"Tradition, without Holy Scripture, Old or New, sufficed for years, and could still suffice. But Holy Scripture has never sufficed by itself; it always stood in need of Tradition. For it is only by Tradition that we learn that Holy Scripture is an inspired book. It is only Tradition that can give with authority and certainty the right meaning of Holy Scripture. Without Tradition the Holy Scripture may be made to speak in many discordant ways, thus destroying its authority altogether. "
-Catholic Belief
68 comments:
Without Tradition the Holy Scripture may be made to speak in many discordant ways, thus destroying its authority altogether.
Amen!!
That's just what Peter the first Pope said about St. Paul's writings in his 2nd epistle. ESV :
"And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures."
Keep the quotes coming sister!
as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures."
Anon,
It may help if you go back and look at the context for the bolded portions above. What you are suggesting is not what Peter meant.
I can't tell if you are trying to talk yourself into or out of the Church.
Oh, I left "the Church" a long time ago and I can assure you I will not be returning.
For goodness sake, if Catholics can't destroy the Church themselves, you can't possibly think you can do it from the outside.
No worries, God will deal with "the Church".
I think out of, which is always amusing in light of Acts 5:30-39. Do you think you can fight God himself? Do you think you can destroy what he has established?
Great verse. The Inquisition should have followed Gamaliel's advice, don't you think?
So the logic goes something like this.... Members of the Church have done sinfull things ergo, the doctrine of the Church is null and void?
No, that wasn't the logic I was appyling. Just applying your logic back to your own church.
I find the most bitter "ex-Catholics" in the Protestant blogosphere. Most of you appear to have been deeply hurt by someone connected with the Church, and for that I am so sorry.
Not true for me and not true for most ex-RCs I know.
What happened was that God opened my heart to the gospel and being saved by his grace I was able to understand the true message. At first I thought the RCC was just a dead church that didn't handle the gospel well, but after studying her doctrines I realized she was not really in possession of the gospel in the first place.
Do you know the true gospel?
LOL!!
Carrie, that's one of the more amusing things I've read today. You are so obviously and vindictively bitter towards the Church that it is palpably obvious across the Internet. Actions, blog posts and comments speak louder than denials :-)
Regarding Reginald's comment.
You may have a point about ex-Catholics (who after hearing the true message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ) to be a bit bitter towards the RCC. I "fell away" from Catholicism with the intent on returning back to it until I started going to Bible based churches and hearing the Gospel. I took an honest look at the Scriptures with new eyes and it became clear that I was deceived by a religion that I once thought was the "One True Chruch of Jesus Christ". Wouldn't you be bitter towards something that you believed 100% and realized later it was all lies and that your eternal salvation was based on that lie?
I would not base my eternal security on a system that creates non-Biblical doctrines from oral traditions.
I read alot of Catholic material and even listen to Catholic radio from time to time. The more I read or listen the more I am convinced that Catholicism is not the Church of Jesus Christ but an apostate religion. I'll take the Word of God over the word of man (the pope) anyday.
Honesty about one's attitudes is certainly to be preferred, especially when they seem to be worn on one's sleeve :-)
And if we assume arguendo the rest of what you say is true - then her attitude would be comprehensible. Unfortunately, Carrie (and you, Anon) did not leave something that was "all lies". So the rest of your post is irrelevant, and I can only hope that the catechesis you received was defective; otherwise I fear you have no good excuse for your error. :-(
I still have to find an infallible list of normative APOSTOLIC traditions.
You are so obviously and vindictively bitter towards the Church that it is palpably obvious across the Internet.
Reginald, I can assure you this isn't true.
Don't mistake a passion for apologetics for bitterness or some hidden agenda.
Faith however, is a gift of God’s grace. 1 Cor 12:8-10. Our faith does not save us, God’s grace saves us.
So you are saved by grace alone through faith alone through Christ alone?
If so, then we agree.
Carrie,
Your agenda(s?) will always remain hidden until you start publishing them. :-)
Meanwhile, I stand by my opinion of your attitude until I have good reasons to change it (and your denials here are an insufficient reason, let me assure you) :-)
Peace.
Not having been properly taught the Catholic faith does not negate it's Truth.
Sorry, are you responding to me?
If so, could you give me a yes or no. Your response doesn't make sense.
You are so obviously and vindictively bitter towards the Church that it is palpably obvious across the Internet.
Wow. This is news to me.
"That's just what Peter the first Pope ..."
If Peter were a pope:
1.) He would have called himself by the title Princeps Pastorum (i.e. Chief Shepherd) rather than applying it to Jesus exclusively in his writing.
2.) He would have dedicated his two epistles to the "sacred heart of the Virgin."
3.) He would have told the men of Cornelius' house to bow and kiss his ring rather than "stand up, I also am a man."
4.) Rather than telling Simon Magus to pray to God that perhaps the though of his heart might be forgiven him, he would have said "you are absolved my son."
I've expanded the idea a bit further of what Peter would have done had he been a pope, here.
When you comment on the Catholic faith your commentary is disjointed and misses the mark as one who sees but does not comprehend.
Okay. And I have asked you direct questions and you have yet to actually answer them.
I will ask again: Are you are saved by grace alone through faith alone through Christ alone?
Since you think I am unable to comprehend, please enlighten. You can start with a simple yes or no to the above question.
Anonymous,
I don't care for links to videos with no commentary or reason for such. I have therefore deleted your links.
Having your husband contradict me (assuming that "Carrie's husband" is supposed to be and really is he) is a cheap debating trick that is non-responsive to what I would think is the more fundamental question: how - if I'm wrong about you, which I am still not conceding - I (and others) could have acquired such a "mistaken" opinion of your attitude towards the Church based upon nothing more than your writing.
Please note that it is not simply the fact that you "do apologetics" against the Church that is the cause. Ken Temple (a frequent and unrelenting Protestant poster at Dave Armstrong's blog), Theojunkie, Turretinfan, and Rhology (for four quick off-the-cuff counter-examples) don't come across as mired in the kind of bitterness towards the Church that you do, Carrie.
But that's the last I've got to say on the subject.
Having your husband contradict me (assuming that "Carrie's husband" is supposed to be and really is he) is a cheap debating trick that is non-responsive to what I would think is the more fundamental question
Reginald,
May I suggest that you are the one harboring bitterness towards me?
My husband reads my blog and decided to leave that comment. I wasn't even sure it was him until I asked him last night. Insinuating that I put him up to it as some sort of "cheap debating trick" is just weird. In fact, all of your commentary on my personal motives is strange so I have to wonder what exactly is going on with you.
don't come across as mired in the kind of bitterness towards the Church that you do, Carrie.
So? I know that TF and Rhology have not concentrated in Catholic apologetics as I have, so maybe that has something to do with it. Or perhaps it is a personality or writing style difference - I am known as a very matter-of-fact person in my speaking in writing regardless of the topic. I'm fine with that, sorry if you are not.
This borderline obsession with people and their personalities is disturbing, something that Dave Armstrong (whose blog I know you frequent)does also, so perhaps you think this is usual play in apologetics - it really shouldn't be. I would suggest you move on and stick with blogs that don't cause all this paranoia. It's not healthy.
Avemaria,
I am still waiting for your answer to my question. In case you missed it amongst all the psychoanalysis, here it is again:
When you comment on the Catholic faith your commentary is disjointed and misses the mark as one who sees but does not comprehend.
Okay. And I have asked you direct questions and you have yet to actually answer them.
I will ask again: Are you are saved by grace alone through faith alone through Christ alone?
Since you think I am unable to comprehend, please enlighten. You can start with a simple yes or no to the above question.
By grace alone, thought faith alone, by Christ alone do you intend to reject that covenant which he established? Is that your point?
I am part of the church because I am saved, I am not saved because I am part of the church. You have things backward.
I am saved by grace through my faith in Christ, that is my point (Eph 2:8-10). The new covenant through the blood of Christ has secured my redemption. My “acceptance” of the new covenant is through faith alone.
“But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.” Heb 9:11-15
The new covenant does not establish a visible Church, it establishes a body of believers who are joined through faith in Christ.
Who then is the arbiter of this arraignment?
God. Remember, Jesus is the mediator of the covenant, not the Church. (see Hebrews verse above).
Are the Jehovah Witness part of this invisible body of believers? How about Latter Day Saints?
No. Why would you think so?
Faith in Christ is that which establishes one as a member of the church, interesting.
What else would it be?
John 3:16, John 5:24, John 6:40, Romans 3:21, Romans 5:1, Galatians 2:16, Galatians 3:26, Ephesians 3:17, Phillipians 3:9, 2 Tim 3:15, 1 John 5:13: these are just some of the verses that establish faith in Christ as necessary step for joining his body (the church). Where are your verses showing that one must join the Catholic Church to access Christ and be saved?
The demons believe and they tremble, are they members of this church, this invisible body of believers?
Aquaint yourself with the biblical meaning of "faith" and you won't ask silly questions like this.
By what authority does this invisible body of believers reach consensus?
God is the authority. Is He not enough? You sound like 1 Samuel 8.
Carrie, someone has sold you a big bill of goods and you have accepted it hook, line and sinker. Protestant theology simply does not line up with the bible.
God called me out of the darkness into the light while you are a member of the church you were born into - how much investigating have you actually done? If anyone has been sold a "bill of goods" it is you.
Jesus established one Church, he is the high priest and it is through his efforts that the Church continues to exist.
Which Church is that, the Roman Catholic or the Eastern Orthodox? Prove it.
He guides his Church through the Holy Spirit.
He guides all believers with the Holy Spirit. (1 John 2:27).
Interesting to note that these devoted men and women of God are influencing the world for Christ to this day. Now that’s devotion to the Lord and his work.
Are you sure?
"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'" Matt 7:21-23
Be sure that your faith is correct - dead "saints" can't help you, only God can.
"Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you fail to meet the test!" 2 Corinth 13:5
I will pray for you.
Okay, whoever keeps leaving links to videos, please stop. I am tired of deleting them.
Are you sure the Saints are dead?
Are they still breathing?
How did that work with Joseph Smith? And the Watchtower speaks of Jesus, are they guided by the Holy Spirit too?
No.
Do you not understand that not everyone who claims to be a follower of Jesus necessarily is?
All who have true saving faith are indwelled by the Holy Spirit. We can know the true believers by their fruit. Likewise, there are wolves in sheep's clothing (Matt 7:15), tares among wheat (Matt 13:25), and some who go out from us b/c they are not of us (1 John 2:19). Since we have been warned of such, people like Joseph Smith are really no surprise.
But you are lobbing up weak rebuttals to minor points. Instead you need to spend your time proving to yourself why the Catholic Church is your mediator for the new covenant rather than the Lord Jesus himself, as scripture states. Figure out why faith in the Church will save you rather than faith in the risen Saviour, again, as scripture tells us.
Examine yourself whether you are in the faith - ask God (directly) to reveal the truth to you.
How did that work with Joseph Smith? And the Watchtower speaks of Jesus, are they guided by the Holy Spirit too?
BTW,
You do realize that Mormons & JWs are not Protestant, don't you?
Those 2 groups actually have more in common with the Catholic Church since they both claim to be the one true church and preach the necessity of a infallible interpreter.
Review 1 Cor 12.
How does that prove a single visible Church? It doesn't.
All who are truly in Christ are members of the body. Again, you are getting your order wrong.
Show me the verse where it essentially says I must join the Catholic Church to be a member of Christ's body or the verse that says the Church is the mediator b/w myself and Christ.
Carrie:
Would you please stop promoting falsehood about Catholic doctrine. Maybe change the name of your blog to something more revealing of your intentions?
It would be a bit more charitable and less disingenuous than your tireless rants based on false information and a profound hatred for Catholicism.
Your Catholic relatives in heaven continue to intercede before the throne of God for you and the rest of us. Like it or not.
Why not post on the beauty and truth of Calvin's Institutes of Religion or blog about how Jesus has given you much joy, peace and charity through the reforming power and truth of Calvinism?
Instead, you come across as a bitter ex Catholic with a major axe to grind.
Let's read some beautiful things about TULIP and perhaps you can persuade some Catholics about the life changing grace found in your religion.
I would enjoy reading how your life has been transformed by your belief in Calvinism.
Has Calvinism given you more charity towards others who don't agree with you? Has it given you a love for the unsaved? Has it caused you to defend the helpless in society including the frail elderly and the unborn? Has Calvinism and its tenets inspired you to share the good news about Jesus death and resurrection to others? Has TULIP inspired you to work at your local shelter over the holidays, support crisis pregnancies, open your wallet and finances to the poor?
Has it improved your marriage?
(obviously the answers are none of our business, just food for thought)
Regardless of what you believe the gospel is, at the end of our lives we are all going to be judged by God based on what we did and didn't do as the gospel of matt 25 tells us. You can say someday, "Lord Lord, I tried to tell those Catholics how deceived they were, I sniped at their doctrines on my blog, I insulted their beliefs and showed much hate for their twisting of the gospel etc etc"
And Jesus will say "whatsoever you did to the least of these, that you have done unto me."
I am waiting to hear a post called the Joys of Calvinism. Perhaps you will win some of us by your charity? C'mon Carrie. Inquiring Catholic minds want to know how Calvinism has been life changing for you. Preach it sister!
I am waiting to hear a post called the Joys of Calvinism. Perhaps you will win some of us by your charity? C'mon Carrie. Inquiring Catholic minds want to know how Calvinism has been life changing for you. Preach it sister!
I am not quite a Calvinist.
Want to revise your comment?
Would you please stop promoting falsehood about Catholic doctrine.
BTW anon, I do try to be accurate. Please list the "falsehoods" I have promoted so I can look into it.
"I am not quite a Calvinist."
Perhaps a post explaining wherein thou differest from thine 'Reformed' cronies.
"BTW anon, I do try to be accurate.
Please list the "falsehoods" I have promoted so I can look into it."
Start with this one Carrie:
"after studying her doctrines I realized she was not really in possession of the gospel in the first place."
This comment smacks of your lack of understanding and blatant hatred of the Church and promotion of falsehood. 2000 years later, you have the ability to state that the Church was not really in possession of the gospel in the first place???
Can you give me historical references to all the other churches until 1517 that did have possession of the Gospel??
"I would not believe the Gospel except by the authority of the Catholic Church" St.Aug.
Was Augustine wrong too Carrie?
Do you place your biblical knowledge and private revelation and wisdom above his?
I guess according to your logic St. Augustine was wrong too.
Please start looking into it.
anon, it seems if anybody here is being hateful is not Carrie but you.
Carrie you are doing a fine job and totally patient with those who are accusing you of spreading falsehoods about the Catholic faith. I as an unintentional former Catholic can testify that you are not spreading lies here about Catholicism.
Catholics are 'testy' here because they can not defend their religion in the light of Holy Scriptures. They also can not prove that their unBiblical oral traditions to be inspired by God..unfortunately they take the magisterium's word for it over what God's Word teaches.
Mrs. LB
"I as an unintentional former Catholic can testify that you are not spreading lies here about Catholicism.'
That's all you needed to say Mrs LB!
You never knew what you left, so you are ill-equipped to even make such a comment. "Un-intentional" Catholics such as Carrie and yourself have no basis with which to make a platform and speak against the Church.
For Carrie to say the Catholic Church never possessed the gospel is a patent lie. Which church Mrs LB had the true gospel before 1500?
Names and dates please.
Thanks for your king words, Mrs. LB.
Can you give me historical references to all the other churches until 1517 that did have possession of the Gospel??
I am sure there were many pockets of believers throughout history.
At what point exactly the Roman Catholic Church lost possession of the gospel, I don't know. And I don't really care - she clearly isn't in possession of it now.
The original churches, established by the apostles, were an assembly of believers. The gospel is for the people and upon believing that gospel they join the church. No single visible organization has sole rights to the gospel - it is God's, offered to sinners at his timing.
Until you grasp this concept you will continue to be mistaken about the importance of history in establishing truth.
"I am sure there were many pockets of believers throughout history."
Can you produce even ONE document any of ONE these supposed people produecd in the years 100 AD to 1500?
"At what point exactly the Roman Catholic Church lost possession of the gospel, I don't know. And I don't really care - she clearly isn't in possession of it now."
I thought you said she never had it? How could she lose it?
"At what point exactly the Roman Catholic Church lost possession of the gospel, I don't know. And I don't really care."
It's a good thing you are not bitter, or you would not care... oh, never mind.
Can you produce even ONE document any of ONE these supposed people produecd in the years 100 AD to 1500?
Many of the church fathers held to Protestant principles. See the King/Webster trilogy on Sola Scriptura.
But if you are interested in a group of people who were clearly in possession of the gospel, look to the apostles. I never can understand why people would want to place more importance on post-apostolic, fallible authors. Makes no sense.
Again though, this is the fatal flaw of the Catholic. The gospel has been preserved faithfully in the Scriptures and that gospel is at variance with Rome.
I thought you said she never had it? How could she lose it?
No, I said when I was first saved I thought the RCC was a dead church based on my experience but I later realized she wasn't dead (not acting on the gospel) but not in possession of the gospel.
I would say most likely the Roman Catholic Church never had the true gospel but it is difficult to determine when the original catholic church became the Roman Catholic Church and how quickly that transition occurred. What I can say is that the RCC today is not in possession of the true saving gospel of Christ.
Anon, It's amazing how much Catholics think they know us former Catholics who left Catholicism. Honey, I loved and was proud to be a Catholic of the "One true Church". I was even affiliated with a religous order and made many retreats with them. But, you know what? You;re right I was ill equiped not in my catechism but with the true Gospel message!! Thanks to the internet I've discovered much more about what Catholicism really teaches and the contradictions of many of it's teachings. You're so blinded by your loyality to the Mother Church that you literally can not see it just like I was when I was still a practicing loyal Catholic. I remember being presented with the Gospel and the message literally went over my head. Now that I am away from the teachings of the Catholic Church the Gospel opened my eyes and the burden lifted off of my shoulders. I then realized Christ set me free by taking the wrath of the Father unto Himself and paid with His Blood so that I may live in Him forever. I am no longer bounded with the uncertainity of performing my penances correctly or not. Let's not get into all the mindboggling rules and guidelines with indulgences.
The Catholic Church does have in it's possession of the Gospel but unfortunately they have perverted it with their traditions. A question I have for you Anon, is this, do you know with certainty where the Oral (Sacred) Traditions originated from and the evidence they came from God?
Mrs.LB
"But if you are interested in a group of people who were clearly in possession of the gospel, look to the apostles. I never can understand why people would want to place more importance on post-apostolic, fallible authors. Makes no sense."
Ok,I look to the apostles but what about all the people who lived from the last apostle's death until 1517? Where are the writings? What are the names? What are the dates?
According to you Carrie,
the apostles had the True gospel, but the Catholic Church never had it or lost it, or misplaced it?
"Oops, I just had it somewhere...now where did it go?"
So the "pockets" of un-named silent believers carried forth the True gospel passing the torch to Luther or Calvin or whichever of the "fathers" you derive your doctrine from. You have a magisterium too Carrie. We just are more open about ours.
Not only are your comments historically incorrect but betray a "Jack Chick-like" understanding of history that is colored by blinding hatred towards Catholics.
Please Carrie, names and dates of all the true believers who possessed the gospel? If you can't come up with any, you are spreading falsehood about the Catholic Church by insisting Catholics never had or "lost" the gospel.
Your inability to provide factual information on this blog discredits you and does a disservice to the other reformed bloggers who at least attempt to answer with some snippets of historical information .
Also, why you would want to place
more importance on your post-apostolic father's interpretations of Scripture such as Luther, Zwingli and Calvin who all bitterly detested and disagreed with one another's interpretations? Doesn't make sense to me either.
Luther himself, once he realized the disaster that sola scriptura was said: "Fly to the Church councils for in them you will find safety." Why don't you write a post about what he meant by that one? Was the 'Church' he referred to in that quote in possession of the gospel?
Until you can present factual arguments not based in hate and Boetnner/Chick "invisible church theories," your blog becomes yet another outpost of poorly informed fundamentalist screed based in prejudice and mis-information.
Can you please do one more blog post on how the beauty of TULIP minus 1 has changed your life for the better? How have the doctrines of grace made you more tolerant of those who don't share the same views as you on penal substitutionary atonement? You may win some of us lost souls if we could hear personal testimony of how reformed theology has renewed your heart and mind and made you more like Jesus. Show us the beauty of your theology. Let us see the fruits of it please. You may win more souls to Christ than attacking a Church you never chose to understand.
Mrs LB:
"Thanks to the internet I've discovered much more about what Catholicism really teaches and the contradictions of many of it's teachings."
No offense But That's your first mistake.Do you really think the internet is a reliable source of information? Unless you are going to the Vatican website site itself, I caution you to take what you read with a grain of salt.
Go to Amazon.com and buy yourself a catechism and read it yourself. As a matter of fact, read the compendium of the catechism for free on the net.
The internet is full of misrepresentations of Catholicism as evidenced by Carrie's lack of genuine scholarship and integrity.
Straw man apologetics as the type seen here will never lead you to Truth.
Mrs LB you said:
I then realized Christ set me free by taking the wrath of the Father unto Himself and paid with His Blood so that I may live in Him forever. I am no longer bounded with the uncertainity of performing my penances correctly or not. Let's not get into all the mindboggling rules and guidelines with indulgences"
Mrs LB (I hope your initials aren't Lorraine Boetnner), I was a born again believer for more than 15 years until I saw the truth of Catholicism. The things you just stated reveal that you never understood any Catholicism whatsoever! I don't care if you were a professed nun in an order, it doesn't make you an authority on Catholicism. Bart Brewer was a priest who never understood Catholicism! So being Catholic doesn't make you an authority.
Your comments betray an ignorance of Catholicism and sadly the fact that you never understood the grace that was available to you through the Eucharist which the early Church fathers wrote so much about. I feel bad for you Mrs LB and Carrie too, because of your negative Catholic experiences. I suggest you both take sometime off from the internet, get yourselves a good used Catholic Catechism and sit with it and the Holy Scriptures. When you can accurately state what Catholics believe, comeback and we'll talk.
If you still vehemently argue that Catholics don't believe Christ died for their sins, than I politely suggest a norologist consultation to help you with your dyslexia. Sometimes it takes some powerful medicine to remove the hate-colored glasses you view Catholic doctrine with.
Luther himself, once he realized the disaster that sola scriptura was said: "Fly to the Church councils for in them you will find safety."
Can I get a source reference for that quote, please.
Now that I am away from the teachings of the Catholic Church the Gospel opened my eyes and the burden lifted off of my shoulders. I then realized Christ set me free by taking the wrath of the Father unto Himself and paid with His Blood so that I may live in Him forever.
Amen!
Isn't it amazing how God unblinds us and the truth is just so overwhelming and joyous! Many, many of us have been through this exact experience but sadly those still left on the other side are still stumbling in the darkness.
Anonymous,
You seem to have a reading comprehension problem. Sorry, but there is not much I can do about that.
I said I wasn't fully Reformed so why do you keep bringing that up?
The gospel was carried on throughout history through the scriptures (didn't I say this already) - I don't need writings from random people throughout history. Again, I can't follow this logic that we need post-apostolic, fallible writers to confirm what the infallible scriptures tell us.
Also, why you would want to place
more importance on your post-apostolic father's interpretations of Scripture such as Luther, Zwingli and Calvin
Again, I am not fully Reformed so this is meaningless. At the time of my rebirth I had no clue who any of those guys were.
Can you please do one more blog post on how the beauty of TULIP minus 1 has changed your life for the better?
Again, not fully Reformed.
You may win some of us lost souls if we could hear personal testimony of how reformed theology has renewed your heart and mind and made you more like Jesus.
Still not fully Reformed.
If you would like to interact further I will have to ask that you actually read my comments more thoroughly.
And since you are so concerned about getting the facts correct (which is a good thing) I will need a source of that Luther quote.
Anon said:
"No offense But That's your first mistake.Do you really think the internet is a reliable source of information? Unless you are going to the Vatican website site itself, I caution you to take what you read with a grain of salt."
I strictly use Catholic websites like EWTN, Catholic Answers, even the Vatican website etc, etc. I hope that makes you feel better ;)
"Go to Amazon.com and buy yourself a catechism and read it yourself. As a matter of fact, read the compendium of the catechism for free on the net."
Not going to waste my mulla on buying more Catholic books.
"The internet is full of misrepresentations of Catholicism as evidenced by Carrie's lack of genuine scholarship and integrity."
I am a big girl I can discern which are "true" Catholic material from others. I used to be a very traditional Catholic and still can "smell" the not-so-Catholic view. But thanks for the advice anyway. I personally don't know Carrie but she seems to have a very good understanding of Catholicism. I see on your part though of being very judgemental, snobbish, uncharitable by falsely accusing others of ignorance while in fact you are the one to be in possession of what you accuse others of. I see right through Catholics like you who paint the opposing individual in a bad light rather than confront the unBiblical facts of your religion.
"Straw man apologetics as the type seen here will never lead you to Truth."
Such as you can't answer with evidence that unBiblical Oral Traditions are inspired by God with the Truth? hmmm, no wonder.
Mrs LB you said:
I then realized Christ set me free by taking the wrath of the Father unto Himself and paid with His Blood so that I may live in Him forever. I am no longer bounded with the uncertainity of performing my penances correctly or not. Let's not get into all the mindboggling rules and guidelines with indulgences"
"Mrs LB (I hope your initials aren't Lorraine Boetnner), I was a born again believer for more than 15 years until I saw the truth of Catholicism. The things you just stated reveal that you never understood any Catholicism whatsoever! I don't care if you were a professed nun in an order, it doesn't make you an authority on Catholicism. Bart Brewer was a priest who never understood Catholicism! So being Catholic doesn't make you an authority."
I have no idea who Lorraine B was or Bart Brewer nor did I say I was a nun either. You think you were a born again believer? Quite frankly I doubt that you ever had a true relationship with Jesus. If you had you would not have exchanged truth for a lie. I could tell by your staunch defense of Catholicism (btw, w/o Biblical support) that you came from a protestant background. Oddly are the worse types of Catholics IMO. But, there will always be psuedo Christians in any denomination. Your arrogance and know it all attitude towards former Catholics is typical. The unChristlike attitude and defense of a man-made religion shows me that you never knew Christ or even what the Bible says about false teachers entering the early church. Otherwise, you would have recognized the false errors of the Catholic Church.
"Your comments betray an ignorance of Catholicism and sadly the fact that you never understood the grace that was available to you through the Eucharist which the early Church fathers wrote so much about."
And you betray an ignorance of the Scriptures which is the Word of God. You now entrust the magisterium to interpret Scriptures for you rather w/o question. Some people call that as being under mind control.
"I feel bad for you Mrs LB and Carrie too, because of your negative Catholic experiences."
Fortunately I was never molested by any priests. (though I knew someone who was) In fact, I knew plenty of fine priests in my day and I still hold pleasent fellings towards them. No negative Catholic experiences. Sorry to burst your bubble.
" I suggest you both take sometime off from the internet, get yourselves a good used Catholic Catechism and sit with it and the Holy Scriptures. When you can accurately state what Catholics believe, comeback and we'll talk."
I have but you didn't answer my question about the origin of unBiblical Oral Trads.
"If you still vehemently argue that Catholics don't believe Christ died for their sins,"
I never said that nor do I think Carrie did. Must be in your own imagination.
" than I politely suggest a norologist consultation to help you with your dyslexia. Sometimes it takes some powerful medicine to remove the hate-colored glasses you view Catholic doctrine with."
The only hate I see is spewing from you but then again you wouldn't see that because of the gigantic log wedged in your eyes.
Mrs.LB
St. Louis is a Doctor of the Church but does he know what the Bible teaches regarding the Holy Spirit? Obviously not. Here is an example of one of his blasphemeous beliefs that the magisterium apparently believes too otherwise they would chuck this out onto the garbage pile.
St. Louis de Montfort
Through Mary
258. We must do everything through Mary, that is, we must obey her always and be led in all things by her spirit, which is the Holy Spirit of God. "Those who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God," says St. Paul. Those who are led by the spirit of Mary are children of Mary, and, consequently children of God, as we have already shown. Among the many servants of Mary only those who are truly and faithfully devoted to her are led by her spirit. I have said that the spirit of Mary is the spirit of God because she was never led by her own spirit, but always by the spirit of God, who made himself master of her to such an extent that he became her very spirit. That is why St. Ambrose says, "May the soul of Mary be in each one of us to glorify the Lord. May the spirit of Mary be in each one of us to rejoice in God." Happy is the man who follows the example of the good Jesuit Brother Rodriguez, who died a holy death, because he will be completely possessed and governed by the spirit of Mary, a spirit which is gentle yet strong, zealous yet prudent, humble yet courageous, pure yet fruitful.
http://www.iipg.org/consecration4.htm
Sadly, what many Catholics don't see is that this spirit of Mary is not the Holy Spirit of God but a satanic spirit speaking lies. If the Catholic Church was the one true Church of Christ they would not hold to such teachings as this but condemn them in order to protect her sheep from being led away.
Mrs. LB
yeah Mrs LB, you certainly aren't judgmental. "Quite frankly I doubt that you ever had a true relationship with Jesus. If you had you would not have exchanged truth for a lie.'
Yes, that's not judgemental at all.
When a Catholic defends the faith, they are hateful and arrogant. When a protestant is arrogant and hateful, they are "contending for the faith." Interesting double standard.
Mary leads us to Jesus, the closer one gets to Mary, the closer one gets to Jesus. Get over it. Jesus mom. he's our brother, so she's our mother. Rev says Queen of heaven. All generations should call her blessed.
"And since you are so concerned about getting the facts correct (which is a good thing) I will need a source of that Luther quote."
"If the world lasts for a long time, it will again be necessary, on account of the many interpretations which are now given to the Scriptures, to receive the decrees of councils, and take refuge in them, in order to preserve the unity of faith."
Epis. ad. Zwingli (ap. Balmes, p. 423)
What councils are those Carrie?
The councils of the Church that you have proclaimed "did not possess the gospel." (Your words, not mine)
What councils are those Carrie?
The councils of the Church that you have proclaimed "did not possess the gospel." (Your words, not mine)
Who can know what councils since your quote appears to be a phony.
James has dealt with this quote previously
"The first Luther quote used by Therese is from LW 37:16 and actually reads,
“If the world lasts much longer, men will, as the ancients did, once more turn to human schemes on account of this dissension, and again issue laws and regulations to keep the people in the unity of the faith. Their success will be the same as it was in the past.”
What will their success be according to Luther in the above quote?- Failure."
"If the world lasts much longer, men will, as the ancients did, once more turn to human schemes on account of this dissension, and again issue laws and regulations to keep the people in the unity of the faith. Their success will be the same as it was in the past."
Note the last sentence: "Their success will be the same as it was in the past." Their success will be, according to Luther....failure, because "human schemes " "laws and regulations " are not the work of the Holy Spirit, but of men. The text goes on to say, "In short, the devil is too clever and too mighty for us" because "If we wish to stand upon the councils and counsels of men, we lose the Scriptures altogether and remain in the devil’s possession body and soul."
Carrie:
Yes I am sure there is no bias in finding his source for this quote and it can be trusted implicitly.
Yes I am sure there is no bias in finding his source for this quote and it can be trusted implicitly.
I guess we shouldn't expect an apology from you for pushing a misquote from a secondary source?
Instead you question the integrity of James. How impressive.
Carrie- I turned off anonymous comments- so far, I like what I don't see.
By the way, this morning I did a brief blog post on this Luther quote, and it will probably be on the aomin blog sometime in the next few days.
Carrie- I turned off anonymous comments- so far, I like what I don't see.
I have done the same here (and am very happy about the change at BA). Anonymous commenting seems to be too tempting for some to behave poorly.
Thanks for feedback on the Luther quote.
Post a Comment