Anti-catholics Know Catholic Church Teachings

[Anna]

:wub:

[Mickey's_Girl]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Apr 30 2004, 03:36 PM']ironmonk and lumberjack are two peas in a pod[/quote]
Bro. Adam--you got it right on the nose!

And Pedro X: YOU SAID "Ian Paisley"!!!

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!

(rolling on floor, laughing)

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I LOVE THIS BOARD!!!

MG

[ironmonk]

[quote name='Mickey's_Girl' date='May 1 2004, 09:25 PM'] Bro. Adam--you got it right on the nose!

And Pedro X: YOU SAID "Ian Paisley"!!!

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!

(rolling on floor, laughing)

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I LOVE THIS BOARD!!!

MG [/quote]
Not quite.

One of us posts truth about the Catholic Church... the other does not.

One of us attacks, one of us defends.

BIG difference.

One of us is well studied with scripture, history and the first Christian writings... One is not.



God Bless,
ironmonk

[RandomProddy]

[quote name='PedroX' date='May 1 2004, 05:48 PM'] I'm guessing the source for the document was Ian Paisley, as there are clear signs it originated in the UK. [/quote]
Mad guy and he gives most Protestants a bad name, but if you read up on the conflict you start to see why the region is so polarized. I'm not surpried there are a few protestant extremists as well as Catholic extremists there..It's all a mess, and they are all ignoring "Jesus's second commandment" so badly

[Mickey's_Girl]

[quote]"Not quite.

One of us posts truth about the Catholic Church... the other does not.

One of us attacks, one of us defends.

BIG difference.

One of us is well studied with scripture, history and the first Christian writings... One is not."[/quote]

Aww, Ironmonk, don't be mad! I only meant that you both like to *mix it up*. Pax?

MG

[ironmonk]

[quote name='RandomProddy' date='May 2 2004, 05:02 PM'] Mad guy and he gives most Protestants a bad name, but if you read up on the conflict you start to see why the region is so polarized. I'm not surpried there are a few protestant extremists as well as Catholic extremists there..It's all a mess, and they are all ignoring "Jesus's second commandment" so badly [/quote]
Yes... from my understanding it goes back to the Irish Potato Famine in 1845–49. I've heard that the protestants told the Catholics that beets were poison, I haven't been able to verify that, but both sides need to lighten up.

I know for one thing, many of the Catholics up there totally miss the boat on the whole Catholic thing. The IRA claim to be Catholic, very sad that they don't listen to the Masses.

God Bless,
ironmonk

[Mickey's_Girl]

Yeah, I think that the Northern Ireland issues go back even farther, to when the British (English at the time?) first started colonizing there. Big, big issues for hundreds of years. The only way that situation will ever get fixed is through forgiveness; hearts are so hard, and I think it will take a miracle (but I believe in miracles!).

N. Ireland needs our prayers in a big way...and there are lots of people who don't take part in the conflict (I have friends there) but who are trying to do the Lord's will. It's so difficult for them sometimes...

MG

[socalscout]

I've been gone for awhile, is Lumberjack really just Bruce?

[BeenaBobba]

I know what you mean. Last week, I was hanging out with my friends. One of them informed me that Catholics worship Mary and the Pope. Since I'm Catholic, I was like, "Um, no we don't. I'm Catholic, and I certainly don't worship the Pope and Mary." I then went on to explain that we honor them both, which is quite different from actually worshipping them. The 4th Commandment says that we must honor our parents; therefore, to "honor" cannot and does not go against the Bible, i.e., unless the 4th Commandment goes against the Bible (and obviously, it doesn't.).

God bless,

Jennifer

[BeenaBobba]

Hi the lumberjack,

[quote]He might be the pope but his interpretation of what is ministry and how a man is given one, is sadly mistaken. Peter’s ministry was Peter’s – it could not be passed on to anyone else. And there is no proof whatever that popes are the successors of Peter anyway. The assumptions are based on tentative myths, legends and very bad interpretation![/quote]

What think ye of Matthew 16? Many non-Catholics assume that Jesus was referring to Peter's faith and wasn't giving him any [i]real[/i] or distinct authority. But to understand this passage, one must understand a particular passage in the Old Testament. This passage is Isaiah 22. If you've got your Bible with you, I strongly suggest you read both. I'm sure you will notice the striking similarities between the two. David, addressing Eliakim, gave Eliakim authority as the steward of his kingdom. You will notice that he used almost the [b]exact[/b] wording Jesus used with Peter.

As for the petros/petra argument, you might want to read [url="http://www.envoymagazine.com/backissues/2.2/nutsandbolts.html"]this article[/url], as it discusses the differences between petros, petra, lithoi, lithos, kepha, and evna. One [i]could[/i] argue (without paying much attention to Greek grammar), that "petros" refers to a small rock, but that does not even address the fact that Peter was elsewhere called [i]Kepha[/i] in the Aramaic vernacular of Jesus and the Apostles. [i]Kepha[/i] certainly doesn't mean "small pebble." In fact, the Aramaic word for small stone or pebble is [i]evna[/i].

It is clear that we have differing views of the Bible. But who's to say who's right? Did the early Christians believe that Peter was the rock? Let's see:

[b]Cyprian of Carthage[/b] said:

"The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. . . . If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?" (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).

"There is one God and one Christ, and one Church, and one chair founded on Peter by the word of the Lord. It is not possible to set up another altar or for there to be another priesthood besides that one altar and that one priesthood. Whoever has gathered elsewhere is scattering" (Letters 43[40]:5 [A.D. 253]).

"There [John 6:68–69] speaks Peter, upon whom the Church would be built, teaching in the name of the Church and showing that even if a stubborn and proud multitude withdraws because it does not wish to obey, yet the Church does not withdraw from Christ. The people joined to the priest and the flock clinging to their shepherd are the Church. You ought to know, then, that the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishop, and if someone is not with the bishop, he is not in the Church. They vainly flatter themselves who creep up, not having peace with the priests of God, believing that they are
secretly [i.e., invisibly] in communion with certain individuals. For the Church, which is one and Catholic, is not split nor divided, but it is indeed united and joined by the cement of priests who adhere one to another" (ibid., 66[69]:8).

[Quotations taken from Catholic Answers' page, which you can read [url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Authority_of_the_Pope_Part_1.asp"]here[/url].]

[b]John Chrysostom[/b] said:

"Peter, that Leader of the choir, that Mouth of the rest of the Apostles, that Head of the brotherhood, that one set over the entire universe, that Foundation of the Church." (Chrys. In illud hoc Scitote)

[Quotation taken from [url="http://web.globalserve.net/~bumblebee/ecclesia/patriarchs.htm"]here[/url].]

Did Peter have successors, and were they at Rome? Let's see:

[b]Irenaeus[/b] said:

"But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition" (Against Heresies 3:3:2 [A.D. 189]).

[b]Eusebius of Caesarea[/b] said:

"A question of no small importance arose at that time [A.D. 190]. For the parishes of all Asia [Minor], as from an older tradition held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the feast of the Savior’s Passover. . . . But it was not the custom of the churches in the rest of the world . . . as they observed the practice which, from apostolic tradition, has prevailed to the present time, of terminating the fast [of Lent] on no other day than on that of the resurrection of the Savior [Sunday]. Synods and assemblies of bishops were held on this account, and all, with one consent, through mutual correspondence drew up an ecclesiastical decree that the mystery of the resurrection of the Lord should be celebrated on no other but the Lord’s day and that we should observe the close of the paschal fast on this day only. . . . Thereupon [Pope] Victor, who presided over the church at Rome, immediately attempted to cut off from the community the parishes of all Asia [Minor], with the churches that agreed with them, as heterodox. And he wrote letters and declared all the brethren there wholly excommunicate. But this did not please all the bishops, and they besought him to consider the things of peace and of neighborly unity and love. . . . [Irenaeus] fittingly admonishes Victor that he should not cut off whole churches of God which observed the tradition of an ancient custom" (Church History 5:23:1–24:11).

"Thus then did Irenaeus entreat and negotiate [with Pope Victor] on behalf of the peace of the churches—[Irenaeus being] a man well-named, for he was a peacemaker both in name and character. And he corresponded by letter not only with Victor, but also with very many and various rulers of churches" (ibid., 24:18).

"Paul testifies that Crescens was sent to Gaul [2 Tim. 4:10], but Linus, whom he mentions in the Second Epistle to Timothy [2 Tim. 4:21] as his companion at Rome, was Peter’s successor in the episcopate of the church there, as has already been shown. Clement also, who was appointed third bishop of the church at Rome, was, as Paul testifies, his co-laborer and fellow-soldier [Phil. 4:3]" (Church History 3:4:9–10 [A.D. 312]).

[b]Peter Chrysologus[/b] said:

"We exhort you in every respect, honorable brother, to heed obediently what has been written by the most blessed pope of the city of Rome, for blessed Peter, who lives and presides in his own see, provides the truth of faith to those who seek it. For we, by reason of our pursuit of peace and faith, cannot try cases on the faith without the consent of the bishop of Rome" (Letters 25:2 [A.D. 449]).

The [b]Council of Chalcedon[/b] said:

"Bishop Paschasinus, guardian of the Apostolic See, stood in the midst [of the Council Fathers] and said, ‘We received directions at the hands of the most blessed and apostolic bishop of the Roman city [Pope Leo I], who is the head of all the churches, which directions say that Dioscorus is not to be allowed to sit in the [present] assembly, but that if he should attempt to take his seat, he is to be cast out. This instruction we must carry out" (Acts of the Council, session 1 [A.D. 451]).

"After the reading of the foregoing epistle [The Tome of Leo], the most reverend bishops cried out: ‘This is the faith of the fathers! This is the faith of the apostles! So we all believe! Thus the orthodox believe! Anathema to him who does not thus believe! Peter has spoken thus through Leo!’" (ibid., session 2).

[b]Irenaeus[/b] also said:

"The blessed apostles [Peter and Paul], having founded and built up the church [of Rome] . . . handed over the office of the episcopate to Linus" (Against Heresies 3:3:3 [A.D. 189]).

[b]Jerome[/b] said:

"I follow no leader but Christ and join in communion with none but your blessedness [Pope Damasus I], that is, with the chair of Peter. I know that this is the rock on which the Church has been built. Whoever eats the Lamb outside this house is profane. Anyone who is not in the ark of Noah will perish when the flood prevails" (Letters 15:2 [A.D. 396]).

[Quotations taken from the links on [url="http://www.catholic.com/library/church_papacy.asp"]this page[/url].]

the lumberjack, those are just a [i]few[/i] quotations. If you think you can find quotations from the early Christians saying otherwise, be my guest. I think, though, that you will be hard-pressed to find them. When I say that Peter was indeed the rock, and that his authority was passed on to the Popes of Rome, I'm not just going by my own [i]personal[/i] interpretation of Scripture. I'm going along with the teachings of the early Christians -- the first Catholics.

I will perhaps write later with reponses to other things in that article you posted.

God bless,

Jennifer

Edited May 3, 2004 by BeenaBobba

[Dave]

[quote name='BeenaBobba' date='May 3 2004, 05:30 AM'] I know what you mean. Last week, I was hanging out with my friends. One of them informed me that Catholics worship Mary and the Pope. Since I'm Catholic, I was like, "Um, no we don't. I'm Catholic, and I certainly don't worship the Pope and Mary." I then went on to explain that we honor them both, which is quite different from actually worshipping them. The 4th Commandment says that we must honor our parents; therefore, to "honor" cannot and does not go against the Bible, i.e., unless the 4th Commandment goes against the Bible (and obviously, it doesn't.).

[/quote]
That's one wacky charge that I don't hear much, but it's still one of those charges that, when you hear it, you can't help but be like, "Are people really THAT dumb?!"

[IcePrincessKRS]

[quote name='socalscout' date='May 3 2004, 04:11 AM'] I've been gone for awhile, is Lumberjack really just Bruce? [/quote]
no... lol

[the lumberjack]

hahahaha

thanks IcePrincess...

no I'm not Bruce...silly rabbit.

[IcePrincessKRS]

np LJ.

Socal, there was a while (before he got suspended again...) where Bruce and LJ were both posting here.... while they're both pretty enthusiastic posters, I don't think either of them has that kind of time and energy. lol

[the lumberjack]

[quote name='IcePrincessKRS' date='May 3 2004, 02:17 PM'] np LJ.

Socal, there was a while (before he got suspended again...) where Bruce and LJ were both posting here.... while they're both pretty [b]enthusiastic posters[/b], I don't think either of them has that kind of time and energy. lol [/quote]
ARE YOU CALLING ME A GEEK!?!?!

FOR IF YOU ARE, MY GOOD LADY...........!!!


I'd have to be in accord with you...

hahahaha