I Really Tried but

[Philthy]

I reject Purgatory because it mocks the Passion and Death of Our Lord Jesus Christ and what He did for us.

You believe Purgatory mocks the Passion and Death of Christ? That is a clear indication that you don’t understand things as well as you claim. Purgatory is as much a part of the Passion and Death of Christ as any other part of our salvation. I cant tell you what to do - but it sounds like VociMike shares my thoughts. You will probably be searching for the church that happens to believe everything you believe - at the time you believe it - forever. What is the criteria you have established for finding a better church?

Blessings

 

[Philthy]

Why? Out of thankfulness for being saved from eternity in Hell …Then out of gratitude for what …Christ did for them in their place they live a life of Holinesss and obedience to Him by doing His will by loving God and neighbor. This is the Gospel.

Yes it is - Im not sure what your point is though. Do you think this is something Catholics dont embrace? If so, you are mistaken. The primary point of departure for Catholics and Protestants is whether living a life of “holiness and obedience to Him by doing His will by loving God and neighbor” is an optional activity for the Christian or a necessary one. Much of the NT is devoted to this very concern: “Now that we are saved, what’s next?”
Paul, in particular was repeatedly clear on the need for us to love. He even went so far as to say that if you have faith so as to move mountains but don’t have love, you are nothing.
See the difference is that you mistakenly place all works into the “filthy rag” category. The reason I say mistakenly is because you are forgetting that we are created in Christ Jesus FOR the good works that God has prepared in advance. (Eph 2:10) God has prepared the good works of love for us to walk in - they are most definitely not filthy rags - they are Christ’s presence in us and our abiding in Him.

Blessings!

 

[steve_b]

1.Papal Primacy. Before you all start quoting tons of out of context quotes from the Early Church Fathers let me say that*** NONE*** of the early Fathers held to the Primacy of Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome.

None? you should know better than to say NONE. ESPECIALLY on THIS subject.
k:

MOST of the Early Fathers DID NOT give Mat 16:18 the Papal Interpretation of this verse. They said that the “Rock” was either Christ Himself or Peter’s confession, not Peter.

MOST ECF’s didn’t have to defend the teaching. When they DID comment

• Most said it was Peter/Peter’s confession. The ROCK (Jesus) renaming Simon, ROCK, & his confession/faith

k:

In the Canons of the Council of Nicea each Bishop and Patriarch only had jurisdiction in his own See. No Bishop was to interfere in the See of another Bishop, this INCLUDED the Bishop of Rome.

Specifically, what canon(s) are you reffring to?
k:

In the beginning the Church was a loosely knit group of semi-independent Congregations under the Apostles and led by men appointed by them and were more or less independent and managed their own local affairs led by a plurality of “Presbyters” (Elders) and Deacons. For example in a recently published book by Peter Lampe “From Paul to Valentinius: Christians at Rome in the First Two Centuries”, an exhaustive ,detailed and painstakingly researched study of the Church in Rome from the time of St. Paul to 200 AD, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Church in Rome not only was not the “See of Peter” where Peter and his successors ruled the entire “Catholic Church” as the center of a Universal Papacy as we understand it today,

• Says who, Lampe?
• Valentinus? The heretic? the gnostic? He was excommunicated by the Church of Rome
• List Lampe’s points he uses to rebut the Church?

k:

Rome did not even have a single Monarchial Bishop who governed even the Church in Rome until the close of the 2cnd Century.

Prove it
k:

Rome was not the exception, the whole concept of a single Monarchial Bishop who governed over a set group of Churches in any geographic area was a slow and gradual development.

Rome was already settling sedition among the bishops in Corinth Greece in the 1st century.
k:

It came about not by any “Divine Mandate” but rather for practical reasons of organisation and administration and to safeguard the Church from Heresy. Many will cite men like Clement or Ignatius to “prove” their position, but what are the FACTS?

Yes what are the facts? So far you have given only opinion.
k:

The facts are that Clement was not a Bishop, ***but one of at least twelve ***“Presbyters” who oversaw the Church in Rome as a plurality.

• Who says Clement was not a bishop
• What are the names of the 12.

k:

One could say that Clement was the person in charge with communicating with Churches outside of Rome, sort of a “Secretary of External Affairs and Communications”.

Where’s your support for this?

“sort of” doesn’t make it.
k:

What about Ignatius? We know very little about the “real” Ignatius except that perhaps he was an0 educated layman and not a :Bishop.

:doh2:Sheesh!!!

Did this come from Lampe too? Who says Ignatius was not a bishop?
k:

The “letters” attributed to him were written long after his time by a pseudonymous and anonymous author or authors between 250-350 AD.

The letters attributed to him are real. The letters NOT attributed to him are considered spurious.
k:

These aren’t the opinions of “Anti-Catholics” but the accepted facts that most Historians agree on. Actually some of them are Catholics.

The accepted writings are accepted by historians and Catholics alike. The contrary is true for the spurious writings.
k:

2.Papal Infallibility: I suggest one reads “Origins of Papal Infallibility 1150-1350: A Study on the Concepts of Infallibility, Sovereignty, and Tradition in the Middle Ages” by Brian Tierny. He is not an “Anti-Catholic crank” but a respected Catholic Historian.

Also “How the Pope Became Infallible: Pius IX and the Politics of Persuasion” by August Bernhard Hasler who was a Catholic Historian and a Priest and worked in the Vatican Archives and taught in University.

• Did infallibility ever exist? Where/when
• If it existed, when did it end?
• Prove your answer.

k:

3.Purgatory:

[snip]

I maintain that the whole concept of Purgatory mocks what Christ accomplished for us.

How does it mock what Jesus accomplished? Be specific
k:

4.Justification:

[snip]

try dealing with one subject at a time.

 

[ladycascadia]

I think if people are really being honest with themselves, they’d say they don’t agree with everything in the Church. Some take a “stand” and leave the Church. However, speaking from experience, I know that doesn’t really solve the issue at all. There will always be situations, circumstances, groups one will not agree with. Nothing is perfect.

I’ve discovered that when something doesn’t sit well with me, that’s the time when faith has to carry one through. Not always easy, for sure, but worth it in the long run.

 

[tonyrey]

It would be interesting to know what do you believe! Which articles of the Nicene Creed do you accept as true?

 

[tonyrey]

Kotek, it would be interesting to know what you do believe… For example, do you accept any of the articles of the Nicene Creed?