Re: The Apocrypha
Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2023 10:52 pm
Delete
I would not bother about it. As these are without a reference link from the Vatican archives and as the topic does not address the Deposit of the Faith, it is not binding in the present day. The present day is all that matters now in how the Catholic Church addresses matters of faith.Falco Knotwise wrote: ↑Mon Oct 30, 2023 10:52 pm
For the reasons I clearly laid out, I’m not even sure what he said about it. Nor is it my job to figure it out. It’s for the theologians.
Hutterian colonies also use Bibles containing the Deuterocanonical books. Some have the KJV translation, some the ESV, and others the Lutheran.
Not in my opinion. Now do you have anything intelligent left to say, because your juvenile gotcha games are really getting old.ken_sylvania wrote: ↑Mon Oct 30, 2023 10:38 pm So was the Pope correct when he said that the statement "that burning heretics is against the will of the Spirit" is heretical, false, scandalous, or offensive to pious ears?
"There is no man so blind as he who will not see."Falco Knotwise wrote: ↑Mon Oct 30, 2023 10:52 pm
For the reasons I clearly laid out, I’m not even sure what he said about it. Nor is it my job to figure it out. It’s for the theologians.
I see just fine, thanks. Now do you have anything intelligent left to say because your juvenile gotcha games are getting old?ken_sylvania wrote: ↑Mon Oct 30, 2023 11:19 pm"There is no man so blind as he who will not see."Falco Knotwise wrote: ↑Mon Oct 30, 2023 10:52 pm
For the reasons I clearly laid out, I’m not even sure what he said about it. Nor is it my job to figure it out. It’s for the theologians.
Good. I'm glad you understand now that the sale of indulgences wasn't something that Luther imagined of his own accord. And that the RCC's attempt to burn him was wrong.Falco Knotwise wrote: ↑Mon Oct 30, 2023 11:26 pmI see fine.ken_sylvania wrote: ↑Mon Oct 30, 2023 11:19 pm"There is no man so blind as he who will not see."Falco Knotwise wrote: ↑Mon Oct 30, 2023 10:52 pm
For the reasons I clearly laid out, I’m not even sure what he said about it. Nor is it my job to figure it out. It’s for the theologians.
Repetitive as well. As there are no links cited for the original documents in the Vatican archives, this can only be considered hearsay no matter how many times it is repeated. Focusing upon present day teachings and actions avoids the burden of becoming embittered about the past.Falco Knotwise wrote: ↑Mon Oct 30, 2023 11:26 pm
I see just fine, thanks. Now do you have anything intelligent left to say because your juvenile gotcha games are getting old?
It got blown WAY out of proportion as even many Protestant scholars admit today, and I don’t think anyone should have gotten burned, nor have I ever said otherwise.ken_sylvania wrote: ↑Mon Oct 30, 2023 11:28 pmGood. I'm glad you understand now that the sale of indulgences wasn't something that Luther imagined of his own accord. And that the RCC's attempt to burn him was wrong.
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/f ... omine.html28. If the pope with a great part of the Church thought so and so, he would not err; still it is not a sin or heresy to think the contrary, especially in a matter not necessary for salvation, until one alternative is condemned and another approved by a general Council.
29. A way has beeri made for us for weakening the authority of councils, and for freely contradicting their actions, and judging their decrees, and boldly confessing whatever seems true, whether it has been approved or disapproved by any council whatsoever.
30. Some articles of John Hus, condemned in the Council of Constance, are most Christian, wholly true and evangelical; these the universal Church could not condemn.
31. In every good work the just man sins.
32. A good work done very well is a venial sin.
33. That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit.
34. To go to war against the Turks is to resist God who punishes our iniquities through them.
35. No one is certain that he is not always sinning mortally, because of the most hidden vice of pride.
36. Free will after sin is a matter of title only; and as long as one does what is in him, one sins mortally.
37. Purgatory cannot be proved from Sacred Scripture which is in the canon.
38. The souls in purgatory are not sure of their salvation, at least not all; nor is it proved by any arguments or by the Scriptures that they are beyond the state of meriting or of increasing in charity.
39. The souls in purgatory sin without intermission, as long as they seek rest and abhor punishment.
40. The souls freed from purgatory by the suffrages of the living are less happy than if they had made satisfactions by themselves.
41. Ecclesiastical prelates and secular princes would not act badly if they destroyed all of the money bags of beggary.
No one of sound mind is ignorant how destructive, pernicious, scandalous, and seductive to pious and simple minds these various errors are, how opposed they are to all charity and reverence for the holy Roman Church who is the mother of all the faithful and teacher of the faith; how destructive they are of the vigor of ecclesiastical discipline, namely obedience. This virtue is the font and origin of all virtues and without it anyone is readily convicted of being unfaithful.
Indeed. Nevertheless, Christians best do well to live their discipleship in the present; forgive the past; and carry the Gospel into the future.Falco Knotwise wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2023 12:03 amIt got blown WAY out of proportion as even many Protestant scholars admit today, and I don’t think anyone should have gotten burned, nor have I ever said otherwise.ken_sylvania wrote: ↑Mon Oct 30, 2023 11:28 pmGood. I'm glad you understand now that the sale of indulgences wasn't something that Luther imagined of his own accord. And that the RCC's attempt to burn him was wrong.