-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Indulgences
- Thread starter Darrell C
- Start date
- Status
I have never bashed Catholics. Ever. But Catholics are not free to ignore the teaching of magisterium. My church has people who believe in Augustinian soteriology and those who lean toward Arminianism because there is no magisterium to impose what must be believed.
Indulgences are not just doctrine; they are dogma, things which must be believed (or at least attempted to be believed.) There are doctrines that are not dogma (such as Mary as co-redemptrix) and may be believed or not, and doctrines that are unlawful to be believed (i.e., sola fide.)
You seem to think that indulgences can be separated from the Latin Rite's teaching on penance, justification, authority, et al., but they are all tightly bound together.
Bowing out now. No offense was intended to the Latin Rite folks.
Indulgences are not just doctrine; they are dogma, things which must be believed (or at least attempted to be believed.) There are doctrines that are not dogma (such as Mary as co-redemptrix) and may be believed or not, and doctrines that are unlawful to be believed (i.e., sola fide.)
You seem to think that indulgences can be separated from the Latin Rite's teaching on penance, justification, authority, et al., but they are all tightly bound together.
Bowing out now. No offense was intended to the Latin Rite folks.
Insofar as the contemporary Catholic church, Pope Francis has answered this question with his granting of indulgences which can be obtained for the deceased (specifically mentioned in the announcement).
Letter of the Holy Father according to which an Indulgence is granted to the faithful on the occasion of the Extraordinary Jubilee of Mercy (1st September 2015) | Francis
Is Pope Francis too indulgent with indulgences?
You were not charged as having done so, rsr, but, the thread is not open to look at all of the perceived errors of the Catholic Church, and, if that is the direction it goes that is what is going to happen.
On the contrary, we have a Public Confession of that very thing...and it has been ignored.
And that is my point. I have spoken with quite a few Catholics and had many of them overlook certain Doctrines which "a Catholic has to believe," when the fact is that all fellowships have their share of heretics (also known as people who think for themselves, who are not subject to indoctrination for the sake of indoctrination).
That is the myth, and usually when a Catholic comes on here, in my opinion, mind you, they come on because of the nasty way Catholics are treated, so the potential for sincere discussion goes out the window and it becomes a Catholic bash.
An example might be those who reject a Pre-Tribulational Rapture. Comments like "Pre-Tribbers are waiting for a bailout," or, "Pre-Tribbers think there is secret whisking away," or something to that effect. The problem is that (1) the people making comments about "Pre-Tribbers" have no real grasp of Biblical teachings concerning the Rapture, (2) no real understanding of what all Pre-tribbers believe and teach, and (3) a tendency to impose what they think Pre-Tribbers believe on all Pre-Tribbers.
And the result is that they seldom take the time to try to understand why someone is a Pre-Tribber.
So if people take an approach like that, why would we not think that the only Catholics who come here, come here on the defensive in the first place, and seek to justify the faith group they are a part of? Rather, if we seek to stir up sincere discussion of the Doctrines which divide us, I thikn there are two very real outcomes, (1) we can better understand why they believe what they believe, and (2) it may just be we may be surprised by their reaction which could be a rejection of the disputed doctrine.
But it isn't going to happen in an environment that is strictly hostile.
Not for all Catholics. It was in fact a Catholic that I spoke with that basically dismissed indulgences and pointed out the difference between how some Catholics view the doctrine, and the often erroneous view of antagonists who use it as a club on them.
It isn't something that a Catholic has to believe. Everyone can make that decision for themselves, and that is what they do. That's why we have "Baptists" that teach Annihilation and Soul Sleep.
And you may say Catholics have to believe certain things, or cannot believe certain things, but that is about as useful as saying Baptists have to believe certain things and cannot believe certain things. You really want to claim a Unity among Baptists? On a forum where Baptists are debating the same things over and over, day in, day out?
Tell that to Adonia. Tell him what it is he has to believe. You could do that, and what do you think is the result?
You just might push him into adopting into his beliefs the very thing that most who "witness" to Catholics say they are trying to dissuade Catholics from, lol.
Get the point?
And nothing you said would have made anyone think you were trying to offend.
But let's keep the OP on point, and not extend it to all issues we might see as erroneous in Catholic Doctrine.
As far as I am concerned, the thread was over with Adonia's statements. That was in fact the point of the OP, to show that we have to distinguish, individually, and on a personal level, the Basis of Belief of every believer, rather than putting them into a box and telling them what they believe. We have to find out what a person believes in reality before we can "address it" or "witness to them."
I have spoken to numerous people on this forum that say they are "Baptist," and few would argue that there have been some rather strange "Baptists" come to this forum.
And if I resemble that remark...please keep it to yourself. I wouldn't want it to get out I am a heretic.
God bless.
Well, I would like to get the opinion of Catholics about this new Pope. Might be we may see a division as we see over Trump. Catholics are as diverse as Baptists. My own view of what a "true Baptist" is was shaped, surprise surprise, from the Baptist Fellowships I have been a part of. I think it quite probable, seeing that every congregation has leadership that influences and shapes the views of the majority of their congregation, that there is a range among Catholics from nominal to fanatical, from Liberal to Conservative. And my experience on forums speaking with Catholics supports that.
As far as the links go, I am not interested in following links, so if there is something in there that you feel is relevant, quote the particular statement and comment, and open it up to Catholics for a response.
God bless.
"we do not equate remission of sins by men with the remission of sins accomplished by Christ through His Offering of Himself. "
The question is does Jesus Christ equate it?
That's his prerogative. He can choose to dispense as he pleases. If he says cats and dogs can forgive sins, fish can remove punishment, and petting donkeys removes sins of the people you think about, it is what it is. church is the body of Christ and Jesus Christ is the head. No Jesus then no church.
Jesus Christ can have you run the entire Church tomorrow.
"So it is quite impossible to say the disciples are born again Christians at this point because one is not a new creature until they are reconciled to God and brought into Eternal Union with Him."
Well that is a interesting concept to put on the table. You are saying these are UNBELIEVERS with the holy spirit and the authority to forgive and not forgive sins?
Some would argue the only way to believe and receive any authority was to be born again.
Qualification of disciple are also very high, these UNbelievers who leave their families and jobs to follow Jesus?
Or now we will have to explain not all believers are born again.
You say the passage doesn't mention regeneration, Some would argue above all things receiving the holy spirit is the #1 regeneration. In fact I challenge to give yourself all benefits of perfection of regeneration and have the holy spirit taken away.
The Devil was made perfect too.
we MUST "bash" the officiial doctrines of the RCC, as they are mainly either heresyl, or non biblical, and they do teach another Gospel, period!
My desire for catholics is as paul was for his fellow Jews, that they are woke up and saved by God and depart that church for a true one!
And Chick to me was really bad, as he was a KJVO, and his hatred for the Rome Church was not like mine, as he fixed on almost like God saved none of them, I know that he does, as about 50% of my Baptist church used to be them, including my senior pastor Himself!
And did you read that link to 9 facts to know about Council of trent I posted?
The link is to the Vatican website, which I take it is the "official" Catholic position. The first was the announcement from Pope Francis granting indulgences. It specifically offers indulgences given to those who are deceased. The second link is to the National Catholic Reporter's article questioning if the Pope has become to indulgent with indulgences.
What I believe is relevant is that the Vatican position has indulgences given for the deceased, which exceeds temporal punishments in this lifetime.
That said, I do have several Catholic friends who disagree with both the Pope and the Catholic Church (the RCC's official position) on several issues. So I believe you are right that there is a spectrum of belief within the Catholic church (ranging from liberal to conservative, perhaps depending on the issue).
It seems that you are trying to differentiate between a person who attends the Roman church parish and one who obeys the requirements of the Roman church. Wouldn't those who refuse to obey be considered apostates and be in jeopardy of damnation according to the traditions of the rulers of the church?You were not charged as having done so, rsr, but, the thread is not open to look at all of the perceived errors of the Catholic Church, and, if that is the direction it goes that is what is going to happen.
On the contrary, we have a Public Confession of that very thing...and it has been ignored.
And that is my point. I have spoken with quite a few Catholics and had many of them overlook certain Doctrines which "a Catholic has to believe," when the fact is that all fellowships have their share of heretics (also known as people who think for themselves, who are not subject to indoctrination for the sake of indoctrination).
That is the myth, and usually when a Catholic comes on here, in my opinion, mind you, they come on because of the nasty way Catholics are treated, so the potential for sincere discussion goes out the window and it becomes a Catholic bash.
An example might be those who reject a Pre-Tribulational Rapture. Comments like "Pre-Tribbers are waiting for a bailout," or, "Pre-Tribbers think there is secret whisking away," or something to that effect. The problem is that (1) the people making comments about "Pre-Tribbers" have no real grasp of Biblical teachings concerning the Rapture, (2) no real understanding of what all Pre-tribbers believe and teach, and (3) a tendency to impose what they think Pre-Tribbers believe on all Pre-Tribbers.
And the result is that they seldom take the time to try to understand why someone is a Pre-Tribber.
So if people take an approach like that, why would we not think that the only Catholics who come here, come here on the defensive in the first place, and seek to justify the faith group they are a part of? Rather, if we seek to stir up sincere discussion of the Doctrines which divide us, I thikn there are two very real outcomes, (1) we can better understand why they believe what they believe, and (2) it may just be we may be surprised by their reaction which could be a rejection of the disputed doctrine.
But it isn't going to happen in an environment that is strictly hostile.
Not for all Catholics. It was in fact a Catholic that I spoke with that basically dismissed indulgences and pointed out the difference between how some Catholics view the doctrine, and the often erroneous view of antagonists who use it as a club on them.
It isn't something that a Catholic has to believe. Everyone can make that decision for themselves, and that is what they do. That's why we have "Baptists" that teach Annihilation and Soul Sleep.
And you may say Catholics have to believe certain things, or cannot believe certain things, but that is about as useful as saying Baptists have to believe certain things and cannot believe certain things. You really want to claim a Unity among Baptists? On a forum where Baptists are debating the same things over and over, day in, day out?
Tell that to Adonia. Tell him what it is he has to believe. You could do that, and what do you think is the result?
You just might push him into adopting into his beliefs the very thing that most who "witness" to Catholics say they are trying to dissuade Catholics from, lol.
Get the point?
And nothing you said would have made anyone think you were trying to offend.
But let's keep the OP on point, and not extend it to all issues we might see as erroneous in Catholic Doctrine.
As far as I am concerned, the thread was over with Adonia's statements. That was in fact the point of the OP, to show that we have to distinguish, individually, and on a personal level, the Basis of Belief of every believer, rather than putting them into a box and telling them what they believe. We have to find out what a person believes in reality before we can "address it" or "witness to them."
I have spoken to numerous people on this forum that say they are "Baptist," and few would argue that there have been some rather strange "Baptists" come to this forum.
And if I resemble that remark...please keep it to yourself. I wouldn't want it to get out I am a heretic.
God bless.
Why do the opinions matter, Darrell? Roman church dogma does not become less just because parishioners don't adhere to the dogma or believe it.
I have several extremely liberal Catholic colleagues who encourage radical feminism, a woman's right to choose abortion and deny the deity of Jesus, yet they self-describe as being members of the Roman church. Do they count in the spectrum or are they not really Roman church followers?
I don't know. Personally I see very little if any merrit to the RCC. But I have a friend (in his late 50's) who is Catholic out of tradition alone. He holds the superstitions but little confidence in the Church itself. His mother is devout Catholic.
Why they would continue to maintain their status within the Latin Rite which is a faith tradition that is diametrically opposed to their belief's on those things is beyond me. Seems they would be more comfortable worshipping somewhere else.
The official teachings of the the RCC deny the real Gospel of Christ, period...
The Council of trent is still the officially theology of the RCC, and they condemn to hell those whose Gospel denies the RCC version of it!
Oh good grief!
Superstitions? Are you talking about things like a virgin giving birth, burning bushes talking, people ascending into thin air, seas parting, people being raised from the dead, people being healed, the idea of eternal life, a heaven, and on and on and on? Superstitions all and you believe them - at least I hope you do, as do I.
- Status