9161[Covenanted Reformation] Re: Going back to Rome is COVENANT BREAKING
- Oct 30, 2003I spent some time working on a response to your post, only to get
booted offline and lose all my work just as I went to view the
message before sending. So I'm giving the abridged version now.
It is important always to understand what an opposing side is
actually stating before launching a critique of them. These
corrections are NOT to support that woman that sits on the 7 hills,
but are in the interests of accuracy. It does no good to critique
someone and then misstate their position.
"1. The Scriptures are not only insufficient, but they are also in
If you mean that they teach that what Scripture actually teaches is
erroneous by holding different views, agreed. If you mean they teach
the Bible contains errours, I find no such thing in a cursory review
of "Divine Revelation" from Vatican II. If you mean a statement the
pope made about evolution some time ago, it was not an ex cathedra
statement (essential for infallibility, see my correction of point 10
"2. Head coverings are not necessary or right after all."
Many Roman churches to my understanding used to teach that it was an
act of worship and require them. Not sure what the going idea is now.
"3. Psalm singing in the public worship of God ain't no big thing."
And exclusive psalmody is against every Roman liturgy that I can
think of since at least the fall of the Gallican movement in France,
which attempted in the reformation era to oppose uninspired hymns in
the liturgy and had not used them for apparently for some substantial
length of time.
"5. The First and Second commandments are redundant and
indistinguishable. There is no way to break the second without
breaking the first."
Perhaps better stated this way:
They renumber the commandments so that they have 2 barely
distinguishable 10th commandments, and so merge the 2nd and 1st into
one commandment as to open the door to make violations of the 2nd
commandment really only violations of the moral law if they clearly
violate the first, since it is all regarded as one commandment.
"6. The Arminian's were right, except that they didn't go far enough."
Depends on what doctrine you are looking at, and what school you are
looking to. That may be true of Jesuits and Fransiscans, but Thomas'
views of efficacy of divine grace, necessity of efficacious
prevenient grace as the initial cause of an inclination in the will
of a sinner to turn the will towards God in the initial act of
conversion, uncaused by nor responding to anything in the sinner
inclining Him to move that way, and certain elements of
predestination are closer cousins to calvinism than to arminianism.
"7. "Hail Mary" means way more than hurling a football down the
field, for Mary is a god."
You mean goddess.
"10. The Church of Rome and the Pope have never ever ever been wrong
about anything, ever."
Papal infallibility only applies to a certain very limited set of
pronouncements made by the papacy, and not to any other ideas,
teachings, or pronouncements by the papacy, even on matters of
doctrine, where it is believed that the pope may err. It is a
convenient way for their apologists get around issues like Honorius
being condemned in a church council for heresy, or other acts, ideas,
or pronouncements that were heretical or just plain full of
naughtiness. To put it in simple terms, the Wizard of
Oz can in fact err, but not when he sits on his throne in the Ruby
City and says "The Great and Powerful Oz has spoken!!!" (Oh, and pay
no attention to that man behind the curtain.)
"The most authoritative research indicates that, unlike certain other
sees such as Antioch in Syria, the Roman see did not possess a
monarchical bishop until the mid-second century. Until that time the
church in the capital of the empire was governed by a college of
presbyters or presbyter-bishops." William J. La Due, former
professor, St. Francis Seminary and Catholic University. Doctorate in
canon law from Lateran University.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>