Positive Proof The Catholic Church Is The Only True Church

[ckempston]

ckempston:

---

(Joshua, please correct me if I’m wrong. I mean that sincerely because I am yet a “baby catholic”.)

---

**The problem lies with the accusation that the Church claims to be “infallible”. The Church claims no such thing. Infallibility has only to do with the Pope as he speaks “ex cathedra” as in from the chair of Peter and ONLY on matters of faith and morals. **

---

AFAIK, there have been only two ex cathedra statements, but I can never get a Catholic to give me a list or define when a Pope is speaking ex cathedra. Results of Ecumenical Councils would also be “infallable,” would they not?

In other words simply put, a Pope can be a dirty rotten scoundrel and as long as he does not teach that point-of-view from Scripture or by means of any part of The Deposit of Faith, he is fully within the authority of Jesus Himself.

---

I understand the difference between infallable and impeccable.

**The point is the catholic Church does not have to be perfect in all matters. And Jesus trusted His Church to sinful people. When did Jesus EVER say His Church would be entrusted to that one or those who were free of sin? That’s simply redicuous. If you believe that then you must believe that there is no one worth Jesus promise on earth and he made the promise in vain. **

I’m not asking for or expecting perfection.

---

To deny that there is a Church which Jesus founded still alive and well today means that you deny Jesus kept his promise. If you accept that Jesus kept His promise, then you must be able to recognize that church today. And if you keep your standards such as you have now, then you must go one step further and put words into Jesus’ mouth and be able to recognize a perfect, infallible church.

The only reason Jesus’ promise would appear to fail is if we forced the Catholic definition of church and then rejected that the Catholic church is “the” church. I contend that “the church” is much more, or maybe much less (complicated), than what the Catholic definition is.

---

**One cannot have it both ways. Jesus only said His Apostles could not teach against Scripture. He then said whatever they bind on earth will be bound in Heaven, so if you are looking for the Church that fulfills THAT promise, the ONLY Church who claims to do this and DOES it is the Catholic Church. **

I have no problem with binding and loosing. What I have a problem with is contradicting Jesus, which I think some Catholic teachings do.

---

**They have doctrine and dogma but NEVER have they interpreted Scripture to the Christian world in error. **

I disagree.

---

That, is the mark of THE ONE TRUE CHURCH.

The mark of the one true church is just what Jesus said it would be: “By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Jesus did not say, “You’ll know who my disciples are because they’ll all submit to the same patriarch.”

 

[janw]

I’m going to throw this in not to offend anyone but just to make a point… Jesus Christ can be found in the catholic church at all times, in the flesh. I have only to go to my tabernacle and kneel before Him and ask Him for whatever I need. I cherish that. I don’t know what I would do if I could not go there and do that.

It has not been an easy journey coming to the RCC, but the above, the Eucharist is the reason I could never go anywhere other than the RCC as to my knowledge no other faith worships or has access to the Eucharist. Also, after praying all my life as a protestant, praying to the saints and the Blessed Mother of God felt a little strange, so I ask God if this is where he wanted me to help me with this and WOW did he.

As praying the rosary has taken me to a spiritual level I never knew existed. It opened my eyes and heart to the scriptures concerning the life of Jesus. I thought I knew my Bible, but when praying the rosary God opened my eyes to see even more.
There is no doubt for me, it is the most powerful prayer ever. I feel God blessed me greatly leading me the the RCC as it was not something I made plans to do.

 

[joshua_b]

AFAIK, there have been only two ex cathedra statements, but I can never get a Catholic to give me a list or define when a Pope is speaking ex cathedra. Results of Ecumenical Councils would also be “infallable,” would they not?
."

Neither of these statements are entirely correct. Any time a doctrine is declared or defined, the infallibility of the chair of Peter is invoked. Papal infallibility will be in the form of an official declaration, and the trigger words are usually the statement that the Church “declares” and/or “defines”.

Ecumenical councils, and the results thereof, would fall under the jurisdiction of “infallible” if they formally declare or define doctine. To further whittle down the focus, infallibility can only apply to matters of “faith and morals”.

 

[joshua_b]

It has not been an easy journey coming to the RCC, but the above, the Eucharist is the reason I could never go anywhere other than the RCC as to my knowledge no other faith worships or has access to the Eucharist. Also, after praying all my life as a protestant, praying to the saints and the Blessed Mother of God felt a little strange, so I ask God if this is where he wanted me to help me with this and WOW did he.

As praying the rosary has taken me to a spiritual level I never knew existed. It opened my eyes and heart to the scriptures concerning the life of Jesus. I thought I knew my Bible, but when praying the rosary God opened my eyes to see even more.
There is no doubt for me, it is the most powerful prayer ever. I feel God blessed me greatly leading me the the RCC as it was not something I made plans to do.

In fairness to our Orthodox bretheren, they also have a valid priesthood, and resultantly, valid Eucharist.

 

[happilycatholic]

AFAIK, there have been only two ex cathedra statements, but I can never get a Catholic to give me a list or define when a Pope is speaking ex cathedra. Results of Ecumenical Councils would also be “infallable,” would they not?

Yes, I believe you are correct. I think this is also defined as speaking ex cathedra. I’m not positive on that one.

I understand the difference between infallable and impeccable.

Well, you don’t show that in your posts regarding the impossibility of the Catholic Church being the One True Church on the grounds of the Inquisitions.

I’m not asking for or expecting perfection.

Again, what you say and what you say are two different things. You ARE asking for perfection from Christ’s One True Church whereas Christ did not. He placed humans capable of sin in charge. You are contradicting your definition of the mark of the True Church. By your definition there can be NO True Church at all. Otherwise, the Catholic Church is like any other in that particular regard, we have sin in the Church much like every sinle other church. It’s unfortunate, but true.

The only reason Jesus’ promise would appear to fail is if we forced the Catholic definition of church and then rejected that the Catholic church is “the” church. I contend that “the church” is much more, or maybe much less (complicated), than what the Catholic definition is.

Then if we take your personal definition of Christ’s Church, where is it? Which Church infallibly interprets Scripture for ALL Christians? Please show me the individual or group of individuals that fulfills your interpretation of Christ’s promise of an infallible church.

I would go with much less complicated. People tend to make it complicated by over analyzing it.

I have no problem with binding and loosing. What I have a problem with is contradicting Jesus, which I think some Catholic teachings do.

Well, we know the first and foremost in your mind on this one. What are some of the other teachings you believe contradict Jesus message?

I disagree.

The mark of the one true church is just what Jesus said it would be: “By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Jesus did not say, “You’ll know who my disciples are because they’ll all submit to the same patriarch.”

This particular part of Scripture is meant to be inclusive I’m sure, not Jesus’ description of His Church en toto. This is one of the problems with individual interpretation of Scripture. This verse is taken out of context of Jesus’ message that among other things, His Church is visible and follows Apostolic Tradition.

 

[ckempston]

Neither of these statements are entirely correct. Any time a doctrine is declared or defined, the infallibility of the chair of Peter is invoked. Papal infallibility will be in the form of an official declaration, and the trigger words are usually the statement that the Church “declares” and/or “defines”.

Ecumenical councils, and the results thereof, would fall under the jurisdiction of “infallible” if they formally declare or define doctine. To further whittle down the focus, infallibility can only apply to matters of “faith and morals”.

Do you have a list?

 

[joshua_b]

The only reason Jesus’ promise would appear to fail is if we forced the Catholic definition of church and then rejected that the Catholic church is “the” church. I contend that “the church” is much more, or maybe much less (complicated), than what the Catholic definition is.

This is a reasonable assertion that relates specifically to the discussion at hand. Please expound on and support these contentions.

 

[nilofc]

Thank you Josuha for the clarity. I don’t agree with everything you say, but I know you recognize the truth in me as I recognize the truth in you. As far as me being catholic, it really doesn’t matter, I learned from GOD directly through HIS interpretation of HIS Truth, if that matches what you believe, then You have given me hope that there is more people like you that shares the truth.

I will share something with you. My father is Jewish, converted to christianity before my birth. I was raised catholic, my god father was a priest whom I loved dearly, he was a monsignor before he died. But I will tell you. I learned nothing from the catholic church and I removed my name from the books. I was very young then. It wasn’t until I was much older that GOD revealed who HE was to me, I didn’t know who HE was or why HE would bother appearing to me. I didn’t even know it was Gabriel who appeared to me blowing the trumpet. It took me a long time to accept GOD, because the church taught that you had to be special, and I was a common person. Jesus appeared one morning and told me to read Jeremiah 18 the Parable of the Potter and the teachings continued. I follow GOD, and His Anointed Son. I am glad to know that there is people like you Joshua who own the truth, who is humble and reaches out. Thank you again.

You have the truth in you??? I don’t think so…

The truth is a person not an enigmatic concept. The truth is the second person of the blessed trinity.

But since you deny Jesus as being God…then obviously, the truth is not in you.

Sorry. I think you are hallucinating. Nice story though.

 

[happilycatholic]

It has not been an easy journey coming to the RCC, but the above, the Eucharist is the reason I could never go anywhere other than the RCC as to my knowledge no other faith worships or has access to the Eucharist. Also, after praying all my life as a protestant, praying to the saints and the Blessed Mother of God felt a little strange, so I ask God if this is where he wanted me to help me with this and WOW did he.

As praying the rosary has taken me to a spiritual level I never knew existed. It opened my eyes and heart to the scriptures concerning the life of Jesus. I thought I knew my Bible, but when praying the rosary God opened my eyes to see even more.
There is no doubt for me, it is the most powerful prayer ever. I feel God blessed me greatly leading me the the RCC as it was not something I made plans to do.

We are truly blessed!

It is funny how many, many Protestants say they have “guardian angels” but are not open to praying to our beloved saints. That’s sad.

 

[joshua_b]

Do you have a list?

Yes. You may dismiss the answer as “predictable”, but the LIST that so many people insist on seeing is the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The Catechism is the official teaching of the Church, all of the contents of which would be considered infallible teaching.

 

[janw]

In fairness to our Orthodox bretheren, they also have a valid priesthood, and resultantly, valid Eucharist.

Yes, you are right, even though they are not RC, I believe they are Catholic. I am still learning so if I am not correct in thinking they are Catholic, please let me know.

I guess I should have used the word Catholic and not RCC.

But for me, following the Pope is great. After so many years visiting protestant churches where it seemed each church had their own beliefs, I think having authority in the church is sooooo great. The confusion without that is a nightmare.

 

[joshua_b]

The mark of the one true church is just what Jesus said it would be: “By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Jesus did not say, “You’ll know who my disciples are because they’ll all submit to the same patriarch.”

I can not argue the Truth of Scripture. I can however, suggest that Scripture must be taken in it’s entirety. There are many statements in Scripture related to the Church, and discipleship. To get a true sense of what the Church is, and how to recognize it and it’s members, and support the conclusion in the manner that you just have, would require a listing of all Scripture passages related to the Church. That’s a pretty arduous task, that quite frankly I am not up for at the present. (maybe, if I get ambitious I will start another thread on it)

 

[joshua_b]

Yes, you are right, even though they are not RC, I believe they are Catholic. I am still learning so if I am not correct in thinking they are Catholic, please let me know.

I guess I should have used the word Catholic and not RCC.

Yes they are Catholic, and are official members of the Church (albeit imperfectly joined through their state of communion with the Catholic Church) through their valid baptism.

 

[happilycatholic]

Yes they are Catholic, and are official members of the Church (albeit imperfectly joined through their state of communion with the Catholic Church) through their valid baptism.

**Catholic once-removed? **

 

[joshua_b]

Thank you Josuha for the clarity. I don’t agree with everything you say, but I know you recognize the truth in me as I recognize the truth in you. As far as me being catholic, it really doesn’t matter, I learned from GOD directly through HIS interpretation of HIS Truth, if that matches what you believe, then You have given me hope that there is more people like you that shares the truth.

I will share something with you. My father is Jewish, converted to christianity before my birth. I was raised catholic, my god father was a priest whom I loved dearly, he was a monsignor before he died. But I will tell you. I learned nothing from the catholic church and I removed my name from the books. I was very young then. It wasn’t until I was much older that GOD revealed who HE was to me, I didn’t know who HE was or why HE would bother appearing to me. I didn’t even know it was Gabriel who appeared to me blowing the trumpet. It took me a long time to accept GOD, because the church taught that you had to be special, and I was a common person. Jesus appeared one morning and told me to read Jeremiah 18 the Parable of the Potter and the teachings continued. I follow GOD, and His Anointed Son. I am glad to know that there is people like you Joshua who own the truth, who is humble and reaches out. Thank you again.

Of course you don’t agree with me in entirety. If you did, you would be Catholic. My only comment to your testimony is that the Church and the Truth it contains were not accurately presented to you. The Church has never taught that you need to be “special”; the Church’s most well known saints were all quite “ordinary”. As to your comment that I own the Truth, I thank YOU for your kind words, and can only reply that the Truth I own (and you recognize) was given to me by God through the Catholic Church. Yes, God can work through means outside of the Catholic Church, but it was through those means that God has reached out to me personally.

 

[janw]

SHIA22 --I will share something with you. My father is Jewish, converted to christianity before my birth. I was raised catholic, my god father was a priest whom I loved dearly, he was a monsignor before he died. But I will tell you. I learned nothing from the catholic church and I removed my name from the books. I was very young then. It wasn’t until I was much older that GOD revealed who HE was to me, I didn’t know who HE was or why HE would bother appearing to me. I didn’t even know it was Gabriel who appeared to me blowing the trumpet. It took me a long time to accept GOD, because the church taught that you had to be special, and I was a common person. Jesus appeared one morning and told me to read Jeremiah 18 the Parable of the Potter and the teachings continued. I follow GOD, and His Anointed Son. I am glad to know that there is people like you Joshua who own the truth, who is humble and reaches out. Thank you again.

I can understand about bad experiences, but any vision or word from God must be in line with the scriptures. The scriptures teach us to gather with other christians for worship. Finding the right place to worship can take many years and can be exhausting emotionally. But Jesus did say pick up your cross and follow me, so it was never meant to be easy.

If you ever decide to find a church for yourself, I pray it will be much easier and faster than my own journey. It will be worth it in the end though.

 

[joshua_b]

**Catholic once-removed? **

HA…The whole Catholic/Orthodox schism is really quite enough to make your head hurt. At the time of the split, there was actually a MUTUAL excommunication between each other. They consider themselves the Church, and claim we are in schism with them. It really is a political mess, and I simply leave it up to the Holy Sprit to straighten out.

 

[ckempston]

This is a reasonable assertion that relates specifically to the discussion at hand. Please expound on and support these contentions.

I think it’s self-evident that “the church” does not exist independent of believers. It is a lot like the word “fellowship.” It’s an abstract idea that describes what happens when Christians get together. That’s how I view “the church.” It meets many of the criteria that Catholics often say must be present: it’s visible, it can exercise authority, there is structure and order within the church, but the church itself is not a structure.

Luke 17:20-21 Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is within you.”

Catholics seem to do the very thing that Jesus said should not be done: Ask people to point to the church and say, “there it is.”

I don’t think you can biblically support that “the church” is synonymous with ecclesiastical structure or authority of some kind of governance (in the sense of men “ruling” over one another). It still has not been answered why Jesus would tell Apostles, who were inspired and given authority directly from Christ, that they should take a matter before “the church” if they and another brother were not able to resolve it. (Mt 18:17)

If anything, from that passage, you would conclude that the authority structure goes:

Individuals → Leaders → The Church (being defined as members assembled together).

 

[Shai22]

ckempston:

---

(Joshua, please correct me if I’m wrong. I mean that sincerely because I am yet a “baby catholic”.)

---

**The problem lies with the accusation that the Church claims to be “infallible”. The Church claims no such thing. Infallibility has only to do with the Pope as he speaks “ex cathedra” as in from the chair of Peter and ONLY on matters of faith and morals. **

---

In other words simply put, a Pope can be a dirty rotten scoundrel and as long as he does not teach that point-of-view from Scripture or by means of any part of The Deposit of Faith, he is fully within the authority of Jesus Himself.

---

**The point is the catholic Church does not have to be perfect in all matters. And Jesus trusted His Church to sinful people. When did Jesus EVER say His Church would be entrusted to that one or those who were free of sin? That’s simply redicuous. If you believe that then you must believe that there is no one worth Jesus promise on earth and he made the promise in vain. **

---

To deny that there is a Church which Jesus founded still alive and well today means that you deny Jesus kept his promise. If you accept that Jesus kept His promise, then you must be able to recognize that church today. And if you keep your standards such as you have now, then you must go one step further and put words into Jesus’ mouth and be able to recognize a perfect, infallible church.

---

**One cannot have it both ways. Jesus only said His Apostles could not teach against Scripture. He then said whatever they bind on earth will be bound in Heaven, so if you are looking for the Church that fulfills THAT promise, the ONLY Church who claims to do this and DOES it is the Catholic Church. **

---

**They have doctrine and dogma but NEVER have they interpreted Scripture to the Christian world in error. **

---

That, is the mark of THE ONE TRUE CHURCH.

GOD teaches that the teachers [priests, rabbi’s, pastors, popes, cardinals,etc] are held responsible for their people. You can read Hosea 4:4-6 The LORD says, Let no one accuse the people or reprimand them - my complaint is against your priests. 5. Night and day you blunder on and the prophets do not better than you.
6 My people are doomed because they do not acknowledge me.

The roles of priests, are not different than the roles of popes, they are to guide people to GOD so HE can teach them. Isaiah 54:13;
Psalms 32:8 and John 6:45

GOD does not expect us to be perfect, we cannot be, but HE doesn’t also expect that the ones HE put in position as overseer to HIS people to misguide them, through traditions, and unscriptural guidance. Jesus trained his Apostles to do away with any dogma, and to learn GOD’S teachings, through Christ.

GOD takes us through a process of surrendering, letting go of all what we know, so we can take in HIS teachings and truths, all the time learning how to be a servant.

 

[ckempston]

Yes. You may dismiss the answer as “predictable”, but the LIST that so many people insist on seeing is the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The Catechism is the official teaching of the Church, all of the contents of which would be considered infallible teaching.

Thanks. Not dismissing; I honestly didn’t know what the answer was. If that’s the case, then that’s no small amount of “required” belief. I’ve been meaning to read the whole thing from beginning to end, but usually when I look stuff up from the Table Of Contents, I don’t find much that I disagree with.

However, I do know of a couple things that I definitely disagree with that are in there, such as the existence of, and need for, purgatory and the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, along with Mary’s perpetual virginity (which I’m not sure if that’s in there, but I know the Immaculate Conception is).

We can discuss these specific topics in another thread or on PM if necessary. I’m just pointing out that there’s quite a bit of very specific, very technical stuff, that’s required of Catholics to believe.