Dealing with anti-Catholic stuff.

[SAVINGRACE]

You’ve already received great advice. Mine would be to make it your business to learn about the faith so you can defend it, not necessarily at Akins or Staples level but enough to stump the usual suspects.

I thought being a “christian” was tough then I became a Catholic christian. It’s not for the faint of heart. I am defending the faith from family, friends, work colleagues, strangers, other christians and other Catholics believe it or not. People do get very worked up, I am a calm person even when chaos ensues around me. I let them get worked up and always engage calmly. Don’t let their emotional state affect you, it’s theirs to own, not yours.

It can be confronting for friends when you convert, the dynamics of the relationship changes. I experienced similar incidents with friends after I converted. I would listen politely, nod and smile. At the end of their lecture I would reply calmly "Thank you but I won’t be changing my mind. I have finally found my spiritual home and I’m not leaving."

If they try to engage me in debate I would say “sorry to interrupt but I really need to get to an appointment, shops, lecture, home etc…another time perhaps”. If they do take up the offer to discuss scripture, make sure you do your homework.

Welcome home. :grouphug:

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

It’s heart wrenching. They are going backwards.

:bighanky:

 

[retire_early]

My reply to this question is focused on the feeling of “upset-ness” and hurt the OP felt after the incident.

You’ve gotten really good feedback and advice from the other posters regarding the religious issue at hand.

For just the “feelings” issue, may I suggest that you politely gasp when someone like this attacks you and state how your feel, i.e., “Goodness! Horace, Imogene, I feel so attacked by you; I feel terrible. I thought you were my friends! I don’t care to discuss this with you if all you’re going to do is attack me. I am open to a civil and friendly discussion, but this style of communication is something I do not want to engage in. I hope that the next time we meet, you will be more open to a fair exchange of ideas without rancor. Good afternoon.” Then exit, stage right. Those folks showed poor manners in ganging up on you.

Maybe follow up with a note in the mail to the effect that perhaps you met them on an “off” day and you wish them well and perhaps they would like to read this little booklet that you are enclosing with the note. Send along one of the many tracts or pamphlets recommended by others on this thread that might enlighten them.

 

[Trident_H]

My reply to this question is focused on the feeling of “upset-ness” and hurt the OP felt after the incident.

You’ve gotten really good feedback and advice from the other posters regarding the religious issue at hand.

For just the “feelings” issue, may I suggest that you politely gasp when someone like this attacks you and state how your feel, i.e., “Goodness! Horace, Imogene, I feel so attacked by you; I feel terrible. I thought you were my friends! I don’t care to discuss this with you if all you’re going to do is attack me. I am open to a civil and friendly discussion, but this style of communication is something I do not want to engage in. I hope that the next time we meet, you will be more open to a fair exchange of ideas without rancor. Good afternoon.” Then exit, stage right. Those folks showed poor manners in ganging up on you.

I think Horace would get it Ok. But if I know anything about Imogene, you’d never get her back out the door once her foot’s in it. She can be an absolute anchor.

 

[GodsGrace154]

Hi GG,

I am new to this site and just sort of perusing around. Part of your statement above caught my attention.

Do you mind if I ask you what you meant by “there’s no right or wrong” above? Just curious.

Thanks.

Hi Bestil
Welcome to the site.
I’m glad you asked - it gives me the opportunity to say what’s in my heart.

I’ll answer you by pointing out some posts I just read.

Abu post no. 17

Abu feels only the Catholic Church is right. Everyone else is wrong. Everyone else is missing something - they don’t have the complete picture OR the fullness of faith, as he might say. This is nonsense. EVERYONE who knows Jesus has the fullness of faith. Jesus went to the cross to save humanity. Jesus saves us - not the church. Abu will be interested to know that the church is going through a lot of change - change which he is going to have to accept. His feelings of superiority for belonging to the RCC are a sin. I think he forgot to read the beatitudes in Mathew 5:2-20 (and continuing on).
Jesus came to cause a change in our heart NOT to be proud because we belong to one group or to another.

Why argue about how many sacraments any one church honors? Jesus said to baptize, He said to celebrate the Lord’s Supper or Communion. The other sacraments the Catholic church teaches can be gleaned from scripture although Jesus did not specifically make them a sacrament: Like Holy Orders (Priesthood), Marriage, Last Rites (Annointing of the sick) Confirmation and Confession (or Reconciliation).
And, I guess he believes no other church teaches faith and morals…
He says only Jesus is right and all else is somehow wrong,
I wonder if he realizes there is only ONE Jesus who taught the same principles to ALL His disciples.

JonS post no. 20

I like JonS. He’s figured out that being tired is good. Arguing is bad. The bible is clear that we are not to argue but to teach. Here are some scriptures for your perusal:

Romans 14:19
James 3:17
Galatians 5:22-23
Philippians 2:14
2 Timothy 2:23-24

Why quarrel amongst ourselves when we serve the same Lord?

SAVINGGRACE post no. 21

I feel badly for SavingGrace. Friends make you feel badly because they like to divide and conquer. We feel much safer if we’re right and everyone else is wrong. What does it prove? Nothing. The only event that proves anything is the Resurrection.

So, you see, Bestil, there is no wrong and there is no right. There is only God and His Son, Jesus Christ who should be worshipped by us in spirit and not in Law.

The church we end up in will be the right church for us. If Jesus is there, if there is teaching, if we feel comfortable in our spiritual worship.

We should always remember
John 13:35

and treat each other with love and respect.

GG

 

[Jon_S_1]

Hi Bestil
Welcome to the site.
I’m glad you asked - it gives me the opportunity to say what’s in my heart.

I’ll answer you by pointing out some posts I just read.

Abu post no. 17

Abu feels only the Catholic Church is right. Everyone else is wrong. Everyone else is missing something - they don’t have the complete picture OR the fullness of faith, as he might say. This is nonsense. EVERYONE who knows Jesus has the fullness of faith. Jesus went to the cross to save humanity. Jesus saves us - not the church. Abu will be interested to know that the church is going through a lot of change - change which he is going to have to accept. His feelings of superiority for belonging to the RCC are a sin. I think he forgot to read the beatitudes in Mathew 5:2-20 (and continuing on).
Jesus came to cause a change in our heart NOT to be proud because we belong to one group or to another.

Why argue about how many sacraments any one church honors? Jesus said to baptize, He said to celebrate the Lord’s Supper or Communion. The other sacraments the Catholic church teaches can be gleaned from scripture although Jesus did not specifically make them a sacrament: Like Holy Orders (Priesthood), Marriage, Last Rites (Annointing of the sick) Confirmation and Confession (or Reconciliation).
And, I guess he believes no other church teaches faith and morals…
He says only Jesus is right and all else is somehow wrong,
I wonder if he realizes there is only ONE Jesus who taught the same principles to ALL His disciples.

That’s your opinion I guess…the next Protestant down the road would say you are way off, then the next one might condemn this or that of your opinion. Of course that would simply be their opinion as well.

As Catholics, we don’t have opinions…not about doctrine at least. We have humble submission of our will to the objective truth of God. That truth IS held in care by the Catholic Church.

So it’s not Abu’s opinion…it just is.

One of my favorite passages of Flannery O’ Connor- she nails it in these few paragraphs.

"We mean entirely different things when we each say we believe the Church is Divine. You mean the invisible Church with somehow related to it many forms, whereas I mean one and one only visible Church. It is not logical to the Catholic to believe that Christ teaches through many visible forms all teaching contrary doctrine. You speak of the well-known facts of Christ’s life – but these facts are hotly contested – the virgin birth, the resurrection, the very divinity of Christ. For us the one visible Church pronounces on these matters infallibly and we receive her doctrine whether subjectively it fits in with our surmises or not. We believe that Christ left the Church to speak for him, that it speaks with his voice, that he is the head and we are the members.

If Christ actually teaches through many forms then for fifteen centuries, he taught that the Eucharist was his actual body and blood and thereafter he taught part of his people that it was only a symbol. The Catholic can’t live with this contradiction. I have seen it said that the Catholic is more interested in truth and the Protestant in goodness, but I don’t think too much of the formula except that it suggests a partial truth.

The Catholic finds it easier to understand the atheist than the Protestant, but easier to love the Protestant than the atheist. The fact is though now that the fundamental Protestants, as far as doctrine goes, are closer to their traditional enemy, the Church of Rome, than they are to the advanced elements of Protestantism. You can know where I stand, what I believe because I am a practicing Catholic, but I can’t know what you believe unless I ask you. You are right that enjoy is not exactly the right word for our talking about religion. As far as I know, it hurts like nothing else. We are at least together in the pain we share in this terrible division. It’s the Catholic Church who calls you “separated brethren,” she who feels the awful loss."

 

[GodsGrace154]

That’s your opinion I guess…the next Protestant down the road would say you are way off, then the next one might condemn this or that of your opinion. Of course that would simply be their opinion as well.

As Catholics, we don’t have opinions…not about doctrine at least. We have humble submission of our will to the objective truth of God. That truth IS held in care by the Catholic Church.

So it’s not Abu’s opinion…it just is.

One of my favorite passages of Flannery O’ Connor- she nails it in these few paragraphs.

"We mean entirely different things when we each say we believe the Church is Divine. You mean the invisible Church with somehow related to it many forms, whereas I mean one and one only visible Church. It is not logical to the Catholic to believe that Christ teaches through many visible forms all teaching contrary doctrine. You speak of the well-known facts of Christ’s life – but these facts are hotly contested – the virgin birth, the resurrection, the very divinity of Christ. For us the one visible Church pronounces on these matters infallibly and we receive her doctrine whether subjectively it fits in with our surmises or not. We believe that Christ left the Church to speak for him, that it speaks with his voice, that he is the head and we are the members.

If Christ actually teaches through many forms then for fifteen centuries, he taught that the Eucharist was his actual body and blood and thereafter he taught part of his people that it was only a symbol. The Catholic can’t live with this contradiction. I have seen it said that the Catholic is more interested in truth and the Protestant in goodness, but I don’t think too much of the formula except that it suggests a partial truth.

The Catholic finds it easier to understand the atheist than the Protestant, but easier to love the Protestant than the atheist. The fact is though now that the fundamental Protestants, as far as doctrine goes, are closer to their traditional enemy, the Church of Rome, than they are to the advanced elements of Protestantism. You can know where I stand, what I believe because I am a practicing Catholic, but I can’t know what you believe unless I ask you. You are right that enjoy is not exactly the right word for our talking about religion. As far as I know, it hurts like nothing else. We are at least together in the pain we share in this terrible division. It’s the Catholic Church who calls you “separated brethren,” she who feels the awful loss."

Hi Jon S
I hesitate to comment on the above.
What I disagree with most is this:

“You can know where I stand, what I believe because I am a practicing Catholic, but I can’t know what you believe unless I ask you.”

This is not true. If you ask what church a Protestant goes to, you will know his doctrinal beliefs.

Are you intimate with the church? Do you think all Catholics agree on everything? And I don’t mean the lay people. One big umbrella, many OPINIONS. The CCC is taught, but opinions and beliefs vary greatly. And that’s all I’ll say on this.

The virgin birth, the resurrection and the divinity of Christ cannot be contested if one is a Christian. If so, they CANNOT call themselves a Christian. Let’s not take every weird idea (or heresy?) circulating about out there and say it’s Protestantism.

The writer you quoted is speaking of the pain of separated bretheren. They separated for a reason. And your attitude in your original post makes the separation more painful, not less.

GG

 

[po18guy]

Coming up against proper anti-Catholic sentiment today from a church friend from a former church. They were properly angry with me, something that has left me tearful and horribly upset. How does one deal with feeling so crushed when attacked like this?

Pray for them. Obtain a copy of good Catholic Apologetics material, such as The Essential Catholic Survival Guide (sold by Catholic Answers). If the opportunity arises once again, ask them by what authority they attack and JUDGE a fellow Christian. Demand to know of their authority. They will, of course, say “the bible”, but you also have a bible. Really, they are fearful and jealous, if not envious. For that reason and others, they need prayer.

 

[GodsGrace154]

It’s heart wrenching. They are going backwards.

:bighanky:

CUTE!!

 

[Abu]

GodsGrace154 #25
Abu feels only the Catholic Church is right.

To ignore Christ is the cardinal error –“feelings” actually cause that error, but assenting to His truth cures the error:
**You are Peter and on this rock I will build MY Church." (Mt 16:18) **

I wonder if he realizes there is only ONE Jesus who taught the same principles to ALL His disciples.

Jesus gave ONLY HIS APOSTLES UNDER PETER the power of binding and loosing – Jesus taught disciples and did NOT give them His authority to teach, rule and sanctify – that came only through His Apostles under St Peter.

Jesus came to cause a change in our heart NOT to be proud because we belong to one group or to another.
The bible is clear that we are not to argue but to teach.

As Jesus established only ONE CHURCH – the other “groups” all lack the fullness of His truth and sacraments, precisely what Jesus gave His Church so that She through Her faithful can “Go and teach all nations whatsoever I have commanded you.”

Jesus saves us - not the church.

False.
By His Crucifixion, death and Resurrection, Jesus has REDEEMED us. Learn the facts from St Paul. So long as one realises that **we are not “saved” in this life, but we are redeemed **– we have to listen to St Paul in that what is lacking is our co-operation. **That is precisely why St Paul teaches: “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” (Philippians 2:12). **We don’t achieve salvation in one fell swoop by accepting Christ as our personal saviour as some are misled to feel. St Paul knows very well what he is teaching.

Further, all who are saved are saved through Christ’s Catholic Church whether they realise it or not.

I wonder if he realizes there is only ONE Jesus who taught the same principles to ALL His disciples.

This very clearly then is why Christ established His Magisterium (teaching authority) in St Peter (His first Pope) and his successors who proclaim the truths of faith and morals in dogma and doctrine, and not to everyone who “feels’ they want to preach to others:
“I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you." (John 14:15-18) “The Advocate, the Holy Spirit that the Father will send in My name, He will teach you everything and remind you of all that I told you.” (John 14:26) “But when He comes, the Spirit of truth, He will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on His own, but He will speak what He hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming. He will glorify Me, because He will take from what is mine and declare it to you. Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that He will take from what is mine and declare it to you.” (John 16:13-15).
And, behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.” (Mt 28: 20).

 

[GodsGrace154]

To ignore Christ is the cardinal error –“feelings” actually cause that error, but assenting to His truth cures the error:
**You are Peter and on this rock I will build MY Church." (Mt 16:18) **

Ummmm. Who is ignoring Christ?
He’s all I talk about.

And who said anything about “feelings?”
And what IS His truth?

I’m so tired of hearing about Peter and the rock and the church from those such as yourself. Did I say I don’t agree with Mathew 16:18? Did you read my post where I mention you? You’re proving everything I said…

Jesus gave ONLY HIS APOSTLES UNDER PETER the power of binding and loosing – Jesus taught disciples and did NOT give them His authority to teach, rule and sanctify – that came only through His Apostles under St Peter.

Huh? Did you read my post? I said Jesus TAUGHT His disciples. (incl us) How did you make the jump to the above? Do you not agree that Jesus TAUGHT ALL His disciples the same lessons?

As Jesus established only ONE CHURCH – the other “groups” all lack the fullness of His truth and sacraments, precisely what Jesus gave His Church so that She through Her faithful can “Go and teach all nations whatsoever I have commanded you.”

Yes. I did say that you’d say that the other churches don’t have the true fullness of faith or truth. THEY ARE SO LACKING, aren’t they. Only YOU have the truth. Could you please take the time to tell me what that truth is? I’d appreciate it.

False.
By His Crucifixion, death and Resurrection, Jesus has REDEEMED us. Learn the facts from St Paul. So long as one realises that **we are not “saved” in this life, but we are redeemed **– we have to listen to St Paul in that what is lacking is our co-operation. **That is precisely why St Paul teaches: “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” (Philippians 2:12). **We don’t achieve salvation in one fell swoop by accepting Christ as our personal saviour as some are misled to feel. St Paul knows very well what he is teaching.

We receive salvation by repenting. Repent means to change direction. I was going the wrong direction (toward satan) and now I’m going in the opposite direction (toward God).
I hear say in the RCC that we are forever and always converting. Think about how nonsensical this is. Now I’m saved, now I’m lost, now I’m saved, now I’m lost, etc etc.
We are safe with Jesus as long as we trust in HIM.

Ephesians 2:8-9
Acts 16.31
Romans 10:9-10
Mark 16.16
John 8:31-32
Mathew 19:25-26
Hebrews 7:25

and let’s never forget:
John 3:16

Further, all who are saved are saved through Christ’s Catholic Church whether they realise it or not.

This very clearly then is why Christ established His Magisterium (teaching authority) in St Peter (His first Pope) and his successors who proclaim the truths of faith and morals in dogma and doctrine, and not to everyone who “feels’ they want to preach to others:
“I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you." (John 14:15-18) “The Advocate, the Holy Spirit that the Father will send in My name, He will teach you everything and remind you of all that I told you.” (John 14:26) “But when He comes, the Spirit of truth, He will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on His own, but He will speak what He hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming. He will glorify Me, because He will take from what is mine and declare it to you. Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that He will take from what is mine and declare it to you.” (John 16:13-15).
And, behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.” (Mt 28: 20).

Here we go with feelings again.
Let me ask you this:
If someone came to you wanting to know about God, would YOU be able to teach them anything at all about Him so that maybe they could become more interested and come to love Him?
Or would you send them to the magisterium?
The Pope just said in his ecyclical that the magisterium is not to be depended upon for everything and that some matters are pastoral.
You say above that Jesus would send the Holy Spirit to teach us everything. So why do you think the bible was written? Do you think the mageterium doesn’t depend on the bible? WHAT is it depending on? Tradition? Is Tradition not biblical?

Look up Jeremiah 31:33-34
It speaks of the New Covenant. How the Holy Spirit will teach us. Individually.

And I do like learning about the Body of Christ which could be found in CCC no. 787-796 and even beyond. Please note that Church is written with a capital C.

BTW, the RCC is now teaching that we are to have a PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP with Jesus. Please look into this. “Look upon the faith of the church” - what does this mean exactly? I could sin but the church will save me? I’m saved throught the church? The church went to the cross or did Jesus go to the cross? You could go over the above verses again - they apply to this too.

GG

 

[Abu]

GodsGrace154 #31
And who said anything about “feelings?”

GodsGrace154 #25
Your Quote: Abu feels only the Catholic Church is right.

The Catholic Church teaches Christ’s truths – real Catholics don’t rely on “feelings” for truth.

I said Jesus TAUGHT His disciples. How did you make the jump to the above? Do you not agree that Jesus TAUGHT ALL His disciples the same lessons?

You still do not realise that Jesus had His chosen Apostles to whom He gave His teaching and whom He mandated to: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations… teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and behold I am with you all days, even unto the consummation of the world.” [Mt 28:19-20].

Not ANYONE had that commission.

Could you please take the time to tell me what that truth is? I’d appreciate it.

“I am the way the Truth and the life.” [Jn 14:6]. How did Jesus choose to give His Truth to us? Clearly: **You are Peter and on this rock I will build MY Church." (Mt 16:18) **

You say above that Jesus would send the Holy Spirit to teach us everything. So why do you think the bible was written? Do you think the mageterium doesn’t depend on the bible? WHAT is is depending on? Tradition? Is Tradition not biblical?

Once again the failure to realise that Jesus wrote nothing for us but only gave us His Catholic Church, which fact some try to ignore, and the fact that She gave us the Sacred Scriptures authorised as the Word of God by Her, the NT being written by Catholics. How do we know? Only because the books that actually are declared the inspired Word of God were authorized by Pope Damasus at a Council of Rome in 382, confirmed at the Councils of Hippo, 393, Carthage III 397, Carthage IV in 419 and canonised at the Council of Trent (1545-1563) – 46 books in the Old Testament, 27 books in the New Testament – clearly showing the authority of Christ’s Church, and culminating in the defined Canon of Sacred Scriptures at the Council of Trent.

Answer by Fr. John Trigilio on Sept 17, 2010 (EWTN):
“The first Bible translated from Hebrew & Greek by St. Jerome in 400 AD had all 46 OT + 27 NT as did the Latin Guttenburg Bible of the 15th c. Only Protestant Bibles from 16th c. to today are missing the 7 books. But 2/3 of the world’s Jews at that time (3rd c. BC, from 250-100 BC) lived outside the Holy Land and were more literate in Greek than Hebrew. Christians from the time of the Apostles and during Jesus’ time knew and accepted these 7 books, hence their presence in St. Jerome’s Bible and every other Bible until Luther. IRONICALLY these 7 books were in the ORIGINAL King James Bible but Parliament removed them in subsequent editions.”

 

[GodsGrace154]

The Catholic Church teaches Christ’s truths – real Catholics don’t rely on “feelings” for truth.

Oh my goodness Abu. Exchange the word “feels” with “thinks.” It’s English for goodness sake.

You still do not realise that Jesus had His chosen Apostles to whom He gave His teaching and whom He mandated to: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations… teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and behold I am with you all days, even unto the consummation of the world.” [Mt 28:19-20].

Not ANYONE had that commission.

Let me help you along here. Jesus commissioned the Apostles. So only their successors could teach, ie, priests. Is this what you’re trying to say? I think so.

Have you ever read the following:
2 Timothy 2:15
2 Timothy 3:16-17

It would do you good to read the above. All of us can teach each other. What are we doing here on this forum anyway? I like to learn new things and maybe you can too.

“I am the way the Truth and the life.” [Jn 14:6]. How did Jesus choose to give His Truth to us? Clearly: **You are Peter and on this rock I will build MY Church." (Mt 16:18) **

Yes. But you won’t tell me what the truth is.
You think the truth is that Jesus set up the Catholic Church??
Please find out what the truth is and advise.

Once again the failure to realise that Jesus wrote nothing for us but only gave us His Catholic Church, which fact some try to ignore, and the fact that She gave us the Sacred Scriptures authorised as the Word of God by Her, the NT being written by Catholics. How do we know? Only because the books that actually are declared the inspired Word of God were authorized by Pope Damasus at a Council of Rome in 382, confirmed at the Councils of Hippo, 393, Carthage III 397, Carthage IV in 419 and canonised at the Council of Trent (1545-1563) – 46 books in the Old Testament, 27 books in the New Testament – clearly showing the authority of Christ’s Church, and culminating in the defined Canon of Sacred Scriptures at the Council of Trent.

Answer by Fr. John Trigilio on Sept 17, 2010 (EWTN):
“The first Bible translated from Hebrew & Greek by St. Jerome in 400 AD had all 46 OT + 27 NT as did the Latin Guttenburg Bible of the 15th c. Only Protestant Bibles from 16th c. to today are missing the 7 books. But 2/3 of the world’s Jews at that time (3rd c. BC, from 250-100 BC) lived outside the Holy Land and were more literate in Greek than Hebrew. Christians from the time of the Apostles and during Jesus’ time knew and accepted these 7 books, hence their presence in St. Jerome’s Bible and every other Bible until Luther. IRONICALLY these 7 books were in the ORIGINAL King James Bible but Parliament removed them in subsequent editions.”

I do hope you realize that the Catholic Church wasn’t always around. I do hope you realize that catholic meant Universal because it was the ONLY church around.

And you say the NT was written by Catholics? I thought the letters and gospels that make up the N.T. were written by Jews. I thought everybody in Israel was Jewish. I thought they worshipped in synagogues back then.
Interesting to read:
1 Corinthians 1:2
1 Corinthians 12:27-30

As far as Fr. Triglio - yes. I do trust him. The Catholic Church (as it was called by then) did PUT TOGETHER the bible and we do have the CC to thank for this. This is different from saying that the bible was WRITTEN by Catholics.

GG

 

[Jon_S_1]

Hi Jon S
I hesitate to comment on the above.
What I disagree with most is this:

“You can know where I stand, what I believe because I am a practicing Catholic, but I can’t know what you believe unless I ask you.”

This is not true. If you ask what church a Protestant goes to, you will know his doctrinal beliefs.

This is exactly the point. We are supposed to be able to tell the world “I am a Christian” and he knows what we believe.

Instead we have to ask “what flavor of Christian?” And if the response is Lutheran for example you have to ask what flavor of Lutheranism.

Jesus prayed “that they all may be one as The father and I are one”

Are you intimate with the church?

yes

Do you think all Catholics agree on everything? And I don’t mean the lay people. One big umbrella, many OPINIONS. The CCC is taught, but opinions and beliefs vary greatly. And that’s all I’ll say on this.

No all Catholics don’t agree on everything…but they all agree on something important or they cease to be Catholic.

They believe there is one faith given by Christ and the apostles, that faith consisting in Word and Letter is held in care by the bishops of the church, their successors, in union with the Bishop of Rome by the Holy Spirit.

We can know exactly what this faith is by reading the consensus of the church fathers, the papal pronouncements, the creeds and councils. This is summarized in the Catechism.

The virgin birth, the resurrection and the divinity of Christ cannot be contested if one is a Christian. If so, they CANNOT call themselves a Christian. Let’s not take every weird idea (or heresy?) circulating about out there and say it’s Protestantism.

Again that’s your opinion…another Protestant on this board could very well take offense to your claim here. You have no authority other then yourself or groupings of opinions to support your claim. They will use the Bible too and so you both have no living voice to settle the matter since you both reject the idea that the Church is the pillar of truth and instead place the Bible as the pillar of truth.

The writer you quoted is speaking of the pain of separated bretheren. They separated for a reason. And your attitude in your original post makes the separation more painful, not less.

GG

Not sure how this is true…sorry you feel that way.

 

[GodsGrace154]

This is exactly the point. We are supposed to be able to tell the world “I am a Christian” and he knows what we believe.

Instead we have to ask “what flavor of Christian?” And if the response is Lutheran for example you have to ask what flavor of Lutheranism.

Jesus prayed “that they all may be one as The father and I are one”

yes

No all Catholics don’t agree on everything…but they all agree on something important or they cease to be Catholic.

They believe there is one faith given by Christ and the apostles, that faith consisting in Word and Letter is held in care by the bishops of the church, their successors, in union with the Bishop of Rome by the Holy Spirit.

We can know exactly what this faith is by reading the consensus of the church fathers, the papal pronouncements, the creeds and councils. This is summarized in the Catechism.

Again that’s your opinion…another Protestant on this board could very well take offense to your claim here. You have no authority other then yourself or groupings of opinions to support your claim. They will use the Bible too and so you both have no living voice to settle the matter since you both reject the idea that the Church is the pillar of truth and instead place the Bible as the pillar of truth.

Not sure how this is true…sorry you feel that way.

I agree with much of what you say.
Churches split up / ideas (even within the RCC) could be different. I’ve often wondered why this is. Martin Luther was upset that the church was making people pay for indulgences and getting loved ones out of purgatory. The Pope didn’t even pay any attention to him and threw him out of the church so Protestantism could get under way. Was this a plan of the Holy Spirit? Couldn’t God direct His church? What about the Orthodox in 1,000 –

Jon S, we’re here on this earth and nothing is perfect. I hear weird stuff in and out of the RCC. I agree with you 100% that the bible could be used to prove anything. And why is this? Because the writers didn’t know all the dumb ideas we’d eventually get. Or they would have made sure everything was very clear.

So we agree on the big things. God will judge each by the light received. I don’t think He’s Lutheran or Catholic or any other religion. I think He’s God and will welcome all that honor and worship Him and His Son.

It was nice to speak to you.

GG

 

[wildrumpus]

Don’t feel so dreadful JTTW

If God be for you, who can be against you?
Romans 8.31

There are misconceptions on both sides of the isle.
Catholics don’t believe salvation is by works but by faith.
James just says that faith without works is dead.
James 2:14-20

(in fact James causes a bit of a problem by stating that we are justified by works, but that’s another question).

Do they not believe James?

Try Jesus:
Mathew 7:16-23

If you feel you belong in the RCC, then that’s where you should be. The Holy Spirit guides us where He will. There’s no right or wrong - there’s only the Body of Christ of which any disciple of Christ is a member.

Also, remind your friends of:
Jonn 13:35

GG

“(in fact James causes a bit of a problem by stating that we are justified by works, but that’s another question).” It is not James who causes a bit of a problem by stating this, but people who take things out of context. If you look at all of the scripture from Paul and James, you will see that James’ concern is that people have real saving faith, not counterfeit faith. And the difference is that the real faith produces loving behavior (works).

 

[GodsGrace154]

“(in fact James causes a bit of a problem by stating that we are justified by works, but that’s another question).” It is not James who causes a bit of a problem by stating this, but people who take things out of context. If you look at all of the scripture from Paul and James, you will see that James’ concern is that people have real saving faith, not counterfeit faith. And the difference is that the real faith produces loving behavior (works).

What is counterfeit faith??
What is real, saving faith??

GG

 

[guanophore]

I agree with much of what you say.
Churches split up / ideas (even within the RCC) could be different.

Catholicsm is One Faith. Yes, there are people who purport to be Catholic that have left the One Faith. Sometimes they don’t know they have lost their Catholiicity. The Faith, however, is not defined by those who depart from it. The CC is not “Roman”.

I've often wondered why this is.  Martin Luther was upset that the church was making people pay for indulgences and  getting loved ones out of purgatory.

Luther was upset about many things, but the Church never “made people pay for indulgences”. Even when there was a perception that indulgences could be “sold”, (which they cannot), no one was ever compulsed do to so.

 The Pope didn't even pay any attention to him and threw him out of the church so Protestantism could get under way.

This seems to be a simplistic and somwhat erroneous view of how the Church responded to Luther. The Pope did pay attention to him, though it was not the attention Luther wanted. The Pope did not “throw him out”, but Luther excommunicated himself by denying the doctrines of the faith, and creating his own. The Excommunication was an acknowledgement of what had already occurred. That is why Luther threw it in the fire.It had no significance for him because he has already departed.

Was this a plan of the Holy Spirit?  Couldn't God direct His church?  What about the Orthodox in 1,000 --

The Holy Spirit always leads toward unity. Here is a link to the Catechism on the wounds to unity.

I agree with you 100% that the bible could be used to prove anything. And why is this? Because the writers didn’t know all the dumb ideas we’d eventually get. Or they would have made sure everything was very clear.

The NT was never intended to be a full compendium of the faith. The letters were written to respond to specific instances of problems, and the Gospels were to reinforce the Truth of what was preached by the Apostles. The NT came out of the Church, not the Church out of the NT. This is why we say that 'bible based" denominations have it upside down.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Great post Guanaphore!

I was thinking of a follow up to Grace as well and think I would simply say,

Assuming all you said about Luther is true, how does the Bible say the issue should be resolved?

Based on Matt 18, ultimately in this Feud, Luther was to take it to the church. Then the church was to make final determination.

It says nowhere “don’t listen and start the proper church according to how you feel”

Instead it says listen to the church.

This is very important.

 

[Abu]

GodsGrace154 #33
Yes. But you won’t tell me what the truth is.

You already know that:
“I am the way the Truth and the life.” [Jn 14:6]. How did Jesus choose to give His Truth to us?

You think the truth is that Jesus set up the Catholic Church??

Clearly Jesus did:
You are Peter and on this rock I will build MY Church." (Mt 16:18)
“The gates of hell will not prevail against it.”(Mt 16:18)
I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven." (Mt 16:19)
“Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” (Mt 16:19) [Later, also to the Twelve]. [My emphasis]

To St Peter alone – Sole authority:
“Strengthen your brethren.” (Lk 22:32)
“Feed My sheep.”(Jn 21:17).

Let me help you along here. Jesus commissioned the Apostles. So only their successors could teach, ie, priests. Is this what you’re trying to say? I think so.

Christ made St Peter His Supreme Vicar.
Christ never wrote anything of this but His Catholic Church, established by Him collected, from among very many writings a chosen set which She declared, through the Popes succeeding His chosen St Peter, to be the Word of God.

So the Bible tells us clearly whom to believe and that Christ gave us His Church with St Peter leading His Apostles – with Christ assuring them and us “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and behold, I am with you all days, even unto the consummation of the world.”

And you say the NT was written by Catholics? I thought the letters and gospels that make up the N.T. were written by Jews.

Those who wrote the NT were Christ’s followers His Apostles and disciples – of course Jews became Catholics then as they do today.

The Catholic Church (as it was called by then) did PUT TOGETHER the bible and we do have the CC to thank for this. This is different from saying that the bible was WRITTEN by Catholics.

Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, Paul, and all the other NT writers, were all converted by Christ who founded His Universal Church which is Catholic (St Ignatius).