Here is what Catholics believe, what part if this do other Christians disagree with?

[cradlecathlic26]

Dear Ellen.

Thank you for your response. To answer your quesions “Who told you”. Actually it was my Catholic neighbors. According to them they learned in the classes they took.

These are the same people who will party on christmas eve and stagger over to church for Mid Night mass so drunk they can hardly walk. I notice in their home in the mist of the Jim Beam and Vodka bottles on the bar is a little plastic Jesus.

I remember in Vietnam the Catholic soldiers referred to the Catholic Chaplain as “The Town drunk” because they had to carry him to his tent every night. And he never had confession until the afternoon because of a hangover.

Is holy living not an issue for Catholics?

BTW when Paul was writing to the Romans about Sin, he was not referring to the resurrected sinless Christ.

As to asking people for Prayer. My Sister had her Blind eye opened when the Church Prayed for her. My wife was healed from melenoma Brain Cancer when the Church prayed, even though 8 Doctors said she would not live to see daylight. She lived 9 years
after that day.

Do we ask people to pray with us? You bet we do, but we Pray to Jesus himself after all he is Jevoha Ropha our Healer. I don’t understand why you have so many levels of people dead and alive to get to Jesus. All you have to do is ask him. He said come unto me and I will give you rest.

Blessings

Im sorry, but who ever said drinking was bad? You must be baptist right?

And about praying to “dead” people, they are NOT dead… when you are in heavan you are much alive. Hello!!!

 

[Atreyu]

Do Protestants really believe in the following line:
** We believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.**
It seems to me that Protestants believe in either one Church or the Catholic Church; but they cannot believe in both. If they believe in one Church, then they believe that their own Church - which encompasses only those people whom are in Communion with that Church - is the true Church. But this Church is clearly not *catholic *(as in, “universal”), Anglican Communion aside. Alternatively, if a Protestant believes in the Catholic Church, then they believe in the body of all believers - all those who are “saved” I think is the terminology. But this Church is clearly not one - unless you think that the Baptist Church and the Presbyterian Church are the same thing. They are not.

So why do Protestants (apart from Anglicans) confess a Creed that they don’t believe in?

And then there’s a line from the Apostle’s Creed that Protestants don’t seem to really believe in either. It is this one:
I believe in… the communion of saints.
What do Protestants mean when they say this? They mean they believe in the body of all believers right, all the saved? But according to Protestants, not all saints are in communion with one another, as the “body of all believers”, or “the saints” encompasses more people than those within their own Communion. So really, they are saying:
I believe in the communion of people who are not in communion with one another.
It doesn’t make sense.

I have one more question. The historical writers of these two Creeds clearly did not have in mind the Protestant reinterpretations of the text when they originally wrote the Creeds. So why do Protestants elevate the words themselves above what is actually meant by the words? Are they claiming that the very words of the Creeds are the inspired word of God? This would violate sola scriptura, I would think.

 

[c659smith]

revwd01

So this is your quote below

“And lastly we believe that communion is symbolic, Jesus said “This do in Remberence of me” not literal eating of his flesh. I am aware of the scripture wher Jesus refered to that, but he was not talking in literal terms anymore than when he said if your eye offens you pluck it out”.

Now how would you explain this scripture as what you have decided was biblical symbolism Paul states you are wrong.

Paul wrote to the Corinthians: “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16). So when we receive Communion, we actually participate in the body and blood of Christ, not just eat symbols of them. Paul also said, “Therefore whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. . . . For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself” (1 Cor. 11:27, 29). “To answer for the body and blood” of someone meant to be guilty of a crime as serious as homicide. How could eating mere bread and wine “unworthily” be so serious? Paul’s comment makes sense only if the bread and wine became the real body and blood of Christ

 

[c659smith]

revwd01

This is your post below

"We do not believe that any man can forgive your sins, Acts tells us “There is only one name under Heaven by which a man may be saved, and that is the man Jesus Christ”.

How to you explain this scripture below your quote above seems to me to be flawed by scripture alone

Jesus Christ had power to forgive sins, and he conferred this power on the apostles and, through their successors the bishops, on priests. Although priests are sinners themselves, they have Christ’s authority to forgive sins through the sacraments of confession.

“Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me” (Luke 10:16).

“[Jesus] said to them again, ‘Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.’ And then he breathed on them and said to them, ‘Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained’” (John 20:21-23).

Jesus first repeated what he said, then summarized: “‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’” (John 6:51–52).

Again Jesus said in deed what is the challenge here?

His listeners were stupefied because now they understood Jesus literally—and correctly. He again repeated his words, but with even greater emphasis, and introduced the statement about drinking his blood: “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him” (John 6:53–56

 

[HannahLisa]

Do Protestants really believe in the following line:
** We believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.**
It seems to me that Protestants believe in either one Church or the Catholic Church; but they cannot believe in both. If they believe in one Church, then they believe that their own Church - which encompasses only those people whom are in Communion with that Church - is the true Church. But this Church is clearly not *catholic *(as in, “universal”), Anglican Communion aside. Alternatively, if a Protestant believes in the Catholic Church, then they believe in the body of all believers - all those who are “saved” I think is the terminology. But this Church is clearly not one - unless you think that the Baptist Church and the Presbyterian Church are the same thing. They are not.

So why do Protestants (apart from Anglicans) confess a Creed that they don’t believe in?

And then there’s a line from the Apostle’s Creed that Protestants don’t seem to really believe in either. It is this one:
I believe in… the communion of saints.
What do Protestants mean when they say this? They mean they believe in the body of all believers right, all the saved? But according to Protestants, not all saints are in communion with one another, as the “body of all believers”, or “the saints” encompasses more people than those within their own Communion. So really, they are saying:
I believe in the communion of people who are not in communion with one another.
It doesn’t make sense.

I have one more question. The historical writers of these two Creeds clearly did not have in mind the Protestant reinterpretations of the text when they originally wrote the Creeds. So why do Protestants elevate the words themselves above what is actually meant by the words? Are they claiming that the very words of the Creeds are the inspired word of God? This would violate sola scriptura, I would think.

I don’t know what the Protestant theological reasoning is behind saying “one catholic [universal] and apostolic church.” Most Protestants, as far as I know, DO NOT have it as an article of faith that you have to be part of their denomination to be saved. So, maybe they believe that all believers make up the universal church. I do not know this for sure; these are guesses. I have not done research on the Protestant theology behind this.

I do not see anything which suggests that most Protestants who use these creeds believe that all the saints are not in communion with one another. I think they believe that all believers are saints, regardless of denomination. I believe most Protestant churches are in communion with each other, and I do not think that any would refuse communion to a Catholic or Orthodox person. Rather, the Catholic or Orthodox person would refuse to take communion if it was offered, because “it’s not valid”.

 

[fbl9]

hi HannahLisa when a catholic say communion of saints they mean those here and now and those who are in heaven, by saints i mean all who are in heaven not just canonnized saints. an application of this can shown this way. Catholics have some formulated prayers this is a standard on for grace before meals: Bless us and these thy gifts o Lord which-we-are about to recieve through thy bounty through Christ our Lord. when we say we it means we are in communion with those on earth saying this prayer and those in heaven giving God glory.now this is my own way of thinking this.

 

[ALLGIRLS]

Dear Ellen.

Thank you for your response. To answer your quesions “Who told you”. Actually it was my Catholic neighbors. According to them they learned in the classes they took.

These are the same people who will party on christmas eve and stagger over to church for Mid Night mass so drunk they can hardly walk. I notice in their home in the mist of the Jim Beam and Vodka bottles on the bar is a little plastic Jesus.

**I’m so sorry to hear that . Misinformed cultural Catholics, and I used to be one, unfortunately, do more harm to the Church (or at least the image of the Church) than all the “Jack Chicks and Dave Hunts and James Whites” put together, imo, because they are far more numerous and visible. Best stay here to learn what Catholics REALLY believe:thumbsup: **

I remember in Vietnam the Catholic soldiers referred to the Catholic Chaplain as “The Town drunk” because they had to carry him to his tent every night. And he never had confession until the afternoon because of a hangover.

I really can’t comment on that. Vietnam was a horrible place, and did a number on a lot of people. That priest might have been very devout and upright prior to getting there. My former supervisor was a Vietnam vet, and he was WAY messed up. I think it was only by the Grace of God (although being an agnostic, he’d never admit that) that he wasn’t a homeless drug addict

Is holy living not an issue for Catholics?

**It’s supposed to be. That’s why we have confession (and no, you can’t be forgiven if you’re not repentent, and you can’t confess sins ahead of time, or sin on purpose with the plan of going to confession later. I’ve heard all these claims made, by Catholics and nonCatholics, about the Sacrament), and Saints to model our lives after. That’s actually one of the main things we have in common w/ the “holiness” churches (Nazarene, Wesleyan, etc). **

BTW when Paul was writing to the Romans about Sin, he was not referring to the resurrected sinless Christ.

What about the precrucified Christ? Just ribbing ya. St. Paul was actually making the point that there is no distinction b/t Jew and Gentile when it comes to sin, and Jews don’t have a “pass” just because they are Jews, nor do Gentiles because they haven’t had “the Law” passed onto them. We (general humanity “we”) all need Christ’s Saving Grace.

As to asking people for Prayer. My Sister had her Blind eye opened when the Church Prayed for her. My wife was healed from melenoma Brain Cancer when the Church prayed, even though 8 Doctors said she would not live to see daylight. She lived 9 years
after that day.

**That’s awesome! Really demonstrates the power of prayer, and that real miracles DO occur everyday **

Do we ask people to pray with us? You bet we do, but we Pray to Jesus himself after all he is Jevoha Ropha our Healer. I don’t understand why you have so many levels of people dead and alive to get to Jesus. All you have to do is ask him. He said come unto me and I will give you rest.

We do too. I don’t why people have this idea that Jesus is the last person Catholics talk to :banghead: In fact, if you go to a Mass, which is considered the Church’s universal “prayer”, it’s ALL about Jesus. Mary and some of the Saints are mentioned like twice, unless it’s a Marian or Saints’ feast day,(then they’re mentioned a couple more times, but Jesus is still the center of the Mass). I actually start all my prayers with “Lord Jesus” or “Heavenly Father”. I ask for Mary or one of the Saints (if I have a specific problem that a particular Saint is “known for”) after I talk to Jesus and the Father. I also always ask the Holy Spirit to fill me and make me holy, open my eyes, and make me so people see Christ through me. We don’t put Mary and Saints before Jesus and God, we just recognize that, just like we have family and friends and fellow parishioners to pray for us (as we pray for them), we have Saints in heaven who can too Now, with the Saints, we don’t need to pray for them, because being in heaven, they don’t need our prayers anymore, but the otherwise it’s exactly the same.

Blessings

Blessings and peace to you as well

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

I do not see anything which suggests that most Protestants who use these creeds believe that all the saints are not in communion with one another. I think they believe that all believers are saints, regardless of denomination. I believe most Protestant churches are in communion with each other, and I do not think that any would refuse communion to a Catholic or Orthodox person. Rather, the Catholic or Orthodox person would refuse to take communion if it was offered, because “it’s not valid”.

Most Protestant churchs that i have found do practice closed communion. you may not have to be a member of their church but you you do need to be a member of their denomination. Now again most would not ask you. Say if you happen to go to a baptist church and they are having communion service that Sunday you could part take i believe without showing proof of being a baptist first. but as a rule they will tell you that you would need to be a baptist. Just my experience. Now there are some that do practice open communion but the majority practice closed.

 

[EmergencyOps]

Most Protestant churchs that i have found do practice closed communion. you may not have to be a member of their church but you you do need to be a member of their denomination. Now again most would not ask you. Say if you happen to go to a baptist church and they are having communion service that Sunday you could part take i believe without showing proof of being a baptist first.

As a Baptist, I can tell you that you are correct
We do the Lord’s Supper in memory of Him. In rule, we ask that you be a Baptist. In a way, Catholicism is the same way. You can pretend to be Catholic or pretend to be taking communion worthily, but in fraudulently obtaining it, you lie to the congregation and yourself. What really shocked me was an RCIA director who informed me that many people short-cut the RCIA system (lying about their RCIA attendance if moving to a new parish RCIA) to enter the Church quicker You’re only cheating yourself in the end.

-Mark

 

[whatisthetruth]

Hi Jimmy,

I disagree with
12. We believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

I am sure “Roman” is implied as in
12. We believe in one, holy, (Roman)catholic, and apostolic Church.

However our church believes, with apostolic removed
12. We believe in one, holy, catholic(universal, the meaning of catholic) Church.

also

1. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

not baby baptism but baptism by immersion.

Luke 14:27
And anyone who does not carry his cross and **follow me **cannot be my disciple.

As Jesus was baptized, shouldn’t we follow him,

16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased
Matthew 3

And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.
Acts 8 36:38

I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
Matthew 3:11

Thank you

God bless

truth

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

I have read the accounts of baptisms throughout the Bible and I do not find any place that says the the person being baptized was immersed. In the previous Post about the baptism of the eunuch it reads they both went down into the water and he was baptized. Did they both go under the water? I was not there so I do not know what was done. He could have been immersed he could have knelt down and bowed his head and Phillip could have cupped the water in his hands to pour over his head. I don’t know I was not there. Th catholic Church teach that both the pouring or immersion is acceptable. It is the act of submission to God that is important.

Now you are correct that an infant can not repent of sin. At the baptism of a child the parents and god parents pledge to raise the child in the body of Christ, within the teachings of the Church. At the age if accountability the person then takes upon themselves the promise of baptism he pledges himself to those vows made at his baptism. I don’t know about everyone but I can state that at my confirmation I felt the Holy Spirit upon me.

I see no substance in the continued argument over the method of baptism, I have found no were were either the water was pured or the person was immersed in the Bible. If I am mistaken please provide me with the verse.

 

[HannahLisa]

As a Baptist, I can tell you that you are correct
We do the Lord’s Supper in memory of Him. In rule, we ask that you be a Baptist. In a way, Catholicism is the same way. You can pretend to be Catholic or pretend to be taking communion worthily, but in fraudulently obtaining it, you lie to the congregation and yourself. What really shocked me was an RCIA director who informed me that many people short-cut the RCIA system (lying about their RCIA attendance if moving to a new parish RCIA) to enter the Church quicker You’re only cheating yourself in the end.

-Mark

I don’t remember ever visiting a Baptist church on a communion Sunday.

The Methodist and Episcopalian churches I attended do not require you to be part of their denomination. They only require that you be Christian (have Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord).
List of denominations and who they let receive Communion

 

[fbl9]

hi whatisthetruth the quote of Jesus’s baptism in no way implies He was immersed. where i live i have never gone down to get out of a body of water. Jesus’s actions are meant as way of clairifying for the people present that it was Jesus who was the centre of attention. it Christ’s action of moving himself away from St.John the baptist that is misrepresented.St. John writes6;54 amen amen i say unto you unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood you shall not have life in you.verse 56 For my flesh is real food indeed and my blood real drink indeed.what is so hard to understand may i ask?

 

[fbl9]

hi whatisthetruth did you know by removing apstolic from the creed you are admitting your church has no succesion from the apostles. thus removing yourself from the teachings of the apostles. St. John in writing the gospel made it clear all Christ taught and did is not contained here.St. Paul wrote hold fast to all i have taught you. He did not state and nowhere is it stated all he taught.

 

[whatisthetruth]

Hi fbl9

the quote of Jesus’s baptism in no way implies He was immersed.

okay. The verse in no way says He wasn’t immersed.

So can we respect each other for what we believe, let God be the judge and focus on the love of Jesus.

what is so hard to understand may i ask?

I do understand why Roman Catholics believe what you do, I do not believe in your interpretation of scripture or the use of other doctrines to support your belief.

My question to you is…

can you understand as to why we non catholics believe the way we do?

In all due respect, Is it hard to understand how we could believe something different about the same verse?

Thank you

truth

 

[wanner47]

Dear Ellen.

Thank you for your response. To answer your quesions “Who told you”. Actually it was my Catholic neighbors. According to them they learned in the classes they took.

These are the same people who will party on christmas eve and stagger over to church for Mid Night mass so drunk they can hardly walk. I notice in their home in the mist of the Jim Beam and Vodka bottles on the bar is a little plastic Jesus.

I remember in Vietnam the Catholic soldiers referred to the Catholic Chaplain as “The Town drunk” because they had to carry him to his tent every night. And he never had confession until the afternoon because of a hangover.

Is holy living not an issue for Catholics?

Let me apply some of your own logic.

This evangelical preacher paid another man for sex; therefore, all evangelicals must be practicing homosexuals.

This Baptist minister has been accused of sending lewd text messages to a 14-year-old girl; therefore, all Baptists must enjoy soliciting minors.

Is holy living not an issue for evangelicals or Baptists?

… You can’t take the actions of two Catholics you’ve known in your life and assume that every single one of the 1 billion plus Catholics in the world act the same way. It’s ridiculous.

By the way, where on earth did you get the notion that Catholics consider the Pope to be sinless? That’s absurd. Can you back up this assertion with proof from a Catholic source?

 

[c659smith]

What I find diffulcult to understand is how big a misconception people have of the Catholic Church.
I do not know where people get their information from but it is definitely amusing.
It is also surprising tha when people then are told of what the Catholic Church and the teachings they find themselves not in dissagreement but in a kind of limbo on what to do about the info.

Just as an F.Y.I.

At the parish I attend you knell down in 3ft. of water through Baptism and if you want to be fully immersed that’s your option.

The reason for Baptizing an Infant is that we are all born with original sin do you agree,

That we are not released from this sin without baptism,do you agree?

What would happen to the child if he or she died without being baptized ?

Believe it or not the Sacrament of Confirmation gives the Baptized member of the Church to decide for themselves.
This is done between the 6th and 9th grade. Age of Reasoning

 

[whatisthetruth]

hi whatisthetruth did you know by removing apstolic from the creed you are admitting your church has no succesion from the apostles. thus removing yourself from the teachings of the apostles. St. John in writing the gospel made it clear all Christ taught and did is not contained here.St. Paul wrote hold fast to all i have taught you. He did not state and nowhere is it stated all he taught.

oops, sorry about that

the only reason I removed the word apostolic from the creed is not to illiminate the power in the teachings of the apostles, but to illustrate, that I do not believe Jesus intended for His church to be built in the structure of the apostolic sucession from the pope right on through the priests.

thanks for pointing that out fbl9

truth