Differences between Catholic faith and Baptist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Carole
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
MrS:
Thanks, me bad.:bowdown:
Click to expand...
:rotfl: No! No! You good! Make itty bitty mistake. No harm; no foul. Bartender! Double iced mocha cappuccino for MrS!:tiphat:
 
mercygate said:
:rotfl: No! No! You good! Make itty bitty mistake. No harm; no foul. Bartender! Double iced mocha cappuccino for MrS!:tiphat:
Click to expand...

That tasted really good…thanks, (urp)
 
40.png
MrS:
Thanks, it does help.

In Catholicism, there is no command or directive for us to go to a priest in confession. But it is apparent that since the priests have been given this authority by God, and the continuity of the Church is more than scriptural, then perhaps there are sinners who need this sacrament. Since we are all sinners, we all should take “advantage” of what God has given His Church. Yes? No?
Click to expand...
**Catechism of the Catholic Church 1457 **According to the Church’s command, “after having attained the age of discretion, each of the faithful is bound by an obligation faithfully to confess serious sins at least once a year.”

**Canon Law 989 **All the faithful who have reached the age of discretion are bound faithfully to confess their grave sins at least once a year.

How often should we go to Confession?
“Church law lays down the minimum of once a year for the laity.”
This is the Faith, Canon Francis Ripley, p. 297

Note: This is the bottom-line minimum legal requirement of the Church. The Pope himself confesses at least once a week. We are encouraged to avail ourselves of frequent confession. Monthly confession is strongly advised.

JMJ Jay
 
Ahimsaman wrote:

**
Yes, I believe in universal salvation
Click to expand...
One could call this concept “hyper-purgatory” in that the Catholic **idea of purgatory doesn’t go far enough - it doesn’t include purification of the wicked. **

By the way, this is not a baptist belief - it is something I believe outside of the Baptist faith. It actually started with Catholics!!! Origen, St. Gregory of Nyssa, etc.

I don’t want to hijack this thread. Someone has no doubt pointed out to you that this is NOT Catholic doctrine. Nor, as you have said, is it Baptist. But it is perfectly in keeping with the Baptist doctrine of “liberty of conscience.” You are free to invent your own doctrine. And you have!** 😃

Peace, Jay

P.S. I apologize for the red – I tried to make it go away, but was unsuccessful.
 
40.png
MrS:
four comments to the four highlighted areas>>>>

salvation is not universal in that all attain it (say yes to Christ)

all will be judged and the sheep will be separated…

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon10.gifpurgatory won’t go far enough? If you mean permanent condemnation for the condemned wicked…that is hell, or the eternal separation from God, along with Satan and his crew.

Catholics may have started the discussion on this heaven/hell as Christ intended, but the Church could not teach any idea that would define hell as empty. (even the current Pope has studied the concept that hell could be empty IF… but there “ain’t no if”…
Click to expand...
The magisterium condemned it as heresy although some theologians such as Origen and bishops such as St. Gregory of Nyssa believed it and proposed it. All this is in the thread I started which I mentioned earlier.

Peace…
 
40.png
Katholikos:
Ahimsaman wrote:

I don’t want to hijack this thread. Someone has no doubt pointed out to you that this is NOT Catholic doctrine. Nor, as you have said, is it Baptist. But it is perfectly in keeping with the Baptist doctrine of “liberty of conscience.” You are free to invent your own doctrine. And you have! 😃

Peace, Jay

P.S. I apologize for the red – I tried to make it go away, but was unsuccessful.
But, I didn’t invent the doctrine. Origen proposed it and it was believed by many people, including St. Gregory of Nyssa. This was all talked about at the thread I started, titled, “hell and everlasting punishment” in the apologetics forum. I really don’t want to “re-invent the wheel” after dealing with over 300 posts in which I exhausted much time and energy. Please go there if you wish to get further information or discuss it.

I forgive you for the red - 😃 . I won’t hold it against you.

Peace…
Click to expand...
 
40.png
Katholikos:
Hey! I want to come to the party! Make mine a double.🙂 Jay
Click to expand...
Would you let a heretic Baptist come in too??? I wanna go, I wanna go!!! 😃
 
Guys, count me in. Double iced, with a shot of espresso.

As for universalism: go to ahimsaman72’s other big thread on this forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=23446

I am returning control of this thread to those who are discussing Baptist/Catholic similarities & differences. ahimsaman72 is an outlier, even in his own denomination! :yup:
 
40.png
mercygate:
Guys, count me in. Double iced, with a shot of espresso.

As for universalism: go to ahimsaman72’s other big thread on this forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=23446

I am returning control of this thread to those who are discussing Baptist/Catholic similarities & differences. ahimsaman72 is an outlier, even in his own denomination! :yup:
Click to expand...
Boy, what a motley crew we would be in a coffee shop!!! or bar???

Yes, I’m a heretic in both churches!!! Neither knows what to do about me!!!

Thanks for providing the link to that. I was just too lazy to give it myself 😃 .
 
40.png
ahimsaman72:
With all due respect concerning MrS:
He wrote a post on another thread which mirrors the same comments he made here on this thread. He speaks in condescending tones but veils it under the auspices of “speaking the truth”. In his mind if he is “speaking truth” (as he sees it and his church believes it) then it is okay to speak in such manners. The “truth” can never be sacrificed when ecumenism is involved (in his opinion). Again, this is based on his definition of truth.

So, your post is presumptous that his post is intended in purity. I posit that given my experience with him this is indicative of his nature here on the forums.

Peace…
Click to expand...
Condescension is in the eye of the beholder. My perception is that MrS is a man who has been Surprised By Truth – the title of Patrick Madrid’s book of 11 whammy conversion stories. And we know that he is an older fellow; he writes about his grown son, who is a Baptist.

On these discussion groups, people tend to take offense too easily. My rule is, unless I am personally attacked, I try not to be offended by someone’s writing style.

You see “truth” as whatever you believe. He has a different standard. We’re all entitled to our POV.

Although I haven’t read any posts of his saying this, I agree that Truth cannot be sacrificed to ecumenism. If “truth” is relative, it is isn’t “true.” Ecumenism is finding points of agreement, not agreeing on every point.

We’re not going to get out of this alive, so we may as well enjoy it. The Lord bless you, the Lord shine his face upon you and give you peace, the Lord bless you. JMJ Jay
 
saint theresa use to said that the heart is like a crystal pure and beautiful an that the present of god is like a light that shine in the center of that crystal. that when we sin is like a thin layer of dirt that get into our heart,an start covering that light little by little. st theresa believe that if we don’t clean our hearts that dirt start accumulating until finally block all that light that come from god. the sacrament of reconciliation is the one thing that help clear that darkness an bring that light again back in our hearts. this is the way you feel when you get out of confession. at least is the way i feel.:blessyou:
 
40.png
Katholikos:
Condescension is in the eye of the beholder. My perception is that MrS is a man who has been Surprised By Truth – the title of Patrick Madrid’s book of 11 whammy conversion stories. And we know that he is an older fellow; he writes about his grown son, who is a Baptist.

On these discussion groups, people tend to take offense too easily. My rule is, unless I am personally attacked, I try not to be offended by someone’s writing style.

You see “truth” as whatever you believe. He has a different standard. We’re all entitled to our POV.

Although I haven’t read any posts of his saying this, I agree that Truth cannot be sacrificed to ecumenism. If “truth” is relative, it is isn’t “true.” Ecumenism is finding points of agreement, not agreeing on every point.

We’re not going to get out of this alive, so we may as well enjoy it. The Lord bless you, the Lord shine his face upon you and give you peace, the Lord bless you. JMJ Jay
Click to expand...
Yes, by nature it is in the eye of the beholder. I usually don’t take offense. I let things fall off my back usually. I don’t mind disagreements. I mind disrespect though. But, given the recent activity here between MrS and I, I feel we are working through any problems and I have no animosity towards him whatsoever. I admit I’ve been disrespectful and have attacked folks on the forums. I have always apologized (I think) for those times.

We’re human. We make mistakes. We get mad, sad and everything in between. The end result though, is that I hold no grudges against anyone here. I have enjoyed my time here. I’ve met wonderful people such as yourself, mercygate, mayra, catholic4areason and many others. I wish everyone peace, joy and happiness this Christmas season!!!

Peace…
 
For anyone who wants to learn more about the Mass, the Eucharist, and the Bible, here’s on online course offered by Dr. Scott Hahn at his website, the St. Paul Center for Biblical Theology:

QUOTE:

The Bible was made for the Liturgy and the Liturgy is where the Bible was meant to be proclaimed, expounded, interpreted and “heard.” That’s why, from the Sign of the Cross and the priest’s greeting: “The Lord be with you,” the Mass is one long biblical prayer - a tapestry woven from a fabric of biblical passages, phrases and allusions. This is no accident. In the Mass, the story of salvation told in the Bible continues - is made real and present - in our lives.

salvationhistory.com/online/beginner/begcourse2_home.cfm

JMJ Jay
 
40.png
ahimsaman72:
Yes, of course - I didn’t mean to imply you chew on a cadaver! I admit, though, the mystery of the eucharist is quite difficult of a concept for me to understand.
Click to expand...
You know, do you not, that the early Christians (Catholics) were accused of cannibalism? And some make that charge against Catholics still today, 21 centuries later. But we don’t drink Christ’s type AB blood, nor bite off His toe:p. We receive His Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity sacramentally, under the appearance of bread and wine. His Divine Life is sacred food for our souls.

The Church had been offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (then called the breaking of the bread) for nearly a quarter of a century before the first words about the Eucharist were written in what we now know as the NT – 1 Cor 10:16-17 and 11:23-30. Paul founded the Church at Corinth about the year 51. He taught the Corinthians personally, then moved on to found other Churches, and received upsetting news about them in 56, five years later, which prompted him to write 1 and 2 Corinthians. (Unfortunately, the letter from the Corinthians to Paul, which he answered in his Corinthian correspondence, was lost in antiquity.)

When St. Paul said “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor 10:16-17) these were rhetorical questions. He wasn’t teaching the Corinthians new doctrine. He was reminding them of Truths he had taught them personally when he lived among them. So, too, when he wrote 1 Cor, chapter 11, he wasn’t plowing new ground, but was reseeding the same fields he had already planted five years previously.

The Gospel of John wasn’t written until approximately 90 - 100. St. John had been teaching the Church personally for about 57 to 67 years when he wrote his recollections about Christ’s teaching on the Eucharist in John, Chapter 6. The Church didn’t read the Gospel of John to try to figure out whether he meant his words literally or figuratively. The Church had by then been offering the Sacrifice and confecting the Eucharist for well over half a century. The Church already knew what John meant, because he had been teaching and confecting the Eucharist himself for many years.

Now this a difference between the Faith of Catholics and Baptists that could fill many websites.

🙂 JMJ Jay
 
40.png
Katholikos:
You know, do you not, that the early Christians (Catholics) were accused of cannibalism? And some make that charge against Catholics still today, 21 centuries later. But we don’t drink Christ’s type AB blood, nor bite off His toe:p. We receive His Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity sacramentally, under the appearance of bread and wine. His Divine Life is sacred food for our souls.

The Church had been offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (then called the breaking of the bread) for nearly a quarter of a century before the first words about the Eucharist were written in what we now know as the NT – 1 Cor 10:16-17 and 11:23-30. Paul founded the Church at Corinth about the year 51. He taught the Corinthians personally, then moved on to found other Churches, and received upsetting news about them in 56, five years later, which prompted him to write 1 and 2 Corinthians. (Unfortunately, the letter from the Corinthians to Paul, which he answered in his Corinthian correspondence, was lost in antiquity.)

When St. Paul said “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor 10:16-17) these were rhetorical questions. He wasn’t teaching the Corinthians new doctrine. He was reminding them of Truths he had taught them personally when he lived among them. So, too, when he wrote 1 Cor, chapter 11, he wasn’t plowing new ground, but was reseeding the same fields he had already planted five years previously.

The Gospel of John wasn’t written until approximately 90 - 100. St. John had been teaching the Church personally for about 57 to 67 years when he wrote his recollections about Christ’s teaching on the Eucharist in John, Chapter 6. The Church didn’t read the Gospel of John to try to figure out whether he meant his words literally or figuratively. The Church had by then been offering the Sacrifice and confecting the Eucharist for well over half a century. The Church already knew what John meant, because he had been teaching and confecting the Eucharist himself for many years.

Now this a difference between the Faith of Catholics and Baptists that could fill many websites.

🙂 JMJ Jay
Click to expand...
Wow, very good history here. Thanks for sharing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top