Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 6/4/83; site PSUVM.BITNET Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!psuvax1!psuvm!v6m From: V6M@PSUVM.BITNET Newsgroups: net.religion.christian Subject: RE:miracles,true church and the purpose Message-ID: <1616V6M@PSUVM> Date: Wed, 27-Feb-85 12:34:13 EST Article-I.D.: PSUVM.1616V6M Posted: Wed Feb 27 12:34:13 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 1-Mar-85 08:17:49 EST Lines: 67 <<>> It looks my name is taken in vain again between Hutch and Rich so... I was asking Rich multiple questions in my earlier postings some were rhetorical and some weren't. As for him not understanding some concepts.. some were beyond understanding for all (well maybe Ken Arndt is the exception :-) ) since they are considered mysteries by Christianity and some I thought he would not understand because I felt that he could not COMPLETELY understand the theistic stance on anything, since he is so adamantly opposed to it. A generalized opposition to a principle makes it difficult to listen to specific arguments or claims from the opposition. I'm just as bad. I do give Rich credit for his ability to write long postings and keep them coherent and in accordance to his set of principles (maybe even beliefs is appropriate). I consider his working set of axioms wrong, although he is able to offer incisive criticisms to Christianity if one is able to see through the heat and to respond appropriately. One good thing is that arguing with Rich sharpens our apologetics. Yes I would like to change his mind on Christianity since one duty of all Christians is to spread the Gospel, but we can't coerce. (yeah I know about the past Rich). Something which causes the fury in our postings is that both Rich and his critics are convinced of the correctness of each position. The PURPOSE OF N.R.C. I agree with Moffett with the general use of the net, only emphasizing the ecumenical nature of reply,otherwise all of replies will sound like ROSEN vs ARNDT. I grant you it is entertaining but dangerous. So...Lets cool down the discussion on miracles. See below. MIRACLES. I started this set of responses off by asking Rich how he would analyze them. I really did want an answer. I haven't seen the reply if he gave one but I got lots more. Thanks. Unfortunatly it is turning into a debate on the existence of God which should be in n.r. Lets finish up this line and I'll try to summarize what I've saved and then we try another tack. I should have known better than to start the discussion the way I did. TRUE CHURCH Karen is getting much heat on her position. Let me help a bit. In grade school some 30 years ago, the position she claims for the Roman Church was understood, at least in our neighborhood. WE may have misunderstood the teacher and or the teacher may have misunderstood the then current teaching. To be objective I need to review older materiel. Now when John called V II the promulgated stance was one of seperation not damnation. As I understand it this is the current position. Again I must reasearch. Sean McLinden has posted on this maybe he could quote a source. I will NOT push on this subject since all sects want salvation, Karen is proseltyzing while n.r.c. is ecumenizing. Btw thanks for all of the HighE articles. EUCHARIST I do believe that transubstantiation is the official position of the Church. SOME of our theologians have fallen out of this and have been censured so be careful what you read. THE LAITY Sean came down hard on the laity and the hierarchy. NOT SO. Our laity is no more nor less qualified than other sects lay groups. The serious student of his sect will be able to quote scripture and or other sources. I have seen no demonstrable difference. As for our clerics having a high degree of error....I'm not sure what he had in mind. Liberal Catholics, (we swear up and down that they are in league with Satan) are critical on MULTIPILE positions. Sean may be talking about them. On the other hand if he is one of THEM then he is talking about the percieved errors of the Magesterium and how JP II is tyranical in demanding fidelity to it. (I'm basically an old fuddy-duddy). There IS dissension within the CHURCH on basic dogma and hopefully the upcoming synod will sort things out. I guarantee you that there will not be harmony during it, especially with the American bishops. Overall though there is great capability on the part of the hierarchy. OH WELl sometimes it is difficult in trying to do what one is told.... Vince.