A question for some Protestants who feel it is necessary to proselytize Catholics

[Hisalone]

Do you disagree with the Catechism’s statement that it is the parents’ job to raise up the child in the faith?

I believe we are commanded to honor our mother and our father.
The post was offensive. My prayers go out to you. I pray that God blesses you and your family, gives you good health and prospers your way. In Jesus’ name.

 

[PRmerger]

I believe we are commanded to honor our mother and our father.
The post was offensive. My prayers go out to you. I pray that God blesses you and your family, gives you good health and prospers your way. In Jesus’ name.

Thank you. I need your prayers.

Now, if you are offended by the CC saying that it’s the parents’ job to raise up the child in his faith then you are offended by Scripture, then? For I am certain that you know which verse the Catechism is referring to.

 

[eucharisteo]

I believe we are commanded to honor our mother and our father.
The post was offensive. My prayers go out to you. I pray that God blesses you and your family, gives you good health and prospers your way. In Jesus’ name.

I don’t get why you would be offended. Parents are responsible for teaching their children. Joesph was a good father and taught Jesus. Christians, like Jewish parents area also required to “raise up a child” in the Lord. Maybe I missed something.

 

[Dokimas]

Fundamentalist are very very judgmental and condemning towards anyone that does not accept their authority and indoctrination.

This statement reminds me of some catholics here on CAF. They fit this description pretty well.

 

[Dokimas]

Right. As we have said before, Doki, there is nothing inherently sinful about eating meat on Friday. The sin lies in the DISOBEDIENCE.

I know you have said that before. I’ve tried to point out that being disobedient to 1 Tim 4 is what I’m referring to.

 

[Dokimas]

I bet there’s* hundreds* of thousands of different answers, Dokimas. Mathematically, that’s the possibility. Actually, it’s in the millions.

It’s a factorial equation, written as 28! (For there were 28 different “issues” I listed)

Example: 4! means 4 x 3 x 2 x 1

so 28! means 28 x 27 x 26 x 25 etc etc etc

So, to find combinations when order doesn’t matter, say how many combinations of 3 letters could be made from 10 letters, we use this formula nCr or 10C3.

However, we don’t have a certain # of ways, so we have to do this for all the numbers up to 28…

21C1
21C2
21C3
etc etc etc!!

Mind boggling!

Just what the Devil ordered, in my opinion!

(Thanks to my DD, who enjoys math problems such as this! )

I guess we’re getting no where with this one. Time to move on.

 

[guanophore]

I have believed as you now believe. I have studied as you have studied. I now look past and have come to a different understanding.

Clearly you have a different understanding, but I dont’ think you ever had Catholic faith. You may have thought you did, but your posts make it clear that you never understood the Catholic faith. I did not either, when I left the church to become a fundamentalist.

This is why many say that what the RCC is now does not look anything like the 1st century church.

The Catholic Church is not “Roman”.

The first century Church was not “Roman”.

It is likely that you do not recognize the similarities because you are a “bible christian”. Those who have departed from the Apostolic faith, and have extracted their notions of the Church from the NT often have trouble recognizing that the Catholic faith is the same as the Church Jesus founded that is written about in the NT.

That is why Jesus has sent us The Helper. He does not lie.

No, He does not lie. Neither does He lead an individual in the opposite direction than He has already led the Church.

I think that those Catholics that dont know God need a knowledge of Him.

Technically speaking, it is not possible to be Catholic without having an intimate relation with Christ. Persons who claim to be Catholic but do not have this,are “nominal” (in name only) but are not Catholic. Like Paul said, “a Jew is one who is a Jew inwardly”.

For many Catholics bible study begins and ends with those verses that they believe justifies them.

Catholics begin bible study with the knowledge that Jesus gave Peter the duty to feed and care for the sheep?

I guess I don’t see why this is a problem.

How is it Catholics believe they are justified by the Petrine gifts?

Catholics who understand their faith know they are justified by grace, through faith.

 

[guanophore]

Does your soul magnify the Lord? Is not Mary the example we all should follow?

I pray daily that I can be more like Mary to the extent that her soul magnified Him.

Did she not say "Do whatever He tells you?

Indeed. This is why looking to her will never lead us astray.

At anytime did Jesus tell you to ask Mary for help? Jesus always taught us to be directed to the Fatherfor our help. Why do you dishonor Mary by not following her example and doing as Jesus has taught?

I think the answers to this are in the story of the wedding feast at Cana. Where did they go with their problem? Why did they not go “directly” to Jesus? They brought their problem to Mary, and she brought it to Christ.

Jesus solved the problem over and above the need. Why is this story included in the gospel? Could it be that Jesus is ready to give an overabundance to His Mother?

What split the church was pridefull men disregarded Gods word and attempted to lead Gods people from a position of their own sin.

Indeed, sin always has the effect of division and wounding.

The need of men for Reform is basic. Where Luther got off track is thinking that the Teaching of the Apostles needed to be changed, rather than the corrupted persons who had distorted it.

The Sacred Scriptures should never be read in isolation from the Teachings that produced them.

Lectio Divina begs to differ.

No, not at all His. Lectio Divina is firmly rooted in the Teaching of the Church.

 

[guanophore]

I absolutely agree with your statement, although I would not agree with the idea that the RCC = the Church of Jesus Christ. That is not to say that Roman Catholics are not Christian (and don’t interpret my words that way).

The Catholic Church is not “Roman”.

What I am saying is that the Church is bigger than the Roman Catholic Church.  From the perspective of non-Catholic Christians (except for those who don't think you can be Catholic and Christian!), Catholics comprise part of Christ's Church, not the totality of it.  That is a major rub between us.

I don’t know why this rubs you. Are you rubbed because the Catholic Church teaches this?

You said that you couldn't "wrap your brain" around my question.  The problem I have with the idea of someone like Pope John XII, for example, being the Vicar of Christ:  a person who lives the kind of lifestyle that he did has no business being in any position of spiritual authority.  Even Catholics will go so far to state that the man probably went to hell, as his sins were so grievous.

We are out of order to make statements about anyone being in hell.

Peter was not the paragon of virtue either. The gifts and the call of God are based upon His grace, not our worthiness of them. President Nixon was still the President, though His actions disgraced the office he occupied.

None of those that God has called to His service have been appointed because they “deserved” it. Look at Moses! King David?

Jesus said that we will know men by their fruits. John XII’s fruits were wicked in the extreme. That man bore no fruit whatsoever that he was a follower of Christ, and unless he repented before his death, I don’t see how he could possibly go to heaven.

God can work through a donkey!

*As we both have agreed:  If you are not a follower of Christ, you are not a part of Christ's Church.*  And yet John XII occupied an office that the RCC states makes that person Christ's representative on earth--and that he was a lawful successor to Peter.  *I can't "wrap my brain" around that. *  How can a person who is not a member of Christ's Church legitimately be the Vicar of Christ?

We are not in a position to judge the state of his soul. God allows evil that greater good may come of it.

  Did holding an office suddenly make the man part of Christ's Church?  Or does the Catholic Church believe that even a person who is not a part of Christ's Body (i.e., is not truly a Christian) can *legitimately* hold spiritual authority over true Christians?

Legitimate authority is not dependent upon the impeccability of the office holder. For example, Jesus constantly castigated the Scribes and Pharisees, but He told His discples “do whatsoever they tell you because they sit on the seat of Moses”. They were hypocrites and evildoers, but Jesus said to do as they said, not as they did. He upheld the authority they had been given.

Yes, if God can speak through a donkey, he can speak through any human being, at any given point in time. And that means that He can even speak through an ungodly pope. But that does not mean that we should put a donkey in a position of spiritual authority and regard him as though he were God’s chosen vessel to lead His people.

You won’t get an arguement from me on that point! We have been blessed to have holy popes through the last century.

I am not stating that all popes (or even most popes) have been ungodly people.  But during the period that the RCC held political power, there were too many that were corrupt.

Are you saying that people should abandon Jesus because of the actions of Judas?

I am not going to go so far as to say that all of them were not Christian; but at the very least, they were not fit to hold a spiritual office.

I have my hands full working out my own fitness to judge them.

I can understand why a disgusted Savanarola called the Chair of Peter "vacant" during the rule of the ungodly Pope Alexander VI.  I simply don't understand why the Catholic Church doesn't share Savanarola's perspective on the matter.

For the same reason Jesus did not declare the seat of MOses vacant.

 

[guanophore]

I have not forgoten the promises to Cephas or any of the apostles.
All of them are a far cry from “Pope”

Perhaps they are a far cry from your perception of Pope. But the office of the Pope is based in the Petrine gifts.

Why would you say that?

Because people that understand and practice Lectio know that we do not read and pray scripture in isolation from the Teaching of the Church. When you say things like this, it becomes clear that you never understood the Catholic faith.

How many Protestants are familiar with Lecitio Divina and spell it right?

Not nearly enough!

How many are familiar with first friday and first saturday devotions?

I am glad you are, but that still does not mean you understand the Catholic faith.

The Pagan Romans wrote about CAtholicism “they drown their children and eat their God”. These are true statements, but it does not mean they understood.

How many are familiar with Sister Faustina and Divine Mercy? How many Protestants have read Thomas Merton?

Not nearly enough!

It has been 18+ since I was a practicing Catholic but I know these things because** I LIVED them.**If I could say one thing on this board that Catholics would hear it would be this.

Apparently going through a form of godliness while denying the power thereof. I did the same thing.

Catholics put aside all your other devotions and practice Lecitio Divina and Contempletive prayer.

I just read another post where you claim you are not here to proselytize. However, here you presume to give spiritual instruction to Catholics on how they should conduct their devotional life.

Lectio Divina and contempletive prayer are not practiced apart from what the HS has already revealed to the Church.

 

[guanophore]

Your statement that all the bulls I mentioned were directed to Protestants is untrue. The dates of a number of the bulls (Unam Sanctum, for example) pre-dated the Protestant Reformation.

This is true, but heresy has always been present. If you look at the historical context of the documents, it is clear that they are responses to error and schism.

The historical background behind the Boniface VIII's bull was nothing more or less than a power struggle between himself and the king of France.  It had nothing to do with heretical teachings.

Well, keep reading!

Pope Eugene IV–from “Cantate Domino”–“It [the Church] firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics ***and schismatics ***cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart ‘into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels’ [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

This was written in 1441–after the Great Schism of 1054 and prior to the Protestant Reformation begun by Luther in 1517. Note that the pope states that heretic and schismatics suffer the same punishment: damnation.

This is the teaching of the Apostles.

There were plenty of heresies already rampant prior to the “Reformation”.

Since Eastern Orthodox are regarded as schismatics by the RCC, do not the Eastern Orthodox suffer the fate described in Eugene IV's bull?

The anathamas were rescinded by both sides when they realized that the schism resulted from misunderstandings and human pride. The issues were not doctrinal.

 

[guanophore]

I am saying forced fast violated 1 Timothy 4

Well, since fasting is a spiritual discipline that can only be entered into willingly, then that leaves you without much to say, does it not?

One cannot be coerced into serving God, or making spiritual devotions.

Fasting is a method of sharpening one’s spiritual perceptions through the denial of the flesh. One cannot be “forced” into relationship with God.

And authority should NOT go against the Bible or, IMO, they should not be followed.

What you are saying is that authority should not go against how you understand the bible. you refuse to follow someone who understands what scripture says differnently than you do. You have made yourself your own authority.

Catholics were forced to refrain from eating meat or they’d be sinning.

Sorry Doki, but no one can force anyone into a spiritual experience. It is just not possible.

A person cannot be forced into sin, either. If someone is compulsed to engage in an act, by force, then they are not responsible for the deed. That is why Jesus said “he who delivered me to you has the greater sin”.

Agreed; so why did the CC miss the verse?

The fact that Catholics understand the scriptures differently than you does not mean they “missed the verse”. The Catholic church does not forbidmarriage, or command that eating any food is wrong.

Do you remember what the converts did after they were baptized on Pentecost? They devoted themselves to something…remember what?

Do you think they were "forced’ to do this?

 

[guanophore]

I believe we are commanded to honor our mother and our father.
The post was offensive. My prayers go out to you. I pray that God blesses you and your family, gives you good health and prospers your way. In Jesus’ name.

Honoring includes regarding truthfully. Some of us had a dismal example of Christianity in our families. This is a fact, and if it is offensive, it is because people fall short of the glory of God.

Catholic parents who bring their children to baptism make promises to God to raise the child in the faith. Many then forget, or don’t have the skills to keep their commitment. Some fall into sin, which injures their children as well.

Some of us who were wounded in this way thought the answer was to leave the Church. We were mistaken.

 

[guanophore]

I know you have said that before. I’ve tried to point out that being disobedient to 1 Tim 4 is what I’m referring to.

Yes, but since the guidelines for fasting are something different, the verse really has no relevance here. No food is forbidden.

I guess we’re getting no where with this one. Time to move on.

You are right. Your rejection of a communal fast and attempt to characterize it as forbidding the eating of certain foods is not going to work on any Catholic here. It is simply a mischaracterization of the facts, and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the Teaching of the Apostles.

I encourage a reading of the Didache. Perhaps you can try convincing us that the Apostles were forbidding food because they urged fasting?

 

[PRmerger]

I guess we’re getting no where with this one. Time to move on.

That’s fine.

But the point has been made that mathematically, just from that list I made of 28 different issues, there can be a very, very big number of different combinations of understandings of them. We could then see how a very, very big number of denominations could exist, each teaching their own combination of that list.

 

[wmscott]

I know you have said that before. I’ve tried to point out that being disobedient to 1 Tim 4 is what I’m referring to.

Did you even read what I posted regarding 1 Timothy 4, or is it because it does not support your argument you are going to ignore and keep up with your incorrect personal interpretation of that reference. Go back and read post 458-460 and then tell me how you can stick to your story of forced fasting.

 

[Sword_Brethren]

When I get to heaven it will be because of the grace and the mercy of God

You all ready know you are going to Heaven when you die?

St. Luke 13: 24 "Strive to enter by the narrow gate; for many, I say to you, shall seek to enter, and shall not be able. 25 But when the master of the house shall be gone in, and shall shut the door, you shall begin to stand without, and knock at the door, saying: Lord, open to us. And he answering, shall say to you: I know you not, whence you are.

24 “Shall seek”… Shall desire to be saved; but for want of taking sufficient pains, and being thoroughly in earnest, shall not attain to it.

26 Then you shall begin to say: We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets. 27 And he shall say to you: I know you not, whence you are: depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity."

Our Lord will say to many “I know you not” even to those who say Lord, Lord.

 

[Sword_Brethren]

I know what you believe. I understand what the RCC teaches. I attended many a first friday vigil.
What you believe and what you understand is not what Jesus taught. It is not what the bible taught.

What you believe and are teaching here is not what Our Lord Jesus taught or what is biblical.

 

[Sword_Brethren]

I first came to CAF out of curiosity I stayed to defend Non Catholic beliefs that are constantly under attck. in a nonCatholic forum.

Yes a non-Catholic forum on a Catholic site.

 

[benidict]

his alone…it is hard for thee to kick against the goad…