R
- Status
Z
zz912
Guest
No worries, you are fine.Thanks guys. I wrote that last night, still in a state mixed with overwhelming joy but also embarrassment. Which is quite a novel experience. One to tell the grandkids no doubt. I did however worry before I slept that it mightn’t be received well, so thanks again.
Nope, absolutely not. Hell is pure separation from God, and it is terrible and excrutiating because we are made to be with Him. Purgatory is the process of coming closer to Him. It might be unpleasant, but also beyond wonder because we are becoming who we were meant to be through purification, and coming closer to Him who we desire.
Nope. You can see it in the OT.
*Numbers 5:17
Then he shall take some holy water in a clay jar and put some dust from the tabernacle floor into the water.
Ezek 36:25 I will sprinkle clean water over you to make you clean; from all your impurities and from all your idols I will cleanse you.
*
Also see Ex 29:4, Ex 30:18-19, Lev 8:6, Num 8:7, 1 Kings 7:38-39
I love the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible. It is only out with the NT and a few books of the OT as yet. Scott Hahn wrote the study notes on it. Excellent.
That she is highest in honor among all created beings, but is still created, and only receives honor, never worship. The words to express it are Latria (worship reserved to God alone), Hyper-dulia (special honor for Mary), and Dulia (honor given to saints and angels). Dulia and Hyperdulia are not lesser versions of Latria, they are different in kind. No matter how much honor is given Mary and the saints, it never rises to Latria.
Q
QNDNNDQDCE
Guest
You’ve already answered your own question! Since Catholics give Mary royal titles (Queen of Heaven), we call her our Lady just like we would for secular royalty.
A
Asiyreh
Guest
Hi guys. Well I’ve finally “taken the plunge” and swallowed possibly the most difficult pill so far. I had to tell all my evangelical friends that I’ve decided to return to Momma Rome. The following is the status I posted:-
This is going to come as a shock to most of my evangelical friends out there and this status is mostly for you. I have decided to return to the church of my youth - The Catholic faith. This does not mean I condone the actions of criminals and degenerates who need to find themselves in a jail. However it is my considered opinion that the keys given to Peter are no doubt the final teaching authority for the Church and that there is no rational way to interpret the passage other than to say Christ called Peter the Rock of The church. The historical evidence for the early Church and the testimony of the early Church fathers attest the validity that The Bishop of Rome, has been passed the apostolic role of succession and final authority on the morals and dogmas for the church. I have already received the sacrament of reconciliation and attended mass.
Of course people might have questions or feel that I have somehow betrayed their faith. I will find it completely understandable if people want to delete me from their friends list. I will try to answer any questions people may want to pose if and only if, they’re phrased in a cordial manner. If you want to spit, snarl, name call, or whatever, there are plenty of other places to do it.
For any of my secular friends, try and restrain yourself from posting in this thread unless you have something valid to say.
Thanks guys for your understanding I have loved being an evangelical it’s been such a learning experience and one that I could never gained inside the Catholic Church.
God bless and may the light of Christ ever guide you.
Apologies about the statement - “not being able to experience things inside the Catholic Church.” It’s a bit of a truism over here. As I said there’s little in the way of bible study. And of course one has to let some crumbs fall from the table, only to be diplomatic you understand.
Ok so most of the replies went surprisingly well. Most people simply wished me all the best etc. However of course there’s always the bitter ones.
So getting to the point… I’m more used to making statements such as these, rather than defending against them. So I was wondering if a few of you better informed guys might be willing to aid a brother under fire.
Ok so here was one of the comments I want to respond to. I’ve a few ideas of my own. Last weeks been a bit of a crash course in Catholic apologists for me but I’ve only had one week…
So here it is anyways -
Peter was a christian not a catholic. What you’re referring to is the un corrupted EARLY Christian Church which was very different to what we now know as the Catholic church which is a result of pagan Rome joining forces under the Emperor Constantine with Christian Rome and everything changed. There’s a world of difference between the humble, pure, early christian church and the riches, pomp, power and control of the Catholic Church of today. Some people are ‘always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth’ 2 Tim 3. 7
This is going to come as a shock to most of my evangelical friends out there and this status is mostly for you. I have decided to return to the church of my youth - The Catholic faith. This does not mean I condone the actions of criminals and degenerates who need to find themselves in a jail. However it is my considered opinion that the keys given to Peter are no doubt the final teaching authority for the Church and that there is no rational way to interpret the passage other than to say Christ called Peter the Rock of The church. The historical evidence for the early Church and the testimony of the early Church fathers attest the validity that The Bishop of Rome, has been passed the apostolic role of succession and final authority on the morals and dogmas for the church. I have already received the sacrament of reconciliation and attended mass.
Of course people might have questions or feel that I have somehow betrayed their faith. I will find it completely understandable if people want to delete me from their friends list. I will try to answer any questions people may want to pose if and only if, they’re phrased in a cordial manner. If you want to spit, snarl, name call, or whatever, there are plenty of other places to do it.
For any of my secular friends, try and restrain yourself from posting in this thread unless you have something valid to say.
Thanks guys for your understanding I have loved being an evangelical it’s been such a learning experience and one that I could never gained inside the Catholic Church.
God bless and may the light of Christ ever guide you.
Apologies about the statement - “not being able to experience things inside the Catholic Church.” It’s a bit of a truism over here. As I said there’s little in the way of bible study. And of course one has to let some crumbs fall from the table, only to be diplomatic you understand.
Ok so most of the replies went surprisingly well. Most people simply wished me all the best etc. However of course there’s always the bitter ones.
So getting to the point… I’m more used to making statements such as these, rather than defending against them. So I was wondering if a few of you better informed guys might be willing to aid a brother under fire.
Ok so here was one of the comments I want to respond to. I’ve a few ideas of my own. Last weeks been a bit of a crash course in Catholic apologists for me but I’ve only had one week…
So here it is anyways -
Peter was a christian not a catholic. What you’re referring to is the un corrupted EARLY Christian Church which was very different to what we now know as the Catholic church which is a result of pagan Rome joining forces under the Emperor Constantine with Christian Rome and everything changed. There’s a world of difference between the humble, pure, early christian church and the riches, pomp, power and control of the Catholic Church of today. Some people are ‘always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth’ 2 Tim 3. 7
D
Della
Guest
Well, I think, on the whole, your message to your Evangelical secular friends was all right, except for the apology for what is supposedly lacking in the Church. There are great Bible studies in many parishes and online. You either didn’t have access to them or didn’t know they existed when you decided to leave the Church for what you thought were greener pastures. The Church Christ founded has seen 2000+ years of saints giving their lives for Christ, it know the Bible intimately, and has spirituality beyond compare. Just wait until you begin to read the great Saints, you’ll see what I mean.Hi guys. Well I’ve finally “taken the plunge” and swallowed possibly the most difficult pill so far. I had to tell all my evangelical friends that I’ve decided to return to Momma Rome. The following is the status I posted:-
This is going to come as a shock to most of my evangelical friends out there and this status is mostly for you. I have decided to return to the church of my youth - The Catholic faith. This does not mean I condone the actions of criminals and degenerates who need to find themselves in a jail. However it is my considered opinion that the keys given to Peter are no doubt the final teaching authority for the Church and that there is no rational way to interpret the passage other than to say Christ called Peter the Rock of The church. The historical evidence for the early Church and the testimony of the early Church fathers attest the validity that The Bishop of Rome, has been passed the apostolic role of succession and final authority on the morals and dogmas for the church. I have already received the sacrament of reconciliation and attended mass.
Of course people might have questions or feel that I have somehow betrayed their faith. I will find it completely understandable if people want to delete me from their friends list. I will try to answer any questions people may want to pose if and only if, they’re phrased in a cordial manner. If you want to spit, snarl, name call, or whatever, there are plenty of other places to do it.
For any of my secular friends, try and restrain yourself from posting in this thread unless you have something valid to say.
Thanks guys for your understanding I have loved being an evangelical it’s been such a learning experience and one that I could never gained inside the Catholic Church.
God bless and may the light of Christ ever guide you.
Apologies about the statement - “not being able to experience things inside the Catholic Church.” It’s a bit of a truism over here. As I said there’s little in the way of bible study. And of course one has to let some crumbs fall from the table, only to be diplomatic you understand.
And as for those who have done wicked things in the Church, if you mean the abuse of children by a few priests, such behavior is rampant in Evangelical circles, but no one talks about it because it isn’t allowed. There is no higher authority there to take complaints to and no redress of wrongs because no one is held accountable unless he is caught in the act by an outsider willing to talk. I saw a lot of abuse when I was in the Assemblies of God, but we said nothing for the false fear that the name of Christ would be dragged in the mud.
That’s good to hear, except for the bitter ones, of course.
Where to begin with the falsities and misunderstandings in one paragraph! What does this person think the word Catholic means? Apparently s/he is pitting the word Christian against the word Catholic as if there is a difference. To be Catholic is to be Christian. The word catholic merely means universal. Didn’t Christ want his Church to be universal when he sent his Apostles to the whole world to preach and baptize in his name? Of course Peter was a Catholic because he was a Christian.
And no, the Church did not change it’s teachings to adapt to pagan Rome under Constantine. Constantine urged the Church to come up with a creed, which it did, giving us the Nicene Creed–I dare any Evangelical to find anything contrary to what they believe in it. And as for pomp, the Church has no more of it than the Jewish priests did in the OT, pomp which God insisted they have, btw. Those who make such accusations know little to nothing about real history nor will they accept anything that goes against their bias and their desire to minimize Christianity down so far they teeter (and often tip over) the edge of heresy. God wants us to follow his Church, not individual likes and dislikes or he never would have established it.
A
Asiyreh
Guest
I’ve seen a small piece of that already Della, I hadn’t realised Catholic biblical studies make the best of protestantism look a schoolboy who likes to suck his thumb.
I mentioned that first Della because I knew it would be the first means of attack used against anything I said. Ireland actually closed her embassy to the Vatican of course it was for “financial” reasons. But it’s one of the favorite objections to the church here.
Isn’t it one of the greatest sins, these snakes who attack inside the church? And people believe there isn’t a spirit of Satanism alive in the world, you have to wonder how they manage to believe the things they do.
Hi there’s always one… at least.That’s good to hear, except for the bitter ones, of course.
I actually went with that myself citing the greek translation of the Acts passage, where Christ refers to the “EKKLESIA KATH’OLES.” Apparently this was irrelevant… lol ahh sigh.
I hear ya Della. Was listening to a Tim staples vid the other day. He said the Jewish temple in this day and age, to build it would have cost quite a lot. Can’t remember the exact figure but it was very expensive
Oh here’s a little poster I made myself and uploaded as some what of a response.
s1235.photobucket.com/user/Asiyreh/media/Marypray1.jpg.html
Image courtesy of desktopnexus.com
This poster of variants of it. Quoting bible verses. I think these would have a big impact on the protestant churches. It’s a pity you actually need to study the scripture to see Our Lady and not just have someone point out a verse.
I like this one. Something I think we need to understand as Catholics. The Church has such a high Christology. I think we could do well remembering the importance of things such as “The Gospel for the poor.”
D
Della
Guest
And that most of what is good in Protestant biblical studies came from Catholic scholars.
People forget that sin has always been “in” the Church in the form of its members, some greater sinners than others, of course. Even Christ had Judas. Who are we to think we won’t have some who betray Christ for the allurements of the devil? Those who are pointing fingers ought to be careful to examine their own houses before doing so, yes?
Yes. I believe most such reactions are caused by fear rather than hatred. In order to truly hate something you have to know what it is, and they don’t. Rather, they are fearful on two levels. The more charitable is they fear for your salvation, which is hard to allay in those who are convinced that people can only be saved “their way.” And the other is fear that you may be right because then they would have to follow in your footsteps, something they cannot do for many reasons, some reasons better than others.
For some people anything that challenges what they want to believe is irrelevant because they cannot pull the blinders off their heads, poor things.
Those who make this objection also know nothing about many Franciscan chapels that would be considered too plain even for some Protestants. In stripping the priest of robes they aren’t exalting God but telling God he shouldn’t have made the universe so gaudy and beautiful, IMHO.
I think it’s lovely, but when I was deeply involved in the Assemblies of God I’m afraid would have taken offense at it rather than finding it helpful in understanding Marian doctrine. Anything Marian at that time shocked and appalled me. Yes, I was that anti-Catholic at one time.
Marian verses mean nothing outside the context in which the Church places them. It’s all about Jesus, really. All the Marian teachings are about Jesus more than they are about Mary. Some Protestants simply have a knee-jerk reaction to any Marian teaching, and there are those who go so far as to question if she actually conceived him–wanting to believe that he was implanted in her. As I said, some tip over into heresy in their zeal to remove Mary from the life of the Church.
Another thing our Evangelical brethren have ignored in favor of minimizing the faith down to getting people “saved”. However, many are beginning to reexamine that attitude and are reaching out to help those in need, definitely a step in the right direction.
S
steve_b
Guest
All the internal links in the following post are operational.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=11630884&postcount=37
points to consider as you look through the links
- when Ignatius wrote “Catholic Church” in his letters, did he invent the name? No
- He was bishop of Antioch from approx (~) 69 a.d. to ~107 a.d. (his martyrdom). He is an apostolic father because he lived during the time and was ordained by the apostles. And he was a direct disciple of St John the apostle. Every Church Ignatius wrote to in his 6 letters are to the Catholic Church in those 6 locations. While his letters are dated at the time of his martyrdom, he wrote what he learned from the apostles. Which means he believed and taught as a bishop in 69 a.d. as he continued to believe and teach and ultimately wrote about in 107 a.d.
- Every writer after him, referred to the Church as the Catholic Church.
- The council of Nicea made belief in the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church a matter of faith, because that’s the Church Jesus established, and taught by the apostles.
Irenaeus writes powerfully on succession and even names bishops by name from Peter down to his day as Peter’s successors.
Z
zz912
Guest
Regarding the person who wrote about the Church being different from the one in Acts. Well of course it looks different, just as Jesus taught us that the mustard seed looks much different than the mustard tree. But they are the same tree and Church. We have the same teachings.
Ask him to detail specifically what teachings changed and when. Make him be specific.
Ask him to detail specifically what teachings changed and when. Make him be specific.
A
Asiyreh
Guest
Thanks for the replies guys. It doesn’t matter this particular conversation degenerated into unpleasantness.
During my reply to her… Great girl hearts in the right place, but she’s very adventist. And her knowledge of nutrition adds to the fact she’s on the right path. So pretty stubborn.
Interesting concept by the way. I think it would be good for the church to start giving “semi authoritative advice about some foods.” It’s a minefield out there. I believe she once did, the church I mean. Though I think it was ceremonial reasons. Usually those things have practical roots though don’t they?
Anyways. In a side note of my reply I quoted the context of the verse she aimed at me. And immediately apologized for her, saying I was sure she didn’t mean this.
**The verse refers to people who are be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— having a form of godliness but denying its power. **
She replied that she knew the verse was referring to people on the last days… and that’s why she choose it dot dot dot.
During my reply to her… Great girl hearts in the right place, but she’s very adventist. And her knowledge of nutrition adds to the fact she’s on the right path. So pretty stubborn.
Interesting concept by the way. I think it would be good for the church to start giving “semi authoritative advice about some foods.” It’s a minefield out there. I believe she once did, the church I mean. Though I think it was ceremonial reasons. Usually those things have practical roots though don’t they?
Anyways. In a side note of my reply I quoted the context of the verse she aimed at me. And immediately apologized for her, saying I was sure she didn’t mean this.
**The verse refers to people who are be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— having a form of godliness but denying its power. **
She replied that she knew the verse was referring to people on the last days… and that’s why she choose it dot dot dot.
D
Della
Guest
Ah, Adventist. That explains a lot. They are quite anti-Catholic. One of those groups that cannot let themselves see anything outside their own beliefs except as “we are good and they are bad” kind of sense. I saw this a lot in the AoG when I was a member of that.
The problem is, how would you tell various countries that grow/breed very different kinds of food what they can and cannot eat? The only time the Church has commented on food is to tell us to avoid gluttony or to abstain from certain foods as penance. Otherwise, the Church leaves all such matters to those of nutritionists.
Her quote is from 2Tim3. Her purpose is accuse the Church of having “a form of godliness but denying its power” because the Church uses liturgies instead of being “spirit led” in the Mass and its prayer life. This is silly, of course, and the verse needs to be torn out of its proper context to force it to say what she wants it to say. Such cherry picking of verses is typical of anti-Catholic groups. It’s sad that some groups need to resort to such tactics in their efforts to justify their own way of doing things. And it’s ironic too because no matter what house of worship one goes to there’s always a form and a function to their services that hardly ever varies even in those that claim they are “spirit led” in all things.
- Status