 2015 | Teófilo de Jesús (@vivificat)

Posted on 03/25/2015 8:35:47 AM PDT by Teófilo

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 last

ph


81 posted on 03/27/2015 1:42:42 PM PDT by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88
I can't imagine what your problem is.

Yes, I wrote that post.

And the 73-book canon was in place (if by "in place" one means "widely known and accepted in practice") before it was "declared" to be so. These declarations by Councils are not innovations or impositions, they are recognitions of what was already the practice of the Churches. "Confirm the brethren."

There's a little ambiguity about the term "Roman" Catholic Church, Anglicans who wished to refer to themselves as "Anglo Catholic" first coined the term "Roman Catholic" to distinguish those in union with Rome from themselves and to assert the propriety of applying the term "Catholic" to themselves.

But we trace the birth of the Catholic Church, not to Westminster or Rome but to Jerusalem, not to the Reformation but to Pentecost, and not to Peter as a quasi-monarchical figure at the Vatican but to Peter who was Christ's appointed Shepherd (John 21:15-17), selected as the one who was to "confirm the brethren," the first among the Twelve.

So what do you mean by "before there was a Roman Catholic Church"? Before Pentecost, before the Anglicans, or before --- what?

82 posted on 03/27/2015 2:45:24 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Blessed be God - Blessed be His Holy Name - Blessed be Jesus Christ, true God and true Man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
"I can't imagine what your problem is."

I don't have a problem...except the error promulgated by the Romanist organization that has enslaved many nice folks...like you.

"So what do you mean by "before there was a Roman Catholic Church"? Before Pentecost, before the Anglicans, or before --- what?"

I mean exactly what I wrote...the Roman Catholic Church shows up between 300 - 400AD. You perhaps believe their line about Peter being the first Roman pope, but this is not only absent in the Scriptures (yes, the Scriptures that were in place prior to Roman domination), but it does not comport with ordinary history records. Of course Rome has concocted several lists of "popes" along the way, some of which were in place at the same time, some of which had mistresses, etc. But, Rome's "proof" of its authority attempts to use the Scriptures (yes, 66 books/letters), but denies its story.

This is a myopic, self-proving argument that can be manufactured by anyone (read that, the Mormons use this, the Scientologists use this, even Ellen G White and the 7th Dayers use this). But, the true gathering of believers traces its beginnings not to 1st cent. Jerusalem, but to Abraham and includes all those rescued of God by grace, through faith (Heb. 11), and that not of ourselves (Eph 2)...it has always been a gift of God, not of works lest any man/woman boast. The blood of Jesus reached back to all the rescued and forward to this very day. So, I guess we predate your gang.

And, no, the Apocrypha, was not widely recognized as Scriptural (inspired like the 66).

83 posted on 03/27/2015 3:15:14 PM PDT by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88
Peter was Bishop of Rome, and every one of his successors as Bishop of Rome shared in the Petrine ministry: feeding the lambs and sheep, exercsing the power of the keys, binding and loosing, confirming the brethren.

This ministry has been exercised in different forms and ways by different men in different centuries, and perhaps that's why you don't think there was a "pope" or a "Catholic Church" before the 4th or 5th century. But in this you are wrong: because you don't see the development of a sacred institution as it responds to historical challenges and new situations.

You will not find in Peter and his immediate successors a "monarchical" papacy, but will find him to be exercising, in his circumstances, and in an early form, the same ministry.

84 posted on 03/28/2015 5:08:13 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Blessed be God - Blessed be His Holy Name - Blessed be Jesus Christ, true God and true Man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

While Peter was a good friend of Jesus, the fact that he often slipped into a very skewed view of the Gospel is spelled out plainly in Paul’s letter to the Galatians. He had a tendency to hide in his Jewishness and was soundly (and publicly) rebuked by Paul, the apostle sent to the Gentiles (that’s you and me). Check Paul’s letter to the Roman believers and see if you find any trace of Peter’s supremacy...I find only Jesus. But, if you need to have some sort of “worldly organization” to feel safe, I leave you to that. But, out here, out of the camp, with Jesus, there is freedom and light and safety.


85 posted on 03/28/2015 8:25:26 AM PDT by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88
No one ever said Peter (Kephas) was "impeccable": whithout fault or sin. That's perfectly obvious.

There's no evidence whatsoever that ANY of the Apostles were appointed on the basis of merit: certainly not Peter, an impetuous man whose failings are all there in the honest chronicle of Scripture. Yet his threefold denial of Christ, so plainly and painfully recounted in the Gospel, culminated in his threefold reassertion of his love of Christ, and then Jesus' threefold commissioning of him to his new vocation as shepherd of Christ's whole flock: "Feed my lambs, Feed my lambs, Feed my sheep." (John 21:15)

This doesn't make Peter impeccable. It does make his chief shepherd of the flock after the Lord ascends on high. Correction he still needs, as do we all; sometimes a face-to-face confrontation he needs; but he is shepherd nevertheless, and thus will not (even despite his faults) lead the whole flock off a cliff of false doctrine.

86 posted on 03/28/2015 9:35:26 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Blessed be God - Blessed be His Holy Name - Blessed be Jesus Christ, true God and true Man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Please re-read my post...I am not arguing his lack of “impeccability”. I am arguing that there is no reference to his becoming your first “pope” anywhere but in your own documents. You folks made up popism, sacerdotalism, purgatory, genuflecting, even the so-called sacraments out of whole cloth. All I am saying is that if you read the text it points to being saved by grace, through faith, and none of that coming from us...it is all a gift, NOT BY WORKS lest anyone turn into a RC. This is what the first century believers held and taught and reported. But, Rome has morphed this into a monstrous cult. If that is what you prefer, so be it. But, those of us who find ourselves clinging only to Jesus don’t need the trappings of man-made traditions.

And, all of your posts do not explain why this woman should have been abandoned by a boss who says criticizing homosexuality is a deed worth being fired. All the while your pope smiles and visits with the homos. You can believe Jesus is “Lamb-like”, but it is certainly not the Jesus in the text. “I came to bring a sword.”


87 posted on 03/28/2015 10:13:46 AM PDT by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88
"And, all of your posts do not explain why this woman [Patricia Jannuzzi] should have been abandoned by a boss who says criticizing homosexuality is a deed worth being fired"

This shows you to be, as we say in English Lit, an unreliable narrator. I am one of the most active of all activists defending Patti Jannuzzi at Free Republic. If you don't comprehended that, you haven't comprehended much.

I think this wraps up this particular conversation. I'm off to cook some pasta.

88 posted on 03/28/2015 10:33:21 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ( "Everything you see I owe to spaghetti." - Sophia Loren)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Please tell me which one of your posts roundly criticized the homo-loving “Bishop, Father, Msgr, Cardinal, or Buzzard”? Or...just enjoy the pasta...man, that sounds good.


89 posted on 03/28/2015 10:37:54 AM PDT by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88
This'll take you less than 1 minute. Search each one with the searchword "Mrs Don-o". <> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/search?m=all;o=time;q=quick;s=Jannuzzi>

Your report on this homework assignment can come later.

90 posted on 03/28/2015 11:26:41 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ( "Everything you see I owe to spaghetti." - Sophia Loren)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
Well done!

Thank you.

91 posted on 03/29/2015 3:58:12 AM PDT by Northern Yankee (Where Liberty dwells, there is my Country. - Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 last

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.

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