Why does one hate the Catholic Church?

[tomylee1]

who hate catholic church.
do you mean another religious persons.

 

[CMatt25]

who hate catholic church.
do you mean another religious persons.

Hi Tomylee, I don’t know what some of the others mean. But how can another religious person hate? Is religion about hate? Or is it about love? God bless you. Peace.

 

[Nicea325]

Actually Jesus wants 5-6 billion sects…according to Lib.

Foolishness! Jesus most certainly didn’t want His Church to be chopped liver.That is the error with Protestanism,the belief it is okay to divide as long as one believes in Christ. Nonsense! Why the need to create 39,000 different sects? Jesus does not need competition,but followers of His church.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Foolishness! Jesus most certainly didn’t want His Church to be chopped liver.That is the error with Protestanism,the belief it is okay to divide as long as one believes in Christ. Nonsense! Why the need to create 39,000 different sects? Jesus does not need competition,but followers of His church.

I believe fbl9 forgot the sarcasm emoticon…

 

[Nicea325]

I believe fbl9 forgot the sarcasm emoticon…

I still cannot comprehend the need to have 39,000 different churches? As St.Paul said: God is not the author of confusion.

AMEN!:bowdown:

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I believe fbl9 forgot the sarcasm emoticon…

I still cannot comprehend the need to have 39,000 different churches? As St.Paul said: God is not the author of confusion.

AMEN!:bowdown:

You’re preaching to the choir brother.

 

[Nicea325]

**You’re preaching to the choir brother. **

Nice to mee you. BTW: Are you Catholic?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

**You’re preaching to the choir brother. **

Nice to mee you. BTW: Are you Catholic?

Yes. You can tell what Church most are affliated with by looking to the right side of their post, across from their username.

Welcome to CAF.

 

[guanophore]

However if Baptism incorporates one into the Church and no sin can erase this as the catechism teaches… a person may be considered any variety of Catholic with an adjective preceding, but nevertheless still Catholic.

I suppose you can make a case for that, but what good will it do if the baptized person is in a state of mortal sin? What benefit is there to calling oneself Catholic if one rejects the Teachings of the Church? What benefit is it to be called Catholic when one has fallen away from Catholicity?

Is there any eternal value to being a “lapsed” Catholic?

 

[guanophore]

Did you look at the website? It looks very Catholic to me check it out:

mostholyfamilymonastery.com/
Most Holy Family Monastery

*This website is dedicated to defending and spreading the Catholic Faith, as taught and defined by the authoritative teachings of the popes throughout history. It is also dedicated to exposing in great detail the post-Vatican II pseudo-“Church” and the New Mass. These purport to be Catholic, but are not. *

I have heard alot of discussion about the diaster of Vatican II which of course I know nothing about.

That explains how it is that you can’t tell this is a schismatic sect that is publishing misinformation.

 

[guanophore]

My diocese must be wrong then too. Its mission statement begins with “The Mission of the Roman Catholic Church…” I would have thought the bishop would have known there was no such thing.

It is customary for the Latin Rite to use this terminology.

Due to politics and economics separating geographical areas, there have been times in history when the Roman Catholics thought they were the only ones left.

I just like to take the opportunity to remind folks that the Catholic church is not Roman.

 

[guanophore]

Perhaps I should have rephrased it to say the CC itself interprets itself only as having the power to interpret and thus teaches that itself only receives teaching.

Well, it is a false statement, but you have the right to make it if it makes you feel good. One has to wonder why it would

But of course Christ founded one universal (catholic) church. That makes it all the more strange some in the CC try to limit Christ’s Church to itself only and not the greater universal sense.

Some people are ignorant (lacking in knowledge) and they don;t know any better. All we can do is point them to the Catechism.

 

[guanophore]

No one has ever listed them for me- elviaman is the only one that has even given it a try.

Sacred Tradition is a way of life, a world view. It cannot be reduced to a “list”.

 You have a dispute?  You don't just willy-nilly decide on it, you look to Scripture,what  does Scripture says about the issue.

Yes, but we look at scripture in the light of what the Apostles believed and taught. That is why we understand it differently than those of you who are separated from the Apostolic Tradition.

  You also don't lay down a general rule that everyone must follow, especilly when it doens't necessarily have anything to do with your salvation- too often there are reasons there should be exceptions.

It seems like you have a specific axe in mind to grind…

It is through the Church that GOD's Holy Word and WORD was and is to be shown to the World.  It is not our various man-made traditions that the Church needs to push on people but The Gospel of Jesus Christ.    **Ephesians 3**

10His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms, 11according to his eternal purpose which he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Indeed yes! The Church He founded, the Catholic Church. Those that departed from it created various man-made traditions. This changed the gospel message so that what is now preached is a “different gospel” than the one we received from the Apostles.

Somehow you seem to think that the manifold wisdom of God stopped being made manifest through the Catholic Church, so that a new one had to be started.

 

[guanophore]

OK, maybe this is one of those tradtions that the Catholic Church has that I don't have.  But it seems that it is the Catholic Church that is lacking on this one.

Jesus specifically mentiones the 2 forms separately and labels on as HIS Body and the other as HIS Blood.

If for some reason a person can not drink the wine then grape juice is consercrated [just let the Pastor know]-laity is always given or offered both Body and Blood in my Church.

Actually, they are offered neither. It is not a valid consecration, not valid elements, and probably improper form.

What is the clue for us non-catholic Christians to look for? Any site that questions any Pope, the Vatican I and II issue?

No, there is nothing about questioning that is problematic. If there were, we would not be on this site!

I have heard my Catholics friends question things- even saying the Pope is not infallible in anything- are these people really Catholic?

Most Catholics don’t know much about their faith. They may lack Catholicity in their beliefs due to ignorance. They may understand, yet be in rebellion. Most American Catholics are actually Protestants and don’t realize it. They think they can be “cafeteria Catholics”. This is not the case. The faith is a seamless whole. It is not possible for someone to reject parts of it, and still be Catholic.

I mean do you have to agree with everything? I have heard it said that the majority of Catholics are actually Lutheran, because of the way the don’t believe in much of the things Catholic Popes and higher ups say and do.

I do not doubt this a bit.

I remember my Nana having heard the Pope talk about sex being only for procreation- said, "He doesn’t know what he is talking about".

Wait till she reads Theology of the Body!

We were all so surprised because she was a widow at the time and in her 60’s and as a kid you never think of your parents as having sex, let alone your sweet widowed Nana!!

Not all of what the Pope says/writes is considered infallible teaching.

 

[guanophore]

Please exactly what are these traditions about Jesus that I am missing that deal with one’s salvation?

That the Gospel is to be received from those authorized to carry it, and not extracted peicemeal from the Holy Scriptures 2000 years after the fact.

 

[schaick]

You are laying down your own rules to Catholics with your posts.

You call them ‘man-made’ traditions, as an ad hominem, evident by your avoidance to answer any questions specifically addressed to you. The Bible being the ‘final authority’ is not in scriptures, therefore it’s a ‘man-made’ tradition. The Bible does not teach everyone to interpret scriptures for themselves, therefore we have another ‘man-made’ tradition.

Please point me to the questions I haven’t answered.

No you are just taking it that way. Man-made traditions are only bad if a Church says you have to follow these for your salvation when there is absolutely no proof that they are in fact required for your salvation.

The man-made tradition of singing Christmas Carols at Christmas isn’t a bad thing. Now if you say you have to sing Christmas Carols at Christmas or you have no salvation-that is a bad thing.

You haven’t proved anything about these “Sacred Traditions” whatever they might be. Please, show the chain of transmission.

A person doesn’t interprete Scripture for themselves-You must alllow Scripture to interprete Scripture.

 

[schaick]

Kooksite, big time. Check out this garbage:
mostholyfamilymonastery.com/eric_efird_hoyle.php

LOL! ok everyone I got it!

Hey be careful you’ll be accussed of:

***“Couldn’t resist another opportunity to post a link to an ‘anti-Catholic’ website, huh?” ***

as I was. but I see you are listed as a fallen away Catholic.

 

[schaick]

Sacred Tradition is a way of life, a world view. It cannot be reduced to a “list”.

I have been reading on ** many sites-I think are Catholic **and I am seeing that while there is a lot of talk about these Sacred Traditions there is not a mention about what they are.

Until I found this site:
stjameshopewell.org/questions/question_traditions.html
*Most of the beliefs and practices found in sacred tradition have their basis in Scripture, but some do not. Catholics’ belief that Mary was assumed into heaven is an example of a sacred tradition that has no reference in Scripture. The Assumption of Mary was nonetheless an important belief in the early Church, and that is why it has been passed on through the generations as part of sacred tradition. *

Can you show me how this tradition has been passed down- Who was the first Apostle to mention it?
What I am taking as a Catholic site:
davidmacd.com/catholic/mary_in_the_early_church.htm*

In 130 Irenaeus and then St. Justin in 110-165 A.D write about Mary.

Where is the connection between the Apostles and the early Church Fathers?

*There were also feasts in memory of the Assumption of Mary in Antioch dating back to 380 A.D.

We see the genesis of the doctrine of Immaculate Conception, Assumption, and the traditional role of Mary as Co-Redeemer and Mediatrix in the early Church*. Here are references to Mary by other early church fathers:

Mary, you are the vessel and tabernacle containing all mysteries. You know what the Patriarchs never knew; you have experienced what was never revealed to the Angels; you have heard what the Prophets never heard. In a word, all that was hidden from preceding generations was made known to you; even more, most of these wonders depended on you. (270 A.D., St. Gregory Thaumaturgus),

Blessed Virgin, immaculate and pure you are the sinless Mother of your Son, the mighty Lord of the universe. You are holy and inviolate, the hope of the hopeless and sinful; we sing your praises. We praise you as full of every grace, for you bore the God-Man. We all venerate you; we invoke you and implore your aid…Holy and immaculate Virgin…be our intercessor and advocate at the hour of death and judgment…you are holy in the sight of God, to Whom be honor and glory, majesty, and power forever (373 AD, St. Ephem of Edessa)

It becomes you to be mindful of us, as you stand near Him Who granted you all graces, for you are the Mother of God and our Queen. Help us for the sake of the King, the Lord God Master Who was born of you. For this reason you are called ‘full of Grace’…" (373 St. Athanasius)

Back to that first site:
A few examples of beliefs and practices that do have their basis in Scripture would include the following:
· The Apostles’ Creed, an early summary of important Christian beliefs.
· The role of bishops, priests, and the pope in Christian ministry.
· The authority of the pope – the belief that the pope cannot teach falsely when he speaks officially as head of the Church on matters of faith and morals.
· Our understanding of the Sacraments and their place in Christian life.
Although Scripture touches on these matters, it is through sacred tradition that we fully understand their meaning and significance to the Church.

This information can not be trusted because there is no basis for the authority of a single Pope in Scripture or the believe that the pope cannot teach falsely when he speaks officially as head of the Church on matters of faith and morals.

Yes, but we look at scripture in the light of what the Apostles believed and taught. That is why we understand it differently than those of you who are separated from the Apostolic Tradition.

I do have the teachings of the Apostles- the Creeds. Actually I have in my Church the ** Sacred Tradition that the Bible is GOD’s Word and infallible**

It seems like you have a specific axe in mind to grind…

No axe to grind. Just trying to understand how people have put trust in immoral Popes through the ages, yet can’t put it solely in the most moral thing on the face of the earth GOD’s Word.

I have yet to see a chain of command so to speak on the “Sacred Traditions”.

Yes, I do have authority in my Church as laid out by Scripture, but not the way Catholics do added to over the ages.

Indeed yes! The Church He founded, the Catholic Church. Those that departed from it created various man-made traditions. This changed the gospel message so that what is now preached is a “different gospel” than the one we received from the Apostles.

Somehow you seem to think that the manifold wisdom of God stopped being made manifest through the Catholic Church, so that a new one had to be started.

No Catholics don’t seem to understand that a new “church” was not made. My Church is a part of the universal Church that Jesus is building.

Where Trinitarian Christians see unity in the one faith of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and diversity in celebrating that faith, Catholics simply see division and confusion.

This is a very interesting statement:
This changed the gospel message so that what is now preached is a “different gospel” than the one we received from the Apostles

Yes if they interprete the Scripture in a way different then the one true interpretation-Mormons, Jehovah Witness, Oneness Pentecostals, etc.*

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Please point me to the questions I haven’t answered.

Where in scriptures does scriptures tell us the Bible is the ‘final authority’?

Where in scriptures does it teach each individual is to interpret scriptures for themselves?

Where in scriptures do you get an assurance that the interpretation you received of the Holy Spirit is the correct interpretation over others who also claim their interpretation comes from the Holy Spirit, when interpretations differ from each other?

 

[schaick]

Actually, they are offered neither. It is not a valid consecration, not valid elements, and probably improper form.

To that I say prove it!

In effect you are saying my baptism is also invalid, because it was not done in the Catholic Church.

Show me where it says that only the Catholic Church, not the universal Church but the Catholic Church has the only access to the Holy Spirit.