Monarchy Forum
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 8 of 8     «   Prev   5   6   7   8
AaronTraas

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 537
Reply with quote  #106 
Quote:
Originally Posted by azadi

My fundamentals of Christianity is actually the fundamentals of pre-reformation Christianity (Catholicism, Orthodox Christianity and Nestorianism). I have never claimed, that Protestants aren't Christians. I have amended my list of fundamentals of Christianity in order to broadening it. I have replaced "Dyophysitism" with "Jesus Christ is fully divine and fully human" and "rejection of justification by faith alone" with "good works being necessary to salvation".


Claiming a list of "fundamentals" connotes the minimum subset of properties to meet a classification. I.e., all must believe this in order to be Christian. 

And if you're attempting to talk about requirements pre-Lutheran Christian churches to be valid sees, you fail to mention apostolic succession. 

You are, for the most part, making a non-exhaustive list of things you like to put your preferred tradition(s) in the best frame. And thus, it's not terribly useful to talk about.

(it doesn't matter that I happen to agree with most of your list, with exception to your stance on the filioque. I don't see what your list is intended to define or classify.)
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,474
Reply with quote  #107 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronTraas


Claiming a list of "fundamentals" connotes the minimum subset of properties to meet a classification. I.e., all must believe this in order to be Christian. 

And if you're attempting to talk about requirements pre-Lutheran Christian churches to be valid sees, you fail to mention apostolic succession. 

You are, for the most part, making a non-exhaustive list of things you like to put your preferred tradition(s) in the best frame. And thus, it's not terribly useful to talk about.

(it doesn't matter that I happen to agree with most of your list, with exception to your stance on the filioque. I don't see what your list is intended to define or classify.)

Why do you disagree with me on filioque? According to the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, the Father is the sole origin of the Holy Spirit, but the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son in time.
I replaced "Dyophysitism" with "Jesus Christ being fully divine and fully human" on my list, because the Miaphysites affirm Jesus Christ being fully divine and fully human, despite rejecting Dyophysitism, and I replaced "rejection of justification by faith alone" with "good works being necessary to salvation", because Luther affirmed, that faith ought to be followed by good works.

VivatReginaScottorum

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 368
Reply with quote  #108 
Quote:
Originally Posted by azadi
I replaced "rejection of justification by faith alone" with "good works being necessary to salvation", because Luther affirmed, that faith ought to be followed by good works.


That's not the same as good works being necessary for salvation. Lutheran teaching is that faith alone saves, but the genuinely faithful can be expected to engage in good works anyway, as an external sign of their faith. As Luther put it, "God does not need your works, but your neighbour does."

__________________
That which concerns the mystery of the King's power is not lawful to be disputed; for that is to wade into the weakness of Princes, and to take away the mystical reverence that belongs unto them that sit in the throne of God. - James VI and I of England, Scotland and Ireland
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,474
Reply with quote  #109 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VivatReginaScottorum

That's not the same as good works being necessary for salvation. Lutheran teaching is that faith alone saves, but the genuinely faithful can be expected to engage in good works anyway, as an external sign of their faith. As Luther put it, "God does not need your works, but your neighbour does."

You're right. I have never claimed otherwise. I reject justification by faith alone, but I want to acknowledge the fact, that Luther didn't claim, that good works don't matter at all. 
Windemere

Registered:
Posts: 459
Reply with quote  #110 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronTraas


Agreed. 

Azadi's attempt at narrowing the definition of Christian is rather odd. But yes, both creeds and practicing baptism with correct form and matter are enough to be considered Christian.

Now, if he were attempting to define Christian (small-o) orthodoxy, he might have a point, but I'd disagree with him on some. Or trying to define what creates a valid church (though he leaves out apostolic succession from his arguments).

I'm one of those troublesome "extra ecclesiam nulla salus" Catholics who's very close to the Feeneyite position. I'm not used to being the one defending those my church sees as heretics or schismatics.



For his interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (no salvation outside the church), and for his public preaching of it,  Father Feeney was excommunicated sometime in the 1950s. He never recanted. Nonetheless, at some later date, he apparently was quietly reinstated, and he died, fortified by the sacraments, sometime in the 1980s.

Along with some adherants, in the heyday of his preaching, he'd formed a group called ISlaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and the group settled in Still River, a village in the town of Harvard, Massachusetts. Since then, due to internal dissensions, this affinity has split into 5 groups. One group of monks returned to a traditional, albeit very conservative, form of Catholic monasticism. They affiliated with the Benedictine Order, and maintain Saint Benedict's Monastery in Still River. . A group of nuns moved to Petersham, Massachusetts, and formed Saint Scholastica's Convent, which is also still extant, embracing a very conservative form of traditional Catholicism, and have formed an affiliation with another small group of Benedictine monks who maintain a nearby monastery. A second group of nuns moved to Worcester, Mass., and formed Saint Anne's House. a small community of Benedictine nuns engaged in teaching and social work. And the main group, known as Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at Saint Benedict Centre, composed of priests, nuns, and laypeople, remain at Still River and operate a small, very traditional, high-school there. All four of these groups hold official Catholic recognition, and don't seem to emphasize extra ecclesiam nulla salus in their teaching, concentrating instead on an exceedingly conservative form of Catholicism.

A 5th group split off from the original Slaves at some time in the past, and relocated to Richmond, New Hampshire. Somewhat confusingly, they've retained the name Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at Saint Benedict Centre. They formed a community of clergy and laypeople, and having retained (and still publicly preach) Father Feeney's interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, they aren't officially recognized as a Catholic institution by the local bishop, though they themselves maintain their inclusion within it.



__________________
Dis Aliter Visum "Beware of martyrs and those who would die for their beliefs; for they frequently make many others die with them, often before them, sometimes instead of them."
AaronTraas

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 537
Reply with quote  #111 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Windemere

For his interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (no salvation outside the church), and for his public preaching of it,  Father Feeney was excommunicated sometime in the 1950s. He never recanted. Nonetheless, at some later date, he apparently was quietly reinstated, and he died, fortified by the sacraments, sometime in the 1980s.


I said I was close to the Feeneyite position, not fully espousing it. My thoughts:
  • There are other potential ways that one who is outside the official purview of the official and recognized Catholic church, which were outlined by the first Vatican council. 
  • The requirements for such exceptions are exceedingly narrow -- invincible ignorance, unyielding following of the natural law, avoidance of all grave sin, etc. Who do you know who has gone their entire life even within the Church and knowing her teaching has a record like this and would maintain sanctifying grace without regular reception of the sacraments?
  • I also allow for, as a mental exercise, other situations not enumerated by the council, but see those as equally likely and must have the same restrictions in kind. 
  • If salvation was easily attainable outside of the Church, what is the purpose of the great commission? Would it be not better to leave the pagans and heathens alone in their ignorance?
And then there's the practical -- I see counting on one of these exceptions to be similarly risky as living a life of sin and planning on a deathbed confession. It's legalistic, presumptuous, and prone to failure if I get hit by a car or something. The low-risk position in a believing Catholic is to act as if Fr. Feeney was 100% correct, even accepting that there are some nuanced cases where he was wrong. And in charity, we should treat the general commission in the same way, quite seriously seeking to convert souls to the Church because that is the safest path of salvation.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.