so.. I'll consider my self such one.... Candid Catholic...
![]()
ditto^^^Originally Posted by pandisal
mao gyud ni ang angayng explanation, sadly, lalison man gud ta ug wa diri wa didto... tuyok nuon hangtod maabot sa wala.
iSTORYA.net Sitewide Forum Rules
Buy/Sell/Trade/Classifieds Forum Rules
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it.
There are intelligent men who have devoted their lives to the pursuit of wisdom, seeks enlightenment and glory for themselves. At one point, I thought they were great men and famous who have transcended the limits of human understanding beyond its imagination, surpass its individual capabilities and have shown the best of human abilities.
I still remember one phi***pher said that “ the more you know, the more you don’t know”. I guess, this is true. There are several artists and writers and who was inspired by their accomplishment and yet, it was so discouraging by their own plot, their own story, which they did not have the power to recreate. What was their wisdom for? If such wisdom would push an artist to kill himself, a writer to become an hermit, or a phi***pher to despise his neighbors, then what was their wisdom for? If such wisdom would make man proud and declare himself equal with God, then I don't want the wisdom of the world. Many people have turned away from God and even denied His existence because of such wisdom.
@pandisal... uyun ko nimo bro.
asa mang ka nga bakery gkan .hehehehe
ni p.m na siya nko part....naa na siya julies quiot branch....hehehehehe
hehehe... pandisal ako gamit... pero dili na siya pandesal .... :P
pero, mingaw nako init nga pandesal ma sayo sa buntag dah,... chk chk chk.
Pan to ang staple sa mga Judeo.hehehe... pandisal ako gamit... pero dili na siya pandesal ....
pero, mingaw nako init nga pandesal ma sayo sa buntag dah,... chk chk chk.
This is clearly untrue. The Apostles passed on their authority, and expressed it with the laying of hands. This was the practice in Apostolic times. To deny this succession is to claim that the Aposltes were teaching error. That is not an acceptable thesis for Christians who hold to Apostolic teaching (and this inclues the Catholic Church and most other christian churches).The apostleship of Peter and the other presbyters were fastened like a peg. No one can claim succession to it.
By the way, let us not distort the teachings of the Catholic Church about salvation of non-catholics. I think we should know and undertsand a doctrine BEFORE we criticize it. Here is the teaching:
There is a need for a true church. If there were none, then why did Christ found the Catholic Church and give it the power to "bind and Loose" and to forgive sins?Code:"Outside the Church there is no salvation" 846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body: Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it. 847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation. 848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."
God bless!
Incidentally, here is the URL of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. it would be good if we look up a partiocular doctrien FIRST before we think we can criticize it.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM
By the way, let me comment on the misconception that Church doctrine taught that slavery was okay. This is FALSE. Here is an excerpt from an interesting article:
http://www.church-in-history.org/pag...ts/slavery.htm
"In fact, from 1435 to 1890 numerous bulls and encyclicals were
written by several Popes to both bishops and the whole Christian
faithful for the sole purpose of condemning slavery and the slave
trade. The very existence of these many papal teachings during
particular period of history is a strong indication that from the
viewpoint of the Magisterium there must have developed a moral
problem of a different sort than any previously encountered. In
this article we will address three -- from many more -- of the
responses of the Papal Magisterium to the widespread
enslavement that accompanied the Age of Discovery and beyond."
The author cites three papal statements against slavery. There were, of course, many more. These include (quoted from article):
- On January 13, 1435, Eugene IV issued from Florence the bull
Sicut Duhum. Sent to Bishop Ferdinand, located at Rubicon on
the island of Lanzarote, this bull condemned the enslavement of
the black natives of the newly colonized Canary Islands off the
coast of Africa."- The pontifical decree known as The Sublime God has indeed had
an exalted role in the cause of social justice in the New World. Recently,
even the Peruvian liberation theologian Gustavo Gutierrez noted this
fact: "The bull of Pope Paul III, Sublimis Deus, is regarded as the most
important papal pronouncement on the human condition of the
Indians," [6] It is moreover addressed to all of the Christian faithful in
the world, and not to a particular bishop in one area, thereby not
limiting its significance, but universalizing it.- The 1839 Constitution In Supremo of Gregory XVI continued the
antislavery teaching of his predecessors, and was in the same manner
not accepted by many of those bishops, priests and laity for whom it
was written. As we will see, even today many authors do not have an
accurate understanding of this work.
Similar Threads |
|