tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post1784141548035449931..comments2024-03-21T04:02:46.799-07:00Comments on Little Catholic Bubble: What Obama forgot to mention in his welcome to Pope Francis!Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comBlogger268125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-78091054699619730482015-10-01T11:02:27.487-07:002015-10-01T11:02:27.487-07:00of which there may be manyof which there may be manyAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05491397288423296804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-1526982971392453622015-10-01T11:01:21.921-07:002015-10-01T11:01:21.921-07:00//I'll just add that I think you may be confus...//I'll just add that I think you may be confusing inerrancy (and infallibility) with impeccability?//<br /><br />Leila, I think that that is quite helpful. When one is talking to evangelicals they will say that inerrancy means that the bible cannot be factual incorrect, is completely consistent and so on. I think you might be something slightly different. <br />BTW I am more than happy to agree that the Church precedes scripture and is the originator of it. <br /><br /><br />Here is a little thought on the feast of the Little Flower, perhaps its the little things that unite, of there may be many, that might be a better focus.<br /> I will offer one. <br />I was brought to baptism by my Godparents and parents, who in turn were brought to baptism by their Godparents and parents and so on. There are about 100 people standing in a long line going back to someone who was baptised by the apostles. What's true of me is also true of all of you.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05491397288423296804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-61433863090511294092015-10-01T10:29:56.349-07:002015-10-01T10:29:56.349-07:00* But the Church still holds the entirety of the t...* But the Church still holds the entirety of the teachings on faith and morals ...<br /><br />Correct my typos at will ... no edit buttonNubbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15972118374098863290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-47154959484787991262015-10-01T10:27:43.052-07:002015-10-01T10:27:43.052-07:00Then that's a matter of logic, Marcus. Right?...Then that's a matter of logic, Marcus. Right? It's a historical fact that there were breaks from the Catholic Church. I'm not saying some reform wasn't necessary, but that wasn't enough of a reason to break from authority. So there we are. We are broken. We are now scattered. People have left for emotional reasons, since the Reformation at least.<br /><br />Here in the modern day, as a seeker, one can look back at history, study the breaks, study why they happened, that's all fine. But the Church still holds the entirely of the teachings on faith and morals and She exists solely to provide sacramental life for the fold. Right?<br /><br />If you want to argue what believe is a valid sacrament, etc., that's all plain and clear in theology and scripture and even just basic doctrine of the faith. It's good to examine it all. My opinion is also that of the Church, when I say you have a portion of the pie. That's exactly what the Church would say. No one denies your faith. But you're simply missing the rest of the life within the Body.<br /><br />You'll hopefully come to a place where you can accept the teachings and come inside. Everyone has his own journey.Nubbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15972118374098863290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-4886471024264722422015-10-01T10:15:43.919-07:002015-10-01T10:15:43.919-07:00/Is this really just a matter of the emotional dis.../Is this really just a matter of the emotional dissatisfaction of how some lay Catholics have spoken to you?/<br /><br />Not really, but its a fair question<br /><br />But let me pick at this a bit. <br /><br />/You’ve got a portion of the pie. But not the whole pie. That’s just what it is.//<br /><br />Now whether that refers to the validity of the Eucharist outside of the the Catholic Church, or the withholding of the sacrament from baptised Christians who are not Catholic, or both, what is implied that the responsibility for disunity lays with the non Catholic. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05491397288423296804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-20455384273773029592015-10-01T10:09:05.694-07:002015-10-01T10:09:05.694-07:00"I think we might be talking across each othe..."I think we might be talking across each other a bit here."<br /><br />I'll just add that I think you may be confusing inerrancy (and infallibility) with impeccability?<br /><br />No one has ever claimed that Catholics are sinless or even "nice". But the Church has always claimed to be the protector of the Deposit of Faith. That is to say, even as the people of the Church sin, the Magisterium will never <i>teach error</i> on matters of Faith and Morals. And she never has. The teaching remains true, and will continue to remain true.<br /><br />Jesus provided us a way to find and know His truth. If he didn't, then we are orphans, wandering aimlessly.<br /><br />And regarding the Bible: The Church was growing, thriving, teaching, sanctifying, hundreds of years before she (the Church) ultimately canonized the New Testament, declaring, with her God-given authority, that the New Testament was Truth. So, it's not a circular proposition at all. It's utterly linear.Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-25702563867940516632015-10-01T09:45:09.092-07:002015-10-01T09:45:09.092-07:00I think we might be talking across each other a bi...<i>I think we might be talking across each other a bit here. </i><br /><br />I am trying to talk directly to your points which is why I try to use a wider logical lens to bring all the thoughts back in. I mean, we’ve gone from moral objectivity to inerrancy and now to the question of the Body as one fold. <br /><br />What are we chasing to answer, specifically? I just like to know for my own thought process, because I like to eventually reach the end product of the thoughts-- after all the considerations have been put on the table. I’m solution-driven. Is this really just a matter of the emotional dissatisfaction of how some lay Catholics have spoken to you?<br /><br /><i>Now I would ask the question of you, what about the rest of us? The baptised who are not in communion with you. Who are often spoken to by Catholics, as we that lack of communion was our fault or that of our forebears. With no blame attached to the Catholic Church at all. I cannot accept as infallible an institution that has proved as fallible as any. And yet when it comes to the disunity of Christianity, we are told that it is everybody else fault. </i><br /><br />Well, I cannot speak for how other Catholics have spoken with you. I can’t speak to their motives or attitudes. My personal opinion is that you are a member of the body, if you’re a baptized Christian, but you are lacking the life of the sacraments. You’ve got a portion of the pie. But not the whole pie. That’s just what it is. As far as the blame game goes, I’m personally not interested in airing complaint. I don’t think that helps in moving dialogue for understanding. I would just steer you in good faith toward the logic and the intellectual side of things. I’m sorry people are jerks, but you know, I mean, I’ve experienced some jerkiness from Protestants and atheists, so, that’s really not relevant to the logic at the end of the day.Nubbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15972118374098863290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-13678314989925840512015-10-01T08:12:11.341-07:002015-10-01T08:12:11.341-07:00I should add that that's the impression one ge...I should add that that's the impression one gets speaking to members the Catholic laity, less so when speaking with clergy including the higher clergy. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05491397288423296804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-37500278467585123632015-10-01T08:09:48.867-07:002015-10-01T08:09:48.867-07:00as we that lack of communion
should be
as if that...as we that lack of communion<br />should be <br />as if that lack of communionAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05491397288423296804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-85511971593275850012015-10-01T08:07:51.105-07:002015-10-01T08:07:51.105-07:00I think we might be talking across each other a bi...I think we might be talking across each other a bit here. <br /><br />Jesus called us to be one. And yet for all the human reasons that we know well, we are not one. <br />Now I would ask the question of you, what about the rest of us? The baptised who are not in communion with you. Who are often spoken to by Catholics, as we that lack of communion was our fault or that of our forebears. With no blame attached to the Catholic Church at all. I cannot accept as infallible an institution that has proved as fallible as any. And yet when it comes to the disunity of Christianity, we are told that it is everybody else fault. <br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05491397288423296804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-62293340642189861062015-10-01T07:51:54.861-07:002015-10-01T07:51:54.861-07:00So when Justin Martyr spoke of God creating out of...<i>So when Justin Martyr spoke of God creating out of pre existing matter, who was deciding, at that time, whether he was correct or incorrect. And why do we not have their judgement on it?</i><br /><br />?<br /><br />Marcus,<br />We do have a judgement on this idea. We have the doctrines that came about to guard against any ideas of Gnosticism or Greek thought of the time. I mean, the authority is in place to keep error out.<br /><br />We're starting to go down these side creeks of thought. Let's take a wider approach.<br /><br />When we want to see how something works, we take it apart. We look at the parts and components that make up the whole. We look at the inner workings of the gears, how they all turn one another, how the motor works, how the parts work in sync to fulfill the purpose of the thing as a whole. Right?<br /><br />Same mode of thought when analyzing the Church. There are many parts to the Church-- all created authoritatively and institutionalized authoritatively by Christ. All parts work together under the guidance of the Holy Spirit for truth and accuracy.<br /><br />If your worry is that men aren't to be trusted, you have to couple that with the reality that Jesus gave the Holy Spirit to the Church, to operate within the Church, for the sole reason of protecting the Church body. Right? That is the point where you're not showing faith. You're worried that men have run this thing into the ground, when in fact, God has kept the Church flowing down the same river for 2,000 yrs. <br /><br />To me, that shows the beauty and accuracy of all the inner workings of the parts together. Does it take faith, sure. What would it mean without it? That's the whole point. Logic gets you to the point of belief. It is logical to believe in the authority of the entire workings of the Church.Nubbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15972118374098863290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-37790421818162713072015-10-01T07:34:56.499-07:002015-10-01T07:34:56.499-07:00//God, by definition, does not make mistakes. (Oh,...//God, by definition, does not make mistakes. (Oh, and I might prewarn you that I'm not really interested in what you might think about that "notion"; we're talking about a defining attribute of the true God here.//<br /><br />You will get no disagreement with me there. But human beings do make mistakes.<br /><br />//the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it" // Is it not Hades/SHeOL that he is talking about? The abode of the dead, rather than specifically the power of the devil - all kinds of attacks, physical violence as well as false teaching. <br />Is he not saying that the power of death will not prevail against, if he had wished to speak of the power of the hell that is the abode of the devil, why not use the word gehenna/hinnom? <br /><br />I am not a cynic, not in the modern sense, I am asking question because you are making claims to know things, I am asking how you substantiate those claims in way that don't rely on the authority of the ones making claims to that authority. <br /><br />And he spoke about the church, last time I looked I was member of that church. <br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05491397288423296804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-63662671975359196602015-10-01T07:19:32.550-07:002015-10-01T07:19:32.550-07:00Nubby
//Scripture, itself, did not fall pristine f...Nubby<br />//Scripture, itself, did not fall pristine from heaven.//<br /><br />I did not say it did. <br /><br />//You realize it was compiled and put into a canon. It was decided by the Church which of those writings are inspired.//<br /><br />Of course, <br /><br />//So... I can trace to an authority on the matter of it all. Can you?//<br /><br />I would not make such a claim.<br /><br />//As to the development of doctrine, that's doesn't mean the Church made stuff up along the way. Doctrine fleshes out what has already been believed, just not articulated fully. See? It's a matter of explaining what the Church has always taught, believed, and known.// <br /><br />So when Justin Martyr spoke of God creating out of pre existing matter, who was deciding, at that time, whether he was correct or incorrect. And why do we not have their judgement on it?<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05491397288423296804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-86724742116034265152015-10-01T06:40:37.667-07:002015-10-01T06:40:37.667-07:00"empires have risen"..."empires have risen"...Francis Choudhuryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01146223983345452362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-62409946726912096352015-10-01T06:37:02.711-07:002015-10-01T06:37:02.711-07:00Marcus,
God, by definition, does not make mistak...Marcus, <br /><br />God, by definition, does not make mistakes. (Oh, and I might prewarn you that I'm not really interested in what you might think about that "notion"; we're talking about a defining attribute of the true God here.)<br /><br />Even leaving scripture aside for a moment, if God founded a Church - necessarily - to bring all men to Truth, and did <i>not</i> provide it with a charism of infallibility, without which its members would most likely fall into un-Truth, confusion and perpetual debate, that would be a major-major omission (mistake) on His part - indeed a gross negligence of Divine Providence. Right? Is Providence negligent?<br /><br />Again and again, as I follow these highfalutin debates about God, His Church and Christianity, and listen to the labored, academic, non-Catholic propositions and pontifications (sorry!), the simple question arises in my mind, "What think ye of God, what believeth ye of Him?"<br /><br />It's really as simple as that. A faith filled and trusting (read: childlike) understanding of God preempts any spectacle of going around in theological circles - or discovering circular arguments where there are none. Questioning is one thing, cynicism something else - usually a reliable indicator of unbelief.<br /><br />As for your comment about development of doctrine, of course the Holy Spirit has - for 2000 years now - been teaching the Church "all that I have told you" (John 14: 26). Even allowing for man's slowness of learning, it'd be nothing short of silly to claim, this late into the piece, that even the most basic foundations of the Church's understanding, such as, say, of Jesus' guarantee of indefectibility of His Church's teaching/doctrines are still open to inspection and debate. Now <b>that</b> would really constitute riding a merry-go-round!<br /><br />By the way, at the very dawn of Christianity, the Archangel Gabriel announced to the Blessed Virgin Mary that Christ “shall be king over the house of Jacob forever; and of His kingdom <b>there shall be no end</b>” (Luke 1: 32-33). This was echoed in Christ's words when He declared to Peter: "Upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18). By the "gates of Hell", He meant all the power of the devil - all kinds of attacks, physical violence as well as false teaching. So... how has the Catholic Church fared for 2000 years to date, even as mighty empires and risen and returned to dust? And has this survival, nay, flourishing, of the Church been off her own power and cleverness, or marked evidence of Christ's assurance? What do you reckon?Francis Choudhuryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01146223983345452362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-77774275987776025292015-10-01T06:17:24.153-07:002015-10-01T06:17:24.153-07:00*I see this before me, I can reasonably make a lea...*I see this before me, I can reasonably make a leap of faith...<br />** As to the development of doctrine, that doesn't mean the Church made stuff up along the way.Nubbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15972118374098863290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-56893785505134251852015-10-01T06:14:31.027-07:002015-10-01T06:14:31.027-07:00Marcus,
It's not just something to accept on f...Marcus,<br />It's not just something to accept on faith. It's intellectually accurate. We have x, y, z to examine, right? We have a paper trail of historical documents. We have early writings and the earliest of traditions. All available to put on the table to look at. <br /><br />I can assert it because it's fact. Look at what is before us. What makes logical sense? It's not even a faith-based decision. The faith-based decision can enter much later, if you want to take the solely intellectual route. I see this before me, I can reasonable make a leap of faith into that invitation to believe. Rather plain to me.<br /><br />As to the development of doctrine, that's doesn't mean the Church made stuff up along the way. Doctrine fleshes out what has already been believed, just not articulated fully. See? It's a matter of explaining what the Church has always taught, believed, and known. <br /><br />Scripture, itself, did not fall pristine from heaven. You realize it was compiled and put into a canon. It was decided by the Church which of those writings are inspired. So... I can trace to an authority on the matter of it all. Can you?<br />Nubbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15972118374098863290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-24564993210971747612015-10-01T05:48:04.525-07:002015-10-01T05:48:04.525-07:00Nubby with the greatest of respect that's an a...Nubby with the greatest of respect that's an assertion, one that might be accepted, on faith, but an assertion none the less any course, in New Testament studies and a study of the Fathers, certainly at a British University, I am sure the same is true in the US, reveals that the doctrine of the church did not fall from heaven pristine and fully formed. It developed over time, we set development in the NT. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05491397288423296804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-26113758731660133172015-10-01T05:36:34.320-07:002015-10-01T05:36:34.320-07:00It's not circular at all, since the Catholic c...It's not circular at all, since the Catholic church is the one who gives those scriptures, the one who decided if those scriptures are both God-breathed (divinely inspired) and inerrant (free from error). The Church also uses Oral tradition and extra biblical writings, along with the canon of Apostolic Tradition which is inerrant, too. The Church has the authority because it was given the authority by Christ. The early Church Fathers support this authority. Everything points to the reality that the Church is the authority, not that it just claims to be, arbitrarily. It was given that authority, it was institutionalized with that authority, by Almighty God.Nubbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15972118374098863290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-18684829791231684692015-10-01T05:26:22.300-07:002015-10-01T05:26:22.300-07:00//It's the continuing fallout from the patentl...//It's the continuing fallout from the patently nonsensical and divisive doctrine of Sola Scriptura.// <br /><br />You know Francis I totally agree with you, thanks for the links btw.<br />100 people reading with 100 interpretations, all claiming objectivity. <br />So far I am with you. So much therefore for in-errancy. I am surprised to be arguing with Catholics about that. <br /><br />Here is my sticking point, just being honest here. <br /><br />//And yes, she does have the charism of infallibility in interpreting the Word of God, because her divine Founder explicitly guaranteed as much (that the gates of hell would never prevail against her).//<br /><br />Now of course that is rested on a passage of scripture, and its an interpretation of that passage by the very body that claims authority to interpret. <br /><br />Put another way, 'We claim to be the sole authority when it comes to interpreting scripture, and our claim is based on our interpretation of scripture.' <br /><br />Isn't that rather circular?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05491397288423296804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-37770874352517264582015-10-01T04:32:18.507-07:002015-10-01T04:32:18.507-07:00Marcus said: "I am not against the the notion...Marcus said: <i>"I am not against the the notion of revelation, what I am less than convinced about is the ability of human beings and their institutions to infallibly interpret and apply that revelation.</i><br /><br />1. Divine Revelation exists as objective Truth, regardless of Marcus (or anyone else) being for or against the "notion".<br /><br />2. Marcus is right about the ability of <i>individual</i> human beings and <i>their</i> "institutions" to infallibly interpret and apply that revelation. But the Church - as in the one. holy, catholic and apostolic Church - is not just comprised of human beings. She has Christ for her Head and the Holy Spirit for her Guide, and is thus at once a human and divine, sacramental entity. And yes, she does have the charism of infallibility in interpreting the Word of God, because her divine Founder explicitly guaranteed as much (that the gates of hell would never prevail against her). <br /><br />3. Whatever confusion exists in Christianity today is in some do-it-yourself version (such as is being pursued by Marcus), independent of the sacred Tradition and teaching Magisterium of the Body of Christ. It's the continuing fallout from the patently nonsensical and divisive doctrine of Sola Scriptura.Francis Choudhuryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01146223983345452362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-40854228615046829822015-10-01T02:03:12.813-07:002015-10-01T02:03:12.813-07:00//he source itself must be free from error.//
Le...//he source itself must be free from error.// <br /><br />Lets go back a bit, what do you mean by inerrant? <br /><br />According to Genesis, what was created first the Adam or the animals? Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05491397288423296804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-51095734782265818532015-09-30T15:26:02.383-07:002015-09-30T15:26:02.383-07:00But that's our point, Marcus. Why are we anal...But that's our point, Marcus. Why are we analyzing principle themes in preaching if the whole idea is that scripture is not inerrant? I mean, it's useless as reference, then, right? Then it follows that it's also useless and meaningless to believe, to reflect on scriptures, to dissect typology, to analyze fulfilled prophesies in Christ. The list goes on. The source itself must be free from error. Otherwise, it's just an exercise of literary interest.Nubbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15972118374098863290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-71369725924372076392015-09-30T15:18:20.669-07:002015-09-30T15:18:20.669-07:00I almost never click links, so for me, if you coul...I almost never click links, so for me, if you could summarize or answer the questions I posed? Christianity is not supposed to be so complicated that 2,000 years later we still don't know what a sin is, or what is the reason for repentance. It shouldn't be that we are still discussing the authority or weight of different books of the Bible, or whether or not its inerrant. <br /><br />Did Christ leave us with a human authority or not?Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-43504351342374919192015-09-30T15:10:46.791-07:002015-09-30T15:10:46.791-07:00This might explain more, if you have time.
http://...This might explain more, if you have time.<br />http://lookingthinkingacting.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/analyse-principle-themes-in-preaching.htmlAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05491397288423296804noreply@blogger.com