Have Your Say 

Recent Comments

1. What is so important about Cardinal Pell's presence in the Catholic Church in Australia, is that he shows clearly the type of Catholicism we could all expect if the restraining hand of secularism didn't force the Church to put on its nicest face, and to keep its delight in authoritarian values within its instituional limits .
   Cardinal Pell acts with impunity within the Catholic institutional confines, witnessing to nothing more than ideology and self interest, free of challenge and accountability given his allegiance to the current reactionary culture that abuses the larger Church. He acts, oblivious to the fact that his actions are seen clearly by the outside society, a society in which there are, for good reason, checks and balances to ensure against abuse by power and self interest.
   And people wonder why Catholicism is in dire straights in the Western world.

   Posted By: MJ

2. It is always healthy and appropriate for all organisations to encourage dialogue between its various committed groups.
   Without change and ongoing dialogue nothing happpens to improve things.
   Cardinal Pell apparantly lacks a sense of renewal, but more importantly fears those who seek renewal and change.
   His current denial of a church for an AGM is a disgrace, and unfortunately Cardinal Pell is going the way of all mere mortals in high places - they think the know what is good for all of us. And yes, this means they have become despotic.
   

   Posted By: Mike b

3. The Rose Bay group has often shown they are no longer Catholics. The Cardinal is correct.

   Posted By: Stanley J. Harris

4. I support the views of MJ and Mike b. but Cardinal Pell has been making a habit for quite some time of 'banning' people he does not like from the use of church property, citing canon law (well, he would, wouldn't he?) when it is the laity who has paid for the church property in the first place!
   

   Posted By: Richard Flynn

5. It would be a great surprise indeed if former priest Paul Collins did not discuss topics 'that go against the (Catholic) church's teachings'. He has been happy to do so in the past, on radio and tv and publications.
   Cardinal Pell has a duty to see that denial of Catholic Church teaching, or dissent from it, is not given on church property, implying the approval of the Church. Jesus warned about 'wolves in sheep's clothing' misleading the faithful.

   Posted By: Carolyn

6. Cardinal Pell: Servant leadership or Prince of the Church? The request for dialogue seems reasonable.

   Posted By: Paul W

7. Sad. The Cardinal's actions are not in the interests of the church, where healthy debate of Christian ideas has been the norm pre Trent, and was again, since Vatican 11. The freedom of the children of God in Christ, and his Spirit, are not served by such reaction. We should trust the Holy Spirit, who leads us into all truth. When the church merely reacts, it is not acting like Christ.

   Posted By: Tony LeClerc

8. The importabnt thing is: What would Christ Say7

   Posted By: Maurice Ferdinando

9. Interesting that the likes of Cardinal Pell are called restrictive or harsh or 'clamping down' on various outlaw groups, yet nobody ever critcises the so-called progressive or liberal bishops who hound, restrict and persecute Catholics who prefer to worship in the Tridentine rite. You think if they were really true to their liberal agenda they would allow anything Tridentine or clown masses but alas no! Scratch a liberal find a fascist! So touche to those who despise the Cardinal!

   Posted By: Bernard Gui

10. Matthew( 6:15):Be on your guard against false prophets; they come to you looking like sheep on the outside, but on the inside they are really like wild wolves.' Enough said!

    Posted By: Joe

11. So secularism is now emerging as a force for good in the world, crusading against the evils of the Catholic Church!
    It should be remembered instead that 'the gates of hell will not prevail against it.'
    It should also be remembered that the first rule of dialogue is to listen.

    Posted By: Trish

12. Congratulations to our good Cardinal for showing decisive leadership in defence of authentic Catholic teaching. Leftist-liberal-modernist types will cry foul, but they act no differently when they're in positons of authority. I was once banned from speaking in the Diocese of Sale. My crime? Catholicism.

    Posted By: Robert Haddad

13. So the question is: Who is the wolf; Paul Collins or Cardinal Pell.
    In Paul and his colleagues, I've always noticed a certain humility, willingness to ask and to listen and a commitment to consult widely and to include all.
    In the Cardinal I have never noticed any of these traits; they just don't seem to stand out publicly where, if Jesus is to be heard at all in this secular world, they need to be. Instead I have noticed mostly his authoritarian stance and his regret - not so much the now well publicised 'sins of the fathers' - but that their victims and supporters dared to publicise them.
    So, provocative as it may seem, I ask again: Who is the wolf?

    Posted By: Dr Frank Donovan

14. Some of the bloggers above seem to believe that Jesus founded a Church that was actually a democracy, not a hierarchy - but Our Lord was no popularist or secularist. He gave us freedom to accept or reject His church's teachings and had harsh words for those who falsfied these teachings.
    If secularism is what you want (a doctrine that rejects religion), there are some churches that might oblige, amongst the many thousands of religions today.

    Posted By: Carolyn

15. Cardinal Pell has a duty of care to his flock, to reject the dissenters, if only the naive mob pretending to be a part of Roman Catholicism would have been courteous enough to ask permission without being beligerantly arrogant. Well handled, George! We want quality, not quantity in this wonderful Universal Church.

    Posted By: Trevor J Bates

16. Carolyn: what if the wolves in sheep clothing were/are actually the religious orthodox? It seems to me that these were the ones Jesus had most trouble with. didn't they end up crucifying him?
    
    Where did Jesus found a hierarchical Church? There were no popes and cardinals in the New Testament and the episkopoi and presbuteroi mentioned are a bit of a mystery. There were no priests mentioned in the New testament Church. He founded a Church of servant disciples.
    
    Does not Canon Law say that we, the People of God, have the right to make known to our Pastors our opinions etc Can 212§3.... they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful

    Posted By: Francis

17. Robert Haddad: Is it possible you were banned from speaking in Sale because there is nothing catholic about your Catholicism? Or that you're usuing religion to propogate politics and ideologies?

    Posted By: TJ Lawson

18. I think we have a new virus;
    the main symptom is labelling.
    Both sides of the argument seem to have been infected.

    Posted By: Mark Porter

19. Would those who assume that the banned group are not Catholics or wolves in sheep's clothing like to outline where they have gained this impression. I seem to remember Jesus also saying judge not and you will not be judged. There is nothing Christ-like about ignorant condemnation.

    Posted By: John Buggy

20. In my ignorance, I had thought that the meaning of catholic was all embracing, universal, broad minded, tolerant and not exclusive. Obviously I have misunderstood the teaching of the Gospels

    Posted By: David Pearson

21. To Dr Frank. Cardinal Pell is spokesman for the Church which was founded by Christ (You are Peter and upon this Rock), which has 2000 years of loyalty to His teaching through tradition, scripture and the Magisterium, compared with Paul Collins with his disconnected personal interpretation, and you would ask who is the wolf (false prophet)?

    Posted By: Joe

22. Congratulations, Cardinal Pell. I really like your guidance, leadership and focus on Jesus Christ. You have my support and that of many.
    I am just reminded of the reading of St Paul to the Corinthians (1 Cor 15:1-11). I would like to encourage my brothers and sisters from the Reformed Catholic to do bit of critical analysis of that passage.

    Posted By: clarence

23. I was taught that the Catholic Church was the Universal Church. How can anyone be excluded? Is this an issue of power again?
    Well thought out comments, Francis.

    Posted By: Chris

24. A spokesman for Archbishop of Sydney Cardinal George Pell has denied rumours that the cardinal had a heart turn while in Rome.
    No heart turn, but, please God, a change of heart.

    Posted By: Lois

25. I would have thought that Dr George Cardinal Pell would have a number of people monitoring the intentions and actions of the ARC or any other church groups within his jurisdiction. Furthermore I'm sure the members of ARC are more than aware of this.
    It spells out for me that the ARC do not have approval as aN movemnet or organisation of the Church to function on behalf of the Church.
    The constant criticisms by the ARC of every person in roles of responsibility, their words and actions in every aspect of the official Church and citing the lack of church goers today as evidence of the 'evil' within obviously moves some people. However, I'd guess that the online hits on the ARC are not always supporters of their line of thinking but observations to know what they selling.

    Posted By: anastasia

26. David Pearson : If you're struggling with the Catholic faith, then perhaps your definition has a lot to do with it. That sounds more New Age to me. Catholicism asserts that there is a Truth and that this Truth is universal: that is, open to all who wish to accept it.
    It doesn't mean that we are free to tamper with the Truth. It doesn't mean it is easy to be Catholic, because real love often includes tough lessons, not just good times. Any parent can tell you that. Sometimes, it is an effort to do the right thing.
    We are meant to be transformed by the Truth, we're not mean to force the Truth to be what we want. Otherwise all that will be left is a mess of our own making. I don't know about you, but I want the real thing, even if it means a rap over the knuckles every now and again.

    Posted By: Trish

27. Francis is dead right! The Cardinal recently attended the Parliament of World Religions in Melbourne, where the theme of 220 World Religions was 'Hearing each other, healing the earth'. Is being a Catholic who does not agree with Cardinal Pell a crime?

    Posted By: Peter M

28. By all means let these 'reformers' and their supporters lodge a formal protest, though I suspect the only 'gain' they'll make when their protest is heard and the Cardinal's ruling endorsed will be more fuel for the histrionic invective 'dictatorial' and 'despot'. That is their predictable response on any matter relating to the legitimate exercise of authority in the Church.
    In response to Carolyn's suggestion above as to their seeking a place in one of the many groups that share their views, what other conclusion can be drawn than that they choose to remain in ostensible connection with the Catholic Church and attack her from within because they would have no distinctive 'message' elsewhere, or that they lack either the logic or courage of their convictions, or both?
    Unremitting negativity from 'within', not the Pope and Bishops exercising their authority in the interests of true teaching and the faithful, creates the impression of a house divided against itself, contrary to Christ's desire and gift of unity.

    Posted By: John

29. Having had I look at their website, all I can say is that letting groups like the ARC spin their stuff on catholic ground would be a little like dragging a glass-bottomed trojan horse into Troy, wouldn't it?

    Posted By: Paul Keen

30. Dr Donovan: Paul Collins humble? Well-cultivated and media savvy, perhaps. But he has an agenda, and he sticks to it. Sad it doesn't seem to be God's agenda any more.
    Maybe the local socialist hall will rent itself out to the local fascist club for their AGM?

    Posted By: Peter

31. Sounds fishy. I'm sure Cardinal Pell wouldn't have acted this way without a valid reason.
    

    Posted By: Pat

32. Cardinal Pell has full authority from Jesus Christ himself, What did Jesus do when he went to God's house and found a trash and treasurer market?
    Did he say: 'I am open for dialogue'?

    Posted By: Pat

33. Dr Frank Donovan: I have had the opposite experience. I had dinner with Paul Collins at a History conference and he must have presumed that all present shared were as enlightenment as himself or eager to become his disciples - his conversation consisted of remarks against the likes of Cardinal Pell and flaunting his own interpretations of Church History.

    Posted By: Cas

34. David Pearson: You have to read the Gospel again. What a tragedy the faulty ignorance is!

    Posted By: Arthur

35. Trash and treasure indeed! ARC's quarterly newsletter ARCVoiceis posted on the website for all to read and judge for themselves what we are about and how concerned we are with the way the Vatican seems bent on dragging the Church back to its pre-Vatican days. [ARC Website: www.e-arc.org]

    Posted By: Margaret Knowlden

36. We have been commanded to judge all actions, speech and writing against truth. As Cardinal Pell knows and promotes truth, he is acting to expose error -- Paul Collins and his crowd promote error.
    
    Francis needs to assent to Vatican II in which Chapter III of Lumen Gentium clearly states " The Church is Hierarchical". But then dissenters don't care for truth.

    Posted By: PDH

37. Francis: Priests and the priesthood are referred to in the New Testament in several places, this being one of the more prominent from 1Tim 4:14: Neglect not the grace that is in you, which was given you by prophecy, with imposition of the hands of the priesthood.

    Posted By: Invictus Maneo

38. Trevor J Bates states: if only the naive mob pretending to be a part of Roman Catholicism would have been courteous enough to ask permission without being beligerantly [sic] arrogant.
    I did ask my parish priest for the use of our church hall for ARC's AGM, which, as an incorporated association, we have to have by law. My wife and I clean and keep this hall and the toilets in good order. We are both active in our parish and have been bringing Holy Communion to the housebound and a nearby nursing home for some forty years. I don't think any of our fellow parishioners would deny that we play a significant role in our parish. The parish priest readily gave his permission. Why would we have needed to obtain the Cardinal's permission? The Cardinal has not communicated at all with ARC. He wrote to the parish priest, not to ARC, forcing him to withdraw the permission, much to the embarrassment of that very good priest. I don't know any organisation where the AGM attracts many members to attend. That is why we invited Paul Collins to speak to us about the history of reform in the Church. Instead of condemning ARC and all its members, using unfortunate and inaccurate labels, why not come along and listen to what Paul Collins has to say and let us by all means have an open discussion about what is said and about our concerns? Among our members we count, at least [not everyone indicates their status!], one bishop, 15 priests, 22 religious sisters, 2 religious brothers, 5 religious congregations, and 2 Catholic organisations. Because we are open, we send copies of our quarterly publication ARCVoice to all the bishops. Anastasia, we seek dialogue with all our bishops. One bishop even asked our spokesperson to address his curia, which he did with great competence. ARC is not looking for confrontation. If this issue has blown up, it is solely because of Cardinal Pell's action. Had it not been for his action, ARC would have held its AGM with perhaps 30 or 40 people and most people would have been totally unaware of this. And, finally, remember that John Buggy did not call the Cardinal despotic. Whether the Cardinal is considered to have acted in a despotic manner people can judge for themselves. The Church is always in need of reform, because it is composed of human beings with all their frailties. Can we not all work towards this reform without rancour and name calling?

    Posted By: Rob Brian

39. I am appalled at Cardinal Pell's arrogance and obtuseness interference with the legitimate and life-giving aspirations of a group of dedicated and faithful Catholics who are seeking ways in which to further the movement of the Holy Spirit within the Church. Lord knows, our Church will always need reform and renewal. Surely that is what the Church should be about. Theologians such as Rahner, Kasper, Schilleebecx, Sobrino, and many, many more have struggled to have their voices heard over the years to ensure that the Church remains faithful to its mission. Can't the Cardinal see this? I would have thought that a bishop of a diocese would encourage reformist debate, enter into the dialogue and use the occasion to do what Bishops are ordained to do, lead their people.

    Posted By: Bernard Edwards

40. Invictus Maneo: The Greek word used is presbyter, usually translated as elder. Eg the Jerusalem Bible (Catholic) 1 Tim 4:14: You have in you a spiritual gift which was given to you when the prophets spoke and the body of elders laid their hands on you; do not neglect it.
    The greek word for priest is never used of any individual person in the NT Church. Rather, it is Jesus the Great High Priest and the Christian community that is referred to as priest.
    

    Posted By: Francis

41. Thank you to Cardinal Pell for preventing church land and resources from being used by those who are against the teaching of the church!
    In any event, you would struggle to find anyone under the age of about 55 at groups such as ARC's meetings meaning that these organisations will simply die out over the coming years. The demise of groups such as ARC will not be a bad thing for the church in Australia

    Posted By: David

42. Francis: I think I see your problem! The bible you are using is a butchered modern version, which, no surprise, translates that passage the same way as the C of E King James Version.
    I recommend to you the definitive English translation, the Douay-Rheims version. It is 'a faithful, word for word translation of the Latin Vulgate Bible of St Jerome.'
    St Jerome (342-420) was fluent in Greek, Latin, Aramaic and Hebrew, and moreover, he had access to ancient texts that no longer exist. He translated these texts into Latin, and it his work that the Douay translates straight into English. The vulgate is the bible the church has relied on since the 5th century.
    To give further weight to the authenticity of the Vulgate (and, by extension, the Douay), Pope Pius XII declared in 1943 that the vulgate was 'free from error whatsoever in matters of faith and morals.'
    The bottom line is, rest assured, the word priest and priesthood is referred to in the New Testament, and not just in this passage.

    Posted By: Invictus Maneo

43. David: What evidence do you have that ARC is against the teachings of the Catholic Church? What teachings are we supposed to be denying? Why don't you come and listen on 7 March?

    Posted By: Rob Brian

44. Invictus Maneo: I do not have a problem with the Greek. You seem to suggest that the Catholic Jerusalem Bible is 'heretical'?
    Actually, I read the Greek New Testament, one of the great results of Vatican II was to open the Scriptures to ordinary Catholics.
    We don't get punished anymore for having the Scriptures in the vernacular.
    So I went off and learned NT Greek and loved every minute!
    Next is Biblical Hebrew.
    The Greek of 1 Timothy 4:14 uses 'presbyter' (elder). The Greek word for priest who offer sacrifice is 'hiereus'. This word is used of Jesus in Hebrews (Our Great High Priest) and the Christian community. It is never used of any individual within the Church.
    If I'm wrong please show me where (in GreeK).
    
    
    
    Re Jerome.....so, was he infallible? I think not. Anyway, our Greek versions are older than Jerome's translations.
    
    
    
    As for Pius XII's statement re the Vulgate......was that an infallible statement?
    
    
    
    Re the Douay-Rheims version.....are there any parishes in the workld that still use that version?
    
    

    Posted By: Francis

45. Francis: The only thing I can tell you in Greek is “souvlaki.” My long suffering Year 9 Italian teacher assured me that I had no gift for foreign languages, which is why I rely on the work of St Jerome through the Douay-Rheims bible.
    May I ask, why does the Greek Orthodox Church, whose NT apparently doesn’t mention the word priest, have priests? And a hierarchy? Where did they receive their apostolic rites from if not through the laying on of hands in ordination to the priesthood…ultimately through the apostles and Our Lord?
    
    The Greek texts are indeed older that St. Jerome’s work. He drew on 2nd and 3rd century Greek and Hebrew texts for translation into the Latin Vulgate. Greek was his mother tongue. Needless to say, these ancient texts are no longer with us.
    

    Posted By: Invictus Maneo

46. The D-R translation of the Vulgate was released in 1609 in response to the need to have the scriptures available in English to faithful Catholics enduring persecution in England during the reformation. It was the only Catholic version of the bible in English for nearly 350 years.
    You will note that this initiative pre-dates Vatican II by several centuries.
    Since he was not a Pope, St Jerome was not infallible. However, his Latin Vulgate was infallibly proclaimed to be “authentic, and no one may dare or presume under any pretext whatsoever to reject it” by the Council of Trent. Additionally, Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu infallibly proclaimed that it was free from error in 1943. As far as I am aware, it is still the official Catholic version of scripture to this day.
    I respectfully submit that since St Jerome is one of the Four Great Fathers of the Western Church, and considering his work has been in constant use for 16 centuries, its authenticity confirmed infallibly by at least two Popes (one a saint - Pius V) and an Ecumenical Council, you should at least take the work of St Jerome seriously.
    There is at least one parish in the world that still uses it. Mine! :)
    

    Posted By: Invictus Maneo

47. Invictus Maneo: I did not say that the NT never mentions the word priest; I said it never uses the cultic word hiereus of any individual in the Christian community but only of Jewish priests, Jesus the great High Priest, and the Christian community. The English word priest comes from the Greek presbuteros, presbyter/elder, and which is used many times but not of sacrificing priests.
    Re laying on of hands. Only used twice: once in Acts where the apostles lay hands on those (incl women) who had been baptised only in the name of Jesus; and I Timothy where there is reference to the gift that Timothy had received through the laying on of hands by the presbyters. Neither of these refer to ordinations as we know them since the Acts event includes women and Tim it is presbyters = priests laying on the hands and priests have no authority to ordain.

    Posted By: Francis

48. Invictus Maneo: Which version of the Vulgate? How many versions/revisions have there been?
    Does not the Catholic Encyclopedia (www.newadvent.org) say re the Clementine version: That it has numerous defects has never been denied.
    I wasn't aware that Pius XII's encyclical that you mention was infallible. Are you sure? Some scholars say that there have only ever been two infallible dogmas and both refer to Mary.
    You did not answer my question: Is the Catholic Jerusalem Bible heretical/defective? You referered to it as a 'butchered modern version'.

    Posted By: Francis

49. The group should be called Australian Deforming Catholics. As the Pope recently said to the English bishops: 'In a social milieu that encourages the expression of a variety of opinions on every question that arises, it is important to recognize dissent for what it is, and not to mistake it for a mature contribution to a balanced and wide-ranging debate'.

    Posted By: deesis

50. Francis: Unless you read Latin fluently as well as Biblical Greek and Hebrew, I should probably stick to the D-R translation.
    The nature of the defects are not revealed, but they clearly do not affect faith and morals, as stated by Trent.
    Apologies if I mis-understood your original point. If you re-read your original post, you could see how I made that mistake.
    To call the Jerusalem Bible heretical would probably be a bit harsh. To say that its accuracy is doubtful might be more appropriate. Perhaps you could answer my question regarding the priesthood of the Greek Orthodox Church, whose doctrine on the priesthood (comes from Christ through the Apostles and given to them at the Last Supper) is much the same as the Catholic Church. Where would they get that idea from? They have a hierarchy too.
    My understanding of Papal infallibility is that the Pope is protected from error by the Holy Ghost in matters of faith and morals. This one obviously falls under the faith category. If I am mistaken, it doesn’t really matter because the Council of Trent has it amply covered. Considering that Pius XII was only repeating what was said at Trent through a Papal Encyclical, I’d be surprised if it wasn’t infallible.

    Posted By: Invictus Maneo

51. Acts 6:2 to 6 refers to seven men selected to have the Apostles lay their hands on them. These men are in the Catholic tradition as priests (as are the apostles themselves). No women are mentioned. See also 2 Tim 1:6.
    You should also note that the Church recognises two sources of revelation, the Bible and Apostolic Tradition.
    Not everything is in the Bible, and the end of St. John’s gospel (John 21: 25) says as much. The rest had been passed down to us through the Apostles.
    Since you recognise that Christ is a priest, offering himself as the sacrifice, I am a little surprised that you cannot see how he passed the sacramental priesthood (i.e. conferring the ability to turn the bread and wine into the Christ’s Body and Blood) to his apostles.
    After confecting the sacrament himself, he told the apostles to “Do this in memory of me.”
    What had he just done? If Christ did not pass on his priesthood, how could they do what he had just done? What was the point of creating a church if the Apostles were not priests in the sacramental sense?
    For me, the most beautiful thing about the Catholic religion is that the priest is able to make Christ present on the altar for the congregation to worship him in person, all the way down through the ages, just the same as the Last Supper. Try doing a search on New Advent for priest and priesthood.

    Posted By: Invictus Maneo

52. Women have never been able to confect the Sacrament, and St Paul goes so far as to say that women should keep silent in the church (1 Corinthians 14:34).
    Pope John Paul II pointed out in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis that Our Blessed Mother, the most perfect of humans and greatest of saints, was not made a priest. If not her, then who? As he says, it is not that women have a lesser dignity, they just have a different role to play.

    Posted By: Invictus Maneo

53. Invictus Maneo: The D-R translation? No way. There are far better ones available. I am in no way interested in Latin, a useless dead language. That there are defects is quite clear re the D-R version. I suggest you endeavour to find out what they are.
    I do not care for the Jerusalem version. I prefer the New Revised Standard version. Howveer, I suspect the Jerusalem Bible has the Church's imprimatur. Where is it defective anyway?
    Re the Greek Orthodox priesthood. The answer is found in the Greek words presbuteros and hiereus.
    Re infallibility. The Pope has to be speaking ex cathedra and make it very clear that he is doing so. Many solemn statements by popes in the past (eg no salvation for non-Catholics) are no longer accepted by the Church.
    As for Trent, we've moved on, led by the Holy Spirit since then. Thank God.

    Posted By: Francis

54. Francis: If, as it appears you want to be acknowledged as some sort of scholar, I suggest you refrain from repeating the assertion that the Church punished people for having the Scriptures in the vernacular.
    It wasn't until 1550 years after the foundation of the Catholic Church, that anyone first suggested that it was possible to have a Christian 'church' without priests.

    Posted By: Ronk

55. Ronk: Of course there were translations in the vernacular at times. History shows, however, that eg the Lollards and William Tyndale were persecuted for the desire to have an English version. Did not the Index Librorum Prohibitorum and Pope Leo XIII in Ubi Primum http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=3998; http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/trent-booksrules.html. ban such?
    Not sure what your para re priests is about.

    Posted By: Francis

56. Invictus Maneo: Acts 6:2 is definitely not a reference to priesthood. Some have seen it as a reference to deacons (servants). These men were chosen to care for the needs of the Hellenist widows. The apostles dedicated themselves to 'prayer and to the ministry of the Word' (6:4) whereas these men were to serve tables (6:2).
    2 Timothy 1:6 refers back to 1 Tim 4:14 referring to the presbyters (priests?) laying hands (ordaining?) on Timothy. But only bishops (episkopoi) and not presbuteroi may ordain. Therefor the 'ordination' of Timothy is invalid if the presbyters were only priests.
    Jesus did not ordain anyone. If so, where?
    Jesus is referred to as 'High Priest (hiereus)' (Heb 7:26). No individual in the NT CHurch is referred to as a hiereus. NB Heb does not call Jesus a high presbyter.
    
    

    Posted By: Francis

57. Francis: The Lollards (= babblers) and William Tyndale were rejected because of the whole package of their differing doctrines which influenced how they translated their Bibles. You see translations can be twisted to serve erroneous doctrine by the words and phrases used. Their translations were not authorised.

    Posted By: Deesis

58. Deesis: Your response is far from convincing. We still persecuted them. Is this what Jesus would have done? They were not merely rejected as you suggest; they were tortured! So we may kill those, eg JW's, who issue unauthorised editions of sacred Scripture. I think not!

    Posted By: Francis

59. Francis: I'll stick with the version with 1600 years of use, thanks. If you think we've been led up the garden path for the best part of 2000 years, you might as well pack it in and join the Atheists.
    It makes a nonsense of Christ's statement on his church 'the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.'
    Latin: Not dead, just sleeping. According to the 1962 Vatican II document Sacrosanctum Concilium 'Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.' Thanks to Summorum Pontificium, Latin is back, baby.
    No salvation etc: Never abrogated and still in force. No point being a Catholic when you could be something else, get to do lots of stuff Catholics think is sinful, and still go to heaven.
    Trent: Again, never abrogated and still in force. In fact, referred to in many places by the documents of VII. Look 'em up on the Vatican's website.
    Funny that the Holy Ghost should lead us into Trent, and then completely change his mind. When he puts something in place 'in perpetuity', one would think that an omnipotent God meant what he said.

    Posted By: Invictus Maneo

60. Francis: Presbuteros and Hiereus? I'm afraid its all Greek to me. Pardon my ignorance, but you'll have to spell it out in plain English.
    The Greeks have sacramental priests and bishops, same as us. Where do they get their biblical justification for that? Have they misinterpreted their own Greek scriptures?
    Our Lord ordained the apostles at the Last Supper. That is basic Catholic (and Orthodox presumably) theology 101. Read my earlier post re the Last Supper.

    Posted By: Invictus Maneo

61. Invictus Maneo: Vatican II does confirm the salvation of Protestant Christians, Jews etc. Refer Lumen Gentium #15 and 16. You're welcome to stay with your version but I'll stick with more accuarte and authentic ones. Where is, eg, the Jerusalem version defective/heretical etc? You keep refusing to answer the question.
    Latin is back! Sorry, it died years ago and God is the God of the living not of the dead according to Jesus.
    No guarantee that just becasue one is a Catholic that that person will go to heaven. Perhaps we need to pull the log out of our own eye.
    Who says the Holy Spirit led us to Trent? Vatican II, however, is definitely the work of the Spirit and she's not finished with us yet by a long shot.

    Posted By: Francis

62. Re our Lord ordaining the apostles at the Last Supper... where? At what point did he lay his hands on each? Or is the washing of the feet the time of ordination?
    Google on presbuteros and hiereus.

    Posted By: Francis

• » Advertise in CathNews

Email to Friend Please fill out the following details (fields marked with a * are mandatory):
Send To Email Address*:
Send To Name *:
Sent By Email Address*:
Sent By Name *:
Text to include in email:
Captcha validation:	please enter the code above:

^ Page Top

Comment on this article

More from this section

1. Catholic Health warning on non-profit fringe benefits removal

   Government funding for non-profit organisations must go up to enable the groups to deliver better community services and to pay their staff properly, said a Productivity Commission report.

2. Australian Catholic Bishops Conference now on Facebook

   The Australian Catholic Bishops Conference (ACBC) has announced the launch of its Facebook page, containing information, media releases, photos and forums about the work and ministry of the ACBC.

3. Council approves Church bushland subdivision

   Bendigo Council has approved a proposal by the Church to subdivide 15 hectares of bushland in Golden Square, a move that has been opposed by local residents unhappy with the potential removal of vegetation.

4. Pell denies sending disgraced priest to Perth

   Sydney Archbishop Cardinal George Pell says he did not "quietly move" Father Richard Abourjaily to Perth and stated that the priest "has no rights" to celebrate Mass or administer Sacraments.

5. Controversial Qld surrogacy bill passed

   Queensland's controversial surrogacy bill was passed last night, despite two Labor MPs crossing the floor to vote against the Bligh Government.