ECT MARTIN LUTHER ON OBEDIENCE TO THE CHURCH

[CabinetMaker]

Already answered (Post #118).

So that would be a refusal to think on your part. Fair enough.

Because there's a lot to learn, and not everything comes by osmosis. There are some things, however, that one generally becomes aware of in the everyday course of living as a Catholic. The fact that priests are not infallible is an example of the latter.

In all the yeasts I attended mass, in all the different churches I attended mass in, not once did a priest or anybody else ever draw a distinction between veneration and worship when praying to Mary. So tell us, it the priest is not teaching it from the pulpit, how is the average person ever to learn that there is a distinction between veneration and worship and what the distinction is.

Not if your posted statements on this forum are any indication. :nono:



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

I was one of the brave ones to raise the vestments to see what was hidden behind them. Glad I did.

 

[Cruciform]

So that would be a refusal to think on your part. Fair enough.

Straw Man Fallacy. Already answered (Post #118).

In all the yeasts I attended mass, in all the different churches I attended mass in, not once did a priest or anybody else ever draw a distinction between veneration and worship when praying to Mary.

...that you bothered to remember or intellectually process, anyway. I learned it in a basic RCIA class before I ever actually became a Catholic. It was one of the very first things I learned. Again, the problem seems to be yours.

I was one of the brave ones to raise the vestments to see what was hidden behind them.

:darwinsm:... Thanks, I really needed that. Of course, there's nothing at all "brave" about rejecting Christ's own teachings as delivered through his one historic Church in order to make up one's own self-serving and self-styled pseudo-"Christianity" for oneself. All it takes is a fundamental sense of pride, arrogance, and self-centeredness. Yes, your "bravery" is quite impressive. I hear that Arius, Pelagius, Sybellius, etc. were all "brave" as well.

Glad I did.

Enjoy it while you're still able to maintain the self-styled facade.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[CabinetMaker]

...that you bothered to remember or intellectually process, anyway. I learned it in a basic RCIA class before I ever actually became a Catholic. It was one of the very first things I learned. Again, the problem seems to be yours.

And thre it is. You need to take some sort class to learn it. Thank you for your confirmation of that fact.

:darwinsm:... Thanks, I really needed that. Of course, there's nothing at all "brave" about rejecting Christ's own teachings as delivered through his one historic Church in order to make up one's own self-serving and self-styled pseudo-"Christianity" for oneself. All it takes is a fundamental sense of pride, arrogance, and self-centeredness. Yes, your "bravery" is quite impressive. I hear that Arius, Pelagius, Sybellius, etc. were all "brave" as well.

There is something brave about questioning authority. I questioned the authority of the RCC to define doctrines that have no biblical basis.

Enjoy it while you're still able to maintain the self-styled facade.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

I very much enjoy a much closer relationship with Christ.

 

[Cruciform]

And thre it is. You need to take some sort class to learn it.

Straw Man and Non Sequitur Fallacies. Try again.

There is something brave about questioning authority.

...unless the authority you're questioning is in fact that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself, against which he declared that the gates of hell would never prevail, and which he established to guide and teach the faithful in his own name and by his very power (Mt. 16:18-19; 28:18-20; Lk. 10:16; Ac. 16:4; 2 Thess. 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Jn. 4:6). You have no more doctrinal authority to deny or reject the authoritative teachings of Christ's one historic Church than you do to deny or reject the Church's teachings contained in the Scriptures themselves, given that both are the very teachings of Jesus Christ himself.

I questioned the authority of the RCC to define doctrines that have no biblical basis.

"...no biblical basis according to the opinions of your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect," you mean. Thanks for nicely proving my point made just above.

I very much enjoy a much closer relationship with Christ.

Again: Enjoy it while you're still able to maintain the self-styled facade.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[CabinetMaker]

Straw Man and Non Sequitur Fallacies. Try again.

Don't complain to me that you tripped over your own argument. You were the one who first stated that by attending mass you could learn the catholic doctrines. I pointed out a flaw in your reasoning to which you responded that you had attended a RICA class first. Your argument failed.

...unless the authority you're questioning is in fact that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself, against which he declared that the gates of hell would never prevail, and which he established to guide and teach the faithful in his own name and by his very power (Mt. 16:18-19; 28:18-20; Lk. 10:16; Ac. 16:4; 2 Thess. 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Jn. 4:6). You have no more doctrinal authority to deny or reject the authoritative teachings of Christ's one historic Church than you do to deny or reject the Church's teachings contained in the Scriptures themselves, given that both are the very teachings of Jesus Christ himself.

That is exactly the authority I am questioning as they long ago abandoned the very teachings of Christ Himself. Don't believe me? Then give me a point by point response to post 518 and prove me wrong.

"...no biblical basis according to the opinions of your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect," you mean. Thanks for nicely proving my point made just above.

No, I said what I meant. You don't have the integrity and honesty to deal with what I said so you test it and add stuff to it. You really should be quite ashamed of yourself.

Again: Enjoy it while you're still able to maintain the self-styled facade.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

There is nothing self-styled about it. You are all about your church and your relationship with your church. You never witness for what Jesus did for you, its always about your church, never about God. I have a theory about why you actually became a Catholic based on all the interaction we have had over the breadth of our conversations. It leaves me to think that you are far, far, more self-styled in your beliefs than I.

 

[Cruciform]

Don't complain to me that you tripped over your own argument. You were the one who first stated that by attending mass you could learn the catholic doctrines. I pointed out a flaw in your reasoning to which you responded that you had attended a RICA class first. Your argument failed.

Already answered and corrected (Post #124). Try again.

That is exactly the authority I am questioning as they long ago abandoned the very teachings of Christ Himself.

...according to the opinions of your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect, anyway---which you have already admitted you cannot show is in fact that one historic Church founded by Jesus Christ himself, and against which he declared that the gates of hell will never prevail, and so whose interpretations and opinions carry no doctrinal authority whatsoever. Try again.

No, I said what I meant.

Yes, you "said what you meant" according to the opinions of your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect. Again, thanks for nicely proving my point.

There is nothing self-styled about it.

The fact that it is based upon your own subjective, self-styled, and personally made-up belief system demonstrates otherwise. Try again.

...its always about your Church, never about God.

Your latest False Dilemma Fallacy is noted. You have exactly nothing.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[republicanchick]

Given that the priest is generally teaching his congregation what the formal teachings of the RCC are, how are they to know they have been lead astray. As your participation on this site has revealed, Catholics are not encouraged to question their leaders. If the priest who speaks for the mother church says it must be so, then it must be so.

how utterly insulting

the implication is that Catholics cannot think for themselve and wouldn't know true Catholic doctrine from heresy unless.. what? some protestant came along?

PLEASE!!!

Catholics are just as capable of knowing truth from error as anyone else, and MORE so.. b/c they are Catholic. They are in the Church Christ himself founded.. The ones most prone to error are the ones who are not in Christ's Church (which should go w/o saying).

If people are deluded, and stay deluded for years and years, it is b/c they choose to believe lies... and that is something all humans are quite capable of.. our fallen nature being what it is ..