Catholic here. Appreciate the thoughtful questions.
I’m not even close to conversant in the liturgical differences between our branches of Christianity.
With regards to our current Pope, I’m not at all comfortable with his attitude and actions. Of course we’ve had a number of bad situations in my lifetime, much of which were ultimately leadership problems. Humans are terribly fallible, even Popes. That’s my personal opinion, which may not respect church teachings. I pray that God cleans house.
Bump
Thank-you and God Bless.
Great question.
When the Fathers of Vatican I were defining the dogma of infallibility, they had in front of them the case of Honorius I, who was anathematized as a heretic by a council and later Popes. That happened precisely because Honorius tried to play cute with Sergius and the Monothelite heretics and didn't condemn them.
This prior example is important because it shows that "infallibility", as we define it, does *not* mean that every Pope is above reproach or cannot be personally condemned as a heretic when he fails to do his job. It just means that Christ will not allow the Pope's personal failings--under any circumstances--to solidify as official teaching. Because the Pope serves Christ as a regent of the Church, a temporary head who acts on his Lord's behalf--not as a dictator who can do as he pleases.
What you are watching unfold now toward Francis shows what we actually believe about the papacy. Francis has no power to change what the Church has always taught, and if he tries to, a) he will ultimately fail and b) in the meantime Catholics are not obliged to follow him into error and are, actually, bound to stick to the truth and correct him as necessary. St. Paul was never called Head of the Apostles and never ever took that title away from St. Peter--but he had to correct Peter's behavior when need be.
Respect. Part of respect is not trying to tell us what we believe. (Not referring to you here, Jocko, but to certain others I have no desire to name. They know who they are.)
It should be possible for anyone here who has ever served in the military to understand the concept of "saluting the uniform" and apply that to understanding how Catholics can be loyal to the Papacy in the abstract, and loyal to this Pope in particular, as long as he acts within the bounds of his office and his charism.
When he goes astray from that, we have every right to ignore him (e.g., in re "global warming") when he's speaking of things not germane to the faith, and oppose him "to his face" when he teaches things that are inimical to the faith.
Speaking for myself, differences such as whether clergy can marry or not are not an issue. Differences on the frequency of observing the sacrament are not an issue.
Sola Scriptura is the issue. There is value in the writings of the Saints, and in writings of Martin Luther, Calvin, Wesley. But they are no more authoritative than the book of Mormon. The 66 books of the Bible are authoritative. The Apocrypha are at the level of the writings of a Saint...worth reading but not authoritative.
The differences between the various English translations of Scripture are minor and not a real issue.
Joint Bible Studies could be a start.
Why would we PROTs want to?
As far as I know; the FOLLOWING is STILL in force...
"One indeed is the universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved, in which the priest himself is the sacrifice, Jesus Christ, whose body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the species of bread and wine; the bread (changed) into His body by the divine power of transubstantiation, and the wine into the blood, so that to accomplish the mystery of unity we ourselves receive from His (nature) what He Himself received from ours."
--Pope Innocent III and Lateran Council IV (A.D. 1215)
Heck; you can't even get the divided Catholics to agree on what their chosen leader is saying/doing/thinking/believing.
For starters, the understanding of the Mass where Christ is called down from Heaven by the priest to be placed upon the altar so He can be sacrificed again and again and again and again in contradiction of Hebrews.
| John O' Brien, Roman Catholic Priest in the Faith of Millions. | Hebrews 9:24-28 | Hebrews 10:11-13 |
| When the priest pronounces the tremendous words of consecration, he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man. It is a power greater than that of monarchs and emperors: it is greater than that of saints and angels, greater than that of Seraphim and Cherubim. Indeed it is greater even than the power of the Virgin Mary. While the Blessed Virgin was the human agency by which Christ became incarnate a single time, the priest brings Christ down from heaven, and renders Him present on our altar as the eternal Victim for the sins of man—not once but a thousand times! The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows His head in humble obedience to the priest’s command. | 24For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; 25nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. 26Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. 27And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, 28so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him. | Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; 12but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD, 13waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET. 14For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. |
I do not mean any disrespect, but the Pope
is the Vicar of Christ, this is what the
Church teaches.
This means that the Pope represents Christ
here on earth, wouldn’t this be like an apostle going
to a pagan Church and sharing his concern
that Jesus was not quite going the route
we think he should. hi
I believe in Jesus who is now the christ, if
I am not happy with what he is doing who am I
to turn to? No one.
If I decided that Jesus was all wrong my belief
in him would perish and I would no longer believe.
The Catholics has accepted that the Pope is Christ
here on earth, if they now can not except that it
must be one of two things, they are either wrong or
they are in a wrong church.
If the Pope was ordained by God in the first place
he still is.
As a non-Catholic Christian, to me any dialogue as you seek is a non-starter, due to an emphasis I think most RC have as regards this statement/qustion:
“What understandings, perspectives, deeds would the RCC’s on FR wish to successfully transmit into the observant and sincere Evangelicals on FR about this broader situation affecting us all and the globe—Christians and non-Christians? “
I see all matters regarding the Roman Catholic Pope as Roman Catholic matters and not matters affecting the rest of Christianity at all. Other Christians may have their opinions, but neither their faith nor their institutions are directly affected or even ought to be indirectly affected by the actions of the Roman Catholic Pope, other than by what I’d consider a wrong-headed approach allowing them to.
A few questions that could be asked on political ideological issues:
Do you oppose
Homosexual marriage?
Transgender surgery under certain conditions?
Sexual relations before marriage?
Cohabitation as a alternative to marriage?
Abortion outside (perhaps) of danger to life?
Forbidding any corporal discipline of children, if warranted and conditional?
Forbidding government to sanction any prayer or affirmation of any religion in general?
Forbidding artists the right to refuse to create works for causes that offend them?
Forbidding citizens rights to bear arms, if conditional (type and vetting)
Forbidding capital punishment (even as per criteria in Scripture, but with exclusion for religious crimes)?
Rejection of any positional/functional distinctions btwn male and female in marriage and church government?
Open borders?
Increased Muslim immigration?
Equal rights and benefits to illegal immigrants?
Increased government spending on social programs per capita?
Smaller military?
Rejection of the any just war premise?
Increased funding for the EPA
Increased funding for the UN?
Forbidding “Right to work” statutes?
So our discussions shouldn't be what "stuff" is triggered by the Pope. Our discussions should be how today's issues relate to what God states in scripture. Unfortunately, few people care what the Bible has to say.
I think one other poster mentioned what I was thinking: political issues. Those political issues that deal with religion are areas we can discuss.