Why do most Non-Catholic Christians always claim that the Catholic Church makes error

[Goth_Catholic]

You know what sweetheart? I LIVED it for 7 years in Europe! I lived in Eastern Europe and have many good friends from Yugoslavia. They have grandparents and parents who lived through this stuff and lived to tell about it. It was them who got me to look closer.

I don’t live in the USA bubble where you hear the ecumenical nonsense and buy into it. I currently work with a man in Mexico who is an evangelical from Chiapas who saw friends gunned down on their way to church knowing that the gunmen are financed by the Catholic church.

Get your head out of the hole!

And I suppose this man is anti-catholic. Please, all you’ve presented at sources that are anti-catholic and therefore bias to your cause. Your not proving a point, your making the Church into a scapegoat. I belive that was what happened in a certain country in the early 1900s only the scapegoat was of a different religion…

 

[stringbeanduck]

I don’t live in the USA bubble where you hear the ecumenical nonsense and buy into it. I currently work with a man in Mexico who is an evangelical from Chiapas who saw friends gunned down on their way to church knowing that the gunmen are financed by the Catholic church.

Get your head out of the hole!

It seems your knowledge is 2nd and 3rd hand. Doesnt seem to hold much water if you ask me.

 

[SolaFide]

And I suppose this man is anti-catholic. Please, all you’ve presented at sources that are anti-catholic and therefore bias to your cause. Your not proving a point, your making the Church into a scapegoat. I belive that was what happened in a certain country in the early 1900s only the scapegoat was of a different religion…

No, what I’m doing is pointing out the incredibly loooonnnnngggg history of violence, many centuries of it: sensual debauchery, corruption and collusion with men of violence all for the quest of power and control.

All done in the name of Christ by men who were supposed to be “Christ’s representative on earth.” Hogwash!

Rom 2:24 For “THE NAME OF GOD IS BLASPHEMED AMONG THE GENTILES BECAUSE OF YOU,” just as it is written.

 

[Goth_Catholic]

No, what I’m doing is pointing out the incredibly loooonnnnngggg history of violence, many centuries of it: sensual debauchery, corruption and collusion with men of violence all for the quest of power and control.

All done in the name of Christ by men who were supposed to be “Christ’s representative on earth.” Hogwash!

Rom 2:24 For “THE NAME OF GOD IS BLASPHEMED AMONG THE GENTILES BECAUSE OF YOU,” just as it is written.

It is the lowest of men who are first in the kingdom of heaven. Sinners become saints, and those who judge are judged themselves. Be careful of what you accuse the Church of. The hand of God is heavy, and no mercy can be given for those without remorse.

“If you were of this world, the world would love it’s own. But because you are not of this world, and I have taken you out of this world, the world shall hate you.” John 15: 19 just as it is written

 

[Mannyfit75]

No, I’m not. But then again I don’t lay out dogma and doctrine and claim that my words are to be guides to faith and morals and these men who have been complicit in these crimes have.

True. Do you know why? Jesus Christ didn’t established that an individual can teach these things. Jesus did say that if there any disagreement among you, you take it to the Church. We see this in the Councils of the Church starting from Council of Jerusalem to Second Vatican Council. Had not the Church form these Councils; Gentiles would still be required to be circumcised and adhere to Mosaic Law to include dietary Laws, or accept the heresy of Gnosticism, or Arianism.

Jesus Christ gave His Church build upon Peter, "I give you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, whatever you loose on earth will be loose in heaven. Likewise, he grant the same authority to the other Apostle in Matthew 18:18.

Leaders of the church are supposed to be men above reproach and lead by example.

They are. Where the Apostles any different? For one Peter denied Jesus, Our God, three times, Judas betrayed Jesus, and you have Saul killing Christians before his conversion. I would think that Saul conversion had a little distrust among Christian since Annias know of Sauls actions against Jesus Christ’s Church.

Leaders of the Church my friend are sinners. No different than you and me. The serious of sin differs on which commandment he or she has broken.

If I were to follow the example of the and cardinals I’d be raping, pillaging, stealing and murdering my way through life and hiding it under the guise of infallibility and magisterium authority.

BIG DIFFERENCE!!!

Oddly enough, you miss the point that there are over 30 Canonized Popes as Saints out of the 267 Popes. Peter, Clement, Gregory, and others. These Popes lead good lives. The total number of bad popes is a minority, my friend.

There is a difference but the point of that fact is that we are humans and subject to sin. You are not immune either. I don’t think you have the authority to judge church leaders yourself for you admit you aren’t perfect either.

Let me quote Matthew 7:2-5:

** 2 For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you. 3Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove that splinter from your eye,’ while the wooden beam is in your eye? 5 You hypocrite, 3 remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother’s eye.**

I know you quote this before but it does get back at you. For you said it yourself you are not perfect.

 

[SolaFide]

True. Do you know why? Jesus Christ didn’t established that an individual can teach these things. Jesus did say that if there any disagreement among you, you take it to the Church. We see this in the Councils of the Church starting from Council of Jerusalem to Second Vatican Council. Had not the Church form these Councils; Gentiles would still be required to be circumcised and adhere to Mosaic Law to include dietary Laws, or accept the heresy of Gnosticism, or Arianism.

Jesus Christ gave His Church build upon Peter, "I give you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, whatever you loose on earth will be loose in heaven. Likewise, he grant the same authority to the other Apostle

1. The church being the body of Christ as a whole, not just a bunch of guys claiming to be speaking for Christ while they whore it up on the side.
2. I totally reject any implication that Peter was the first “pope” by mere simple study of the Greek. Hence I reject your second argument out of hand. Also, you are the one who appealed to the Jerusalem council, did you notice who had the last word (ergo the leader) at this council? James, NOT Peter.

They are. Where the Apostles any different? For one Peter denied Jesus, Our God, three times, Judas betrayed Jesus, and you have** Saul killing Christians before **his conversion. I would think that Saul conversion had a little distrust among Christian since Annias know of Sauls actions against Jesus Christ’s Church.

Leaders of the Church my friend are sinners. No different than you and me. The serious of sin differs on which commandment he or she has broken.

You’ve brought up at least two guys who weren’t even saved when they did what they did! Judas wasn’t even saved at all and Saul killed Christians BEFORE his conversion. Duh!

I’m talking about guys who not only are supposed to already be saved but are “leaders” of their church acting like this.

:1 Faithful is this word: If anyone aspires to the position of a bishop, he desires a good work.
1Ti 3:2 ** It is necessary, therefore, for a bishop to be irreproachable,** the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, well-behaved, hospitable, skillful at teaching;
1Ti 3:3 **not given to wine, not a bully, not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not loving money; **1Ti 3:4 one ruling his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence;
1Ti 3:5 (for if one does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?);
1Ti 3:6 not a new convert, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the same condemnation as the devil.
1Ti 3:7 Moreover **he must have a good testimony among those outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. **1Ti 3:8 Likewise deacons must be reverent, not double-tongued, not being given to much wine, not greedy for money,
1Ti 3:9 holding the mystery of the faith with a pure conscience.
1Ti 3:10 **But let these also first be tested; then let them serve as deacons, being irreproachable. **1Ti 3:11 Likewise their wives must be reverent, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things.
1Ti 3:12 Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children well, and their own houses.
1Ti 3:13 For those who have served well as deacons obtain a standing for themselves and much boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.

How many times does Paul have to say above reproach or irreproachable for you people to get it??? Not only have your popes been reproachable they’ve been reprehensible and bringing disgrace and blaspheming the name of Christ!

 

[SolaFide]

Oddly enough, you miss the point that there are over 30 Canonized Popes as Saints out of the 267 Popes. Peter, Clement, Gregory, and others. These Popes lead good lives. The total number of bad popes is a minority, my friend.

There is a difference but the point of that fact is that we are humans and subject to sin. You are not immune either. I don’t think you have the authority to judge church leaders yourself for you admit you aren’t perfect either.

Yeah…oddly enough. Given that it’s less than 10% of all the so-called popes. You just made my point.

Luk 6:44 ** For each tree is known by its own fruit. **For men do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they gather grapes from a thorn bush.
Luk 6:45 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart brings forth that which is evil. For out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.

Judging? No, I’m just saying that I wouldn’t want to eat any of the rotten fruit I’ve seen growing from the Roman Catholic tree.

 

[SolaFide]

And I suppose this man is anti-catholic. Please, all you’ve presented at sources that are anti-catholic and therefore bias to your cause. Your not proving a point, your making the Church into a scapegoat. I belive that was what happened in a certain country in the early 1900s only the scapegoat was of a different religion…

And you present all pro-Catholic ones that bias *your *cause. So I guess you won’t listen to me and I won’t listen to you.

The Catholic church has been guilty of murder in many countries over many centuries dear. I’m just giving some examples.

 

[Mannyfit75]

1. The church being the body of Christ as a whole, not just a bunch of guys claiming

to be speaking for Christ while they whore it up on the side.

1. I totally reject any implication that Peter was the first “pope” by mere simple study of the Greek. Hence I reject your second argument out of hand. Also, you are the one who appealed to the Jerusalem council, did you notice who had the last word (ergo the leader) at this council? James, NOT Peter.

Incorrect. It is Peter. According to the Apostolic Tradition, and the writings of the Early Church Fathers, James is the Bishop of Jerusalem. He is the one in charge in the Church there while Peter is the protos of Apostle. For one, Peter is the first to speak during Pencost Sunday, the first the speak before the Sandhedrin. After Peter spoke, the Apostles, disciples and elders fell silent.

In the Eastern Orthodox Church, it is a belief that James is the first bishop of Jerusalem.

You’ve brought up at least two guys who weren’t even saved when they did what they did! Judas wasn’t even saved at all and Saul killed Christians BEFORE his conversion. Duh!

What kind of a comment is Duh? Is that charitable? I don’t think Jesus Christ would say something like that. The point is the Church early on did not have perfect men. They remain sinners. They tried their best to persevere. I do find the comment Duh offensive.

Of course Saul killed Christians before his conversion. I’m very sure the majority of the Christians did want him to be in the Church either during those few days until he had to prove to himself to be trustworthy as the Apostles. He had to go to Jerusalem and visited Peter for 15 days after his conversion to the faith.

I’m talking about guys who not only are supposed to already be saved but are “leaders” of their church acting like this.

Those men who acted wrong were wrong. I do not condone their actions. I only pray that before they died, they repented and ask for God’s mercy.

I don’t condemn men who bring scandal. I only ask for God’s mercy.

How many times does Paul have to say above reproach or irreproachable for you people to get it!!!???

How about you? Comments like Duh is rarely consider as being Christlike. If you wish to call yourself a Christian then act like it.

Not only have your popes been reproachable they’ve been reprehensible and bringing disgrace and blaspheming the name of Christ!

And so do you with your comments. If you want to judge, act like Jesus Christ. Don’t mock. You see someone sin, you correct them and have them ask for God’s mercy. Many times, I find individual human beings like yourself who see a man who bring scandal resort to mockery of Church Leaders. I’m very sure, that individual feels guilty for the sin he has committed.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Yeah…oddly enough. Given that it’s less than 10% of all the so-called popes. You just made my point.

The good popes outnumber the bad popes. That’s the point. You seem to miss that a lot.

Judging? No, I’m just saying that I wouldn’t want to eat any of the rotten fruit I’ve seen growing from the Roman Catholic tree.

Is this what I expect someone who claims to be a follower of Jesus Christ to act?

 

[SolaFide]

It seems your knowledge is 2nd and 3rd hand. Doesnt seem to hold much water if you ask me.

And yours is first hand? You read it on the news and get it in papers just like me. How is yours on your internet so much more accurate than mine?

I’m from the USA remember.

 

[SolaFide]

What kind of a comment is Duh? Is that charitable? I don’t think Jesus Christ would say something like that. The point is the Church early on did not have perfect men. They remain sinners. They tried their best to persevere. I do find the comment Duh offensive.

“Duh” means it should be a no-brainer that the guys you used to defend your position of men in the Bible being fallible weren’t even saved at the time, thus how does that even defend your point?

 

[SolaFide]

The good popes outnumber the bad popes. That’s the point. You seem to miss that a lot.

Is this what I expect someone who claims to be a follower of Jesus Christ to act?

I would disagree reading history that the good popes outnumber the bad ones.

Just cause I’m saying that I’ve seen the fruit from the tree and I wouldn’t eat it that makes me not a follower of Christ?

Wow! For somebody who just lambasted me for judging popes on debauchery, greed, lust, and murder you get awfully touchy at just my use of certain phrases. So why are you judging my morality if I’m not supposed to be judging the popes morality?

Isn’t that being hypocritical?

 

[Mannyfit75]

“Duh” means it should be a no-brainer that the guys you used to defend your position of men in the Bible being fallible weren’t even saved at the time, thus how does that even defend your point?

You should have said no brainer instead of Duh. Duh implies dumb or stupid. So I take offense to that. Choose your words carefully next time and be more charitable.

 

[SolaFide]

If you want to judge, act like Jesus Christ. Don’t mock. You see someone sin, you correct them and have them ask for God’s mercy.

You know what? The sins of the Catholic church have been brought to her attention many times over throughout the years. The 95 theses of Martin Luther and the Reformation just being one of the most prominent. God was being gracious and merciful during the reformation giving the church a chance to change yet she refuses.

She refused to repent of her evil and now she is being delivered over to Satan for the destruction of her flesh. God will judge her…

Rev 18:5 for her sins have piled up as high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities.
Rev 18:6 "Pay her back even as she has paid, and give back to her double according to her deeds; in the cup which she has mixed, mix twice as much for her.

 

[Mannyfit75]

I would disagree reading history that the good popes outnumber the bad ones.

You are welcome to disagree. I will give you some statistical numbers to prove my point though.

It should be noted that 78 popes are Canonized Saints and 10 more are beatified, which means they were awesome popes. There have been 42 Anti-popes, and there 8 Bad Popes. There are 265 Popes. So we see the a good majority of the Popes are good.

Just cause I’m saying that I’ve seen the fruit from the tree and I wouldn’t eat it that makes me not a follower of Christ?

Not being kind to your neighbor by ranting over the bad clergy is hardly Christlike. For Jesus said, “love your neighbor as you love yourself.”

Instead of mocking and ranting, offer prayers on their behalf so God will give them to grace to overcome the temptation of sin.

Wow! For somebody who just lambasted me for judging popes on debauchery, greed, lust, and murder you get awfully touchy at just my use of certain phrases. So why are you judging my morality if I’m not supposed to be judging the popes morality?

Isn’t that being hypocritical?

Nope, I’m not hypocritical. I have not condemned you. I answer your objection with Christian charity. I would be a hyprocrite if I assault you by **writing uncharitable **posts. You on the other hand are attacking the Catholic clergy and the actions of the bad popes.

 

[Mannyfit75]

You know what? The sins of the Catholic church have been brought to her attention many times over throughout the years. The 95 theses of Martin Luther and the Reformation just being one of the most prominent. God was being gracious and merciful during the reformation giving the church a chance to change yet she refuses.

She accept only 45 of the Theses of Martin Luther. The rest she rejected.

She refused to repent of her evil and now she is being delivered over to Satan for the destruction of her flesh. God will judge her…

Pope John Paul II offered a public prayer for forgiveness of the Catholic Church actions committed by its clergy and laity. I hardly think the Church refuse to repent. I believe his actions as the Successor of St. Peter speaks for the Church herself. This is a form of repentance. Your claim that she refuse to repent her evil is completely wrong.

 

[Rachel_Malloy]

I will remind those posting here to remain charitable in their comments.

:tsktsk:

God bless-

Rachel