Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
juj you are standing on shakey ground
do you reject the following document from the Vatican II Council?
LUMEN GENTIUM - Dogmatic Constitution of The Roman Catholic Church
12. The holy people of God shares also in Christ's prophetic office; it spreads abroad a living witness to Him, especially by means of a life of faith and charity and by offering to God a sacrifice of praise, the tribute of lips which give praise to His name.(110) The entire body of the faithful, anointed as they are by the Holy One,(111) cannot err in matters of belief. They manifest this special property by means of the whole peoples' supernatural discernment in matters of faith when "from the Bishops down to the last of the lay faithful" (8*) they show universal agreement in matters of faith and morals. That discernment in matters of faith is aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth. It is exercised under the guidance of the sacred teaching authority, in faithful and respectful obedience to which the people of God accepts that which is not just the word of men but truly the word of God.(112) Through it, the people of God adheres unwaveringly to the faith given once and for all to the saints,(113) penetrates it more deeply with right thinking, and applies it more fully in its life.
The ground I stand on is solid orthodox Catholic ground. What I reject is your interpretation of the above document.
What that actually means is that when a matter of faith is decided on by the sacred teaching authority (Pope and the magesterium), ALLthe faithful will believe with the help of the Holy Spirit. It says that the faithful cannot err in matters of belief. This is not saying YOU, as a layman get the decide the matters of faith, but rather when a matter of faith is presented, the entire church from bishops to layman will not ERR IN BELIEF of this new matter. This is something that YOU break on just about every count. Oh, wait, you're not one of the faithful, so it doesn't include you.
You've got your entire Church structure upside down, Ted. It is you who doesn't understand what that means. Don't look now, but there's an earthquake in your area.
i sincerely hope that the church works it out. most of my family are catholic i love them very much. however a few things worry me. i am sure the pope clemente V and his predecessor were thinking those very thoughts, i am the church, as they exterminated the cathars of southern france. holding that beautiful doctrine in mind of-- we are one, the church, when then tortured and murdered the knights templars they had sent to kill the cathars, knights templars the monastic warriors of the pope.
or how bout dominican monks the right hand of the inquisition-- now a respectable monastic order.
all this stuff disturbs me. i hope it can be worked out.
I agree with everything you wrote. Someone mentioned purgatory recently and it reminded me how my local priest laughs and dismisses the entire notion as nonsense.
That is sad to hear. I'm not even sure ted is saying Purgatory is nonsense. Although the term "purgatory" only dates to the twelfth century the idea of an intermediary state of purification can apparently be attested to the pre-Nicene age. The idea of being able to purify after death, that you get a second chance in a sense, is very important to me and is one of the more significant reasons I never switched to Eastern Orthodoxy.
I suppose technically such priests, by separating themselves from established teaching, are Catholic priests in name only. Maybe that's of some comfort, but I don't know how much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ted08721
Citing
LUMEN GENTIUM
12. The holy people of God shares also in Christ's prophetic office; it spreads abroad a living witness to Him, especially by means of a life of faith and charity and by offering to God a sacrifice of praise, the tribute of lips which give praise to His name.(110) The entire body of the faithful, anointed as they are by the Holy One,(111) cannot err in matters of belief. They manifest this special property by means of the whole peoples' supernatural discernment in matters of faith when "from the Bishops down to the last of the lay faithful" (8*) they show universal agreement in matters of faith and morals. That discernment in matters of faith is aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth. It is exercised under the guidance of the sacred teaching authority, in faithful and respectful obedience to which the people of God accepts that which is not just the word of men but truly the word of God.(112) Through it, the people of God adheres unwaveringly to the faith given once and for all to the saints,(113) penetrates it more deeply with right thinking, and applies it more fully in its life.
I think now that I see this I may agree to it, but I don't think it means what you think it means.
It does seem extremely unlikely that when the faithful have universal agreement on some matter of faith or morals that they would be in error. However this is in many ways a conservative belief, not a progressing one. In Orthodoxy changes and definitions are extremely slow because universal agreement to change a tradition or value is rare. Basically changes would only be possible in Ecumenical Councils and maybe not even then. Catholicism would, by the ultimate logic here, be barely able to clarify anything since Vatican II to present. As opposition to birth control was already established by Church teaching there would need to be universal agreement to change it and although there is widespread agreement it's not universal. Likewise certain changes in the Mass, by necessity, should not have happened as they may not have had "Universal Agreement."
Now as Papal Infallibility has already been defined by the Church it couldn't be undone by this unless there is universal agreement to do so. That ability would seem to make the Church much less conservative, small-c, than "Universal Agreement" would likely result in. There would still be room for clarification, by the Pope, provided the Pope is not disagreeing with every Catholic. (Or at least with a rough consensus, like maybe 65-80%) I'm a little hesitant on this, but maybe I can see the value in that. If a Pope goes completely insane, and says something clearly heretical by established Church doctrine, I can see some mechanism to make that not count. I'd have to think a bit though.
So if all you want is elected bishops and an unchanging Church that will not even further define any existing teaching that might be okay. I mean I think that's a bit too conservative because new events might require clarification, but maybe I'll hear that out more than I have to you.
Thomas R. That is sad to hear. I'm not even sure ted is saying Purgatory is nonsense. Although the term "purgatory" only dates to the twelfth century the idea of an intermediary state of purification can apparently be attested to the pre-Nicene age. The idea of being able to purify after death, that you get a second chance in a sense, is very important to me and is one of the more significant reasons I never switched to Eastern Orthodoxy.
I suppose technically such priests, by separating themselves from established teaching, are Catholic priests in name only. Maybe that's of some comfort, but I don't know how much.
Purgatory isn't even taught anymore and just like "limbo" the Church is reconsidering a lot about death and afterlife. Purgatory was a way to explain the unknown and the idea of praying for the souls in purgatory is almost embarrassing among many Catholic priests. Today purgatory is just not being mentioned before it will be disavowed altogether.
I don't mean to offend you. But there are teachings that are considered less important and more an issue of personal piety rather than dogma. Fasting and abstaining from meat on Fridays is an example.
That's not correct, but I don't blame you on this. If I understand you it's the Catholic priests in your area who have severely misled you. Or perhaps you innocently misinterpreted questions and discussions as rejections. Or you're confusing Limbo with Purgatory.
Be that as it may Purgatory certainly is still taught.
And what I find in the National Catholic Reporter, generally liberal, also doesn't generally seem to reject the idea.
The idea of Purgatory is a critical part of "All Souls Day." It's also seen as being referenced in the Book of Maccabees and other parts of the Catholic Bible.
Granted this issue matters more or less depending on how you see Catholicism. If you see Catholicism as a religion there's really no way they could abandon Purgatory altogether and they have not. However if you see Catholicism as a social organization, which I think many Catholics do, than no specific belief is vital. Probably not even the Resurrection or virgin birth because, from this mindset, Catholicism is more a culture than a religion. So if it's a culture what matters is that Catholicism remains community that runs hospitals, good schools, creates nice buildings, provides festivals, helps the poor, teaches people some universally agreed on virtues, and maintains other Catholic cultural features. (Music, painting, candles, etc)
Although I actually don't think that's simply a modern thing. I've been surprised by how often in the Middle Ages a great many people just went the "culture/community" route too. That's why they could switch to Anglicans or Lutherans or whatever. What mattered most to many was that "The Church", whatever "The Church" was, agreed to maintain the festivals, support services, and building projects they liked. They were either innocently ignorant or basically indifferent about the beliefs of a religion.
Last edited by Thomas R.; 08-21-2010 at 03:01 AM..
Vatican 2 is better than Vatican 1, Vatican 2 is opposed because of the fear of the loss of old traditions or the fear of liberalism that some leader want more control into the church ... But the whole essence of Vatican 2 was to ask Holy Spirit back into the church as the promise from the start of the church beginnings before all the church politices overshadowed Jesus move with world politices...Before Vatican 2 the Priest had their backs to the people and conducted the service by himself, with Vatican 2 the Priest were alowed to turn around to address the people of the body of Christ and invite them to partisipate, which allow the Service to be all English or native tongue, or non latin services.... Like the complant of Vayican 2 was : Do they want to let Holy Spirit do their work why can t they do it.......Where Heavens plan is Holy Spirit will bring Jesus grace to lead the body of Christ in harmony , and all gifts of the Holy Spirit are done by Holy Spirit and all crowns in Glory are the crowns were Jesus was allowed to do his will threw thoughs who recieved the crowns only..You do not recieve a crown of Glory for what you do for Jesus , but it is what Jesus does threw you ... If you are fixing the Catholic Church stay to the plan of Jesus Church, the body of Christ
Now as Papal Infallibility has already been defined by the Church it couldn't be undone by this unless there is universal agreement to do so. .
Yes it would seem that the hierarchy has painted themselves into a cornner with papal infallibility, but the Church has changed its teaching on many issues slavery etc.
They do not have to do away with it but as I have heard there is nothing stopping them from reinterpreting / expanding on the meaning of it.
One must remember that papal infallibility was a 19th century invention by a nut case pope who was dilusional and was trying to save his powers as forces were taking away his papal estates.
It was forced upon those in attendance at the council, it marked a dark day in the Church.
It was what caused Lord Action to pen his most famous quote.
"Power Corrupts, Absolute Power corrupts Absolutely"
The ground I stand on is solid orthodox Catholic ground. What I reject is your interpretation of the above document.
What that actually means is that when a matter of faith is decided on by the sacred teaching authority (Pope and the magesterium), ALLthe faithful will believe with the help of the Holy Spirit. It says that the faithful cannot err in matters of belief. This is not saying YOU, as a layman get the decide the matters of faith, but rather when a matter of faith is presented, the entire church from bishops to layman will not ERR IN BELIEF of this new matter. This is something that YOU break on just about every count. Oh, wait, you're not one of the faithful, so it doesn't include you.
You've got your entire Church structure upside down, Ted. It is you who doesn't understand what that means. Don't look now, but there's an earthquake in your area.
What it says is very straight forward, I am afraid that you are the one doing the interpretation to fit your way.
You are right I do have the Church structure turned upside down, that is the way the early Church was.
The hierarchy is suppose to be serving the people, the people are not suppose to be serving the hierarchy, it is time to topple those pedestals that the hierarchy has placed themselves on.
What it says is very straight forward, I am afraid that you are the one doing the interpretation to fit your way.
You are right I do have the Church structure turned upside down, that is the way the early Church was.
The hierarchy is suppose to be serving the people, the people are not suppose to be serving the hierarchy, it is time to topple those pedestals that the hierarchy has placed themselves on.
You seem to want a Catholic Church where the Magisterium tells you exactly what you want to hear, where it gives you everything you want and asks nothing of you.
Either you believe the Catholic Church was created by Christ to speak in time in matters of Faith and Morals through Peter, or you don't. Once you throw away Church authority you are no longer Catholic, you are a heretic. Plain and simple.
What it says is very straight forward, I am afraid that you are the one doing the interpretation to fit your way.
You are right I do have the Church structure turned upside down, that is the way the early Church was.
The hierarchy is suppose to be serving the people, the people are not suppose to be serving the hierarchy, it is time to topple those pedestals that the hierarchy has placed themselves on.
Ted, your interpretation of the document is as false as your interpretation of Catholicism. You really don't have a clue. I bet you built your whole position on Catholism based on that text. Buddy, I hate to tell you, you got it wrong. So please re-position. (ding...you are now free to move about the cabin)
Iranaeus (Against Heresies, Book 3, Chapter 3, Verse 2)(probably written around 190 AD):
2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.
Oh, and the orthodox have it wrong, too.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
