Protestant saying hello

[guanophore]

I can understand why some may think this. When false teachings are presented as the truth and lead people astray that is something to be deeply deeply concerned about.

I agree with you, and that is why several of us have chosen to keep a close eye on every post you make here at CAF.

You and others would probably think the samething about the prophets and apostles who were also intolerant of false teachings. What i see with so many catholics is attitude of apathy towards the truth. So many are luke warm. Same could also be said about many protestants.

I hope that those persons will have the flame of the truth faith fanned for them at CAF.

If you and other knowledgeable (only with respect to church doctrine and not scripture) roman catholics claim to believe in Sacred Tradition and cannot even show clearly what it is, one is well justified in believing that something seriously wrong. However this is not the most serious error you face.

Here is an example of what I was telling you about that intractible bigotry. This post is addressed to me. I have pointed out to you dozens of times that I am not a “Roman” Catholic. Yet you still continue to put this label on me, and use it to describe me. That is why I think you are doing it just to be disrespecful. No matter how many times you are told differently, you persist in holding to your bigoted approach.

With regard to Sacred Tradition, such a thing will never be clear to a person who is faithless about it. One cannot apprehend a manner of living based on a faith they do not believe exists. That is just my opinion. If there are others that think differently, then let me know.

I find it the epitome of arrogance that a person who does not even believe that Sacred Tradition exists (even though the scripture he uses as his ulitmate standard says to “hold fast” to it) will come here and tell those that have embraced The Way what a serious “error” they face in doing so.

 So it is claimed. You have no way to demonstrate whether this is true or not but you must accept this on faith even though the Scriptures have warned that false teachers would come into the church itself and decieve many.

It is ok, ja4. We know you are here.

What "apostles" said this? The only place i'm aware of is Paul's statement in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 and I Corinthians 11:2 . These are traditions that Paul refers to his own and not the other apostles. Even here we don't know with certainty what they were. All we have are his writings and his writings don't reflect in many respects roman catholic doctrines and practices.

Here is another example of that anti-Roman bigotry I was talking about, ja4. I have told you repeatedly that there was no separate “Roman” Rite for about 600 years. Yet you still try to compare the practices of the NT to the “Roman doctrine”. Roman doctrine is no different than the doctrine of the other rites, and no different than what is in the NT.

 

[guanophore]

What "apostles" said this? The only place i'm aware of is Paul's statement in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 and I Corinthians 11:2 . These are traditions that Paul refers to his own and not the other apostles.

Are you saying that Paul would tell the disciples to follow the traditions of men?!

3 Follow the **pattern of the sound words which you have heard **from me, in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus; 14 guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us. 2 Tim 1:13-14

I can’t believe you would accuse Paul of such a thing! Accusing al the rest of us Catholics is one thing, but I thought you believed the NT was inspired-inerrant?

No, the “pattern of sound words” is the Sacred Tradition. It is a manner of life, how to be in the world. It is the living out of the message that is in the Holy Writings.

No apostle ever taught this.

"hold fast to what is good " Rom 12:9

The pattern of sound words is what is “good”. It is a way of life, it is working out ones salvation with fear and trembling. Called in the NT “The Way”.

Then why does not your church rebuke the teachers on the marian doctrines and practices?

I am sure they do, whenever they note any error being taught.

Same goes for the celibacy rule that stops married men from being bishops.

Do you want people to be rebuked who choose not to embrace the rule? Or you want the ones rebuked who choose to embrace it? Do you not support Jesus’ teaching that there are some who choose to become eunuchs for the Kingdom?

But I do appreciate you saying it is a “rule”, rather than a doctrine, because you are right about that.

What does this mean? Are you saying its ok if a person he believes he wears a scapular that he won't spend much time in purgatory?

Is it right for a catholic to pray to angels even though it has never dogmatically asserted that its alright to do so?

I don’t see how either of these practices could be harmful to a Christian. The practices of the scapular are actually quite rigorous, and if a person is that devoted to their religious practice, it seems that it could only benefit them.

What did the “elevating” of the deutrocanonical books have to do with the reformation?

It was the other way around. The Reformers de-elevated them. The Church made a pronouncement about what was always held about them, so the error the Reformers made would be clear.

Huh? This issue had not much at all to do with the reformation.

The reformers wanted to change the canon, because there were several books that reinforced Catholic theology.

Does this mean you will accept anything your church says to you?

Why not?

16 “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” Luke 10:16

 

[wisdomseeker]

Does this mean you will accept anything your church says to you?

i dont know what mean by that. like i said i cannot expect you to understand our Church, our faith, and all the things our Church requires of the faithful.

 

[Lampo]

This problem is yours not mine. If you don’t know what a specific Tradition is then its really not of any use.

Are these “traditions” true though? If so, how do you know?

I have absolutely no problem with Tradition of the Catholic Church. Don’t try and pin that on me. I know these traditions are true for the same reason I know the Trinity is true.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I’m confused. It seems that most roman catholics get agiated very quickly when someone counters their claims (fullness of the truth etc). In my expierence with some, they can get down right nasty and insulting if you don’t agree with them. For those who are like this its probably best them not to venture out into the real world where you will encounter some serious challenges and they won’t be so nice. I personally have known only one roman catholic that has been able to take the heat… it would have been great to find some here…

i dont quite understand your comments.
PEACE!

 

[wisdomseeker]

I am a convert also. I didn’t convert from 7th Day Adventists, but from Southern Baptist. I did this when I was living at home with my parents. My mother would ask me where I was going to church and at first, I didn’t tell the truth. After a couple of times, I felt my dishonesty was not fair to the church or to Christ since I was sure converting was where He was leading me. She was upset at first, but later came to terms with it. My life was totally turned around when I converted. I was trying to get a job and kept trying a local catholic organization, I took another job in my desparation to change jobs and my mother’s advice was “if you want to work there (the catholic organization) then don’t give up.” That advice let me know she was ok with who I am becoming through Him and the catholic church.

I have been employed at the catholic organization 9 1/2 years now. And I have NEVER regretted my decision to convert.

Glory to the God of all creation for He has shown you the way. He called you and you obeyed.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Same goes for the celibacy rule that stops married men from being bishops.

have you read Revelalions where Jesus speaks of men who never been with women? these are men that Jesus has chosen from the earth to be with Him always. maybe you want to check that out.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Quote:
Originally Posted by asking

The danger you are in with other catholics with this kind of thinking is that it is impossible for you ever to detect error in your own church since it will be told to you that the HS guides us and it is impossible to be wrong. This is why you cannot accept that you do have false teachers in your church even when you are presented with the facts.

Yes, it is very dangerous we are over one billion in danger. i assume you are safe in your congregation since you can detect false teachings in it. what do you do then?

:banghead:

 

[wisdomseeker]

Originally Posted by justasking4
This problem is yours not mine. If you don’t know what a specific Tradition is then its really not of any use.

Are these “traditions” true though? If so, how do you know?

we have many traditions. some like: we dont celebrate Mass on Good Friday. Easter Vigil Mass begins when the sun goes down. Baptism, First Communion, Confirmation. 3 years of Catechesis. Scriptures Readings. GodParents. Infant Baptism. when people come into the Church they go through few Rituals. color of priest’s garment changes. what they wear carries a meaning.everything done in the Church has a meaning. we bow, we kneel before the Tabernacle. there are so many more.

:bowdown: :doh2:

 

[steve_b]

Have you ever dialogued with a Mormon or Jehovah Witness?

Yes. However, they come from a non Christian perspective. That’s why I objected to your earlier comparisons.

asking:

How do you know this? What is your criteria that you use to determine this?

Not so fast.

You made a broad sweeping accusation (emphasis mine)

:

The danger you are in with other catholics with this kind of thinking is that it is impossible for you ever to detect error in your own church since it will be told to you that the HS guides us and it is impossible to be wrong. This is why you cannot accept that you do have false teachers in your church even when you are presented with the facts.

It’s up to you then to identify a faith or moral teaching that is taught by the Catholic Church that is/was found to be heretical.

asking:

Since this is a discussion, it would help if you gave in few sentences what you think these 2 men said.

It’s not a long discussion that Augustine and Jerome had on Gal 2. You brought up the issue of Paul rebuking Peter. Scroll down and start in Ch 3 v 9 . It gets to the point quickly. I suggest reading all of it through. It might change what you think went on in Gal 2.

newadvent.org/fathers/1102075.htm

 

[cascherman]

Justasking,

I see all these long explanations from Catholics to all of your questions. They include evidence and quotes and real reasoning. As far as I can tell you come back with not things that have evidence but non-Catholic rhetoric like,“you are not in total error, but some Catholics do not hold their leaders accountable” and your opinions that, quite frankly, are up to your own interpretation of the Bible.

See here:

Are these “traditions” true though? If so, how do you know?

What were some of the factors that led to you coming to the catholic church?

Also, how well did you know the scriptures and doctrines of the Baptists?

Not so. They tell essentially the same kind of thing here when it comes to specifics and challenges. Have you ever dialogued with a Mormon or Jehovah Witness?

How do you know this? What is your criteria that you use to determine this?

Does this mean you will accept anything your church says to you?

You are sending us off on these homework missions. People find the answers for you and present an argument with evidence and you just ask another question. What are your intentions here, I’ve been following your argumentation and it just jumps around with one rhetoric to the next. Very meaningless stuff that has, unlike many other responses, any real evidence, mostly opinion.

Enough questions. Many have asked you question after question and you respond with another question. Let’s get down to it, what is your issue with traditions passed down from person to person?

Better yet, prove to us from the Bible that Christ did not organize a visible Church for believers to turn to that could be kept from error.

The evidence points to a visible authority in the apostles and their successors.

 

[cascherman]

Here is a list of items that point to a single visible authoritative Church:

1. Philip goes to the eunuch to help him understand what the Bible (specifically Isaiah) is saying. Acts 8;26-40 An example of an apostle being sent to laity to help him understand. He doesn’t say, interpret it the way you feel in your heart is right. God makes such a point for correct interpretation of the Bible that he reveals himself to Philip (something unheard of now) to go help the man. Apparently an important mission.
2. Peter speaks about Paul’s writings being twisted by the ignorant to their own destruction. 2 Peter 3:16 Supporting a need for an authority.Are you ignorant? Am I ignorant? Probably.
3. Christ makes a foundation for his Church (whether you think it is Peter or his confession). He declares the gates of hell will not prevail against it. If the Christian Church is actually a conglomeration of all the Christians in the world yet they all disagree, has not Satan misled someone? Has not the gates of hell prevailed and created disunity?

4.Peter is given the Keys of the Kingdom, a parallel with an OT story, where Eliakim is made Prime Minister of the kingdom while the king is away. So Christ made Peter his Prime Minister while he is no longer on earth. Hmmm, that sounds like authority.

1. The Father sends the apostles the Spirit of truth by Christ’s request. And interestingly enough, Christ even says he was not able to reveal everything to them and the Spirit of truth will reveal more.
2. The apostles themselves elected successors. Timothy being a great example.
3. From Matthew 18, Christ tells us that if we see our brother sin and he does not repent to tell the Church. First you tell him yourself, if he does not listen, bring three people, if he still does not listen, take the matter to the Church, if he still does not listen, treat him as a tax collector. The Church seems to be the final authority. It doesn’t say go to the New Testament and show him a verse where it says he is wrong. It says go to the Church. Actually, Christ never commissioned the apostles to write down anything, interesting the crux of most protestant Churches is the New Testament and Christ never even spoke about making one or using one and certainly not dismissing the successors to the apostles for it.
4. The Church is the pillar and bulwark of the truth. (1 Timothy 3:15) Again, how can the Church be the pillar of truth if it is a conglomeration of Churches that all disagree with each other in one way or another. Heck, if you go to a certain Lutheran Church you will be told abortion is Okay. Huh? Pillar of Truth?
5. Oh and Pentecost. Plain and simple, the Holy Spirit came down on the Apostles. It doesn’t say and the whole crowd and everyone had fire from heaven come down on them and they all started speaking in tongues. No, apparently the apostles got something from God that everyone in the crowd did not. Maybe protection from teaching error?

This is just a start. There is more. The Church will and has been kept from error. It does not know everything by divine telepathy, but it can be protected by the Holy Spirit from teaching error, and if a tradition has been passed down by it, we can know that it has been kept from error.

 

[Good_Fella]

Go back and read John 16:13. The context is about the disciples and not the church. The church was not in existence at this point in time. That doesn’t happen until Acts.

“But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming.”
{John 16, 13}

I agree that the Church was not yet in existence at the time Jesus spoke these words to his disciples. But our Lord is speaking in the future tense: “He will guide you to all truth,” and the future progressive tense: “…will declare to you the things that are coming.” Jesus is referring to Pentecost, when the Spirit descends upon Mary and the Apostles giving birth to the Church (Acts 2, 1-4). Let us keep in mind that Jesus founded his Church on Peter and the Apostles (Matthew 16, 17-19). And the Spirit of truth continues to declare to the apostolic teaching authority of the Catholic Church the things that are coming. :yup:

Pax vobiscum
Good Fella

 

[Good_Fella]

Before i can answer this what is your defintion of church? What is it composed of?

One body and one Spirit; one Lord, one faith, one baptism.
{Ephesians 4, 4}

This Pauline formula certainly doesn’t describe Protestantism. :nope:

Pax vobiscum
Good Fella

 

[ILUVGSUS2]

What were some of the factors that led to you coming to the catholic church?

My spiritual life was at an all time low. I had stopped going to church, was living my life without God in it at all. I was miserable and was about to move back to Alabama. I made a promise to God that when I moved, I would straighten out my life and would make Him the center of my life. I moved and was looking for another Baptist Church to attend when I thought of how interested I had always been of the Catholic Church, which is what led me to the RCIA classes. My spiritual life took off from there. Mass is so important to me and I was thrilled when I finally had kids so I could raise them in the Church, teach and share with them our faith and our wonderful Lord and Savior!

Also, how well did you know the scriptures and doctrines of the Baptists?

I knew the scriptures pretty well and have a fair knowledge of the doctrines. I had been away from God for a long time before coming back to Him.

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;3448276]I

Originally Posted by justasking4
If you and other knowledgeable (only with respect to church doctrine and not scripture) roman catholics claim to believe in Sacred Tradition and cannot even show clearly what it is, one is well justified in believing that something seriously wrong. However this is not the most serious error you face.

guanophore
Here is an example of what I was telling you about that intractible bigotry. This post is addressed to me. I have pointed out to you dozens of times that I am not a “Roman” Catholic. Yet you still continue to put this label on me, and use it to describe me. That is why I think you are doing it just to be disrespecful. No matter how many times you are told differently, you persist in holding to your bigoted approach.

You claim to be Byzantine in your profile. For simplicity sake do you believe the following:
1- the pope is head of the church?
2- the mass?
3- all or most catholic doctrines and practices?
4- most or all the sacraments?

Secondly, i also address others through my posts also. I suspect most people on the forum are roman catholics or close to it and have a good idea what i’m addressing.

Third, i suspect you also know that there are various degrees of protestants in beliefs also and i do not subscribe to. However, if someone describes such a protestant belief that i don’t subscribe to i don’t imply or call them bigots. Your name calling is just another indicator of a failed argument on your part.

With regard to Sacred Tradition, such a thing will never be clear to a person who is faithless about it. One cannot apprehend a manner of living based on a faith they do not believe exists. That is just my opinion. If there are others that think differently, then let me know.

I really don’t think you and others really don’t know that much about it by your responses. If on the other hand this is as clear as a catholic can get about Sacred Tradition then its really not that substantive.

I find it the epitome of arrogance that a person who does not even believe that Sacred Tradition exists (even though the scripture he uses as his ulitmate standard says to “hold fast” to it) will come here and tell those that have embraced The Way what a serious “error” they face in doing so.

Its not arrogance but an understanding doctrines and comparing those doctrines and practices to what the scriptures say. Celibacy is just one of the many problems.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
So it is claimed. You have no way to demonstrate whether this is true or not but you must accept this on faith even though the Scriptures have warned that false teachers would come into the church itself and decieve many.

guanophore
It is ok, ja4. We know you are here.

I’m in good company. Jesus and His apostles were also thought of as false teachers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by justasking4
What “apostles” said this? The only place i’m aware of is Paul’s statement in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 and I Corinthians 11:2 . These are traditions that Paul refers to his own and not the other apostles. Even here we don’t know with certainty what they were. All we have are his writings and his writings don’t reflect in many respects roman catholic doctrines and practices.

guanophore
Here is another example of that anti-Roman bigotry I was talking about, ja4. I have told you repeatedly that there was no separate “Roman” Rite for about 600 years. Yet you still try to compare the practices of the NT to the “Roman doctrine”. Roman doctrine is no different than the doctrine of the other rites, and no different than what is in the NT.

This should probably be another topic for discussion. Do all the other rites share the same pope? Do they celebrate the Mass? Do they all have priests that forgive sins?

 

[jmcrae]

Do all the other rites share the same pope?

Yes.

Do they celebrate the Mass?

Yes.

Their discipline of the Mass is slightly different; for example, they receive Holy Communion from a spoon rather than by hand, as we Latin Rite (aka “Roman”) Catholics do. They also have different kinds of music, and their priests dress a bit differently - but yes, it is a Mass, and it is both licit and valid in the Catholic tradition, and it is in full communion with the Pope.

Do they all have priests that forgive sins?

Yes.

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;3448279]
Originally Posted by justasking4
What “apostles” said this? The only place i’m aware of is Paul’s statement in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 and I Corinthians 11:2 . These are traditions that Paul refers to his own and not the other apostles.

guanophore
Are you saying that Paul would tell the disciples to follow the traditions of men?!

Huh? Perhaps you didn’t read the passages carefully. Paul is referring to his own and to Silvanus and Timothy’ traditions. Paul is no ordinary man in the sense of being of the world but of Christ.

3 Follow the pattern of the sound words which you have heard from me, in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus; 14 guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us. 2 Tim 1:13-14

I can’t believe you would accuse Paul of such a thing! Accusing al the rest of us Catholics is one thing, but I thought you believed the NT was inspired-inerrant?

Huh??? I’m making the point from Scripture that Paul was referring to his own “traditions” (whatever they may have been) and not to all the other traditions that were perhaps in place then and certainly not to many of the catholic traditions of today which he was totally unaware of.

No, the “pattern of sound words” is the Sacred Tradition. It is a manner of life, how to be in the world. It is the living out of the message that is in the Holy Writings.

I can agree with this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
No apostle ever taught this.

guanophore
"hold fast to what is good " Rom 12:9

Here is what i wrote in context.–What “apostles” said this? The only place i’m aware of is Paul’s statement in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 and I Corinthians 11:2 . These are traditions that Paul refers to his own and not the other apostles. Even here we don’t know with certainty what they were. All we have are his writings and his writings don’t reflect in many respects roman catholic doctrines and practices.

Now what does Rom 12:9 have to do with this?

The pattern of sound words is what is “good”. It is a way of life, it is working out ones salvation with fear and trembling. Called in the NT “The Way”.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Then why does not your church rebuke the teachers on the marian doctrines and practices?

guanophore
I am sure they do, whenever they note any error being taught.

If your church believes in the marian doctrines then it missed that one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Same goes for the celibacy rule that stops married men from being bishops.

guanophore
Do you want people to be rebuked who choose not to embrace the rule? Or you want the ones rebuked who choose to embrace it?

It is the leadership that is responsible for this rule that has a grounding in doctrine.

Do you not support Jesus’ teaching that there are some who choose to become eunuchs for the Kingdom?

Yes.

But I do appreciate you saying it is a “rule”, rather than a doctrine, because you are right about that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
What does this mean? Are you saying its ok if a person he believes he wears a scapular that he won’t spend much time in purgatory?
Is it right for a catholic to pray to angels even though it has never dogmatically asserted that its alright to do so?

guanophore
I don’t see how either of these practices could be harmful to a Christian. The practices of the scapular are actually quite rigorous, and if a person is that devoted to their religious practice, it seems that it could only benefit them.

I don’t expect you to see the harm. However the apostles did in false teachings and practices. We see this in 2 Corinthians 11:3 where he writes these words—But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ.
That’s what harmful about these doctrines and practices. They lead people astray from the simplicity and devotion to Christ.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
What did the “elevating” of the deutrocanonical books have to do with the reformation?

guanophore
It was the other way around. The Reformers de-elevated them. The Church made a pronouncement about what was always held about them, so the error the Reformers made would be clear.

i don’t think this is correct. As far as i can remember the canon for the reformers came later. Maybe i’m wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Huh? This issue had not much at all to do with the reformation.

guanophore
The reformers wanted to change the canon, because there were several books that reinforced Catholic theology.

And the roman church wanted to protect some of its theology by elevating these books to full canon status. Even in this council there were doubts about these books.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Does this mean you will accept anything your church says to you?

Why not?
guanophore
16 “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” Luke 10:16

How do you know when your church is speaking by the HS?

 

[mikey_b]

Originally by Justasking4 If you and other knowledgeable (only with respect to church doctrine and not scripture) roman catholics claim to believe in Sacred Tradition and cannot even show clearly what it is, one is well justified in believing that something seriously wrong. However this is not the most serious error you face.

To Justasking: Are you saying here with “(only respect to church doctrine and not scripture]” that you are trying to find a Catholic that will give you a list that isn’t scriptural? You won’t find what you want then. Just to clarify from reading Patrick Madrid’s book: “The key to understanding Tradition is to realize that it really is not so much a separate thing apart from Scripture, but rather, it is the Church’s lived understanding of the deposit of faith as set forth in the pages of Scripture.” What that entails is both the explicit teachings like the Incarnation, Ressurection, and Atonement, etc but also other implicit teachings such as the Trinity and the Catholic Tradition of the books of the Bible that you follow. For the books of the Bible that you don’t follow you may like to read " Why Catholic Bibles are Bigger" by Gary G. Michuta.]
To make sure it isn’t all a telephone game like you stated in an earlier post, you will need to compare what the early church taught perhaps by reading “Faith of the Early Church Fathers” by Jurgens. I hope that helps at least a little.

 

[jmcrae]

Huh? Perhaps you didn’t read the passages carefully. Paul is referring to his own and to Silvanus and Timothy’ traditions. Paul is no ordinary man in the sense of being of the world but of Christ.

Yes, but he is still a man. If he has his own self-invented traditions, then these would be “man made traditions” and not from God. It doesn’t matter how good or Christlike the man is, if he is inventing his own tradtions in the place of God’s word.

Huh??? I’m making the point from Scripture that Paul was referring to his own “traditions” (whatever they may have been) and not to all the other traditions that were perhaps in place then and certainly not to many of the catholic traditions of today which he was totally unaware of.

You are making assumptions, here. There is clear historical evidence that all of the practices of the modern day Catholic Church were either in place or under development during the lifetime of St. Paul. He would certainly have been aware, for example, of people praying to the martyrs, of people collecting and using relics, of people making an early form of the Sign of the Cross (they crossed their foreheads in those days, rather than their whole bodies) and so on.

Here is what i wrote in context.–What “apostles” said this? The only place i’m aware of is Paul’s statement in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 and I Corinthians 11:2 . These are traditions that Paul refers to his own and not the other apostles. Even here we don’t know with certainty what they were. All we have are his writings and his writings don’t reflect in many respects roman catholic doctrines and practices.

If they are only his own local traditions, then why does he exhort the whole Church to follow them as the Word of God?