Sentences with phrase «teaching of the church as»

You must study the teachings of the Church as taught by the Church herself.

There need not be truly subjective guilt either in the case of the individual or of a social group, even when the subjective conscience is confronted with the official teaching of the Church as a formally binding authority.

He then went on to speak of the sacramental system - especially the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist - and the teaching of the Church as part of the continuing Unity - Law in its provision for mankind until the Law reaches its final perfection with the Second Coming.

Every aspect of the Chaplain's role must lead back to his first and most crucial task, to be a «presence of faith» whose fidelity to the liturgy and teaching of the Church as well as to those in his pastoral care, helps to bring shape and solidity to the ambiguous but sincere faith that he encounters in his work.

We see the teachings of the Church as truth — a source of authentic freedom, equality, and happiness for women.

This concept does not mean that some truths are truer than others, or that the Catholic faithful are free to pick and choose among the teachings of their church as they please....

Not exact matches

I was taught as a child to pray to God and nothing / no one else and that I need not be in a Church or any building and that God hears all of our prayers, to have faith in following The Ten Commandments, to incorporate The Golden Rule, to be honest and true to myself and most importantly, to not judge others.

Most of the people I work with are aware of it, and some the stuff I do on the side is because of it, like youth ministry and working as part of the teaching team at our church.

In response to this controversy, he told me in an email that as «a lifelong practicing Catholic, I take very seriously the social and moral teachings of the church.»

Quoting Romans 8:23 «we wait eagerly for... the redemption of our bodies» West says that he hopes that his teaching will ultimately impact the Church by shaping our view of and hope in the afterlife as offering us bodily redemption.

And the Church teaches that the freedom of religion may not be infringed by government mandates that persons act contrary to what their consciences tell them about the truth of such things as the sanctity of life, the dignity of marriage, and the reality of sex as the basis of «gender.»

Investment for return (as Rodney Stark relates in The Victory of Reason) largely occurred against the grain of Church teaching, the Spanish Scholastics being largely ignored, and it was Calvin's application of biblical law to trade and commerce that created the competitive tension under which a millennium of misapplication and resultant economic suppression could begin to be corrected.

We're talking about love relationships not the titillation of nerve endings As to who can or can not hold a leadership position or who can or can not teach in a church, I think it comes down to morals not legality.

The Eastern Orthodox Church, for example and certainly not exclusively, endorses the teachings of pioneering Christian monastics known as the Desert Fathers, who placed great emphasis on living in continual «remembrance of death.»

Ms. Knust's views are completely outside of teachings of the Early Church Fathers, as well as Orthodox Christianity through the ages.

You must also not believe the Bible when it tells us that Jesus Christ promises to guide and guard His Church until the end of time [so that evil will not prevail] and that the Bible says that Jesus Christ will bring His Apostles [which would include their successors] into remembrance of all that He taught them and He would bring them into the fullness of Truth as we can bear it.

The ordained leaders of the Church, and the laity who are Christ's principal witnesses in the public square, do not enter public life proclaiming, «The Church teaches...» When the question at issue is an immoral practice, they enter the debate saying, «This is wicked; it can not be sanctioned by the law and here is why, as any reasonable person will grasp.»

For the consecrated life (as John Paul II taught in the 1996 apostolic exhortation Vita Consecrata) is the spiritual engine of the Church, in which the energies of evangelism are refined and shared in a great exchange of gifts by which the entire Church, the bride of Christ, strives for union with her divine spouse.

Note also that the bishops «argue» this position, as though it is their rather peculiar opinion and not the magisterial teaching of the Church consistently maintained for two millennia.

On Luther's side, the final break with the Church authorities came in the wake of Leo X's bull of November 1518; in that document, as Luther saw it, Leo arrogated to himself the power of defining Church teaching without accountability to Scripture, the Fathers, or the ancient canons.

The Reformers vigorously protested what they viewed as deviations from biblical teaching, but they never used Scripture to undermine the Trinitarian and Christological consensus of the early Church embodied in the historic creeds that had come down from patristic times.

Together we affirm that Scripture is the divinely inspired and uniquely authoritative written revelation of God; as such it is normative for the teaching and life of the Church.

i beleive there is good out there, and as a Mom i want to make sure i live me life in a way that will make my daughter proud of me so i will introduce Church to her and i will teach her the commandments because whether or not Moses came down from the mountain with two tablets in his hands they are a good starting point to instill good morals.

Unlike Anselm's legalistic theory of the Atonement, the writings of the Early Church Fathers teach theosis or deification, the realization of our human potential for godlikeness through a relational participation in the Divine Life, as the source of our redemption in Christ:

Luke tells us that as a boy he «grew in his wisdom» (Lk 2:52), but the Church has taught that this means «his human nature was instructed by his own divinity» (Jerome) or that while remaining divine «he made his own the progress of humans in wisdom and grace» (John of Damascus).

So... you are fully aware of the Catholic Church's teaching on these matters of faith taught by the magisterium as truth, yet dismiss them as false, AND call yourself Catholic.

Some Christians will see some branches of the Church's changes as positive and a step forward, while others will see it as negative and move away from what the Bible teaches.

His idea of balance was to give equal time to opinions supporting and opposing the Church's teaching, leaving readers with serious doubts as to which side America was on.

As a 22 year old woman you should use your God given intelligence to see if this typee of mentality is first morally sound and secondly in accordance to the teachings of the Catholic church.

If you think the bible is enough, just look at the hundreds of traditional - Christian churches that read from one bible, yet teach hundreds of different doctrines, which confuses us as to which interpretation is the truth.

But then, of course, the seminary's opponents would use similar reasoning to suggest that the church's public teaching must regard the Jonah story as a straightforward historical account, and soon no distinction at all would be possible between what the Bible records and what it teaches, what is central to the faith and what is not.

Mormon fundamentalism (also called fundamentalist Mormonism) is a belief in the validity of selected fundamental aspects of Mormonism as taught and practiced in the nineteenth century, particularly during the administration of Brigham Young, an early president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter - day Saints (LDS Church).

It's my understanding that until as recently as the early 1970's the Mormon church taught that black skin is the mark of Cain.

--------------- Beginning in 325AD, the amalgamation of church and government — aka, Roman Catholicism — had begun a dangerous journey away from the Apostle's teaching and into apostasy when it left the Bible behind, and began to claim justification as a result of sanctification.

The Church, however, has consistently taught over the centuries that the direct and intentional taking of innocent human life, as in abortion, is a grave and intrinsic evil.

Pressed by organizations such as Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council, as well as by the emphatic teaching of the Catholic Church, millions of Americans have been caught up in the effort to restore «the traditional family.»

Fred, as I see it, most of the people lamenting the state of the church are those who have been in institutional churches where actual teachings of the Bible were ignored in favor of the concepts power - hungry teachers liked.

The responsibility of bishops is and always has been, as Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis and other bishops have explained in great detail, to protect the integrity of the sacrament, to prevent public scandal that creates confusion about the Church's teaching, and to avoid the danger of people receiving the sacrament, as St. Paul puts it, to their damnation.

And especially after the Noachian Flood, did false religion take a leap, with false religious doctrines and practices such as the trinity, immortality of the soul, that God torments people in a «hellfire», the establishment of a clergy class, the teaching of «personal salvation» as more important than the sanctification of God's name of Jehovah (Matt 6:9), the sitting in a church while a religious leader preaches a sermon, but the «flock» is not required to do anything more, except put money when the basket is passed.

The moment the Christian churches begin Attuning themselves properly to Jesus Christ and Preaching His eternal message of LOVE for Everyone, Without Conditions, and Teaching about the Afterlife as God has promised us there is, and Teaching about the laying - on of hands to heal the sick as Jesus did, and begin truly Sharing their money with the poor as Jesus did, THEN you will find people flocking back into the church.

Others think that the church should teach monogamy as the preferred form of marriage relationship but should accept those who practice polygamy.

Obama is a Christian and his actions as president are very much in line with the teaching of the new testament, yet I couldn't dare say that at my Evangelical church where the ACA has literally saved the life of our pastors child but here is so much hate for Obama it's down right scary.

Regrettable as these facts are, the Church always taught the duty of clemency and mercy.

To the contrary, when it is recognized that in Paul's surviving letters to the Corinthians, he nowhere addresses elders, this section is best seen as a description of how a church could get it's teaching when there are no trained and qualified elders to perform the teaching.

I agree that the church keeps people away by teaching wrong doctrine such as hell being a place of everlasting torment - who wants to serve a God like that.

Haught can not explain what happens at death, nor the meaning of the sacraments as taught by the Church, nor the human need for true interior life.

Humanae Vitae (1968) talked of the procreative and unitive meanings of the marital act as governed by «two divine laws» which were in harmony, and the relevant teaching of the Church is often presented in terms of these two equal «polarities» and their inseparability.

So I think the idea that the [appeal to] conscience [can be used as a] kind of an escape hatch is really not what the church teaches.

In Dear James, the catalyst is not only the teachings of the Church but its sacred places as well.

What is less clear to me is why complementarians like Keller insist that that 1 Timothy 2:12 is a part of biblical womanhood, but Acts 2 is not; why the presence of twelve male disciples implies restrictions on female leadership, but the presence of the apostle Junia is inconsequential; why the Greco - Roman household codes represent God's ideal familial structure for husbands and wives, but not for slaves and masters; why the apostle Paul's instructions to Timothy about Ephesian women teaching in the church are universally applicable, but his instructions to Corinthian women regarding head coverings are culturally conditioned (even though Paul uses the same line of argumentation — appealing the creation narrative — to support both); why the poetry of Proverbs 31 is often applied prescriptively and other poetry is not; why Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob represent the supremecy of male leadership while Deborah and Huldah and Miriam are mere exceptions to the rule; why «wives submit to your husbands» carries more weight than «submit one to another»; why the laws of the Old Testament are treated as irrelevant in one moment, but important enough to display in public courthouses and schools the next; why a feminist reading of the text represents a capitulation to culture but a reading that turns an ancient Near Eastern text into an apologetic for the post-Industrial Revolution nuclear family is not; why the curse of Genesis 3 has the final word on gender relationships rather than the new creation that began at the resurrection.