What teachings would the Catholic Church have to drop for you to be a catholic

[1beleevr]

joe370:Oops, sounds like someone is resding way too much into this postIn prison, we call it “burglarizing our conversation” My, my joe, where did you get the isea that I said that we as Christians do not have to pick up our cross everyday? Perhaps you got a bit overheated, and assumed that’s what I was implying! Even though my flesh is sometime resistant, I do pick up my cross daily; as tedious as it may sometimes seemsJohn 16:33. And yes, among many Christians, the message of Matthew 16:18 is still in debateIf you had been able to understand the context of the statement about “having our passes”, or our “tickets are punched”,John 10:28-29, John 14:2-4, you would know that I meant that because we are covered by the bloodof Christ, we are secure in His care, as you are. Romans 8:31-39 And I am proud to say that I attend The Way Fellowship, a Christ-centerd, non-denominational church:thumbsup:I am involved in street ministry, community outreaches; which includes feeding the homeless, and setting up Bible studies and other activities for adults and children alike(Matthew 25:31-46) Tell me Joe, when was the last time that you witnessed to someone, any one about Christ, and not your religion? Is Protestantism necessary? Good question, but you’re asking the wrong person, I’m denomination blind! I guess you missed the part about “religion” being a despicable word! Like it or not Joe, by whatever means you catholics want to deem it, we sre a part of the Body of Christ:thumbsup:

 

[1beleevr]

W-o-w, Joe, very impressive! So you haven’t ever heard of the “still,small voice”? And Jesus sent out His disciples! Isn’t shouting against forum rules?

 

[Shavonneleo]

Personally; I would not want to become a Catholic for any reason. There is not so much in common with Catholics and the rest of the Christian world as some would have us believe. They would have to change so much that indeed, they would not even seem Catholic anymore, if they would do what it takes to get more to join their denomination.

I am not catholic and never will be because I find a lot of things that doesnt agree with the word of God 'the bible" not the catholic bible .
My reasons for not following this traditional church are :

1. The catholic church worships mary
   and removes the commandant from the bible “tho shalt not worship any graven images”
   2.Baptism of babies -Where does it say in the bible that we must baptise our babies because there is " original sin" What happens to still borns???
   3.Babies have evil spirits that’s why they need to be baptised -someone please tell me
   where in the bible does it say this ???
   4 Where in the bible does it speak of nuns,popes or even purgatory?
   5.Where did we see in the bible that saints can help losts souls ?eg Saint MARIA KOWALSKA ? ??

PLEASE CLARIFY THIS FOR ME AND WE CAN DISSCUSS!!!
4

 

[joe370]

**

W-o-w, Joe, very impressive! So you haven’t ever heard of the “still,small voice”? And Jesus sent out His disciples! Isn’t shouting against forum rules?

**

What is so impressive? EEK IS used to signify surprise or sudden fright. I would never shout or try and change you; you are a very good person who picks up his cross and follows Jesus. However, you have yet to answer my questions, and that’s OK; I’m use to it, when it comes to non-Catholics, in my family!!! If I am guilty of —“burglarizing [your] conversation,” then I apologize; I thought this was an open forum…my bad!!!

God bless my friend…

 

[joe370]

Shavonneleo;4956042]I am not catholic and never will be because I find a lot of things that doesnt agree with the word of God 'the bible" not the catholic bible .
My reasons for not following this traditional church are :

1. The catholic church worships mary

REALLY??? I GUESS THE C.C. DIDN’T GET THAT MEMO…LOL… IF YOU CAN SHOW ME, IN THE CATECHISM OF THE C.C. WHERE IT SAYS, CHRISTIANS BELONGING TO THE C.C. WORSHIP THE BLESSED MOTHER MARY, I WILL DENOUNCE CATHOLICISM!!!

and removes the commandant from the bible “tho shalt not worship any graven images”

SO, CATHOLICS WORSHIP GRAVEN IMAGES? REALLY??? IF YOU CAN SHOW ME, IN THE CATECHISM OF THE C.C. WHERE IT SAYS, CHRISTIANS BELONGING TO THE C.C. WORSHIP THE GRAVEN IMAGES, I WILL DENOUNCE CATHOLICISM!!!

2.Baptism of babies -Where does it say in the bible that we must baptise our babies because there is " original sin" What happens to still borns???

WHERE IN THE BIBLE DOES IT SAY, WE MUST NOT BAPTIZE BABIES? STILL BORNS GO DIRECTLY TO HEAVEN.

3.Babies have evil spirits that’s why they need to be baptised -someone please tell me
where in the bible does it say this ???

YOU ARE JUST JOKING NOW --RIGHT!!!

4 Where in the bible does it speak of nuns,popes or even purgatory?

WHERE IN THE BIBLE DOES IT SPEAK OF SOLA SCRIPTURA OR THE RAPTURE, OR THE INCARNATION , OR THE TRINITY?

5.Where did we see in the bible that saints can help losts souls ?eg Saint MARIA KOWALSKA ? ??

WHERE IN THE BIBLE DOES IT SAY, THEY CAN’T??? DO YOU BELIEVE THAT OUR LOVED ONES ARE WITH GOD, RIGHT NOW???

PLEASE CLARIFY THIS FOR ME AND WE CAN DISSCUSS!!!
4

I’M ON MY WAY TO WORK, BUT I WILL DELVE INTO THIS WHEN I GET HOME.

Shavonneleo…HOW MANY CHURCHES DID JESUS BUILD???

 

[joe370]

p101 SAID: Personally; I would not want to become a Catholic for any reason. There is not so much in common with Catholics and the rest of the Christian world as some would have us believe. They would have to change so much that indeed, they would not even seem Catholic anymore, if they would do what it takes to get more to join their denomination.

P101, PLEASE TELL ME, WHY I WOULD WANT TO BECOME A MEMBER OF THE SEVENTH DAY… I HAVE RESEARCHED THE BELIEFS OF THAT CHURCH, WITH GREAT SCRUTINY. I HOPE THE MODERATOR DOESN’T BLOCK THIS POST JUST BECAUSE I MENTIONED ANOTHER CHRISTIAN CHURCH, BY NAME!!! AFTER ALL, THAT CHURCH TOO, IS A PART OF JESUS’ MYSTICAL BODY, TO WHICH JESUS IS THE HEAD AND SAVIOR!!! WHY DO YOU DIGRESS WHEN PEOPLE ASK YOU QUESTIONS VIS-A-VIS THE CHURCH TO WHICH YOU BELONG; BE PROUD OF YOUR CHURCH.

"Sing to the mountains, sing to the sea, [ABOUT YOUR CHURCH] – "Raise your voice, lift your heart. This is the day the Lord has made. Let all the earth rejoice!

 

[The_Iambic_Pen]

With the Orthodox, as far as I know they do not have any doctrinal error. The schism is more political than anything.

Perhaps. The Orthodox, however, do not believe in certain doctrines which Catholics are required to believe. I believe the Catholic Church would say that a Catholic who did not believe in papal infallibility and the immaculate conception would be in error in matters of doctrine. Thus, an Orthodox Christian who does not believe in these things (and it would be difficult to find one who does) would also be in error.

Since Christ did not make the promise of hell not prevailing against these churches then I don’t really know how they fit into the equation. None of them is the church that Christ founded so the question does not apply.

From a Catholic perspective, I believe this is a logical thing to say.

Btw, I like your posts. They’re very well thought through and I truly like well reasoned arguments. Kudos!

Thanks! I like yours, as well.

This is an interesting thread. There is some meaningful discussion (and I hope this includes my small part ), but there is also much of the ignorant anti-Catholicism that one would not generally expect of people who are smart enough to use a computer…

 

[bobzills]

Shavonneleo;4956042] STILL BORNS GO DIRECTLY TO HEAVEN.

I thought that unbaptised babies went to a place in hell called limbo?

 

[Cinette]

Benedictus used the word “DUMP” to describe what some Protestants have done on this thread and I agree totally.

Janet1983 dumped her list and bolted. Craig suggest I respond because he felt it was the right thing to do and I did - I responded to each item on her list except for one. I noticed she had not posted for a while and PMed her twice to alert her to the response and …zilch! Nix, NADA!

CONCLUSION: The list was posted to make mischief? What else? Since she has ignored the response which was done in good faith.

Craig posted and I noticed that tqualey responded (two pages). I was looking forward to Craig’s response to tqualey since the latter’s response was very well presented. Any response? No…zich, nix, nada. Nothing!!

CONCLUSION: Did tqualey’s response intimidate Craig? Was Craig unable to respond? Only Craig knows!

So, how can one have a debate with anyone who makes statements but does not substantiate those statements?

I am disappointed with Craig because I developed a lot of respect for him on other threads.

 

[The_Iambic_Pen]

I thought that unbaptised babies went to a place in hell called limbo?

I thought that this was an idea put forth, that was never an official teaching of the Church?

 

[bobzills]

I thought that this was an idea put forth, that was never an official teaching of the Church?

Really? Then how do you explain the declaration of many Popes, including for example, Pope John XXII: Nequaquam sine dolore (November 21, 1321)
Illorum autem animas, qui in mortali peccato vel cum solo originali decedunt, mox in infernum descendere, poenis tamen ac locis disparibus puniendas.
“The Roman Church teaches …] that the souls of those who depart in mortal sin or with only original sin descend immediately to hell, nevertheless to be punished with different punishments and in disparate locations…”
And even before that the Church had stated in the 2nd Council of Lyons in 1274 the same thing, namely that souls who die in the state of mortal sin or with original sin only immediately descend into hell, yet to be punished with different punishments.

 

[Cinette]

I am not catholic and never will be because I find a lot of things that doesnt agree with the word of God 'the bible" not the catholic bible .
My reasons for not following this traditional church are :

1. The catholic church worships mary 100% UNTRUE!
   and removes the commandant from the bible “tho shalt not worship any graven images"TOTALLY UNTRUE
   2.Baptism of babies -Where does it say in the bible that we must baptise our babies because there is " original sin” What happens to still borns??? This has been thoroughly thrashed on these forums. Why don’t you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. All the answers are there.
   3.Babies have evil spirits that’s why they need to be baptised -someone please tell me
   where in the bible does it say this ???They are stained by the stain of Original Sin - I think most Christians acknowledge that.
   4 Where in the bible does it speak of nuns,popes or even purgatory?Where in the bible do you find the word Protestant, Trinity, and other words we use to explain Christianity. For that matter where is the word Christian and Bible in the bible??
   5.Where did we see in the bible that saints can help losts souls ?eg Saint MARIA KOWALSKA ? ??

Maria Kowalska was not born at that time nor were many of the Saints.

PLEASE CLARIFY THIS FOR ME AND WE CAN DISSCUSS!!!

Welcome to the thread. If you are a serious poster we can have a good discussion.

By the way - Never say never!! LOL!

 

[Cinette]

I thought that this was an idea put forth, that was never an official teaching of the Church?

I think you are right lambic Pen.

Cheers
Cinette

 

[1beleevr]

I aure hope that joe370 is the only one yelling and screaming in this thread! It has been interesting and combative, inspiring and informative! And I must say, benedictus2, that the comment about me putting out scripture, and basically saying,“it is so!”, seems to be the running theme in this forumI have seen entire pages of scripture, to support one’s position! As to Mstthew 16:18, let me present a theory, about why some may not immediately accept the catholic position. In reading the Old Testament, and also many times in the New Testament, God and Jesus are referred to as the Rock:thumbsup:So, with that in mind, why is it so farfetched for us to believe that Jesus was speaking about Himself in Matthew 16:18? Consider the Sanhedrin’s confusion, when He told them He would tear down the Temple and rebuild it in three(3) days Scripture interpretation is something that humans do constantly, and then it’s a matter of who’s wrong and who’s right! As far as confession; catholics go, is it weekly, or as needed, I’m not sure. I’m also not sure if it is mandatory, highly recommended or what. As for myself, I have been confessing sins directly to God, through my intrcessor Jesus Christ for 42 years, and it’s still working I have on occasion, if I felt comfortable, shared with a pastor, about a sin that I had already confessed(James 5:16), but I do not ask him to forgive it. I know that only God can forgive sins.And when I am referred to as a catholic hater, or other less than desirable names, I smile, and shrug, thankful for the peace of Christ. And I notice also, that no one comments on activities like street ministry, outreaches, feeding the homeless, etc., things that are addressed by our Lord in Matthew 9:37-38, Matthew 25:31-46, and Mark 10:45! I mean individuals, not so much as a church. So, even though we don’t see eye to eye, and I grate on you r nerves, I love all of you, who are my brothers and sisters in Christ:thumbsup:Onward to more posting!!

 

[TLara]

tqualey: Greetings to you, in the Name of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ! Craig and I are not necessarily a part of the same denomination(non-denominational for me), but we do think a lot alike! And, I believe that by accepting Christ as our Saviour, we already have our passes! If God had wanted me to be a catholic, I would have been one by now! To put it bluntly, I have been turned off to the catholic church, by those catholics that I have known and befriended(friends with many, before I knew they were catholic). Many of them are very arrogant and condescending(which doesn’t mean you all are). My former fiance was raised catholic, and changed over to nondenominational, all on her own! So, my brother in Christ, I for one am secure in my salvation, and have been for 42 years; no catholicism necessary! And as far as I know, the only verse that catholics use to validate their religion(a despicable word, to say the least), is Matthew 16:18, which of course is still up for debate, amongst non catholics But, tqualey, rejoice in your choice, and we shall rejoice in ours! The most important choice I ever made was on May 15, 1967, when I gave my life to Jesus! Romans 8:31-39

I take it you have more insight than St. Paul, I remember him saying that we should work out our salvation with fear and trembling?

 

[Peter_J]

I have another idea that might help explain what I am trying to say. From a Catholic perspective, the Orthodox and Protestant churches all teach some things that are incorrect. Would you say that Hell has prevailed against these churches, or would you say, as I have been suggesting as a possibility, that they are suffering from the enemy’s attacks, but have not yet been completely defeated. Hypothetically, the Orthodox Church (to give one example), could reunite with the Catholic Church someday. If it can still be saved and restored to the fullness of truth, then this must mean that its defeat is not complete.

Hi IP,

If I might “butt in” here, I think it’s a lot more symmetric than you and your friend are making it sound. Catholics believe that the Catholic Church is the Church against which the gate of Hell will not prevail. Orthodox believe that the Orthodox Church is the Church against which the gate of Hell will not prevail.

To my mind, neither claim is odd or presumptuous.

Perhaps. The Orthodox, however, do not believe in certain doctrines which Catholics are required to believe. I believe the Catholic Church would say that a Catholic who did not believe in papal infallibility and the immaculate conception would be in error in matters of doctrine. Thus, an Orthodox Christian who does not believe in these things (and it would be difficult to find one who does) would also be in error.

Ah yes … that’s not an easy issue to tackle.

At the risk of appearing lazy, I’d like to refer you to this thread, which went into some depth about the “pre- dogmatic definition vs. post- dogmatic definition” issue.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Craig,

Looks like you two have joined some kind of mutual admiration society. Sharme it is based on such mis-reading of Scripture and delusional thinking as expressed in OSAS. Oneway to stop listening is to keep on humming that tune about already having your pass…and failing to listen to the part about having that pass stamped.

Thank you 1beleevr,

I thought that post was superbly expressed. This is my position entirely and precisely.

I already have my “PASS” in the heavenly councils. It is not by works of righteousness that I have done but by His great mercy He saved me; by the washing of SPIRITUAL REGENERATION and the renewal of the Holy Spirit.

The problem that I have with the Roman Catholic doctrine of salvation is that it never offers to anyone the CERTAINTY of salvation. How differently the scriptures present the awesome salvation of Christ. The scriptures CLEARLY AFFIRM that all who genuinely come to Christ, repenting of their sin and trusting deeply in the FINISHED WORK OF CHRIST ON THE CROSS AS THE ONLY WAY OF SALVATION will be saved. The biblical view of salvation is that it is a passing from DEATH unto LIFE.

I was saved by God’s grace alone on Friday 18th November 1977. Praise God! What a Mighty Saviour is Jesus Christ my Lord! I know that my name is in the LAMB’S BOOK OF LIFE!

I am not interested in “religion” per se whether Roman Catholic or Protestant. I am, furthermore, under no pressure to defend or promote “Protestantism” as such. I am, however, under the direct orders of God to declare the UNSEARCHABLE RICHES OF CHRIST.

Actually, if you really want that ‘pass’ stamped, just go to your Bible and read Matt 25:31-46. None of those guys are humming the OSAS tune… all those going to be with God have DONE things for the Body of Christ … and all those who were humming OSAS and managed to sit on their hands while others were hungry, naked and isolated are marching off to ‘warmer’ quarters with the devils in Hell.

Christ has paid the full price for the salvation of all mankind. None of us get to heaven by our efforts- but, by cooperating with the Grace of God and DOING what Christ said to DO. And that means you have to WORK for this eternal treasure. And, that is the name of that tune.

God bless,

 

[cazayoux]

The problem that I have with the Roman Catholic doctrine of salvation is that it never offers to anyone the CERTAINTY of salvation. How differently the scriptures present the awesome salvation of Christ. The scriptures CLEARLY AFFIRM that all who genuinely come to Christ, repenting of their sin and trusting deeply in the FINISHED WORK OF CHRIST ON THE CROSS AS THE ONLY WAY OF SALVATION will be saved. The biblical view of salvation is that it is a passing from DEATH unto LIFE.

Help me to see this CERTAINTY in scripture that CLEARLY AFFIRMs this.

Your checklist of what to DO to have a certainty of salvation is:
1 - genuinely come to Christ
2 - repent of sins
3 - trust deeply in the finished work of Christ on the Cross

Catholics absolutely believe all of these are necessary … but we don’t stop there.
We listen to ALL that Jesus said that we must DO to be saved.

As a Catholic, I believe what the ***Bible ***says in terms of what one must do in order to get to Heaven …
Have faith (Rom 3:28, John 3:16, 1 John 4:15)
forgive the sins of others (Matt 6:14-15)
care for one’s family (1 Tim 5:8)
feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the sick and imprisoned (Matt 25:31-46)
keep the Commandments (Matt 19:17 and 1 John 2:3-4)
love my brother (1 John 2:10)
deny ourselves and pick up our cross daily (Luke 9:23)
do the will of the Father (Matt 7:21)
eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of Man (John 6:51-58)
give a return for the talents the Master has given us (Matt 25:14-30)
be baptized (John 3:3-5, 1 Ptr 3:20-21)
confess our sins (1 John 1:9)…
all by the grace of God.

You speak about a certainty of salvation that Paul never spoke of.
Help me to see this CERTAINTY in scripture that CLEARLY AFFIRMs this.
Please provide the scripture.

Cheers!

michel

 

[cazayoux]

The problem that I have with the Roman Catholic doctrine of salvation is that it never offers to anyone the CERTAINTY of salvation. How differently the scriptures present the awesome salvation of Christ. The scriptures CLEARLY AFFIRM that all who genuinely come to Christ, repenting of their sin and trusting deeply in the FINISHED WORK OF CHRIST ON THE CROSS AS THE ONLY WAY OF SALVATION will be saved. The biblical view of salvation is that it is a passing from DEATH unto LIFE.

I would add another point.
You believe that a Christian, once performing the functions you list, are saved … and assured of that salvation which cannot be lost.

Why then, did Paul write all those letters that are in the bible in which he answered questions and gave instruction?
He was writing to Christians.
I’m sure you think these Christians were saved … and assured of their salvation.

If this assurance were true, then Paul’s letters would have been much shorter … along the lines of …

“No worries. Y’all are good”

michel

 

[The_Iambic_Pen]

Really? Then how do you explain the declaration of many Popes, including for example, Pope John XXII: Nequaquam sine dolore (November 21, 1321)
Illorum autem animas, qui in mortali peccato vel cum solo originali decedunt, mox in infernum descendere, poenis tamen ac locis disparibus puniendas.
“The Roman Church teaches …] that the souls of those who depart in mortal sin or with only original sin descend immediately to hell, nevertheless to be punished with different punishments and in disparate locations…”
And even before that the Church had stated in the 2nd Council of Lyons in 1274 the same thing, namely that souls who die in the state of mortal sin or with original sin only immediately descend into hell, yet to be punished with different punishments.

A better question would be, how does the Catholic Church explain these declarations? The Catechism of the Catholic Church seems to suggest that we may hope for the salvation of unbaptized infants who die. Perhaps there is some supernatural means by which those conceived with original sin might not depart in it?

Unless one wants to take the position that the Church has been overcome by the evil one and has begun to teach error since, say, Vatican II, there must be a way to explain these apparent contradictions. Personally, I am more likely to trust the Church’s explanation than I am to trust the opinions of dissenters within the Church or antagonists outside of it.

I am not going to make an absolute statement that unbaptized infants who die go to Heaven. I do not know that. However, to say that we must not even hope for their salvation seems extremely harsh.

Part of what keeps me from being Catholic is the fear that the “real” Catholic Church, despite the current attempt to be open and affirming, is one in which there is no room for the virtue of hope.