Infallibility: Will someone evaluate this article for me?

[po18guy]

There are many false teachings floating around Catholicism as well as all other religions. Although the RC Church never officially taught certain false teachings they were allowed to exist for hundreds of years. 2 such teachings are the worship of the Blessed Mother and the recrucifying of our Lord at every Mass. Even though the Catholic Church inspired by the Holy Spirit put the Bible together; let’s give credit to Judaism for the Old Testament; anyone could read it and understand the Gospel message and many other spiritual teachings of Jesus such as faith, forgiveness, humility, giving to the poor and persistence in prayer. A child could understand all these. If people were studying their bibles they would see through all false teaching. The Bereans were known for this and they were not Catholic. To say you must be a Catholic or consult a Roman Catholic official teaching to understand the bible is like saying the only way to play the piano is to take classical music instruction from a college professor.

My brother, both are 100% wrong!!! No Mary worship has ever been taught. Do some worship her anyway? Likely, but they risk their souls. We worship God alone. Period.

WE DO NOT “re-crucify” Christ. That is impossible. This is a lie from the evil one. Do not believe such evil. This has been put forth by fellow “Christians” who have incorrect beliefs and/or are willfully ignorant of the Catholic Church. Do not let the evil one deceive you. He wants you to believe these lies. The evil one loves division. He makes up a new lie and circulates it daily.

God is outside of time, correct? Time does not apply to God. Same with Christ and the Holy Spirit. Time applies to man. Christ’s sacrifice was once for all time - those before His incarnation and all who came after. Even Evangelicals will agree with this Catholic teaching.

OK, since God is outside of time and Christ’s sacrifice is also outside of time, the sacrifice is timeless. We celebrate the same, one-time for all, sacrifice. Mass makes it present to us, by the power of God. It is made present, not re-done. Another lie.

You have been mislead by people who are making stuff upand assisting the devil with his lies. And that, precisely, is the problem with a shattered church. People begin making stuff up. The Catholic Church would not have lasted 1,975 years making stuff up. Making stuff up began with the early heresies, and continues to this day. Making stuff up delights Satan.

I cannot let a brother in Christ be lied to.

 

[mercygate]

mercygate;4146077:

The word Catholic means universal or “whole.” There is definitely a reference to the “whole Church” in Acts.

The churches in Revelation are “particular” churches that are members of the “whole Church.” The church in Philadelphia was part of the “whole” – or Catholic – Church. The church in Laodicea was part of the “whole” Church. The churches in the New Testament were in full communion with one another. They did not preach ‘different’ gospels.

So then would you say that all who preach the same gospel are part of the same body of Christ?p/quote]

Check the Catechism for what the Catholic Church teaches about separated brethren. What do you mean by “same Gospel?”​

mercygate:

They were not “denominations.” Even Paul pow-wowed with the church in Jerusalem and boasted that the “pillars” affirmed that he was preaching the *same *

gospel they were preaching. That would be partly because the Church had not yet been born from His pierced side on Calvary.

Today, the normative way in which He forgives sins is through His Body – the Church – in the sacrament of Confession.

**So if a person makes a death bed confession do you think God will forgive him? If a person was not raised in the Catholic faith do you think God will forgive him? Do you think there is a Catholic section in heaven and He loves them more than anyone else? **This is a disingenuous question that does not go to the matter of the indefectibility of the Church, which is the topic of this thread.​

mercygate:

ONLY a Christian sees Jesus in the Old Testament. It took Paul three years in Arabia to “see” Jesus in the Old Testament. [Disclaimer: mercygate’s private theory – that Paul spent those three Arabian years with his precious “parchments” being instructed by the Holy Spirit.]

Both John 1 and Revelation were written well after the Church was up and running. Revelation nearly failed to make the canon. Eusebius, in 325 A.D., lists it among the disputed books, and there was a lot of resistance for several decades after that. It was the Church that put Revelation in the Bible. Correct. And so does everybody else who rejects the Deuterocanonical books.

I accept those books if that’s what you mean.

I am getting at the point that it is inconsistent to accept the Catholic Bible as Scripture if one does not accept the authority of the Church to canonize Scripture.

** and like the Catholics they are taught that only their officials are qualified to interpret it. If they read a real bible the truth would set them free. **

Do you know any Jewish Christians? I think if anyone were qualified to interpret the bible it would be a Jewish Christian because they know all about Jewish Tradition and customs which are sprinkled throughout the New Testament.The problem is is that the Jews were thrown out of the church in it’s early stages.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Yes. I know Jewish Christians. No. They do not have a problem understanding that Abraham is a Saint.

Excuse me? The Jews were thrown out of the Church? Au contraire, mon ami. The Christians were thrown out of the synagogues. I believe you have cited the Acts of the Apostles in this thread. Check it out.

 

[ron77nyc]

My brother, both are 100% wrong!!! No Mary worship has ever been taught. Do some worship her anyway? Likely, but they risk their souls. We worship God alone. Period.

I never said it was an official teaching nevertheless it was taught.

WE DO NOT “re-crucify” Christ. That is impossible. This is a lie from the evil one. Do not believe such evil. This has been put forth by fellow “Christians” who have incorrect beliefs and/or are willfully ignorant of the Catholic Church. Do not let the evil one deceive you. He wants you to believe these lies. The evil one loves division. He makes up a new lie and circulates it daily.

I know we do not recrucify Christ and I never said I believed it. All I said is it definitely was taught erroneously. I don’t know how old you are but I was taught that in school.We were not allowed to let it touch our teeth because it would hurt the Lord.

---

God is outside of time, correct? Time does not apply to God. Same with Christ and the Holy Spirit. Time applies to man. Christ’s sacrifice was once for all time - those before His incarnation and all who came after. Even Evangelicals will agree with this Catholic teaching.

OK, since God is outside of time and Christ’s sacrifice is also outside of time, the sacrifice is timeless. We celebrate the same, one-time for all, sacrifice. Mass makes it present to us, by the power of God. It is made present, not re-done. Another lie.

I can remember very clearly sitting in a Catholic bible study and this erroneous belief was discussed and corrected by a Catholic priest. Why? Because it was taught at one time…erroneously.​

You have been mislead by people who are making stuff upand assisting the devil with his lies. And that, precisely, is the problem with a shattered church. People begin making stuff up. The Catholic Church would not have lasted 1,975 years making stuff up. Making stuff up began with the early heresies, and continues to this day. Making stuff up delights Satan.

I cannot let a brother in Christ be lied to.

Thank you for your concern and considering me a brother in Christ but I was lied to by people who were lied to and it took a lot of searching to get to the truth and at times I had to go outside the Church because the lies came from inside. If that offends people then whoever it offends should be glad it didn’t happen that way for them. There is no reason to curse someone for expressing an idea on a forum. This doesn’t pertain to you po18guy but to the person it pertains to you knows who you are.

.

 

[po18guy]

Thank you for your concern and considering me a brother in Christ but I was lied to by people who were lied to and it took a lot of searching to get to the truth and at times I had to go outside the Church because the lies came from inside. If that offends people then whoever it offends should be glad it didn’t happen that way for them. There is no reason to curse someone for expressing an idea on a forum. This doesn’t pertain to you po18guy but to the person it pertains to you knows who you are…

Has there been error taught in the church? You betcha! Do we correct it wherever we see it? Yup. With 1.1 billion members, there’s a lotta educating to do. We have a moral obligation to correct those in error. Not to judge them but, as a brother in Christ, to point out their error so that they may recognize and change it.

Ron, start from scratch and learn a good, orthodox explanation of the faith. I am confident that all of your concerns will be ably handled and that you will be attracted to the truth in its fulness.

Christ’s peace.

 

[mesl4]

We don’t need Mary for salvation, since Christ is our Savior. However, her veneration is from the earliest days, beginning with God, then to Elizabeth, then John received her as his own mother, and on to modern times. She was absolutely necessary, her “Yes” to the Angel Gabriel was necessary, for the Lord’s plan to come to fruition.

 

[mesl4]

also, to the posts saying that all the other (non-Catholic) churches lead to division, I was thinking the opposite. In reading church history, I thought it was so sad that there had to be divisions among fellow Christians who loved God, simply because people defined things differently. It was sad to me when Arius (?) came into the council to present the idea he had on the relationship of Jesus and Father, and the majority yelled, “heresy!” and it through everything into a big fuss and divisions, etc. I thought, “Man, couldn’t they just’ve left it as 'we don’t really know the exact relationship but that he is the Son of God, the Messiah, the Saviour of mankind and deserves our worship, will come again to judge the living and dead, died and rose” as the gospels/epistles state? If it was confusing, then maybe it didn’t really matter that much. Seems like there were several verses in the NT that state what the pure/simple gospel was to be believed (Son of God, died and rose for our sake, to resurrect us as well, and to love him and others as primary importance). I wonder if that is what defines the body of Christ and the Church. That would include many more, bring unity, not division. That would include the “cults”: Mormons, JWs, 7th Day Adv, Protestants, Catholics, and ??? If we’re not against him we’re for him right? Can you imagine the unity when we all see Christ coming and raise our hands in praise and worship, looking forward to uniting w/him? :extrahappy: :clapping: :dancing: :bowdown2: :bowdown:
I think all the above believers would run to him and noone would care who defined the trinity in which way, or who held to certain practices, etc. God would see us from the inside out and unite all those lovers of him to himself. Anyway, that’s how I envision the future. Maybe I’m being optomistic:shrug:

 

[po18guy]

A few things come to mind:

1. I’ve heard these arguments about Mary, read “Hail HOly Queen” and admit I saw her in a new light. But it still seems Catholics do an awful lot of assuming when it comes to her. We non-Catholics read those words and see it just as it’s said, we don’t go and presume that she was sinless or immaculately conceived or assumed into heaven etc. I can handle saying, “yes those things may be.” but I can’t say for sure it’s fact when they’d just be presumptions. To be Catholic, can’t I just say, “Those things are possible” w/out making an absolute statement?

A lot of these beliefs come from the Apostle John, whose mother she became. They are in church tradition, but not in scripture. That’s why they look strange to non-Catholics. What is strange is that Protestants have abandoned sacred tradition and assume (sometimes) that the Catholic Church just made it up. This is part of the fallacy of sola scriptura. The bible states in at least four places that it is incomplete (Luke 3:18, John 20:30, John 21:25, Acts 4:20). Very incomplete without the traditions of the Apostles, which Paul commanded us to keep: 2 Thessalonians 2:15 “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.”

1. Catholics say Mary said “yes” to Gabriel/God, but I always saw it as she was just being told what would happen, "you will be with child and give birth to a son…"Luke 1:31. He didn’t say, “Will you…?” but “you will.” It wasn’t a question but a statement. She accepted it in the sense that noone can refuse God. He does what he wants. She could’ve said, “no please!” but it still would’ve happened.

Wait just a minute! You really want to believe this, but such is nowhere in scripture. She said “Let it be done to me according to your word” and “I am the handmaid of the Lord” She had free will, but submitted totally to God - even under the penalty of stoning to death under the law of Moses.

Who would say “no” to such an honor though? You don’t have to be sinless to say “yes” to being Jesus’ mom. I’d love the honour! I don’t think she knew of all the suffering she’d have to go through at that point.

Under Mosaic law, she was an adulteress. Stoning to death was the penalty, that’s why Joseph wanted to divorce her privately. John 8:3-6 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

I do wonder why when Zechariah asked Gabriel, “How can I be sure of this?” (Luke 1:18) God muted him, and when Mary asked the same question, she was just given the answer. I assumed it was based on the attitude of the asker. Maybe Zechariah said it more in a “yeah right” way, and Mary more of just curious and confused way.

Easy. Zechariah, a priest, expressed doubt. Mary, a teen-ager, asked for an explanation.

Protestant traditions go back less than 500 years, and have no unbroken line of authority to Christ. The church founded by Christ has believed what it believes since the absolute earliest days. Ask yourself: Why has Luther’s veneration of Mary been thrown away? Answer: To look less Catholic.

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

I am sure they would consider the opportunity to do so reward enough, and say they enjoyed the debate.

try

scripturelink.googlepages.com/authority

it may clear it up.

 

[mercygate]

Thank you for your concern and considering me a brother in Christ but I was lied to by people who were lied to and it took a lot of searching to get to the truth and at times I had to go outside the Church because the lies came from inside. If that offends people then whoever it offends should be glad it didn’t happen that way for them. There is no reason to curse someone for expressing an idea on a forum. This doesn’t pertain to you po18guy but to the person it pertains to you knows who you are.

Ron, my Brother. Would you PLEASE [SIGN]PLEASE[/SIGN]

take five minutes to figure out how the “quote” feature works. Your posts are EXTREMELY difficult to follow and to answer because of this small technical detail.

 

[ron77nyc]

What exactly did you mean when you wrote; For which I would hope go rejoicing to the flames hand in hand with you, singing “Nearer, My God, to Thee.”

 

[mesl4]

A lot of these beliefs come from the Apostle John, whose mother she became. They are in church tradition, but not in scripture.

 

[mercygate]

po18guy;4147250:

Did he write any other books besides what we have in the Bible? If so, where are they? How can I get access to reading them?
.
But Protestants came from Catholics so don’t they have the link too? Or do they not count once they are no longer in communion w/the church?

Of course Protestants “count” insofar as they espouse the ancient doctrines of Christianity. But many have taken “sola *Scriptura” *to an extreme that the original reformers would have deplored. Many protestant laymen think “if it ain’t in the Bible, it ain’t Christianity.” But ALL the main line protestant groups accept the first four ecumenical councils.

Over in your Baptist church, mention that Baptists officially accept the doctrine that Mary is “Mother of God.” This teaching was promulgated at the Third Ecumenical Council – BEFORE the canon of the New Testament was fixed. If you try this, be sure you have a fire extinguisher in your purse because people will likely set themselves (or you) on fire!

 

[po18guy]

Did he write any other books besides what we have in the Bible? If so, where are they? How can I get access to reading them?

I do not know for certain. You might google it, or check the vatican web site: www.vatican.va
.

But Protestants came from Catholics so don’t they have the link too? Or do they not count once they are no longer in communion w/the church?

Yes, they are derived from Catholicism, but they broke the direct link to Christ via Apostolic succession. That is why they are considered our separated brothers and sisters in Christ. For the most part, they abandoned the Sacred Traditions, choosing to go with Luther rather than Saint Paul. This brought about sola scriptura, which is the source of much of your doubts and confusion about the original church.

Another bit about the Apostle John from church tradition is that, when he was well advanced in years, and was confined to his mat, he had to be carried into and out of church gatherings. He exhorted the early Christians to “Love one another!” as he was carried out. There is no way to know this from scripture. That, as well as much of Catholic Liturgy, has been lost to the Protestants. And that, as they say, is a shame. It is also why we constantly speak of unity.

Christ’s peace.

 

[mesl4]

Another bit about the Apostle John from church tradition is that, when he was well advanced in years, and was confined to his mat, he had to be carried into and out of church gatherings. He exhorted the early Christians to “Love one another!” as he was carried out. There is no way to know this from scripture. That, as well as much of Catholic Liturgy, has been lost to the Protestants. And that, as they say, is a shame. It is also why we constantly speak of unity.

Christ’s peace.

But even outside the Bible, there must be some writing from an Early Church Father, or other reliable Christian that would have shown this. Or is it just know by oral tradition?

 

[mercygate]

But even outside the Bible, there must be some writing from an Early Church Father, or other reliable Christian that would have shown this. Or is it just know by oral tradition?

Seems to me that this sort of thing falls under “pious tradition” with a VERY small “t” – whether this is true or not simply does not affect any teaching of the Church. It doesn’t even affect devotional practice . . .

Perhaps you have come across some of the Christian apocrypha – those supposedly “lost” Gospels that have received so much press lately. Some of them were never “lost” but contributed to the thread of Christian piety. Gospel of James, Epistle of Barnabas, Acts of Paul and Thecla . . . among others. I think there are around 17. Lee Strobel lists them in The Case for the Real Jesus. When you read this stuff, you KNOW why these documents never made it into the canon! :whacky:

 

[ron77nyc]

My brother, both are 100% wrong!!! No Mary worship has ever been taught. Do some worship her anyway? Likely, but they risk their souls. We worship God alone. Period.

WE DO NOT “re-crucify” Christ. That is impossible. This is a lie from the evil one. Do not believe such evil. This has been put forth by fellow “Christians” who have incorrect beliefs and/or are willfully ignorant of the Catholic Church. Do not let the evil one deceive you. He wants you to believe these lies. The evil one loves division. He makes up a new lie and circulates it daily.

God is outside of time, correct? Time does not apply to God. Same with Christ and the Holy Spirit. Time applies to man. Christ’s sacrifice was once for all time - those before His incarnation and all who came after. Even Evangelicals will agree with this Catholic teaching.

OK, since God is outside of time and Christ’s sacrifice is also outside of time, the sacrifice is timeless. We celebrate the same, one-time for all, sacrifice. Mass makes it present to us, by the power of God. It is made present, not re-done. Another lie.

You have been mislead by people who are making stuff upand assisting the devil with his lies. And that, precisely, is the problem with a shattered church. People begin making stuff up. The Catholic Church would not have lasted 1,975 years making stuff up. Making stuff up began with the early heresies, and continues to this day. Making stuff up delights Satan.

I cannot let a brother in Christ be lied to.

Here is where recrucifying Christ was taught. If I’m reading this wrong please correct me. It was called “the unbloody sacrifice of the mass.”
The Council of Trent

Twenty Second Session, Doctrine
ON THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS.
CHAPTER II.
That the Sacrifice of the Mass is propitiatory both for the living and the dead.
And forasmuch as, in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the mass, that same Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner, who once offered Himself in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross; the holy Synod teaches, that this sacrifice is truly propritiatory and that by means thereof this is effected, that we obtain mercy, and find grace in seasonable aid, if we draw nigh unto God, contrite and penitent, with a sincere heart and upright faith, with fear and reverence. For the Lord, appeased by the oblation thereof, and granting the grace and gift of penitence, forgives even heinous crimes and sins. For the victim is one and the same, the same now offering by the ministry of priests, who then offered Himself on the cross, the manner alone of offering being different. The fruits indeed of which oblation, of that bloody one to wit, are received most plentifully through this unbloody one; so far is this (latter) from derogating in any way from that (former oblation). Wherefore, not only for the sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities of the faithful who are living, but also for those who are departed in Christ, and who are not as yet fully purified, is it rightly offered, agreebly to a tradition of the apostles.

 

[mesl4]

Here is where recrucifying Christ was taught. If I’m reading this wrong please correct me. It was called “the unbloody sacrifice of the mass.”
The Council of Trent

Twenty Second Session, Doctrine
ON THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS.
CHAPTER II.
That the Sacrifice of the Mass is propitiatory both for the living and the dead.
And forasmuch as, in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the mass, that same Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner, who once offered Himself in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross; the holy Synod teaches, that this sacrifice is truly propritiatory and that by means thereof this is effected, that we obtain mercy, and find grace in seasonable aid, if we draw nigh unto God, contrite and penitent, with a sincere heart and upright faith, with fear and reverence. For the Lord, appeased by the oblation thereof, and granting the grace and gift of penitence, forgives even heinous crimes and sins. For the victim is one and the same, the same now offering by the ministry of priests, who then offered Himself on the cross, the manner alone of offering being different. The fruits indeed of which oblation, of that bloody one to wit, are received most plentifully through this unbloody one; so far is this (latter) from derogating in any way from that (former oblation). Wherefore, not only for the sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities of the faithful who are living, but also for those who are departed in Christ, and who are not as yet fully purified, is it rightly offered, agreebly to a tradition of the apostles.

I don’t see anything in this paragraph that is re-crucifying. This is presenting and offering Christ’s sacrifice that already took place. Because we have nothing of our own that can forgive or appease God for our sins, we offer him HIS sacrifice. HIS perfect lamb, the only acceptable sacrifice. Right? I will say though, I dont understand why this has to be presented /sacrificed over and over again if we know his sacrifice took care of this 2000 yrs ago. I thought it was sufficient for all time and there is now now need for sacrifice.

 

[ron77nyc]

I don’t see anything in this paragraph that is re-crucifying. This is presenting and offering Christ’s sacrifice that already took place. Because we have nothing of our own that can forgive or appease God for our sins, we offer him HIS sacrifice. HIS perfect lamb, the only acceptable sacrifice. Right? I will say though, I dont understand why this has to be presented /sacrificed over and over again if we know his sacrifice took care of this 2000 yrs ago. I thought it was sufficient for all time and there is now now need for sacrifice.

“in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the mass, that same Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner”

immolate means 1: to offer in sacrifice ; especially : to kill as a sacrificial victim
2: to kill or destroy often by fire

 

[FCEGM]

“in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the mass, that same Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner”

immolate means 1: to offer in sacrifice ; especially : to kill as a sacrificial victim
2: to kill or destroy often by fire

All that Trent is teaching is that in the Mass the same Christ and His Sacrifice is made present to us; iow, we are present through the sacramental signs at the foot of the Cross where He IS being immolated. He is not being sacrificed again and again, but He is making His One Sacrifice available for all to be witness to through the ages until His coming in Glory.

 

[po18guy]

“in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the mass, that same Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner”

immolate means 1: to offer in sacrifice ; especially : to kill as a sacrificial victim
2: to kill or destroy often by fire

Ron, it appears that you are reading this through Fundamentalist/Evangelical glasses. Do not fear! The accusation of a “new sacrifice” is 100% false. What you mention is an innovative, anti-Catholic fundamentalist teaching that likely originated in the 1890s. It is not a re-sacrifice. The Church teaches that it is not a re-sacrifice. One Sacrifice for all who came before Him, all who were with Him, and all to come after. Period. His one sacrifice is sufficient for all time.

Can we be extremely clear on this? A re-sacrifice cannot be done by man, as it has already been accomplished by Christ. Once for all. No church on earth has either the power or the authority to re-create Christ’s sacrifice. At mass, we are made present at Calvary. The one sacrifice occurred for all time, and the Holy Spirit, Who is outside of time, makes that same sacrifice present to us in this age. One sacrifice. Period.

The demon who relentlessly attacks the Church perpetuates lies and hatred against the One Church. Always has and always will. My brother, do not fear. The truth will set you free from any fear of the true church.

This link explains it very well:

anawim.pair.com/CATHOLICS/CATHOLIC%20MASS.htm

Christ’s peace, brother.