G
guanophore
Guest
I just wanted to stop and compliment you on the flawless use of the quote feature in this post. I have never seen anyone using this username do such an excellent job of it!
Which church is God's true church? Is it the Roman Catholic Church?
- Status
L
Lilyflower
Guest
It seems very simple to me. Surely God’s true Church is that which Christ founded
It is Holy, unified, Apostolic, Orthodox and Catholic. That fits two Church’s.
I believe the Holy Spirit chose His Holiness to heal the split in the Church so that she may be ‘one’ once more.
I think we shall see not so much the abolition but the lessening, broadening and accommodating of certain doctrine, together with Papal infallibility being widened to include all the Patriarchs.
The idea of Pope is no bar since before the split, the Patriarch of Rome was always affectionately known as ‘Pope’ and did not originally imply ‘greater than’ other Patriarchs. Surely his Holiness is Partriarch of the Western Rite.
Have we not been using the rhetoric for many decades: ‘The Church of Rome’, The Church of Alexandria’ etc
I know my fellow Western Catholics will come at me with guns blazing, but the Holy Spirit is wooing and moving hearts and souls towards thinking about unification. There will eventually be more canon fodder than there are bullets and then Unity will prevail.
Then I believe many Lutherans and mainstream protestants will come back into the fold, while still retaining their own unique diversified culture and style. The Unified Orthodox Catholic Church may even grant them their own liturgy.
Blessings and peace.
It is Holy, unified, Apostolic, Orthodox and Catholic. That fits two Church’s.
I believe the Holy Spirit chose His Holiness to heal the split in the Church so that she may be ‘one’ once more.
I think we shall see not so much the abolition but the lessening, broadening and accommodating of certain doctrine, together with Papal infallibility being widened to include all the Patriarchs.
The idea of Pope is no bar since before the split, the Patriarch of Rome was always affectionately known as ‘Pope’ and did not originally imply ‘greater than’ other Patriarchs. Surely his Holiness is Partriarch of the Western Rite.
Have we not been using the rhetoric for many decades: ‘The Church of Rome’, The Church of Alexandria’ etc
I know my fellow Western Catholics will come at me with guns blazing, but the Holy Spirit is wooing and moving hearts and souls towards thinking about unification. There will eventually be more canon fodder than there are bullets and then Unity will prevail.
Then I believe many Lutherans and mainstream protestants will come back into the fold, while still retaining their own unique diversified culture and style. The Unified Orthodox Catholic Church may even grant them their own liturgy.
Blessings and peace.
C
catholiconce
Guest
Oh I am sure you will .I am just glad That you do not know where I live. I am sure their is a Lutheran across the alley or the up the BLock. DO you have to use this fourm now to vent your hatred for others because of some restraining order or something. You act as if God Is telling you to attack others on these threads. What is up with that. I be back in about 14 hours to read your venting response.
P
PerryJ
Guest
It is in the Bible. Apostolic succession is a requirement of the Church. This is shown by Peter selecting a replacement for Judas. If Apostolic succession was not required why did they reaplce Judas. Note he wasn’t desinagted as just a teacher as we see with so many others in the Bible he is a replacement. This story shows that apostolic succession is required. It shows Peter as the leader in this event. Peter specifically organizes and create Apostolic succession. Tell me where in scritpure you can deny this event and its outcome.
I have also shown to you that Clement a person recorded in the Bible became Pope and exercised his authority.
Please show me in the Bible how you can refute these biblical events.
P
PerryJ
Guest
Have you read the whole statement. If you have read Pope Benedict’s writing you would know that he is a very loving person. In his statement he does not condemn our separated brethen from going to Heaven. His statement is referring to the fatc that Protestants do not have Apostolic succession. This is true they don’t. Do not listen to the media and Protestant biased interpretations. Read his writing.
Even if the Pope was wrong why would one leave the Catholic Church and the Eucharist to be a Protestant. They do not have the Eucharist. As one that converted from being Protestant they do not have the blessings we have.
If you are worried about the Pope one can also pray for him I am sure he would be delighted.
Catholics do have a harder life than Protestant. We believe in self sacrficing love for God. We put no merit in feel good theologies such as Prosperity Gospels, the Rapture, Calvinistic Double Predestination, OSAS, etc. We accept our responsiblity to the World. As a former Protestant I will say that many Protestants also accept responsiblity for the world; however, most change theologies if it is against their personal belief. God created the world and we are to follow. For us to follow Christ we have to believe in self sacrificing love for this world and our fellow people. We are focused upn people getting to heaven. Not that people just have a nice life here on earth. A Catholics goal is heaven. As it says in the Bible the path to destruction is wide.
P
PerryJ
Guest
justasking4,
You are so helpful when you post the Catholic myths such as you do. It allows us to show the world how little people know of facts.
Copernicus already published theories concerning the Earth not being the center of the Universe. The Church approved the publishing of these theories. Remember the Catholic Church invented the university system. Most universities actually required the Pope to approve a person receiving a degree. Pope Urban invited Galileo to visit him to discuss his theory. Pope Urban was very influential in expanding science and free thought. The two of them were good friends. What occurred though was Galileo wished that his theory be published as a law. The Pope did not wish to mix theology with science and force the world to believe Galileo’s theory. After Galileo published several papers and a play, which criticized the Pope, the Pope forced Galileo to live with the Medici family. If you have read history you will know that they were one of the riches families in the world. He lived a wonderful life fully supported by the Medici family. While with the Medici family he published many more theories. You may want to also note that Galileo’s theory was proven wrong by Kepler within Galileo’s own lifetime. The Church was correct in not stating that Galileo’s theory was law.
Also note that Galileo had two daughters. Both became nuns. One left after becoming ill. The second remained a nun her whole life and was loyal to Catholicism her whole life.
Why do you continue to attack the Church yet do no research on the subject. Do you think God likes you spreading misinformation? Perhaps you should read on some of the subjects in which you make charges against the Church.
C
catholiconce
Guest
as for one who was a catholic and now Lutheran we do have the eucharist and the Same “Blessings’” as all christians There is one God one Son of God we are worshiping the same Christ. THis attitude that the Catholic church as it is today is the one true church is why I left.
P
PerryJ
Guest
This is nonsense. Read my post in response to jsuasking4.
P
PerryJ
Guest
Tell me the history books you reading. Nothing of what youu state is true?
If you are reading history books you are publishing half truths. That is not nice. Do you think this will get you points with God.
P
PerryJ
Guest
There is a diferrence in the beliefs concerning the Eucharist is there not. Can you tell me what the difference is?
J
jay29
Guest
Sorry, God did not found the Lutheran Church and He certainly did not give you His Body and Blood in the Eucharist. I will never buy that nonsense.
C
Cinette
Guest
OK, so you prefer to belong to a church that is NOT the one true Church?
uch::tsktsk:
:ehh:
P
PerryJ
Guest
Your posts do concern me. Not all Christians receive the same blessings. Many Protestant Churches only believe in two sacraments. Others do not believe in the Eucharist the same way as we believe. If you leave the faith I hope you have researched what you are leaving and what you are going to. I am not trying to be critical in this post. Your posts shows that perhaps you did not fully understand the Catholic Faith and that concerns me.
Have you ever read a book by Pope Benedict? He is a very loving man. He is certainly not what is portrayed by the media. His statement concerning the other faith was not an indictment as the media was trying to portray. He was simply stating that they did not have apostolic succession. He did not say all separated brethren where going to Hell. If one has read the Catechism of the Catholic Faith you know that he did not state this. Have you read the Catechism to make sure you are aware of what you are refuting? It would appear from some of your posts that you do not understand the faith. I am again not trying to be critical.
R
Reformed
Guest
Please show me in the Bible where God reveals more than two sacraments for the New Testament believer (Christian).
T
TriuneUnity
Guest
I would concur. Let me add an additional warning here…one should never belong to a church simply as a statement of opposition to another. “Catholicism is eeevil so I am going to become Presbyterian” or what have you. You could always be going into something worse.
P
PerryJ
Guest
Luke 22 19:20 "and he took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “this is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me” and then “this cup which is poured out for you is the new convenant in my blood” Christ does not state this represent, it kinda is he says this IS my body. If it wasn’t his body why did so many lose faith and leave. Would they have lost faith if he was just asking them to eat bread as a symbol? No.
1 Corinthians 11:27-30 "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgement upon himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill and some have died.
Note in John’s gospel he doesn’t use the term "phago’ which is the generic term for eat. He use the more explicit “trogo” which liuterally means to eat. To eat his body.
This is an example that shows you need to know who translsated your bible. Many Protestant Bibles have mistranslated verses to support their version of theology.
Do you believe in the Eucharist? Do you need me to give more truth?
Before you change the subject or quote some Bible verses that do not pertain to this discussion. Answer two questions. Why did people leave the Lord when he professed this? How do you explain the use of the term “trogo” that specifically explains to eat his body. It is only used twice in the Gospels and both times it is specifically refering to the Eucharist.
L
Lisdogan
Guest
This discussion, as noted, just runs and runs. I have posted elsewhere ((Why don’t Protestant/Bible Only Christians understand the Catholic Church?) something that I hope is worth repeating here:
'I am a life-long Canadian mainstream Protestant (please note the vital word ‘mainstream’) who has been confirmed recently in the Catholic Church here in South Africa (the same as any other in most ways).
'The idea that Catholics are routinely hacked and attacked and deliberately hounded to hell is one that clearly underlines much of the discussion and debate on this Forum. And to a great extent it undermines our ability to understand and learn from one another.
'On both sides of some imaginary fence we tend to attack rather than to respond with information; we tend to be defensive-aggressive; we ignore those who are genuinely attempting to bridge a gap in understanding and faith.
'The imaginary fence I refer to is composed of the explicit feeling among Catholics that they are being attacked (reflecting the affront to the Catholic Church by the Reformers centuries ago?) and the implicit/explicit feeling among some Protestants that they must justify their beliefs (when confronted by certain interpretations of the Scriptures?).
'This kind of insecurity no doubt enhances aggressiveness on both sides, and is surely underpinned by inevitable arrogance. The very question asked in the title of this thread suggests this insecurity/arrogance problem - for both sides.
'Some of us are born into our faith. Some of us make choices, often based on intellect + heart. We usually all end up with a bag of understanding of bits - but not all - of our Christian faith, Catholic or Protestant.
‘Not all Catholics, for example, understand exactly the same meaning of the Nicene Creed. Not all Protestants lie. Not all Catholics believe Heaven exists in the sky. Not all Protestants use crackers and grapejuice for communion. Not all Catholics put veneration of Mary at the top of their religious bag. Not all Protestants are called to action on improving the quality of life of others, as Jesus taught; nor are they all committed to getting as rich as they can as fast as they can - typical now of many of West African Protestant Churches and spreading through the rest of Africa. Not all Catholics understand exactly the meaning of ‘transubstantiation’. Not all Protestants can read - and so must have the Bible interpreted for them, just as do Catholics.’
Christ’s Church is surely universal. But humankind is profoundly wounded, complex and fallible in understanding the messages of Jesus of Nazareth.
The true Church? Where God is welcome, where Christ is, where the Holy Spirit Parclete surrounds us with Her love. No more, no less. Nothing else matters.
In Christ
'I am a life-long Canadian mainstream Protestant (please note the vital word ‘mainstream’) who has been confirmed recently in the Catholic Church here in South Africa (the same as any other in most ways).
'The idea that Catholics are routinely hacked and attacked and deliberately hounded to hell is one that clearly underlines much of the discussion and debate on this Forum. And to a great extent it undermines our ability to understand and learn from one another.
'On both sides of some imaginary fence we tend to attack rather than to respond with information; we tend to be defensive-aggressive; we ignore those who are genuinely attempting to bridge a gap in understanding and faith.
'The imaginary fence I refer to is composed of the explicit feeling among Catholics that they are being attacked (reflecting the affront to the Catholic Church by the Reformers centuries ago?) and the implicit/explicit feeling among some Protestants that they must justify their beliefs (when confronted by certain interpretations of the Scriptures?).
'This kind of insecurity no doubt enhances aggressiveness on both sides, and is surely underpinned by inevitable arrogance. The very question asked in the title of this thread suggests this insecurity/arrogance problem - for both sides.
'Some of us are born into our faith. Some of us make choices, often based on intellect + heart. We usually all end up with a bag of understanding of bits - but not all - of our Christian faith, Catholic or Protestant.
‘Not all Catholics, for example, understand exactly the same meaning of the Nicene Creed. Not all Protestants lie. Not all Catholics believe Heaven exists in the sky. Not all Protestants use crackers and grapejuice for communion. Not all Catholics put veneration of Mary at the top of their religious bag. Not all Protestants are called to action on improving the quality of life of others, as Jesus taught; nor are they all committed to getting as rich as they can as fast as they can - typical now of many of West African Protestant Churches and spreading through the rest of Africa. Not all Catholics understand exactly the meaning of ‘transubstantiation’. Not all Protestants can read - and so must have the Bible interpreted for them, just as do Catholics.’
Christ’s Church is surely universal. But humankind is profoundly wounded, complex and fallible in understanding the messages of Jesus of Nazareth.
The true Church? Where God is welcome, where Christ is, where the Holy Spirit Parclete surrounds us with Her love. No more, no less. Nothing else matters.
In Christ
L
Lisdogan
Guest
C
cazayoux
Guest
I would add to this that Jesus is God and God has the power to create with His word.
When Jesus says ‘this is’, I see it as a very powerful, divine statement.
I’ve seen others bring up that Christ should have said something that was clearer or stronger than the words we see in scripture such as ‘this becomes’.
Tim Staples posited that ‘this is’ is the clearest strongest language He could have used given that divinity and power of words.
I’ve seen other also bring up that Jesus stated that he was many things (bread of life, vine, …).
However, even the sentence structure is different in the last supper accounts.
Instead of saying ‘I am this’ or ‘I am that’ he says ‘this is me’.
Very different indeed.
Cheers!
michel
- Status