The truth about Catholicism

  • Follow Letters

I have read with interest many columns in this paper about how other religions such as Islam are treated with kid gloves, as not to offend anyone, while Christians complain that their religion is fair game.

As a practicing Catholic I’ve been told that that my faith is not really Christian because we don’t use the Bible and we have graven images such as Christ on the cross and the Virgin Mary. I have also been told that praying to the Virgin Mary is heresy.

I have news for these folks. The Catholic Church cannot teach error, and we do use the Bible.

If any of these Catholic detractors would actually attend a Mass they just might understand.

We believe the Holy Eucharist is the body of Christ. When I am told that that my faith is not correct I simply reply that I am satisfied with the church Christ founded 2,000 years ago.

I am not condemning other forms of Christianity, but the Catholic Church teaches the truth.

Jesus said his church was indestructible, and 2,000 years later the Catholic faith is over 2 billion strong.

I am proud to be a part of the church that Christ started and to which all truth is preached.

Comments (26) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
RMSHEFF
18742
Points
RMSHEFF 06/05/13 - 07:48 am
4
5
The disagreement is not over

The disagreement is not over church names or labels but over truth. Either you are saved by works or you are not. Either the pope is infallible or he is only a fallible man like the rest of us. Either Christ is the only mediator between us and God or Mary and the Catholic church is. Salvation comes through Christ or through the Catholic Church. These are big differences in doctrine and yes doctrine divides.

NrthAugustaSam
504
Points
NrthAugustaSam 06/05/13 - 07:50 am
1
8
Yes - Catholicism is a cult. Not Christian

Nowhere is scripture are we told to confess our sins to any man (a sinner himself) to receive forgiveness and salvation. Try reading 1 John 1:6-9.

And what about....When Jesus died on the cross for the sin of the world he said, “It is finished.” Doesn't this mean that your purgatory crap is just a made up man made shackle?

Try reading your Bible again and forget all that made up crap from Rome.

jkline
527
Points
jkline 06/05/13 - 08:10 am
6
0
Good for Mr Glover

I am not a Roman Catholic, but I am glad that the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church stick to their guns. Somebody has to. Anybody can change with the prevailing winds of political correctness, or whatever the latest mode is called. The world is better because it has special people who do not. And those who attack them show more about themselves than they show about those attacked.

RMSHEFF
18742
Points
RMSHEFF 06/05/13 - 08:22 am
5
2
jkline

As a Christian I find myself in agreement with the Catholic church on many social issues however political correctness is not the commission of the Church. Christians are to go into the world and make disciples. The Catholic church has it wrong at the fundamental point of "making disciples".

What difference does your moral and political beliefs make if you are not saved. I am all for a moral society and I am very conservative however one can't equate these with salvation.

AutumnLeaves
10254
Points
AutumnLeaves 06/05/13 - 08:45 am
3
0
Does being saved mean you'll

Does being saved mean you'll never sin again before you reach the gates of heaven? If not, then you're not truly saved in my opinion, until you're inside the gates. If you think you'll never sin again before you reach the pearly gates, because you claim to be saved, that is the sin of pride. A bit of a conundrum there, isn't it? What exactly does saved mean then, to those that use the word so frequently? I've tried to get this answered before, maybe someone here can define it for us. I was raised a Christian, but never heard that word used in this way until I moved to the south. I've been here over 30 years and have never heard an explanation of what "saved" means that didn't just use the word "saved" in it again, which, of course, is no explanation at all. I am a Christian, but I expect I'm going to have to continue to examine my conscience every day and do my best to obey the church's teachings until I hope to gain entrance to heaven.

AutumnLeaves
10254
Points
AutumnLeaves 06/05/13 - 08:56 am
4
0
NrthAugustaSam, The Catholic

NrthAugustaSam, The Catholic religion is not a cult. It is the Church that was founded when Jesus said to St. Peter, "Upon this rock I will build my Church". Unless you're Jesus, you don't have the authority to undo that BIBLICAL statement.

GiantsAllDay
10485
Points
GiantsAllDay 06/05/13 - 09:57 am
2
2
I think I'm going to post

I think I'm going to post once and then sit this one out. I'm just going watch with amuzement the different Christian sects (Catholics, Baptists, Mormons, etc etc) argue with each other about which one is really Christian. They believe in an all powerful, all knowing diety, yet they think that mortals living on a small speck in the vast universe know what that diety desires. Score one for the mighty human ego, I guess. This is my first and final post on this LTE. In parting, I must say that it took some chutzpah for the writer of this LTE to submit this. Today, my admiration goes out to the GOVERNMENT OF IRELAND. The most catholic country in the world called the church and its hierarchy on the carpet for the raping of children by priests and the even more heinous cover up by the highest leaders of the church. When Jesus turned the reins over to St Peter, I'm pretty sure this is not what he had in mind. Anyway, the problem in Ireland is equal to or greater than that over here in the US. I look at the entire college of Cardinals as unidicted co-conspirators. I remember watching TV when I saw the prime minister of Ireland call the Catholic Church and its leaders to task. I actually stood up an applauded.

Darby
29249
Points
Darby 06/05/13 - 10:39 am
4
0
"Yes - Catholicism is a cult. Not Christian"

Sam, you could at least try to be nice.

Fundamental_Arminian
1871
Points
Fundamental_Arminian 06/05/13 - 11:51 am
3
2
AutumnLeaves, you say the RCC

AutumnLeaves, you say the RCC is the church our Lord founded when he told Peter, "Upon this rock I will build my church." You add that no one but Christ has the authority to undo that statement.

Question: What does the statement mean? Eastern Orthodox Christians, who say the Roman Catholic Church broke off from them, interpret the verse differently. The Orthodox Study Bible says of that verse (Mt 16:18), "Peter/rock is a play on the word for 'rock' in both Aramaic and Greek (petros/petra). This rock refers not to Peter per se, but to 'the faith of his confession' (JohnChr). The true Rock is Christ Himself (1 Cor 10:4), and the Church is built on the faithful confession of Christ."

That explanation makes sense. For although some books of the New Testament were written after Peter's death, the Bible nowhere mentions the ordination of a papal successor.

Obviously, I disagree with the RCC about some things, but I still consider devout Catholics to be Christians. Letter writer John Glover says, "The Catholic Church cannot teach error. ..." I wish he were right. All of us, however, are subject to err, especially if we drift into sin.

This is why the apostle Paul warned the Galatians, "... If we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed" (Gal 1:8 NKJV). You see, not only the apostles, but even angels from heaven could apostatize.

No doubt Satan would like us to let down our guard enough to trust some human being or organization without question. To avoid being fooled, we must make sure we're hearing the Gospel that our Lord, Paul, and the other apostles preached. The only way for us to do that is to read and reread the inspired the record of their teachings, the Bible.

You asked what is meant by "saved." Salvation appears to be progressive, dynamic, and continuing. We were saved from the penalty of sin when we were joined to Christ by repentance and faith. We are being saved from the power of sin as we grow in grace thanks to the Holy Spirit's power. We will ultimately be saved from the presence of sin when we are received into heaven by God's mercy.

RMSHEFF
18742
Points
RMSHEFF 06/05/13 - 11:57 am
3
2
Autumn

You quoted correctly when you said "Jesus said to St. Peter, "Upon this rock I will build my Church" The question is what is "the rock upon I will build my Church"? The New Testament makes abundantly dear that Christ alone is the foundation and only head of His church. In vs. 16 & 17 the rock is taken to be Peter’s divinely inspired confession of Jesus as “the Christ, the Son of the living God” (vv. 16–17). This statement of truth is the"rock" or truth upon Christ will build His Church not a sinful man as Peter was. If you confess this in your heart you will be saved.

RMSHEFF
18742
Points
RMSHEFF 06/05/13 - 12:06 pm
1
1
Does being saved mean you'll

Does being saved mean you'll never sin again before you reach the gates of heaven? Of course not, all have sinned and will continue to sin until we are made perfect. Our sins are forgiven (past present and future sins) by the grace of God through faith in Christ, not by works of righteousness.
Genesis 15:6 And Abram believed the LORD, and the LORD counted him as righteous because of his faith. Faith not the act or works!

Fiat_Lux
16422
Points
Fiat_Lux 06/05/13 - 02:35 pm
2
1
@ RMSHEFF

Two points, addressing your first comment:
1. The pope is a sinner and is fallible like any other person, EXCEPT in one circumstance only. When he speaks purely in/from his role as head of the Catholic Church, as pontiff, regarding the official beliefs regarding faith and morals for the Catholic Church, he is stating what the Church believes because he is the final earthly authority for the Catholic Church.

Most people, probably even most Catholics, haven't a clue what papal infallibility actually is, and they make the exact same kind of incorrect assumptions as you did above. It doesn't mean he is never wrong, even on theological issues. But when he says, as head of the Catholic Church, "This is an article of faith for the Catholic Church", well, that's it. It is what Catholics believe to be the truth. It has been used very, very rarely, and for such dogma as the belief in the Immaculate Conception of Mary, another concept that most people simply do not understand correctly at all.

2. Re: Mary as mediator between us and God, I'm assuming that you are a Christian, meaning you believe the Nicene Creed in the part where it says, "I believe in Jesus Christ, the only BEGOTTEN Son of God, God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God, begotten, not made; being of ONE SUBSTANCE WITH THE FATHER...", and so on, with slight variations in the lingo depending on your particular denomination.

Mary was the doorway for the Incarnation: she was the mother of Jesus, God the Son. That means that Mary was the Mother of God in the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, when He took on the form of man and brought about our salvation. That means, with very little extrapolation necessary, that Mary was the mediator of our salvation in cooperating with God the Holy Spirit in the begetting of God the Son, Jesus, the Savior. She is the mediatrix of salvation because she gave birth to the Savior. Salvation came to us the way it/He did because she said "yes" to God. That makes her the mediator of our Salvation. That reality also should help give one a better grasp of what our responses potentially can mean for mankind.)

If you are a Christian and believe in heaven, then you almost certainly would believe that Mary, the mother of Jesus, the Mother of God the Son, is there. And since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses (ie, saints who have gone before us), it is only logical that she is among them. Asking her to ask Jesus, God the Son, to intercede for us with her own Son in our times of need and distress is nothing less than obvious. Think about that for a moment.

Who is God more likely to say "yes" to than His own mother?

RMSHEFF
18742
Points
RMSHEFF 06/05/13 - 03:30 pm
3
2
1 st Timothy 2: 5-6 For

1 st Timothy 2: 5-6 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

I am sure you would agree that Mary had other children with Joseph. Scripture does not support anything other than Mary being chosen and blessed by God to be the mother of Jesus.
Papal infallibility is a very recent development in the history of the Roman Church. It was formally affirmed only in 1870, at the First Vatican Council. In that council, the doctrine was not immediately accepted .

Even the limited definition of papal infallibility to ex-cathedra [a] pronouncements on faith and morals can be shown to be inconsistent with the historical evidence. Let us look at a few examples.
Pope Liberius and the Arian Controversy

Our first example is Pope Liberius (who was pope from 352 to 366). Elected pope during the height of the Arian controversy, he was sent into exile by Emperor Constantius II (337-361) for refusing to condemn Athanasius. While in exile his morale collapsed. He then condemned Athanasius and accepted an alternative creed to the Nicene Creed. This alternative creed rejected the Nicene formula for the Son being "one in being with the Father" and suggested that the Son is lower than the Father. This is clearly a non-orthodox formula. It was only after the declaration that Liberius was allowed to return to Rome. After the death of Constantius II in 361, Liberius reverted back to Nicene orthodoxy. However the point has been made. Here is one pope whio made a pronouncement of faith which is today looked upon as heretical.[5]
Pope Vigilius and the Three Chapters Controversy

Next on our list is Pope Vigilius (in office, 537-555). We will have more to say about his character later. Our interest here is in his position with respect to the "Three Chapters Controversy". The Emperor Justinian (483-565), in his effort to win over the monophysites, condemned as heretical the "Three Chapters": which stands for the Christological speculations and teachings of Theodore of Mopsuestia (d.428), Theodoret of Cyrrhus (d. c458) and Ibas of Edessa (d.457). The three chapters wrote on the "two natures" of Jesus: a concept not condemned as heretical by the Council of Chalcedon (451). As emperor, he ordered all the bishops throughout Christendom to endorse his condemnation.
Vigilius, at first, refused to give his approval to Justinian's edict. He was forcibly brought to Constantinople, and, seeing the emperor's determination on the matter, agreed to condemn the Three Chapters. This met with disfavor by the western church. A synod of African Bishops excommunicate him for his condemnation. In an effort to placate the western church, Vigilius withdrew his condemnation. This, again, met with imperial disfavor. The pope was caught between the devil and the deep blue sea. Seeing that recalcitrant bishops were either jailed, deposed or exiled by the emperor, Vigilius decided to safe his own hide. He informed the emperor that he had been misled by the devil to withdraw his condemnation of the Three Chapters! In other words he said, the devil made him do it; sounds familiar? He was then allowed by the emperor to return to Rome to resume office. The Three Chapters Controversy was one of the historical evidence brought forward by some bishops in the First Vatican Council to oppose the doctrine of papal infallibility. .[6]

Pope Honorius and Monothelitism

The case of Pope Honorius I who was pope from the year 625 to 638 is enough to prove this point. Honorius I agreed with the bishop of Constantinople that Jesus had only one will. This doctrine, called monothelitism was later declared heretical by the Council of Constantinople in the year 681. Here then, is a case where a pope made a pronouncement on a matter of faith (concerning the nature of Jesus) which was subsequently condemned as heretical. In fact the newly appointed pope, Leo II (pope from 682 to 683), publicly condemned Honorius II for undermining the faith of the Church. [7]
The Catholic Church today is still as dogmatic as ever in holding on to this doctrine. In 1970 the Swiss Catholic theologian Hans Kung (b.1928), generally regarded as one of the most brilliant Catholic thinkers of the modern era, published a book entitled Infallible?. In the book, Kung argued that the doctrine of papal infallibility was disproved by both biblical and historical evidence. It was a book that did not win him any friends in the Vatican. And when he summoned to Rome for a formal interrogation of his views, Kung, perhaps wisely, refused to go.

On December 18th 1979, Pope John Paul II announced that Kung is no longer qualified to teach Roman Catholic doctrine. Kung was sacked as the head of the Department of Theology at the University of Tubingen. He was told that he was no longer a Catholic theologian and was forbidden to write and publish again. [8]

By such means does the pope today maintain the doctrine of his own infallibility.

The Sale of Indulgences endorsed by the Pope.
By making a monetary contribution to the church, a penitent would receive a partial indulgence not to commit further sins, while at the same time, diminishing the time period that he/she was to suffer in PURGATORY for remission of his sins. Most people do not understand that an indulgence did not cancel sins. Only a priest during a confession session could absolve a truly repentant penitent.

dahreese
4907
Points
dahreese 06/05/13 - 05:28 pm
2
2
"That means that Mary was the
Unpublished

"That means that Mary was the Mother of God in the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, when He took on the form of man and brought about our salvation."

There is not a single verse in the bible that indicates "three in one" nor backs that idea.

And while I admire Mr. Glover for his letter, and disagree with some of his beliefs, I have never seen so much malarkey posted in some of the responses.

And we wonder why religion and politics are in the shape they're in?!

RMSHEFF
18742
Points
RMSHEFF 06/05/13 - 06:12 pm
2
0
Dahreese

This doctrine comes from a former Pope and is considered equal with Scripture. You won't find it in your Bible. Most of the doctrine that Catholics believe that differ from Christians come from a previous Pope speaking from the chair or ex cathedra (literally, "from the chair") it is considered infallible and without error.

dahreese
4907
Points
dahreese 06/05/13 - 07:33 pm
1
2
"This doctrine comes from a
Unpublished

"This doctrine comes from a former Pope and is considered equal with Scripture. You won't find it in your Bible."

"Equal with scripture" and, I won't find it in my bible.

Well, who's bible will I find it in?

Who's bible do you find it in?

And who's bible did this pope find it in?

studmuffin1533
305
Points
studmuffin1533 06/05/13 - 08:38 pm
0
2
The Catholic Church

The Catholic Church thought the invention of the fork was the work of the Devil. Their mindset hasn't changed.

RMSHEFF
18742
Points
RMSHEFF 06/05/13 - 08:47 pm
0
0
It is not an anyones Bible.

It is not an anyones Bible. Catholics believe that when the pope speaks in his official position , anything he says is from God and is just as true and binding on the Catholic church as the scripture. Below you will find some of the declarations made by various popes. This error began with the establishment of the position of the pope as the head of the church.

Immaculate Conception: Pope Pius IX proclaimed the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary on 1854-DEC-8. Many Roman Catholics believe that this refers to Jesus' conception circa 5 to 7 BCE. In fact, it means that Mary herself was conceived free of sin before her birth circa 20 BCE.
4. Assumption of Mary: Pope Pius XII, in his Munificentissimus Deus (1950-NOV-1), defined that Mary, "after the completion of her earthly life was assumed body and soul into the glory of Heaven." That is, she was "taken up body and soul into heaven," at the time of her death. She is there "exalted as Queen of the Universe." 1
In addition, various popes and church councils have referred to Mary as co-redemptrix, mediatrix, and advocate:

In ancient times:
St. Antonius (circa 250 - 350): "All graces that have ever been bestowed on men, all came through Mary."
St. Bernard (1090 - 1153): "[Mary is called] the gate of heaven, because no one can enter that blessed kingdom without passing through her."
St. Bonaventure (1221 - 1274): "As the moon, which stands between the sun and the earth, transmits to this latter whatever it receives from the former, so does Mary pour out upon us who are in this world the heavenly graces that she receives from the divine sun of justice." 1
1750: Alphonsus Mary de Liguori, canonized as Saint Alphonsus in 1839, wrote a book "The Glories of Mary." It continues to be published today, under various church imprimaturs. Various chapters in the book are titled: "Mary our Help," "Mary our Mediatress," "Mary our Advocate," etc. 1
1935: Pope Pius XI gave the title co-redemptrix to Mary during a radio broadcast. 1
1964-NOV-21: The Chapter 8 of the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church, passed by the Vatican Council II, and "Solemnly promulgated by Holiness Pope Paul VI" states, in part:
"Rightly, therefore, the Fathers see Mary not merely as passively engaged by God, but as freely cooperating in the work of man’s salvation through faith and obedience. For as St. Irenaeus says, she being obedient, became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race. Hence not a few of the early Fathers gladly assert with him in their preaching ...'death through Eve, life through Mary.' This union of the mother with the son in the work of salvation is made manifest from the time of Christ’s virginal conception up to his death" 2
"Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. By her maternal charity, she cares for the brethren of her Son, who still journey on earth surrounded by dangers and difficulties, until they are led into their blessed home. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress and Mediatrix." 3
"...the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix, and Mediatrix. This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficaciousness of Christ the one Mediator."
"For no creature could ever be counted as equal with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer. Just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by the ministers and by the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is really communicated in different ways to His creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source." (Footnotes deleted) 7

1985: Pope John Paul II recognized Mary as co-redemptrix" during a speech in Guayaquil, Ecuador. He said, in part, "Having suffered for the Church, Mary deserved to become the Mother of all the disciples of her Son, the Mother of their unity...In fact Mary’s role as Co-redemptrix did not cease with the glorification of her Son." 4
1987-MAR-25: In his encyclical Redemptoris Mater, Pope John Paul II "referred to Mary as 'Mediatrix' three times, and as 'Advocate' twice." 1
1997-APR-9: During an audience Pope John-Paul II referred to the role of Mary during the crucifixion of Jesus: "Mary … co-operated during the event itself and in the role of mother; thus her co-operation embraces the whole of Christ’s saving work. She alone was associated in this way with the redemptive sacrifice that merited the salvation of all mankind. In union with Christ and in submission to him, she collaborated in obtaining the grace of salvation for all humanity...In God’s plan, Mary is the ‘woman’ (cf. John 2:4; John 19:26), the New Eve, united to the New Adam in restoring humanity to its original dignity. Her cooperation with her Son continues for all time in the universal motherhood which she enjoys in the order of grace. Trusting in this maternal cooperation, let us turn to Mary, imploring her help in all our needs." 1

Fiat_Lux
16422
Points
Fiat_Lux 06/05/13 - 09:10 pm
2
0
Sola Scriptorum

It's the same thing-different book that also keeps Islam afloat.

It's pointless to discuss Catholicism with protestants who think Catholicism is not true to the Faith. They're mistaken, but there is no way to convince someone whose mind is already made up. And, it's not my job to try anyway.

Over the course of my life, I have learned it is far better to focus on what we have in common rather than on what we disagree about, and to show godly charity and kindness while doing it. Doing otherwise grieves the Holy Spirit.

dahreese
4907
Points
dahreese 06/05/13 - 09:21 pm
2
0
"Catholics believe that when
Unpublished

"Catholics believe that when the pope speaks in his official position , anything he says is from God and is just as true and binding on the Catholic church as the scripture."

And equally how many times have we watched a 'protestant', especially a fundamentalist, sit in his/her pew and hear the fundamentalist preacher (a man 'called' of/by god) say, "God says...!"

And he or she feels like he/she is bound to do and to believe what he/she told...? Because 'a man of god' said so.

Have you ever wondered that the gospel writers, Matthew, Mark and Luke, in particular, wrote their gospels to try and conform to the "promises" and predictions of the Old Testament (the history and myths of Judism)?

faithson
5526
Points
faithson 06/05/13 - 10:18 pm
2
0
the real discussion...

should be about the similarities in our faith. those things that bring good to ourselves and our community. discussions of the differences only leads to the type of banter found above. WE ALL know good people from ALL faiths, so lets focus on the good people do, no matter where they find the motivations to do so. and anyone, I mean anyone who says THEY know WHO is going to the eternal beyond should be marginalized, no questions asked.

whyme
2109
Points
whyme 06/05/13 - 11:37 pm
2
0
respect

As the above debate goes on about Catholic teaching and so forth, I want to address the issue of respect. As a Catholic I wish the author of the letter to the editor could have been a bit more eloquent and/or chose one issue to address but that's fine. My concern is and always has been the lack of respect for Catholicism. You don't have to agree with the teachings of the church-we all have the right to interpret the Bible as we choose and that's why we have so many different Christian faiths. But it's unacceptable as a Christian to allow one denomination to be ridiculed publicly and not stand up against such behavior. If someone were to dress up like a Muslim for Halloween, for example, and there was a complaint, there would be apologies all around. If someone imitates Hitler who was not a religious figure but who was an evil man, more apologies, and rightly so. Top ministers of various churches come out to support a member if they feel that this person was wronged for their race. Yet no one says much if a celebrity dresses up like a pregnant nun, if people swing around rosary beads as an accessory, or if the core values of Catholicism are minimized to ensure that those who are not believers have their rights even if it means Catholics give up theirs. About the only other folks who get made fun of or harassed are the Jehovah's Witnesses and that's not ok either.

Fiat_Lux
16422
Points
Fiat_Lux 06/06/13 - 08:37 am
1
0
Perfect response, Whyme

I've often wondered the same thing. And I often wonder if these folks who cut and paste from the Bible actually understand that, without the Catholic Church, they wouldn't have a New Testament to begin with, much less one that they, themselves, could read and interpret or misinterpret to their hearts content.

Where do they believe the canon of the New Testament came from anyway? They accurately believe it is the Word of God, but just whom do they think discerned and decided what was the true rendering of the words and actions of Jesus and of the events that accompanied His life, death, resurrection and ascension and not just some erudite fantasy or misconception?

They weren't protestants, and that's a certainty. They were the leaders and scholars of the One, Holy, Catholic (as in, "universal", not "Roman" Catholic) and Apostolic Church, and until the great schism, its earthly leader was the bishop of Rome.

The biggest problem is that not that many people know the history of the Church, from its beginnings up to the protestant reformation. They know a little, but with heavy emphasis on the human failings that occurred over the centuries, but very little understanding of how the understanding of the Incarnation evolved over time--not CHANGED over time, but became more precise and at the same time, broader.

It took many centuries for us to understand the basics of who Jesus was and is, and was finally somewhat codified in the creeds (Nicene and Apostles creeds). Some things about Him were understood immediately, but the revelation of the Incarnation continues even to this day. Even scripture itself is dynamic because of that fact.

God is not changing, but our ability to know and understand Him changes and grows the more and better we know and love Him. And the Catholic Church has spent the last two thousand years, without taking a break or arbitrarily changing its collective mind, focused on leading people to know, love and serve God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Private revelation is what led to the formation of virtually all protestant denominations, whether it was prompted by injustices and corruption of church leaders, or for personal or nationalistic ends such as a new wife for obtaining an heir or the seizure of church properties.

The Catholic Church, on the other hand, never, ever bases any dogma on personal or private revelation, even that which may appear to be completely supported by holy scripture and tradition. New statements regarding the essentials of the faith come only after years, even decades or centuries, of study, observation, prayer and debate. Change is ponderously slow specifically to prevent the errors that always are a danger when the limited perspective of only a single individual or even several individuals is being put forth as truth and reality.

The Catholic Church often has waited for more than a few generations before deciding that some new understanding being considered actually represents the enduring, untainted Truth as revealed by the Holy Spirit, purely and simply to avoid the influence and distortion of the fallen human vessels through which it is delivered. When the Pope speaks "ex cathedra", he is not speaking for himself or of his own knowledge and wisdom; he is the mouthpiece of the Church as it proclaims the Truth as it has been revealed by the Holy Spirit and then understood by the Church.

I don't believe any other denomination of Christianity, nor any other religion on earth, attempts to discern the Truth of God and the intent of the Holy Spirit with that level of humility or faithfulness.

Apple 12
3
Points
Apple 12 06/06/13 - 08:37 am
1
0
The Truth About Catholicism

What a beautiful letter! The Truth is in the history of the Church---one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Thanks be to God!

InChristLove
22485
Points
InChristLove 06/06/13 - 10:24 am
0
0
I'd like to address a

I'd like to address a statement dahreese made "There is not a single verse in the bible that indicates "three in one" nor backs that idea."

Once again dahreese, like always, you need to do more research.

Matthew 28:18-20 "And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, ‘All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. GO THEREFORE and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you, and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.’"

John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God [qeo;" h\\n oJ logo"]. And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us." (Jesus is God)

(Meaning God the Father and God the Son (who became flesh) are one.)

Acts 5:3-4 "But Peter said, ‘Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit, and to keep back some of the price of the land? While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not under your control? Why is it that you have conceived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men, but to God.’" (The Holy Spirit is God)

Galatians 4:6 "And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, "Abba! Father!"

If God (who is the Father) send the Spirit of His Son (son being Jesus) and they cry "Abba! Father!" (Which is God) then God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit is One who are manifest in different forms. God became flesh in the form of Jesus the Son, and became spirit, guidance, counselor, as the for of the Holy Spirit....the Trinity.

Believe it or don't believe it, is up to you but please if you are going to make a statement about what God isn't, please do your research and speak the truth, otherwise it's is heresy.

dahreese
4907
Points
dahreese 06/06/13 - 10:33 am
1
0
@Fiat_Lux 06/06/13 - 09:37
Unpublished

@Fiat_Lux 06/06/13 - 09:37 am

I will not have time today to get into this discussion. I agree that most Christians do not know the history of the Christian church, because the focus of the Church, on the whole, is about converting people from sin and observing the formalities of worship.

The Church intends to keep it that way.

There are few ministers, by whatever title, who are interested in teaching the true history of the Christian church. If they did, too many people would begin to learn that they do not need the Church as an intermediary.

Most folks forget that the first Christians were Jews, including Paul.

Also, the putting together the "books" of the "bible" was as much, or more, for political purposes as religious ones by a group of men who knew a lot less about the origins of those "books" than is known today.

Not alone, the Catholic church is BIG into national and international politics (and protected its butt during the reign of Hitler in Germany)

Too, some of the sayings of Catholic and Protestant ministers are downright ignorant, and embarrassing. Homosexuality, especially of late.

Fiat_Lux
16422
Points
Fiat_Lux 06/07/13 - 11:44 am
1
1
Dahreese, I'd really like to see some evidence

You say all these things as if they are absolutely the truth, but you don't offer a single source for your information. Who says the canon of the New Testament was decided upon simply as a political maneuver? I have no doubt that some people may have had political designs, but somehow, you seem to write off the influence of the Holy Spirit completely.

There are endless numbers of people who sincerely believe they are far more intelligent, sophisticated and well-informed than people of faith, especially mindless drones such as Catholics. It's a pity because closing that door to serious investigation and consideration pushes unbelievable riches out of reach for the skeptics. Still, with the gift of free will, it is an option--with consequences.

Nevertheless, even a skeptic such as yourself cannot seriously believe that every single Catholic priest and leader from Peter on has been motivated purely by greed, lust and other debased aspirations, with none of them striving to hear the Holy Spirit and serve God. You can't simply gloss over people like Ambrose and Aquinas and Francis of Assisi, to name just a few.

AutumnLeaves
10254
Points
AutumnLeaves 06/07/13 - 08:02 pm
1
0
Thank you,

Thank you all for a very lively and interesting discussion, especially those that did it respectfully. In their cases, I couldn't have said it better myself.

AutumnLeaves
10254
Points
AutumnLeaves 06/08/13 - 12:43 pm
1
0
"Fiat Lux", not sure I get

"Fiat Lux", not sure I get your meaning. You don't really believe Catholics are mindless drones, do you? I don't think you meant that, since it is obvious by your further comments that you know some of those great Catholic minds such as Thomas Aquinas, St. Francis of Assisi, etc.

Back to Top

Top headlines

Daniel Field removes trees, lights structures in airspace

Daniel Field, managed by operations company Augusta Aviation, has spent more than $30,000 conducting land surveys, removing 30 trees and installing red blinking lights on top of the Newman Tennis ...
Search Augusta jobs