Stumbling Block for Protestants?

View First Unread

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

#181    Today, 3:24 pm

Isaiah45_9  Regular Member Book Club Member   Join Date: June 23, 2011 Posts: 1,826 Religion: Católico

Re: Stumbling Block for Protestants? Quote: Originally Posted by Per Crucem  You can continue to trumpet that. It doesn't matter to me.  Trumpet, ha! Just shows true history is annoying to you. Unless you enjoy the sounds of a trumpet. Hahn, Pelikan and many, many others will disagree with you. But we already know you hold your personal opinion higher than that of the Church. Quote: Originally Posted by Per Crucem  Do you want a historical dissertation? A substantial answer is much better than a little one liner that demonstrates nothing. Are you working on your line of Lutheran Bishops from the time of the Apostles? __________________ Jose All that is not done for Christ's sake, even though it be good, brings neither reward in the future life nor the grace of God in this life. That is why our Lord Jesus Christ said: He who does not gather with Me scatters (Luke 11:23). St. Seraphim of Sarov

#182    Today, 3:26 pm

Isaiah45_9  Regular Member Book Club Member   Join Date: June 23, 2011 Posts: 1,826 Religion: Católico

Re: Stumbling Block for Protestants? Quote: Originally Posted by Per Crucem  Not in substance, no. What do you mean by substance, specifically? __________________ Jose All that is not done for Christ's sake, even though it be good, brings neither reward in the future life nor the grace of God in this life. That is why our Lord Jesus Christ said: He who does not gather with Me scatters (Luke 11:23). St. Seraphim of Sarov

#183    Today, 3:42 pm

Contarini  Forum Master   Join Date: June 4, 2004 Posts: 14,804 Religion: Christian (Episcopalian)

Re: Stumbling Block for Protestants? Quote: Originally Posted by Isaiah45_9  Fixed. To be in Church History is to be either Catholic or Orthodox. That is obviously, empirically false. I know a lot of people who are more learned in church history than I, including my "Doktorvater" (the professor who oversaw my doctoral dissertation at Duke University), and who see no need to be Catholic or Orthodox. Newman's famous quote should be rephrased, given its historical context: "to be deep in history is to cease to believe the line of propaganda peddled by Calvinist evangelicals in the Church of England in the early nineteenth century." And even that is dubious:Joseph Milner was a very learned man, even though many of his interpretations were incorrect. I suppose it depends on what one means by "being deep in history." Edwin

#184    Today, 3:53 pm

Isaiah45_9  Regular Member Book Club Member   Join Date: June 23, 2011 Posts: 1,826 Religion: Católico

Re: Stumbling Block for Protestants? Quote: Originally Posted by Contarini  That is obviously, empirically false. I know a lot of people who are more learned in church history than I, including my "Doktorvater" (the professor who oversaw my doctoral dissertation at Duke University), and who see no need to be Catholic or Orthodox. Newman's famous quote should be rephrased, given its historical context: "to be deep in history is to cease to believe the line of propaganda peddled by Calvinist evangelicals in the Church of England in the early nineteenth century." And even that is dubious:Joseph Milner was a very learned man, even though many of his interpretations were incorrect. I suppose it depends on what one means by "being deep in history." Edwin And the tune of my trumpet! __________________ Jose All that is not done for Christ's sake, even though it be good, brings neither reward in the future life nor the grace of God in this life. That is why our Lord Jesus Christ said: He who does not gather with Me scatters (Luke 11:23). St. Seraphim of Sarov

#185    Today, 3:53 pm

PRmerger  Forum Elder   Join Date: March 19, 2006 Posts: 21,857 Religion: Roman Catholic

Re: Stumbling Block for Protestants? Quote: Originally Posted by Per Crucem  I find it enough to say it was without error. I don't think inserting infallible is necessary or helpful. Not that history is as simple saying that it determined the canon, as it isn't as tidy historically as it made to be in apologetics circles. Quote: Originally Posted by PRmerger  Why is that a stumbling block for you? That is simply what infallible means. And if you believe that the CC was able to produce the canon of the NT without error, then you believe that she was indeed given a charism of infallibility. That you can't quite say "therefore the CC has been given the charism of infallibility" is a misstep in your own logic/reason. But it does not change the fact that you believe this, if you believe that the NT canon is without error. Quote: Originally Posted by Per Crucem  It's not a stumbling block. Then the fact that you can't quite say "therefore the CC has been given the charism of infallibility" is a misstep in your own logic/reason. __________________ 25 Random Things About Me Visit my blog: 3 Minute Apologetics

#186    Today, 4:03 pm

Contarini  Forum Master   Join Date: June 4, 2004 Posts: 14,804 Religion: Christian (Episcopalian)

Re: Stumbling Block for Protestants? Quote: Originally Posted by PRmerger  Then the fact that you can't quite say "therefore the CC has been given the charism of infallibility" is a misstep in your own logic/reason. No, the fact that you think that being right on a particular issue requires a charism of infallibility is a mis-step in yours. It is reasonable to believe that the reason why the Church got so many things right is that it had a charism of infallibility. But that's not the same thing as saying that it's logically necessary. Similarly, it is odd that conservative Protestants insist so tenaciously on adhering to the results of certain decisions of the early Church, sometimes (as, for instance, with the apostolicity of 2 Peter) oing against the overwhelming consensus of modern scholarship without even having an overwhelming consensus of early Christian opinion on their side. But that doesn't mean that it's logically incoherent. Catholics frequently use a priori arguments when a posteriori arguments would do the job better. Edwin