Protestants, how can this be possible?

[JacktheCatholic]

Yeah, imagine that! Circular reasoning at its finest. The only problem is that you cannot put God and his true followers into a box, as circular as it may be. The truth shall set you free.

Not a “box” but a “Body”… the Body of Jesus Christ our Lord.

 

[PRmerger]

Since PR addressed me personally, “Really, Grace?”, I take it that his comments are indeed directed at me personally.

You proclaimed:

I didn’t say that I held such diametrically opposite beliefs.

To which JRKH (James) responded:

If I may jump into this conversation for just a minute, PR’s comments are not necessarily directed at you personally, but rather at the singular “Body of Christ”.

James is correct, Grace. I didn’t say that YOU personally held such diametrically opposed beliefs. I just asked if you believed that reasonable people could say,

I believe the pope is the vicar of Christ AND
I believe the pope is the anti-Christ.

The “Really, Grace” part was: really, Grace, you believe that reasonable people can hold such diametrically opposed beliefs?

You responded by evading the question and asserting that you didn’t hold those beliefs.

Since you didn’t actually answer my question, I’m going to have to presume that you as a rational creature would agree that no reasonable person can hold “I believe X” and “I believe not-X” at the same time…but you just don’t want to acknowledge it.

 

[PJM]

=JacktheCatholic;5742558]The Infallibility doctrine goes back to the beginning. As you have accepted that God divinely guided men to choose the correct books so adequately shows you too see this in the Early Church.

So the only part of your post that seems contradictory is the Dogmatic portion. But just as you believe the books were devinely chosen and/or written so too do you believe in that Dogma. After all what is Dogma except that one sees as a absolute truth?

Dear “not so smart” in an effort to assist your level of understanding so you can change your name to “some what smart” enroute to SMART, and end at “very smart” I share the following.

This is the process for a Catholic Dogmatic Proclaimation;

First a Common believe by many Catholics

Second it becomes part of Catholic Tradition

Third it becomes a formal teaching = doctrine of the CC

Forth it becomes defined with assurance of Divine Inspiration and guidance = Dogma.

See, we really do love ya, and have your best interest at heart.

 

[NotTooSmart]

Sad but true and how can it be? 2 Tim. 3: 16 “All scripture is inspired by God and * profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” It’s the same in the KJB.

So if the Bible is inspired and therefore true, how can Protestants change both the Canon and mutiple verses. I understand why your understanding is different. The truth [Jn.17:15-17] resides in Christ one church, so anyone seeking it outsice His One Church, simply can’t find it. Impossible:thumbsup:

And so you say.

Nice try But I said "Catholic, NOT Roman Catholic, and these churches remain Catholic.

Oh cool. I thought when you mean Catholic that you meant those in submission to the pope located in Rome.

You must be using the other meaning that is Universal. Cool. I am Catholic too.

What the heck are you talking about? I’m a life long, pretty well informed Catholic and at age 65 have never heard of this. My how rumors are started.

Google is your friend:

The point is mute: both remain Catholic!

Yup. Part of the Universal Church

As I am.

The Catholic Church was Founded by Jesus Himself. FACT
That same Church was in the Roman Governance, dedicated by Jesus to The Father, and promised TRUTH would remain in Her [ONLY in Her] by Jesus Himself. Please read John 18;15:18 and take note of verse 17.

John 14: 16 And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, to be with you for ever, 17 even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him; you know him, for he dwells with you, and will be in you.

I would point out that even if your correct, your not, but I will not be divereted from THEE TRUTH, the bible was completely written and fully Inspired by the end of the First Century, when noone can didpute that the ONLY Christian Church was the Catholic Church we know today as the RCC. Therefore everything in the Bible Inspired by an All Wise and All Perfect God has to apply specifically, and in many cases, exclusively to Her, the RCC!

Love and prayers friend, truth is a difficult thing to disprove , but OH SO EASY to deny.

Yup…the Universal Church was founded by Jesus Christ. And when I became a Christian, Jesus placed me in His church. Praise be to God almighty.

 

[PRmerger]

The Catholic Church was Founded by Jesus Himself. FACT

It seems that our brother in Christ, NotTooSmart, has admitted as much in his post where he proclaimed:

The Assemblies of God comes from the Wesleyans which comes from the Anglicans which comes from the Catholics.

As wisdomseeker insightfully pointed out–NTS stopped at the Catholics. There is no other Church that came before the CC. Founded by Jesus Christ!

 

[NotTooSmart]

The Infallibility doctrine goes back to the beginning. As you have accepted that God divinely guided men to choose the correct books so adequately shows you too see this in the Early Church.

So the only part of your post that seems contradictory is the Dogmatic portion. But just as you believe the books were devinely chosen and/or written so too do you believe in that Dogma. After all what is Dogma except that one sees as a absolute truth?

I have no evidence that Peter and Clement believed themselves incapable of being incorrect.

As far as the books in the Bible go, there is a big difference in being 100% correct and incapable of being incorrect.

To illustrate. I might create this post with absolutely no spelling errors (then again I might not who knows). If I do, then my post is 100% accurate (with respect to spelling anyway).

However, just because I create a post that is 100% defect free in spelling, it does not mean that I am incapable of being incorrect with respect to spelling.

 

[NotTooSmart]

It seems that our brother in Christ, NotTooSmart, has admitted as much in his post where he proclaimed:

As wisdomseeker insightfully pointed out–NTS stopped at the Catholics. There is no other Church that came before the CC. Founded by Jesus Christ!

Actually the Orthodox dispute this. And the Oriental Orthodox. They claim that the Catholic come from the Orthodox.

So who knows.

The metric of lineage is not unique to one group of Christians.

But yes, Jesus did found the Universal (Catholic church). Today this church is divided amongst several organizations. It is a fallacy to assume that one organization is “the Catholic church” of the apostolic age while the other churches are not (and no…sharing the same name does not prove the point…neither does the lineage of popes).

 

[PRmerger]

Actually the Orthodox dispute this. And the Oriental Orthodox. They claim that the Catholic come from the Orthodox.

Whatever. The Orthodox and the CC have the same doctrines, same sacraments, same apostolic succession, same ordination–the teachings that your fallible Assemblies of God pastor has disputed.

You have acknowledged that one of these Churches was the one founded by Christ. That’s HUGE, NTS!!

 

[luke1_28]

May I suggest to you that Jesus did not say that.

But…have a Blessed Mass anyway.

May I suggest to you that Jesus did not have to say that because He didn’t have to. His actions spoke louder than His words. Who would have thought in Christ’s day that mere man would have the gall to violate the Bride of Christ as violently as the reformation did!..and further remember how one of those Gospels close…“There are many things that Jesus said and did and if they could be written down…”

Also, He said something much stronger…“Unless you eat My Body and drink My Blood, you cannot have My Life within you.”

There was only One Church then offering the Body and Blood of Christ and there’s only One Church offering the Body and Blood of Christ in the fullness Christ intended now. It’s the same Church. Yes, the Orthodox - because of Apostolic Succession being in tact have valid Eucharist. Anglicans do not - I don’t think…BUT their liturgy is valid - they just lost the power to say it by following the king instead of The King.

Through Apostolic Succession, the Deposit of the Faith is safeguarded until the end of the time. catholicfaithandreason.org/depositoffaith.htm It’s all about Apostolic Succession. Here’s a blurb from somewhere out on the web…

---

From God’s point of view the groups that have valid Holy Order (maintained unbroken apostolic succession) are:

1)Catholic Church (and the only one in the Fullness of the faith)

1. Eastern Orthodox Churches
2. Various schismatic Churches, such as the Old Catholics who split from the Catholic Church after Vatican I, but who have maintained apostolic succession by virtue of a schismatic but valid bishop.

It is a sad scandal that these valid Churches are split, but each of them do have apostolic succession. The Catholic Church alone, however, has the Christian faith in the Fullness of the teachings of Christ and His apostles.

Those who have lost apostolic succession or never had it and thus do not have Valid Holy Orders and so do not technically have a valid “Church”, but are rather ecclesial fellowships, are:

1. Anglican/Episcopal (lost apostolic succession soon after their schism and heresy)
2. Reformation Protestants
3. Post-Reformation denominations
4. All non-denomination denominations and various sects of modern invention.

As for Communion, for all “churches” without valid Holy Orders communion is merely a symbol and the bread is merely bread and the wine merely wine (or grapejuice). They do not have a valid Eucharist because they do not have valid priests.

Baptism is valid, however, no matter who performs the baptism, even if an atheist baptizes someone, if the baptism is done properly. In order for baptism to be valid it must:

1. use real water that touches and pours over the person’s skin either by immersion or by pouring
2. use the Trinitarian formula
3. do what the Church intends in baptism (the Church intends number #1 and #2, thus even an atheist can administer baptism in an emergency if he intends to baptize the person as the Church intends, even though he personally does not believe.

Marriage is valid with all Christian groups that have valid baptism. The minister of Marriage is the couple themselves. When two baptized persons (man and woman) are married it is presumed valid. Baptized Protestant couples who join the Catholic Church are still considered baptized and still considered married.

The rest of the Sacraments – Confirmation, Holy Orders, Confession, Anointing – are not valid in any group without Valid Holy Orders.

---

And saying God save you wasn’t meant to be rude. I genuinely meant it.

It was a blessed Mass, thank you. God loved us so much that He couldn’t wait til our time was done here to give Himself completely to us in eternity. The Eternal One again subjects Himself to time…and becomes our food on the altar. THAT’S how much He loves us! That action definitely speaks louder than words…at every Mass.

God bless you,
luke1_28

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

I have no evidence that Peter and Clement believed themselves incapable of being incorrect.

They are human and often needed correction, I’m sure.

 

[NotTooSmart]

You have acknowledged that one of these Churches was the one founded by Christ. That’s HUGE, NTS!!

Yes…as far as the metric of lineage goes…it either starts with the Orthodox or Catholic.

But I read far less into this than you do. There is more than the metric of lineage. In fact when I read the gospels, Jesus was quite underwhelmed with bragging about lineage.

But I wouldn’t phrase it “the one founded by Christ”. By virtue of my faith in Christ and subsequent baptism, I am a member of his Universal church.

 

[PRmerger]

Yes…as far as the metric of lineage goes…it either starts with the Orthodox or Catholic.

:extrahappy::extrahappy::extrahappy:

But I wouldn’t phrase it “the one founded by Christ”. By virtue of my faith in Christ and subsequent baptism, I am a member of his Universal church.

Indeed, you are, dear brother!

 

[luke1_28]

NTS!

You want to know what’s hilariously ironic? From your posts - you have more correct understanding of our Church - than do some ‘progressive’ Catholics nowadays!

That really just dawned on me and I seriously chuckled.

God bless you!
luke1_28

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Actually the Orthodox dispute this. And the Oriental Orthodox. They claim that the Catholic come from the Orthodox.

So who knows.

The metric of lineage is not unique to one group of Christians.

But yes, Jesus did found the Universal (Catholic church). Today this church is divided amongst several organizations. It is a fallacy to assume that one organization is “the Catholic church” of the apostolic age while the other churches are not (and no…sharing the same name does not prove the point…neither does the lineage of popes).

What is agreed is that the OOC and EOC and RCC have Apostolic Succession.

 

[NotTooSmart]

May I suggest to you that Jesus did not have to say that because He didn’t have to. His actions spoke louder than His words. Who would have thought in Christ’s day that mere man would have the gall to violate the Bride of Christ as violently as the reformation did!..and further remember how one of those Gospels close…“There are many things that Jesus said and did and if they could be written down…”

Also, He said something much stronger…“Unless you eat My Body and drink My Blood, you cannot have My Life within you.”

There was only One Church then offering the Body and Blood of Christ and there’s only One Church offering the Body and Blood of Christ in the fullness Christ intended now. It’s the same Church. Yes, the Orthodox - because of Apostolic Succession being in tact have valid Eucharist. Anglicans do not - I don’t think…BUT their liturgy is valid - they just lost the power to say it by following the king instead of The King.

Through Apostolic Succession, the Deposit of the Faith is safeguarded until the end of the time. catholicfaithandreason.org/depositoffaith.htm It’s all about Apostolic Succession. Here’s a blurb from somewhere out on the web…

---

From God’s point of view the groups that have valid Holy Order (maintained unbroken apostolic succession) are:

1)Catholic Church (and the only one in the Fullness of the faith)

1. Eastern Orthodox Churches
2. Various schismatic Churches, such as the Old Catholics who split from the Catholic Church after Vatican I, but who have maintained apostolic succession by virtue of a schismatic but valid bishop.

It is a sad scandal that these valid Churches are split, but each of them do have apostolic succession. The Catholic Church alone, however, has the Christian faith in the Fullness of the teachings of Christ and His apostles.

Those who have lost apostolic succession or never had it and thus do not have Valid Holy Orders and so do not technically have a valid “Church”, but are rather ecclesial fellowships, are:

1. Anglican/Episcopal (lost apostolic succession soon after their schism and heresy)
2. Reformation Protestants
3. Post-Reformation denominations
4. All non-denomination denominations and various sects of modern invention.

As for Communion, for all “churches” without valid Holy Orders communion is merely a symbol and the bread is merely bread and the wine merely wine (or grapejuice). They do not have a valid Eucharist because they do not have valid priests.

Baptism is valid, however, no matter who performs the baptism, even if an atheist baptizes someone, if the baptism is done properly. In order for baptism to be valid it must:

1. use real water that touches and pours over the person’s skin either by immersion or by pouring
2. use the Trinitarian formula
3. do what the Church intends in baptism (the Church intends number #1 and #2, thus even an atheist can administer baptism in an emergency if he intends to baptize the person as the Church intends, even though he personally does not believe.

Marriage is valid with all Christian groups that have valid baptism. The minister of Marriage is the couple themselves. When two baptized persons (man and woman) are married it is presumed valid. Baptized Protestant couples who join the Catholic Church are still considered baptized and still considered married.

The rest of the Sacraments – Confirmation, Holy Orders, Confession, Anointing – are not valid in any group without Valid Holy Orders.

---

And saying God save you wasn’t meant to be rude. I genuinely meant it.

It was a blessed Mass, thank you. God loved us so much that He couldn’t wait til our time was done here to give Himself completely to us in eternity. The Eternal One again subjects Himself to time…and becomes our food on the altar. THAT’S how much He loves us! That action definitely speaks louder than words…at every Mass.

God bless you,
luke1_28

That is a nice summary of what your church believes with respect to communion. Other churches of course believe different stuff.

However when I read the Bible, Jesus made it much simpler.

Jesus said "This is my body…This is my blood…Do this in remembrance of me (Paul in Corinthians).

That is good enough for me.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I have no evidence that Peter and Clement believed themselves incapable of being incorrect.

As far as the books in the Bible go, there is a big difference in being 100% correct and incapable of being incorrect.

To illustrate. I might create this post with absolutely no spelling errors (then again I might not who knows). If I do, then my post is 100% accurate (with respect to spelling anyway).

However, just because I create a post that is 100% defect free in spelling, it does not mean that I am incapable of being incorrect with respect to spelling.

I think you missed my point.

I was not saying a person would be infallible but rather with God working through them the action they take would be infallible. I gave the example of choosing the Scriptures or even writing the Scriptures which many “non Catholics” believe is God breathed.

Infallibility is saying the Church has a charism that protects it from false teachings.

 

[PRmerger]

However when I read the Bible, Jesus made it much simpler.

Jesus said "This is my body…This is my blood…Do this in remembrance of me (Paul in Corinthians).

That is good enough for me.

And that’s the Catholic understanding of it as well, NTS. You’re right–it’s quite simple.

I assume that you have acknowledged, from your previous thread, that the CC gave us the Scriptures, right?

Like Luke1_28 said: you’re more in line with the CC than some of my fellow parishioners!!

 

[NotTooSmart]

What is agreed is that the OOC and EOC and RCC have Apostolic Succession.

Ah yes. The metric of lineage.

But the point remains. If the church of Jesus Christ today consists of one and only one ecclesiastical organization (with the remaining ecclesiastical organizations of lesser status), the metric of lineage does not point to one and only one unique organization.

And that does not even address the question on whether the metric of lineage is the right metric.

And the big question which still is open is whether the church of Jesus Christ today actually exists in one and only one unique organization (with everyone else of inferior status)

 

[luke1_28]

That is a nice summary of what your church believes with respect to communion. Other churches of course believe different stuff.

However when I read the Bible, Jesus made it much simpler.

Jesus said "This is my body…This is my blood…Do this in remembrance of me (Paul in Corinthians).

That is good enough for me.

Whenever I read the Bible Jesus makes it simple for me too - through His Church that He so lovingly gave mankind. Otherwise it gets complicated. Because I can pick and choose what to believe based on where my feelings and emotions take me - and that’s dangerous. Random churches spring up everywhere because of that very fact. I can think homosexuality is ok, polygamy is ok, stealing is ok, murdering is ok…etc.etc.etc.etc. My mind and passions can control my faith then - instead of my Faith controlling my mind and passions.

Jesus simplified all this…2000 years ago. 500 years ago - man complicated it.

God bless you,
luke1_28

 

[NotTooSmart]

And that’s the Catholic understanding of it as well, NTS. You’re right–it’s quite simple.

I assume that you have acknowledged, from your previous thread, that the CC gave us the Scriptures, right?

Like Luke1_28 said: you’re more in line with the CC than some of my fellow parishioners!!

As far as the CC gave us the Scriptures…I still don’t like the wording of the phrase (God gave us the Scriptures…it just so happens He used men in this process)…and the double standard it implies. And I consider the apostolic church to be common lineage.

By common lineage, it is quite simple. Let us say that at point in time 1 there exists entity A. Let us say at a later point in time A has divided such that there is entity A’ (which retains the name of A) and entity B. Entity A is a common parent for both A’ and B.

Maybe this is too much object oriented programming to understand in this forum. But anyway, just laws of inheritance.

But it is not a terribly big point and not worth the bother of being told that my church is a Brothel and that I have demons.

But yes, my version of the Bible translates as This is my body…This is my blood. So there you have it.