chat with a catholic

[IreneM]

Kath,

so the church can see something on the same footing and equal to the bible.

For me the bible stands alone.

there are many things that I find at odds with scripture such as the assumption of Mary and emaculate conception both of these beliefs are not mentioned in scripture yet are held as gospel in the catholic church........

so for me as an ex catholic this is not a question of tradition it is finding that both are not mentioned in scripture so therefore are not valid for me......

For Mary to be born without original sin to have accend to heaven instead of dieing to say that mary was sinless flies in the face of scripture

Romans 3:23 says

For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

would that not also include Mary.....??

Was she not also in need of a Saviour??

oohhh but don't feel alone in this many church doctrines of denominations of the protestants church are not scriptual either......

In Christ

IreneM

[Guest wilburnh]

What you've got here are ignorant(not a bad thing) people concerning Catholocism. We see a contradiction so please reiterate what you mean. You said unwritten and yet talk about things that are in the Bible. I don't know what the assumption is (ignorance again) but everything else is to me not tradition but teachings that I've gathered from reading the Bible. So what exactly are the 'Sacred Traditions'?

[Katholish]

Katholish,

You say "Sacred Traditions are the unwriten oral yet inspired teachings of Christ and the Apostles just as the New Testament is the writen teachings of Christ and the Apostles."

And then you list the Immaculate Conception, and the Assumption as Sacred Traditions. Can you explain the source of these Traditions? Didn't the Assumption only become a Tradition in 1950?

Very good question.

In 1950, Pope Pius XII declared the Assumption to be an official doctrine of the Church, but what was the status of this doctrine before that declaration?

I will draw a comparision with the Canon of Scripture, because I will assume that examples pertaining to Scripture might be more familiar. That Canon )list of books) of Scripture wasn't generally accepted until the end of the 4th Century, and there was much debate before that. Good Christians disagreed, but the declaration of the Canon, doesn't make certain books Scripture, merely declares that they are so, even though that wasn't known by everyone before the declaration.

Likewise, when a pope declares something to be part of Sacred Tradition, it doesn't make it Tradition, be declares that it has been so all along though it might not have been understood as authoritative teaching before the declaration.

Thus, the Assumption didn't become Tradition then, it was just declared to already be so.

[Katholish]

I wanted to ask Kath, and this is an honest question, and no insult is intended.

How does the members of the Roman Catholic believe they will enter Heaven?

Anne

The simple answer is that Catholics believe that they can enter Heaven by becoming children of God and heirs to Heaven when they receive the sacrament of Baptism, having Faith in Christ. Baptism gives the soul Sanctifying Grace, and if this Grace is retained (Grace is a participation in the Divine Life) until death, the person would be saved, having persevered to the end.

Of course I can go into much further detail, if you wanted me to go into any specific area.

[Katholish]

Kath, 

  so  the church  can see something on the same footing and equal to the bible.

For me the bible stands alone. 

Yes, I understand Luther's doctrine of Sola Scriptura. However, out of respect for your wishes, I will not argue against it at this time.

there are many things that I find at odds with scripture    such as the assumption of Mary and  emaculate conception    both of these beliefs are not mentioned in scripture  yet are held as gospel in the catholic church........

I don't believe there to be any contradiction between these two doctrines and what is mentioned in Sacred Scripture. However, while it is true that there is no mention in Sacred Scripture of the Assumption, I am not willing to say that there is no mention in Scripture of the Immaculate Conception, for I believe that it is implicitly mentioned in the first chapter of Luke, though I do not claim that the Church entirely bases her doctrine on this passage.

Let me first define what the Catholic Church means by the Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. We mean that the Blessed Virgin Mary, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of Almighty God, and in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race, was preserved free from every stain of original sin.

To answer you question, yes, though it would seem to be mentioned in the Sacred Scriptures implicitly as opposed to explicitly.

Luke 1:

28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

This verse was not interpreted by all early Christians to mean that Mary was conceived without sin, but it certainly was by some. Even if is not stated explicitly, this verse is viewed as Scriptural support for that understanding.

The Greek word used in Luke 1:28 is kecharistomene, and although I am not an ancient Greek scholar myself, it is my understanding that this word means more literally "You who have been made agreeable to God". This rendering seems to more clearly express why the Catholic Church sees this as support for the Immaculate Conception and is in agreement with the idea that Mary was made special before the Announciation. We usually translate it as "Full of Grace", which also implies that she is not sinful, and makes a person wonder that if she is full of grace, how can this be consistant with her having Original Sin?

It also helps to understand the Doctrine of Recapitulation as expressed by St. Paul.

Ephesians 1:

7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the remission of sins, according to the riches of his, grace,

8 Which hath superabounded in us, in all wisdom and prudence,

9 That he might make known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure, which he hath purposed in him,

10 In the dispensation of the fulness of times, to re-establish all things in Christ, that are in heaven and on earth, in him.

St. Paul speaks of Christ remaking all things in Himself, the human race is given a new beginning in Grace, which is also why St. Paul refers to Christ as the "last Adam".

1 Corinthians 15:

20 But now Christ is risen from the dead, the firstfruits of them that sleep:

21 For by a man came death: and by a man the resurrection of the dead.

22 And as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive.

...

44 It is sown a natural body: it shall rise a spiritual body. If there be a natural body, there is also a spiritual body, as it is written:

45 The first man Adam was made into a living soul; the last Adam into a quickening spirit.

46 Yet that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural: afterwards that which is spiritual.

47 The first man was of the earth, earthly: the second man, from heaven, heavenly.

One of the Early Church Fathers shows how this Doctrine applies to Mary.

St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Adversus Haereses, Book V, Chapter 19:

1. That the Lord then was manifestly coming to His own things, and was sustaining them by means of that creation which is supported by Himself, and was making a recapitulation of that disobedience which had occurred in connection with a tree, through the obedience which was [exhibited by Himself when He hung] upon a tree, [the effects] also of that deception being done away with, by which that virgin Eve, who was already espoused to a man, was unhappily misled -- was happily announced, through means of the truth [spoken] by the angel to the Virgin Mary, who was [also espoused] to a man. For just as the former was led astray by the word of an angel, so that she fled from God when she had transgressed His word; so did the latter, by an angelic communication, receive the glad tidings that she should sustain (portaret) God, being obedient to His word. And if the former disobeyed God, the latter was persuaded to be obedient to God, in order that the Virgin Mary might become the patroness (advocata) of the virgin Eve. And thus, as the human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so is it rescued by a virgin; virginal disobedience having been balanced in the opposite scale by virginal obedience. For in the same way the sin of the first created man (protoplasti) receives amendment by the correction of the First-begotten, and the coming of the serpent is conquered by the harmlessness of the dove, those bonds being unloosed by which we had been fast bound to death.

As for Romans 3:23, I would be cautious of interpreting this passage in such a way that leaves room for no exceptions. We know that Christ did not sin, yet was human. Also there is a distinction between the state of sin, and active sinning. To commit a sin takes an act of the Will, whereas all men are born into a state of sin called Original Sin. We shouldn't interpret Romans to mean that every person has committed actual sin. Take for instance a little child who dies at the age of 3 months. Have they commited a sin? No, they have not, but they were still nevertheless born in a state of sin, but I hope you can see the difference.

More to the point, there are several other places in the Scriptures when "all" is not taken in the absolute sense, but is rather a generalization, as it is here. For instance,

Matthew 4:

24 And his fame went throughout all Syria, and they presented to him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments, and such as were possessed by devils, and lunatics, and those that had the palsy, and he cured them:

Does that literally mean absolutely every sick person came to Him? Is it possible that there was one lunatic that wasn't taken to Him? Certainly, all is used as a generalization there, as in many other places, but I just give this one as an example.

Did Mary need a Savior?

The answer is yes, if you will note, the official declaration of the Church on the Immaculate Conception, Ineffabilis Deus, specifically states that this.

Blessed Pope Pius IX, Ineffablis Deus, 1854AD (emphasis added):

We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instance of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race , was preserved free from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by God and therefore to be believed firmly and constantly by all the faithful.

Whole document: http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_pi09id.htm

[IreneM]

but we leave out pergatory which the catholic church does not.

To say that we must suffer in pergatory is saying that Jesus Death on the Cross was not enough for our sin.

When Jesus said "it is finished" he was saying that what He had come to do was done He had paid the price for our sin PAID IN FULL yet the catholice church says that that is not so there are some sins that were not paid for on the Cross and we much suffer for them in pergatory but if you have relitives or friends who give money to the church they can lessen your time there................

That is not scriptual yet millions believe it.

Oh but I went to a baptist church once and was told that I was a major sinner because I had short hair and the bible condemns women cutting their hair. I told the person who told me I was a major sinnner that long hair gave me violent headaches he said that did not matter and that I was not to go back to that church again....

During the service I did some looking around and yup 100% of the women did not have short hair some had it down some had it up but you could tell all had long hair..........

the commandment was not to have short hair yes but it was meant not to crop it short like a man . My hair is short but not as short as a mans and it is not done in some funky fashion it is at a length that does not give me headaches . So am I condemend by God or just by the church that did not want me to return.

The point being all churchs are not scriptual 100%

the question is do they teach the gospel do they add to it or take away from it.........

Kath I appreciate this more then you know

In Christ

IreneM

[Guest wilburnh]

Katholish, you make a grave mistake in including Jesus in Romans 3:23. For one, the Bible does say that he was born without sin. That He was the only individual without sin. More importantly, He is God while Mary was not. His Godhood is why he was born without sin. He had to fulfill the prophecy of a blameless lamb. Nothing of this nature is ever mentioned of Mary.

My original point is this, Jesus is not included in the scripture that all have sinned because he was fully man while at the same time being fully God while also having a special scripture mentioned birth.

For the child who dies without sin, this is a parallel that should not be drawn. A child has not entered the age of accountability so they have no guilt applied. The have not reached adulthood unlike Mary.

Sorry for the double explanation, just wanted to make sure point was understood so that my next post would not be clarifying.

Calvin

Edited February 26, 2005 by wilburnh

[Scylth]

As part of the Catholic's twisted and deceitful teaching about the Immaculate Conception is the teaching that Jesus was the only child born of Mary. Scripture tells us that Jesus had brothers. This shows a direct contradiction between what the Catholic's teach on this subject and what the scriptures teach.

The Catholics teach that Mary is a mediatrix between us and God. Someone in Heaven who intercedes for us, between us and God. This also is in direct contradiction to scripture which tells us that only Jesus Christ is our intercessor with the Father.

The Catholic Catechism is replete with stated beliefs that are in direct contradiction to what scripture teaches. I am willing list all I can of them if required to combat the lies of the "idol worshipers" if they insist on promoting their false teachings here. The Catholic church just says flat out that they are not restrained by scripture, that their beliefs have been revealed to them by God, and they therefore cannot be questioned. They state flat out that their Tradition is the equal of Scripture as far as revealed truth from God.

Simply put, they seem to have no shame whatsoever.

Edited February 26, 2005 by Scylth

[Botz]

Scylth...Hi there.

If you look at the start of this thread Irene who initiated it specifically asked for a decent and respectful conversation with a Catholic about some doctrinal isssues.

You may strongly disagree with Catholic doctrine and there may be a place for you to express yourself in an uncompromising manner...but I think in this instance you should respect the stated desire of the person who started this thread.

Kind regards. Botz

[Scylth]

Oh yeah, I am sorry. I read that yesterday I think, but when I went to the thread tonight I just went to the end and got a bit fired up hehe. I wont post on this thread again. Thank you for pointing that out.