Name one Catholic teaching that contradicts Scripture

[Mannyfit75]

The Reformers wounded Christ’s Church. I don’t the Reformation is from God because it caused division.

God is all about unity. Jesus pray that we “are One, just as the Father and I are One.”

The Reformation is not God send, and it is a result of the sins of our parents. I do firmly believe the Reformation is the result of Satan’s influence on self-men on both sides, which did not look to resolve the issue peacefully without the need for division.

God promotes unity, Satan promotes division. I don’t see Reformers as saintly individuals…

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

What about divorce? Is that also a discipline? There is an Orthodox priest on this forum who stated in a thread that divorce was permitted by the Catholic Church for a period of five hundred years.

No, the Catholic teaching on divorce is doctrine not discipline. No one has the authority to dissolve the sacramentality of marriage.

I would ask to see the specific documents that the Orthodox priest cites, in full.

 

[Traveller1534]

Like I said there is no Catholic belief that contrary to the Bible.

Oh really???

Well how’s about showing me where it is in scripture how Mary was assumed into heaven body and spirit and while you are at, why don’t you show me how the church call sell indulgences to folks so that they can pray their loved ones out of Purgatory, I would love to see where that one is!!

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

Oh really???

Well how’s about showing me where it is in scripture how Mary was assumed into heaven body and spirit and while you are at, why don’t you show me how the church call sell indulgences to folks so that they can pray their loved ones out of Purgatory, I would love to see where that one is!!

Mary’s Assumption - Rev. 12:1; Cant. 6:10 among others.: Gn. 5:24; 2 Kg. 2:11 show that an assumption isn’t contrary to Scriptures.

Now show where the Bible says that Mary wasn’t assumed into Heaven (that would show the teaching being contrary, not just a lack of explicit text).

Please show where the Church’s official teaching is that indulgences are for sale. Sales of indulgences did occur, and it was an abuse that is not to be condoned, but it was never an official doctrine of the Church.

 

[MariaG]

Hi! I accept the challenge. Nice post, by the way, whoever started this!

Thank you, that would be me Although I would argue that these kinds of threads get very, very messy, I still can’t seem to resist throwing one up every once and awhile

1. Also strange is that belief that faith plus works equals salvation. Quite an erroneous equation, when one considers:

"This Good News tells us how God makes us right in his sight. This is accomplished from start to finish by faith [lit. ‘from faith to faith’]. As the Scriptures say, “It is through faith that a righteous person has life.” --Rom. 1:17

And,

“We are made right with God by placing our faith in Jesus Christ.” --Rom. 3:22

“People are made right with God when they **believe **that Jesus sacrificed his life, shedding his blood.” --Rom. 3:25

“What good is it, dear brothers and sisters, if you say you have faith but don’t **show **it by your actions?.. I will show you my faith by my good deeds…” James 2:14, 18

You see, his [Abraham’s] faith and his actions worked together. His actions made his faith complete. And so it happened just as the Scriptures say: ‘Abraham believed God, and God counted him as righteous because of his faith.’ He was even called the friend of God.” --James 2:22, 23

James and Paul seem very much in agreeance about the nature of salvation. It is a “free gift, not a reward for the good things we’ve done.” To James, in his situation, it had to be made clear to a lazy, stubborn people that faith resulted in fruit, and one who had true, living faith was bound to perform good works, but only as a by-product of that same faith.

The fact that so many instances the Scriptures declare God will take these works into account on Judgement Day would imply little more than that he looks at our fruit to see if there is that real, living faith in us … that faith that is productive to his Church.

That will suffice for now. I’m very tired

I personally will start with number 4 since it has the most obvious misunderstanding of Catholic Doctrine.

First, Catholic do not teach that initial justification is in any way dependent on works.

So if you think that any of the posts that answer this or that Catholics teach that we can earn our way to heaven, you are mistaken.

But we do believe that good works, that can only be from the Grace of God in the first place, will be manifest in a believers life or they have a dead faith. A faith must include hope and charity for it to be a vibrant, alive faith. And a vibrant alive faith will of course exhibit obeidience.

Catholics define, based on scripture, that faith is intellectual assent only. This is the reason that we vemenently deny that one can be saved by faith alone.

However, if by faith alone you mean faith, hope and charity, we would agree.

There is a nice article by James Akin on this. by James AkinJustification by Faith Alone

So it would appear that in the case of number 4, you are arguing against something that the Catholic Church does not in fact teach, since the Church does NOT teach that good works will earn a person heaven, nor has the Church EVER taught that.

An interesting question for me has always been, since Luther and the people of their time clearly understand the definition of faith, did Luther and his followers think that intellectual assent alone, (a dead faith by definition of the Catholic Church) could really get them into heaven, and has today Lutheran understanding has changed or did Luther just wish to redefine words that had been defined for hundreds of years? Ah well, another thread.

God Bless,
Maria

 

[MariaG]

I can name several Catholic practices that are not supported by scripture and a couple that are contrary to scripture. That was the reason for the Reformation and thank God for it.

Since the first two, have been answered, let’s look at the purgatory question First, it should be noted what purgatory is and what it isn’t.

Purgatory is** NOT** a second chance at heaven. If you die with unrepented mortal sin on your soul, you will go straight to hell. Purgatory although commonly thought as a “place” by most Catholics, has no such definition in the doctrine of the Catholic Church.

1030 All who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.
1031 The Church gives the name *Purgatory *to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.606 The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. The tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire:607
As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come.608

1032This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture: "Therefore [Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin."609 From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God.610 The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead:
Let us help and commemorate them. If Job’s sons were purified by their father’s sacrifice, why would we doubt that our offerings for the dead bring them some consolation? Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them.611
607 Cf. 1 Cor 3:15; 1 Pet 1:7.
608 St. Gregory the Great, Dial. 4,39L 77,396; cf. Mt 12:31.
609 2 Macc 12:46.
611 St. John Chrysostom, Hom. in 1 Cor. 41,5G 61,361; cf. Job 1:5.

(continued)

 

[MariaG]

(Continued)

The strongest defense, in my opinion, from Scripture of purgatory is one of the books Luther did not wish to include in the Protestant Canon since he did not believe in purgatory. This would be the canon that was set in the 300’s at the council of Hippo in 393, and the Third Council of Carthage in 397 and reaffirmed in the time of the “reformation”, also understanding that the Jewish Canon was not set until AFTER the Christian Church was established and therefore has no authority for Christians. Incidently, the Jews did not wish to include them since they were such strong cases for Christianity in them. Did you know the Holy Day of Hanakah is contained in Maccabes? They hold it to be true and holy yet do not include the scripture that contains the story to be inspired, although again, this was not decided until AFTER christianity began.

The Council That Wasn’t
The Myth of Jabneh and the Old Testament Canon
By Steve Ray

:bible1: 2 Macc. 12:42-45 42] and they turned to prayer, beseeching that the sin which had been committed might be wholly blotted out. And the noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen.
43] He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably, taking account of the resurrection.
44] For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead.
45] But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin.

There is plenty of other scripture about a state or process after death of cleansing. This process or state, Catholics have named purgatory.

Here is a link to the numerous amounts of scripture with Catholic interpretation of it.

Purgatory

God Bless,
Maria

 

[MariaG]

An interesting question for me has always been, since Luther and the people of their time clearly understand the definition of faith, did Luther and his followers think that intellectual assent alone, (a dead faith by definition of the Catholic Church) could really get them into heaven, and has today Lutheran understanding has changed or did Luther just wish to redefine words that had been defined for hundreds of years? Ah well, another thread.

God Bless,
Maria

Again, although this would be another thread, I found this article interesting.

**Justification by Faith **PETER KREEFT

God bless,
Maria

 

[contramundum7]

I don’t understand… how could she “fall short of the glory of God” if she was perfect and without sin?

And regarding babies who are below the age of reason… I’ve been told that they are born with original sin so if they died prior to baptism, they would not go to heaven. It seems that Mary is put into a different catagory altogether and not at all like babies or those beyond the capablility to reason.

Adam and Eve were created without original sin… Why couldn’t God do that again with the woman who was going to carry Jesus Christ, our Lord (God) in her womb? More importantly: why WOULDN’T He?
Though it held God, The Ark of the Covenant was just a material box…
Again, why wouldn’t God created a special person, a sinless woman to carry Jesus ?

 

[Valke2]

Adam and Eve were created without original sin… Why couldn’t God do that again with the woman who was going to carry Jesus Christ, our Lord (God) in her womb? More importantly: why WOULDN’T He?
Though it held God, The Ark of the Covenant was just a material box…
Again, why wouldn’t God created a special person, a sinless woman to carry Jesus ?

By that logic, why wouldn’t he do that for all of us? Why should we not all be born without original sin? The Ark didn’t hold God.

 

[contramundum7]

By that logic, why wouldn’t he do that for all of us? Why should we not all be born without original sin? The Ark didn’t hold God.

Who knows? I’m not God.

The Ark did hold God, according to what i’ve read in the OT. He wasn’t always in it, but he visited the Israelites by entering into it…

I believe God just decided to do a miracle in creating Mary for Jesus…

Also - For that matter, why couldn’t God have forgiven us all our sins forever and always, without the horrifying death on the Cross of his only Son??

When we have all the answers to these questions, we will no longer have need of faith…

 

[MariaG]

Adam and Eve were created without original sin… Why couldn’t God do that again with the woman who was going to carry Jesus Christ, our Lord (God) in her womb? More importantly: why WOULDN’T He?
Though it held God, The Ark of the Covenant was just a material box…
Again, why wouldn’t God created a special person, a sinless woman to carry Jesus ?

By that logic, why wouldn’t he do that for all of us? Why should we not all be born without original sin? The Ark didn’t hold God.

The Ark carried the Word of God. Mary carried the Word (John 1:1)

Why should we not we all be born without it? We are not God.

If one believes that Jesus is God incarnate, it is fitting that the God-bearer should be without any sin. Look at all that was necessary to carry the Word of God. Look at all the instructions in the OT concerning the Ark. It carried the Word of God. So much more care would be taken with that which would actually carry God incarnate.

And BTW, although I see it is a current issue for some, the post by Carol Marie is 2 years old. I would not look back and try to answer those questions. They have already been dealt with. She is happily Catholic now. If someone brings them up anew, that is fine, but it is not necessary to go back to the beginning of this thread and answer old questions with the “Catholic Answer”

 

[Valke2]

It carried God’s presence. Not God.

 

[lak611]

why don’t you show me how the church call sell indulgences to folks so that they can pray their loved ones out of Purgatory, I would love to see where that one is!!

The Church cannot sell indulgences.

 

[LukeJ]

Hi, I have a challenge for you. Preists are called “Father” (so and so) by parishoners, but how do you explain when Jesus tells people in Matthew not to call anyone Father except God?

“Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.” (Matthew 23:9)

 

[Nancie_Lew]

Who knows? I’m not God.

The Ark did hold God, according to what i’ve read in the OT. He wasn’t always in it, but he visited the Israelites by entering into it…

I believe God just decided to do a miracle in creating Mary for Jesus…

Also - For that matter, why couldn’t God have forgiven us all our sins forever and always, without the horrifying death on the Cross of his only Son??

When we have all the answers to these questions, we will no longer have need of faith…

God did not dwell inside the Ark. He dwelt on the" Mercy Seat " which was between the two cherubims on top of the Ark.

 

[Nancie_Lew]

The Ark carried the Word of God. Mary carried the Word (John 1:1)

Why should we not we all be born without it? We are not God.

If one believes that Jesus is God incarnate, it is fitting that the God-bearer should be without any sin. Look at all that was necessary to carry the Word of God. Look at all the instructions in the OT concerning the Ark. It carried the Word of God. So much more care would be taken with that which would actually carry God incarnate.

And BTW, although I see it is a current issue for some, the post by Carol Marie is 2 years old. I would not look back and try to answer those questions. They have already been dealt with. She is happily Catholic now. If someone brings them up anew, that is fine, but it is not necessary to go back to the beginning of this thread and answer old questions with the “Catholic Answer”

God did not dwell inside the Ark. He dwelt in the" Holy of Holies ". The Ark was in the middle of the “Holy of Holies”. The reason for the Ark was to house the ten commandments and the Torah. On top of the Ark were two cherubims. The two golden cherubs represented the Jewish People. While the “Mercy Seat” in between the Cherubs represented God and his unity with the Jewish people.

 

[believers]

Hi, I have a challenge for you. Preists are called “Father” (so and so) by parishoners, but how do you explain when Jesus tells people in Matthew not to call anyone Father except God?

“Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.” (Matthew 23:9)

I’d like to know who they don’t call father. Rev 17:3

 

[Singinbeauty]

One issue that I cannot seem to wrap my head around is the fact that God flat out, no explanation necessary type of commandment, told us that we are not to make graven images of anything on this earth, above or below us. These images that are prayed in front of make me wonder. I am not saying that Catholics are idol worshippers but if God said don’t do it why are we?

 

[believers]

The Church cannot sell indulgences.

You mean not anymore.