43,000 denomination source

  • Thread starter Thread starter jttierney1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Louie1983 said:
Truth my friend, truth. There is only one version of it and it only resides in the Catholic church.
Click to expand...
You claim that there is only one version of truth? It seems to me that there are two versions:For examples:

What is the one truth about limbo? Is it true that unbaptized babies go to limbo as taught in the Baltimore catechism for many years?
What is the one truth about the Blood? Was the Blood shed for many or was the Blood shed for all?
What is the one truth about leavened bread? Should the Mass be said with leavened Bread or with unleavened Bread?
What is the one truth about the creed? Should the creed be said with the filioque or without the filioque?
What is the one truth about the reception of Holy Communion. Should the reception be in the hand or on the tongue?
What is the one truth about altar railings? Should a church have altar railings or not?
 
Louie1983 said:
Wrong again Tom.

These differences you refer are two Cardinals who are looking at different ways to bring the same message. Not changing the teaching itself.

The non denomination you refer have very different teachings on different issues. Again, I’ve mentioned it a number of times but you seem to ignore this because you don’t have a valid response. How can these denominations claim to be united under Christ when they teach different doctrines on different issues.

Truth my friend, truth. There is only one version of it and it only resides in the Catholic church.

I’m going to leave it there because we’re going in around in circles and you continously dodge important arguments that you simply have no response to.

May God bless you and keep you safe.
Click to expand...
There may be differences, but that does not make them different denominations.
 
Louie1983 said:
How can these denominations claim to be united under Christ when they teach different doctrines on different issues. .
Click to expand...
Just as Roman Catholics are united under Christ even though they have different teachings on limbo, leavened bread, married priests, altar railings, communion in the hand, whether or not to include the filioque in the creed, whether or not some marriage annulments are a dishonest Catholic divorce (Cardinal Kasper), whether the Blood was shed for many or for all, was Christ omniscient and know the day and the hour, capital punishment, burning at the stake, should a pope be married, etc.
 
Tomdstone said:
I already answered this several times. It is an exercise in futility to give the number of “denominations” because there is no agreed upon definition of the word. Further many Protestant groups believe that they are united under the leadership and Head of One Lord and Savior of the world, but some Catholics here refuse to recognize that and claim that they are not united but make up thousands of different denominations, without telling us what a denomination is.
Click to expand...
Many? Care to clarify why you can’t say “all” here?

Peace!!!
 
Tomdstone said:
Actually, no because the non-denominational church will teach that authoritarian hierarchicalism is unbiblical. It is taught that hierarchicalism is not based upon Scripture and it may stimulate latent tendencies in our fallen nature by leading to arrogance, selfish ambition, politicking, blame shifting, etc. The non-denominational church is not organized around authoritarian hierarchicalism, but is based on the authority of Scripture and the belief that Jesus is the One, Saviour of the world
Click to expand...
Tom - I know this is what they say… But the fact is that they have a pastor. They have a budget. They have bills. They own or rent a meeting space, they pay an electric bill, they typically pay there pastor and sometimes others. They have a chain of command and business structure, just like any other organization.

The Holy Spirit doesn’t negotiate the rent or purchase price of their building. The Holy Spirit doesn’t approve capital expenditures. Humans do.

So I can remove theology for this and still express that they have a hierarchy. They are their own denominations because they do NOT have a straight or dotted line to a local bishop like Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Anglicans, Methodists, etc. Nor are they members of a conference like the most Baptist denominations. They can hire or say whomever or whatever they want because they CLAIM they have no earthly authority. It they do… Their earthily authority is themselves.

The non-denominationals are denominations of one, whether they want to admit it or not. If I stopped being Catholic, I could open a non-denominational church on MY OWN authority and preach whatever I wanted about they Bible. People will either come and listen or they won’t, but I could do whatever I want on my own authority.
 
PRmerger said:
That’s the only thing, then.

And it’s a trenchant point.

You see what happens when folks divorce themselves from the Vicar of Christ…you get this obscenity of tens of thousands of different denominations.
Click to expand...
benhur said:
But that is a big thing, a real big thing (that P’s are unified in not being Catholic).
Click to expand...
Well, look at that One Unifying Factor of Protestantism and compare it to this(again, thanks to Tomdstone for assisting me in adding to it):

Abortion
Attend weekly services, don’t have to go to Church
Baptism—in Jesus’ name only, or Trinitarian? In a river? Sprinkling? Immersion? Sacrament or ordinance? Adult or infant?
Can men and women sit together during services?
Church leadership, or no leadership
Death/Soul Sleep
Divorce and remarriage
Drinking alcohol
Health and wealth gospel
Hell
Homosexuality
Is God‘s Holy Name Jehovah
Is it permissible for women to teach Scripture
Music in their worship services
Once saved, always saved
Ordination
Predestination
Rapture
Sola scriptura/private interpretation
The Eucharist
Tongues
Trinity
When to celebrate the Lord’s Day
Women’s ordination
Whether to say the filioque in their creed
Whether to use leavened bread
Whether to crown the married couple (really? That’s a funny one to dispute, but ok)
Whether to confer confirmation at the time of baptism, others wait later at about 12 or 13 years old.
Whether to have icons and not statues
Whether to use the guitar in their services.
Whether to receive Communion with a spoon, receiving both the Bread and Wine at the same moment.
Whether to allow married men as preachers
Whether to believe in limbo
Whether the fires of purgatory are equal to the fires of hell
Fasting regulations differ between denominations
Some Protestant churches have an altar rail, others do not.
Some Protestant churches allow Communion in the Hand, others do not.

And that’s not even an exhaustive list. I’m sure lots of folks could add all sorts of stuff to this.

So you can see how removing the authority of the Vicar of Christ leads to the chaos and confusion of the above. No one knows in the Protestant world whether baptism saves, is an ordinance, is to be done ONLY by immersion, by sprinkling, as an infant, as an adult, in Jesus’ name, in the Trinitarian formula…

All you do know is that you don’t need a pope to tell you what to believe.

And then you see its fruits…:eek:
 
Tomdstone said:
Similarly with Protestants, AFAIK, that they allow for differences as long as it does not undermine the understanding that Jesus Christ is the Lord and Savior and Head of the Church. Just as with Catholics, these differences in belief will not necessarily correspond to an essentially different “denomination.”
Click to expand...
Absolutely incorrect. It is not similar at all.

With the CC, we know where to look when there are disputes in theology: we have the magisterium to speak definitively.

With Protestantism, when folks disagree (see below), all they need to do is …

start their own church…

which, leads to chaos, confusion, and tens of thousands of differing denominations.
Abortion
Attend weekly services, don’t have to go to Church
Baptism—in Jesus’ name only, or Trinitarian? In a river? Sprinkling? Immersion? Sacrament or ordinance? Adult or infant?
Can men and women sit together during services?
Church leadership, or no leadership
Death/Soul Sleep
Divorce and remarriage
Drinking alcohol
Health and wealth gospel
Hell
Homosexuality
Is God‘s Holy Name Jehovah
Is it permissible for women to teach Scripture
Music in their worship services
Once saved, always saved
Ordination
Predestination
Rapture
Sola scriptura/private interpretation
The Eucharist
Tongues
Trinity
When to celebrate the Lord’s Day
Women’s ordination
Whether to say the filioque in their creed
Whether to use leavened bread
Whether to crown the married couple (really? That’s a funny one to dispute, but ok)
Whether to confer confirmation at the time of baptism, others wait later at about 12 or 13 years old.
Whether to have icons and not statues
Whether to use the guitar in their services.
Whether to receive Communion with a spoon, receiving both the Bread and Wine at the same moment.
Whether to allow married men as preachers
Whether to believe in limbo
Whether the fires of purgatory are equal to the fires of hell
Fasting regulations differ between denominations
Some Protestant churches have an altar rail, others do not.
Some Protestant churches allow Communion in the Hand, others do not.
Click to expand...
 
Louie1983 said:
Are you serious?

How is having different teachings on abortion, Gay Marriage, Women Priests and others not undermining That Jesus is Lord and Saviour of all when they are all clearly condemned in the Bible? (and for us Catholics just as importantly against sacred tradition).

They are different because they teach different Doctrines.
Click to expand...
Egg-zactly.

Jimmy Akin addresses the Tu Quoque fallacy here:

go2gbo.com/forums/religious-discussion/the-essentials-of-christianity/
Because of the difficulties with the “unity in essentials” argument, its advocates typically do not attempt to defend it on its merits. Instead, they commonly resort to a form of tu quoque (Latin, “You are also!”) argument in which they attempt to tar Catholics with similar disunity.
Click to expand...
For example, they might say, “Look at the Dominicans and the Jesuits. They typically hold different views of predestination. This shows that Catholics as well as Protestants disagree on essentials, and thus are no more credible than Protestants.”
Click to expand...
In response, a number of points may be made: First, Catholicism has a functioning magisterium that can decide that these matters are not essential differences. Second, the relevant schools adhere to the teachings of the magisterium and, if their views were reprobated, would accept the results (or cease to be faithful Catholics). Third, the differences between Catholic schools of thought have nowhere near the magnitude of the difference among Protestant schools. Compared to the differences among Protestant groups, differences among orthodox Catholic groups are trivial.
Finally, the fact that the Catholic Church has a magisterium means that there can be—and on the most important theological matters there is—an official Catholic position. There is no parallel standard in Protestant circles that can speak for Protestantism.
Click to expand...
 
Tomdstone said:
You claim that there is only one version of truth? It seems to me that there are two versions:For examples:

What is the one truth about limbo? Is it true that unbaptized babies go to limbo as taught in the Baltimore catechism for many years? ** Never an official teaching from the Magisterium. Yes, it was taught by the Bishops in America. And perhaps others, but it was NEVER declared by the Church as official. It was not accepted by all Bishops and never declared by the Pope or a council or synod. The Baltimore Catechism was not a Church wide Catechism like the current one **
What is the one truth about the Blood? Was the Blood shed for many or was the Blood shed for all? Context and syntax. It was shed for all of Humanity, but not everyone will go to Heaven.
What is the one truth about leavened bread? Should the Mass be said with leavened Bread or with unleavened Bread? it doesn’t matter to Jesus. But it matters to us for the Liturgical Symbolism in the Mass or Divine Liturgy. In the Rites that use unleavened bread, they so it because Jesus most likely broke unleavened Bread during the Last Supper. The Rites that do not use unleavened bread are emphasizing that Jesus comes to us in ordinary, everyday things. Neither is wrong. It simply has to do with different symbolism used during the Liturgy.
What is the one truth about the creed? Should the creed be said with the filioque or without the filioque? this issue is beating on a dead horse. Catholics have declared for centuries what we believe and this was accepted by the Patriarch of Constantinople in the 1400s. It has to do with the Greek vs Latin translations. The EO accepts the explanation of “from the Father through the Son.” But we don’t want to change it because we don’t want to then have to re-explain the relationship of the Trinity. **
What is the one truth about the reception of Holy Communion. Should the reception be in the hand or on the tongue? ** this is discipline. There is evidence that suggests that the first century Christians received it in the hand. Which is what the Church was trying to get to for hundreds of years. But it wasn’t until they found some historical documents back in the 1930s that gave them a better understanding of how the very early Church performed the liturgy.
What is the one truth about altar railings? Should a church have altar railings or not? ** discipline not Divine Revelation. Personally, I love altar rails because it allows me to kneel and close my eyes at the altar to better pray and prepare myself to receive Christ. But it’s not impossible prepare oneself to receive Christ in the Communion line. **
Click to expand...
See my responses above in bold.
 
The Catholic Church Catechism is the source of our beliefs. So you can go into parishes and find individuals who are not embracing the fullness of their Catholic faith. Our parish is now working on this…and we are now looking at bringing in a parish program that will address all the errors.

Limbo was never a doctrine of faith.

The Latin and Eastern Churches were founded by the apostles.

Protestantism came about 1500 years later. Gutenberg was a Catholic, the inventor of the printing press. There are a number of derivatives of bibles that came out from this split. As we learn Scripture as the Living Word of God…the Word Made Flesh…Ordinary Sunday is the greatest feast of the Church, not Easter or Christmas. It is called Resurrection Sunday. What the Church did after the Reformation was to have all missalettes used at Sunday Mass now printed with all the same wording throughout the entire Church in Latin…I am not sure when the vernacular was added…but in those days most people could not read.

The Roman Missal was promulgated way back in the 1500’s and in use up to 1965. According to Pope Benedict, it was never intended to be removed and he was shocked when those did that. It was subversive elements within Vatican II that brought in all sorts of dissension leading up to Cafeteria Catholics, which is essentially based on materialism…we have it so good affluent wise in contrast to the rest of the world, we can do what we want with no consequences.

I wonder how many Protestants back at the beginning of the Reformation could read.

There are Latin rite churches that fell into schism but also returned, thinking of the Ethiopian churches.

Right now…most likely because of the rise of Islam and all that contradicts the 10 commandments, the Orthodox are responding to P Francis to come together to meet regularly.
 
Louie1983 said:
Diversity: Yes. By diversity I mean different customs and traditions in the church yet presenting the same universal* truth* that is found in The Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
You mean the same universal truths plural ? For surely you have many truths, not just one. And it is still expanding (e.g. Marion doctrine etc.). I say this because when you try to be explicit on more and more things you naturally push the limit of infallibility, and run the risk of losing universality, losing members, as happened somewhat with orthodoxy and protestantism.

Again, the Nicene Council (325AD) had about a page of canons , where as as Trent Council (1500’s) has pages and pages of canons.
Denial of doctrine or rejection of doctrine revealed to us by Christ through his Holy Catholic church on the other hand…
Click to expand...
Yes , a risky business, as is declaring doctrine, infallibly at that.

Blessings
 
Louie1983 said:
Yes, True.

Hence why we have one Church founded by Christ, Governed on earth by The Pope who has the gift of infallibility (on faith and morals) to guide us. Not X number of denominations claiming to be the truth yet splinter off into countless sections.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is the scenario today. It is the old, monarchal , authoritarian vs oligarchal, democratic model (for lack of better words). Both have pros and cons. His kingdom is certainly top down and not democratic. There is no "con’’ when He truly reigns. Last I heard His kingdom has not completely subdued Satan and his minions, that they are still in the picture. So to claim infallibility in divine connection to declared truth is problematic. Possible perfection absolutely, but also conditional. For the conditionality to be met in one man as Vicar is problematic but less so with councils etc. I like the number twelve and I think God does also. I also like the Holy Spirit as His Vicar . I liken Him to the powerful yet invisible "axis’’ the Earth spins on. Nothing mechanical to maintain or break down yet all kept in place by His Word.

Anyways, that is why we look forward to His second coming, even to our "changing’’, for then no more conditionality, and we will and be just like Him and His governance will have no rival and truly and visibly be infallible.

Blessings
 
PRmerger said:
Well, look at that One Unifying Factor of Protestantism and compare it to this(again, thanks to Tomdstone for assisting me in adding to it):

Abortion
Attend weekly services, don’t have to go to Church
Baptism—in Jesus’ name only, or Trinitarian? In a river? Sprinkling? Immersion? Sacrament or ordinance? Adult or infant?
Can men and women sit together during services?
Church leadership, or no leadership
Death/Soul Sleep
Divorce and remarriage
Drinking alcohol
Health and wealth gospel
Hell
Homosexuality
Is God‘s Holy Name Jehovah
Is it permissible for women to teach Scripture
Music in their worship services
Once saved, always saved
Ordination
Predestination
Rapture
Sola scriptura/private interpretation
The Eucharist
Tongues
Trinity
When to celebrate the Lord’s Day
Women’s ordination
Whether to say the filioque in their creed
Whether to use leavened bread
Whether to crown the married couple (really? That’s a funny one to dispute, but ok)
Whether to confer confirmation at the time of baptism, others wait later at about 12 or 13 years old.
Whether to have icons and not statues
Whether to use the guitar in their services.
Whether to receive Communion with a spoon, receiving both the Bread and Wine at the same moment.
Whether to allow married men as preachers
Whether to believe in limbo
Whether the fires of purgatory are equal to the fires of hell
Fasting regulations differ between denominations
Some Protestant churches have an altar rail, others do not.
Some Protestant churches allow Communion in the Hand, others do not.

And that’s not even an exhaustive list. I’m sure lots of folks could add all sorts of stuff to this.
Click to expand...
Whew ! I am tired just reading the list.:coolinoff: Good thing Protestantism is not a church. Can you imagine if within my parish, church, fellowship, even denomination we had all those differences? I mean I don’t mind a little flexibility, but I am also more comfortable with conformity and uniformity .
So you can see how removing the authority of the Vicar of Christ leads to the chaos and confusion of the above.
Click to expand...
Yes, very true. But you also had some confusion (varied views) from day one, not just beginning at 1500. But yes, certainly mushroomed.

It has also been said when a P pastor leaves a church or passes away the church folds for lack of structure or foundation. I would ask what kind of Christians (Catholic also) are we that if we take away our leader we fall apart ? Granted we need shepherding, but to a point, and we are to mature. That is discipleship, not just “membership”. My point is that in the Catholic old days maybe this immaturity or weakness was veiled in many with the conformity/membership. We had that same challenge in our country where we were once predominantly a Christian society , that is there was conformity to the church. But was it real for many or just "cultural’ ? Like today in the West if you are Christian it is probably because you are Christian, and certainly not because you are conforming to social, political dictates and norms.
No one knows in the Protestant world whether baptism saves, is an ordinance, is to be done ONLY by immersion, by sprinkling, as an infant, as an adult, in Jesus’ name, in the Trinitarian formula…
Click to expand...
Again, Protestantism is not a church. And certainly a particular P church will have baptismal ordinances as does your church.
All you do know is that you don’t need a pope to tell you what to believe.
Click to expand...
Partly depends on the stage of your disciplship and what the pope is saying to believe.
And then you see its fruits…:eek:
Click to expand...
Partly agreed. A non bulls eye on a matter is not cool. And there are a lot of non bulls eye beliefs and practices under the umbrella of Protestantism. Good thing there are not so many in my church and maybe none in yours.

Blessings
 
phil19034 said:
See my responses above in bold.
Click to expand...
The claim is that there is one version of truth. What is the one version of truth with reference to burning at the stake? Does the Holy Spirit want heretics to be burned at the stake?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top