|
Post by genesda on Mar 10, 2004 6:44:25 GMT -5
I think you really need to answer that for yourself. It is really not up to me or Ann or anyone else for that matter. Besides, amathema for you would have to have been declared bu the present Pope. Although I do not know for sure, I don't think he personally knows you or your beliefs. Nor has he come out with a blanket statement regarding his opinion of the SDA group. In the meantime, here's some additional reading regarding the RCC position concerning salavtion. You'll note some of it came from the very same Council of Trent: Do you deny what i posted concerning salvation as quoted from the council mentioned? Does other statements cancel previous statements?[/color]
|
|
|
Post by marysia on Mar 10, 2004 9:18:31 GMT -5
gene, i've only skimmed what you wrote because a question kept coming to mind... once you have accepted Christ - do you not WANT to keep His laws and WANT to love one another as He has loved us, WANT to share your love in every thought word and deed? it is NOT but the actions alone that one can be in Christ. we're told faith without actions is dead. participation in life, in helping others and being charitable in all we think do and say, is a direct result of your faith, your love for Christ, your desire to do as He did. can you not understand that those things we're told to "do" are just life style participations -- things to help us grow in our faith, stay on the right track. they are not what gives us salvation - our faith in our Lord does that - but they help us llive everday accordingly.
maybe one day you'll understand that concept. until then, you're in my prayers!
|
|
|
Post by HomeAtLast on Mar 10, 2004 10:19:34 GMT -5
gene, If you can not read "Catholic Church" without mentally seeing "Roman" in front of it you are totally missing the point and teaching of that section of the catechism. Perhaps if you would take off your SDA gpkmtyolles you would see that the word is not there. The Catholic Church states that it is the one true church as far as it was the one that started with Jesus. All other denominations splintered off from it. It does not say that any who do not agree with the RCC is doomed, at all. As for why believe the Eucharist is the body of Christ.......because Jesus told us all that at the Last Supper. That is good enough for me. Really? Let's see what some of your past officials have declared:
[/color] The Council of Trent, in response to the Reformers' doctrine of justification by faith alone, states the following: If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sin for Christ's sake alone; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified, let him be anathema (Session VI, Canon 12). If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation but, that without them, men obtain from God through faith alone the grace of justification, let him be anathema (Session 7, Canons on the Sacraments in General, 4 [italics mine]). "If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened, let him be anathema." (Council of Trent, 6th Session, Chapter XVI, Can. 30) As for you last question....as long as you profess that Jesus is your saviour, you will see heaven as is stated in the catechism (without your edit). Prayers and Blessings, Ann I deny that I must confess any sin to another human being in order to receive forgivness.
I deny the Roman catholic church is the church instituted by God
I deny the papacy as being from God, and is an instrument of Satan.
I deny that Mary is a mediatrix and that I must go through her to get to Jesus.
I deny that Mary is the "dispensor" of all graces.
I deny that Mary is a co-redemptress
I believe the Roman church is the 2nd beast of Revelation 13, the papacy is the antiChrist we are warned of by God Himself and is destined for destruction in the lake of fire.
I believe Jesus is God who became flesh and died for the sins of mankind so man doesn't have to pay the price for sin himself.
Am I considered to be "anathama" or can I attain heaven by following God's plan for man without any instruction or advise from Rome?
This question ought to be simple for you to answer
[/color][/quote] CC836 All men are called to this catholic (meaning universal - note: the word Roman not there) unity of the people of God and to it, in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who belive in Christ and finally all mankind called by God's grace to salvation. Sorry you will have to put up with this silly current edition of the Official Catechism as I do not have The council of Trent version. Blessings, Ann
|
|
|
Post by HomeAtLast on Mar 10, 2004 10:29:17 GMT -5
A summary of the eucharist is as follows. If one doesn't accept the eucharist as defined by Rome, then they are to be considered as "anathama", which is d**med. Now, who believes this except the Roman church? Certainly not the Baptists, SDA's, Pentecostal, or other non-RcC;s, so are we all d**med as the catachisim of the "holy Catholic Church" says? Are we to be considered as part of the "Holy Catholic Church" or would that term better be defined as the Roman Catholic Church? I believe the latter fits better with the intent of what is written. [/b][/color][/quote] gene, gene, gene, Once again you spread misconceptions of a catechism that you refuse to read. That just amazes me. And, If you think that is what the Eucharist is, you better look it up. Not believing in it as the body and blood of Christ would make you a nonCatholic. Because that is what you believe, does not make is so. You totally read into everything that the RCC says (waaaay past and few present). Makes me see how you come up with some things from the Bible, too. Blessings, Ann
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 10, 2004 10:34:34 GMT -5
CC836 All men are called to this catholic (meaning universal - note: the word Roman not there) unity of the people of God and to it, in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who belive in Christ and finally all mankind called by God's grace to salvation. Sorry you will have to put up with this silly current edition of the Official Catechism as I do not have The council of Trent version. Blessings, Ann The council of trent version doesn't say "Roman catholic church" either. It does say Roman catechisim though and from what I saw, it is clear that when it says "holy catholic church", it is the "Roman catholic church" and no others that are being referred to. Statements like the following also makes it clear that the attitude is that only Roman catholic people will have salvation, according to Rome, and it doesn't matter what words are now used to look like something different is being said.[/color] "This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra[/b] in such wise, indeed, that his supreme teaching authority be acknowledged with respect, and that one sincerely adhere to decisions made by him." (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, no. 25) The First Vatican Council claimed "Hence we teach and declare that by the appointment of our Lord the Roman Church possesses a superiority of ordinary power over all other churches, and that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate; to which all, of whatever right and dignity, both pastors and faithful, both individually and collectively, are bound, by their duty of hierarchial subordination and true obedience, to submit not only in matters which belong to faith and morals, but also in those which appertain to the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world, so that the Church of Christ may be one flock under one supreme pastor through the preservation of unity both of communion and of profession of the same faith with the Roman Pontiff. This is the teaching of Catholic truth, from which no one can deviate without loss of faith and salvation." (session 4, chapter 3) I deny the two paragraphs above so, where does that leave me?[/color]
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 10, 2004 10:45:28 GMT -5
gene, i've only skimmed what you wrote because a question kept coming to mind... once you have accepted Christ - do you not WANT to keep His laws and WANT to love one another as He has loved us, WANT to share your love in every thought word and deed? it is NOT but the actions alone that one can be in Christ. we're told faith without actions is dead. participation in life, in helping others and being charitable in all we think do and say, is a direct result of your faith, your love for Christ, your desire to do as He did. can you not understand that those things we're told to "do" are just life style participations -- things to help us grow in our faith, stay on the right track. they are not what gives us salvation - our faith in our Lord does that - but they help us llive everday accordingly. maybe one day you'll understand that concept. until then, you're in my prayers! No, No, NO!! There's nothing wrong with what you wrote, in fact, what you wrote is correct, but that's not what your Roman church claims. Read the quotes below and see the real Rome.[/color] "This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra[/b][/color] in such wise, indeed, that his supreme teaching authority be acknowledged with respect, and that one sincerely adhere to decisions made by him." (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, no. 25) The First Vatican Council claimed "Hence we teach and declare that by the appointment of our Lord the Roman Church possesses a superiority of ordinary power over all other churches, and that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate; to which all, of whatever right and dignity, both pastors and faithful, both individually and collectively, are bound, by their duty of hierarchial subordination and true obedience, to submit not only in matters which belong to faith and morals, but also in those which appertain to the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world, so that the Church of Christ may be one flock under one supreme pastor through the preservation of unity both of communion and of profession of the same faith with the Roman Pontiff. This is the teaching of Catholic truth, from which no one can deviate without loss of faith and salvation." (session 4, chapter 3)
What the vatican council says is that if I don't believe as Rome says, I'm d**med! There is no room for other denominations in the council's declarations above, as you claim the Rcc now states. My point is that there has been no admission of error on the part of the Vatican council, and your Rcc claims that it has never erred and that it will never err in the faith, so which is wrong, the church now, or the vatican council that issued these declarations?
[/color]
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 10, 2004 10:50:08 GMT -5
gene, gene, gene, Once again you spread misconceptions of a catechism that you refuse to read. That just amazes me. And, If you think that is what the Eucharist is, you better look it up. Not believing in it as the body and blood of Christ would make you a nonCatholic. I am also considered ANATHAMA!! Read the claims of your Roman catechisim for priests.[/color] Because that is what you believe, does not make is so. You totally read into everything that the RCC says (waaaay past and few present). Makes me see how you come up with some things from the Bible, too. Blessings, Ann Sorry Ann, but it's your REFUSAL to see is where the problem lies. Words have meanings. If those words weren't meant, then they should be retracted. Your refusal tells me that it doesn't matter what your church claims, you'll only accept that with which you agree, just like when we discuss the scriptures.[/color]
|
|
|
Post by HomeAtLast on Mar 10, 2004 10:52:19 GMT -5
CC836 All men are called to this catholic (meaning universal - note: the word Roman not there) unity of the people of God and to it, in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who belive in Christ and finally all mankind called by God's grace to salvation. Sorry you will have to put up with this silly current edition of the Official Catechism as I do not have The council of Trent version. Blessings, Ann The council of trent version doesn't say "Roman catholic church" either. It does say Roman catechisim though and from what I saw, it is clear that when it says "holy catholic church", it is the "Roman catholic church" and no others that are being referred to. Statements like the following also makes it clear that the attitude is that only Roman catholic people will have salvation, according to Rome, and it doesn't matter what words are now used to look like something different is being said.[/color] "This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra[/b] in such wise, indeed, that his supreme teaching authority be acknowledged with respect, and that one sincerely adhere to decisions made by him." (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, no. 25) The First Vatican Council claimed "Hence we teach and declare that by the appointment of our Lord the Roman Church possesses a superiority of ordinary power over all other churches, and that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate; to which all, of whatever right and dignity, both pastors and faithful, both individually and collectively, are bound, by their duty of hierarchial subordination and true obedience, to submit not only in matters which belong to faith and morals, but also in those which appertain to the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world, so that the Church of Christ may be one flock under one supreme pastor through the preservation of unity both of communion and of profession of the same faith with the Roman Pontiff. This is the teaching of Catholic truth, from which no one can deviate without loss of faith and salvation." (session 4, chapter 3) I deny the two paragraphs above so, where does that leave me?[/color] [/quote] As you have said many times before, yourself, If you start on a bad premise the whole argument will be wrong. The Title of the cathechism means that it is the beliefs and doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. In the paragraph it is stating the beliefs of the RCC. But, that does not mean that it only refers to Roman Catholic people in it. It only means it is their beliefs about nonRCC people in that certain paragraph of the catechism. If they remembered to put it in the title, why would they forget to put it in the text, as are seeming to claim? Blessings, Ann
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 10, 2004 10:55:12 GMT -5
Besides, amathema for you would have to have been declared bu the present Pope. Although I do not know for sure, I don't think he personally knows you or your beliefs. Nor has he come out with a blanket statement regarding his opinion of the SDA group. The blanket statement has already been made by the 1st Vatican council. That statement covers anyone for all time. It's talking about a basic belief that has not changed over the centuries, so why would there have to be individual declarations of "Anathama"? You seem to be trying to make both declarations of Vat 1 and what is being said now, acceptable as one belief. It won't work. The belief of the eucharist hasn't changed. Either Vat. 1 is correct, or what is said now is correct. Which is it?
[/color]
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 10, 2004 11:00:22 GMT -5
As you have said many times before, yourself, If you start on a bad premise the whole argument will be wrong. The Title of the cathechism means that it is the beliefs and doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. In the paragraph it is stating the beliefs of the RCC. But, that does not mean that it only refers to Roman Catholic people in it. It only means it is their beliefs about nonRCC people in that certain paragraph of the catechism. If they remembered to put it in the title, why would they forget to put it in the text, as are seeming to claim? Blessings, Ann LOL!! I'm going to rename the magestarium to the "Kerry Institute of RC Study", because it wants to be on both sides of issues! [/color]
|
|
|
Post by HomeAtLast on Mar 10, 2004 11:04:36 GMT -5
gene, gene, gene, Once again you spread misconceptions of a catechism that you refuse to read. That just amazes me. And, If you think that is what the Eucharist is, you better look it up. Not believing in it as the body and blood of Christ would make you a nonCatholic. I am also considered ANATHAMA!! Read the claims of your Roman catechisim for priests.[/color] Because that is what you believe, does not make is so. You totally read into everything that the RCC says (waaaay past and few present). Makes me see how you come up with some things from the Bible, too. Blessings, Ann Sorry Ann, but it's your REFUSAL to see is where the problem lies. Words have meanings. If those words weren't meant, then they should be retracted. Your refusal tells me that it doesn't matter what your church claims, you'll only accept that with which you agree, just like when we discuss the scriptures.[/color][/quote] gene, You refuse to even read the catechism. I read the catechism and the Bible. Do you see the difference. I do not go at it with a closed mind. I do the research. You refuse to read the doctrines you wish to attack making for a very incredible argument. I prefer to get the whole story, not just pull a phrase here and there. Blessings, Ann
|
|
|
Post by HomeAtLast on Mar 10, 2004 11:08:29 GMT -5
As you have said many times before, yourself, If you start on a bad premise the whole argument will be wrong. The Title of the cathechism means that it is the beliefs and doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. In the paragraph it is stating the beliefs of the RCC. But, that does not mean that it only refers to Roman Catholic people in it. It only means it is their beliefs about nonRCC people in that certain paragraph of the catechism. If they remembered to put it in the title, why would they forget to put it in the text, as are seeming to claim? Blessings, Ann LOL!! I'm going to rename the magestarium to the "Kerry Institute of RC Study", because it wants to be on both sides of issues! [/color][/quote] gene, you just refuse to see the obvious! Does the SDA beliefs only talk about SDA people or am I to assume that everything that is said in it applies to all people no matter what their denomination? It is not riding the fence at all. It is describing the relationship between all of God's children. Talk about absurd!!!! Blessings, Ann
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 10, 2004 11:13:48 GMT -5
As you have said many times before, yourself, If you start on a bad premise the whole argument will be wrong. The Title of the cathechism means that it is the beliefs and doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. In the paragraph it is stating the beliefs of the RCC. But, that does not mean that it only refers to Roman Catholic people in it. It only means it is their beliefs about nonRCC people in that certain paragraph of the catechism. If they remembered to put it in the title, why would they forget to put it in the text, as are seeming to claim? Blessings, Ann so that the Church of Christ may be one flock under one supreme pastor through the preservation of unity both of communion and of profession of the same faith with the Roman Pontiff. This is the teaching of Catholic truth, from which no one can deviate without loss of faith and salvation." [/b](session 4, chapter 3) Ann. Are you just in denial? Reread the last portion that is underlined in red. That is very plain to me and I don't see why you're having such a hard time accepting what it says. There is no room for any other denomination as you say, and would like to believe. It states no one can deviate. No one means no one, not some of other denominations. This is just like wanting "death" to mean "life somewhere else", instead of just the "absence of life" which is what death is. [/color]
|
|
|
Post by marysia on Mar 10, 2004 11:55:09 GMT -5
gene, i've only skimmed what you wrote because a question kept coming to mind... once you have accepted Christ - do you not WANT to keep His laws and WANT to love one another as He has loved us, WANT to share your love in every thought word and deed? it is NOT but the actions alone that one can be in Christ. we're told faith without actions is dead. participation in life, in helping others and being charitable in all we think do and say, is a direct result of your faith, your love for Christ, your desire to do as He did. can you not understand that those things we're told to "do" are just life style participations -- things to help us grow in our faith, stay on the right track. they are not what gives us salvation - our faith in our Lord does that - but they help us llive everday accordingly. maybe one day you'll understand that concept. until then, you're in my prayers! No, No, NO!! There's nothing wrong with what you wrote, in fact, what you wrote is correct, but that's not what your Roman church claims. Read the quotes below and see the real Rome.[/color] "This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra[/b][/color] in such wise, indeed, that his supreme teaching authority be acknowledged with respect, and that one sincerely adhere to decisions made by him." (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, no. 25) The First Vatican Council claimed "Hence we teach and declare that by the appointment of our Lord the Roman Church possesses a superiority of ordinary power over all other churches, and that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate; to which all, of whatever right and dignity, both pastors and faithful, both individually and collectively, are bound, by their duty of hierarchial subordination and true obedience, to submit not only in matters which belong to faith and morals, but also in those which appertain to the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world, so that the Church of Christ may be one flock under one supreme pastor through the preservation of unity both of communion and of profession of the same faith with the Roman Pontiff. This is the teaching of Catholic truth, from which no one can deviate without loss of faith and salvation." (session 4, chapter 3)
What the vatican council says is that if I don't believe as Rome says, I'm d**med! There is no room for other denominations in the council's declarations above, as you claim the Rcc now states. My point is that there has been no admission of error on the part of the Vatican council, and your Rcc claims that it has never erred and that it will never err in the faith, so which is wrong, the church now, or the vatican council that issued these declarations?
[/color] [/quote] well gene, since i live in the year 2004 at the present time and have only been taught since let's just say the second half of the 60's i have NEVER been taught that and it is not what my church teachs. they do not teach that now as they have come to a brighter realization - people are generally more educated than in the first part of the 1900's and prior.
|
|
|
Post by HomeAtLast on Mar 10, 2004 12:46:13 GMT -5
well gene, since i live in the year 2004 at the present time and have only been taught since let's just say the second half of the 60's i have NEVER been taught that and it is not what my church teachs. they do not teach that now as they have come to a brighter realization - people are generally more educated than in the first part of the 1900's and prior. marysia, I have always been taught that Satan was very clever, but if he can not even teach us what gene claims he is trying to teach us (if he were to be the RCC, that is) he must not be very clever. Blessings, Ann
|
|