True or False about the Pope

[Sgt_Sweaters]

I immediately distrust a site about Catholicism that starts out with quotations from heretics like Martin Luther and Hans Küng.

 

[Trick]

NonDenom:

Hi
You may think that I’m kidding, but I’m not. It is also not meant as sarcasm. This is the first time I have seen this site. The points that they make about infalability seem to make sense and I was wondering what you thought about them.
Thanks

Not much.:nope:

Trick

 

[Celia]

Sgt Sweaters:

I immediately distrust a site about Catholicism that starts out with quotations from heretics like Martin Luther and Hans Küng.

I was thinking the same thing.

 

[Genesis315]

Celia:

I was thinking the same thing.

Hahahaha. Look, heretics doubt Catholic dogma!!! Shocking!!!

 

[koda]

Subrosa:

Taking information about the Pope from this page is like taking information about the Israelies from the Palestinians.

Agree!

a) You can’t argue a point if you don’t have a point.
b) You just can’t reason with some people. They will hold their line no matter how much contradictory evidence you have. It is a waste of time - they are only trying to bait you.

 

[Zooey]

What strikes me right off, is that the quotes on the site are taken out of context…We can never know what a quotation means, as long as it is not quoted as it was written.
The other thing is that this guy seems to think that if he uses extra-large type (thus filling the page), that people will be impressed…But he only has a couple of paragraphs (at best) about any given subject; if he used normal type (say 8-10pt), it would be clear that he is just stating his opinion–which he is entitled to, but the “proof” he boasts of is among the missing–so far as I can see.
Of course, this is typical of most people who indulge in attacking anything they don’t understand; but it is still annoying. I mean, gee, I could put up a site…I grew up in the Methodist tradition, I could construct about John Wesley if I felt like it, that would quote him out of context, too…But that wouldn’t make any of it true. Same thing here: the man is just yelling “I’m right”!..Reminds me of the Emperor’s New Clothes…The emperor had no clothes, the site has no facts. Just opinions.

 

[Zooey]

Sgt Sweaters:

If you want to test it, go to the part of the site that lists churches in your area. It will only list Churches of Christ.

Actually, according to this site, there are ** no** Christian churches in my area…Not for any of the nearby cities, not for a three county area…
Sure will come as a surprise to the folks around here who go to church every single week…What are we going to, if these aren’t churches?? Dance concerts? Sheeeshhh!!!:nope:

 

[NonDenom]

Robert in SD:

Oh yeah, well I ran across *this * site and wanted to know what *you * think about what it says. They *also * seem to have some very good points, and can back it up with scripture.

Vatican

P.S. The above is sarcasm. All kidding aside, I think you need to be a bit more specific with your question.

Hi
I’m a Christian that is always looking for answers to what I believe. I was looking for answers to the belief of the Pope and infalability on other sites as well as this forum. I was seriously looking answers and all I get is a bunch of smart-aleck responces from you people. I hope that you don’t represent the majority of your church.
Nondenom.

 

[Atreyu]

While I agree that some of the comments were sarcastic and not really called for, please just take into consideration our position. To learn about the Papacy from anti-Catholic sources will get you nowhere. Do they represent a different view? Yes. BUT, they make completely fallacious comments about the Papacy, and so it simply isn’t worth trying to get information from there. If you were genuinely interested in finding out about the Papacy, then why not check out the Vatican website, or some of the tracts in the library at Catholic Answers? If you’d already done that, then by now you should be able to refute a lot of those comments made from the link in the original post. If there are specific comments that you are still unsure about, then please post them here and someone will address it.

 

[Joe_Monahan]

Robert in SD:

All kidding aside, I think you need to be a bit more specific with your question.

NonDenom:

I’m a Christian that is always looking for answers to what I believe. I was looking for answers to the belief of the Pope and infalability on other sites as well as this forum. I was seriously looking answers and all I get is a bunch of smart-aleck responces from you people. I hope that you don’t represent the majority of your church.

ND,

I agree that folks have gotten a bit off-topic, but I think you need to recognize three things:

• the site to which you link is familiar to many here as one that is so extreme in the virulence of its anti-Catholicism that they have trouble according it sufficient credibility to even discuss its claims;
• the site is voluminous; and,
• your question, as initially stated,

I ran across this site and wanted to know what you think about what it says. They seem to have some very good points, and can back it up with scripture.

is extremely general and broad, making it very difficult to frame a responsive answer.

May I suggest that you select one of those which you describe as very good points …
back[ed] … up with scripture and let folks have an opportunity to respond to it. Then, if there are additional points that you wish to raise, you can take each of those up in turn. It will make for a more productive discussion and be less frustrating to both you and your respondents.

Joe

p.s., if a genuine discussion evolves, I will likely relocate this thread to the Apologetics forum, where it more properly belongs

 

[scylla]

Nondenom, I specifically answered your question as best as possible given the broadness, would you like more?

I am always happy to discuss anything about Catholicism especially since I feel I probably come from a similar background.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Ignatius]

NonDenom:

I was seriously looking answers and all I get is a bunch of smart-aleck responces from you people…

:ehh: :whacky:

You post a site full of cynical and hate filled site like that and expect us to believe you are seriously inquiring about The Faith?

 

[RobHom]

NonDenom:

Hi All
I ran across this site and wanted to know what you think about what it says. They seem to have some very good points, and can back it up with scripture.
Thanks.

bible.ca/cath-peter=pope.htm

What do I think? The site and its contents are “garbage”. It is the same old tired saw generated by Catholic haters and bashers who have nothing better to do than spew this kind of nonsense and hatemongering. Yet they claim to be “Christians…”?

Their points are invalid, are based on ill conceived misinterpretations and out of context abuse of scriptures.

They can’t back up “squat” with scripture…at least not that drivel they are trying to pander on that “christian” :nope: website. Each and every claim that they have made has been “de-bunked” over and over and over and over…

The reason that you get the responses you have gotten from “Catholics”…is well, put quite simply: Because that site contains the same old tired **** that thousands of other Catholic bashing and hatemongering sites do…so whats new?

 

[scylla]

Nondenom what might be very obvious to us as mis-representation and outright lies might not be so to you, so please just ask what stands out in this link and we will answer it. Many of us have seen this sort of thing in many different ways and it is very clear to most of us how Catholicism is mis-represented.

I have a book here I am writing an essay on which pretty much consists of mis-representation just to attack the Catholic Church. It was one of the things that made me look into it, once I opened my heart to the Church. It just took a little looking into and I was surprised how obvious it is once you know where to look.

The answers you get here are sometimes a result of the frustration of seeing the same things over and over again.

This is like someone saying that Bible Christians worship Bibles and you explain how you do not, yet it keeps getting repeated over and over again. No matter how often you spread the truth and try to explain some people will just keep spreading things like this site. There are some on this board who have gone to this site you posted and tried to correct the mis-representations and just have been rebuffed.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Mystophilus]

NonDenom:

I’m a Christian that is always looking for answers to what I believe. I was looking for answers to the belief of the Pope and infalability on other sites as well as this forum. I was seriously looking answers and all I get is a bunch of smart-aleck responces from you people. I hope that you don’t represent the majority of your church.
Nondenom.

First, may I apologise for the reactions of certain people around here. They are not as hostile as they seem; they are merely guarded. The site which you linked to is the kind of thing created, and often referenced, by Catholicophobes.

Having said that, you might like to consider these as sources for information on infallibility and the papacy. Both of them are quite long, so I will begin with an ultra-brief summation, and you can then ask what you like. By that time, people who, being Catholics, know a great deal more about this than I do will hopefully chime in.

Infallibility is essentially a condensation of the Church’s teaching. When the Church has always taught something, when theologians have agreed upon this one point for many centuries, it is seen as entirely reasonable to state that the given point must be true, and no longer needs to be questioned further. At this point, the particular doctrine can be defined as infallibly true, meaning that it is impossible for it to be wrong. The interesting implication of this is that the Catholic Church effectively suspends such absoluteness of belief regarding all other doctrine, showing an intellectual maturity which few institutions possess.

The papacy developed from Peter’s “first among equals” status with regard to the other disciples, and was conferred thence to the bishops of Rome, who were deemed to follow in his stead. While Peter was not described as a “Pope” during his own lifetime, the Catholic Church recognises him as the first of the line, and, therefore, retrospectively describes him as such, knowing full well that this is somewhat anachronistic in the mere labelling.

As a general rule, be highly sceptical any time that you see a site challenging Catholics on history. They have more of it than the rest of us, and they spend more time studying it, so they can generally trounce us without breaking a sweat.

Questions?

 

[gryskull]

NonDenom:

Hi All
I ran across this site and wanted to know what you think about what it says. They seem to have some very good points, and can back it up with scripture.
Thanks.

bible.ca/cath-peter=pope.htm

They picked all the titles of the Pope except for one…the servant of the servants of christ. I think they intentionally excluded that so as not to portray the pope as someone who serves. I think that site was really biased. They just try to pick and choose some verses in the bible that could apply to their belief and work it against the Pope.

Well, here are some others verses they sure didn’t use:

Matt 16: 17-19 where Jesus gives the keys of the kingdom only to Peter. Only Peter’s name was changed to mean something. From someone who listens or hearkens(Simon) to The Rock(Peter or Cepha).

John 21: 15-19 where Jesus leaves His flock to Peter.

Luke 22 31-32 where Jesus prays only for Peter who is commissioned to strenthen his brothers.

Act 1: 15-20 where it is Peter who speaks in front of over a 120 people to choose the successor of Judas.

Acts 10 9-16 where Peter was the first to see a vision about the Gentiles being included in the fold of Christ.

Act 15: 1-12 Where is was Peter who spoke in behalf of the first council of Jerusalem.

Here are just some of the verses of the bible that they had missed or maybe just plainly didn’t want to include. Verse-picking is not a good way to show that the papacy is wrong. I don’t know of any way to prove that papacy is wrong although you can try though(sorry for the biased statement). The bible is a harmony of books. It is like a symphony where you can hear one music with different instruments. The bible cannot contradict itself because there is only one principal author and that is God.

Plus, with a site like that where you couldn’t even respond to their post… I really have my doubts. They just want to preach, they don’t want to listen.

 

[MiddleBear]

Here are a couple of quotes from two cannonized saints.

" because some have committed spiritual homicide
we should not commit spiritual suicide"

Francis De Sales 1621

"Keep close to the Catholic Church at all times, for the Church alone can give you true peace, since She alone possesses Jesus, the true Prince of Peace, in the Blessed Sacrament. "

•           St. Pio of Pietrelcina (Padre Pio)

So, I say,

Those poor protestants are missing out on the graces being offered by Jesus through His Church, the Catholic Church.

Point them to Catholic Answers web site for sound apologetics.

Also pray the rosary for conversions.

 

[scylla]

I am bumping this, just for the possibility that Nondenom really was sincere in his question.

I for one am confident that there are complete and logical answers, so ask away.

If you are not interested in an answer and just want to portray Catholicism in a bad way or want to make us doubt the faith, then that is ok. We see this all the time (many people post without looking for answers) and I will just continue to browse the forums for more sincere questions.

So again which specific point did they make would you like addressed? Again what might be obvious to us as misrepresentation and bias might just make you doubt Catholicism, I am happy to spend some of my time trying to help out,

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

NonDenom:

Hi All
I ran across this site and wanted to know what you think about what it says. They seem to have some very good points, and can back it up with scripture.
Thanks.

bible.ca/cath-peter=pope.htm

No point, however well backed-up by quotation from the Bible, has anything in its favour if it does not agree with the CC.

That’s why no argument against the CC is worth anything - it can’t be criticised, because its position has been dedcided in advance.

This may look - and be - prejudiced; but, it’s a problem for all forms of Christianity that insist on revelation: no disproof of revealed truth by reason is possible, because revelation is always truthful. So no argument from reason, however cogent, can persuade an Evangelical that the Bible is not inerrant, say.

The only arguments that will be admitted to have weight, are those that don’t sem to threaten the form of religion at its foundation.

 

[gracelife]

NonDenom:

Hi All
I ran across this site and wanted to know what you think about what it says. They seem to have some very good points, and can back it up with scripture.
Thanks.

bible.ca/cath-peter=pope.htm

The article found at the bible.ca website is easy to refute, Was The Apostle Peter A Pope?

**Vicar of Christ **
Catholics do not believe the pope is a replacement for Christ and His life, death, & resurrection. Vicar of Christ does not mean that the pope is a substitute in that sense, but unfortunately it is often misunderstood and mistaught.

The article, *Was The Apostle Peter A Pope?, *suggested that the following verse identified the pope as the son of perdition.

“Let no one deceive you in any way, for the day of the Lord will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and is exalted above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits in the temple of God and gives himself out as if he were God.” 2 Thess. 2:3-4

This verse does not signify the papacy. The pope does not oppose God nor exalt himself above God. The pope is not worshipped as God nor does he pretend to be God. Yes, many Catholics love the Pope dearly, but they do not esteem him higher than God. Going to Mass at a Catholic church readily shows how much God is praised and honored throughout the liturgy. Catholics sing glory to God and pray to God.; not glory or prayers to the Pope. Only God answers prayer.

Primacy of Peter
The primacy of Peter speaks of his place amongst the Apostles, not in relation to Christ. Early church writers did speak of this Peters primacy as an apostle catholic.com/library/Peter_Primacy.asp .

Where is the Pope in the Body of Christ?
Col. 1:18 and Eph. 5:23-25, Catholics would agree. Christ is the head of the church. The pope is part of the body of Christ (as are we).

Christ is the head of the church that he founded. Still, as we have governments and leaders for our civil life, Christ did not leave us without earthly leaders for our spiritual lives. He founded a church.

**Shepherd / Fold: **
Yes, Jesus is the good shepherd.

After Jesus’ resurrection, he met with Peter. Jesus told Peter to: “Feed my lambs, tend my sheep, feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17) Feed, as in give spiritual food, tend to their spiritual needs. Jesus initially gave Peter this job to do. Peter was to feed the young Christians (lambs), take care of and feed the mature Christians (sheep). This is where the idea of Peter as a shepherd comes from. Peter was to tend & feed the “sheep”, as a shepherd would.

Ministers today from all denominations shepherd their congregations.

Mothers and fathers shepherd their children in the faith.

In John 10, Jesus also said there would be one fold. If one fold is not one Church, then what is it?

**Visible church **
“I will entrust to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 16:19). What good would it have done to bestow the keys upon an invisible church?

When there is a problem among Christians that is not solved privately, Christ teaches: “Refer it to the Church” (Matt. 18:17). Today we might ask, which Church?

For example, 2 churches believe in sola scriptura (Bible/Scripture alone), but in one church abortion or divorce is okay. In the other church it is not. So which church does one go to in order get the correct counsel to answer or assist with to those “hot button” issues. Another example, one church says baptism is not regenerative saving, another says it is. Well, if it is saving and you miss out … one’s salvation could be on the line. There are a host of other issues as well, including the nature of The Lord’s Supper, age of baptism, mode of baptism, annoiting of the sick, once saved/always saved, end times, etc. Each group contends that THEY use scripture to back up what they teach. Still, they come up with differing teachings between the various denominations.

While Christians agree, Jesus is the Way, the truth, and the life. If you look closely at what various churches teach, they are teaching different things with regard to some “secondary” issues.

Is that really, okay, with God to differ on these things?

To recognize a visible church, one would need to admit there is one true earthly body that Christ founded and then seek out which church it is. The idea of an invisible church stems from the Reformation.