🚀 go-pugleaf

The Astute Andrew wrote:
> 
> These "other works" are called Sacred Tradition and the Magesterium.
> They aren't text, although the Early Church Fathers write frequently
> about Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium.

Are they the word of God? How does one verify such a thing?

> Catholics use the
> cross and rosary beads as things to focus our attention during
> meditation.  It is a misconception to say that Catholics believe there
> is inherent value in beads or crosses.

Ok, so it is a physical focal point, rather than a spiritual one?
 
> The sacrament of Confession comes largely out of the book of James and
> the Sacred Tradition.

James as in the new testament? Confess to God, I think it says, or along
those lines. No need to confess to a sinner (all humans are sinners,
even the saints and priests, etc.). As for the ST... I refer you to my
earlier qn.
 
> Prayer to Mary and the saints akin to someone walking up to another
> person and asking that person to pray for them.  The word "prayer" is
> perhaps a bit misleading in todays society with it's connotation meaning
> an act of worship.  A more descriptive way to say "praying to the
> saints" is to say "asking for the intercession of saints."  Furthermore,
> the "Hail Mary" (most frequent Catholic prayer to Mary) comes mostly out
> of the Bible itself.

What's wrong with praying to Christ? He said that none shall come to the
father but through me, or something along the lines of: Pray to me and
no other, or you're not getting into Heaven. I don't see why one needs
to extoll the virtues of a lucky broad, or ask others to pray for them.
God values your requests and thoughts most when they are from you,
rather than an intermediary who is looking for brownie points with
his/her congregation.
 
> > The bible says you may only enter heaven through christ. It also says
> > you are not to bow down, worship, or pray to any other than christ
> > or God. Your 'good works' will not get you a place in heaven, nor
> > will your wealth or charity.
> 
> Before I even pull out my Bible to offer evidence to the contrary, I'd
> like to again establish that I do not understand the logic behind why
> Protestants consider the Bible divinely inspired.  I understand the
> logic behind why the Church considers it inspired, but not why
> Protestants do.

I don't follow? How come one party can think it is divinely inspired,
and another cannot. As for prayer, it says in the old and new testaments
repeatedly to make any kind of idol to kneel before. Bow your head only
to God & the trinity, not any other thing or entity.
 
> Additionally, I would make the argument that the Bible is not necessary,
> though perhaps helpful, for Christianity to exist.  The vast majority of
> Christians throughout history got along fine with maybe seeing a Bible
> once or twice in their lifetime, considering that most Christians were
> illiterate peasants.  The concept of "sola scriptura" only arose after
> the Middle Ages when literacy rates rose and the printing press made
> Bibles more available.

Those illiterate folks were often tricked into doing some rather nasty
things (the witch hunts, and the crusades come to mind). They trusted
their literate peers to be honest, and often relied on what they saw of
that person's behaviour to establish whether or not to trust the fellow.
Keeping in line with the rules one espouses helps too. Hypocrites don't
do any favours for any faith.
 
> > The church is the people, not the building. Ergo, the building should
> > be simple, not extravagant.
> 
> My non sequitur alarm went off here, because that's a logical fallacy.
> How does it follow that because the Church consists of people that
> buildings dedicated to worship (called churches) *must* be simple?

The first priority of the congregation is to worship God. The next is to
help the needy. (visit prisoners, clothe the naked, feed the hungry,
take care of the sick, etc. All that gear JC said near the end). How can
the congregation say it has done all it can if it is spending money on
appearances? JC put more value in the peasants coin than the rich mans
gold, IIRC, because it was all she had, whereas the wealthy man could
still give more.

And I am aware that it is impossible to ever have enough to do the
charitable things JC said all his followers should do. But building
extravagant buildings and edifying individuals at great expense is like
kicking sand in His face coz he's a bit scruffy.
 
> Furthermore, there is precedent for having extravagant places to
> worship.  The Old Testament is filled with examples where God demands
> his people create extravagant worship and ritual sites.

Yes, and IIRC JC said that was old hat. No need for buildings and
extravagance or sacrificial lambs/goats or first borns anymore. He was
the last sacrifice, for all of humanity. And he never preached in a
building unless he had no choice (e.g., weather or some sort of
charitable act in progress). Indeed, IIRC, he preached and wandered
about in areas most modern christians would fear to tread within. God
only knows (literally) how he managed in some locations. I guess the
pimps and drug dealers knew he was not interested in flogging them, or
such. Unlike most people who seemed to have authority, he was
approachable to everyone.

-- 
from: Mr. J D Cooper aka Phorse 5 [Force 5]
Remove the number(s) from the email address
for fastest reply. More sig here:
© http://phorse.netfirms.com/sig.html ©
Fireball Holdings © 2001 - 2004  
ABN: 23 939 806 835