- Status
M
Malachi4U
Guest
Jesus established the Catholic Church in 33 A.D. and gave the Pope (St. Peter/Kepha the Rock) His authority on earth until His return.
The Catholic Church is the power not the Bible. That is why the Church put the Bible together, declared it inspired, decided it was needed, put in 73 books, etc…
And God has destroyed all those heresies outside His visible body on earth over time. All those religions you see around pop up and desolve and will allways do so, except one, His Catholic Church.
Just take a drive and find all the closed “churches” in you area.
W
Wildkit
Guest
All of the points are on target,…but let me hear from a Protestant on this issue. Why is tradition,…when nothing else available except the Holy Spirit,…why is that not important?
P
Peter_J
Guest
I does seem a little strange to me that you haven’t gotten more responses from Protestants. But then, I only been on CAF a couple months, and mostly I’ve been involved in Catholic-Orthodox discussions.
So perhaps I could ask you, and anyone else who’s been involved with a lot of Catholic-Protestant (or Catholic-Protestant-Orthodox) discussions around here, is this silence common, or do you typically get a lot of Protestant (name removed by moderator)ut?
S
SIA
Guest
The Spanish Inquisition is a darned good example of the sanctioned violence and murder of the RCC. It is so sad that Catholics today try to hide from the truth of their dark history. The RCC support of Hitler and the Nazis would be another.
F
FdeS2
Guest
SIA, unless you have ANY historically accurate statements, please refrain from posting. None of the things that you have said are even remotely credible.
The Spanish Inquisition was perpetrated by political figures calling themselves “Catholic,” just as some political candidates will claim to be Christian while supporting abortion and other various ideas. These people, in the name of the Catholic Church, killed people. Anyone can do an evil in the name of an institution, but it makes them no more truly connected to that institution. The Roman Catholic Church has not and never will teach that it is acceptable to torture and kill people in order to “convert” them.
As for Catholic support regarding Hitler and the Nazis, it is absolutely absurd. It is well documented that Pope Pius XII helped to save an astounding number of Jews through the Catholic underground. In addition, he prevented the utter destruction of the Vatican, where many Jews were being held in safety.
Robert P. Lockwood, in a November 2006 article from “This Rock” magazine (called “A Pius Legend”), explains where anti-Pius XII sentiments were made popular: “The myth of Pius XII began in earnest in 1963 in a drama created for the stage by Rolf Hochhuth, an otherwise obscure German playwright. Born in 1931, Hochhuth was part of a post-World War II movement called ‘documentary theater’ or ‘theater of fact.’” He goes on to give a full picture, which one can find here: catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0611tbt.asp
Perhaps you’ve been reading propaganda like John Cornwell’s book, “Hitler’s Pope: The Secret History of Pius XII.” I would suggest reading sources from both sides instead of singling out only books and articles that support your pre-existing opinions.
May we all come to see the truth through Jesus Christ our Lord, Amen.
P
Peter_J
Guest
SIA and FdeS2,
Perhaps you should start a new thread to talk about the Spanish Inquisition. When Linda Marie asked
(Similarly, you could start a thread about SIA’s idea that the RCC supported the Nazis – although personally I wouldn’t bother, since the idea is so absurd and groundless.)
-Peter.
Perhaps you should start a new thread to talk about the Spanish Inquisition. When Linda Marie asked
she was clearly talking about the early church. The Spanish Inquisition was many centuries later.
(Similarly, you could start a thread about SIA’s idea that the RCC supported the Nazis – although personally I wouldn’t bother, since the idea is so absurd and groundless.)
-Peter.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
The Catholic church was founded upon Peter and the Apostles. The teachings of Jesus was handed down to the early disciples and church fathers, the fullness of the deposit of faith has already been deposited. So armed with Truth and revelation, the church was ready to die for her teachings from Jesus, and she did, many a pope and saints were martyred for the Catholic faith in these early centuries.
There were no protestants to speak of during the first 1500 years only Catholilcs and heretics. These heretics were excommunicated from the church so as not to infect their teachings to the sheep, that Jesus put Peter in charge and his successors the Pope of the Catholic church. Again armed with the fullness of faith and truth, the church was abel to expose the wolf, and chase it off from the flock. She has done this for 2000 years now.
The Catholic church also dealt with the “apostacy” and at times had to excommunicate her own bishops. Later these, recanted and confessed, repented and were accepted back into the Catholic church, but others did not. This created such a scandal, that St. Ambrose, wanted these apostate bishops to be rebaptised into the Catholic church. But the Pope (successor of Peter) said No! to St. Ambrose. Once baptised, you cannot repeat baptism. ST. Ambrose did not like the Pope’s decision, but all adhered to the authority of Peter and his successors. St. Ambrose was from the Eastern Church, sorry, thought I’d mention that.
As far as those heresies that tried to enter the Church, came from different schools of thought and learning and tried to mix these heretical teachings with the Teachings of Jesus. This is how the Catholic church had to use her authority Jesus gave her, to bind and loose. Because whenever her teachings were under attack, the bishops and Pope counciled heard every side of the arguments, and defined the teaching in question unchangeable and made it a doctrine of the faith. The Catholic church always possesed the fullness of the deposit of faith and truth. It does not get doctrinized until the teachings come under attack.
Many Saints were discovered from these battles of powers and prinicipalities, and were victorious. Because the Catholic church is still here today unchanged for 2000 years.
As far as a bible was needed? The Church possesed the writings of the apostles as well as many other writings. The Catholic church desposed of the books that were not used for the Mass, and cannonized the books to be used in the Liturgical settings both liturgies of the word and liturgy of the Eucharist. This is the untold story why the Catholic church put the bible together.
The bible was not needed to fight against heresies before the church put the liturgical books together ( the bible). Because Peter the Pope and the successors of the apostles had the Oral Tradition from the apostles themselves to defend against any teaching that came against her. The council made up of the Pope and Bishops came together to put the heresies to rest, this is a divine act under the holy spirit, when the church meets in council, because whenever 2 or more are gathered in my name their “IAM”. This is where infallibility takes issue among the church. Infallibility= teaching on faith and morals without error.
Hope this helps, Peace be with you
F
FdeS2
Guest
LOL
Peter J, I think that there are already threads on the topic, but I personally wouldn’t even want to discuss it any further. I simply wanted to refute the “interesting” opinions put forth just in case anyone read them and saw that they were unanswered.
Now, for the early church…
Arianism was the largest and most difficult heresy to get rid of, seeing as a majority of bishops, successions of emperors (including Constantine), Amazingly, a bishop named Athanasius wrote a stellar refutation of Arianism and, later, the Council of Nicea sided with Athanasius instead of Arius and Constantine, teaching the truth.
So it was through the authority that you already recognized that the heresies were defeated! The same basic story goes for all of the heresies…
Yours in Christ,
FdeS2
Peter J, I think that there are already threads on the topic, but I personally wouldn’t even want to discuss it any further. I simply wanted to refute the “interesting” opinions put forth just in case anyone read them and saw that they were unanswered.
Now, for the early church…
Arianism was the largest and most difficult heresy to get rid of, seeing as a majority of bishops, successions of emperors (including Constantine), Amazingly, a bishop named Athanasius wrote a stellar refutation of Arianism and, later, the Council of Nicea sided with Athanasius instead of Arius and Constantine, teaching the truth.
So it was through the authority that you already recognized that the heresies were defeated! The same basic story goes for all of the heresies…
Yours in Christ,
FdeS2
S
SIA
Guest
I gave you credible examples and it is you who are stepping around the facts. Face it, the RCC has much blood on its hands. Look at the infamous bloody Mary and how she had Cranmer,Lattimer and one other burned at the stake (hence the three blind mice). Historical facts. I also have never read the book that you were so certain I read, but I have several pictures showing allegiance between predominate Nazi figures and Catholic clergy. Real historica documents that you nor anyone else can deny.
F
FdeS2
Guest
It has already been suggested that a new thread be started, and this will be the last time that I post anything regarding these allegations.
There have been no facts “stepped around.” I realize that there are pictures of clergy with Hitler… it is their job to try and bring peace and help the poor man! (I use “poor man” in the sense that he was really terrible and far off the path to salvation, in concern for his soul)
Flip a few pages further in history, and you will see that Elizabeth I was a far more bloodthirsty monarch than Bloody Mary. I do not deny that Bloody Mary did terrible things, nor do I condone those actions, but you are linking the actions of people that call themselves Catholic (Bloody Mary) and the Catholic Church, which is NOT represented by Bloody Mary. It has never claimed to take teaching from her or any other monarch… for teachings accepted from a monarch, see Henry XIII and that church.
Elizabeth was a quick-tempered woman and had a “roll list” at her Anglican services. Anyone who did not attend, and/or was caught going to a Catholic Mass was captured, drawn, quartered, and beheaded. Her “secret police” followed people who were suspected, and… well, if they were Catholic, they usually died. Many more Catholics were killed under Elizabeth than Protestants were killed under Bloody Mary. So, really, they should call her “Bloodier Elizabeth.”
I was not so sure that you had read the book, but the things you were saying are quite in line with the views held in that particular book.
Finally, there are historical documents and evidence that Pope Pius helped save countless Jews and was NOT a puppet/proponent of Hitler or the Nazi party. Alright, enough on this point… back to the early church again…
There have been no facts “stepped around.” I realize that there are pictures of clergy with Hitler… it is their job to try and bring peace and help the poor man! (I use “poor man” in the sense that he was really terrible and far off the path to salvation, in concern for his soul)
Flip a few pages further in history, and you will see that Elizabeth I was a far more bloodthirsty monarch than Bloody Mary. I do not deny that Bloody Mary did terrible things, nor do I condone those actions, but you are linking the actions of people that call themselves Catholic (Bloody Mary) and the Catholic Church, which is NOT represented by Bloody Mary. It has never claimed to take teaching from her or any other monarch… for teachings accepted from a monarch, see Henry XIII and that church.
Elizabeth was a quick-tempered woman and had a “roll list” at her Anglican services. Anyone who did not attend, and/or was caught going to a Catholic Mass was captured, drawn, quartered, and beheaded. Her “secret police” followed people who were suspected, and… well, if they were Catholic, they usually died. Many more Catholics were killed under Elizabeth than Protestants were killed under Bloody Mary. So, really, they should call her “Bloodier Elizabeth.”
I was not so sure that you had read the book, but the things you were saying are quite in line with the views held in that particular book.
Finally, there are historical documents and evidence that Pope Pius helped save countless Jews and was NOT a puppet/proponent of Hitler or the Nazi party. Alright, enough on this point… back to the early church again…
P
Peter_J
Guest
Oh blah dee, oh blah da, life goes on.
I’m actually not as interested in the question of this thread (assuming we even get back to it after this argument about which English queen was bloodier, etc.) in and of itself, as I am in why more Protestants haven’t responded to it.
I’m actually not as interested in the question of this thread (assuming we even get back to it after this argument about which English queen was bloodier, etc.) in and of itself, as I am in why more Protestants haven’t responded to it.
S
SIA
Guest
I don’t believe you, plain and simple. Your logic is flawed, you do not have facts and you will obviously not look at reality unless it is through RC glasses. You do not wish to link bad Catholic people with their respective church, but you do that very thing to others. Your judgments are inconsistant at best and otherwise completely flawed. If you do not wish to continue on these points then fine, but it is you who hasn’t answered the questions here.
N
NDfan
Guest
The early church fathers appealed to scripture to refute heretical teachings. Ignatius used scripture to refute Marcion. To think that the early church just tried to muscle their way by saying we are the authorities is completely false. That’s why Ignatius was the first to push hard for an established list of canonical books. Marcion rejected all the gospels except Luke and all other works except the Pauline letters. But he proceeded to re-write these works to fit the beliefs of the Gnostics. This started to pull many christians away from the church which was alarming.
The final canon may not have been published until close to the 5th century but the works that made up that list were in widespread use for hundreds of years.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
And here is a Catholic’s perspective, St. Ignatius, because he consumed the body and blood of Jesus, and is in the communion of Saints with Jesus and his body on earth first of all. The early church fathers did not appeal to scripture, they appealed to the Oral teachings given them by the apostles, and used the old testament and letters from the apostles only to support their Oral Traditional teachings for support of their arguments against heretics. St. Ignatius having the full deposit of faith and truth, could have easily defeated any heresy using only the old hebrew scriptures, for Jesus revealed himself to them in the scriptures when the new testament was not written yet.
I dont agree with your analogy about the church using authoritative muscle. You have to remember the Jews and Romans were still persecuting the Catholic church and Her popes during this time. They had no muscle to speak of, only faith.
For your information, the list of books that St. Ignatius gave us, ended up being canonized by the popes and bishops who counciled to make up the new testament. I dont quite understand why you say St. Ignatius pushed so hard, pushed against who? you mean to tell me, there was a Pope in authority at the time St. Ignatius adhered to, inorder to push his list of books for approval?
St. Igantius knew that; because the catholic church was growing leaps and bounds, and found that other bishops were using books in the liturgies that he himself being a disciple of the apostle John, were not authentic books from the apostles, and made a list of the books, for all bishops to use in their liturgies. The Pope and Cathoilc bishops counciled in 300 ad, when the persecution ended by edict of Milan, counciled and approved the list St. Ignatius gave us and got rid of the other gospels that were not inspired of God, to be used for the liturgies in the Catholic Mass.
To which from here, this same list of books, goes through 400 years of scrutiny by the Popes, Saints, bishops, and councils, that made it final, no add or subtract from these books of the bible that were canonized by the Catholic church, if anyone does let them be “anathema”
So from St. Ignatius first century on, it took over 400 years to finally accept these same books from St. Ignatius (did I mention a disciple of the beloved apostle John) to be canonized (approved list of books) for the liturgy of the word, and the liturgy of the Eucharist) For this is the real reason the Catholic church put the books of the bible together.
M
mercygate
Guest
Short answer: They held 4 Ecumenical Councils.
A
adrift
Guest
Your history isn’t very good. The Spanish Inquisition was the Spanish government not the Church.
Yes I have seen those pictures. Those pictures do not show what you claim. The Jewish leader converted to Catholicism because of how the Church helped the Jews. You really need a course in history not your perverted one.
It is you who do not have the facts. You choose to believe the worst. Is your conscience bothering you?
A
adrift
Guest
M
mercygate
Guest
You need to read *The Myth of Hitler’s Pope *by Rabbi (did you get that? RABBI David G. Dalin. He completely uncovers the calumny perpetrated by John Cornwell in his 1999 book, *Hitler’s Pope, *(which has been severely criticized for the many errors it contains) and that began with the play *The Deputy, *which has also been shown to be a work of theatrical fiction.
- Status