The Cc Teach You Can't Understand

[Dave]

You went THAT WAY... I came THIS WAY, funny how all roads DON'T "Lead to Rome"

I think that any Protestant that doesn't take the time to inform themselves about CHRISTIAN history, writings, and battles, is one that takes things at face value and could benefit greatly FROM those that have gone before us.

Now, I note in passing, that the founders of Protestantism, in all of its glorious variety, were NOT ignorant dolts. Calvin, Luther, Wycliff, Huss, were ALL first, Catholic SCHOLARS, note and re-read that again. ALL Catholic scholars.

They were blessed with the skill, insights, and prodding from God to UNBUNDLE the message of salvation from man made denominational baggage. Rather like Jesus himself had to do with Judaism.

Jews had added so much to the message over the centuries that the underlying Covenent relationship with God was gone, and so, had the Covenent relationship with Jesus been burdened with even more denominational baggage, prompting the Reformation. Later on Pentecostals "rediscovered" the Spirit of God that had been buried under formalized dogma's, and re-envigorated all Christianity ... including the Catholic Church who ... along with everyone else, had settled into a ritualized Christianity.

Just worth noting.

You left the Catholic Church because of your feelings and opinions. If you allow yourself to be guided by those, you will ALWAYS be led astray. God CANNOT and WILL NOT lead anyone to do whatever is at odds with His Truth. The Catholic Church alone fully conforms to God's truth.

And the so-called reformers, in a nutshell, were no heroes. They basically decided they wanted to serve God on their own terms, not on His terms. Thus, they decided they wanted to serve themselves. Look at Martin Luther, for example. He exhorted people to sin like there's no tomorrow! He even promoted polygamy! He took the liberty of taking books out of the Bible that didn't fit his agenda. He went against centuries of constant Christian teaching. That's not simplifying the Gospel.

[Dave]

ahh. very true. that is why I am not a Catholic

Read through many articles there actually. And there is severe misrepresentation of many protestant doctrines (word choices from a 'Catholic' perspective) and they don't deal with many of the rebuttals presented against them. Maybe they are good for someone with no education, but there are problems in most on even semantic issues.

1. But something tells me your church wasn't founded by Jesus either.

2. Could it be that you don't want to admit that certain Protestant teachings are unbiblical or that people have refuted your claims? It's a common tactic by anti-Catholics to claim that Catholics misrepresent their teachings just so they can avoid admitting that there's no justification for their beliefs. Likewise, it's a common tactic by anti-Catholics to claim that we haven't addressed their rebuttals when we really have. They do that because they don't want to admit that maybe their positions are wrong.

[Bruce S]

You left the Catholic Church because of your feelings and opinions. If you allow yourself to be guided by those, you will ALWAYS be led astray. God CANNOT and WILL NOT lead anyone to do whatever is at odds with His Truth. The Catholic Church alone fully conforms to God's truth.

Not really.

I left TOTALLY OVER PRACTICE. Honest.

What the Catholic Church WAS, not what they are on paper.

I won't toss flamebait here, no need for that.

Doctrine ... is useless if NO ONE actually knows it, follows it, or frankly [try and read and UNDERSTAND some of the "proofs" you guys love ] can even begin to UNDERSTAND ....

About Catholic Church.

It is a denomination fraught with PRACTICE PROBLEMS, and IMPENTRABLE PROSE working around, towards, in support of "denominational distinctives."

[Bruce S]

And the so-called reformers, in a nutshell, were no heroes. They basically decided they wanted to serve God on their own terms, not on His terms.

OK, if you say so.

And all those wonderful Popes....

Yawn.

Frankly, Luther, Calvin, and the others were SAINTS [pardon the pun] compared to....

[Anna]

Look at Martin Luther, for example. He exhorted people to sin like there's no tomorrow! He even promoted polygamy! He took the liberty of taking books out of the Bible that didn't fit his agenda. He went against centuries of constant Christian teaching.

Apparently, Dave, that's God-inspired "unbundling."

(I guess they forget that Peter was given the authority to 'bundle' - bind- and 'unbundle' - loosen!)

Pax Christi. <><

[Laudate_Dominum]

Now, I note in passing, that the founders of Protestantism, in all of its glorious variety, were NOT ignorant dolts. Calvin, Luther, Wycliff, Huss, were ALL first, Catholic SCHOLARS, note and re-read that again. ALL Catholic scholars.

They were blessed with the skill, insights, and prodding from God to UNBUNDLE the message of salvation from man made denominational baggage.

Last time I checked these men were heretics and excommunicants. Most heretics down through the ages were Catholic scholars, not just the protestant brand. And note that those men you named had some pretty major differences in their agendas and teachings. These were not heroes who unbundled some secret, long lost message to save the world. These were poor souls who fell into grievous error and disobedience and who sadly died in a state of seperation from Christ's flock. They are to me as gentiles and tax collectors, or yet as men accursed, for they have preached a different Christ, a different Gospel than that which we have heard from the Apostles. These men had no authority to found a religion in the name of Jesus Christ. God entrusted His truths of Salvation to His Church through the Apostles and their successors, not to the many rogues and bandits who have ravaged His flock down through the ages.

Edited January 24, 2004 by Laudate_Dominum

[Dave]

Not really.

I left TOTALLY OVER PRACTICE. Honest.

What the Catholic Church WAS, not what they are on paper.

I won't toss flamebait here, no need for that.

Doctrine ... is useless if NO ONE actually knows it, follows it, or frankly [try and read and UNDERSTAND some of the "proofs" you guys love ] can even begin to UNDERSTAND ....

About Catholic Church.

It is a denomination fraught with PRACTICE PROBLEMS, and IMPENTRABLE PROSE working around, towards, in support of "denominational distinctives."

Yeah, right.

So you're saying that you left the Church because you couldn't understand it's teachings and that other Catholics you saw were ignorant of its teachings? As for the former, that's your own fault, not the Church's. You had ample opportunities to learn. And you still do, actually. But you didn't come here to Phatmass to learn; you came to proselytize. As for the latter, that's a really lame, sorry cop-out. Just because there are those who don't live the Church's teachings doesn't make the Church true. Didn't Jesus say there would be weeds among the wheat?

[Anna]

About Catholic Church.

It is a denomination ...

Bruce,

You couldn't even get the first three words right.

The Catholic Church is not a denomination. We are the Church, founded By Christ, in His Holy Name, the same One True Church that the heretics broke away from! (de=from, nom=name.) Denominations are those that broke from The Original.

The Catholic Church is the The Original.

That's why y'all wanna call "The Church" the whole body of believers, regardless of the fact that no two denoms believe in the same thing!

The Church is, in fact, the Body of Christ, which He instituted. It preserves and continues to teach the same Truths that came from the mouth of Christ to His Apostles.

Denominations teach doctrines made by men.

fraught with PRACTICE PROBLEMS,

Such as?

and IMPENTRABLE PROSE

Say whaaaaaaaat?

working around, towards, in support of "denominational distinctives."

Really, what the heck are you talking about? Sounds like you just described protestantism!

Pax Christi. <><

[phatcatholic]

The CC know that you are because you have not received the Holy Spirit.

my whole point is that the claim you are making is in no way supported by the quote you originally provided (at the start of this thread). you have failed to provide sources that substantiate your claims about the Church.

and btw, to prove to you that the Church does agree w/ the necessity of the Holy Spirit to illuminate understanding, i provide you this quote from an article discussing the Council of Orange:

The Second Council of Orange (529 A.D.), accepted as dogma by the Catholic Church, dogmatically taught in its Canon VII:

If anyone asserts that we can, by our natural powers, think as we ought, or choose any good pertaining to the salvation of eternal life . . . without the illumination and inspiration of the Holy Spirit . . . he is misled by a heretical spirit . . . [goes on to cite Jn 15:5, 2 Cor 3:5]

from 1 Corinthians 3:9 and John Calvin's Distorted Understanding of the Council of Trent's Doctrine of Grace

i would have quoted directly from the Council myself (instead of using someone else's quotation from it), but i could not find the Canons of the Council online. the point is that the Church affirms what u think it does not.

Good Luck and God Bless You in your search for Truth,

phatcatholic

[Truth]

Stop taking credit away from the CC. The CC was the Early Church.

If it was when and where did it become the CC? I didn't see it any where between the first page in Genesis and the last page in Revelation but I did see and read letter to the seven church that both the Apostle and Jesus wrote to.

[Dave]

If it was when and where did it become the CC? I didn't see it any where between the first page in Genesis and the last page in Revelation but I did see and read letter to the seven church that both the Apostle and Jesus wrote to.

It was always the Catholic Church! It may not have gone by that name right at first, but it was still the Catholic Church. And those churches in Revelation were just part of the Catholic Church.

[Circle_Master]

1. But something tells me your church wasn't founded by Jesus either.

my church? of course not. the church I belong to began in the 1950's. 'the church' I belong to, the invisible one began at pentecost however and it is still adding members daily.

2. Could it be that you don't want to admit that certain Protestant teachings are unbiblical or that people have refuted your claims?  It's a common tactic by anti-Catholics to claim that Catholics misrepresent their teachings just so they can avoid admitting that there's no justification for their beliefs.  Likewise, it's a common tactic by anti-Catholics to claim that we haven't addressed their rebuttals when we really have.  They do that because they don't want to admit that maybe their positions are wrong.

What the heck are you talking about? There are many protestant positions that are wrong, I would never say otherwise. You seem to be speaking from a stereotype here. I suggest you reevaluate who you are talking to, and not speak to a past experience. I don't like being called an anti-Catholic either. You don't call atheists or agnostics anti-Catholic when they believe the Catholic Church is wrong so why do you call me that? Frankly I couldn't care less about the Catholic Church except when it is a problem in evangelism. I.E. I have to clarify that I am not catholic so they actually listen to me and don't think of ritual and just 'another religion'.

[Dave]

my church? of course not. the church I belong to began in the 1950's. 'the church' I belong to, the invisible one began at pentecost however and it is still adding members daily.

What the heck are you talking about? There are many protestant positions that are wrong, I would never say otherwise. You seem to be speaking from a stereotype here. I suggest you reevaluate who you are talking to, and not speak to a past experience. I don't like being called an anti-Catholic either. You don't call atheists or agnostics anti-Catholic when they believe the Catholic Church is wrong so why do you call me that? Frankly I couldn't care less about the Catholic Church except when it is a problem in evangelism. I.E. I have to clarify that I am not catholic so they actually listen to me and don't think of ritual and just 'another religion'.

1. There's no such thing as an invisible Church. Jesus made it quite clear that His Church is a visible entity.

2. Number one, why do you refuse to consider the possibility that YOUR OWN Protestant position may be wrong? Number two, all you've done on this phorum is spout lies about the Catholic Church, and then, when we've corrected you, you've refused to listen. So I'd say "anti-Catholic" fits you to a T.

[phatcatholic]

If it was when and where did it become the CC? I didn't see it any where between the first page in Genesis and the last page in Revelation but I did see and read letter to the seven church that both the Apostle and Jesus wrote to.

Larry,

a long time ago, in another thread, i posted my proof that the Early Church is the Catholic Church, and you never responded to it, despite my frequent reminders. i will post it yet again, b/c i am sincerely interested in discovering how a person can be confronted w/ the following information and still insist that the early Church is not the Catholic Church.

below you will find testimony from the earliest christians which reveals that they held distinctly Catholic beliefs. Does YOUR church believe in these? (each link will take u to a page w/ the early church testimony i am referring to)

--80 AD, Apostolic Tradition upheld

--80 AD, belief in Apostolic Succession

--80 AD, Authority of the Pope upheld

--200 AD, belief in Peter as the First Pope

--200 AD, belief in Peter's Primacy among the Apostles

--189 AD, belief that the Pope was Peter's Successor

--80 AD, belief in the Intercession of Saints

--120 AD, Mary's Perpetual Virginity upheld

--189 AD, belief in Mary as the Mother of God

--110 AD, the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist is upheld

larry, pay particular attention to the following:

--74 AD, belief that Grace is Received through Baptism

--151 AD, belief that we are "Born Again" in Baptism

--189 AD, the legitimacy of Infant Baptism is upheld

--70 AD, Baptism is performed with the Trinitarian Formula

--80 AD, the Necessity of Baptism is upheld

now, on to a few more:

--160 AD, belief in Purgatory

--70 AD, Christians worship on Sunday

--110 AD, even the early Christians knew their Church was the Catholic Church

if you would like even MORE proof that the early Church is the Catholic Church, then you can go here or here.

is this enough proof, Larry? Do you believe in all of those things? the early Church sure did............as do Catholics today. How could any other conclusion be drawn besides the one that Dave and I have been fighting to prove to you? The early Church believed what only the Catholic Church beleives today. To me that says that the Early Church is the Catholic Church.

Larry, i anxiously await your attempt to reconile this information both w/ ur beleif system and w/ ur misconceptions about Catholicism.

Good Luck and God Bless You in your search for Truth,

phatcatholic

[Circle_Master]

1. There's no such thing as an invisible Church. Jesus made it quite clear that His Church is a visible entity.

dude, I've already argued this and Catholics admitted there is an invisible church. You really think Christ is going to marry the Catholic Church with all of it's members? When He marries the church He marries only believers, and only believers are in the true church. I really don't think you are that nieve to believe everyone who is a member of the Catholic Church is saved if Christ returned today...

2. Number one, why do you refuse to consider the possibility that YOUR OWN Protestant position may be wrong?  Number two, all you've done on this phorum is spout lies about the Catholic Church, and then, when we've corrected you, you've refused to listen.  So I'd say "anti-Catholic" fits you to a T.

Again, freaking STOP with your stereotypes. I DO BELIEVE I COULD BE WRONG. I am not arrogant like that. Get over yourself and consider who you are talking to, not what you have been taught. All I've said is lies all over this forum? Ugh - no response.