how do non catholic christians justify thier faith?

[adrift]

[
Your problem is that you don’t understand the concept of outside the Church. You really should read the catechism.
Who belongs to the Catholic Church?

836
"All men are called to this catholic unity of the People of God. . . . And to it, in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, called by God’s grace to salvation."320

837
"Fully incorporated into the society of the Church are those who, possessing the Spirit of Christ, accept all the means of salvation given to the Church together with her entire organization, and who—by the bonds constituted by the profession of faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and communion—are joined in the visible structure of the Church of Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. Even though incorporated into the Church, one who does not however persevere in charity is not saved. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but ‘in body’ not ‘in heart.’"321

838
"The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord’s Eucharist."324

Outside the Church there is no salvation"

no it isn’t i can’t believe you’re going to make me look this stuff up. if you have an issue with the translation tell me where it is wrong.

](http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect2chpt3art9p3.shtml)
846
How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
You might want to read this as well by the late Father Most.

never were indulgences sold huh? i don’t know whose eyes you’re looking at history through but they need glasses. i wonder why the church bothered with a counter reformation specifically to deal with the selling of indulgences then? these were sold all throughout europe, all over st. peter’s yet the pope was “unaware”, doubtful it was funding his basillica.

MYTHS ABOUT INDULGENCES
I

One never could “buy” indulgences. The financial scandal around indulgences, the scandal that gave Martin Luther an excuse for his heterodoxy, involved alms-indulgences in which the giving of alms to some charitable fund or foundation was used as the occasion to grant the indulgence. There was no outright selling of indulgences. The Catholic Encyclopedia states: “*t is easy to see how abuses crept in. Among the good works which might be encouraged by being made the condition of an indulgence, almsgiving would naturally hold a conspicuous place. . . It is well to observe that in these purposes there is nothing essentially evil. To give money to God or to the poor is a praiseworthy act, and, when it is done from right motives, it will surely not go unrewarded.”
*

not that widespread? you have to be kidding me. anytime i hear people apologize for this disaster i get sick to my stomach. i won’t dignify that nonsense with a response.

You did respond but not with any evidence that it is widespread. The percentage I found was 4% that leaves 96% and you consider that widespread? It makes me sick as well but I don’t exaggerate the numbers. A higher percentage is committed by teachers the highest is parents.

the answers became totally ridiculous and circular hence why i stopped posting. it’s the same tired apologetic that makes no sense.

I suppose when you speak of answers being ridiculous and circular you do mean your own? Makes no sense? I think you had no rebuttal so you just dismiss the arguments. Idols mean worship of a false god. Statues are not meant to be a god and so your whole argument failed hence you stopped posting.

believe what you want, none of my concerns are mere “ignorance”, they are legitimate concerns that try as i might have not been able to reconcile. it wouldn’t be right to lie to myself into accepting something i find unacceptable.

I believe the truth. You should seek the truth. So far you don’t seem open to it.

 

[ChristIsLord]

Your problem is that you don’t understand the concept of outside the Church. You really should read the catechism.
Who belongs to the Catholic Church?

nonsense, this is mental gymnastics, at the time what the popes stated was undisputed and everyone knew what it meant. rewriting it today to do away with any contradiction doesn’t work with me.

MYTHS ABOUT INDULGENCES

more nonsense, the sale of indulgences to free relatives suffering in purgatory was so widespread it was the main drive of the church to raise money. to say the cc didn’t sell indulgences in the 16th century at least even though it started much earlier is naive at best, and decietful at worse…

[You did respond but not with any evidence that it is widespread. The percentage I found was 4% that leaves 96% and you consider that widespread? It makes me sick as well but I don’t exaggerate the numbers. A higher percentage is committed by teachers the highest is parents.

over 10,000 cases, thousands of accused priests, pretty widespread. so 4% of priests are child rapists and this isn’t widespread. since apologists for pedophiles love throwing stats around how about this, 100% of the bishops involved showed zero integrity and moved them around many times knowing they would offend again as many were multiple offenders.

I suppose when you speak of answers being ridiculous and circular you do mean your own? Makes no sense? I think you had no rebuttal so you just dismiss the arguments. Idols mean worship of a false god. Statues are not meant to be a god and so your whole argument failed hence you stopped posting.

only in your mind, i stopped posting because the discussion devoled into the usual strawmen and ad hom attacks. somehow the words no longer mean graven image, somehow the words do not bow before them means something else. it’s all double speak, the words are clear. when the discussion goes to comparing watching t.v. and going before a graven image, lighting candles, kissing them, venrating them, and praying before them all common sense has been thrown out and there’s no more point in participating.

you believe what you believe to be the truth, unfortunately it’s not that simple for me.*

[/quote]

 

[wanner47]

nonsense, this is mental gymnastics, at the time what the popes stated was undisputed and everyone knew what it meant. rewriting it today to do away with any contradiction doesn’t work with me.

Can you cite a reliable source for this assertion? (see bolded portion)

more nonsense, the sale of indulgences to free relatives suffering in purgatory was so widespread it was the main drive of the church to raise money. to say the cc didn’t sell indulgences in the 16th century at least even though it started much earlier is naive at best, and decietful at worse…

Again, can you cite a reliable source? For example, an official proclamation from a Pope confirming what you say above?

over 10,000 cases, thousands of accused priests, pretty widespread. so 4% of priests are child rapists and this isn’t widespread. since apologists for pedophiles love throwing stats around how about this, 100% of the bishops involved showed zero integrity and moved them around many times knowing they would offend again as many were multiple offenders.

ChristIsLord, I hate to break it to you, but this happens in every Christian denomination (not to mention in secular public schools and other institutions). See, for example, www.reformation.com and www.stopbaptistpredators.org. Actually, the rate of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church, when equitably compared to the rate in other Christian denominations (taking into account the ratio of clergy to members) is one of the lowest among Christian denominations. The reason it seems so “widespread” is due to media saturation. Usually, sexual abuse of children within Protestant denominations doesn’t get much press.

I recommend reading Philip Jenkins’ “Pedophiles and Priests: Anatomy of a contemporary crisis” for a more balanced view of the sexual abuse scandals. Dr. Jenkins is non-Catholic, by the way.

only in your mind, i stopped posting because the discussion devoled into the usual strawmen and ad hom attacks. somehow the words no longer mean graven image, somehow the words do not bow before them means something else. it’s all double speak, the words are clear. when the discussion goes to comparing watching t.v. and going before a graven image, lighting candles, kissing them, venrating them, and praying before them all common sense has been thrown out and there’s no more point in participating.

Is that the only explanation you’ve gotten? Perhaps you should read this.

you believe what you believe to be the truth, unfortunately it’s not that simple for me.

But if both of us claim to be guided by the Holy Spirit, how do you know who is right?

 

[adrift]

nonsense, this is mental gymnastics, at the time what the popes stated was undisputed and everyone knew what it meant. rewriting it today to do away with any contradiction doesn’t work with me.

Your history is wanting. You didn’t read my link or you would not have written what you did. It is simple: Jesus deemed that we would be saved through His Church that is what is meant by there is no salvation outside of the Church. How that is accomplished is through Baptism. Anyone who is baptized belongs to His Church. It is what has always been taught. You may think you know what it meant but obviously you did not.

more nonsense, the sale of indulgences to free relatives suffering in purgatory was so widespread it was the main drive of the church to raise money. to say the cc didn’t sell indulgences in the 16th century at least even though it started much earlier is naive at best, and decietful at worse…

You say so. History does not. Did you even read the article? You don’t even try to dispute it with evidence only what you say happened.

over 10,000 cases, thousands of accused priests, pretty widespread. so 4% of priests are child rapists and this isn’t widespread. since apologists for pedophiles love throwing stats around how about this, 100% of the bishops involved showed zero integrity and moved them around many times knowing they would offend again as many were multiple offenders.

Hmmmm where is your proof of 10,000? 4% is a small amount of priest.

There are approximately 46,000 Catholic priests in the United States and 300 cases filed to date,

Some bishops and psychiatrists noted that the prevailing psychology of the times suggested that people could be cured of such behavior through counseling.[5][7] Many of the abusive priests had received counseling before being reassigned.

only in your mind, i stopped posting because the discussion devoled into the usual strawmen and ad hom attacks. somehow the words no longer mean graven image, somehow the words do not bow before them means something else. it’s all double speak, the words are clear. when the discussion goes to comparing watching t.v. and going before a graven image, lighting candles, kissing them, venrating them, and praying before them all common sense has been thrown out and there’s no more point in participating.

The strawmen was set up by you and there was no attack just your evasions. You still cannot deal with what you were shown that scripture deals with idols and your statements are taken out of context. BTW Catholics do not believe in scripture alone.

Don’t make what?
Don’t bow down to what?
Don’t worship what?
Quote:
You shall not make for yourself an idol
Idol
Quote:
1: a representation or symbol of an object of worship ; broadly : a false god
In order for it to be an idol, it must be thought of as a god. If you can show that Catholics believe that the statues are gods than you would be right but we don’t think they are gods and your argument falls apart.
Reply With Quote

you believe what you believe to be the truth, unfortunately it’s not that simple for me.

I wish you were more open to seeing it from other perspectives. You have your mind made up and you don’t want to be confused with facts. It is hard to believe you were Catholic
Posted by Soutane

ChristIsLord,are you really a Catholic?Were you taught nothing about your faith?Did you not receive basic catechesis,or weren"t you listening? No direspect intended but I am honestly curious.

 

[adrift]

Can you cite a reliable source for this assertion? (see bolded portion)

 

[mabibleteacher]

Read this book:Bruce and Stan’s Guide to God by Bruce Bickel and Stan Jantz. It’s out of print but you can usually find it on Amazon.com cheap. Despite it’s somewhat silly name, it’s an excellent source of information for someone in your position. It also gives plenty of references to other materials for deeper learning.
It’s easy to read, has some humor and is written in a way that explains faith in “real” day to day terms. I promise you will love it!

 

[SIA]

Oh my how you distort what I wrote that is also typical of those who cannot dispute what is truth and a much older scheme.

Baloney. I’ve seen it way too many times here to buy that garbage.:dts:

 

[hays1122]

I guess you didn’t really read my post carefully. I never claimed that the Holy Spirit doesn’t do ALL those things for the faithful. Not once did I say that.

So, what did I say?

I said, The Holy Spirit is not a personal, private interpreter of your Bible. If He was, then He would allow me to discern exactly the same significant salvific requirements that you have also discerned. But He did not do that. Now, as I prayerfully read my Bible, He is definitely a specialist in application, in encouragement and exhortation in following the teachings of Christ in a way that suits the state of my life, but He does not discern for me through some sort of interpretation exactly what those teachings ARE.

I really would think that should be obvious. Again, if that were true, then you and I would agree on all the fundamental necessities to ensure our eternal life. We don’t agree. What does that tell you? That I’m wrong?? Why am I wrong? I genuinely and fervently pray to the Holy Spirit when I open my Bible…just as I assume you do? Then why do we not agree on the faith? Now you know why.

We need an authority this side of heaven, my friend. And we have one. That’s biblical.

God Bless.

Thank you for the clarification.
I see what you mean about “we need an authority this side of heaven”.
But why does it have to be the pope as Catholics insist?
I believe a baptist pastor or Catholic priest can be the authority this side of heaven as well. There are popes who have been wrong in the past which proves they are just human.
May God bless us all and lead us in the way we should go.

 

[adrift]

:bowdown:

Baloney. I’ve seen it way too many times here to buy that garbage.:dts:

I don’t buy yours either just the same unsubstantiated rheterec.

 

[hays1122]

It is hard to believe that you have done as much investigating as you say and then post what seems a Protestant argument without any trace of Catholicism. Most of what you write is ignorant. I guess Bishop Sheen was right.

What did Bishop Sheen say? I listen to his sermons when I can on EWTN and he seems like a very nice understanding man.
I checked out three of his books from the library.
I like what I’ve read so far.

 

[SIA]

:bowdown:
I don’t buy yours either just the same unsubstantiated rheterec.

By your actions, claims and beliefs you show that you feel Scripture is unsubstantiated rhetoric as well.

 

[SteveGC]

Thank you for the clarification.
I see what you mean about “we need an authority this side of heaven”.

You’re quite welcome. Clarity is the first step toward unity.

But why does it have to be the pope as Catholics insist?

We only insist it because God insists it, through Christ’s proclamations. This gets into a debate about Peter, which I will avoid.

I believe a baptist pastor or Catholic priest can be the authority this side of heaven as well.

This has to do with the theology of “being sent”. Throughout salvation history, God has consistently “sent” only certain people to shepherd His flock. Whether it be prophets or priests, he has annointed specific people (often lesser people) to lead His people into all Truth. With Christ, this did not change. He fulfilled OT prophesy, not abolishing the old laws and customs, but fulfilling them. In keeping with salvific tradition, He annointed Peter as the shepherd of the flock of the new covenant (including you and me). And Peter subsequently annointed others to continue this command from Christ, so that when Peter died, the flock would not be lost. So, only those whose annointing can be traced back to Peter are TRULY sent as sheperds. Not that your pastor isn’t a faithful man; not that he can’t advise you and encourage you to live a Christ-like life. But he cannot teach you faith and morals, he does not have authority to interpret the teachings of Christ. Like it or not, only the Pope (and his teaching body, the Magisterium) can do that for the flock. And the bishops and priests annointed and serving at local levels are “sent” to shepherd their local flocks on behalf of the Pope, delegated to expound upon teachings, consecrate the host (Eucharist), deliver Christ’s absolution and forgiveness of confessed sins, etc.

There are popes who have been wrong in the past which proves they are just human.

Indeed they are human. Fully human. Just like you and me. Not impeccable. Not free from sin. Popes often confess weekly. Their lives are often lived as examples of pure humility and servitude. That’s what it means to be ordained. It is to serve. Plenty of popes have been wrong…even corrupt (atleast a dozen historically). But Christ sent the Holy Spirit unto His Church led by Peter to not only lead them into all truth, but also to protect The Church from destruction, from the gates of hell. So corrupt or not, no pope could ever act to de-sanctify The Church, nor have success at bringing Her to an end. This is why the Catholic Church still exists today, throughout all of history, and will forever until Christ comes again. Far too many non-Catholics misinterpret infallibility. It does not make the Pope a superpower, nor divine, nor impeccable. Infallibility means when the Pope speaks from the chair of Peter, only on matters of faith and morals, he is protected by the Holy Spirit from all erroneous teaching. The actual utilization of infallibility is extremely rare. Look up infallibility in the Catholic Answers search engine. That’ll help.

May God bless us all and lead us in the way we should go.

Amen, brother.

God Bless

 

[hays1122]

How do I justify my faith.
1.On the pope being infallible. The pope is a man of God.
He is a very good man devoted to the Lord’s work I’m certain. But he is a man voted into a position of authority for the Catholic church. He is human a mere mortal.
The pastor of our church is hired.Before he is hired other pastors also visit our church hoping we will vote them in. The congregation meets and votes on who should be hired as our new pastor.
The pastor is a man of God dedicated to the Lord’s work. He is human a mere mortal.
2.I believe bowing down and kneeling in prayer directed to the Lord is reverent and respectful. I would not bow down or kneel before a statue. Candles are nice but they are not necessary.
3.I have no idea how indulgences work. I haven’t read anything about the Lord giving instructions for indulgences in the bible.
4.Mary’s role. I agree that too much attention is given to Mary. I mean yes she is the mother of Jesus who is God incarnate.
And I’ve read up on the apparitions.
But Jesus nor the apostles gave instructions for us to ask her to intercede for us.
And some Catholics carry things a bit too far when they have personal altars for Mary in their homes. And they kneel down to pray before Mary.
5.The real presence. I believe that when receiving the body and the blood we should be meditating on Jesus and what he said to the apostles. Which the pastor reads in God word on the last supper. The Holy spirit knows what’s in our hearts and if we are receiving his body and blood in the right spirit.
6.This is a horrible and very sad subject to even think about. Unfortunately priests aren’t the only ones guilty of this. Pastors and others claiming to be doing the Lord’s work have been used by Satan to prey on the innocent. God help us all to stay out of Satan’s snare.
I understand how you feel in your search for the truth. I believe that the Lord knows we are seeking to know Him better. And he will bless those who seek Him.
I justify my faith by what I read in God’s word. And praying for his guidance.
The Lord has revealed my sins and he has answered my questions in his own mysterious way. Through the Holy word of God.
I attend church to worship the Lord.
The church doesn’t save me. Jesus died on the cross to save me.
All praise and glory belong to Jesus Christ our Lord.Amen

 

[adrift]

By your actions, claims and beliefs you show that you feel Scripture is unsubstantiated rhetoric as well.

Main Entry: rhet·o·ric
Pronunciation: \ˈre-tə-rik\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English rethorik, from Anglo-French rethorique, from Latin rhetorica, from Greek rhētorikē, literally, art of oratory, from feminine of rhētorikos of an orator, from rhētōr orator, rhetorician, from eirein to say, speak — more at word
Date: 14th century
1: the art of speaking or writing effectively: as a: the study of principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times b: the study of writing or speaking as a means of communication or persuasion
2 a: skill in the effective use of speech b: a type or mode of language or speech ; also : insincere or grandiloquent language
3: verbal communication : disco

Scripture may be spoken but generally I believe that it is thought of as written :bible1: so I don’t consider it rhetoric. Strange that you do:whacky: but maybe your problem is that you just nees a :hug1: so you stop :slapfight:

 

[ChristIsLord]

adrift, can you stop hi-jacking my thread taking it off topic for your own accusations, cross postings and whatever else drives you in here?

 

[Phillipos]

When G.K. Chesterton couldn’t accept the teaching of celibate priests he just pretty much accepted it knowing that the magisterium had wisdom beyond his. Yesterday at Mass a “recovering Presbyterian” told me that he has a problem with praying to the virgin Mary but he just goes with it.

 

[SteveGC]

What did Bishop Sheen say? I listen to his sermons when I can on EWTN and he seems like a very nice understanding man.
I checked out three of his books from the library.
I like what I’ve read so far.

“There are not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions of people who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church— which is, of course, quite a different thing"

–Archbishop Fulton Sheen

 

[adrift]

:tsktsk:

adrift, can you stop hi-jacking my thread taking it off topic for your own accusations, cross postings and whatever else drives you in here?

I will not let you get by with lies about the Church. If that is off topic, it is your fault for posting it.

 

[hays1122]

“There are not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions of people who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church— which is, of course, quite a different thing"

–Archbishop Fulton Sheen

How do we know if we are one of the “millions who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic church.”
Though I don’t hate the Catholic church. I was raised to hate some of the things Catholics teach and do. But fortunately I’m old enough now to find out for myself what the Catholic church is really about.
I’ve read here that there is only one Catholic church. So how can we be wrong about what they teach and believe. Especially since I can come here and read for myself what they believe.
There are different opinions about certain things but the basics are the same.
The pope,Mary interceding,prayer to saints,purgatory,infant baptism. And that’s about it. I can actually go along with most of the teachings. It’s just the attention to Mary that sure looks like worship to non-Catholics.
As a matter of fact I am reading a book by Bishop Fulton Sheen,his dedication reads like this:
“To that immaculate heart mother of grace divine these stumbling words are written and this book is dedicated in prayerful hope that as celestial temptress and with loyal deceit she may betray us to her son as uncaught captives of love divine.”
This dedications just sounds strange to me,“celestial temptress”
and “with loyal deceit she may betray us to her son as uncaught captives of love divine.” What in the world does that mean?
Sounds like Mary is a temptress and she’s going to sneak us into heaven past her son who is God in some deceitful way,with her love divine.
Help me understand this dedication please. How does a Catholic understand or interpret that dedication?

 

[SteveGC]

How do we know if we are one of the “millions who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic church.”

The odds, for one thing But, seriously, many an ex-anti Catholic thought they were among the 100 also. It’s quite common to erroneously think so. I think many of the 100 (perhaps not all) are actually people who don’t seek Christ in the first place, so they certainly will abhor even the proper understanding of The Church, and hence, be one of the 100.

Though I don’t hate the Catholic church. I was raised to hate some of the things Catholics teach and do.

How tragically unfortunate (and I mean that in all sincerity…it really was not fair for that to happen to you)

But fortunately I’m old enough now to find out for myself what the Catholic church is really about.

And yet, I would confidently wager that your rearing has instilled in you a bias and altered perspective with which you use to investigate your information. This is what inevitably happens, you see.

Help me understand this dedication [from Bishop Sheen] please. How does a Catholic understand or interpret that dedication?

It would take me awhile to help you understand. I will get back to you…or perhaps someone more versed in Marian theology will share with you. I will tell you, however, that it is definitely not as you are presuming it to be.

God Bless