|
|
Post by Tim Collins on Apr 29, 2009 17:59:32 GMT -7
this is me being good and keeping my mouth shut You better or I'll use his sheppards crook on your head ;D
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Apr 29, 2009 19:07:00 GMT -7
okay, it's 8p.m.
I'm done now
No human being is infallible. The only perfect human was Jesus.
|
|
|
Post by badlygiven on Apr 29, 2009 19:37:33 GMT -7
Badly, I'd like to go back to your description of purgatory. Where does that concept come from if you know? Do you believe there is actually a hell? One last question, not really related to that but who is the Pope? What is his role? I'm not badly, but I can attempt to answer who is the Pope. Badly can clean up my errors. The Pope is the Spiritual leader of the Catholic Church. He (sorry only guys get the cool hat (Miter?) and sheppards crook) is considered a "descendant" of Peter, of whom Jesus said "Peter, you are my rock, upon whom I will build my house" (really bad paraphrase of a bible quote I cannot recall). The role of the Pope is to provide the spiritual direction of the Catholic Church. He is in effect the President/Prime Minister of the organization. He is guided by the College of Cardinals, who in turn direct the Bishops, who in tern direct their Priests. Somewhere in this picture are the leaders of the various religious orders (Franciscans, Jesuits, etc). On issues of faith, and when the Pope declares he is speaking from the throne of Peter, his proclamations are considered infallible. Pretty much as Snill described it...just some very few clarifications... The Pope is the Bishop of Rome...holding the same title of Episkopos as that of his brother bishops. So if he is like the other bishops, why is he the "Pope"? Because it was considered that since so many things happened in Rome, and since the Church had replaced the vacuum left by the fall of the Roman Empire, that the bishop of Rome was "more of a bishop" than the others, a primacy (the first among bishops). SInce he occupies the Chair of Peter, the apostle described as "the Rock upon which I will build my Church", his place as the bishop of Rome holds more of an importance than the others. As Snill said, on matters of faith and morals, He speaks En Cathedra, that is "from the inside of the church". Ex Cathedra or "outside of the church" is when the Pope speaks about other things. These are not considered infallible, or "without error". Only from the Chair of Peter is he speaking with infallibility. He is the spiritual leader of the Catholic faith, but NOT a replacement for Jesus. He is a servant of Christ. As to Purgatory...the basis for it is this: "...for no one can lay a foundation other than the one that there is, namely, Jesus Christ. If anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay or straw, the work of each one will come to light, for the Day will disclose it. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire [itself] will test the quality of each one's work. If the work stands that someone built upon the foundation, that person will receive a wage. But if someone's work is burned up, that one will suffer loss; the person will be saved, but only through fire." (1 Corinthians 3:11-15) We build on the foundation of Christ, but our construction is tested by fire, and we are saved?... Actually, a better concept is the one where we have lived life, maybe committed some small venial (minor) sins, and departed this earthly life in an "unclean state". Now, I mean unclean in the sense that we are still like precious gold and silver, but have impurities that must be refined out of us...the "fire" of Purgatory, to me, is that fire one feels for someone that person loves. That fire is the passionate fire we have for God, we are so close, yet, since nothing unclean can come before a perfect God, we must be made clean...
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Apr 29, 2009 19:47:58 GMT -7
I know some people who equate life on earth with purgatory, they feel that death releases them from this suffering and they can then choose if they wish to come back to learn from previous mistakes or proceed toward God
|
|
|
Post by badlygiven on Apr 29, 2009 20:00:46 GMT -7
aaahhh...reincarnation...
I remember that movie with Robin Williams, where he dies, and his wife committs suicide..."What Dreams May Come"...had a wonderful concept of the afterlife, though to MY theological understanding, was "incorrect"...remember, incorrect to my understanding does not mean wrong...just worng to the way I look at things...
as to the concept of what Heaven will be like..we can only know when we get there...
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Apr 29, 2009 20:05:14 GMT -7
it doesn't fly much with my understanding, limited as it is, either, and I don't think I'll ever forget that scene with all of the faces....ooh, that was spooky
I think one of the things I lean more toward is that eveyone has his/her "right" and that may not always coincide with what we were taught; even then there are times when it seems to make sense, and other times, it makes so little sense I wonder about those who believe in it
but then again, who am I to decide another's path? My Buddhist friends are usually very open and accepting of other faiths-far more than I have seen many Christians behave toward them
and to be very honest, much of the time, I truly believe there are interconnections amongst these faiths and creeds...I see far more agreement sometimes and it actually gives the universality of the word "faith" more meaing for me
|
|
|
Post by webrunner on Apr 29, 2009 21:23:55 GMT -7
Dang, I can't get away from my words even where I delete them. First of all, I have to say that I agree with Rosa. Jesus is/was the only perfect Person. Badly, between your description of the Pope and Snil's I have a ton more questions. I'm going to ask, but you owe me no explanation, okay? Whether you wish to answer or not is strictly up to you and I will respect it either way. On purgatory, when you say, "that fire is the passionate fire we have for God, we are so close, yet, since nothing unclean can come before a perfect God, we must be made clean... " Isn't that what Jesus accomplished with His death and sacrifice? I understand that the Pope should never replace Jesus but, I'm wondering, is there a notion that he's somehow closer to Jesus than anyone else? When I see the news and he's visiting somewhere, droves of people show up to see him, to touch him, to kneel before him and (I think) kiss his ring (correct me if I'm wrong about that one). Why? The Chair of Peter you speak of. What types of things does he proclaim from that position? How is that different from the things he says otherwise? What if you, in your own reading or understanding of (fill in the blank)_______conflicts with his? Matthew 16:16 is the verse that speaks of Peter as the rock. Shameless Bible thumper that I am, here it is, (along with some verses before and after as well). bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=Matthew+16&version1=49Just by way of information, when the Bible speaks of Christ's church, we believe His church to be the entire body of His believers to include all denominations. Basically anyone who confesses as Peter did, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Apr 30, 2009 4:54:31 GMT -7
Badly says:
As Snill said, on matters of faith and morals, He speaks En Cathedra, that is "from the inside of the church". Ex Cathedra or "outside of the church" is when the Pope speaks about other things. These are not considered infallible, or "without error". Only from the Chair of Peter is he speaking with infallibility. He is the spiritual leader of the Catholic faith, but NOT a replacement for Jesus. He is a servant of Christ.
Here is one area where I disagree with the church. In my opinion, even if he speaks from the Chair of Peter, he is fallible, because as a human being, that condition is irrevocable. He is not a replacement for Jesus, because he never could be. Status conferred upon him by men throughout time, the Church, the College of Cardinals--via their interpretations of his role-- cannot change his nature, even when he speaks to matters of faith and morals.
Status conferred because the college asserts their choice to have been guided by the Holy Spirit? I have a difficult time with that, in that I truly believe that the diversity in interpretations could also have been guided in the same fashion. How do we know this isn't the case? Because the Catholic Church teaches us otherwise?
It is a matter of faith, right? There's no "proof" that he is infallible when he speaks from Peter's chair, rather for those of us who watch the examples set before us by Rome
an argument could certainly be made that fallibility comes as a natural consequence of a very politically inclined church.
He is still a servant of God, and imperfect, fallible--human. The only perfect human was Jesus.
Badly, please forgive my ignorance, I'm long past the stage where my mores include unquestioned acceptance of the trappings that were taught to me as a child. I mean no disrespect.
|
|
|
Post by badlygiven on Apr 30, 2009 5:29:48 GMT -7
No disrespect percieved Rosa....
I should clarify what "infallability" is. It does not make the person perfect, nor does it make the thoughts perfect...what infallability is, is that the pronouncement made is "without error", that is, it does not go against Scripture nor the basic traditions of the Church. That is why I hold out a lot of hope for women to join the ranks of the priesthood...because once our male leaders that were around in the 1940s and 1950s are gone, the ones that grew up with the teachings of Vatican II are going to come into play, and I see some changes coming with them...I agree with you and Web...the only perfect being is the Christ...infallability only speaks to the fact that we have scipture and a way to interpret Scripture though the life and history of the Church
Web...I never have a problem answering your questions...and "thump away" to your heart's content...it challenges me to think...
We are allowed to disagree, in the privacy of our hearts, and in our personal actions reflecting those beliefs...birth control being the biggest one, I think that the faithful and the Church disagree on...and one where I see changes coming as well...
The Pope is like me...he might have a high office worthy of honor but he is no more Catholic, or no closer to Christ than I am...
On Purgatory, it is a concept and teaching that has been around for many centuries, but it is not an absolute...meaning belief in it or non belief in it in not essential for salvation. Here is where I will tie the concept in...
Jesus cleanses us of our sins--the action...Purgatory--the place...what happens in Purgatory is the purification of us all to go before a perfect God...Jesus was the Salvation that enables us to get in the door and what cleanses us...Purgatory is where we are cleansed...
I beleive in Hell...Purgatory is not a place between Heaven and Hell...it is a part of Heaven...
Hell is that place where we are seperated from what and who we love...as John Paul II said...a great emptiness, a nothingness that is for all eternity...
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Apr 30, 2009 5:43:59 GMT -7
"I should clarify what "infallability" is. It does not make the person perfect, nor does it make the thoughts perfect...what infallability is, is that the pronouncement made is "without error", that is, it does not go against Scripture nor the basic traditions of the Church. "
that it does not go against Scripture nor the basic traditions of the Church
these should preface everything he says from Peter's chair, but even having said that, some of the "basic traditions of the Church" have caused me some concern over the years
one reason why: my church, most priests I have known neglected to make this distinction and many taught along the lines of the perceived power that comes from that "infallibility". What he says goes, when it is from that chair. You are no one to question the word, because it is infallible, it comes from God
this is, to this day, what I hear
you see hope where I don't as yet; adherence to scripture as it's interpreted for us is sometimes another reason why, even with Vatican II
|
|
|
Post by Tim Collins on Apr 30, 2009 5:58:02 GMT -7
Just to mix it up. On the issue of who the Pope really is....
...in the secular world, if I am not mistaken, the Pope is accepted and treated as a "head of state". He "rules" Vatican City a soverign state within Italy.
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Apr 30, 2009 6:03:50 GMT -7
I guess I could put it a different way: the Pope's interpretation of scripture as infallible
he is a human being; infallibility, "without error" implies a perfect distinction than that which could be understood by members of a different Christian denomination
non-Catholics are subject to error because they don't speak from Peter's chair?
|
|
|
Post by Tim Collins on Apr 30, 2009 6:36:23 GMT -7
I guess I could put it a different way: the Pope's interpretation of scripture as infallible he is a human being; infallibility, "without error" implies a perfect distinction than that which could be understood by members of a different Christian denomination non-Catholics are subject to error because they don't speak from Peter's chair? Non-Catholics cannot speak to what is or is not a matter of Faith for Catholics. It is an internal matter reserved for the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. Just as a Catholic could not tell an Hassidc Jew what is or is not Kosher. The Pope speaks "infallibly" to his congregation of believers not to the world
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Apr 30, 2009 6:40:37 GMT -7
I guess I could put it a different way: the Pope's interpretation of scripture as infallible he is a human being; infallibility, "without error" implies a perfect distinction than that which could be understood by members of a different Christian denomination non-Catholics are subject to error because they don't speak from Peter's chair? Non-Catholics cannot speak to what is or is not a matter of Faith for Catholics. It is an internal matter reserved for the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. Just as a Catholic could not tell an Hassidc Jew what is or is not Kosher. The Pope speaks "infallibly" to his congregation of believers not to the world theoretically yes, but the Pope speaks as the authority from Rome, he speaks for Christianity too snil. He doesn't speak just for the Church and for Catholics, he speaks for and to all Christians if he didn't do so as the Pope, there would be little reason for the Christian world to pay any attention to Catholics at all
|
|