R
rev_kevin
Guest
Oh here we go again, we were here first so we’re right. Being first don’t always make you right/
- Status
G
guanophore
Guest
Well, for the first 20 years there was nothing to read. Are you saying that those who heard the Apostles’ preaching had no choice but to believe? I don’t think the book of Acts represents the facts that way. the apostles went about preaching, and the HS attested to their gospel in power by the working of miracles. People believed because they were moved by God to repent of their sins and come to His grace.
In what way was this “taking advantage” of people?
You claim that you are not prejudiced against Catholics, but you sure do subscribe to some sort of conspiracy theory that is predicated upon the pride of men, instead of the Grace of God. What you are saying is that God was too weak to preserve His word,a nd that Jesus was not the powerful being portrayed by the letters in the Book of Revelation, but a disinterested or weak and inattentive shepherd who was not able to watch over His Word to perform it.
R
rev_kevin
Guest
Such a nice Catholic you are. I’m sure God is proud of you with this comment
T
tweetymom
Guest
Amen. The first will be last.
G
guanophore
Guest
What you are saying is that Jesus reniged on his promises. He DID leave them orphaned, and He either failed to sent the HS to guide them into all Truth or He did so, and the HS was so weak and ineffectual that He was unable to prevent the gates of hell from prevailing.
What you are saying is that Jesus was unable to properly shepherd His sheep,and allowed them to go astray.
This is true, and it is the very reason that the gift of infallibility is necessary. The only way for God’s word to be preserved in the Church is by His grace and Power.
What you are saying is that He did not have sufficient grace and power to prevent the errors.
It seems that you don’t believe that any of those appointed by God were faithful. This mass apostasy is reminiscent of what the Mormons believe. They think that Joseph Smith had to come to re-establish the church because it went off the rails when the Apsotles died. Is that what you believe?
No, it does not. It does mean that the Gospel committed to the Apostles was received and preserved by those to whom it was committed. It means that God was able to do all that He promised, contrary to what you have been led to believe.
R
rev_kevin
Guest
NO God is not weak, but man is. Why are there so many interpretations of his Word? Does it mean that God is weak? No it means that man has a mind and can think for themselves. Why is there so much wrong doing in this world? Why are there people killing others? Why is there so much distruction in this world? Is it because God is weak? NO. I do not subscribe to some sort of conspiracy theory just because I disagree with some of the teachings of the CC.
G
guanophore
Guest
It is important to separate actions from persons. We are to respect all people, because they are created in the image and likeness of God.
We don’t have to respect their beliefs, or approve of their actions, but to say "I have no respect for them (Baptists) sounds very bigoted, and will not further the unity of the Body of Christ. It is especially counterproductive on a thread that includes Baptists, with whom we are trying to have productive discussion.
I was badly hurt by some Baptists too, but our duty is to forgive them, and pray for them.
“Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us”.
What if Jesus said “I have no respect for (them)”?
M
MyRdmrLvs
Guest
but Rome has the pope right?
M
MyRdmrLvs
Guest
they are all sincere, but Im an uneducated exjunky steel worker. this is why i have an apology in my signiture. some times I like to use humor and it sounds funny when I type it but I then see from the responce that it was taken as snide.**Although I disagree **with you about the Pope (BTW - we don’t believe he’s impeccable and he’s not infallible about everything) - I appreciate your honesty.
Sometimes, I read some of your posts that seem to be on the attack, then I read one like this that is very sincere.
God bless
R
rev_kevin
Guest
Sure God was able to do all he promised but man is fallible subject to mistakes.
M
MyRdmrLvs
Guest
One poster on this forum said that the pope has declared that evangelism is not the priority of the CC:shrug:. I have considered the many Catholic charities and ministries.I had the same experience. Catholics seem to have forgotten how to evangelize. it is our separated brethren, when they come home, that are bringing the evangelistic gift back. There are a few really good Catholic evangelists, but the personal sense of mission that should live in the heart of every Christian is not very evident. Most Catholics are woefully unprepared to give an account of the hope that is within.
That being said, evangelism through the care of the needy in the world is no where better attended to than by the Catholic Church. There are more outreaches and missions, schools, hospitals, and corporate works of mercy engaged in by Catholics than any other organization, political or religious. For Catholics, evangelism is faith, working through love, and it is by our fruit that we are to be known to the world.
Did you think that Catholics believe he is?
It is for people like you that CAF is here.
I am sure you are right, that God will get you where He wants you, so long as you are willing to follow Him wherever He leads. Catholics believe that the HS is always working toward unity.
I think I understand the CC position on infalibility but I think that may be one were not likely to agree on. As I read through the Bible I saw God working His will despite man getting it wrong not God preventing man from being wrong.
M
MyRdmrLvs
Guest
Was there a specific baptist teaching that caused you to be offended or just some people acting as people do, who happen to be Baptists?
B
bluelake
Guest
joe370;6316153:
dokimas,
I really don’t understand your question. what do you mean, 'The Historical Church? Are you referring to the RCC? There any several Protestant Churches.
Churches do not save, Jesus Christ died for our sins. He alone is our Savior. Churches that teach this are corrrect.
Jesus said , “You must be born again.” Jn.3:7 See also Jn.3:16.
Have you been baptized by the Holy Spirit? Do you have a personal relationship with Jesus?
You may not want to reply to these questions , which is fine, I only mention this to get an idea where your coming from.
I do not judge anyone’s salvation.
God bless,
bluelake
G
guanophore
Guest
The CC is not a 'denomination"
It is not hogwash, either, that the more denominating that goes on, the further the splinters drift from the root.
The degree to which the members of the Body are separated from the Apostolic faith is the degree to which they are imperfectly joined to the One Body.
Can you not extend that same courtesy to the early church? You seem to think they were all duped and led astray by what they were told, and could not think for themselves. Do you think all the noble people were confined to the city of Berea?
No, rev, it is not hogwash. to denominate means to name or delineate from. When the Reformers wanted to distinguish their beliefs from the Catholic Church, they denominated themselves.
It is not hogwash, either, that the more denominating that goes on, the further the splinters drift from the root.
Did you think I was saying otherwise?
The degree to which the members of the Body are separated from the Apostolic faith is the degree to which they are imperfectly joined to the One Body.
That will not prevent it from being the crux of the matter.
Not the power only, but the authority. It is that authority that remains in the Magesterium (teaching authority) today of the Catholic church. The Gospel is to be received by those to whom it was committed. In scripture this is called “paradosis” or the handing down. It is not to be gleaned individually from the pages of a book. That is not how Jesus set it up.
In Europe, especially, the great education and civilization that was present at the birth of the Church (because it was the fullness of time) was lost when the Roman Empire fell. My point is that the “early fathers”, for the first 300 years, preserved the Gospel through Sacred Tradition. The bible was not formed until 382, and it was formed on the basis of which books/letters were consistent with the Apostolic Teaching that has been preserved in the Church by the power of the HS.
Not all those that heard the gospel in the first 300 years were uneducated farmers, you know. Even in scripture we can see quite a few high class, educated people who were converted.
Thank you . I am much happier too. :extrahappy:
I don’t think you would be here if that were not the case.
Can you not extend that same courtesy to the early church? You seem to think they were all duped and led astray by what they were told, and could not think for themselves. Do you think all the noble people were confined to the city of Berea?
C
CMatt25
Guest
Wisdom, no I am not telling you that. Quite the contrary. I am telling you God didn’t make it all that difficult. Fallible men did. Christ taught love and peace. He taught helping the poor, the homeless, the sick, the hungry. Not you commit mortal sin if you miss Mass on Nov 1 or Dec 8 but only if you live in certain countries. Or that Latin is the "official’ language. Or…
I still go to a CC because I am Catholic and I can see God anywhere. But see I am willing to see we are ONE in at least our belief in Christ and He is enough for me.
G
guanophore
Guest
So the HS was really unable to bring to mind all that He had taught them, as He promised?
How is it that you have the anointing of the HS that can lead you into truth, but they could not rely on that same promise? What makes you more special than the Apostles?
You are right, Scripture does tell me that. But the same scripture also says that they will understand LATER! As if He intended to reveal all of it gradually to them. According to your history, that never happened!
Indeed He did. Another good example of why the gift of infallibility is necessary. Man is unable to hang onto the truth without God’s grace.
What use is it to be faithful to a mistake? If Jesus could not, or did not lead them into all Truth as He promised, then their faith was in vain!
So, what you are saying is that man’s power to make mistakes overcame God’s ability to keep his promises - in fact, He was not able to lead them into “all Truth”.
Yes, that is why the Church is upheld by His grace, and His supernatural gifts. Infallibility is necesary BECAUSE we are weak and imperfect. what you seem to be suggesting is that man’s weakness is stronger than God’s grace.
This is certainly true, and also the reason why He had to appoint an authority to rule on disputes in the Church. He gave His authority to the Apostles, and they to their successors. It is these successors that today preserve the understanding of the Word according to the mind of those who penned it.
It sure sounds like you don’t believe there was any authentic preaching or believing for at least 350 years after the Apostles died.
G
guanophore
Guest
So you are in agreement that the shortcomings of human beings can destroy the divine?
C
CMatt25
Guest
No thru the divine we can overcome our shortcomings
M
Matariel
Guest
Where did you get this? I never said that the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church was any more, or better than the Eastern Rites (indeed, the Eastern traditions of the Church have a deep and rich spirituality all their own). But when Pope Pius XII was speaking of the Mystical Body subsisting in the Catholic Church, he meant what he said. And sometimes in ecumenical circles, the term “Roman” Catholic Church is used because after the Protestant Reformation it was common for them to call the entire Church that, despite the fact that the Church has more than just a Roman Rite.
Agreed, but I argue they are identified with the visible Catholic Church, due to their Baptism, in whatever form it exists (water, blood, or desire).
If this were so there would be no need of conversion; but rather, all these groups being “Catholic” in a hidden way would be the exception, and not the norm, as extraordinary circumstances would apply. Plus, as the* Baltimore Catechism* states:
No; the last sentence should read “the Mystical Body contains many who are not visibly members of the Catholic Church.”
It doesn’t sound like it; you seem to be divorcing the two aspects of the Catholic Church to the point where there are “two Churches” of Christ. There is only one, the Catholic Church.I am glad we can agree on something.
- Status