There is more than one Catholic Church - How is this possible?

[guanophore]

Why do you use present tense? Of course they aren’t pagan cults anymore! They WERE pagan cults!! (As for All Saints/AllDeads day it is Samhein btw!) And they were implemented in Catholicism prior 312 AD!!-

No, Esdra. There were not then, neither are there now, any Pagan cults or feasts “implemented in Catholicism”. You have been misled.

I read it (but forgot the source. It is quite a long time ago. You now, I have a marvellous memory!  – I was not brainwashed! Hey, I am not in a sect like Scientology where you get brainwashed!

I hope that being here at CAF will result in your brain getting a washing, so there will be room for the Truth to come in.

Jesus would not allow any paganism in His Holy Bride, the Church.

I didn’t say that. You misunderstood me. I said that they gave the Saints functions like the pagan Gods had. So it would be easier for the pagans to accept Catholicism! For example: You pray to Saint Anthony of Padua if you have lost something. Or St. Francis of Assisi is the patron of the animals and so on. I am not really good at Saints. I was never interested though.  These functions all had once the pagan gods and now Saints filled their place! (This is not theology, but mere secular history!!)

You have been given a very warped understanding of the results of sanctification.

Did you know that the term Queen of Heaven is to be found in the Old Testament? What was the Queen of Heaven there? You guessed it, a mother deity – Astarte to be precise (Again secular History!!)

Yes, of course. You were not laboring under the delusion that I have not heard all this before, were you?

I have meant descendant. Sorry, my mistake. You know, English isn’t my mother tongue, so I sometimes confuse words!

Ok. I thought as much.

Have a look here:

Jeremiah 7:18

18 “The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead dough to make cakes for the queen of heaven; and they pour out drink offerings to other gods in order to spite Me.”

Esdra, the presence of a false Queen of Heaven does not negate the true Queen of Heaven. That is like saying that, since Pharoah called himself God on Earth, that Jesus is not really God on Earth.

 

[guanophore]

Well, sort of they did. If they didn’t become Muslims they didn’t have the chance to become members of parliament or so.

They may have pretended to become Mulsims so they could fit in, or get what they wanted, but it is impossible to “force” anyone to believe something.

The first Catholic Church WAS Roman. At least when it became main religion in 312 AD!

No, Esdra. This is not true. You have been misled. The Catholic Church started in Jerusalem, and spread East into Antioch and Asia. It did not come to Rome until later. Besides, the Latin Rite is only one of 23 Catholic Rites. None of the rest are “Roman”.

Again an argue point. I am convinced that the Catholic Church is equally true than any other Church that accepts the Nicene Creed! The Catholic Church is not “more true”!

I can’t see how you could, since you have been fed so many lies about it.

How do you know how they meant it? And don’t tell me now Sacred Tradition! Maybe they meant it just the way I and most of my fellow protestant brothers and sisters do?!

We know because the Word of God that was given to the Church has been maintained by His Spirit within the Church.

We know that you and most of your Protestant siblings have departed from what the Apostles believed and taught because we have kept the Apostolic Command to preserve that which was entrusted to us.

The Holy Spirit revealed to me in my long search for the truth everything that is true (as well as to most of my brothers and sisters in the Protestant Churches) from the Catholic Church.

Esdra, the HS does not reveal things to people 2000 years after the Church was founded upon the Apostles and Prophets that contradict what He has already revealed to the faithful.

Denomination = in German Konfession as far as I know. And in German it is used for the Catholic Church as well. Maybe the German and English words don’t exactly overlap that could be. My mother tongue isn’t English, as I have already mentioned!

Yes, many erroneously refer to the Catholic faith as a “denomination”, but it is a misuse.
Denominations define themselves by what part of the Catholic faith they reject.

I don’t believe that Jesus found anything (he even didn’t write anything down!). The apostles maybe did,

In this case, you have rejected the Holy Scriptures. It is likely that we have nothing left to discuss. If you do not accept the Scriptures as the inspired and inerrant Word of God, we will not get very far.

Peter and Paul and the others. And this Church I call Ancient Christians – and they were NOT CATHOLIC in our sense.

They were Catholic all right, but certainly not “in our sense” as you have been given to believe. They would not recognize the warped ideas you have about the Catholic faith.

I don’t deny the Truth of the Scriptures (on the contrary: Sola scriptura!!), nor do I deny the Nicene Creed.

Yes, you do. If you deny that Jesus built ONE CHURCH, then you have denied the Holy Scriptures, as well as the creed.

 

[guanophore]

Well, I haven't found any so far. (Okay, I haven't been searching in the Catholic Church for 8 years now!)

It is truly remarkable how our prejudices can prevent us from seeing things.

I can. They have many truths. But those who are not correct, are simply just not correct…

And you measure this by what standard?
Esdra;6750517:

I can find out what is correct and what not by the Reforamtors (especially Luther and Zwingli). They were guided by the Holy Spirit in my opinion to reform the Church. But the Church didn’t want to let itself reform… So the denominations arose.

Again you have been given misinformation. The Church did, in fact, reform. However, where Luther and Zwingli went wrong (among other things) is that they mistakely thought that since people are always in need of Reform, they could improve over the doctrine of Jesus Christ. For that reason, they created their own doctrines, which represent a significant departure from what the Apostles believed and taught.

Well, not everything is right.

What you are claiming is that not all of what the Apostles believed and taught was right. You are claiming that Luther and Zwingli came along 1600 years after the Apsotles, and created doctrine that was more “right” than what Jesus taught His followers.

Wasn’t it in history also the community of believer? Or what was the Church among the Ancient Christians?!

The ancient Church was built by Jesus upon the foundation of the Apostles and prophets. It was (and still is) Catholic.

I didn’t. I know what I believe and I know that it is true.

So, why are you here at CAF?

Well, of course they can. Isn’t there a Catholic saying like: “I don’t have arms, only your arms; I don’t have legs, only yours”, says Jesus. (and so on)?

There is a Catholic hymn with these lines, yes. It is not an excuse to depart from the Truth so that everyone who has embraced heresies can feel; warm and fuzzy.

There is no visible Church!

It is curious why it is so important to you that you deny the Word of God. I wonder what it would mean for your faith if you had to admit that Jesus founded a visible Church on earth?

Oh yes, they do. I got to know that pretty hard. It's great that you don't and apparently most others here in CAF as well. It shows that you are more tolerant!

And what makes you think the catholic church rejects anyone?

Good. You are tolerant. But only few Catholics are, sadly enough… (It’s getting especially hard and intolerant if you live in a Catholic dominated country like I do, believe me!)

One can love people and not love the falsehoods they have embraced. I think some of the heresies you have accepted are despicable. I think most of it is not your fault. You have been misled.

The sad thing is that hardly noone here in Austria lives according to their faith! - sbout 80% are Catholics!

It is sad. However, to condemn the Church founded by Christ on the basis of those who have left her does not make any sense.

And did you like their ideas? If I cameback to my original Catholic Faith I guess I would either go to the Old Catholics/Utrecht or to the Lutherans

.

No. both make excuses for refusing to accept the successor of Peter.

Maybe I get a longing for liturgy later in life...? At the moment I don't need it. I am young (24). - But who knows what happens in future?

All of us will be praying that you come to the knowledge of the Truth, and return to the visible Church founded by Christ.

Well, I am not ready to became a Catholic (again). There are too many points I can’t agree on. And one has told me here in CAF that you have to accept the whole doctrine. I can’t. This is the reason why I am not Catholic anymore!

You may have been baptized Catholic, but clearly you were never Catholic in faith. It is clear that you know very little about the Catholic faith.

 

[guanophore]

“What is truth?”, asked Pontius Pilate Jesus. And I tell you: Jesus is the truth! All the other things we are “arguing” here are about are more or less peanuts.

NO, Esdra, they are not “peanuts”. when Jesus commanded the Apostles to teach all that He commanded, He was not referring to “peanuts”.

“What is truth?”, asked Pontius Pilate Jesus. And I tell you: Jesus is the truth! All the other things we are “arguing” here are about are more or less peanuts.

You will be in our prayers. I do hope you will continue to learn. Sometimes you don’t seem very open minded.

And you think those people were to be burnt or killed in another way?! Are you serious??

The burning and killing of people who don’t embrace the Catholic faith is not consistent with the Teaching of Jesus. People who do such things have departed from the faith.

 Did you know that these things all happened with the consent of the pope, the cardinals and the bishops?! Do you really think this was God's will? A God whom we know today as loving, graceful and merciful??!!

People departing from the faith does not invalidate the faith. That is like saying that, since Judas betrayed Christ, nothing Jesus taught had any value.

 Well, actually I think, if the HS REALLY had guided and protected the Catholic Church then he would have been a really, really evil god, without love, mercy and grace!!

You believe this because you lack understanding of the nature of the guidance. the guidance of the HS does not prevent men from committing sins. It protects the Church from error. People who leave the Teaching of the Church do not benefit from the gift of infallibility.

 He didn't. When they fell away from Him he lead thim into the arms of the Assyrians and Babylonians. Even the Psalmists often pray to God and beg Him to come back to them to guide them!

And what happened?

And yes, the CC established the canon of the Bible

It is delightful that you have found one small aspect of history that is correct. There is so much of your studies that have led you astray.

I think I have already answered this one in the previous post...

Yes, you did. You admitted that you use the standard of heretics.

 I don't know. I don't believe in the Apostolic Authority.

This is probably the basis of all the other theological problems from which you are suffering.

  Jesus promised the HS to ALL of us, all who believe in Him. And this is what actually happened at Pentecost. All received the HS, not only the 12. (Even the gentiles, the Romans to whom Peter was called, received the HS!) Jesus is IN us and we are "all priests".

Of course, but the believers do not separate themselves from the Apostles!

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. "
(Jn 3:16-18)

And ALL Protestants DO believe in Him, don’t they? So where is the problem? We are saved, no matter which denomination/Church we belong to. However, I would also insert the Nicene Creed as a criterion. You know there are also heresies that are not even accepted by us Protestants. I am not sure about them!

You have a deficient notion of salvation.

Yes, there are heresies the Protestants accept, and some they reject.

I was not led astray! Jesus and His HS guided me. I know that He loves me and that He would never permit that I go astray!!

I am sure He loves you. He wants to guide you into all Truth, which is found in His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. It is a visible Church which He founded, and over which He appointed a teaching authority to protect you from the heresies into which you have presently fallen.

 Of course He did!! Who else? Do you dare to say the Devil has led me and I followed him?

No, Esdra. The HS does not guide single persons in the opposite direction from where He has already led the church. Why would He do such a thing?

The devil wants to increase the divisions in the 'Body, and to separate you from the Apostolic faith. However, it seems to me that you are quite sincere in your quest, and that you sincerely believe that the heresies you have embraced are the Truth.

 

[guanophore]

Well, the protestant interpretation of this verse is different: “Jesus was so happy that at least Paul understood by the Holy Ghost that He is the Son of God and the Messiah that He said that He would build upon His believe = Rock build up His Church which is the Community of all Believers in Christ Jesus.”

Well, of course! How else can they justify their refusal to submit to the authority appointed by Christ, and to reject the visible Church built by Christ?

But, this interpreteation is a modern innovation, and is not consistent with what the Apostles believed.

Mhm, that’s funny all characteristics you have written above perfectly fit with my Anabaptist community as well except the thing with the apostolic succession (at least as far as I know). Well, and the term Catholic we would interpret differntly: catholic = universal = open for all - and we ARE open for all. Everybody is invited to come.

FOr some reason you don’t believe the Catholic Church is open to all. I wonder why that is?

I wonder why you think that Apostolic succesion does not exist?

there is ONE TEACHING (the Holy Bible).

This is possibly the most damaging heresy of the Reformation.

OOOOps, okay I am not in the True Church then according to you (two points missing…). I see, I have to become either Anglican or Old Catholic/Utrecht or PNCC or an Orthodox.

In which case, you would still be missing out on unity with the successor of Peter.

Then I would be in the True Church.

No. There is unity in the Church founded by Christ.

See, there is more than one “Catholic Church” - I am right.

God gave humans free will, and active imaginations. It is possible for a person to believe they have been led away from his Holy Bride by the HS. It is possible for a person to embrace heresies, and believe they are “right”. It is possible for a person to delude himself into thinking there is more than one “Catholic” church. It is not true, but people are free to believe these products of imagination.

Rinnie:

I personally agree with your Dad that the First Visible Church was in Rome. But who cares? As long as they go by the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church which the Pope is over and are in communion with him what really is the big difference

Rinnie, if this were true, the church would not be recorded as having the first council in Jerusalem, or been first called Christians in Antiioch of syria. All the Chruches planted by Paul, to whom he wrote letters, predated his journey to Rome. These are historical facts.

 

[Esdra]

No, Esdra. There were not then, neither are there now, any Pagan cults or feasts “implemented in Catholicism”. You have been misled.

Actually I meant somewhen POST 312 AD - not prior. I again jumbled up words…
Of course they are! Even my dad, who is a catholic theologian agrees with me on that point. They were former pagan cults or feasts!

I hope that being here at CAF will result in your brain getting a washing, so there will be room for the Truth to come in.

I am not here for becoming a Catholic again. I am here to compare and contrast believes. This is also the reason why I only post in the Non-Catholic Forum. I am there to learn something new. - Because I always have been interested in Religion. (And I am also here to improve my English. You won’t believe how much vocabulary I have learned so far here! )

Jesus would not allow any paganism in His Holy Bride, the Church.

Well, but this is what happened in my opinion… Although you keep saying that through the ST i.e. the assumption of Mary into heaven is evident.

You have been given a very warped understanding of the results of sanctification.

But that’s true. I am to 100& convinced about that!

Yes, of course. You were not laboring under the delusion that I have not heard all this before, were you?

Good. So you know what I mean.

Esdra, the presence of a false Queen of Heaven does not negate the true Queen of Heaven. That is like saying that, since Pharoah called himself God on Earth, that Jesus is not really God on Earth.

Well, for me it is the same. God is against worshipping (or in the Catholic sense: honoring) a “Queen of Heaven”. So why should he allow it all of a sudden?
I think ALL denominations and Churches (except Monophysites maybe) will agree with you in the point that Jesus is the “God on Earth”. This is what Christianity all about, isn’t it?

In Christ,
Esdra

 

[Esdra]

They may have pretended to become Mulsims so they could fit in, or get what they wanted, but it is impossible to “force” anyone to believe something.

I can give you also some Catholic examples of “forcing” people to become Christian: What about the Native Americans of North and South America? Or the Ancient Germans (although they knew how to defend their pagan faith - they even killed some missionars.)

No, Esdra. This is not true. You have been misled. The Catholic Church started in Jerusalem, and spread East into Antioch and Asia. It did not come to Rome until later. Besides, the Latin Rite is only one of 23 Catholic Rites. None of the rest are “Roman”.

Do you really think that Christianity didn’t start in Jerusalem? It says in the Bible doesn’t it? But the Roman Catholic Church started in Rome later on. And first of all - the first Christians were not Catholic in our modern sence! Again a point my dad and I agree on!

I can’t see how you could, since you have been fed so many lies about it.

I was not misled. I found out for myself. I have always been interested in History and Religion and I have been studying for long know (8 years!). If I come to the same conclusion than some Reformators, doesn’t that proove that they are right? Even my dad, whom I talk to quite often about that topic, agrees with me on a great extent!!

We know because the Word of God that was given to the Church has been maintained by His Spirit within the Church.

We know that you and most of your Protestant siblings have departed from what the Apostles believed and taught because we have kept the Apostolic Command to preserve that which was entrusted to us.

I thought the Word of God was the Holy Bible… And as far as I got to know the CC (here), I can see some points which are not in the Holy Bible!

Esdra, the HS does not reveal things to people 2000 years after the Church was founded upon the Apostles and Prophets that contradict what He has already revealed to the faithful.

Of course He does. He promised us to lead us into the fullness of truth and this refers to ALL believers in Christ (“the visible Church, Jesus has founded”, if you want so), not only the Apostles!

Yes, many erroneously refer to the Catholic faith as a “denomination”, but it is a misuse.
Denominations define themselves by what part of the Catholic faith they reject.

Well, I think this is a German/English problem… Never mind. As long as we know what we are referring to with this term! I will simply use denominations and Churches in future when I wirte here.

In this case, you have rejected the Holy Scriptures. It is likely that we have nothing left to discuss. If you do not accept the Scriptures as the inspired and inerrant Word of God, we will not get very far.

WHAT? I reject the scriptures? You know that I am emergant Anabaptist, don’t you? And, as you also were an Anabaptist, you know that the Holy Bible is inspired and inerrant, don’t you? I just said that Jesus didn’t write down anything. But does this mean what the Apostles and evangelists wrote down about hims is wrong or so?

They were Catholic all right, but certainly not “in our sense” as you have been given to believe. They would not recognize the warped ideas you have about the Catholic faith.

Okay, I think I can agree on this point. They were Catholic which means universal. But this doesn’t necessarily to do with the present Catholic Church.

Yes, you do. If you deny that Jesus built ONE CHURCH, then you have denied the Holy Scriptures, as well as the creed.

Of course he found a “visible Church” - the community of all believers who form the Body of Christ!!

 

[minkymurph]

Concerning pagan beliefs, there is another way of looking at it.

We cannot assume that God did not reveal Himself to anyone, in any way, other than through the Nation of Israel. God’s Revelation to man can only be understood in the divine sense through the person of Jesus Christ and therefore, Christ revealed the true meaning of pagan beleifs; such as blood sacrifice which was a feature of many pagan rituals, all be it for non-Christian reasons. Does the belief in the sacrifice of Christ stem from a pagan ritual? Atheists would argue it does.

The question is: did the pagans have Christian beliefs they did not fully understand, or did Christians come to fully understand the true meaning of pagan rituals and beliefs following the outpouring of the Holy Spirit?

On another point, I have often said to persons of other Christian denominations if you disagree with Catholic beliefs fine, but don’t disagree with something you think is a Catholic belief and in fact is not. In discussion with Protestants, which I’m considerably involved in, I’ve found that they have been brought up with certain notions and ideas about Catholicism which are simply not true. The same can be said of Catholics about Protestants; such as Protestants don’t believe in Mary and think all Catholics are going to hell. People in this part of the world are also incredibly ignorant of history; having same notions and ideals of which there is no evidence.

This is why I said this thread was particularly good as through discussions such as this one, the issues I’ve mentioned above can be addressed in a positive and mature way.

 

[Esdra]

It is truly remarkable how our prejudices can prevent us from seeing things.

I don’t have prejudices. I know what I am believing and that it’s true.

And you measure this by what standard?

Oh I hate this question… I have been asked that quite often here in CAF. I am sorry I can’t answer it… - Even if I say through the Holy Bible, there will again come another question…

Again you have been given misinformation. The Church did, in fact, reform. However, where Luther and Zwingli went wrong (among other things) is that they mistakely thought that since people are always in need of Reform, they could improve over the doctrine of Jesus Christ. For that reason, they created their own doctrines, which represent a significant departure from what the Apostles believed and taught.

Yes it did. But only because of the Reformators and only in Vaticanum I and II. And from many points of Vaticanum II they went away again. At least my dad told me so - this is also the reason why he doesn’t like the Catholic Church too much. He really loved the teachings of Vaticanum II and is really interested in the unifying of the Churches (ONE Christianity). Some things I write here I know from him. I once told Him that he is sometime quite reformatoric in his approach for being a Catholic Theologian - and he says that he knows about that. He even seems proud to be so.

Actually what Zwingli and Luther taught is not that far away from the teaching of the RCC!

What you are claiming is that not all of what the Apostles believed and taught was right. You are claiming that Luther and Zwingli came along 1600 years after the Apsotles, and created doctrine that was more “right” than what Jesus taught His followers.

What the apostles taught is correct to 100% (and is to be found in the New Testament. Which is inspired an inerrant as we all know!)! But what their “succeders” taught not always. This is one of the reason why I can’t be Catholic.

to be continued…

 

[minkymurph]

WHAT? I reject the scriptures? You know that I am emergant Anabaptist, don’t you? And, as you also were an Anabaptist, you know that the Holy Bible is inspired and inerrant, don’t you? I just said that Jesus didn’t write down anything. But does this mean what the Apostles and evangelists wrote down about hims is wrong or so?

OK, I’m going to set myself up here for an onslaught.

I believe Scripture is the inspired word of God.

What I don’t believe is every interpretation of scripture is inspired. This is impossible as there are so many intepretations and views in relation to how the Bible should be read that are contradictory to one another.

This is why I believe the only valid interpretation of Scripture is one which is Spirit inspired as only a Spirit inspired interpretation is inerrant. The question is, which one? Even the Pope, who claims infallibility, doesn’t claim he can interpret every verse from Genesis to Revelation infallibly.

I’m going to further than that. There are errors in scripture.

The errors are not in the divine message of the Bible, but in the translation. Bible scholars both Protestant and Catholic have established this and established it alters the meaning of the text. In addition, the authors of the Bible never intended people to believe it was inerrant. St. Paul states scriputure is inspired yes, but he does not claim the authors of the Bible were above putting their own interpretation on events. How could such authors be writing under divine inspiration? Depends how you understand the term ‘inspiration’ and what you believe God wanted the authors to tell us. I don’t think it was written to tell us those who are guided or inspired by the Holy Spirit can never make a theological error. Perhaps God wanted us to know that they could, so future generations would search for the true image of God and a true knowledge of the divine as opposed to thinking they could read what someone else said under inspiration and know as much as they needed to about God. However, I would stress this is personal opinion which no one else is obliged to accept.

I believe there are divine truths in the Bible, but they are nuanced, (hidden). This is why I believe we need guidance in determining what they are.

 

[Esdra]

Guanophore:

The ancient Church was built by Jesus upon the foundation of the Apostles and prophets. It was (and still is) Catholic.

I answered parts of this statement already. We are in agreement that the first Christians were Catholic - but not in our modern meaning of it. The apostles were sort of missionars to spread the Gospel - and the one church built by Jesus is the community of all believers.

So, why are you here at CAF?

Also answered this one already. To learn - to contrast and compare believes. I don’t consider becoming Catholic. I don’t know why people keep thinking that!

There is a Catholic hymn with these lines, yes. It is not an excuse to depart from the Truth so that everyone who has embraced heresies can feel; warm and fuzzy.

This is the “stubborness” my dad dislikes the CC for. Most protestant Chuches are not heresies. It’s just a a bit other glance on things. For me i.e. Lutherans isn’t a heresy at all! Again I like to point out to the Big Tent, 'though.

It is curious why it is so important to you that you deny the Word of God. I wonder what it would mean for your faith if you had to admit that Jesus founded a visible Church on earth?

He did (for the third time writing that) - the community of (all) believers (accepting the Nicene Creed - I write that because the JWs for instance don’t accept it. It’s to distinguish between the Body of Christ and sects!) **is **the one, visible Church founded by Christ.

And what makes you think the catholic church rejects anyone?

I have just this feeling. Especially in countries where they are the majority. They are considered as sect and people are afraid of sects and the whole village will talk about you (a political village/town is normally a parish in those countries!)

One can love people and not love the falsehoods they have embraced. I think some of the heresies you have accepted are despicable. I think most of it is not your fault. You have been misled.

They are no heresies. And I also haven’t accepted them - I found out for myself! And I haven’t been misled. You treat me as if I were a Anabaptist minister. I am not, I am only since Summer 2009 a reborn Christian. Most of the things however, I write here, I knew even before I knew that one has to be reborn and that something like Anabaptists exist!

It is sad. However, to condemn the Church founded by Christ on the basis of those who have left her does not make any sense.

Well, my problem is that I haven’t seen anyone in real life who didn’t “leave”. Only here in CAF. Especially KathleenG and Cinnette and benedictus2 (to name a view) are very special people. I like them. I guess if I had gotten to know such people before I think I woud have never left the Church…
On the other hand, I can’t be in a Church where so many people act the exact opposite way the Church teaches. (Remember 80% of all Austrians are at least on the paper Catholic!!)

No. both make excuses for refusing to accept the successor of Peter.

Did you know that the Russian Orthodox Church calls itself “prawoslawnaja tserkow” = which means the church with the true teaching?
How can they call themselves like that, since they reject the pope? Even the Catholic Church doesn’t have the true teaching according to them?!
Do you consider them as a heresy?
Not that you think I consider becoming Orthodox. Definitely not, especially since all Orthodox churches here in Austria use their national language and I think my Russian would be too poor for that! No, I would go the the Old Catholic/Utrecht Church, the Lutheran Church or the Methodist Church, if I were fed up with the Evangelicals. (Who knows maybe this happens once upon a time?)

All of us will be praying that you come to the knowledge of the Truth, and return to the visible Church founded by Christ.

I won’t. You can pray for me, but please NOT that I return to the Catholic Church. I won’t. (see also above!)

You may have been baptized Catholic, but clearly you were never Catholic in faith. It is clear that you know very little about the Catholic faith.

I know - I never was Catholic and I never will be. Although I got to know my former faith better now in this forum. Nevertheless this doesn’t mean that it’s true!
What you all seem to expect…

In Christ,
Esdra

 

[Esdra]

NO, Esdra, they are not “peanuts”. when Jesus commanded the Apostles to teach all that He commanded, He was not referring to “peanuts”.

OF course he wasn’t referring to peanuts but to His word now standing in the Holy Bible. This is what the EOC the Catholic Churches (although together with ST and the Catechism) as well as most protestant churches do - teaching it.

“What is truth?”, asked Pontius Pilate Jesus. And I tell you: Jesus is the truth! All the other things we are “arguing” here are about are more or less peanuts.

You will be in our prayers. I do hope you will continue to learn. Sometimes you don’t seem very open minded.

I AM willing to learn - but this doesn’t mean that I have to accept all of the Catholic doctrines, doesn’t it? Why do you always expect that? (Refer to prayer my previous post!)

The burning and killing of people who don’t embrace the Catholic faith is not consistent with the Teaching of Jesus. People who do such things have departed from the faith.

I know. See? - this is another reason why I can’t become Catholic!

People departing from the faith does not invalidate the faith. That is like saying that, since Judas betrayed Christ, nothing Jesus taught had any value.

I have people in my Anabaptist denomination that don’t depart from faith. It has the truth in it. So why should I go to the Catholic Church which is (sadly enough) full of people departing from their faith. I already wrote to you - the Catholic Church is too big to administer. I don’t know about the situation in the US, but here in (Central) Europe only very few people haven’t departed from their faith (and they are called bigots, fundamentalists and fanatics by the other “Catholics”! And are loved at.)

You believe this because you lack understanding of the nature of the guidance. the guidance of the HS does not prevent men from committing sins. It protects the Church from error. People who leave the Teaching of the Church do not benefit from the gift of infallibility.

For me the burning of witches, the crusades and the persecution (ending often with death) of Reformator/Heretics is a GREAT error. For you not?

And what happened?

Well, in His mercy he turned again to it through the righteous people.

It is delightful that you have found one small aspect of history that is correct. There is so much of your studies that have led you astray.

Yes, see, I am open to see the truths in the Catholic Church. I don’t condem it…
No I wasn’t led astray. This is the truth according to the Holy Bible, the infaillable word of God.

Yes, you did. You admitted that you use the standard of heretics.

OF course, what did you think? I made it up? Well, in a way I did - but through god’s leading via the HS I came to the same conclusion.

This is probably the basis of all the other theological problems from which you are suffering.

Well, I think it would have been better to write that I don’t believe in the Apostolic Succession… Some of these succedors did go wrong I am sure… As I already have admitted that the Apostles were right in their teachings.

Of course, but the believers do not separate themselves from the Apostles!

Well, I don’t seperate from the Apostles but from their successors.
I, btw, also didn’t - otherwise I would have to reject the Holy Bible and become and Agnostic or Atheist!

You have a deficient notion of salvation.

As far as I know this is the protestant notion of salvation…

Yes, there are heresies the Protestants accept, and some they reject.

Well, with Heresies I meant denominations, Chuches. So the Mormon Churches are heresies in our eyes as well as the JWs as well as Christian Science and similar ones.

I am sure He loves you. He wants to guide you into all Truth, which is found in His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. It is a visible Church which He founded, and over which He appointed a teaching authority to protect you from the heresies into which you have presently fallen.

I AM in the Holy, Catholic (universal), apostolic (bible-believing and so also believing the apostles), visible Church (of all believers)!

No, Esdra. The HS does not guide single persons in the opposite direction from where He has already led the church. Why would He do such a thing?

Because in same ways this church you mentioned went wrong… That’s the reason why he does such things! Note, not the Apostles went wrong, but some of their successors!

The devil wants to increase the divisions in the 'Body, and to separate you from the Apostolic faith. However, it seems to me that you are quite sincere in your quest, and that you sincerely believe that the heresies you have embraced are the Truth.

I AM in the apostolic faith and in the Body of Christ which consists of the community of believers = the visible Church Jesus had established on earth.

In Christ,
Esdra

 

[Esdra]

Well, of course! How else can they justify their refusal to submit to the authority appointed by Christ, and to reject the visible Church built by Christ?

But, this interpreteation is a modern innovation, and is not consistent with what the Apostles believed.

Okay, I must admit this is what our pastor told me! One of the few things I originally got from the Anabaptist Church.

[qoute]For some reason you don’t believe the Catholic Church is open to all. I wonder why that is?

I wonder why you think that Apostolic succesion does not exist?

Do I believe that? Uhm, probably I again used false vocabulary that you come to this conclusion… Principially the Catholic Churches ARE open to all. But because they don’t have open Eucharist they are in some ways also not! You have to become a member and accept all their teachings (at least in theory). By the way the Old Catholic Church/Utrecht HAS open Eucharist. You can do anything there without joining (although it is recommended). - Oh, I really wish the RCC would be more like the Old Catholic Church…

Well, I simply don’t believe in it… So many errant people were successors of the Apostles. And this is the reason why the Catholic Church is quite far away from the Ancient, apostolic, teaching.
Btw, I only got to know this term here in CAF. I have never heared about it before…

This is possibly the most damaging heresy of the Reformation.

But it’s nevertheless true! ST =Tthe New Testament. So the Holy Bible is the ONE TEACHING of Christianity.

In which case, you would still be missing out on unity with the successor of Peter.

Yeah, I know. I think I have already written about that. But better one point lacking than two or three! Btw rinnie had forgotten to write about the papcy as criterion to the One, True Church!

No.  There is unity in the Church founded by Christ.

Correct, which is the community of all believers!

God gave humans free will, and active imaginations. It is possible for a person to believe they have been led away from his Holy Bride by the HS. It is possible for a person to embrace heresies, and believe they are “right”. It is possible for a person to delude himself into thinking there is more than one “Catholic” church. It is not true, but people are free to believe these products of imagination.

Halleluja. God is great. I love his freedom of will towards us!
Otherwise we wouldn’t be here writing about Religion!

God bless you, guanophore,
Esdra

 

[Esdra]

Concerning pagan beliefs, there is another way of looking at it.

We cannot assume that God did not reveal Himself to anyone, in any way, other than through the Nation of Israel. God’s Revelation to man can only be understood in the divine sense through the person of Jesus Christ and therefore, Christ revealed the true meaning of pagan beleifs; such as blood sacrifice which was a feature of many pagan rituals, all be it for non-Christian reasons. Does the belief in the sacrifice of Christ stem from a pagan ritual? Atheists would argue it does.

The question is: did the pagans have Christian beliefs they did not fully understand, or did Christians come to fully understand the true meaning of pagan rituals and beliefs following the outpouring of the Holy Spirit?

On another point, I have often said to persons of other Christian denominations if you disagree with Catholic beliefs fine, but don’t disagree with something you think is a Catholic belief and in fact is not. In discussion with Protestants, which I’m considerably involved in, I’ve found that they have been brought up with certain notions and ideas about Catholicism which are simply not true. The same can be said of Catholics about Protestants; such as Protestants don’t believe in Mary and think all Catholics are going to hell. People in this part of the world are also incredibly ignorant of history; having same notions and ideals of which there is no evidence.

This is why I said this thread was particularly good as through discussions such as this one, the issues I’ve mentioned above can be addressed in a positive and mature way.

First of all this is post is very interesting. Thank you.
Second although I am a Protestant I don’t think they are going to hell. I think also my Anabaptists brethern think so (it seems that evangelicalism is very different than it is in the US!). They have part of the truth, but no the full. But since our God is a merciful God he definitely won’t throw them into Hell, for the sake of His son Christ Jesus in whom ALL Christians believe in.
Confer:

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. "
(Jn 3:16-18)

In Christ,
Esdra

 

[benedictus2]

I don’t have prejudices. I know what I am believing and that it’s true.

Sorry Esdra, but I know for a fact that some of what you believe are outright lies. I don’t know where you got the information from but they are lies. If you got it from a professional anti-catholic site then I suggest you do some research elsewhere.

Considering the number of people who tell you otherwise (and are quite able to back their backup their statement) then I strongly suggest having an open mind and actually reading what we provide.

 

[benedictus2]

First of all this is post is very interesting. Thank you.
Second although I am a Protestant I don’t think they are going to hell. I** think also my Anabaptists brethern think so (it seems that evangelicalism is very different than it is in the US!). They have part of the truth, but no the full.** But since our God is a merciful God he definitely won’t throw them into Hell, for the sake of His son Christ Jesus in whom ALL Christians believe in.

I find that statement interesting. A protestant claiming that other protestannts from a different country who happen to be in the same denomination do not have all of the truth that the same denomination in Europe possses.

 

[minkymurph]

In answer to posts concerning the past actions of the Catholic Church, I would like to make the following points:

If you don’t want to be part of a religion on the basis that they burned or persecuted people, you could not in all conscience be part of any religion.

Let’s get rid of the following notions: T
The Catholic Church was the only Church to burn and persecute people.
The Catholic Church were more enthusiastic about burning and persecuting people than other Churches.
No one in our Church burned anyone (this may be true) and only a handful of naughty individuals persecuted people.
People in our religion have their faults but their faults are not as bad as the faults of people in other religions.

A religious group that has never persecuted anyone violence means may exist. However, a religious group that has never persecuted individuals by non-violent or more subtle means does not exist. I wonder if burning people was permitted by law today, would only Catholics be engaged in it?

I once read of a religious group who did not force young people to become fully fledged members of their community, it had to be their own decision and they had to make it of their own free will. This was true. However, if they decided not to become fully fledged members, no one could see them, or speak them ever again, including their parents. I suppose you could argue it beats burning.

The reason why so much is know about the Catholic Church is because there were people in the Church who spoke out against and it’s documented.

Now why is documented evidence less readily available were other religious denominations are concerned and fewer people seem to speak out? Is that because there is nothing going on? Admittedly, I have a suspicious mind and if anyone wants to correct me and provide evidence that contradicts my statement, I’ll be happy to take it on board.

There’s one thing I will say about the Catholic Church. When they get slagged off they take it on the chin as part and parcel of being who they are. They don’t publically slag off other faiths in an attempt to make it look like their religion is better than anyone else’s and as the people in it are better behaved, they must be the right religion. The people of God are a motley crew and a bunch of serious sinners. Which is why I can consider myself to be a child of God. The difference is, children of God desire holiness,
desire God’s forgiveness, and continue to follow Christ; not in spite of their sin, but because of it.

 

[benedictus2]

Esdra; 6748565:

Why do you use present tense? Of course they aren’t pagan cults anymore! They WERE pagan cults!! (As for All Saints/AllDeads day it is *Samhein *btw!) And they were implemented in Catholicism prior 312 AD!!

Esdra,
Since you are the one making this claim, I challenge you to prove.
And please give sources when you do.
Otherwise, unless your source is the like of Jack Chick, then that throws the credibility out of the window straight away.

 

[guanophore]

Actually I meant somewhen POST 312 AD - not prior. I again jumbled up words…

What is it, exactly, that you believe happened in 312 AD, and why do you think it? I hope you read Hesychios’ fine post explaining the facts about this date.

Of course they are! Even my dad, who is a catholic theologian agrees with me on that point. They were former pagan cults or feasts!

I am sure you admire your dad, and it is great that he is a student of theology, but you seem to be laboring under some misapprehension that theologians are always right in how they perceive things. This is just not the case.

Yes, of course they were FORMER PAGAN cults and feasts. And most of the Gentiles to whom Paul preached were FORMER PAGAN practitioners.The reason Paul preached to them and baptized them after the HS quicked their heart is because no PAGAN worshippers were allowed in the church! They had to be converted. In the same way, the pagan feasts were converted. You cannot mix light with darkness. It is a violation of the first commandment to practice paganism.

I am not here for becoming a Catholic again. I am here to compare and contrast believes. This is also the reason why I only post in the Non-Catholic Forum. I am there to learn something new. - Because I always have been interested in Religion. (And I am also here to improve my English. You won’t believe how much vocabulary I have learned so far here! )

This is excellent. And, if it is true, which I hope it is, please consider receiving what is given to you . No one here will expect you to become Catholic, but we do expect you to LEARN what Catholics actually believe. Consider setting aside what you have been given in the past, and just hear what we have to say. If is very frustrating when you keep insisting that you KNOW, especially when your posts reflect so much misinformation.

Well, but this is what happened in my opinion… Although you keep saying that through the ST i.e. the assumption of Mary into heaven is evident.

Great. So long as you realize that this is your opinion, and that is is not at all consistent with the facts, or the history of the Christian faith. We all affirm your right to have an opinion, no matter how divergent it may be from reality.

The Assumption of Mary into heaven is certainly evident.

I think you meant, though that her assumption is evidence that the saints took the place of Pagan Gods. If you are willing to study the Assumption, it will become clear t you that this is not the case. Mary is a creature. She can do no more than God allows of His creatures. She is not a goddess, she is not divine, and she was not assumed because she is divine. She is a partaker of the divine nature by grace, not by birthright. This is probably a topic for another thread. Search Assumption. There are a lot of them here. The misunderstandings of the faith you are bringing are well known to us here.

But that’s true. I am to 100& convinced about that!

Had you ever considered that, just because you are 100% convinced about something that might not necessarily make it true?

Do you realize that no eye has seen, nor ear heard, what God has in store for those who love Him? However, if you think that becoming sanctified and perfected in His grace equates to becoming a “god” then you are gravely mistaken.

Good. :) So you know what I mean.

Yes. I am familiar with most of the lies that are perpetrated about the Catholic faith. So far, all the ones you have posted are well known.

Well, for me it is the same. God is against worshipping (or in the Catholic sense: honoring) a "Queen of Heaven". So why should he allow it all of a sudden?

I am glad that you realize it is “for me” that you think these things. You are certainly entitled to your opinion about Mary, worship, and the Pagan goddess. It is very important at this point that you are clear that how you interpret what you are reading is “for me” only, and that it is not anywhere near what the church believes and teaches.

God is against the worship of any but Himself (first commandment). He does not allow idolatry. Catholics do not worship Mary, as that would be idolatry.

However, if He were opposed to honoring a real Queen of Heaven, He would not have planned this out from before the foundations of the world. He already knew what He would do, before He created Adam and Eve. I hardly call that “all of the sudden”, would you?

I think ALL denominations and Churches (except Monophysites maybe) will agree with you in the point that Jesus is the “God on Earth”. This is what Christianity all about, isn’t it?

Yes! Glad you have retained this portion of the Apostolic faith. So, are we in agreement that someone falsely claiming to be God on Earth does not negate there being an authentic God on earth?

 

[rinnie]

Yes Esdra I do believe that if the CC is in communion with Rome they are indeed the Catholic Church. But what I do not understand if they are in communion with Rome and have the same teaching’s what makes them different in your opinion?

Now yes I do agree that we have to have all 7 Sacraments. You claim that you only have 2. I am curious what is it about the remaining 5 that you reject? And why? And what makes you think they we do not need them?

Because in order to be part of the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church do you not agree that ALL of the Apostles teachings must be practiced and taught to have the fullness of the truth?