So we now have a Bishop and and ArchBishop removed and in opposition. How many agree but are too intimidated to confront the issues central to faith. This is not a problem confined to our RC brothers, it extends to all Christendom.
If it extends to all Christendom tell me exactly who in the Protestant camp has the authority to do this?
Oh wait ... No one.
Does seem to be a RC issue after all.
Maybe when people on that side of the fence realize there's no position of Pope in scripture and that it's completely unbiblical, then it can be addressed.
Hopefully for that bishop and archbishop this becomes their Reformation moment.
I'm sorry your narrow beliefs preclude the ability to see a bigger - and yes a more Biblically based - perspective. "Christian" churches that bow to the social orthodoxy suffer from the same cancer as is more visible for the moment in the RC church. People has a fundamental choice - view the Bible thru the prism of man and his world or view the world thru the prism of the Biblical Gospel. That is universal across Christendom.
You didn't answer the question I had about YOUR assertion.
How does the Pope affect churches that don't recognize a pope exactly?
Then you moved goalposts to some prism of man / gospel nonsense. The pope is a man, not any part of the gospel...... which was my point that was contrary to your assertion. My believes are based off of scripture alone, aka Sola Scriptura, so yes, as narrow as scripture. I'm sorry your extra wide beliefs preclude you from sticking to God's Word alone.
Would you prefer perhaps to reignite the religious wars of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries, Data?
I think that you missed the jumpers point: "How many agree but are too intimidated to confront the issues central to faith"
jumper is talking about the phenomena where certain things are pushed, take place, etc, by "whatever" authority (i.e. even in a single church or collective, by certain pastors, church leaders, etc) and yet many feel intimidated and refuse to speak up. He is saying this phenomena impacts all of wider Christendom, and the particulars in RC Church are one example of that, not the only one.
At least, that's how I read it. Maybe Jumper can confirm or otherwise explain.
But can I recommend none of us pulling out the "I'm the better Christian and my view is more orthodox than your, so suck it, my beloved Christian brother who I will lord that self-righteous and self-designated authority over by proclaiming how right I am and how wrong you are!" stick?
Thank you Fractal for your response. That is exactly what I'm saying. If, as I believe is a central tenant of the Christian faith, we are one body, this affects us all. We are told to morn with those who morn and to rejoice with those who are joyful. I am not RC but I grieve at the travails that segment of the Body is going thru. Mainstream Protestant churches are really no different, just that their struggles are not this weeks headline.
Back in the day, NBC news had a team report called the Huntley-Brinkley Report. At the end of each episode they had an editorial comment (imagine separating news from editorials? Hmmm). During "The Troubles" in Northern Ireland John Chancelor did a commentary and concluded with this line - "so on one side we have the Catholics and on the other side are the Protestants....I just have to wonder, where are all the Christians?" I am not a "member" of any denomination because I believe denominationalism and schism's to be counter-Biblical, but I attend and support and participate in worship regularly. I count as my brother any who will humble themselves, acknowledge their sinful nature and sin filled life, ask God for forgiveness and accept that Jesus is the means by which God provides that redemptive grace and mercy.
So you don't want to misrepresent him but want to misrepresent me... got it.
I guess you can't see the primary issue stems from an unbiblical structure of the Catholic Church, specifically the office of the Pope, which gives one man the ability to create the issue at hand.
Why are you so adversarial? how did I misrepresent you? I stated what I thought jumper's actual comment was saying. I made no statement or assertion about yours.
I DID make a comment about your general attitude and behavior, which personally I see as belligerent, and you, by all means, appear to self-justify this belligerence with references to [your] view of scripture, while denigrating the views of those who appear to disagree or focus on different things.
Why do I say belligerent? Because you are behaving as if YOUR focus (in this case, the issues and problems of the Roman Catholic Church) is the only one that anyone else must also focus on.
You don't present yourself as being here here for sharing and learning and discussion, but for argument. In my view, that's belligerent, and it comes across very poorly from someone who professes himself/herself to be Christian. In my opinion.
Category error. I was using stepping into your assertion and showing you how it didn't hold up. You are now making an analogy that is another position and argument all together.
We are talking about standards of faith, theology and church structure.
The Bible lays out very specific standards for Pastors, Deacons, and church leadership. None of which the Pope meets.
Do you know what those standards are directly from scripture?
You know what also isn't in the Bible? Sola Scriptura. Why have you taken it upon yourself to assume that is the default position unless stated otherwise?
The Church is the only reason you have a Bible. At best, you'd say God used the Church to compile it, but the truth remains that everything you believe is rooted in the Church. That means something. You don't just get to throw that 2000 years of history away (nor throw away the books that some random dude decides he didn't like 1500 years later).
What other institution has existed for 2000, or to make it more palatable for your Protestant disposition, 1700, years? All the corrupted deepstate ones are renamed and changed constantly, and they hide in the shadows. Seems like the Hand of God at work to me.
God is Lord of Truth, no? But if the Church is wrong, that means there weren't any true Christians for 1500ish years. Does that sounds like God leading His people to truth to you?
And do you really think everything Jesus Christ said is in the Bible? Seems like you don't have God's Word in its entirety. So what did He say that you and I weren't privy to? And what if one of the things He said outside the Bible was exactly what the Catholics have been saying for 2000 years?
What it comes down to is authority. A book has no authority. When you read the Bible, you disagree with 40 different groups on what the same passage means. Protestants have no authoritative beliefs in anything because it is all subjective. It is an egotistic position born out of a refusal to submit to any authority outside of the self. You aren't really submitting to God when you make yourself the authority on scripture. What you are doing is making yourself out to be God.
So it only makes sense God would create some authoritative way to know scripture. This is the Church. The Church must exist and be authoritative for the same reason the Bible must exist and be authoritative. There must be some external, objective thing for us to compare our own subjective interpretations to. Otherwise, we are just making things up and the fruits of that become apparent. Everyone believes something different, and no one knows what is true. The Bible alone is quite apparently not good enough at this, as every differing Protestant denomination demonstrates. God loves 3s, does He not? Bible, Church, and Holy Spirit are the way we learn about the God. The trinities truly never end (you can thank the Church for deciphering that one, too).
Seriously, the level of hubris it must take to think you know better than the entire history of Church fathers who spent their whole lives dedicated to studying God and passing down the knowledge He shared with His original disciples. The entire foundation of Christianity was built by these men. All the most basic tenants of the Faith. To think we can just throw that out 1500 years later and figure it all out on our own, completely individually, and after we just rejected all the prior Truths of God we all always accepted, is patently absurd.
And speaking of fruits; what has the fruit of the reformation been? Obviously, correlation doesn't equal causation, but where are we today? Seemingly living in the new dark ages and in a time of certain moral decay. Though the world is the world. Of course it is evil. But look at Christianity as well. That too is falling to decadence and vice, seemingly led by certain Protestant denominations first and foremost.
The end stage of Protestantism is the non-denominational churches where you go in, get blasted by fog machines, turn off your brain and tune out listening to rock music, and go home having actually thought about God maybe once the whole time. Or the prosperity gospel. There's certainly a reason that these kinds of things crop up the further we go down the Reformation path.
Wait so you're saying "Sola Scriptura" which means our standards should come from scripture alone...... isn't in the Bible which means you are advocating that my standard should only come from scripture? That's a long way around of saying you agree with me.... or you're a hypocrite.
"The Bible" isn't in the Bible either bud. Neither is the trinity, and yet we can rub a couple of brain cells together and understand it.
All the people who rubbed those brain cells together were Catholics. As I said, every foundational belief of Christianity comes from Catholics.
No, not really. The Bible does not tell us the correct way to view the Bible, so Sola Scriptura is false, is what I'm saying. My comment here was meant as a semi-comprehensive defense of the Church. My ultimate point is that the authority of the Church is what validates the Bible. The Church must have authority for the Bible to have authority.
Further, to just assume the Bible is all we should look to for authority, is unproven. It requires deeper examination than just assuming it is the default position unless proven otherwise.
I mean, who are we to decide how things should be and which things require evidence versus which things are assumed to be the case in lieu of evidence? That's for God to decide. And the fact the Bible doesn't say anything on itself is to me simply more evidence that the verification of the Bible is not solely contained in the Bible. If Sola Scriptura is correct, it would make an awful lot of sense to put everything solely in the Bible.
Edit to add: also, if it were the case that every individual could read scripture on their own and come to understand the authoritative truth, everyone would agree on doctrine. But instead, Protestants are all over the place and believe all manner of different things. This is because we are not the authority on God's Word, nor are we capable of fully understanding It on our own.
to just assume the Bible is all we should look to for authority, is unproven.
Proof pre-supposes God. God has conveyed His word through history.
I see your issue, you don't believe God is sovereign enough to convey His word. That's not the God of scripture and certainly not the one I believe in.
"Test everything against scripture" is literally in the Bible. You are saying the apostles were wrong.
Every Catholic doctrine has supporting Scriptural writing. Some explicit, some implicit. Whether you agree with their interpretation is one thing, but you don't get to pretend the Church just makes stuff up.
In case there were any Catholics out there who were wondering if the current pope is corrupt, this should pretty much settle it. Bergoglio is a BAD pope! As a lifelong Catholic, I do not recognize Bergoglio as the head of my church.
Came here to say that. RCs take up about 1/3 of the Catholic church. We in the Eastern/Oriental catholic church see him as a figurehead. Thats why we have Patriarchs. For example with Vatican 2, none of their changes applied to us, only to the RCs and in retrospect that could very well be why the RC is in trouble now.
The Roman part happened under Constantine. When Jesus died on the cross, the veil in the Temple was ripped from top to bottom opening the was to God for everyone. We don't need a priesthood any longer. Jesus is our High Priest and the way is open to Him. All you have to do is ask!
So we now have a Bishop and and ArchBishop removed and in opposition. How many agree but are too intimidated to confront the issues central to faith. This is not a problem confined to our RC brothers, it extends to all Christendom.
If it extends to all Christendom tell me exactly who in the Protestant camp has the authority to do this?
Oh wait ... No one.
Does seem to be a RC issue after all.
Maybe when people on that side of the fence realize there's no position of Pope in scripture and that it's completely unbiblical, then it can be addressed.
Hopefully for that bishop and archbishop this becomes their Reformation moment.
I'm sorry your narrow beliefs preclude the ability to see a bigger - and yes a more Biblically based - perspective. "Christian" churches that bow to the social orthodoxy suffer from the same cancer as is more visible for the moment in the RC church. People has a fundamental choice - view the Bible thru the prism of man and his world or view the world thru the prism of the Biblical Gospel. That is universal across Christendom.
You didn't answer the question I had about YOUR assertion.
How does the Pope affect churches that don't recognize a pope exactly?
Then you moved goalposts to some prism of man / gospel nonsense. The pope is a man, not any part of the gospel...... which was my point that was contrary to your assertion. My believes are based off of scripture alone, aka Sola Scriptura, so yes, as narrow as scripture. I'm sorry your extra wide beliefs preclude you from sticking to God's Word alone.
Would you prefer perhaps to reignite the religious wars of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries, Data?
I think that you missed the jumpers point: "How many agree but are too intimidated to confront the issues central to faith"
jumper is talking about the phenomena where certain things are pushed, take place, etc, by "whatever" authority (i.e. even in a single church or collective, by certain pastors, church leaders, etc) and yet many feel intimidated and refuse to speak up. He is saying this phenomena impacts all of wider Christendom, and the particulars in RC Church are one example of that, not the only one.
At least, that's how I read it. Maybe Jumper can confirm or otherwise explain.
But can I recommend none of us pulling out the "I'm the better Christian and my view is more orthodox than your, so suck it, my beloved Christian brother who I will lord that self-righteous and self-designated authority over by proclaiming how right I am and how wrong you are!" stick?
Thank you Fractal for your response. That is exactly what I'm saying. If, as I believe is a central tenant of the Christian faith, we are one body, this affects us all. We are told to morn with those who morn and to rejoice with those who are joyful. I am not RC but I grieve at the travails that segment of the Body is going thru. Mainstream Protestant churches are really no different, just that their struggles are not this weeks headline.
Back in the day, NBC news had a team report called the Huntley-Brinkley Report. At the end of each episode they had an editorial comment (imagine separating news from editorials? Hmmm). During "The Troubles" in Northern Ireland John Chancelor did a commentary and concluded with this line - "so on one side we have the Catholics and on the other side are the Protestants....I just have to wonder, where are all the Christians?" I am not a "member" of any denomination because I believe denominationalism and schism's to be counter-Biblical, but I attend and support and participate in worship regularly. I count as my brother any who will humble themselves, acknowledge their sinful nature and sin filled life, ask God for forgiveness and accept that Jesus is the means by which God provides that redemptive grace and mercy.
The Church also wouldn't consider itself a denomination and would consider other denominations counter-Biblical.
The real question is are their claims right about their own authority.
Although I'm sure you've considered it before, if not, it's worth considering.
So you don't want to misrepresent him but want to misrepresent me... got it.
I guess you can't see the primary issue stems from an unbiblical structure of the Catholic Church, specifically the office of the Pope, which gives one man the ability to create the issue at hand.
Why are you so adversarial? how did I misrepresent you? I stated what I thought jumper's actual comment was saying. I made no statement or assertion about yours.
I DID make a comment about your general attitude and behavior, which personally I see as belligerent, and you, by all means, appear to self-justify this belligerence with references to [your] view of scripture, while denigrating the views of those who appear to disagree or focus on different things.
Why do I say belligerent? Because you are behaving as if YOUR focus (in this case, the issues and problems of the Roman Catholic Church) is the only one that anyone else must also focus on.
You don't present yourself as being here here for sharing and learning and discussion, but for argument. In my view, that's belligerent, and it comes across very poorly from someone who professes himself/herself to be Christian. In my opinion.
That's all I have to say on the matter.
I'm sure you agree the Bible is not exhaustive, yes?
Well, grilled cheese is also unbiblical… it's just not in there!
But we wouldn't say that makes it inherently bad or wrong, would we?
I'll admit, the analogy isn't perfect, as I'm comparing important matters of the faith to a grilled cheese, but I think it makes my point well enough.
Category error. I was using stepping into your assertion and showing you how it didn't hold up. You are now making an analogy that is another position and argument all together.
We are talking about standards of faith, theology and church structure.
The Bible lays out very specific standards for Pastors, Deacons, and church leadership. None of which the Pope meets.
Do you know what those standards are directly from scripture?
You know what also isn't in the Bible? Sola Scriptura. Why have you taken it upon yourself to assume that is the default position unless stated otherwise?
The Church is the only reason you have a Bible. At best, you'd say God used the Church to compile it, but the truth remains that everything you believe is rooted in the Church. That means something. You don't just get to throw that 2000 years of history away (nor throw away the books that some random dude decides he didn't like 1500 years later).
What other institution has existed for 2000, or to make it more palatable for your Protestant disposition, 1700, years? All the corrupted deepstate ones are renamed and changed constantly, and they hide in the shadows. Seems like the Hand of God at work to me.
God is Lord of Truth, no? But if the Church is wrong, that means there weren't any true Christians for 1500ish years. Does that sounds like God leading His people to truth to you?
And do you really think everything Jesus Christ said is in the Bible? Seems like you don't have God's Word in its entirety. So what did He say that you and I weren't privy to? And what if one of the things He said outside the Bible was exactly what the Catholics have been saying for 2000 years?
What it comes down to is authority. A book has no authority. When you read the Bible, you disagree with 40 different groups on what the same passage means. Protestants have no authoritative beliefs in anything because it is all subjective. It is an egotistic position born out of a refusal to submit to any authority outside of the self. You aren't really submitting to God when you make yourself the authority on scripture. What you are doing is making yourself out to be God.
So it only makes sense God would create some authoritative way to know scripture. This is the Church. The Church must exist and be authoritative for the same reason the Bible must exist and be authoritative. There must be some external, objective thing for us to compare our own subjective interpretations to. Otherwise, we are just making things up and the fruits of that become apparent. Everyone believes something different, and no one knows what is true. The Bible alone is quite apparently not good enough at this, as every differing Protestant denomination demonstrates. God loves 3s, does He not? Bible, Church, and Holy Spirit are the way we learn about the God. The trinities truly never end (you can thank the Church for deciphering that one, too).
Seriously, the level of hubris it must take to think you know better than the entire history of Church fathers who spent their whole lives dedicated to studying God and passing down the knowledge He shared with His original disciples. The entire foundation of Christianity was built by these men. All the most basic tenants of the Faith. To think we can just throw that out 1500 years later and figure it all out on our own, completely individually, and after we just rejected all the prior Truths of God we all always accepted, is patently absurd.
And speaking of fruits; what has the fruit of the reformation been? Obviously, correlation doesn't equal causation, but where are we today? Seemingly living in the new dark ages and in a time of certain moral decay. Though the world is the world. Of course it is evil. But look at Christianity as well. That too is falling to decadence and vice, seemingly led by certain Protestant denominations first and foremost.
The end stage of Protestantism is the non-denominational churches where you go in, get blasted by fog machines, turn off your brain and tune out listening to rock music, and go home having actually thought about God maybe once the whole time. Or the prosperity gospel. There's certainly a reason that these kinds of things crop up the further we go down the Reformation path.
Wait so you're saying "Sola Scriptura" which means our standards should come from scripture alone...... isn't in the Bible which means you are advocating that my standard should only come from scripture? That's a long way around of saying you agree with me.... or you're a hypocrite.
"The Bible" isn't in the Bible either bud. Neither is the trinity, and yet we can rub a couple of brain cells together and understand it.
All the people who rubbed those brain cells together were Catholics. As I said, every foundational belief of Christianity comes from Catholics.
No, not really. The Bible does not tell us the correct way to view the Bible, so Sola Scriptura is false, is what I'm saying. My comment here was meant as a semi-comprehensive defense of the Church. My ultimate point is that the authority of the Church is what validates the Bible. The Church must have authority for the Bible to have authority.
Further, to just assume the Bible is all we should look to for authority, is unproven. It requires deeper examination than just assuming it is the default position unless proven otherwise.
I mean, who are we to decide how things should be and which things require evidence versus which things are assumed to be the case in lieu of evidence? That's for God to decide. And the fact the Bible doesn't say anything on itself is to me simply more evidence that the verification of the Bible is not solely contained in the Bible. If Sola Scriptura is correct, it would make an awful lot of sense to put everything solely in the Bible.
Edit to add: also, if it were the case that every individual could read scripture on their own and come to understand the authoritative truth, everyone would agree on doctrine. But instead, Protestants are all over the place and believe all manner of different things. This is because we are not the authority on God's Word, nor are we capable of fully understanding It on our own.
Proof pre-supposes God. God has conveyed His word through history.
I see your issue, you don't believe God is sovereign enough to convey His word. That's not the God of scripture and certainly not the one I believe in.
"Test everything against scripture" is literally in the Bible. You are saying the apostles were wrong.
Chapter and verse. You guys always want sources until it's about actual truth. The doctrines of Babylon have no life in them
Every Catholic doctrine has supporting Scriptural writing. Some explicit, some implicit. Whether you agree with their interpretation is one thing, but you don't get to pretend the Church just makes stuff up.
Truth!
I was born & raised in Tyler, Tx...went to Catholic Schools there...
This pope has to go and the sooner the better!!! WOWZA!!!!
Heyyyyy, I’m a Tyler guy myself!
I actually know Strickland and this guy is SOLID.
Although, he did ruffle a few feather when first took over the Diocese.
The next one will be the same.
They are all puppets.
And where are all the other bishops? Crickets except for Vigano.
"Dead bodies float down stream."
In case there were any Catholics out there who were wondering if the current pope is corrupt, this should pretty much settle it. Bergoglio is a BAD pope! As a lifelong Catholic, I do not recognize Bergoglio as the head of my church.
Is Francis the False Prophet? He fits the bill! I wonder who his pardner is going to be?
Oh ok, so the "pope" guy does have an agenda, good to know.
Hey RC's have been here before. every 500 years or so we have to clean house and its usually the people in the pews who have to do the cleaning.
Anti pope? Dude ain't poping properly. They're all frauds.
I could say I was Catholic, just not a Roman Catholic!
Came here to say that. RCs take up about 1/3 of the Catholic church. We in the Eastern/Oriental catholic church see him as a figurehead. Thats why we have Patriarchs. For example with Vatican 2, none of their changes applied to us, only to the RCs and in retrospect that could very well be why the RC is in trouble now.
The Roman part happened under Constantine. When Jesus died on the cross, the veil in the Temple was ripped from top to bottom opening the was to God for everyone. We don't need a priesthood any longer. Jesus is our High Priest and the way is open to Him. All you have to do is ask!
The Jesuits control both the Illuminati and the Freemasons.