What Causes People To Attack?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Annunciata
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
yet you still make nothing of ‘working out your salvation with fear and trembling’.

ok, i acknowledge that you’re not being argumentative. i do want to know - why are you here? would you give us a clear answer to that question? do you want to learn more about the catholic faith, or are you on a crusade to lead us away from the RCC? if you believe that we’re going to heaven anyway, why bother?

i don’t know if you already know this, and are ignoring it, or if you just don’t know. but the church teaches that those who are outside of the catholic church can be saved due to the mercies of God, which we don’t fully understand. protestanst, muslims, agnostics, even atheists can be saved, if God chooses to save them. no one can be saved outside of the work of Christ on the cross, but anyone can be saved BY that work - and we don’t know for sure how wide He spreads that net. i hope and pray that it encompasses EVERYONE. i pray for an empty hell.

just so you know - you’re arguing with an old interpretation. the council of trent made its proclamation before the reformation. there was no such thing as a noncatholic christian back then (like protestants now, i mean). the truth of trent remains intact, while being applied and interpreted to the modern milieu.
 
excatholic,

you talk as if you are some expert on Catholic theology because you have read one of the councils of the Catholic Church. If have met some people who have read some of the councils of the Catholic Church but still know little about what the Catholic Church teaches.

By your posts it seems that you do not know the Catholic theology as well as you think. First of all, an anathema is not a condemnation to Hell. It is a condemnation of the beliefs of a person and consequently a condemnation of that person because they reject the truth of God. It does not condemn them to Hell, it just says that members of the Church are not supposed to socialize with those heretics.
 
'RCC dogma is a lie because I am saved by grace and not by my works
Click to expand...
Thats not exactly the greatest reason for saying the Catholic dogma is a lie. Why don’t you read the Catholic Catechism before you make a post like this. Also if you read the council of Trent you would know that it anathametized those who said you are saved by works.
CANON I.-If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema.

CANON II.-If any one saith, that the grace of God, through Jesus Christ, is given only for this, that man may be able more easily to live justly, and to merit eternal life, as if, by free will without grace, he were able to do both, though hardly indeed and with difficulty; let him be anathema. Council of Trent 6th session history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct06.html
Click to expand...
Here is what the Catechism says of Grace. There are more paragraphs than this in the CCC but it would take up too much space.
1996 Our justification comes from the grace of God. Grace is favor, the free and undeserved help that God gives us to respond to his call to become children of God, adoptive sons, partakers of the divine nature and of eternal life.46

1997 Grace is a participation in the life of God. It introduces us into the intimacy of Trinitarian life: by Baptism the Christian participates in the grace of Christ, the Head of his Body. As an “adopted son” he can henceforth call God “Father,” in union with the only Son. He receives the life of the Spirit who breathes charity into him and who forms the Church.

1998 This vocation to eternal life is supernatural. It depends entirely on God’s gratuitous initiative, for he alone can reveal and give himself. It surpasses the power of human intellect and will, as that of every other creature.47

1999 The grace of Christ is the gratuitous gift that God makes to us of his own life, infused by the Holy Spirit into our soul to heal it of sin and to sanctify it. It is the *sanctifying *or deifying grace received in Baptism. It is in us the source of the work of sanctification:48
scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c3a2.htm#II
CCC
Click to expand...
What do you make of Matt. 25? What do you make of the story of the Rich man? What do you make of Eph2;10? Why does Christ even condemn the hypocrites, since it is faith alone?

I advise you to read the Catechism and to reread Trent.
 
Jimmy I have read the dogma maybe you should!CANON I.-If any one denieth, that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, are contained truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ; but saith that He is only therein as in a sign, or in figure, or virtue; let him be anathema.

CANON lI.-If any one saith, that, in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denieth that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood-the species Only of the bread and wine remaining-which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation; let him be anathema.

CANON III.-If any one denieth, that, in the venerable sacrament of the Eucharist, the whole Christ is contained under each [Page 83] species, and under every part of each species, when separated; let him be anathema.

CANON IV.-If any one saith, that, after the consecration is completed, the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ are not in the admirable sacrament of the Eucharist, but (are there) only during the use, whilst it is being taken, and not either before or after; and that, in the hosts, or consecrated particles, which are reserved or which remain after communion, the true Body of the Lord remaineth not; let him be anathema.

CANON V.-If any one saith, either that the principal fruit of the most holy Eucharist is the remission of sins, or, that other effects do not result therefrom; let him be anathema.

CANON VI.-If any one saith, that, in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, is not to be adored with the worship, even external of latria; and is, consequently, neither to be venerated with a special festive solemnity, nor to be solemnly borne about in processions, according to the laudable and universal rite and custom of holy church; or, is not to be proposed publicly to the people to be adored, and that the adorers thereof are idolators; let him be anathema.

CANON VII.-If any one saith, that it is not lawful for the sacred Eucharist to be reserved in the sacrarium, but that, immediately after consecration, it must necessarily be distributed amongst those present; or, that it is not lawful that it be carried with honour to the sick; let him be anathema.

CANON VIII.-lf any one saith, that Christ, given in the Eucharist, is eaten spiritually only, and not also sacramentally and really; let him be anathema.

CANON IX.-If any one denieth, that all and each of Christ’s faithful of both sexes are bound, when they have attained to years of discretion, to communicate every year, at least at Easter, in accordance with the precept of holy Mother Church; let him be anathema.

[Page 84] CANON X.-If any one saith, that it is not lawful for the celebrating priest to communicate himself; let him be anathema.

CANON XI.-lf any one saith, that faith alone is a sufficient preparation for receiving the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist; let him be anathema. And for fear lest so great a sacrament may be received unworthily, and so unto death and condemnation, this holy Synod ordains and declares, that sacramental confession, when a confessor may be had, is of necessity to be made beforehand, by those whose conscience is burthened with mortal sin, how contrite even soever they may think themselves. But if any one shall presume to teach, preach, or obstinately to assert, or even in public disputation to defend the contrary, he shall be thereupon excommunicated.

This is a result of refomation and every Christian that is not of the Roman rite and does not accept this dogma is anathema (damned) Check the dates this was canonized and you will see it was during reformation.
 
Jimmy: When something becomes canon law in the RCC it never changes over the years. You mean to tell me the church has reversed its position and now I am able to go to heaven? Gee thanks! I thought it was God’s job to decide who was going to heaven or hell.
 
40.png
excatholic:
Jimmy: When something becomes canon law in the RCC it never changes over the years. You mean to tell me the church has reversed its position and now I am able to go to heaven? Gee thanks! I thought it was God’s job to decide who was going to heaven or hell.
Click to expand...
You thought wrong, friend. God (or the Church, for that matter) never decides to send someone to Hell. We do that to ourselves.
 
40.png
Annunciata:
Why do anti-Catholics seek to attack the Catholic Faith?

Why do some Catholics attack the different ways of worshiping within the Faith?
Click to expand...
Righteous indignation?
 
 
John of Woking:
Righteous indignation?
Click to expand...
You actually think that righteous indignation causes people to attack?..:hmmm: Have to think about that one for awhile cause I wouldn’t attack a person for their beliefs just because I thought they were wrong. I would try to find a common ground…and yes sometimes fraternal correction may be needed…but attack? I don’t think so. God Bless, Annunciata
p.s. thanks for bringing this thread back on topic
 
40.png
excatholic:
Jimmy: When something becomes canon law in the RCC it never changes over the years. You mean to tell me the church has reversed its position and now I am able to go to heaven? Gee thanks! I thought it was God’s job to decide who was going to heaven or hell.
Click to expand...
First of all canon law can be changed, you are quite wrong.

Second, canon law does not tell anyone they are going to hell, it talks about how to govern the church mainly. It tells priests what do do in certain instances.

Third, as I have already said, an anathema does not condemn someone to hell. It Condemns there theology and it basically teaches people not to associate with them until they realize there error.
 
You repeat this error through your posts, so I will repeat the answer, an anathema does not condemn you to hell. It is a rejection of a person and there beliefs by the church. Anathema is defined as
**1. **A formal ecclesiastical ban, curse, or excommunication.**2. **A vehement denunciation; a curse: “the sound of a witch’s anathemas in some unknown tongue” Nathaniel Hawthorne.
**3. **One that is cursed or damned.
**4. **One that is greatly reviled, loathed, or shunned: "Essentialismhttp://img.thefreedictionary.com/hm/GIF/mdash.gifa belief in natural, immutable sex differenceshttp://img.thefreedictionary.com/hm/GIF/mdash.gifis anathema to postmodernists, for whom sexuality itself, along with gender, is a ‘social construct’" Wendy Kaminer.
Click to expand...
thefreedictionary.com/anathema

So if you are an anathema you are a curse.
So everytime the council said let him be anathema, they were saying let him be a curse.
": If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.
" (1Co 16:22);
Click to expand...
This is from the KJV bible. Apparently Paul used the word anathema. The KJV usually renders the term accursed.
%between%
ANATHEMA
a-nath’-e-ma (anathema): This word occurs only once in the King James Version, namely, in the phrase “Let him be anathema. Maranatha” (1Co 16:22); elsewhere the King James Version renders anathema by “accursed” (Ro 9:3; 1Co 12:3; Ga 1:8,9), once by “curse” (Ac 23:12). Both words–anathema and anathema–were originally dialectical variations and had the same connotation, namely, offering to the gods. The non-Attic form–anathema–was adopted in the Septuagint as a rendering of the Hebrew cherem (see ACCURSED), and gradually came to have the significance of the Hebrew word–“anything devoted to destruction.” Whereas in the Greek Fathers anathema–as cherem in rabbinic Hebrew-- came to denote excommunication from society, in the New Testament the word has its full force. In common speech it evidently became a strong expression of execration, and the term connoted more than physical destruction; it invariably implied moral worthlessness. In Ro 9:3 Paul does not simply mean that, for the sake of his fellow-countrymen, he is prepared to face death, but to endure the moral degradation of an outcast from the kingdom of Christ. In 1Co 12:3 the expression, “Jesus is anathema”–with its suggestion of moral unfitness–reaches the lowest depths of depreciation, as the expression, “Jesus is Lord,” reaches the summit of appreciation. reference-guides.com/isbe/A/ANATHEMA/
Click to expand...
 
joehar said:
Click to expand...
    • “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” / I Peter 2:5 (speaking of all Christians being a priesthood)]
  • **Prayers to dead saints** (see [Deuteronomy 18:10-12](http://www.christiananswers.net/bible/deu18.html#10) - "Let no one be found among you who... who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD...")
    Offering of masses, prayers and rosaries for those who suffer in “purgatory” (see Hebrews 9:27 - “…Man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment.”)

    these items named are some of the reasons. None of this is in the word of God. (KJV)

    If it can be shown or proven in the word of God , then i will believe .
    Who ever said that a priest was a mediator between man and God. The priest is listening and God forgives the sins. The priest confers the blessing at the end. Christ gave the apostles this ability(Matt16 and Matt18).

    I wouldn’t say the saints are dead, they are more alive now than you or me or anyone on earth. Since Jesus spoke to Moses and Elijah during the transfiguration(Matt17;1-8), we can safely assume that they are not dead. So instead of dead saints, you should just saints or something else like that.

    Who said that purgatory is a second death. Of course you are destined to die only once. But we are told that nothing unclean shall enter Heaven(Rev21;27). Therefore we must all be pure and clear from all sin when we get to Heaven. If there is no purgatory then all of us will go to hell because I can tell you that very very few are completely clear and have no attachment to sin. If you are that free I would love to know how you accomplished it because I am not. Purgatory is an act of mercy by God to give us a chance to enter Heaven.

    Most protestants have this idea that purgatory is a place where Jesus’s sacrifice is made better or something. That is not purgatory. Purgatory is where we are freed from all attachment to sin and made pure.

    That shows a lack of compassion to say you shouldn’t pray for a loved one who is being tested like that.
 
I thought the topic of this thread was “what causes people to attack” – and not lets all attack each other.

If you ask me, it looks like this thread was hijacked. But if those who feel like attacking others can explain why they attack, perhaps this thread will return to its original purpose.

I am in RCIA – so I am just learning the Catholic faith.
Anathema is not the same as “going to hell”.
The on-line (but out-of-date) Catholic Encyclopedia is as good a place as any to find an explanation.
See newadvent.org/cathen/01455e.htm
Anathema – literally, placed on high, suspended, set aside
Those in a state of anathema are simply not in a state of communion with the Catholic Church. Non-Catholic dictionaries are not the best reference for looking up Catholic terminologies.
Do you need to be in communion with the Catholic Church to go to heaven? **No. **And Catholic tradition has long taught this even if some are deaf or hard of hearing. Is being in communion a good thing? Yes, I think so. And I think it is best to be Catholic. I am in RCIA. My thinking could be in error.

But I note as examples that there are canonized saints who were catechumens when they died.

St. Thyrsos, who was still a catechumen, was nonetheless eager for martyrdom. He was sentenced to cruel tortures and torments after refusing to offer sacrifice to the idols. Citing the words of the Prophet Jeremiah (Jer. 2:27), he ridiculed those who worshipped wood and stone. St. Thyrsos is recognized by both the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches.

And yesterday, November 11, was the feast day of Saint Martin of Tours. Before Saint Martin was baptized, he saw a freezing beggar. He cut his mantle in two and gave half to the beggar. That night Saint Martin dreamed that he saw Jesus wearing the half mantle he had given the beggar. Jesus said to the angels and saints that surrounded him, “See! This is the mantle that Martin, yet a catechumen, gave me.” Saint Martin did get Baptized after his dream.

Similarly one of the earliest doctors of the Church St. Ambrose was appointed Bishop of Milan even before he was baptized – and I need to be careful because Ambrose was only trying to quiet down those a bitter argument at the time. As a non-Catholic, I was taught that being overly legalistic is one symptom of not being filled with the Holy Spirit. Many Pharisees in Jesus’s time were certainly overly legalistic and they were often rebuked by our Lord.

Instead of greatly arguing with somebody who disagrees, it is best to pray and expect God to work on us all from the inside. God does His work better than we can. We can always only help those who will accept our help. No matter what Christian denomination we belong to at the time.
40.png
excatholic:
I’ll see you in heaven weather you like it or not.
Click to expand...
Excatholic: I assume that you are following your conscience and that you observe the Sabbath. And I have so many friends and relatives who are Christian but not Roman Catholic. In fact, I am not yet in “full communion” with the Catholic Church – although I desire that it will become so (and it will take time in my case). So I do hope you are right that we will all meet again someday in such a better place.
 
40.png
jmm08:
I thought the topic of this thread was “what causes people to attack” – and not lets all attack each other.

If you ask me, it looks like this thread was hijacked. But if those who feel like attacking others can explain why they attack, perhaps this thread will return to its original purpose.
Click to expand...
Gee, Jmm, do you think they’ll get the hint?
I was thinking it…thanks for saying it! God Bless, Annunciata:)
 
40.png
jimmy:
First of all canon law can be changed, you are quite wrong.

Second, canon law does not tell anyone they are going to hell, it talks about how to govern the church mainly. It tells priests what do do in certain instances.

Third, as I have already said, an anathema does not condemn someone to hell. It Condemns there theology and it basically teaches people not to associate with them until they realize there error.
Click to expand...
Read your dogma Jimmy, it says let them be anathema not let their theology be anathema.
 
New Testament writers warned that the Lord’s church would experience corruption (2 Thess. 2:1-12; 1 Tim. 4:1-3; 2 Tim. 4:3-4; 2 Pet. 2:1-3).

“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth” (1 Tim. 4:1-3).

The apostle Paul cautioned that some elders would bring error into the Lord’s church (Acts 20:28-30).

The first church – the one that Jesus built – still exists today. It is to this church – his church – that our Lord adds the saved. The church of Christ can be found anywhere religious people abandon the creeds and denominations of men and practice the New Testament alone. Dear Friend, are you a member of the first church – the one that Jesus built?
 
New Testament writers warned that the Lord’s church would experience corruption (2 Thess. 2:1-12; 1 Tim. 4:1-3; 2 Tim. 4:3-4; 2 Pet. 2:1-3).

“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth” (1 Tim. 4:1-3).
I remeber during holy periods not being able to eat beef.

The apostle Paul cautioned that some elders would bring error into the Lord’s church (Acts 20:28-30).

The first church – the one that Jesus built – still exists today. It is to this church – his church – that our Lord adds the saved. The church of Christ can be found anywhere religious people abandon the creeds and denominations of men and practice the New Testament alone. Dear Friend, are you a member of the first church – the one that Jesus built?
 
40.png
jmm08:
I thought the topic of this thread was “what causes people to attack” – and not lets all attack each other.

If you ask me, it looks like this thread was hijacked. But if those who feel like attacking others can explain why they attack, perhaps this thread will return to its original purpose.

I am in RCIA – so I am just learning the Catholic faith.
Anathema is not the same as “going to hell”.
The on-line (but out-of-date) Catholic Encyclopedia is as good a place as any to find an explanation.
See newadvent.org/cathen/01455e.htm
Anathema – literally, placed on high, suspended, set aside
Those in a state of anathema are simply not in a state of communion with the Catholic Church. Non-Catholic dictionaries are not the best reference for looking up Catholic terminologies.
Do you need to be in communion with the Catholic Church to go to heaven? **No. **And Catholic tradition has long taught this even if some are deaf or hard of hearing. Is being in communion a good thing? Yes, I think so. And I think it is best to be Catholic. I am in RCIA. My thinking could be in error.

But I note as examples that there are canonized saints who were catechumens when they died.

St. Thyrsos, who was still a catechumen, was nonetheless eager for martyrdom. He was sentenced to cruel tortures and torments after refusing to offer sacrifice to the idols. Citing the words of the Prophet Jeremiah (Jer. 2:27), he ridiculed those who worshipped wood and stone. St. Thyrsos is recognized by both the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches.

And yesterday, November 11, was the feast day of Saint Martin of Tours. Before Saint Martin was baptized, he saw a freezing beggar. He cut his mantle in two and gave half to the beggar. That night Saint Martin dreamed that he saw Jesus wearing the half mantle he had given the beggar. Jesus said to the angels and saints that surrounded him, “See! This is the mantle that Martin, yet a catechumen, gave me.” Saint Martin did get Baptized after his dream.

Similarly one of the earliest doctors of the Church St. Ambrose was appointed Bishop of Milan even before he was baptized – and I need to be careful because Ambrose was only trying to quiet down those a bitter argument at the time. As a non-Catholic, I was taught that being overly legalistic is one symptom of not being filled with the Holy Spirit. Many Pharisees in Jesus’s time were certainly overly legalistic and they were often rebuked by our Lord.

Instead of greatly arguing with somebody who disagrees, it is best to pray and expect God to work on us all from the inside. God does His work better than we can. We can always only help those who will accept our help. No matter what Christian denomination we belong to at the time.

Excatholic: I assume that you are following your conscience and that you observe the Sabbath. And I have so many friends and relatives who are Christian but not Roman Catholic. In fact, I am not yet in “full communion” with the Catholic Church – although I desire that it will become so (and it will take time in my case). So I do hope you are right that we will all meet again someday in such a better place.
Click to expand...
Jimmy I believe the Word of God in Acts16:31 when it says “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.” 1John 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. Now I ask you this, do you believe the Word of God?
 
joehar said:
Click to expand...
    • “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” / I Peter 2:5 (speaking of all Christians being a priesthood)]
  • **Prayers to dead saints** (see [Deuteronomy 18:10-12](http://www.christiananswers.net/bible/deu18.html#10) - "Let no one be found among you who... who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD...")
    Offering of masses, prayers and rosaries for those who suffer in “purgatory” (see Hebrews 9:27 - “…Man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment.”)

    these items named are some of the reasons. None of this is in the word of God. (KJV)

    If it can be shown or proven in the word of God , then i will believe . Joehar: I take it that you have a problem with good people like these being lied to? I have a burden for them also because I was one of them. I believe the Word is the light of the world and that it will stand without the added doctrines of men. Jesus is the Rock and not Peter.
 
40.png
excatholic:
Read your dogma Jimmy, it says let them be anathema not let their theology be anathema.
Click to expand...
Read what I said about anathema. I have been very clear on this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top