Protestants, how can this be possible?

[Seeker100]

Friend, if this were really true, and IF you really believed Jesus IS LORD you’d be a Catholic like us

No. You are in error. I am in the Father and the Father is in me.

 

[PJM]

=StrawberryJam;5708481]Well, it is said by christians that the books in the bible are inspired by the Holy Spirit. So, did the writers actually write the words on their own?

I happen to like how Peter seemed the most human of them all though. I don’t see his human frailty as “making errors” as was stated by another poster. Because if Peter made errors, they would have to be uncorrected ones. No one is God but God, who christians give the attributes of a God who is unable to err.

Inspired does NOT mean dictated. It does mean that the topics God wanted in the book are included, it does mean that the teachings God wanted [in large part] are included, including the validity of Sacred Tradition, it does mean that everything in the bible is true [but not necessarly factual… “remove the PLANK from your own eye before you try to remove the SPECK from your brothers eye”.] And it does mean no one verse can contradict another verse.

Love and prayers,

 

[jmcrae]

No. You are in error. I am in the Father and the Father is in me.

Sorry, no. You are not Jesus, and every word of yours is not from the Father.

 

[Seeker100]

Sorry, no. You are not Jesus, and every word of yours is not from the Father.

I did not say I was Jesus. If you were of God you would be in the Father and the Father in you too.

 

[Bill_Pick]

Statistics show the number of Protestant secs at well in excess of 30,000!

I am befuddled, confused, bewildered how this can be a fact [a rapidly growing fact] and yet it does not seem to register with non-Catholics that something is obviously wrong.

I am very sincere in not being able to comprehend the lack of concern that seems to indicate that this is fine, it’s somehow God’s Will. There can only be ONE truth on any particular issue. So how can this be:shrug:

I do not mean this as a disparagement of any type. I simply am confounded that this does not raise a “red flag” and questions? Can you enlighten me?

I have been faithfully answeing your questions for more more than a year. Help me out here

Love and prayers,
Pat

Well I have been thinking it was a little high but if you open your phone and look at the yellow pages you will see more and more each year

 

[Anna_Scott]

Anna,
Thank you fro you kind words. It was actually the passage in Mt 18:15-18 that really settled the question of Church authority for me.
I have never had a protestant give a satisfactory response to it using the unstructured or divided, “Body of Believers” definition of “Church”. I even ran a thread while back on the subject of **How Protestants “Tell it To The Church” **. Have a Look. The upshot was that most all protestant churches develop a sort of “mini-magisterium” to deal with such matters. They do not take it before the entire church community and If someone is ruled against they are asked to recant or leave that community. But of course that does not preclude this person joining another community or even starting their own which, within a generation or two could be just as “accepted” as all the others.
In short these “Churches” authority to “Bind and Loose” ends at their front door, and their very rejection of a universal authoriative Church undercuts their abilbity to legitimately tell someone else they are wrong.

There are two things at the center of the “protestant sea of voices” problem.
The first is the Bible, which many wish to hold up as Authority, yet they cannot agree on what it says. They claim the 'holy Spirit", but if this were true we might see 1 or 3 noncatholic Christian Churches, but not several hundred or several thousand differing belief systems.
The Second is their rejection of an Authoritative Church which precludes their “submitting” to the Will of Christ in His Church. Thus when a matter comes up where there is serious conflict, (women’s ordination or homsexuality come to mind) there is a more than even chance that the church will split rather than it’s members humbly submitting their will to unity in Christ.

Peace
James

James,

I visited the link and starting reading posts–very interesting.

Regarding: Matthew 16:18-20 (ESV): 18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." 20 Then he strictly charged the disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ.

Would you, as an individual Catholic, pray that something be “bound or loosed”?

Anna

 

[mpjw2]

Did you know that Peter means Rock, mpjw? Did you know that Jesus changed Simon’s name to become Rock?

yes I did. Matthew gave Peter the name petros, which is greek.
rock in greek can be either petros or petra

petra is a larger rock in camparison to petros

interesting however is paragraph #424 from the catechism of the catholic church…

it states that Jesus built His church, not on Peter, but on the faith of Peter.

Peter’s faith is the rock

 

[StrawberryJam]

yes I did. Matthew gave Peter the name petros, which is greek.
rock in greek can be either petros or petra

petra is a larger rock in camparison to petros

interesting however is paragraph #424 from the catechism of the catholic church…

it states that Jesus built His church, not on Peter, but on the faith of Peter.

Peter’s faith is the rock

Hi mpjw2!

That is an interesting take and I can see it being very valid. Peter, in spite of all his so called outward flaws (us looking at them all these years after the fact!)
Can not see what Jesus must have seen then, because well… we are not God.
We do know, Jesus knew Peter had faith, in spite of all the things he exibited to the observer/reader.

I can’t imagine anyone thinking the Church was built on anyone but Christ. But, what do I know?

 

[JRKH]

James no apologies necessary. I have no doubt for your love of Jesus…

the impression you gave me was you questioning seeker’s heart when you asked…
“Are you sure…”
If I am wrong … I apologize

I do not doubt seeker’s good heart, but a good heart does not preclude one being misled. In this I have some experience for I have made some bad mistakes and hurt some good people because I thought I was acting out of Love.
As to my question, it was just that, a question to allow for an examination of conscience.

Good question…could some of them be true

I don’t understand, could some of what be true?

the debates will never cease and may I use a quote from the Jesus love thread

The debates will never end because, when the protestant reformers tossed out the Authoriative Church, they tossed out their ability to settle matters in the way Christ instructed us to. By “Telling it to The Church”.
The Catholic Church has been doing just that ever since the first council in Jerusalem as recorded in Acts. Issues come up, there is much debate back and forth, sometimes over decades or even centuries, a council is called to address the issue(s) and an official determination is made under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Case Closed.

I believe the Amish are aware of the different churches around including the RCC
what a shame it is to think that there might be someone in the RCC who may believe
the Amish, as unconditional God loving, forgiving people as they are today… will not mean a blessed thing when they face their death.
Why?
because they may believe the amish person would have died knowing about the RCC but died as a non Roman catholic and because of that…they will spend eternity in hell…
what a shame.
When I pray for all of you I pray that God keep you all strong in your faith
When you say you will pray for us “protestants”, just curious,
are you also praying for the same
or
that we will come home to the RCC because you fear we will not be saved if we die where we are today?
thank you and God bless

It saddens me too when some, in each camp, come across as judgemental. However…
Should we, as Catholics, NOT fear for the souls of others who may be in error? (this includes people both inside and outside the church)

Actually this conversation has given me pause as well. Causing me to ask why I feel the need to evangelize my NCC brethren. The answer is this.
I agree with the **CC Catechism **that:
819 “Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth” are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: “the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements.” Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to “Catholic unity.”
However, I also believe that those outside The Church are missing out on so much more that is available. Chief among these is the Eucharist. I cannot express the joy within me when I was able to return to communion and recieve My Lord and God, Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity, into my very body, and to witness my wife do the same. There is nothing like it. There is a presence and peace within the santuary of the Catholic Church that I have felt in no other place. It is the very real and substantial presence of Christ in the Tabernacle. It is these things and so much more that I wish for my Christian brethren to be able to participate in and to share.
So far from being an act of judgement and condemnation, it is rather an act of compassion and Love to share the fullness of Truth that is contained within the Catholic Church.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

I believe the doctrine of Jesus that he wrote in his letters. I also believe his life and death were a testimony to the Truth and the incredible thiings that he witnessed. Still however he was a human. Because of that he made many mistakes as we all do. If an honest man tells me of an event that he saw, I believe him, but just because he is honest does not mean that he never makes and type of moral or intellectual mistakes.

If your faith is based on men then of course you want them to be perfect in every way as your faith is based on them. If your faith is in God then the witnesses of God can be imperfect without trouble to your stability.

What you say here is very true and it is why the Catholic Church is very careful to keep seperate the Teachings of the Church, and the actions of a mere human.

As an example, a person who has a compulsion to steal can understand this compulsion and write many useful books on the subject and give many life changing testimonies. Causing many with the same problem to seek help. That same person can also backslide and occasionally steal something. They then return the item or make some sort of restitution (either public or private) and continue their drive to a) not steal again (sin no more) and b) help others to overcome their own issues with stealing.
Would we say that the teachings are bad because the person backslides?
Of course not. Why? Because we can ALL think and understand things at an intellectual/spiriual level while still having to battle “sin” at the natural level.
So -
Declaring the teachings of the Church as being imperfect simply because they were recorded by imperfect men is not correct.
If one uses this logic, one would have to reject every book of the Bible. For each was written by 'imperfect men". AAHHH but you say, no these men were protected by the Holy Spirit. Well, in matters of teaching so are the men of The Church. Imperfect men channeling the teachings that God wishes us to have, and testing the individual’s understanding against scripture, and historical teachings in order to prevent error.

Peace
James

 

[mpjw2]

I do not doubt seeker’s good heart, but a good heart does not preclude one being misled. In this I have some experience for I have made some bad mistakes and hurt some good people because I thought I was acting out of Love.
As to my question, it was just that, a question to allow for an examination of conscience.

ok thank you sorry if I did not quite understand your intent

I don’t understand, could some of what be true?

I will just name one disagreement out of many…
was Mary a perpetual virgin or wasn’t she?

The debates will never end because, when the protestant reformers tossed out the Authoriative Church, they tossed out their ability to settle matters in the way Christ instructed us to. By “Telling it to The Church”.
The Catholic Church has been doing just that ever since the first council in Jerusalem as recorded in Acts. Issues come up, there is much debate back and forth, sometimes over decades or even centuries, a council is called to address the issue(s) and an official determination is made under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Case Closed.

but we are still discussing our indifferences…case almost closed

It saddens me too when some, in each camp, come across as judgemental. However…
Should we, as Catholics, NOT fear for the souls of others who may be in error? (this includes people both inside and outside the church)

Actually this conversation has given me pause as well. Causing me to ask why I feel the need to evangelize my NCC brethren. The answer is this.
I agree with the **CC Catechism **that:
819 “Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth” are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: “the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements.” Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to “Catholic unity.”
However, I also believe that those outside The Church are missing out on so much more that is available. Chief among these is the Eucharist. I cannot express the joy within me when I was able to return to communion and recieve My Lord and God, Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity, into my very body, and to witness my wife do the same. There is nothing like it. There is a presence and peace within the santuary of the Catholic Church that I have felt in no other place. It is the very real and substantial presence of Christ in the Tabernacle. It is these things and so much more that I wish for my Christian brethren to be able to participate in and to share.

So far from being an act of judgement and condemnation, it is rather an act of compassion and Love to share the fullness of Truth that is contained within the Catholic Church.

When communication is limited to keystokes sometimes what is sent out of love is received as judgement

Thank you for your heart and God bless

 

[JRKH]

Friend, if this were really true, and IF you really believed Jesus IS LORD you’d be a Catholic like us

To be fair if the quakers use the trinitarian form of Baptism, then Seeker IS a catholic, just not “like us”

ONce again from the Catechism:
818 “However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church.”

And to be both frank and honest PJM, I don’t find your comment about seeker creating his own God to be either True or useful. I say this in Christian Charity that we may continue the conversation in a respectful manner. I hope you will take it as such.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

James,

I visited the link and starting reading posts–very interesting.

Regarding: Matthew 16:18-20 (ESV): 18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." 20 Then he strictly charged the disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ.

Would you, as an individual Catholic, pray that something be “bound or loosed”?

Anna

I’m not sure. Do you mean like some teaching I’d like promulgated?
I pray that my wife be loosed from her disease, but I think that is different. Mostly I pray for God’s will to be done in my life.
Do you have an example or some guidance for me on what you mean?

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

yes I did. Matthew gave Peter the name petros, which is greek.
rock in greek can be either petros or petra

petra is a larger rock in camparison to petros

The old petros/petra argument again.
You do realize of course that jesus did not speak Greek, He spoke Aramaic. In Aramaic, Rock is Rock. The Aramaic Word is Kepha, form which the name Cephas is derived.

interesting however is paragraph #424 from the catechism of the catholic church…

it states that Jesus built His church, not on Peter, but on the faith of Peter.

Peter’s faith is the rock

Yes the Catholic Church accept that it is because of Peter’s faith that He was selected to lead the Church.
You will note that praragraph # 552 says this:
552 Simon Peter holds the first place in the college of the Twelve; Jesus entrusted a unique mission to him. Through a revelation from the Father, Peter had confessed: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Our Lord then declared to him: “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.” Christ, the “living Stone”, thus assures his Church, built on Peter, of victory over the powers of death. Because of the faith he confessed Peter will remain the unshakable rock of the Church. His mission will be to keep this faith from every lapse and to strengthen his brothers in it.

Peace
James

 

[mpjw2]

Hi mpjw2!

That is an interesting take and I can see it being very valid. Peter, in spite of all his so called outward flaws (us looking at them all these years after the fact!)
Can not see what Jesus must have seen then, because well… we are not God.
We do know, Jesus knew Peter had faith, in spite of all the things he exibited to the observer/reader.

I can’t imagine anyone thinking the Church was built on anyone but Christ. But, what do I know?

Hi StrawberryJam

As I was looking back at the "Jesus’s church of christian love’ thread I saw this statement from PJM

Faith is a free gift from God…

I believe that free gift…
was for every body whoever lived
is for everyone living today and will live in the future

and everyone includes Peter who undoubtedly had God’s gift of faith

I believe on the rock of this faith, which Peter confessed to (as stated in the CCC), Christ built His Church on

Since James has been quoting the catechism, here is #424 out of the Catechism of the Catholic Church

424 Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ On the rock of this **faith **confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church.

interesting to say the least

 

[PRmerger]

if it is actual disbelief… I flat out do not believe what the RCC teaches about certain issues,
That is how I want to die…

you say?

2 comments: “If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have no sin; but as it is they have no excuse for their sin”.( John 15:22). That is, if one didn’t know Christ’s message is True, then she would have no culpability; but once the message is given, there is “no excuse for their sin”.

However, I believe that you are quite ignorant about the teachings that you left behind in your RCC days. (I mean that in a non-inflammatory way.) This opinion is based on the questions you’ve raised about Catholicism and the incorrect things you’ve professed that the CC teaches.

IF you would be able to articulate the CC’s teaching on the Eucharist, give the Scriptural references, cite the ECF’s writings professing their belief in the Real Presence, affirm that all Christians believed in this teaching until the 16th century, yet still reject it, then I would tremble for your soul.

**IF **you would be able to articulate correctly WHY the CC proclaims Mary’s perpetual virginity, the papacy, the 7 sacraments, praying to saints, and could express exactly what the Mass is and why it is Scriptural…yet reject the teachings, then I would tremble for your soul.

However, I am confident that I need not worry about your salvation. And I mean this most respectfully. You were not catechized well in your 35 or so years as a Catholic. Now, it’s a different story however…

 

[StrawberryJam]

2 comments: “If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have no sin; but as it is they have no excuse for their sin”.( John 15:22). That is, if one didn’t know Christ’s message is True, then she would have no culpability; but once the message is given, there is “no excuse for their sin”.

However, I believe that you are quite ignorant about the teachings that you left behind in your RCC days. (I mean that in a non-inflammatory way.) This opinion is based on the questions you’ve raised about Catholicism and the incorrect things you’ve professed that the CC teaches.

IF you would be able to articulate the CC’s teaching on the Eucharist, give the Scriptural references, cite the ECF’s writings professing their belief in the Real Presence, affirm that all Christians believed in this teaching until the 16th century, yet still reject it, then I would tremble for your soul.

**IF **you would be able to articulate correctly WHY the CC proclaims Mary’s perpetual virginity, the papacy, the 7 sacraments, praying to saints, and could express exactly what the Mass is and why it is Scriptural…yet reject the teachings, then I would tremble for your soul.

However, I am confident that I need not worry about your salvation. And I mean this most respectfully. You were not catechized well in your 35 or so years as a Catholic. Now, it’s a different story however…

This is how you speak to someone who was in your community, for that many years?

It is no wonder he wants no more of it.

 

[JRKH]

ok thank you sorry if I did not quite understand your intent

No Problem - When in doubt ask charitably.

I will just name one disagreement out of many…
was Mary a perpetual virgin or wasn’t she?

She was and is a perpetual virgin. Next?

but we are still discussing our indifferences…case almost closed

The intent of my posting here was to demonstrate that the Church acts very much in an inclusive and prayerful and Christian way. It looks at issues, and resolves them. It is then up to the faithful to accept the decision of the Church in accordance with Chris’ts instructions in Matthew 18.
In regards to “still discussing or indefferences” I can only say that, if we reach a point of impasse, and we truly wish to remain, “Of One Mind” and “One as Christ and the Father are One” (paraphrased), then we must humbly submit our own wills to that of The Church. This is what Christ Told us to do.
I must now humbly ask how we are to proceed when one of us has rejected the authority of The Church.

When communication is limited to keystokes sometimes what is sent out of love is received as judgement

Thank you for your heart and God bless

Yes, this medium has many advantages as well as some disadvantages.
Just as an aside here I would venture to say that your statement above is one more and very good reason for the “Oral Tradition” of the Church. Oral Tradition can mean matters of “inflection” and “nuance” in understanding the original intent of the Biblical authors. That is why we rely on Apostolic Succession and the ancient writngs not just of the Bible, but also the ECF’s. To preserve the true teachings.

Peace
James

 

[mpjw2]

2 comments: “If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have no sin; but as it is they have no excuse for their sin”.( John 15:22). That is, if one didn’t know Christ’s message is True, then she would have no culpability; but once the message is given, there is “no excuse for their sin”.

However, I believe that you are quite ignorant about the teachings that you left behind in your RCC days. (I mean that in a non-inflammatory way.) This opinion is based on the questions you’ve raised about Catholicism and the incorrect things you’ve professed that the CC teaches.

IF you would be able to articulate the CC’s teaching on the Eucharist, give the Scriptural references, cite the ECF’s writings professing their belief in the Real Presence, affirm that all Christians believed in this teaching until the 16th century, yet still reject it, then I would tremble for your soul.

**IF **you would be able to articulate correctly WHY the CC proclaims Mary’s perpetual virginity, the papacy, the 7 sacraments, praying to saints, and could express exactly what the Mass is and why it is Scriptural…yet reject the teachings, then I would tremble for your soul.

However, I am confident that I need not worry about your salvation. And I mean this most respectfully. You were not catechized well in your 35 or so years as a Catholic. Now, it’s a different story however…

…thank you for explaining

I left the catholic church when I did not fully comprehend the church which is why you are confident about my salvation…right??

If correct, then I appreciate your confidence:thumbsup:

So just to make sure I have it correct, If, and i say this with no disrecpect , you were a devout catholic of many years submitted to all the teachings…etc and you at the ripe age of 70 decided to leave the church and join another christian church, say methodist, do you believe your soul would be in jeopardy?

thank you and God bless

 

[PRmerger]

This is how you speak to someone who was in your community, for that many years?

It is no wonder he wants no more of it.

I’m not sure what it is you’re objecting to. Please share what exactly you think was wrong in what I said.