St. Peter’s Biggest Fan

⁜ Ordinariate Catholic ⁜ Miserable offender ⁜

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@graceofdoge @BreeSolstad @farmingandJesus There has always only been one way to heaven: the grace of God. Everyone from Enoch to Moses to the Virgin Mary to a baby who dies in infancy to you and me, we only get in through the grace of God shown in Christ Jesus. You get in if Jesus lets you in. Period.

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@dlgreen53 @4Veritas2 @farmingandJesus Mary did suffer, but as was prophesied (Luke 2:35 as understood by the church fathers) it happened while she witnessed the crucifixion of her Son.

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@Benji_n_me @ElijahElishaRap High church Anglican

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@ElijahElishaRap Your articulation of Vatican I and papal infallibility/supremacy overcame a huge stumbling block for me. I credit you and one other person for getting me to enroll into OCIA last fall and eventually into the Catholic Church this past Easter. I cannot thank you enough!!

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@Xaverius_1402 @jarldietrich I will say a prayer for you. Have a good day.

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@Xaverius_1402 @jarldietrich “Spiritu principali” comes from the Vulgate text of Psalm 50:14 “et spiritu principali confirma me” — “and strengthen me with a willing/governing spirit” (or “principal spirit”).

(Repent of your blasphemy if you can, I hear this kind may be unforgivable)

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@Christ_Conserv @SirJumpsAlot2 @CharlesTingler But that’s my point. What Paul meant by it is not what you mean by it, and yet even with the uncertainty your tradition binds consciences. Nothing wrong with that. I’m just pointing out that in practice you’re okay with the concept of binding conscience beyond scripture.

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@Christ_Conserv @SirJumpsAlot2 @CharlesTingler Faith + works of love (not of the law, both Christ and Paul make this distinction of the two kinds of law) *together* justify. These works do merit salvation, but man cannot boast because only by grace are we enabled to do them. Grace alone: yes. Faith alone: foreign to scripture

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@Christ_Conserv @SirJumpsAlot2 @CharlesTingler So if scripture cannot bind the conscience, that only leaves the authority of the church in its tradition. Your church binds yours and mine binds mine, both by defining what scripture is, and also by interpreting what it says in ways that may not be directly inferred.

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@Christ_Conserv @SirJumpsAlot2 @CharlesTingler You also presuppose what “scripture” is when scripture itself does not self- identify into a canon. Therefore your idea of what is or isn’t scripture and can therefore bind the conscience is, itself, derived outside of scripture but purely from tradition.

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@Christ_Conserv @SirJumpsAlot2 @CharlesTingler “Faith alone” justifies isn’t found in scripture, only “faith apart from works of the law”. And yet your tradition deems it a salvation issue and binds consciences to it, by claiming anything that disagrees with this interpretation is another gospel and anathema.

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@Christ_Conserv @SirJumpsAlot2 @CharlesTingler This one sits at the nexus of established science (fetal microchimerism) and scripture (Acts 2:27,31, 13:35-36). If Mary was not assumed into heaven then Christ’s living cells, persisting within her body for decades after His incarnation, would have seen corruption.

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@UntoldFortune It’s less about willingness and more about ability.

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@UntoldFortune If it is acknowledged that man is only able to raise the sails by the grace of God, then pelagianism is precluded by definition. That grace merely assists but does not enable is the defining characteristic of Pelagian soteriology.

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@KevinPaulMoritz @autocorrect2_0 @metathomist 1. Some things Jesus taught in the NT contradicted the NT eg “eye for eye”, divorce, clean vs unclean food
2. OP said you have to agree with scripture in order to accept the teaching (not “not contradict”)
3. Scripture never says scripture is the only source of divine revelation

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@extranosky @bonesforsales There’s sinful flesh (ours) and sinless flesh (Mary and Christ, and us after baptism), just as there is sinful spirit and sinless spirit. The divine cannot be carried in sinful flesh. Gnosticism denies the possibility of both sinless flesh or sinful spirit.

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@autocorrect2_0 @metathomist Which scripture did Paul’s readers use to verify his teaching of our works being tested by fire or of the parousia, or Peter’s teaching that baptism saves, or John’s revelation concerning the mark of the beast?

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@Gigantals @CatholicRob Four days and no response? Maybe the Nigerians are owed an apology…

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

@emma_doell @poperespecter1 How about we let the One who gave them life set the rules for when that life is returned to Him?

[St. Peter’s Biggest Fan @catholixity]

Whichever one has all 72 books

[David @DavidFischer]

Christians Only:

For someone brand new to faith, which Bible version would you recommend first?

A. KJV- Beautiful but can feel old-school
B. NIV- Clear modern English
C. NLT- Reads like a story, super approachable
D. ESV- Accurate yet readable
E. Other