A
How can people believe Peter is the rock but still not be Catholic?
- Status
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
Since you put everything in one quote, I am taking the liberty of copying and pasting. If you “reply” to this post, you will see how quote=qui ] (no spaces, though) will open a “quote” window, and a /quote ] (again no spaces after 1st bracket and before last bracket) closes the quote
)
Another said he wondered why his church was closed during the and the Catholic church was always open. So he started taking detours in order to pass the Catholic church on his way to school These were stories told on CAF by converts!
I trust the scholarship of our Magesterium.
continued
One person said it was their faces - they had the kindest, sweetest faces. (tee hee, I’m one of them now!
)Another said he wondered why his church was closed during the and the Catholic church was always open. So he started taking detours in order to pass the Catholic church on his way to school These were stories told on CAF by converts!
Neverthless, one should learn as much about their faith as they can. We are told to “Always be ready to give an explanation for our hope” I Peter 3:15. I like St Francis of Assisi “Preach always, use words when necessary.” I think keeping it simple works best for most people. I prefer to leave the exegis to the scholars - I don’t read ancient Greek or Aramaic.
I trust the scholarship of our Magesterium.There have been heretics from the time of the Apostles. Church Councils addressed these.
Yes, where did you find it? Is it true he said this?
continued
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
continued
Unless they are scholars, I’m sure they don’t even think about it. A lot are under the mistaken impression that the Church had the Bible translated into Latin so that people could read it, not realizing that Latin was the vernacular, hence the term “Vulgate.” Many other Church approved translations came about as languages developed. Did you know the first Bible printed on the Gutenburg Press was the Catholic Bible in German?
They argue that it was the catholic (small C) church, and that we somehow highjacked it. I have not been given any support for how that happened.
Well, in this day of internet, I could imagine that even if they weren’t taught anything about the CC, they could go to a Catholic website and see a picture of the Pope venerating the Blessed Mother and wrongly conclude he was worshipping her. This doesn’t mean that they are taught this by their churches. Having said that, this country was founded on anti-Catholicism (Puritans, etc.) Since I am off the boat European, went to Catholic school exclusively through college, I never realized the extant of anti-Catholic vitriol until I was an adult and moved out of this very Catholic town. I was never taught in school that Protestants told lies about Catholics, and to be on guard for their lies. My own dad was DEVOUTLY Lutheran (LCMS) and never said anything against the CC. In fact, his whole family converted, brothers, sisters, and their children. He never did, though.
Yes, so quit blaming your pastor 40 years ago for bad catechesis!
In this day of lightening speed information and communication, ignorance is no excuse!
T
Truthstalker
Guest
Protestant ignorance of Catholicism is matched by Catholic ignorance both of Protestant beliefs, and Catholic ingnorance of Catholicism.
We are all ignorant. Jesus is the light, and we are in the darkness without Him. By His light we see light. Without Him we have nothing.
We are all ignorant. Jesus is the light, and we are in the darkness without Him. By His light we see light. Without Him we have nothing.
A
Alethiaphile
Guest
How about when that office itself (or, rather, an extreme interpretation of it) is the cause for division in the Church? For example, it was the assertion of the papal “prerogatives” that was one of the main divisive issues between East and West around 1000 AD, and still is. Joe
T
Truthstalker
Guest
One model is that of a classroom, in which one student is very bright, getting the answers right more quickly, cleaning the blackboard, etc. The teacher might even give him duties and even some responsibilities. But if he exalts himself and begins beating the other students, demands they kiss his foot, orders everyone around, puts on a crown and extorts money from them and does worse things, what will the teacher do?
The priesthood of Eli was swept away.
The priesthood of Aaron was ended.
Both Israel and Judah went into exile. Ten of the twelve tribes have utterly vanished from the earth.
The Temple of the Lord was ransacked by His enemies.
Why in the world do they think God would spare the pope, when those leaders have done far worse than the sons of Eli, the kings of Israel, or just about anyone in the Old Testament? These things were written for our warning. The Catholics detest “once saved always saved” - except when it is applied to the papacy.
Somehow the papacy can do no wrong bad enough that God will not judge them.
The arrogance of the popes was judged in 1054, when they sought to force the filioque on the Orthodox.
It seems to me Boniface was judged for Unam Sanctam: kidnapped by the French, then the papacy became a French toy, the corruption in Avignon, then two popes, and ever since a weak and increasingly weaker papacy.
When the Avignon popes reveled in simony, kleptocracy and knavery, was that judgement? Augustine regarded corruption being the judgement of God on the doer of the evil.
It seems to me Leo X was judged when instead of reforming the church he partied. Others reformed the church because he would not.
And so on. Time after time, pope after pope, they refused to lead the church, to reform it, but turned deliberately from the way of the Lord to the love of the world, the flesh and the devil. Julius II set his coronation date after consulting his astrologers. Read of the pope whose illegitimate children were married in the Vatican.
Tell me what great and holy men these were who held the charism of infallibility, so you say. In contrast Timothy is told by Paul to pass the faith on to faithful men who will teach others. Where in that great sadness, that vile and venial worldly papacy, was there failth? Rome was the center of corruption, says Bernard, said Catherine of Siena, and many, many, many others.
They burned Savanorala and Hus and Wyclif’s body - after he had been buried. And many more perished.
How can you NOT be revolted at your own history? How can you believe in the papacy when those who held it for so long believed in it only as a method of holding onto power and becoming rich or as a platform for sexual exploits? They didn’t believe in it and took the world for a ride. Indulgences, for example became a crass method for raising money. Offices were bought and sold, sometimes the same one on the same day more than once.
That’s how someone could believe Peter is the rock but see that the church was so hopelessly corrupt that God used others. In Israel there had always been prophets operating outside the hierarchy. So came Wyclif, Hus, Tyndale, Luther, Calvin and many others. Those who had been looted by Rome rejoiced in a message of freedom. The papacy did itself in.
Anyhow, that is how a lot of people see it.
The priesthood of Eli was swept away.
The priesthood of Aaron was ended.
Both Israel and Judah went into exile. Ten of the twelve tribes have utterly vanished from the earth.
The Temple of the Lord was ransacked by His enemies.
Why in the world do they think God would spare the pope, when those leaders have done far worse than the sons of Eli, the kings of Israel, or just about anyone in the Old Testament? These things were written for our warning. The Catholics detest “once saved always saved” - except when it is applied to the papacy.
Somehow the papacy can do no wrong bad enough that God will not judge them.
The arrogance of the popes was judged in 1054, when they sought to force the filioque on the Orthodox.
It seems to me Boniface was judged for Unam Sanctam: kidnapped by the French, then the papacy became a French toy, the corruption in Avignon, then two popes, and ever since a weak and increasingly weaker papacy.
When the Avignon popes reveled in simony, kleptocracy and knavery, was that judgement? Augustine regarded corruption being the judgement of God on the doer of the evil.
It seems to me Leo X was judged when instead of reforming the church he partied. Others reformed the church because he would not.
And so on. Time after time, pope after pope, they refused to lead the church, to reform it, but turned deliberately from the way of the Lord to the love of the world, the flesh and the devil. Julius II set his coronation date after consulting his astrologers. Read of the pope whose illegitimate children were married in the Vatican.
Tell me what great and holy men these were who held the charism of infallibility, so you say. In contrast Timothy is told by Paul to pass the faith on to faithful men who will teach others. Where in that great sadness, that vile and venial worldly papacy, was there failth? Rome was the center of corruption, says Bernard, said Catherine of Siena, and many, many, many others.
They burned Savanorala and Hus and Wyclif’s body - after he had been buried. And many more perished.
How can you NOT be revolted at your own history? How can you believe in the papacy when those who held it for so long believed in it only as a method of holding onto power and becoming rich or as a platform for sexual exploits? They didn’t believe in it and took the world for a ride. Indulgences, for example became a crass method for raising money. Offices were bought and sold, sometimes the same one on the same day more than once.
That’s how someone could believe Peter is the rock but see that the church was so hopelessly corrupt that God used others. In Israel there had always been prophets operating outside the hierarchy. So came Wyclif, Hus, Tyndale, Luther, Calvin and many others. Those who had been looted by Rome rejoiced in a message of freedom. The papacy did itself in.
Anyhow, that is how a lot of people see it.
S
SCALCO
Guest
We are all sinners.
A
Alethiaphile
Guest
The Orthodox Church also traces its origins to Jesus and the Apostles, and can make the same claims that you make for the Catholic Church above. Rome has even admitted that it has a valid apostolic succession, and valid Orders and Sacraments. Joe
A
Always_For_Him
Guest
You are right truthstalker, there was a lot of corruption within the Papacy in the Middle Ages. However, not one change was made against faith and morals. We didn’t change our teachings, add to or take away from canon, or change our interpretation of scripture. We are still the same Church - One United Holy Catholic Apostolic Church. It is unfortunate that there was such a dark period. There is a lot that of explanation that you have left out, so it seems a little one-sided. We made it through that bad period in-tact and were not prevailed against. We are still the Church founded by Christ. We are united in having the same beliefs, and interpretation of scripture and understanding of Jesus’ ONE Truth as taught by Jesus, Peter and the Apostles, continued to have through the writing of the Bible, and continue to all the way to today.
A
Always_For_Him
Guest
Your Church has done a great job in teaching you all the bad things about Catholocism. Whether it is all true or not, was not anything to be concerned over. But, they haven’t taught you the agregious actions of your Protestant ancestors. Nor have they taught you any real truths about the Catholic Church. For 500 years the machine has spun all the untruths, rationalizations, justifications, misrepresentations, ommissions into something so unrecognizable and unsolvable, you would have to be against the Catholic Church.
A
Always_For_Him
Guest
guanophore (a poster) from a different thread wrote this a lot better than me.
"The Church is the Holy and Pure Bride of Christ, and is prevented from error by the HS. It is people who are in need of reform. You are failing to distinguish between the Holy Body of the Lord, who is infallible by nature of the Head (Christ) who is divine, and whose soul is the HS, who cannot err, and the fallible persons who are joined to her.
"The Church is the Holy and Pure Bride of Christ, and is prevented from error by the HS. It is people who are in need of reform. You are failing to distinguish between the Holy Body of the Lord, who is infallible by nature of the Head (Christ) who is divine, and whose soul is the HS, who cannot err, and the fallible persons who are joined to her.
J
JRKH
Guest
First of all allow me to congratulate you on a well constructed and powerful post, and I apologize for having to snip it for length. It is indeed true that men within the Church were corrupt, and that corruption, directly or indirectly, led to the Protestant Reformation. Also I like your bringing up the various tribulations suffered by the tribes in the OT. It is indeed something that we all must consider.
As to being ashamed of Catholic History while also being Catholic, I can only say that I am also ashamed of many things in American History but will remain an American. I was not present during those times so I cannot effect them any more than you can effect the evils that were prepetrated by Protestants in the past.
In regards to the OT reference, I find this particularly interesting.
God chose a people and made a covenant with them. He kept that covenant with them. When they turned away he sent wars, plaques, and prophets to turn them back. He even allowed most of the tribes to be destroyed. But for all of that, God kept His covenant with Israel.
Israel, likewise, kept their covenant with God, despite having corrupt and evil men in positions of authority, killing God’s Prophets and other travesties. They maintained the law, the sacrifice, the teachings of Moses and Traditions of God’s people. Therefore God did not abandon them. So much so that when Jesus came he found the Temple in Jeruselum rebuilt, and the center of Jewish Life even though they were occupied by a Pagan Power.
I find this a compelling analogy to your concern with The Church. Jesus established a single Church, just as God made a covenant with a single people. God will honor His New Covenant with His Church, just as His Father did in Honoring the Old covenant.
The Church has seen many trials. She has been tested both from within and without. She has had to endure unholy men in positions of authority. She has been buffetted by war, accusation, Political intrique and every form of evil. Indeed the People’s hearts were far from the Lord many times. Yet each time God sent someone to revitalize the Church, to give courage to the faithful and encourage them to turn back toward God.
When the Protestant Leaders began the Reformation, it may well have had legitimate reasons - udoubtedly there were serious problems. The Revolt was also an essential element in the reforms in the Church taken at Trent. If the revolt had remained a strictly religious affair, it is entirely possible that the seperated brethren would have been restored to the Church by now for the revolt originally was mainly about practices and not dogmatic teachings. Unfortunately the Revolt quickly became a political and nationalistic affair which drove wedges so deep that the wounds could not heal.
I pray that the wounds can someday heal and that we can all be re-united in God’s one True Church, celebrating together at the altar and sharing Christ’s Body and Blood with all believers.
Peace
James
A
Always_For_Him
Guest
Can you expound on this a little please? What practices? I have some knowledge, but as I read the Protestant reasoning, I am wondering if I am missing something, or if it is just more Protestant beliefs now. Also, what is some good material to read on this. I have read bits and pieces here and there in other material, but I have really never studied both sides of Trent.
J
JRKH
Guest
I am afraid that I am not that well versed as to specifics either.
The actual Point of “Practices” I had in mind when I wrote my post was the fact that Luther’s 95 theses, which he nailed on the door, dealt exclusively with the issue of selling indulgences. This issue was dealt with at Trent and the practice condemned.
I can give you a link to the Documents of Trent Perhaps some others here can give you some other reading hints.
The important thing for us as Catholics is to not hide from the abuses of the past.
The important thing for Protestants to remember is that the founders were protesting the abuses of The Church at that time. The real question now is whether those reasons still exist, and whether the Protest is still a valid one.
Peace
James
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
Martin Luther, Calvin, etc. were not the first Reformers. Many times earlier in Church history were her members in need of reforming. St. Catherine of Sienna convinced the Pope to come back to Rome from Avignon during the Babylonian Captivity. St Francis of Assisi and many other saints played important roles in rooting out corruption amongst the Church’s members. All with utmost humility, not drawing attention to themselves, and without revolution.
J
JRKH
Guest
You are sooo right. We have been a church of reform for amny centuries.
Martin Luther, Calvin, etc. were not the first Reformers. Many times earlier in Church history were her members in need of reforming. St. Catherine of Sienna convinced the Pope to come back to Rome from Avignon during the Babylonian Captivity. St Francis of Assisi and many other saints played important roles in rooting out corruption amongst the Church’s members. All with utmost humility, not drawing attention to themselves, and without revolution.
Peace
James
T
Truthstalker
Guest
So you admit the church has to reform, but you refuse to admit it sins. Only individuals sin, we are told; the Church is incapable of sin. This is like having the AIDS virus: the Catholic Church cannot fight off systemic illnesses, because it will not even admit there can be sickness. Meanwhile systemic rot can set in, as with scandals or corruption up and down the line that is more than individual. It’s similar to saying the any organization is ok, but it is all the sinners in it who do all the crimes. The organization can encourage people to behave in certain ways and tempt them beyond their ability to cope. Absolute power corrupts absolutely; the temptations of the papacy have been more than many can bear. That is not an individual failing but a corporate one. The first step in recovery is admitting there is a problem. You won’t take that step. Instead you go deeper into denial.
J
JRKH
Guest
M
mercygate
Guest
You are confusing the organizational Church which coinheres with the Mystical Body of Christ, and the perfect and spotless Bride. Human flaws have caused the organization to do things nobody would be proud of, but she has NEVER, ever, ever TAUGHT anything other than the faith of Jesus Christ and His message of salvation.
Never.
Even in the worst rot of the renaissance, the teaching authority of the Church remained incorrupt. Even in the stress, turmoil, and confusion of the recent sex scandals, never has the Church taught that any of this is acceptable behavior.
J
JRKH
Guest
mercygate explained it better than I but, yes I admit that the Church requires reform, revitalization, etc. However you want to term it. Not because she is imperfect, but rather because of the imperfect people within her.
It’s not similar to saying…, It’s exactly like saying…
The “organization”, in this case The Church, encourages people to act in Holy ways. It does not tempt them. The temptations come from the same source as all sinful temptation.
You seem to be under a mistaken impression here. The only Person in the Catholic Church who has “absolute power” is Our King, Jesus Christ.
Peace
James
- Status