Just Wondering? Do you think Catholic Priests Are Saved?

[Martin Marprelate]

If the Catholic Church was inspired enough to preserve scriptures and Canonise the Bible itself, then it is inspired enough to tell us what it means.

For some hundreds of years the Roman Catholic church denied people the Scriptures in their own language.
In 1400, a new law, De Haeretico Comburendo ('On the Burning of Heretics'), ordained for the first time in England, the burning of those regarded as heretics. in 1407, the 'Constitutions of Oxford' were introduced:
'The translation of the text of Holy Scripture out of one tongue into another is a dangerous thing; as blessed Jerome testifies, because it is not easy to make the sense in all respects the same; as the same blessed Jerome confesses that he made frequent mistakes in this business, although he was inspired: therefore we enact and ordain that no one henceforth do by his own authority translate any text of Holy Scripture into the English tongue or any other by way of book, pamphlet, or treatise. Nor let any such book, pamphlet, or treatise now lately composed in the time of John Wicklif aforesaid, or since, or hereafter to be composed, be read in whole or in part, in public or in private, under pain of the greater excommunication, till that translation have been approved by the diocesan of the place, or if occasion shall require, by a provincial Council. Let him that do contrary be punished in the same manner as a supporter of heresy and error.'
Well they're not wrong about Jerome making mistakes, but taking the two laws together, it meant that those wishing to read the Scriptures in their own language could be burned as heretics, and quite a few of them were, before Martin Luther was born. So to say that the Roman Catholic church preserved the Scriptures is simply not true. Rather, it hid the Scriptures from the people to preserve its own errors and illegitimate power.

 

[Armchair Apologist]

I would just say that II have been a Baptist since I was converted, about 50 years ago, and I have never, either as a visitor or a member, been in a Baptist church which had a 10AM Sunday School (and "Sunday School" here in the UK is for children, unlike the USA, where I understand it is for all ages) or that always or even often misses out verses of hymns. Some have had their morning service at 11AM, some at 1030AM. I have never been in a Baptist church where there have been arguments over whop sits where. In my experience, Baptist church do not have traditions.

Now, you know I was just trying to make a joke right? Sometimes things get a little serious here and this is a serious discussion but I think we need to cut up every once in a while just to let the person we are contending with that we mean them no harm and we do appreciate them!

None of these "Traditions" exist in my current Baptist church either but have in the past and nothing wrong with many of them aside from getting one's knickers in a knot over a seat in the auditorium. Another sacred Baptist tradition is when "pot luck" supper is called, someone had better bring some nanner puddin'* (and not the store bought stuff either) or the preecher will have us sing all 97 stanzas of "Just As I Am" until someone either gets saved or gets right!

*That's Banana pudding for all you folks across the pond or north of the Mason-Dixon line!

 

[David Lamb]

Now, you know I was just trying to make a joke right? Sometimes things get a little serious here and this is a serious discussion but I think we need to cut up every once in a while just to let the person we are contending with that we mean them no harm and we do appreciate them!

None of these "Traditions" exist in my current Baptist church either but have in the past and nothing wrong with many of them aside from getting one's knickers in a knot over a seat in the auditorium. Another sacred Baptist tradition is when "pot luck" supper is called, someone had better bring some nanner puddin'* (and not the store bought stuff either) or the preecher will have us sing all 97 stanzas of "Just As I Am" until someone either gets saved or gets right!

*That's Banana pudding for all you folks across the pond or north of the Mason-Dixon line!

Sorry, I am afraid often do that - not realising when somebody is joking in a post. I apologise.

 

[Cathode]

For some hundreds of years the Roman Catholic church denied people the Scriptures in their own language.
In 1400, a new law, De Haeretico Comburendo ('On the Burning of Heretics'), ordained for the first time in England, the burning of those regarded as heretics. in 1407, the 'Constitutions of Oxford' were introduced:
'The translation of the text of Holy Scripture out of one tongue into another is a dangerous thing; as blessed Jerome testifies, because it is not easy to make the sense in all respects the same; as the same blessed Jerome confesses that he made frequent mistakes in this business, although he was inspired: therefore we enact and ordain that no one henceforth do by his own authority translate any text of Holy Scripture into the English tongue or any other by way of book, pamphlet, or treatise. Nor let any such book, pamphlet, or treatise now lately composed in the time of John Wicklif aforesaid, or since, or hereafter to be composed, be read in whole or in part, in public or in private, under pain of the greater excommunication, till that translation have been approved by the diocesan of the place, or if occasion shall require, by a provincial Council. Let him that do contrary be punished in the same manner as a supporter of heresy and error.'
Well they're not wrong about Jerome making mistakes, but taking the two laws together, it meant that those wishing to read the Scriptures in their own language could be burned as heretics, and quite a few of them were, before Martin Luther was born. So to say that the Roman Catholic church preserved the Scriptures is simply not true. Rather, it hid the Scriptures from the people to preserve its own errors and illegitimate power.

How do you explain the High German translation of scripture that Luther used to make his erroneous translation of Scripture.

There already were vernacular translations of the Bible all across Europe long before Luther.

Bede translated scripture in the 700s, the Lindisfarne Gospels in the 800s which are very famous, can be viewed in museum.

Saxon translations
French
German
Dutch
Spanish
Czech
Hungarian
Lithuanian
Italian
Etc

The Catholic Church had authorised many vernacular Bible translations long before the Protestant rebellion.

What the Catholic Church didn’t allow was erroneous translations of the Bible, which deceive the faithful.

And rightly so, the Bible was always the Catholic Church’s book from the beginning.

 

[Cathode]

And besides this, the original Vulgate Bible was a vernacular bible, Latin in Roman times. Vulgar or common tongue Latin was spoken.

You have been fed lies and prejudice narratives here, the Catholic Church had vernacular bibles from the start.

Two historical problems existed in these times.
Most people were illiterate.

Bibles were hand written, there was no fast cheap printing press invented yet.

 

[JonC]

Every Bible aloners view is that God’s word means exactly what is stated. They disagree with the meaning of what is stated.

If your understanding and interpretation of scripture could be wrong, then which of your beliefs are error?
You could be wrong on any or everything?

See Catholics don’t make themselves the arbiters of scripture’s interpretation.
This is what makes twisting the scripture to ones own destruction possible and even probable.

Catholics follow the singular inspired Apostles interpretation of scripture handed down, not the “ I could be wrong “ personal fly by the seat of my pants interpretation of scripture.

Scripture is Infallible, it needs infallible interpretation, not fallible “ I could be wrong “ human interpretation.
Since Bible aloners all rejected infallible guidance as a doctrine, all they have is fallible human understanding and fallible interpretations of scripture.
And that carries no authority to rely on, it’s shaky ground, and Bible aloners all disagree with each other anyway.

If the Catholic Church was inspired enough to preserve scriptures and Canonise the Bible itself, then it is inspired enough to tell us what it means.

You are being very dishonest. The belief that we are to lean on God's words and not our own understanding does not result in many interpretations of essential doctrine. The doctrines that are different are doctrines that are not stated in Scripture and application.

Why do you even use a Bible? You have your cult leaders to tell you what to believe.

The Roman Catholic Church is an amalgamation of Roman paganism and Christianity. It is no more Christian than Islam, JW, SDA, and Mormonism.

 

[Cathode]

Why do you even use a Bible? You have your cult leaders to tell you what to believe.

The Roman Catholic Church is an amalgamation of Roman paganism and Christianity. It is no more Christian than Islam, JW, SDA, and Mormonism.

Catholics have been using the Bible more than thousand years before Bible aloners existed.

We follow the singular Apostles interpretation of scripture by apostolic tradition.
Not the uninspired human founded traditions of Protestantism, which conflict and divide into every kind of doctrine.

That’s why a Catholic has the same understanding of Scripture as the Church Fathers so long ago.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Bede translated scripture in the 700s, the Lindisfarne Gospels in the 800s which are very famous, can be viewed in museum.

What went on in other countries is a matter for them. I am talking about England, where I live and I note that you have not disagreed with any of the points I have made about burnings etc.. I have been to Lindisfarne. The Gospels are beautifully writtten and wonderfully ornate. They are also in Latin.
Bede did indeed translate the Gospel of John into Anglo-Saxon shortly before his death in 735, and King Alfred the Great ordered the translation of the whole Bible about 150 years later. He is said to have translated the first 50 Psalms himself, but wars and his own death prevented the whole Bible from being available in English. All this was made possible by the virtual collapse of the papacy into infighting and corruption (Details available on request), which left English Christianity in freedom for a while. But after the accession of Hildebrand in 1073 as Gregory VII, the iron boot of the papacy was on England for the next 200 years or so.
Hidebrand also published his Dictatus Papae, which stated amongst other things:

Only the Roman pope is rightly called 'universal.'
Only the pope can depose and reinstate bishops.
The pope is the only one whose feet all princes must kiss.
The pope may depose emperors.
The pope may be judged by no one.

Nice job description! Given the horrific wickedness of some popes in the Middle Ages and after, it is no wonder that even the Inquisition could not stop Christians from rebelling.

The facts are as I gave them. In 1400, the burning of heretics was introduced in England (it had previously been allowed in France and elsewhere), and in 1408, the translation of the Bible into English was banned on pain of being treated as a heretic.
You may wish to discuss the treatment of John Hus at the Council of Constance in 1415, but I am only talking about the situation in England which is what I know about.

 

[Cathode]

You are being very dishonest. The belief that we are to lean on God's words and not our own understanding does not result in many interpretations of essential doctrine.

Bible aloners do disagree on “ essential “ doctrine.

Even on questions as fundamental as baptism.

There is no final interpreter of scripture in bible alonism, each man suits himself ultimately.

 

[Mike B]

Orthodox and Bible aloners rejected the infallible guidance doctrine,

Was curious, so I looked up the "Infallible Guidance Doctrine"...Wow..

Infallibility

Infallibility, in theological usage, is the supernatural prerogative by which the Church of Christ is, by a special Divine assistance, preserved from liability to error in her definitive dogmatic teaching regarding matters of faith and morals.

www.catholic.com

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Some years ago I set myself to write a history of what I have called "The People's Reformation" with the aim of dispelling the myth that the Reformation was the work of Henry VIII, who actually burned more Protestants during his rein than any other monarch! Due to my taking on a leadership role in my church, I have let the project slip, but I hope to continue it at some point if the Lord allows.
Here is as far as I have got:

The People’s Reformation (1) Setting the Scene

Earliest Times. Psalm 75:1. ‘We give thanks to You, O Lord, we give thanks! For Your wondrous works declare that Your name is near.’ In setting the scene for the People’s Reformat…

marprelate.wordpress.com

The People’s Reformation (2)

People’s Reformation (2): Religion in Medieval England, Part One Hosea 4:6. ‘My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.’ Before continuing our story, it will be helpful to consider the state o…

marprelate.wordpress.com

The People’s Reformation (3). Medieval Christianity, Part 2

Judges 21:25. ‘In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes.’ We continue our account of Medieval religion in England. The earliest Christians …

marprelate.wordpress.com

The People’s Reformation, Part 4. Wyclif and the early Lollards

Hebrews 11:26, 38. ‘Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt; for he looked for the reward………Of whom the world was not worthy…&#823…

marprelate.wordpress.com

​

 

[Cathode]

What went on in other countries is a matter for them. I am talking about England, where I live and I note that you have not disagreed with any of the points I have made about burnings etc.. I have been to Lindisfarne. The Gospels are beautifully writtten and wonderfully ornate. They are also in Latin.
Bede did indeed translate the Gospel of John into Anglo-Saxon shortly before his death in 735, and King Alfred the Great ordered the translation of the whole Bible about 150 years later. He is said to have translated the first 50 Psalms himself, but wars and his own death prevented the whole Bible from being available in English. All this was made possible by the virtual collapse of the papacy into infighting and corruption (Details available on request), which left English Christianity in freedom for a while. But after the accession of Hildebrand in 1073 as Gregory VII, the iron boot of the papacy was on England for the next 200 years or so.
Hidebrand also published his Dictatus Papae, which stated amongst other things:

Only the Roman pope is rightly called 'universal.'
Only the pope can depose and reinstate bishops.
The pope is the only one whose feet all princes must kiss.
The pope may depose emperors.
The pope may be judged by no one.

Nice job description! Given the horrific wickedness of some popes in the Middle Ages and after, it is no wonder that even the Inquisition could not stop Christians from rebelling.

The facts are as I gave them. In 1400, the burning of heretics was introduced in England (it had previously been allowed in France and elsewhere), and in 1408, the translation of the Bible into English was banned on pain of being treated as a heretic.
You may wish to discuss the treatment of John Hus at the Council of Constance in 1415, but I am only talking about the situation in England which is what I know about.

Read again closely, especially the bold portion.

“Jerome confesses that he made frequent mistakes in this business, although he was inspired: therefore we enact and ordain that no one henceforth do by his own authority translate any text of Holy Scripture into the English tongue or any other by way of book, pamphlet, or treatise. Nor let any such book, pamphlet, or treatise now lately composed in the time of John Wicklif aforesaid, or since, or hereafter to be composed, be read in whole or in part, in public or in private, under pain of the greater excommunication, till that translation have been approved by the diocesan of the place, or if occasion shall require, by a provincial Council. “

Vernacular translations were allowed, but only if it were approved by the Bishop or Council.
Try translate the Catholic Church’s book unauthorised and you would rightfully be in trouble.
The Catholic Church had copyright on its book, no Wally off the street could translate it in error.

Erroneous translations were rightly prohibited because erroneous translations of the Bible destroyed souls.

 

[Cathode]

Bible translation is a serious thing.

It’s funny that Protestants rale and ball against historic Catholic guarding against bad vernacular translations of the Bible.
But then find themselves now complaining about bad vernacular translations themselves today.
Back at yah.
Bad translations have always been bad news in any language.

 

[Cathode]

Was curious, so I looked up the "Infallible Guidance Doctrine"...Wow..

Infallibility

Infallibility, in theological usage, is the supernatural prerogative by which the Church of Christ is, by a special Divine assistance, preserved from liability to error in her definitive dogmatic teaching regarding matters of faith and morals.

www.catholic.com

The Catholic Church has the Infallible guidance in all truth guaranteed by Christ’s word.

That’s why it is still here for 2000 years teaching the same unchanging interpretation and doctrine from scripture.

“It follows after commendation of the Trinity, ‘The Holy Church.’ God is pointed out, and His temple. ‘For the temple of God is holy,’ says the Apostle, ‘which (temple) are ye.’ This same is the holy Church, the one Church, the true Church, the Catholic Church, fighting against all heresies: fight, it can: be fought down, it cannot. As for heresies, they went all out of it, like as unprofitable branches pruned from the vine: but itself abideth in its root, in its Vine, in its charity. ‘The gates of hell shall not prevail against it.’” Augustine, Sermon to the Catechumens on the Creed, 6:14 (A.D. 377).

 

[Cathode]

“And besides, also, one only Catholic and Apostolic Church, which can never be destroyed, though all the world should seek to make war with it; but it is victorious over every most impious revolt of the heretics who rise up against it. For her Goodman hath confirmed our minds by saying, ‘Be of good cheer, I have overcome the world.’ ” Alexander of Alexandria, Epistle on the Arian Heresy, 12 (A.D. 321).

The Catholic Church ploughs through history unstoppable, because it has Christ’s promise behind it. Not even the gates of hell can withstand it.

 

[Cathode]

As Thomas Babington Macaulay observed in 1840.

“The proudest royal houses are but of yesterday, when compared with the line of the Supreme Pontiffs. That line we trace back in an unbroken series, from the Pope who crowned Napoleon in the nineteenth century to the Pope who crowned Pepin in the eighth; and far beyond the time of Pepin the august dynasty extends, till it is lost in the twilight of fable.
The republic of Venice came next in antiquity. But the republic of Venice was modern when compared with the Papacy; and the republic of Venice is gone, and the Papacy remains. The Papacy remains, not in decay, not a mere antique, but full of life and youthful vigour. The Catholic Church is still sending forth to the farthest ends of the world missionaries as zealous as those who landed in Kent with Augustin, and still confronting hostile kings with the same spirit with which she confronted Attila. . .
Nor do we see any sign which indicates that the term of her long dominion is approaching. She saw the commencement of all the governments and of all the ecclesiastical establishments that now exist in the world; and we feel no assurance that she is not destined to see the end of them all. She was great and respected before the Saxon had set foot on Britain, before the Frank had passed the Rhine, when Grecian eloquence still flourished at Antioch, when idols were still worshipped in the temple of Mecca.
And she may still exist in undiminished vigour when some traveller from New Zealand shall, in the midst of a vast solitude, take his stand on a broken arch of London Bridge to sketch the ruins of St. Paul’s.”

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Read again closely, especially the bold portion.

“Jerome confesses that he made frequent mistakes in this business, although he was inspired: therefore we enact and ordain that no one henceforth do by his own authority translate any text of Holy Scripture into the English tongue or any other by way of book, pamphlet, or treatise. Nor let any such book, pamphlet, or treatise now lately composed in the time of John Wicklif aforesaid, or since, or hereafter to be composed, be read in whole or in part, in public or in private, under pain of the greater excommunication, till that translation have been approved by the diocesan of the place, or if occasion shall require, by a provincial Council. “

Vernacular translations were allowed, but only if it were approved by the Bishop or Council.
Try translate the Catholic Church’s book unauthorised and you would rightfully be in trouble.
The Catholic Church had copyright on its book, no Wally off the street could translate it in error.

Erroneous translations were rightly prohibited because erroneous translations of the Bible destroyed souls.

OK, so how come Jerome got away with his Latin translation for 1,000 years when he admitted that it had mistakes in it?
BTW, the Wycliffe translation was a rendering of Jerome's Latin for the simple reason that the Church of Rome had let slip the knowledge of Greek and Hebrew in the West. It was good old Desiderimus Erasmus who published a Latin translation of the NT without Jerome's mistakes in 1516 and sparked off the Reformation.

 

[Jerome]

I have been to Lindisfarne. The Gospels are beautifully writtten [sic] and wonderfully ornate. They are also in Latin.

Latin and English! Get it right.

 

[Novelist]

I agree with most of your post, but John the Baptist is so named because he baptised people, not because he was a Baptist in the sense that we use that label today. I tend to refer to him as John the Baptiser, to avoid any misunderstanding.

Yes I know that. I was just being clever.

 

[Novelist]

Hey Cathode, with all of your posts it seems like you are trying to convince yourself that you are right instead of anyone else.