Why is it better to be Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nogames
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
nogames said:
Are you willing to do the same? For example, if you’re going to say that the apostles knew anything of a “papal office” are you willing to prove that assertion?
Click to expand...
I have given you the list of the apostolic succession (Popes) of the Catholic Church. As I said, Pope is the title we gave to this office. It was not called that during Jesus time. What’s important is that the succession is uninterrupted, the point I wanted to make.
 
You have to provide specific reference that the Church which Peter the apostles served was not the Catholic Church.
 
Reuben_J said:
40.png
nogames:
Are you willing to do the same? For example, if you’re going to say that the apostles knew anything of a “papal office” are you willing to prove that assertion?
Click to expand...
I have given you the list of the apostolic succession (Popes) of the Catholic Church. As I said, Pope is the title we gave to this office. It was not called that during Jesus time. What’s important is that the succession is uninterrupted, the point I wanted to make.
Click to expand...
There can be no “unbroken succession” of popes. As I pointed out earlier, there have been periods of history in which two or three popes existed all at the same time! In addition, there is certainly no way to prove historically, that your list would be accurate even if the multiple popes problem never existed.
 
nogames said:
There can be no “unbroken succession” of popes. As I pointed out earlier, there have been periods of history in which two or three popes existed all at the same time! In addition, there is certainly no way to prove historically, that your list would be accurate even if the multiple popes problem never existed.
Click to expand...
I guess we have to end here then (if there is nothing new or if no reference that I asked could be provided).

The Vatican still stand. All the records are still intact. There was one conflict where there was power struggle of the Popes. It was a short while and later restored. Nothing was lost. All doctrines remained intact.

I admit that because I want to be objective but that alone did not change the apostolic succession by any means.
 
Last edited:
nogames said:
40.png
Reuben_J:
So, again, I want you to provide specific reference as to why it was not the Catholic Church that the apostles served?
Click to expand...
The modern Catholic Church differs from the ancient church (of the days of the apostles) in their teachings, their authority structure, and in the “object” of their devotion. The early church apparently knew nothing of a papal office, purgatory, indulgences, the veneration of Mary, prayers for the dead, or the mixing of our works with God’s grace in salvation. To say that the modern Catholic Church is the same as that of the apostles is a lot like saying that the USA is the same country as the one founded in 1776.
Click to expand...
And you don’t look the same as you did as an infant. Big deal, the essentials are the same, and most happen to be shared by the Eastern Orthodox even after years of isolation.
 
That wasn’t my argument. By what criteria would you judge a modern church claiming to have roots in those early centuries? What practices or beliefs would be evidence? You cite examples of things the ancient church didn’t practice or believe, so I’d like to know what practices you do know they participated in. And, what evidence supports those claims?
 
Last edited:
Furthermore, if you’re claim is that a Catholic ought to be able to prove each doctrine, dogma and discipline from Pentecost to this moment, not only does Catholicism collapse, but all of Christianity. For example the Early Church took a long time to hammer out theology we Christians take for granted- things like the Trinity, for example. So if the criteria for which denomination is true is that all aspects must exist from “Day 1”, than neither of us are afforded much ground to stand on.
 
Reading material:

www.catholic.com

The Papacy in Scripture: No Rocks Required

Matthew 16 is not the only text that demonstrates the truth of the papacy in Scripture. Here is a list of Bible verses that support the Catholic view.
www.catholic.com www.catholic.com

Bibilical references to primacy of Peter.

www.catholic.com

Peter and His Successors

Those who consider the position of the Catholic Church seriously sometimes have difficulty in understanding how Peter’s authority is continued in the Chur...
www.catholic.com www.catholic.com

Your question regarding two popes at once.


Apostolic succession and early church fathers.

🙂🙂
 
How do you know that you are who you are? You’re parents (claim) to have given you a name, they’ve been throwing you a party each year (I hope) on the same day and calling it your birthday. When you’re old enough, the state gives you a little plastic card with that same name and same birthdate. And, if you lose that little plastic card, you can use a piece of paper they (suppopsedly) issued your parents at your birth that says basically exactly the same stuff as both your parents and that little plastic card say.

Of course you believe this, but even if you didn’t, even if you had the mother of all existential meltdowns and wanted to track down the doctor who delivered you, the nurse who washed you up, the neighbor who saw your folks bring you home from the hospital- you can’t take it as “proof”. Even if there was a photograph of you as an infant with your parents, there’s still room for doubt- it could be a different baby for all you know. Is it reasonable evidence? Sure. Because either its true, or you’re living in the Truman Show and everyone is conspiring against you. Because, hopefully, your parents don’t strike you as the type of people who would lie to you about something like that (maybe about Santa Clause, but not about your own birth). So there’s a point where we have to acknowledge the reasonable, logical limit of the evidence available to us.

What we’re doing by citing things like the Early Church Fathers’ writings is the equivelent of showing you our drivers license and birth certificate. You can logically make the claim we’ve all been duped or misled, but in doing so you’d be ignoring some pretty strong evidence. None of us claim the Catholic Church of today is absolutely identical to the ancient church, and there’s no branch of science, human thought, culture, even language that could boast a similar conviction. What we are saying is the Apostles are equivelent to our parents naming us and telling us when our birthday is. Scripture, the Apostolic writings and oral Traditions, these are our identifying documents we hold up as evidence we are who we say we are (Catholics). Its as much proof as any of us, yourself included, can go by since its impossible to verify with 100% certainty. And if we consider the Canon to have been closed by these same men, to recognize their authority in one case and not in another is close to agreeing with your parents that you were born, you just don’t believe the date they claim you were born on is correct.
 
I guess the main reason for me is that historic, apostolic connection the clergy have to Jesus Himself. That can’t be obtained by a man who went to a Bible college created in the last century and became “ordained” without that connection. They have a connection by their Baptism but so does all laity. Why trust a church that came along way, way later to interpret The Bible more correctly when God gave us The Bible through The Church that still exists to this day? It’s very easy in the Protestant world to find a church that conforms to all kinds of beliefs that Christianity, in it’s recorded history, always said was wrong. For example, you can find Protestant churches that now say abortion and homosexual marriage is okay. The early church father’s unanimous agreeded that when Jesus said “This is my body” he meant it literally when talking of The Eucharist. Most Protestant churches have thrown that out in favor of calling The Eucharist merely symbolic of Christ’s body. That’s too big of a change to trust, Imho. That’s why I feel it’s better to be Catholic. As pontious pilate said, “What is truth?” and what John Henry Newman said “to be deep in history is to cease being protestant” I know too because I use to be Protestant. God bless!
 
Last edited:
Only God knows who makes it to heaven. None of us are guaranteed a free pass just because we are Catholic. We have to deserve to go to heaven. The Church does not exclude salvation outside of Catholicism. Because Catholicism has the fullness to truth, we hope/believe that we have been given the knowledge of how to get there. Again, God is the final judge.
 
Nobody deserves to go to heaven but I think I understand what you mean. It’s by God’s grace we have hope to make it one day
 
Last edited:
Honestly the basis for that analogy came from Fr. John Riccardo at Our Lady of Good Counsel in Plymouth, MI. Like I said, I’m a well-trained parrot.
 
I laugh a little when I say something and people ask me how I know that. Like uh…books? Cause I sure didn’t come up with it!
 
I can’t answer any of your questions from an educated perspective or even a Catholic one because I’ve come from a Pentecostal/Non-Denominational background and am only just beginning to enter the Catholic faith. But I can tell you why, after looking at so many denominations I landed on this one, and why I think it’s better to be Catholic.

These answers though are purely why I think it’s better for me. Not for someone else, your choices are yours to make.

But for me it’s better because:
  1. I get solid answers to all of my questions along with evidence from scripture or early church writings that is clear (and I have ALOT of questions).
  2. I can verify those answers via historical writings and/or neutral (non-religious) academics most of the time.
  3. I don’t believe that God would intentionally create confusion and therefore Sola Scriptura always seemed wrong to me. I would research the commentaries on a verse and get literally hundreds of different explanations. Something just seemed wrong to me about that to me. Also, I believe that God wanted us to be one united church but the different views on scripture have lead to thousands of fractured Protestant denominations.
  4. Never once have I been told by a Catholic to stop asking questions and just have faith. Discernment appears to be embraced.
  5. Catholicism is less ‘me’ focused and more God-focused.
  6. Because I feel with all my heart that God is calling me to Catholicism and I initially I was less than impressed (to put it mildly) but now it’s starting to feel like coming home.
There are a million more reasons but they are the biggest. Best of luck with getting answers to your questions 😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top