are non catholic religions getting farther away from the Truth?

[JRKH]

very much so. but i wonder where they got the idea that the CC is just another denomination like all others. perhaps they can tell us.

:bowdown: :byzsoc:

I have been struggling with this somewhat also. One issue might have to do with the actual definition of the Word “Denomination”.

American Heritage Dictionary Defines Denomination as:

1. A large group of religious congregations united under a common faith and name and organized under a single administrative and legal hierarchy.
2. One of a series of kinds, values, or sizes, as in a system of currency or weights: Cash registers have compartments for bills of different denominations. The stamps come in 25¢ and 45¢ denominations.
3. A name or designation, especially for a class or group.

From this we can see that, regardless of the fact the Catholicism is the Original Christian Church, it still fits definition 1 and definition 3 here.

Denomination comes from Denominate, which is: To give a name to; designate

Here again we see that Catholicism can, quite correctly, be called a denomination.

Having clarified the definitions above, it seems that the problem for Catholics with this term is that it implies “Just another”, as in, “Just another denomination within Chistianity”.
This, of course is not the case, for the Catholic Church is the Root and trunk of Christianity. All Christian Churches, and especially those in the west, must trace their roots back through Catholicism, even if it is only because they got their Bible from the Catholic Church.

Just my 2c

Peace
James

 

[bpbasilphx]

**The truth is the “Word of God”. Teach and preach the Word of God like Baptist do and you will never be getting farther away from the truth.

---

Forever Baptist
allischalmers**

**But Baptists don’t preach the Word of God. They preach Baptist doctrine.

I know, because I was a Baptist before I got saved.

Where in the Bible are Sunday Schools, revivals, invitation hymns, and altar calls?

Where in the Biblie did people say prayers to pieces of cloth like they did when I was a Baptist?

**

 

[wisdomseeker]

I have been struggling with this somewhat also. One issue might have to do with the actual definition of the Word “Denomination”.

From this we can see that, regardless of the fact the Catholicism is the Original Christian Church, it still fits definition 1 and definition 3 here.

Here again we see that Catholicism can, quite correctly, be called a denomination.

Having clarified the definitions above, it seems that the problem for Catholics with this term is that it implies “Just another”, as in, “Just another denomination within Chistianity”.
This, of course is not the case, for the Catholic Church is the Root and trunk of Christianity. All Christian Churches, and especially those in the west, must trace their roots back through Catholicism, even if it is only because they got their Bible from the Catholic Church.

Just my 2c

Peace
James

yes, but still does not explain where they got the idea of naming the CC. since the CC has no name. there is no identifiable name for which this Church is under.
i was wonder if that is what they been taught by their own congregations to disregard the True Church is just another church egual to theirs. or if it is their believe related to that the Church fell of the earth right after the apostles.

Glory be to God in the Highest and Peace to His People on earth.

 

[fbl9]

in relation to the posts regarding denominations.it depends to which theory one ascribes to. ie “the trail of blood” or we are linked to the apostles by spirit,which all baptised persons are (in theory, ) linked by the same spirit.or should be…it would be very confusing,well to me, if everyone called themselves catholics,without a label to define their doctrines so to speak…many if not all (ncc) churchs believe they are the true universal church.baptists who ascribe to the “trail of blood” claim the reason for no physical evidence of their past is because the Catholic church destroyed that evidence.lol…

 

[wisdomseeker]

in relation to the posts regarding denominations.it depends to which theory one ascribes to. ie “the trail of blood” or we are linked to the apostles by spirit,which all baptised persons are (in theory, ) linked by the same spirit.or should be…it would be very confusing,well to me, if everyone called themselves catholics,without a label to define their doctrines so to speak…many if not all (ncc) churchs believe they are the true universal church.baptists who ascribe to the “trail of blood” claim the reason for no physical evidence of their past is because the Catholic church destroyed that evidence.lol…

I see.

meaning the same Spirit that tells the CC that the Body and Blood of Christ is True in the Eucharist is the same Spirit that tells the other true churches that it is not.

:bowdown:

 

[fbl9]

I see.

meaning the same Spirit that tells the CC that the Body and Blood of Christ is True in the Eucharist is the same Spirit that tells the other true churches that it is not.

:bowdown:

which spirit convicts one of their sins causing them to repent and to live to serve God?when one cleans their house it needs to be filled with something diferent or else they will end up worse. too bad some don’t recognize this and realize that what they have let in is a spirit of deception which leads them on their path,even though they are trying to serve God.which is better to try and serve God or just wallow in sin?IOW if one is not in the true church (Catholic) are they better off being a baptist or an all out sinner?

 

[Contarini]

The other day my protestant friend told me she was upset with the holy father Ben XVI because he said there is only One True Church.

Now, is it a believe among other religions that the CC is just another denomination? how long has this been going on?

I’m truly baffled by this. If Protestants thought you were the One True Church, they would obviously cease to be Protestants. Just what do you imagine Protestants used to think?

As a matter of fact, Protestants generally used to think that your Communion was the Church of Antichrist and was thus no true church at all. (There was never a time when every Protestant believed this, but it was the dominant view for several centuries.) The view that you are one more denomination is a much more favorable view.

However, in one sense you may be right that this takes Protestants farther away from traditional ecclesiology. A “denominational” view of the Church makes the Creedal affirmation of belief in “one, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church” an empty mockery. In a way, Protestants were perhaps closer to Catholic ecclesiological claims when they denied the validity of Catholicism outright.

Is it the CC’s fault in letting this believe perpetuate throughout our generations?

Well, it’s not as if the Catholic Church didn’t *try *to stamp Protestantism out!

Fortunately for the rest of us, the Catholic Church has concluded that coercive methods are not legitimate means of fighting doctrinal error. I hope you are not suggesting that this was a mistake!

Edwin

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Well, it’s not as if the Catholic Church didn’t *try *to stamp Protestantism out!

Fortunately for the rest of us, the Catholic Church has concluded that coercive methods are not legitimate means of fighting doctrinal error. I hope you are not suggesting that this was a mistake!

Edwin

Hello Edwin,

I’ve heard others say this before but have not found any documentation to back this claim up. Can you please provide some specific sources where I can read up on this?

May the peace of the Lord be with you.
Prodigal Son1

 

[Contarini]

Hello Edwin,

I’ve heard others say this before but have not found any documentation to back this claim up. Can you please provide some specific sources where I can read up on this?

May the peace of the Lord be with you.
Prodigal Son1

Which part of my claim are you challenging? That the Catholic Church once tried to stamp Protestantism out? Or that it has now concluded that coercion is a mistake?

For the latter, see Vatican II’s document Dignitatis Humanae.

Edwin

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Which part of my claim are you challenging? That the Catholic Church once tried to stamp Protestantism out? Or that it has now concluded that coercion is a mistake?

For the latter, see Vatican II’s document Dignitatis Humanae.

Edwin

Actually, I was interested in reading something on your innuendo of the Catholic Church trying to stamp protesantism out. Do you have any sources for these charges?

Please do not take offense at my questions. I truly believe all believers of Christ are connected through that belief inspite of our differences.

May the peace of the Lord be with you.
Prodigal Son1

 

[JRKH]

yes, but still does not explain where they got the idea of naming the CC. since the CC has no name. there is no identifiable name for which this Church is under.

I suppose this could get to be a rather lengthy discussion as to how the various groups came to be called - - Whatever.
I know that when I go to Church I go to a “Roman Catholic Church”. This is not something that someone else calls it, it is right on the sign outside of Church, so I’m not sure what you mean when you say above, “does not explain where they got the idea of naming the CC.”

i was wonder if that is what they been taught by their own congregations to disregard the True Church is just another church egual to theirs. or if it is their believe related to that the Church fell of the earth right after the apostles.

I think to a large extent this is true.
We are painting with a very broad brush here, but in today’s society where there are multiple Christian Churches, many with a long history, and most clinging exlusively to the same book, it would be easy for someone to simply see the Catholic Church as just one among many.
It’s only when people look into the histories and foundations of faith that the Truth can be found, that the Catholic Church is the Original Church that Crist Founded.

Peace
James

 

[wisdomseeker]

I suppose this could get to be a rather lengthy discussion as to how the various groups came to be called - - Whatever.
I know that when I go to Church I go to a “Roman Catholic Church”. This is not something that someone else calls it, it is right on the sign outside of Church, so I’m not sure what you mean when you say above, “does not explain where they got the idea of naming the CC.”

I think to a large extent this is true.
We are painting with a very broad brush here, but in today’s society where there are multiple Christian Churches, many with a long history, and most clinging exlusively to the same book, it would be easy for someone to simply see the Catholic Church as just one among many.
It’s only when people look into the histories and foundations of faith that the Truth can be found, that the Catholic Church is the Original Church that Crist Founded.

Peace
James

I should also have point out that my friend told me that Roman catholic Church did not exist at the time of St Augustine. when i point out to her what St Augustine had to say about the CC.

So, they are probably confused with the word Rome. the CC only has the name rome on it when it is close to an orthodox church as to differenciate from the other. that is what i have seen.
Perhaps they do not know the history of the Rites between orthodox and catholics.

i leave at that.

 

[JRKH]

I should also have point out that my friend told me that Roman catholic Church did not exist at the time of St Augustine. when i point out to her what St Augustine had to say about the CC.

So, they are probably confused with the word Rome. the CC only has the name rome on it when it is close to an orthodox church as to differenciate from the other. that is what i have seen.
**Perhaps they do not know the history of the Rites between orthodox and catholics. **

i leave at that.

I believe that you have hit it on the head here. Many protestants view the different rites within the Church as somehow the same thing as different Churches.
It’s a matter of your educating your friend gently on how the church developed into the different rites, yet are still all Catholic.

Peace
James

 

[Contarini]

Actually, I was interested in reading something on your innuendo of the Catholic Church trying to stamp protesantism out. Do you have any sources for these charges?

It’s not a charge. It’s an unquestioned historical fact. People in the sixteenth century wouldn’t have thought that it was a “charge”–it was an obvious moral duty to try to stamp out heresy.

If you want one particular source that summarizes how people thought about these things, you might try Brad Gregory’s *Salvation at Stake. *One of the early chapters is called “The Willingness to Kill” and summarizes sixteenth-century attitudes on the punishment of heresy. Or you could read the early chapters of Hubert Jedin’s mammoth history of the Council of Trent, which discusses the complex negotiations between Pope and Emperor as to just how best to stamp out Protestantism. These are just two of many sources–any book on the Reformation will give you the outlines. (I chose the two sources above because they are both Catholic.)

One quick reference–you might note that in the papal bull “Exsurge Domine” (itself one of the earliest attempts to stamp out Protestantism), one of the “errors” of Luther that are condemned is the claim that it is contrary to the will of the Spirit for heretics to be burned.

Edwin

 

[JRKH]

It’s not a charge. It’s an unquestioned historical fact. People in the sixteenth century wouldn’t have thought that it was a “charge”–it was an obvious moral duty to try to stamp out heresy.

If you want one particular source that summarizes how people thought about these things, you might try Brad Gregory’s *Salvation at Stake. *One of the early chapters is called “The Willingness to Kill” and summarizes sixteenth-century attitudes on the punishment of heresy. Or you could read the early chapters of Hubert Jedin’s mammoth history of the Council of Trent, which discusses the complex negotiations between Pope and Emperor as to just how best to stamp out Protestantism. These are just two of many sources–any book on the Reformation will give you the outlines. (I chose the two sources above because they are both Catholic.)

One quick reference–you might note that in the papal bull “Exsurge Domine” (itself one of the earliest attempts to stamp out Protestantism), one of the “errors” of Luther that are condemned is the claim that it is contrary to the will of the Spirit for heretics to be burned.

Edwin

First of all I would just like to support Edwin here in his statement that it is indeed an historical fact. During the 16th century, there was much bloodshed committed in the name of religion and even condoned by the various groups. This occurred on both sides of the issue.

However, there are two things everyone should keep in mind when studying these times and events:

1. Political - The Protestant reformation helped to ignite a number of issues that had been fomenting for many years in Europe. Much of the violence which occurred was to a great degree political rather than religiously driven. I don’t say this to minimize the horrors but to indicate teh need for perspective.
2. Cultural - The methods of punishment used by the civil authorities was common and accepted at the time. It is futile and dangerous to try and impose our modern sensibilities onto times past.

Again, my intent here is not to deflect or minimize the evil that occurred during that time, but rather to help others understand that none of this occurred in some political vacuum. Much of what occurred on both sides of the struggle that had more to do with national power and prestige than with the Glory of God.

Peace
James

 

[Contarini]

First of all I would just like to support Edwin here in his statement that it is indeed an historical fact. During the 16th century, there was much bloodshed committed in the name of religion and even condoned by the various groups. This occurred on both sides of the issue.

However, there are two things everyone should keep in mind when studying these times and events:

1. Political - The Protestant reformation helped to ignite a number of issues that had been fomenting for many years in Europe. Much of the violence which occurred was to a great degree political rather than religiously driven. I don’t say this to minimize the horrors but to indicate teh need for perspective.
2. Cultural - The methods of punishment used by the civil authorities was common and accepted at the time. It is futile and dangerous to try and impose our modern sensibilities onto times past.

Again, my intent here is not to deflect or minimize the evil that occurred during that time, but rather to help others understand that none of this occurred in some political vacuum. Much of what occurred on both sides of the struggle that had more to do with national power and prestige than with the Glory of God.

Peace
James

James,

I wasn’t saying anything about the means used (except to quote Pope Leo, who did explicitly refer to burning). I am not a moral relativist–I think that burning people alive, or hanging them till partly dead and then cutting them open (as was done to “traitors” in England, including a lot of Catholic missionary priests), is always wrong, period. This was a point on which sixteenth-century people were morally obtuse, just as people in our society are morally obtuse on other points. (Christians before about the twelfth century had a much more humane view, while still seeing heresy as a great evil.) But you are of course right that brutal punishment was used for all sorts of crimes in the sixteenth century–for some reason the later Middle Ages and the early modern period were times of great brutality in all sorts of ways.

My point was not to accuse the Catholic Church of cruelty, but simply to point out that it’s not the Church’s fault that Protestantism spread and survived!

Edwin

 

[wisdomseeker]

James,

I wasn’t saying anything about the means used (except to quote Pope Leo, who did explicitly refer to burning). I am not a moral relativist–I think that burning people alive, or hanging them till partly dead and then cutting them open (as was done to “traitors” in England, including a lot of Catholic missionary priests), is always wrong, period. This was a point on which sixteenth-century people were morally obtuse, just as people in our society are morally obtuse on other points. (Christians before about the twelfth century had a much more humane view, while still seeing heresy as a great evil.) But you are of course right that brutal punishment was used for all sorts of crimes in the sixteenth century–for some reason the later Middle Ages and the early modern period were times of great brutality in all sorts of ways.

My point was not to accuse the Catholic Church of cruelty, but simply to point out that it’s not the Church’s fault that Protestantism spread and survived!

Edwin

My intention was not to say that the CC should have supressed or kill anyone who turn away from her.
what i was implying here is that shouldnt the CC have paid more attention to the faithfull as far as to have educated them on the issues raised by these prostesters. even today we see
this happening. but who am i to say. who can understand the ways of the CC since it is a divine institution who can fully comprehend her.
throughout the world we see catholics turning away from the faith due to ignorance of the faith when someone comes up with new ideas against the CC. they are not prepared to defend the faith. i also understand that catholics live by faith and not by sight. it is not about knowledge but faith. this worked really well untill the 1600s but now it is much different. it is seems a greater warfare today.
i have an aunt she is very rooted on her faith although she knows nothing about the faith, no one can get her out of the CC. they have tried many times. she now reads more and is better informed.
i cannot explain why some catholics are so easy deceived and others although not knowing nothing has the faith which is beyond my understanding.

Chesterton
“The Catholic faith even when watered down can still boil the world to rags.”

 

[JRKH]

James,

I wasn’t saying anything about the means used (except to quote Pope Leo, who did explicitly refer to burning). I am not a moral relativist–I think that burning people alive, or hanging them till partly dead and then cutting them open (as was done to “traitors” in England, including a lot of Catholic missionary priests), is always wrong, period. This was a point on which sixteenth-century people were morally obtuse, just as people in our society are morally obtuse on other points. (Christians before about the twelfth century had a much more humane view, while still seeing heresy as a great evil.) But you are of course right that brutal punishment was used for all sorts of crimes in the sixteenth century–for some reason the later Middle Ages and the early modern period were times of great brutality in all sorts of ways.

My point was not to accuse the Catholic Church of cruelty, but simply to point out that it’s not the Church’s fault that Protestantism spread and survived!

Edwin

Agreed
I admit to being a little touchy on the subject of the cruelties of that time. We are obviously on the same page though.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

My intention was not to say that the CC should have supressed or kill anyone who turn away from her.
**what i was implying here is that shouldnt the CC have paid more attention to the faithfull as far as to have educated them on the issues raised by these prostesters. **even today we see
this happening. but who am i to say. who can understand the ways of the CC since it is a divine institution who can fully comprehend her.
throughout the world we see catholics turning away from the faith due to ignorance of the faith when someone comes up with new ideas against the CC. they are not prepared to defend the faith. i also understand that catholics live by faith and not by sight. it is not about knowledge but faith. this worked really well untill the 1600s but now it is much different. it is seems a greater warfare today.
i have an aunt she is very rooted on her faith although she knows nothing about the faith, no one can get her out of the CC. they have tried many times. she now reads more and is better informed.
i cannot explain why some catholics are so easy deceived and others although not knowing nothing has the faith which is beyond my understanding.

I’m afraid that you are oversimplifying things here my friend. At the Time of the Reformation, the Church and the State were quite thoroughly intertwined. Thus when the protest began in earnest, and became outright defection from the Church some nobles sided with the Church, others with the Protestants. Things ran downhill from there. It wasn’t a case of peopel on street corners debating, but rather entire countries declaring each other heretics.
Example: If your king was Lutheren you had to be catholic or face execution as a heretic.

If the Protestant reformation had remained a purely Religious issue it would like have died out after the reforms of the Council of Trent. Unfortunately it did not.

Peace
James

 

[mangy_dog]

The other day my protestant friend told me she was upset with the holy father Ben XVI because he said there is only One True Church.

Now, is it a believe among other religions that the CC is just another denomination? how long has this been going on?
Is it the CC’s fault in letting this believe perpetuate throughout our generations?

I humbly ask everyone’s opinion on this.

Hello seeker,

I will pre-amble what I’m going to say with the following: Before I knew who Father Corapi was - I was already Corapian in my way of preaching and teaching and defending my catholic faith.

Having said that…

The Catholic church is the one, true church that Christ intended to exist after His ascension into heaven and of which He left Peter as its first Pope…263 popes later to Pope Benedict XVI.

Neither protestants - whose belief is incomplete
with their “sola scriptura” bible - which is also incomplete,
nor the secret societies, nor atheists, powers, principalities etc etc etc. will ever prevail against her.

(waiting for my blood pressure to come down)

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.