Is it ever permissible to take an oath? In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says, “Do not swear at all. . . . Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything more than this comes from evil” (Matt. 5:34,37). Likewise, St. James writes, “But above all, my brethren, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or with any other oath, but let your yes be yes and your no be no, that you may not fall under condemnation” (James 5:12). Doesn’t this clearly point to an absolute prohibition against oathtaking?
But did you know that St. Paul swears to God twice in the New Testament? So… what’s up with that? That’s what I’m exploring today for Catholic Answers Magazine .
This is an issue near-and-dear to my own heart. As a little kid, I fell into the bad habit of saying “I swear” loosely (I thought it was okay as long as I didn’t add “to God”). I was told this was wrong, and ended up becoming worried about swearing even in solemn contexts. When I finally got a clear sense of what the New Testament does (and doesn’t!) teach, it was both helpful and relieving. Honest.
Someone needs to make Francis swear an oath that he’s really Catholic.
I swear Benedict isn’t still Pope.
I swear there are two catholicisms:
One postmodern secular, supported by a pope.
One of Sacred Tradition, of Scripture, and of Magisterial history, in the world but not of it, supported by other popes.
What’s the problem? Popes are infallible, so if one reverses the pronouncements of the prior one(s) the new boss is as perfectly right as the old boss, so it’s all good. Right?
Or as this little cherry from Cardinal Manning puts it:
“The Church itself is the divine witness, preacher, judge of the revelation entrusted to it. There exists no other. There is no tribunal to which appeal from the church can lie. There is no coordinate witness, teacher or judge who can revise or criticize or test the teachings of the church. It is sole and alone in the world. It belongs to the church alone to determine the limits of its own infallibility”
See, the pope can even determine the limits of his own infallibility, and your job is to stop thinking and follow the bouncing ball.
Or you can be a Protestant and just follow what Christ said.
What did Christ say, James? Remember that what Christ said includes all of Scripture, even the parts you don’t like, such as Faith without works is dead.
It’s in the four Gospels Paul, I know you’re not supposed to read them on your own, or worst of all, formulate your own understanding of them; what Francis calls thinking you can have “a personal relationship with God”, but since the Holy Spirit is not dispensed by popes or priests, but given by God alone, I’m afraid I can’t see how that personal relationship with God in the person of His Son can be avoided and still be a Christian.
You are indeed correct that faith without works is dead, but be charitable with Protestant errors for Protestants like Catholics are but mere mortals, though making no claims to divine authority they can at least be reasoned with!
Popes are not always infallible. The pope’s words as a person (not speaking on behalf of the Church, not speaking ‘with’ the Church, not speaking through the Church, not speaking in Christ) are all very sadly human, often sinful, often divisive, often lacking even the merit of basic general knowledge, and concern, civility, or semblance of charity toward his sheep.
This site has lots of articles on infallibility. You may do yourself a favor and check them out so you can speak other than the clanging cymbal which this pope has shown he knows well to do. I’m a Catholic, and I love the Lord and the Catholic faith. I detest what Francis has and is doing to it. Francis is neither the first nor the last wicked, weak, selfish, vindictive, non-thinking man to sit in the chair of St. Peter.
The fact that the Church has endured horrible popes speaks to its foundation by Christ.
Explain to me how all the people who were on the chair of Saint Peter and who guard and pass on the deposit of faith and therefore less exposed to error, can be “all very sadly human, often sinful, often divisive, often lacking even the merit of basic general knowledge, and concern, civility, or semblance of charity toward his sheep.” ? I do not deny that there have been bad, corrupt, immoral, scandalous and terrible popes. But if you look at church history, these popes were a tiny minority. Most have always been good even in their private lives, or if they were ever wrong, they were in good faith, like Peter (Gal 2:12-14).https://saint-mike.org/blogs/apologetics/qa-Answers-Church-History-h010803Foley
” I’m a Catholic, and I love the Lord and the Catholic faith. I detest what Francis has and is doing to it.” And what is Francisco doing wrong ?
Is this wrong? : “In discussing the dignity and mission of the family, the Synod Fathers observed that, ‘asfor proposals to place unions between homosexual persons on the same level as marriage, there are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in anyway similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family’. It is unacceptable ‘that local Churches should be subjected to pressure in this matter and that international bodies should make financial aid to poor countries dependent on the introduction of laws to establish ‘marriage’ between persons of the same sex.’ ” https://www.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
And is that also wrong? : “The Church has always shown particular concern for the dying, offering them accompaniment and care, respecting the sacredness of life, even in its final stages, and rejecting the ethically unacceptable practices of euthanasia or assisted suicide.” https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/audiences/2022/documents/20220209-udienza-generale.html
And this here? : “abortion is more than an issue. Abortion is murder.”. “Scientifically, it’s a human life. The textbooks teach us that. But is it right to take it out to solve a problem? This is why the Church is so strict on this issue because accepting this is kind of like accepting daily murder,”. https://www.ncregister.com/cna/respect-life-month-pope-francis-8-strongest-statements-against-abortion
“Francis is neither the first nor the last wicked, weak, selfish, vindictive, non-thinking man to sit in the chair of St. Peter.”
This was very strange to me because of this:
“A few minutes ago we heard a person who was yelling, yelling, who had some problem. I don’t know if it’s physical, psychological, spiritual. A brother of ours in difficulty.” “I would like to finish by praying for him, for our brother who is suffering, the poor man, if he shouted it’s because he is suffering, he has some need, don’t be deaf to the need of this brother,”
where Is the wickedness, selfishness and revenge in these words ?
But why is Francis all that you said? Why does he praise and not correct priests, bishops, lay people and politicians who do not follow the moral doctrine of the Church? Or because it restricted the traditional Latin Mass?
I don’t particularly agree with these actions of the pope, but that doesn’t give me the right to characterize him with those words as you did. You should follow Padre Pio’s example, even though he didn’t agree with the Vatican’s censure of his priestly ministry for a decade, he preferred to be an obedient son of the Church and he didn’t even call Pope Pius XI a “wicked, weak, selfish, vindictive, non-thinking man”.
But Christ called for one church – not many denominations with no way to determine how to be saved.
Where is breaking off to form your own church commanded by Christ in Scripture?
My people come out of her that ye be not partakers of her plagues ? In concept at least there’s examples of those that would not bow to the established “Church” of the day due to the corruptions, Steven was stoned for his admonishment of the Sanhedrin, & the protest-ant churches are just a prone to corruptions even Joseph Smith did not follow the instructions and join none of them, find me a “Church” that is not a 501C3 in the U.S. granted permission to hold property and assets by the U.S. government, a licensed “Church” just like in China but more tollerated as long as it’s all tax compliant. Separation of Church and State ? Maybe in Texas as their new amendment plays out. ?
“God is Spirit”. Is not the Body of Christ likewise spiritual? It is the body of believers, and who are the believers? Christ tells us quite clearly who the believers are in the Great Commission.
And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17And these signs will accompany those who believe: In My name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues;d 18they will pick up snakes with their hands, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not harm them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will be made well.”
But let us beware:
1Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’
23Then I will tell them plainly, “I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of iniquity!”
That’s not clear at all. Otherwise we would know. As it stands we don’t know. Scripture is rarely clear on anything which is why Christ gave us His Church so we wouldn’t have to guess and why He refused to support man-made traditions like self-interpretation of Scripture. You aren’t allowed to teach Scripture unless you are an Apostle.
Oh, isn’t it? I tend to think the Almighty speaks quite clearly, and when we cannot understand it is due to our limitations, not His. Christ said that the Holy Spirit would guide us into all truth; “His church” is the body of believers, and He will decide who the believers are. Clearly it won’t be those who were baptized into denomination A, B. or C.
“You aren’t allowed to teach Scripture unless you are an Apostle”. You’d better define your term “Apostle” first of all.
Quoting Scripture is not “teaching”, it is doing what every Christian is supposed to do: seek God through His Word by reading, prayer and consideration.
If you want to take the easy way out of saying it’s someone else’s job I suppose that’s up to you, but seeing as the RC Church sits on a veritable Babble of “man-made traditions” your comment is a little odd.
Anyway, what scriptural authority can you present to support your statement about “self-interpretation of Scripture”?
So you think the Holy Spirit cannot and will not work through Holy Writ on the heart and soul of a person unless they are part of your church?
Mere logic, to say nothing of the experience of millions over millennia proves you wrong. However, anyone who reads this site for a while with modest perception soon comes to see something of the psychological profiles attracted by “group think” and the comfort and convenience of handing over one’s soul to a church on the cheerful assumption that they like a mechanic or a doctor will take care of the matter for us.
Ever since the time of Adam and Eve men like you have wanted to self-interpret the Word of God. Did God really say we couldn’t eat fruit of this tree? Maybe He didn’t really mean it?
It’s pretty clear that man is bent on trying to replace God by becoming a god. That didn’t work out so well, did it?
So you want to self-interpret Scripture do you? Show me where it says YOU have that Authority and where Christ specifically gave it to you then. Since you weren’t alive when Christ walked the earth it is a fool’s errand. You can’t demonstrate it, yet like Adam you will cling to your man-made beliefs that take you down into the abyss never realizing you are the path of your own destruction.
The reason it’s called God’s Word and not YOUR word is because YOU don’t own it and can’t teach it. Only God can do that. He alone gives that kind of Authority. Being God He made it very clear who has His Authority and who doesn’t. Unfortunately, you are trying to steal Authority you don’t have like a thief and false prophet.
Repent of your anti-Christian beliefs which have cause thousands and thousands of splintered denominations, all deceived. Do you think Christ prayed “that they all may be one” for His health or because He knew what errors that your beliefs would cause?
Be not dis-eved from the Simplicity yep. Now bow and kiss that ring & pray to this here carved statue .
[quote]Paul says:
August 23, 2022 at 1:21 pm
Ever since the time of Adam and Eve men like you have wanted to self-interpret the Word of God. Did God really say we couldn’t eat fruit of this tree? Maybe He didn’t really mean it?
It’s pretty clear that man is bent on trying to replace God by becoming a god. That didn’t work out so well, did it?
So you want to self-interpret Scripture do you? Show me where it says YOU have that Authority and where Christ specifically gave it to you then. Since you weren’t alive when Christ walked the earth it is a fool’s errand. You can’t demonstrate it, yet like Adam you will cling to your man-made beliefs that take you down into the abyss never realizing you are the path of your own destruction.
The reason it’s called God’s Word and not YOUR word is because YOU don’t own it and can’t teach it. Only God can do that. He alone gives that kind of Authority. Being God He made it very clear who has His Authority and who doesn’t. Unfortunately, you are trying to steal Authority you don’t have like a thief and false prophet.
Repent of your anti-Christian beliefs which have cause thousands and thousands of splintered denominations, all deceived. Do you think Christ prayed “that they all may be one” for His health or because He knew what errors that your beliefs would cause?
[/quote]
You may recall that God spoke directly to Adam and Eve and they disobeyed His clear injunction? When God speaks directly to men and women, they have no need of anyone’s interpretation.
Adam and Eve did not “interpret”, they simply disobeyed. Eve took the serpent’s advice and Adam took hers. The serpent did not “interpret”, he lied knowingly and consciously, being the father of lies.
Man has probably never been more intent on self-deification than he is today: “Homo Deus” as the recent book flatly declares the agenda to be. If you’ve followed events you will know these people are intent on playing God themselves and modifying what God created; the ultimate act of rebellion in a sense. The working out of that presumption is ongoing, but we know how it will end.
You may have read that Christ left His Holy Spirit to guide those who are truly willing to be guided “into all truth”?
Sinful man does not approach the third person of God except in humility and repentance, that is, if he wishes to be heard. There are a fortunate few who have seen Christ, there are a fortunate few who have heard the voice of God. Most of us are unworthy of such direct contact, “For he said to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.”
If one does not believe in pre-destination, the qualification would seem to be one’s fitness for God’s purpose and that would seem to depend on the strength and persistence of one’s desire to do God’s will, and on one’s humility and readiness to be guided, rather than some belief that one already knows what God’s will is!
“Being God He made it very clear who has His Authority and who doesn’t. Unfortunately, you are trying to steal Authority you don’t have like a thief and false prophet.”
Yes, He did, but St. Peter is dead and so are the Apostles. As for me, I am not claiming any authority – you and your ilk are, and without any clear Scriptural authority. Christ did not say that anyone would succeed like a king to the authority of Peter or the Apostles. Apostolic succession being another invention of man, and since Peter founded other churches, now of course of the Orthodox confession, and the evidence of his founding your church is very weak indeed, to claim that the Bishops of Rome hold the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven by some sort of line of princely succession is pharisaical nonsense.
Indeed, you claim that your church and its officials not only have the exclusive right to “interpret” Scripture, you actually claim supremacy over Scripture. Were it not blasphemous, the proposition would be laughable.
The same reference was made by Christ to binding and loosening in Matt. 18, 18-19 in regard to all the Apostles, and indeed He implies that ANY two or three believers may do the same, not only the Apostles.
As you will see if you research the matter, there are many nuances not well conveyed in the English language as compared to the Greek.
The rub of course is that a “believer” is not just someone who worships with their mouth while their heart is far away. We call ourselves believers, but clearly that is no guarantee that God considers us believers: Matt. 7:21
There is no one between God and man except the man Christ Jesus; no pope, no church, nothing. We will be judged alone on the basis of our conduct, not whether we belonged to one denomination or another. The Body of Christ is the body of believers. “God is Spirit”, but you think His Body is the Roman Catholic Church and not a spiritual body? Bizarre.
The splintering of the Western Church belongs at the door of those who had the dominion and misused it. The record is so rotten and so well known to history it needs no repetition by me.
Preen yourself on denominational pretensions if you wish, if you think your pride is pleasing to God, or humble yourself and ask God to show you the Truth: it’s the same choice we all have, until we don’t!