Scriptural Basis for Mary's Assumption

[Church_Militant]

Again you make the same mistake! The Church of Christ exiasted from the beginning, but the idea of it’s being RC exists only in the minds of RC’s!

This is not true.

If you compare the earliest writings of the early church you very quickly see that they taught the very same beliefs that the Catholic Church does today.

Not just the New Testament, but things like the Didache and the the letter of St. Ignatius of Antioch to the church at Smyrna. When you read these things and compare them to modern n-C teachings, you discover that modern n-C Christianity bears far less resemblance to the real New Testament era church than they propagandize.

 

[Church_Militant]

Markway, Jesus only created ONE CHURCH! He founded this ONE CHURCH on Peter and the other apostles, to whom he gave the keys and the power to bind and loose (govern).

Jesus is the one who exalted Mary, not Catholics. “He has exalted the lowly - all generations shall call me blessed”. We give thanks to God for what He did in the live of Mary, because it pre-figures what He wants to do in all our lives. He wants us to be free from sin, and live with Him forever in heaven.Exactly! There’s a very good MP3 Bible study on this called “One Church” and I highly recommend it.

 

[Markway]

Markway, Jesus only created ONE CHURCH! He founded this ONE CHURCH on Peter and the other apostles, to whom he gave the keys and the power to bind and loose (govern). Jesus is the one who exalted Mary, not Catholics. “He has exalted the lowly - all generations shall call me blessed”. We give thanks to God for what He did in the live of Mary, because it pre-figures what He wants to do in all our lives. He wants us to be free from sin, and live with HIm forever in heaven.

For once Guano, we agree. Christ created one church, His Church, The Christian Church; not the Protestant Church, not the RC church , not the Greek Orthodox Church. We need to follow the lead of Pope John (fill in the number) with Vatican 2, and fight for our “in-commons” and not our differences.

Mary was a blessed mortal and may have been assumed, but she’s not running heaven or running interference between God and man.

 

[Markway]

Exactly! There’s a very good MP3 Bible study on this called “One Church” and I highly recommend it.

I agree completely, but the church was the Christian Church, NOT the RC church. Oh, and the exaltation of Mary is undisputed, it’s the nature and meaning of that exaltation that some of us take exception to. As I’ve said before, name a church after her, but don’t pray to her or teach that she somehow gave birth to God in the sense that He did anymore than pass through her.

 

[guanophore]

Guano, don’t you get it? We are all fallible humans, put here to bear each other’s burdens, and to add light where we are blessed with it.

So, accusing us of heresy is your way of “bearing our burden”? What burden is that, exactly? Are we burdened by calling the Mother of Our Lord Blessed?

I agree that we are all put here to help each other. I guess you believe you are “adding light” by showing us the error of our ways?

Have you read the forum rules lately? Did you know it is not permitted to insult the faith of Catholics, or to try to convert Catholics in here? If you feel called to a ministry of those things, I think you will have to find another venue.

For once Guano, we agree. Christ created one church, His Church, The Christian Church; not the Protestant Church, not the RC church , not the Greek Orthodox Church. We need to follow the lead of Pope John (fill in the number) with Vatican 2, and fight for our “in-commons” and not our differences.

Mary was a blessed mortal and may have been assumed, but she’s not running heaven or running interference between God and man.

I have yet to read in any of your postings any talk of what you might have in common with Catholics. this is a good start, but you have been finding fault and picking at differences since you came into this discussion!

No one has said that Mary was “running heaven”. This is just a slanderous comment that is not beneficial to unity. I am not sure about that running interference part…she sure did seem to get the wine replenished at the wedding!

 

[Church_Militant]

For once Guano, we agree. Christ created one church, His Church, The Christian Church; not the Protestant Church, not the RC church , not the Greek Orthodox Church. We need to follow the lead of Pope John (fill in the number) with Vatican 2, and fight for our “in-commons” and not our differences.

If those things in common are valid, all well and good, but when you examine n-C religion you do indeed find that they follow the modern interpretations of men over what the Word of God actually says. You so far turn a blind eye to the facts of history in favor of your particular n-C teachings. A serious compare and contrast might offer you some important insights.

Mary was a blessed mortal and may have been assumed, but she’s not running heaven or running interference between God and man

.This is a prize winning oversimplification and displays a grave misrepresentation of precisely what the Catholic Church teaches with respect to the Blessed Virgin. Mary & the Saints would offer you some better information an help clarify that issue for you.

 

[Markway]

This is not true.

If you compare the earliest writings of the early church you very quickly see that they taught the very same beliefs that the Catholic Church does today.

Not just the New Testament, but things like the Didache and the the letter of St. Ignatius of Antioch to the church at Smyrna. When you read these things and compare them to modern n-C teachings, you discover that modern n-C Christianity bears far less resemblance to the real New Testament era church than they propagandize.

Sorry. I’ve looked at those early writings and they DON’T teach RC teachings but basic Christian teachings. If you RC’s were not so allergic to talking with or attending “Protestant” churches you’d be more aware of this.

It’s pretty amazing to me that often parallel and even duplicate activities are being practiced by “Jesus Freaks” and the modern movement in the Catholic Church.

 

[Church_Militant]

I agree completely, but the church was the Christian Church, NOT the RC church

. Oh, and the exaltation of Mary is undisputed, it’s the nature and meaning of that exaltation that some of us take exception to. As I’ve said before, name a church after her, but don’t pray to her or teach that she somehow gave birth to God in the sense that He did anymore than pass through her.Again… you follow misinformation as to what we believe. Do some serious study and homework.

Your bolded assertion is not at all supported by the facts of history.

Read the early church documents I have linked for you and then tell me if what your church teaches agrees with them. If not, who’s closer to source and more likely to be correct in their teachings?

Gotta run and get cleaned up so I can make Mass. :extrahappy: :extrahappy: :extrahappy: :dancing: :clapping:

 

[Church_Militant]

Sorry. I’ve looked at those early writings and they DON’T teach RC teachings but basic Christian teachings. If you RC’s were not so allergic to talking with or attending “Protestant” churches you’d be more aware of this.

Yeah? Really? Better read this then. My testimony.

It’s pretty amazing to me that often parallel and even duplicate activities are being practiced by “Jesus Freaks” and the modern movement in the Catholic Church.

Allegation without substance. Citations of source please?

Catch ya after Mass!:bible1:

 

[guanophore]

I agree completely, but the church was the Christian Church, NOT the RC church.

You are right that it was not Roman at the time. The followers of Christ were first called Christians in Antioch, and most of the early communities were developed in the East (Jerusalem, Ephesus, Phillipi, etc.) It was not until later when Peter and Paul ended up in Rome together that the city of Rome was blessed by their presence and teaching to become a city of primacy. The church may have been called Catholic at that time, but we do not see it in writing until about 100 years after that.

Oh, and the exaltation of Mary is undisputed, it’s the nature and meaning of that exaltation that some of us take exception to.

Since you are responsible only for your own actions before God, then I strongly urge that you do not become excessive in the nature and meaning of your exaltation of her. That way, you will be able to stand blamelessly before her Son.

As I’ve said before, name a church after her, but don’t pray to her or teach that she somehow gave birth to God in the sense that He did anymore than pass through her.

Well Markway, we have to teach what was passed on to us by the Apostles. The successors of those Holy Apostles encountered this heresy you speak of here (Nestorianism) early in the history of the Church, and countered it by, among other things, calling Mary Theotokos, and Mother of God. Jesus drew his humanity from Mary, immaculate. If you do not believe this, then you have departed from the faith preserved for us by the Apostles and their successors.

Sorry. I’ve looked at those early writings and they DON’T teach RC teachings but basic Christian teachings.

Really? Well, if you are really interested in unity, then we should start a new thread, and focus on the writings of the fathers, and what they say about “basic Christianity”!

If you RC’s were not so allergic to talking with or attending “Protestant” churches you’d be more aware of this.

I think you must be getting frustrated with us, Markway. You are making baseless and slanderous assumptions and accusations. In fact, the opposite of what you say is true. Many of us here are converts from Protestant churches, or reverts who have spent many years in protestant circles.

It’s pretty amazing to me that often parallel and even duplicate activities are being practiced by “Jesus Freaks” and the modern movement in the Catholic Church.

this sounds like it belongs in another thread too.

 

[Markway]

So, accusing us of heresy is your way of “bearing our burden”? What burden is that, exactly? Are we burdened by calling the Mother of Our Lord Blessed?

I agree that we are all put here to help each other. I guess you believe you are “adding light” by showing us the error of our ways?

Have you read the forum rules lately? Did you know it is not permitted to insult the faith of Catholics, or to try to convert Catholics in here? If you feel called to a ministry of those things, I think you will have to find another venue.

I have yet to read in any of your postings any talk of what you might have in common with Catholics. this is a good start, but you have been finding fault and picking at differences since you came into this discussion!

No one has said that Mary was “running heaven”. This is just a slanderous comment that is not beneficial to unity. I am not sure about that running interference part…she sure did seem to get the wine replenished at the wedding!

Have I tried to convert Catholics here? Good luck, although if you were so sure of how correct you all were this rule would not be necessary.

What do I have in common with Catholics? I would hope the body of scripture, the sacraments of Baptism and Communion, the belief that at the heart of being a Christian is a personal relationship with Christ that grows and changes the believer as much as the believer will allow. I believe that we must allow the Spirit to move in our lives regardless of our own personal inclinations, and to do what the Spirit asks of us however our own private fears and selfishness tells us “NO”.

I don’t believe that we need anyone between us and God, however terrifying that might seem. I am a deep sinner and I approach God with fear and trembling. It would be comfortable to have Mary intercede with me. As one Catholic I know told me, “You pray to Mary when you’ve screwed up so bad that you daren’t face the Father Himself, like going to Mom when you’re afraid of Dad.” I can understand the want, but don’t believe that it’s real or necessary. Christ said that He was our intercessor.

I came here to be convinced, but it hasn’t happened. My last church was great, but it split, something that I cannot visualize the Catholic Church doing. On the other hand, my old church was VERY in tune with the Spirit and did His work in dynamic ways that the RCC leaves as secondary or even tertiary objectives. Hey! I became involved with the Catholic Church in the first place because certain individuals wanted to do mission work among non-believers and the Church would not allow it. “No help for people who are not confessing Catholics”. What about throwing your bread out on the waters?

 

[Markway]

Yeah? Really? Better read this then. My testimony.Allegation without substance. Citations of source please?

Catch ya after Mass!:bible1:

Are we a little arguementative? When I spoke of similarities between Jesus Freaks and modern Catholics I spoke from personal experience. My brother is married to a Catholic who runs the “modern section” of the church service etc. I also attended a home group with a dear church brother and his wife. The differences were nonexistant. Period. If they were drawn into conversation about doctrine I suppose that there’d been a hell of a disagreement, (in a very polite way), but that does not really matter. Largely, they were doing the same thing.

Why is everyone here in “professional” mode? It’s like we’re all in some debating society. Don’t any of you long for ONE CHURCH? Have any of you EVER changed your minds? What’s wrong with admitting that we’re all human etc and working out our differences?

I read recently about a Japanese prison camp. The officers within were both English and American. What emerged over time was the Christian; not the Anglican, RC, Baptist, etc. but the CHRISTIAN. Think about that.

 

[Markway]

Again… you follow misinformation as to what we believe. Do some serious study and homework.

Your bolded assertion is not at all supported by the facts of history.

Read the early church documents I have linked for you and then tell me if what your church teaches agrees with them. If not, who’s closer to source and more likely to be correct in their teachings?

Gotta run and get cleaned up so I can make Mass. :extrahappy: :extrahappy: :extrahappy: :dancing: :clapping:

I’ve read your homework and that’s what scared me. No misinformation. Sorry

 

[Markway]

If those things in common are valid, all well and good, but when you examine n-C religion you do indeed find that they follow the modern interpretations of men over what the Word of God actually says. You so far turn a blind eye to the facts of history in favor of your particular n-C teachings. A serious compare and contrast might offer you some important insights.
This is a prose winning oversimplification and displays a grave misrepresentation of precisely what the Catholic Church teaches with respect to the Blessed Virgin. Mary & the Saints would offer you some better information an help clarify that issue for you.

I could ask you what your qualifications as an historian are, but what’s the use? Please explain to me the change in status contemplated by John-Paul II and discouraged by Ratzinger concerning Mary and then let’s talk again.

 

[guanophore]

Have I tried to convert Catholics here?

I thought that was what you meant when you spoke of yourself as a source of light to us, to guide us out of the darkness.

Good luck, although if you were so sure of how correct you all were this rule would not be necessary.

When you look over some of the postings - especially of people that got banned, you can see that the rule has nothing to do with the confidence of the forum members. The purpose of the forum is to answer questions about Catholicism, not to give non-Catholics a venue to try to separate Catholics from their faith. After you meet some of the evangelicals here that think CAtholicism is the Whore of Babylon, you may better understand the rule.

What do I have in common with Catholics? I would hope the body of scripture, the sacraments of Baptism and Communion, the belief that at the heart of being a Christian is a personal relationship with Christ that grows and changes the believer as much as the believer will allow. I believe that we must allow the Spirit to move in our lives regardless of our own personal inclinations, and to do what the Spirit asks of us however our own private fears and selfishness tells us “NO”.

You probably have more in common with Catholics than not. However, there is nothing in Apostolic teaching that speaks of a “personal relationship with Jesus”. this is a rather new and novel evangelical invention.

I don’t believe that we need anyone between us and God, however terrifying that might seem. I am a deep sinner and I approach God with fear and trembling. It would be comfortable to have Mary intercede with me. As one Catholic I know told me, “You pray to Mary when you’ve screwed up so bad that you daren’t face the Father Himself, like going to Mom when you’re afraid of Dad.” I can understand the want, but don’t believe that it’s real or necessary. Christ said that He was our intercessor.

Christ is indeed our intercessor. He has also ordained and privelged others to share in that ministry of mediation. This “me and Jesus only” is also a novel evangelical invention.

I came here to be convinced, but it hasn’t happened. My last church was great, but it split, something that I cannot visualize the Catholic Church doing. On the other hand, my old church was VERY in tune with the Spirit and did His work in dynamic ways that the RCC leaves as secondary or even tertiary objectives. QUOTE]

Your appearance was not made with and inquiry, but with a criticism. It is better that you have not been convinced, because apparently you did not understand the truth of what the church teaches. Better for you to learn the truth than to be “convinced” in error! I am curious about what might those “dynamic ways” might be?

 

[Markway]

I thought that was what you meant when you spoke of yourself as a source of light to us, to guide us out of the darkness.

When you look over some of the postings - especially of people that got banned, you can see that the rule has nothing to do with the confidence of the forum members. The purpose of the forum is to answer questions about Catholicism, not to give non-Catholics a venue to try to separate Catholics from their faith. After you meet some of the evangelicals here that think CAtholicism is the Whore of Babylon, you may better understand the rule.

You probably have more in common with Catholics than not. However, there is nothing in Apostolic teaching that speaks of a “personal relationship with Jesus”. this is a rather new and novel evangelical invention.

Christ is indeed our intercessor. He has also ordained and privelged others to share in that ministry of mediation. This “me and Jesus only” is also a novel evangelical invention.
Markway;2426991:

I came here to be convinced, but it hasn’t happened. My last church was great, but it split, something that I cannot visualize the Catholic Church doing. On the other hand, my old church was VERY in tune with the Spirit and did His work in dynamic ways that the RCC leaves as secondary or even tertiary objectives. QUOTE]

Your appearance was not made with and inquiry, but with a criticism. It is better that you have not been convinced, because apparently you did not understand the truth of what the church teaches. Better for you to learn the truth than to be “convinced” in error! I am curious about what might those “dynamic ways” might be?

When did I ever speak of myself as a source of light? Am I the new messiah? Give me a break.

For the umpteenth time: I came here looking for some answers, hoping to attend a Catholic Church. All churches try to emulate Christ and to try and please Him, but how many out there wonder if we’re perfect at it:? A show of hands? Jesus wasn’t so happy the last time that He came around, why think that we’re better this time?

The relationship with Christ is central to salvation and is either stated or implied in all scripture. Didn’t the apostles have a relationship with Christ? Those wacko fundamentalists may be out there on some things but they DO read their Bibles. I am retired due to a serious back injury. I take a lot of serious medication to help this. It DOES hurt my memory. Ask any of the other Protestants for scriptural support for having a relationship with Christ; they’ll have a lot. For the time being though what comes to mind is the sown grain parable. Parse that for me.

The Protestants have a lot of problems, but it’s hard to discuss them as there are so many divisions, and most of the discussion here has been directed at Protestants in general.

I’m still going to pray for you Guano. Yr Brother John

 

[Church_Militant]

Are we a little arguementative? When I spoke of similarities between Jesus Freaks and modern Catholics I spoke from personal experience. My brother is married to a Catholic who runs the “modern section” of the church service etc. I also attended a home group with a dear church brother and his wife. The differences were nonexistant. Period. If they were drawn into conversation about doctrine I suppose that there’d been a hell of a disagreement, (in a very polite way), but that does not really matter. Largely, they were doing the same thing.

Back from Mass! :heaven:

Hey, I’m not the one here making statements about what Catholics supposedly believe that are inaccurate.

As for Your personal experience, good for you…

“Modern” part of the Mass? If that is all you remember then perhaps you missed the really important things that were supposed to be going on. That’s a bummer…

Obviously there is “a hell of a disagreement”, or you wouldn’t be here posting this stuff, now would you?

“but that does not really matter.”

The problem is that truth does indeed matter and I’ve seen the assertion that we agree on essentials, but then I discover that most n-Cs can’t even agree on what those are, and some of that is critically important teachings.

An honest person will not dress that up to make nice. Pope John Paul II didn’t do that either, and if you think that that is what he was all about then you need to read some of his encyclicals, like Ecclesia de Eucharistia, where he gets into the reasons why n-Cs are generally not allowed to share communion with us.

Why is everyone here in “professional” mode? It’s like we’re all in some debating society. Don’t any of you long for ONE CHURCH?

Have any of you EVER changed your minds? What’s wrong with admitting that we’re all human etc and working out our differences?Certainly, but there can be only one church when we all share the same doctrines. Anything else would just be heretical disaster.

Sure I changed my mind…that’s what my testimony brings out, and why.

Never said there was a problem with being human and working out our differences, but again truth is critically important. When you post here and state inaccuracies as to what we Catholics believe and teach, then you have to get correct information to even begin to resolve those differences that you speak of.

I read recently about a Japanese prison camp. The officers within were both English and American. What emerged over time was the Christian; not the Anglican, RC, Baptist, etc. but the CHRISTIAN. Think about that.

Yet when they finally were released I’ll wager that they each went back to their respective faiths…

I’ve read your homework and that’s what scared me. No misinformation. Sorry

I can’t tell. You certainly express errors in your posts that do not accurately state Catholic teachings and then want to carry on as if what you have stated is gospel fact when it’s not. Where’s the progress in that?

I could ask you what your qualifications as an historian are, but what’s the use?

And I, you…I can read and understand what I read, and I’m well familiar with both Catholic and n-C teachings.

Please explain to me the change in status contemplated by John-Paul II and discouraged by Ratzinger concerning Mary and then let’s talk again.

There is no “change in status”, and if you think that’s what he meant then you have misread his teachings.

Feel free to link me to his specific documents from whence you perceive this alleged “change in status” you speak of so I can read them for myself. I personally am a knight of the Immaculata, consecrated to the Blessed Virgin for the spread of the Gospel all over the world, and I have not seen any such.

BTW, that would be Pope Benedict XVI to you and me. If you intend to be offensive and disrespectful both to the pope and to the faithful Catholics here at CAF then I suspect your tenure here may be of short duration. Consider if your attitude is one that you would appreciate someone like me taking with you
(I haven’t…yet, and don’t intend to.) and maybe you’ll see what I mean.

From the outset of our exchange I have simply tried to get you to recognize that the things you have stated are factually inaccurate. If you really do know better…please by all means cite sources and prove me wrong. I can handle that.

 

[Church_Militant]

…For the umpteenth time: I came here looking for some answers, hoping to attend a Catholic Church.

All churches try to emulate Christ and to try and please Him, but how many out there wonder if we’re perfect at it:? A show of hands? Jesus wasn’t so happy the last time that He came around, why think that we’re better this time?We can help you with answers and I’d be happy to take you to Mass with me and we could sit down over some lunch and discuss it afterwards. That would be cool, I think. I just think you have some bad info…

The relationship with Christ is central to salvation and is either stated or implied in all scripture. Didn’t the apostles have a relationship with Christ?

Certainly.

Those wacko fundamentalists may be out there on some things but they DO read their Bibles.

And so do we Catholics.

I am retired due to a serious back injury. I take a lot of serious medication to help this. It DOES hurt my memory.

Man I’m sorry to hear that. I’m nursing a gimp knee right now so I can identify somewhat. May the Lord grant you mercy and healing.

Ask any of the other Protestants for scriptural support for having a relationship with Christ; they’ll have a lot. For the time being though what comes to mind is the sown grain parable. Parse that for me.

That’s Matthew 13 or Mark 4 or Luke 8.

The Protestants have a lot of problems, but it’s hard to discuss them as there are so many divisions, and most of the discussion here has been directed at Protestants in general.

Yeah they do and it is confusing because of all those divisions. It makes it especially difficult coming from n-Cs to us Catholics because the premises seem to change based on each individual that we encounter, but the fact is that when it comes down to authority, we Catholics have one voice and any other opinions are generally either dissent or ignorance, and we are dealing with that. That’s one reason that Catholic Answers exists.

I have already prayed for you John, and I’ll continue to do so.

 

[Good_Fella]

Again you make the same mistake! The Church of Christ existed from the beginning, but the idea of it’s being RC exists only in the minds of RC’s! The RC promotes unity?! LOL The scriptural basis for the legitimacy of the Protestant church is the exact same legitimacy that you claim.

It is hard not to view the RCC in the same light, especially in light of the extravagant claims made for Mary that seem designed to promote Her into the Holy Family, a clearly heretical move.

Heretical ? Are you suggesting that the Mother of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, is “unholy”? The angel Gabriel thought otherwise, when he addressed the Blessed Virgin, “Hail full of grace!” The Holy Spirit then came upon her and overshadowed her. Obviously, you choose to ignore scripture when the Word of God fails to register with your blind prejudices. In the Magnificat she proclaims by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, “From now on all ages will call me blessed. The Almighty has done great things for me, and holy is his name.” This prophecy has been fulfilled only in the true Church of Christ. God has no problem with his Son’s mother, so why do Protestants? “Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb.” Her cousin Elizabeth acknowledged Mary’s holy state, and she knew it was because Mary had conceived a holy child to be his mother. God has done great things for Mary. The Catholic Church makes no extravagant claims about her. Since you are outside the Church, there is only one Catholic Church, you fail to see the truth about the person of Mary in God’s plan for our salvation. And I sense you have no desire to see it at all.

The early Church was Christ’s Church? That’s right. But it came to us through the apostles and has carried on through their successors, the popes and bishops of each generation. And the early Church was the Roman Catholic Church. The Greek Catholics separated themselves, as did the Protestant “reformers”. But I can assure you that they did not take Christ with them. Our Lord promised to be with his one, apostolic Church until the end of time. The primacy of Rome in Christendom has existed ever since Peter arrived there, for he was the head of the apostles. The early Church resembled the Roman Catholic Church today in all its essential aspects. Like the early Church, from the time of the apostles, the Catholic Church consists of a single body of believers who profess one creed and are subject to the apostolic order of her hierarchy, just as the first Christians accepted the preaching of the apostles chosen by our Lord and were subject to their authority. The Catholic Church purveys both word and sacrament for the sake of the sanctification of her members through the ministry of ordained priests and bishops, all of whom are under the ultimate authority of the Bishop of Rome, the pope, as how it was in the first century. Finally, the Catholic Church has kept all the seven sacraments which were instituted by Christ and are shown to be celebrated by the ecclesial community in the New Testament. The Catholic Church is the early Church.

The term ‘catholic’ is Greek meaning universal. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch and Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, used this term at the turn of the second century when referring to the Church as being “everywhere” and distinguishing it from schismatics and splinter groups and sects who had broken away from the apostolic tradition and opposed the true Church of Christ.

In seeking to determine the apostolic succession of the churches (united in one faith, unlike the Protestant churches) St. Irenaeus of Lyon refers to the Church of Rome as the example and criterion par excellence of this succession: “…we will consider the great and very ancient church known to all, the church founded and established in Rome by the two glorious apostles Peter and Paul. By showing the tradition received from the apostles and the faith proclaimed by men, which comes to us through the succession of bishops, we refute all who in any way…gather together beyond what is right. In fact, it is with this church, by reason of her most excellent origin, that every church …must necessarily be in agreement with this Church in which the tradition that comes from the apostles has always been preserved by everyone.” [Adv. Haer. 3,2.] (180 AD) The primacy of Rome had been recognized by the other three Apostolic Sees, because the Bishop of Rome was considered St.Peter’s successor.

There is no such thing as a Protestant Church - you mean churches which cannot even agree with each other on essential doctrines. How can this state of affairs be legitimate? It is clear that every Protestant denomination is wrong to the extent it is in accord with the Roman Catholic Church in its essential doctrines. The scriptures serve no purpose if they only divide the numerous Protestant denominations and sects.

Pax vobiscum
Good Fella

 

[guanophore]

I thought that was what you meant when you spoke of yourself as a source of light to us, to guide us out of the darkness.

When did I ever speak of myself as a source of light? Am I the new messiah? Give me a break.

I didn’t take it that way. I just understood you to say that you had been blessed with light, and that you felt it was your God given mission to share His light with others, and I was just not “getting it” (still in the dark). Since you have already advised me that I am a “jerk” it seemed that, from your perspective, I must be very much in need of something!

Guano, don’t you get it? We are all fallible humans, put here to bear each other’s burdens, and to add light where we are blessed with it.

For the umpteenth time: I came here looking for some answers, hoping to attend a Catholic Church.

Sorry, I must have gotten thrown off by all those actions that were speaking louder than your words.

All churches try to emulate Christ and to try and please Him, but how many out there wonder if we’re perfect at it:? A show of hands? Jesus wasn’t so happy the last time that He came around, why think that we’re better this time?

Because this time, He established His own Church, and he endowed it with His spirit, and He promised to guide her into all truth. This time, we can put our trust in an infallible Source.

The relationship with Christ is central to salvation and is either stated or implied in all scripture. Didn’t the apostles have a relationship with Christ?

I didn’t say there was no relationship. I was speaking about this “personal relationship with Jesus” that is a modern evangelical invention. Of course we are related to Jesus, and there are dozens of scriptural passages about the type of relation ship He wants us to have with Him.

Those wacko fundamentalists may be out there on some things but they DO read their Bibles. I am retired due to a serious back injury. I take a lot of serious medication to help this. It DOES hurt my memory. Ask any of the other Protestants for scriptural support for having a relationship with Christ; they’ll have a lot. For the time being though what comes to mind is the sown grain parable. Parse that for me.

I think the sown grain parable belongs on a different thread. As a former wacko Fundie, I can attest to being in the Word.

The Protestants have a lot of problems, but it’s hard to discuss them as there are so many divisions, and most of the discussion here has been directed at Protestants in general.

I see too many general and pejorative comments being made about Protestants here, as if they could be somehow lumped into all one box. It is not right. I wish they would all go to that “Rebellious subjects of the Roman Pontiff” thread and give an account of themselves.

I’m still going to pray for you Guano. Yr Brother John

I am not sure if prayer will deliver me from my apparent darkeness, or the condition of being a jerk either, but I am sure it can’t hurt!