Name 3 reasons you are not Catholic (yet).

  • Thread starter Thread starter cckz7
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
  1. Can’t publicly and obstinately disagree with certain teachings without being declared a heretic and summarily excommunicated.
This makes sense. Why would anyone want to be a part of somthing that they publicly and obstinately disagreed with? 🤷
  1. No one has yet shown me the form I would have to sign (on the dotted line) in order to be Catholic, and until I see that form, I refuse to join.
Oh, dear! Are there FORMS? Was Jesus passing out FORMS? Where is the line? Did the apostles have enough of the forms printed? And here I thought all this time they added people with baptism!😉
  1. If I joined, and became a heretic, my heretical views wounld not be vindicated probably for another 200 years. Sheesh, I can join the Methodists, and get heretical vindication in half the time!
wow
 
40.png
believer1966:
  1. Salvation by works
This is exactly what I am talking about. Some Protestants here think that the Catholic Church teaches we are saved by works. Not at all.

That is not Catholic Church teaching, which she received from her beloved Spouse, Jesus Christ. The Church, my friend teaches that we are saved by God’s grace.

The idea that we are saved by works is called an ancient heresy called Pelagians. In this heresy it states, that the human will, tempered in good deeds and rigorous asceticism, was sufficient to live a sinless life. He told his followers that right action on the part of human beings was all that was necessary for salvation. To him, the grace of God was only an added advantage; helpful, but in no way essential. Pelagius disbelieved in original sin, but said that Adam had condemned humankind through bad example, and that Christ’s good example offered humanity a path to salvation, not through sacrifice, but through instruction of the will.

This heresy was condemned by the Catholic Church in the Council of Carthage…
 
I would like a truthful answer from members of this forum.
  1. What is the purpose of this forum for Catholics?
  2. Why would you want non Catholics here knowing that we agree on so little?
  1. To fellowship and build up with the bretheren. To increase in knowledge which ultimately results in increase of faith. To share our witnessing of Jesus which leads to a stronger community.
  2. Not for the fact that we should focus on the differences, but to understand and realize what the differences are so that we all may be aware them and work on unity. If we are able to see others viewpoints we become equipped with knowledge and will be able to communicate with hopefully less prejudice all for the love of Christ.
 
The Catholic Catechism says of baptism, for example: “Baptism not only purifies from all sins, but also makes the neophyte ‘a new creature,’ an adopted son of God, who has become a ‘partaker of the divine nature,’ member of Christ and co-heir with him, and a temple of the Holy Spirit” (Catechism 1265, emphasis added). “… Justified by faith in Baptism, [they] are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians” (Catechism 1271).
Why is this teaching a problem? Thanks for your help.
 
  1. teaching that the church can not err. (if this is so, why did john
    paul 11 apologize for the inquisition, among other contradictions)
  2. although the official teaching is that mary is venerated and honored, but not adored and worshiped, she is both adored and worshiped by many catholics with no reproof.
  3. scholastic philosophy and its reliance on human reason to explain (or try to explain) the things of god, and the codifying of such reasonings as dogma and canon law.
 
  1. teaching that the church can not err. (if this is so, why did john
    paul 11 apologize for the inquisition, among other contradictions)
John Paul II apologizes for the sins committed by Catholics. Infallibility in the Catholic is limited only to teaching “EX CATHEDRA” from the Chair of Peter when he speaks moral and faith issues. The Pope cannot err when he teaches from his Chair.

And there are no contradictions. I do find contradictions in many Protestant doctrines that was developed by men. The Doctrine of faith alone and Bible alone. We can discuss that in another thread, which I am willing to provide you.

Infallibility is not the same as impeccable (that means always perfect)
  1. although the official teaching is that mary is venerated and honored, but not adored and worshiped, she is both adored and worshiped by many catholics with no reproof.
The belief can be in Patristic sources or Early Church Fathers, many of whom were taught by the Apostles themselves.

St. Ireneaus said;

“For as Eve was seduced by the word of an angel to flee from God, having rebelled against His Word, so Mary by the word of an angel received the glad tidings that she would bear God by obeying his Word. The former was seduced to disobey God, but the latter was persuaded to obey God, so that the Virgin Mary might become the advocate of the virgin Eve. As the human race was subjected to death through [the act of] a virgin, so it was saved by a virgin.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, V:19,1 (A.D. 180).

“Under your mercy we take refuge, O Mother of God. Do not reject our supplications in necessity, but deliver us from danger,[O you] alone pure and alone blessed.” Sub Tuum Praesidium, From Rylands Papyrus, Egypt (3rd century).

“Let, then, the life of Mary be as it were virginity itself, set forth in a likeness, from which, as from a mirror, the appearance of chastity and the form of virtue is reflected… Nor would I hesitate to admit you to the altars of God, whose souls I would without hesitation call altars, on which Christ is daily offered for the redemption of the body. For if the virgin’s body be a temple of God, what is her soul, which, the ashes, as it were, of the body being shaken off, once more uncovered by the hand of the Eternal Priest, exhales the vapor of the divine fire. Blessed virgins, who emit a fragrance through divine grace as gardens do through flowers, temples through religion, altars through the priest.” Ambrose, On Virginity II:6,18 (A.D. 378).

“Recalling these and other circumstances and imploring the Virgin Mary to bring assistance, since she, too, was a virgin and had been in danger, she entrusted herself to the remedy of fasting and sleeping on the ground.” Gregory of Nazianzen, Oration 24:11 (A.D. 379).
  1. scholastic philosophy and its reliance on human reason to explain (or try to explain) the things of god, and the codifying of such reasonings as dogma and canon law.
Paul himself debated with Greeks in his days, and Greeks then were well known for their philosophy. Certain aspect of philosophy can be used to explain the existence of God by reasoning.

Dogma were develop over time. A term used called developmental doctrines. Like the doctrine of the Trinity. Canon Law is use to bring order when dealing with very difficult issue involving Church Law such as annulments, the validity of marriage, and so forth.
 
Earliar on this forum we were all told the Pope is infallible.

Have all Popes been infallible?

Were the Popes during the inquisition and martyrdom of the reformist and other innocent people without error?

Were the murders and tortures and burning at the stake of thousand upon thousands ok with God?

Did did the Catholic Church ever make any restitution for any of the Land and Property they stole that made the church so rich.?

Was the plot by the Jesuits to murder King James I an infallable decision of the Pope?

Did anyone from the Catholic Church every denounce these atrocities and repent for the horrors they inflicted on innocent victums?
 
Earliar on this forum we were all told the Pope is infallible.
The pope is only infallible when speaking ex cathedra. Even our Lutheran brother and sister know this. Our Lutheran brother and sister even know how many doctrine are a result of this.

Here is a link to another thread on CAF regarding this video about the Catholic Faith done by our Lutheran brother and sisters: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=153554

If the link in the thread does not work then you can go here elca.org/mosaic/backissues.html to watch the video.

The one I’m talking about is called “Understanding the Roman Catholic Church”.

God Bless
 
Earliar on this forum we were all told the Pope is infallible.

Have all Popes been infallible?
Only when he speaks Ex-Cathedra from the Chair of St. Peter in his teaching authority regarding moral and faith issues. The Pope only use this ability twice. One was proclaiming that Mary is the Immaculate Conception, and the other is the Assumption of Mary.

It’s rarely been exercise recently.
Were the Popes during the inquisition and martyrdom of the reformist and other innocent people without error?
No Pope at the time taught infallible statements at those times. The inquistion was a response to heretics, and the one who killed were the soverign government.

I also like to add the Protestant at the time were guilty of killing Catholics. Ever heard of the 30 yrs war? Both killing on both sides. No Pope ever proclaim anything contradictory.
Were the murders and tortures and burning at the stake of thousand upon thousands ok with God?
Murder and torture is never justified and Protestants at the time were guilty. Remember the Salem Witch Trials? Was that Protestant?
Did did the Catholic Church ever make any restitution for any of the Land and Property they stole that made the church so rich.?
The Church gains its property through donations from recent converts to the faith. Many of them were granted big real state especially after Emperor Constantine ended Christianity Persecution when he issued His eddict of Milan.

The Church is in debt that it is rich.
Was the plot by the Jesuits to murder King James I an infallable decision of the Pope?
No. That is false lie.
Did anyone from the Catholic Church every denounce these atrocities and repent for the horrors they inflicted on innocent victums?
Pope John Paul II prayed and apologizes for the sins of the Catholics who committed immoral acts.
 
  1. teaching that the church can not err. (if this is so, why did john paul 11 apologize for the inquisition, among other contradictions)
This is a good question. 'Infallibility applies to accurate promulgations of the teaching of Jesus Christ as passed on through the Apostles. It does not prevent individuals within the church from making mistakes, or people from making errors in how they implement that teaching.

“Drive out the wicked person from among you.” 1 Cor 5:13

From my studies on the inquisition, the people involved believed that they were implementing God’s word in the right way. For us in this day and age, it is difficult to understand this.
 
The pope is only infallible when speaking ex cathedra. Even our Lutheran brother and sister know this. Our Lutheran brother and sister even know how many doctrine are a result of this.

Only a partial answer to numerous questions. Where is ex cathedra in the Bible and when did Jesus teach that. Anything that exalts itself above the teachings of Christ has become an idol or a god.
 
Earliar on this forum we were all told the Pope is infallible.
That just means that the HS will preserve him from error in faithfully transmitting the teachings of Christ, not that he is personally free from error.
Have all Popes been infallible?
The promise was for the Church. As it’s chief shepherd, yes.
Were the Popes during the inquisition and martyrdom of the reformist and other innocent people without error?
no. Infallibility only applies to the teachings.
Were the murders and tortures and burning at the stake of thousand upon thousands ok with God?
Personally, I don’t think so! Perhaps someone more authoritative could speak on that. I am sure the people that did them believed they were. that still does not make it true.
Did did the Catholic Church ever make any restitution for any of the Land and Property they stole that made the church so rich.?
Not nearly enough, I feel sure.
Was the plot by the Jesuits to murder King James I an infallable decision of the Pope?
Certainly not!
Did anyone from the Catholic Church every denounce these atrocities and repent for the horrors they inflicted on innocent victums?
Yes, and still do today.
 
That just means that the HS will preserve him from error in faithfully transmitting the teachings of Christ, not that he is personally free from error.

The promise was for the Church. As it’s chief shepherd, yes.

no. Infallibility only applies to the teachings.

Personally, I don’t think so! Perhaps someone more authoritative could speak on that. I am sure the people that did them believed they were. that still does not make it true.

Not nearly enough, I feel sure.

Certainly not!

Yes, and still do today.
Now that is what I call great answers. Totally truthful and honest. I believe that I have found an honest kindred spirit. Thank you from the bottom of my heart. That is the spirit I have searched for on this forum. It is the truth that sets us free. I look forward to reading your post.

May God bless and keep you

Danny
 
No Pope at the time taught infallible statements at those times. The inquistion was a response to heretics, and the one who killed were the soverign government.

Only a half truth. The Church authorities mainly Bishops tortured confessions out of their victims. Sentenced them to death. Then the Government which the Catholic Church controlled because they also feared for their lives carried out the sentence of death, usally by burning or hanging the heretics. The torture and butchery to gain confession on heresy was the sole responsibility of the Church.

Murder and torture is never justified and Protestants at the time were guilty. Remember the Salem Witch Trials? Was that Protestant?

These puritans you speak of were not mainstream Christians, they were followers of the teachings of John Calvin and yes what they did in no way compares to the magnitude of what the Catholic church did to untold numbers of innocent people.

The Church gains its property through donations from recent converts to the faith. Many of them were granted big real state especially after Emperor Constantine ended Christianity Persecution when he issued His eddict of Milan.

Again history shows that along with the inquisition came the seizing of property, land, castles, you name it.

The Church is in debt that it is rich.

I don’t see how that is possible with all the assets of the church. Being in debt is a paperwork thing and has no basis in what the church owns and has hidden in the Vatican. With the number of Catholics in the world all they have to do is pay their tithe to the church for one week and they will be out of debt.

Why do you say that it is a lie that the Jesuits tried to kill King James the I. They put 60 kegs of gunpowed under the parliment building before King James I and parliment were scheduled to meet. They were caught and hanged.

No. That is false lie.
 
You keep saying “The Church did this” or “The church was guilty of this” Holy mother church is infalliable and can do no wrong. Early Catholics are the ones who committed atrocities because they were infalliable. Yeah the crusades were horrible, but guess what Muslims killed Christians too and we lost those wars so it’s not like the christians prevailed and the Pope became not only head of the Catholic Church but also became the iron fist ruler of the world. The Inquision wasn’t much to be proud of, but given the state and the belifs in Queen Isabel’s day she was only doing what she saw was best for her country, and in the long run was best for her country because Spain never underwent the blood shead between Catholics and Protestants years later.
 
No Pope at the time taught infallible statements at those times. The inquistion was a response to heretics, and the one who killed were the soverign government.

Only a half truth. The Church authorities mainly Bishops tortured confessions out of their victims. Sentenced them to death. Then the Government which the Catholic Church controlled because they also feared for their lives carried out the sentence of death, usally by burning or hanging the heretics. The torture and butchery to gain confession on heresy was the sole responsibilityof the Church.
You really got your history all wrong.

First of all the bishops served only an tribunals and held trials of the accused. If they were found guilty they were handed over to the local government.
In the twelfth century (Episcopal inquisition), the Catholic Church together with secular governments started to gradually develop a structured way to deal with heresy. In that time, Church Councils (composed of bishops and archbishops) used local authorities to prosecute those deemed to be heretics. Inquisition was, by then, referred to by the Church as “Inquisitio Haereticae Pravitatis Sanctum Officium”, or “Holy Office of Inquisition into Heretical Wickedness”.
Murder and torture is never justified and Protestants at the time were guilty. Remember the Salem Witch Trials? Was that Protestant?
These puritans you speak of were not mainstream Christians, they were followers of the teachings of John Calvin and yes what they did in no way compares to the magnitude of what the Catholic church did to untold numbers of innocent people.
Yes but they are Protestant Christians regardless.
The Church gains its property through donations from recent converts to the faith. Many of them were granted big real state especially after Emperor Constantine ended Christianity Persecution when he issued His eddict of Milan.
Again history shows that along with the inquisition came the seizing of property, land, castles, you name it.
I don’t see how that is possible with all the assets of the church. Being in debt is a paperwork thing and has no basis in what the church owns and has hidden in the Vatican. With the number of Catholics in the world all they have to do is pay their tithe to the church for one week and they will be out of debt.

The Catholic Church loan of its vehicles from the Italian government. They loan Air Force jet for the Papal travels. You seem to look at one narrow view and overlooked at the charitable works of Mother Theresa, and other devote Catholics committed in helping the poor in the third world. The Church is not wealthy as you claim it to be.
Why do you say that it is a lie that the Jesuits tried to kill King James the I. They put 60 kegs of gunpowed under the parliment building before King James I and parliment were scheduled to meet. They were caught and hanged.
No it wasn’t.

Guy Fawkes (13 April 1570 – 31 January 1606), also known as Guido Fawkes, was a member of a group of English Roman Catholics who attempted to carry out the Gunpowder Plot on 5 November 1605.

Guy Fawkes did and he was no Jesuits. He was Catholic but not a Jesuit “The Gunpowder Plot” was a plan to assassinate the Protestant King James I (James VI of Scotland) and the members of both houses of the Parliament of England, by exploding Westminster Palace during the formal opening session of the 1605 Parliament, in which the King addressed a joint assembly of both the House of Lords and the House of Commons. Fawkes was in large part responsible for the later stages of the plan’s execution. His activities were detected before the plan’s completion, and following a severe interrogation involving the use of torture and a trial in Westminster Hall before Judge John Popham, he and his co-conspirators were executed for treason. Fawkes’s failure (or the attempt) is remembered by Guy Fawkes Night (also known as Bonfire Night or Fireworks Night) on 5 November.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Fawkes

I am not lying here. You have been deceived by an Anti-Catholic website called JesusisLord.com who made the false accusations you made against the Church.

Next time you make false accusation of the Catholic Church you better have more reliable resources. Not of your claims is proven to be true. They are more distorted Truths.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top