Why the catholic church is most the target

[ckempston]

So do you follow Augustine and have the sacrament of ‘the Supper of the Lord’ at your church?

Not sure what you mean here.

So you see the E.O. as part of the Catholic Church.
I pray for reunification.

Well, I didn’t really mean that, or imply it, but any Christian is a part of the “catholic” church whether they admit it or not.

You agree that both are sons, have the apostolic succession traced to the apotles.
Why don’t you at least trust what these two sons agree upon?

It was an analogy; you’re taking a meaning I certainly didn’t intend to imply.

Including the sacrament of ‘the Supper of the Lord’?

Let’s see what else St. Augustine said.
St. Augustine (c. 354 - 430 A.D.) “You ought to know what you have received, what you are going to receive, and what you ought to receive daily. That Bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Body of Christ. The chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Blood of Christ.” (Sermons 227)

Ok.

Change? Clarify?
It is men that Jesus founded a church on and for.
Trust in the truth that was given to them to be stewards over.
It is the church that is the pillar and bulwark of the truth.
It is Jesus’ authority these men were given.
To ignore His church is to ignore Him.

Then to ignore his church is to be damned to hell, which is what the Catholic church taught for a long time, but does no longer. There’s a change.

 

[ckempston]

Please do not see Catholics as following blindly.
You see many examples on these forums that Catholics indeed know their bible and why they believe what they do.

It’s not intended as an insult, but a statement of fact. If the Magesterium says it, Catholics believe it, regardless of how much sense it makes. That is following blindly.

There is a difference between the Catholic and E.O. schism and the multitude of Bible-only Christian churches. The schism isn’t a lynch-pin to say ‘disunity is okay’.
Nobody can be the perfect example that Christ was, but that is still what we hope to do.

And Protestants should hope and strive for it as well.

I don’t see the two arguments in the same form.
One says - protestants split churches daily based on doctrinal issues.
The other says - you have bad people in your church.

No, it is about sin and truth. If the sin of an individual or group (Catholics) does not affect the truth for one group, then the sin of another individual or group (Protestants) does not affect the truth.

Catholics are usually guilty of two fallacies: appeal to the masses, and appeal to fear. The first basically says that because more (or for a longer time) people have believed X, X is true. The second basically says that because bad things happen when Y, Y is false.

Having sinners in your church does not ‘prove IT is wrong’.
We are a church of sinners.
That is why Jesus came for us.

Exactly. Disunity is one sin among many that causes splits among Protestants.

Non-Catholic Christians only follow what Luther taught them. If you don’t like it, start a new church and you get to define the doctrine, which comes straight from the bible, though.

Very few non-Catholic Christians follow what Luther taught.

 

[cazayoux]

Very few non-Catholic Christians follow what Luther taught.

You missed what I said Luther taught … I’ve replaced the “.” after 'them with a ‘:’.

Non-Catholic Christians only follow what Luther taught them: If you don’t like it, start a new church and you get to define the doctrine, which comes straight from the bible, though.

michel

 

[cazayoux]

It’s not intended as an insult, but a statement of fact. If the Magesterium says it, Catholics believe it, regardless of how much sense it makes. That is following blindly.

So even if we study it, understand it … you still consider it done ‘blindly’?
This just isn’t so.

michel

 

[cazayoux]

Catholics are usually guilty of two fallacies: appeal to the masses, and appeal to fear. The first basically says that because more (or for a longer time) people have believed X, X is true. The second basically says that because bad things happen when Y, Y is false.

If Jesus DID found and church, at it IS still around, that church should say so.
It has every right to.

I agree that it does not matter how many people believe something … numbers don’t matter.

michel

 

[PJM]

=ckempston;5076300]You forgot that the other reason that it works well is that it was enforced by secular authorities and Bishops often held governorships and positions of secular authority over their dioceses.

True but VERY OLD NEWS!

When your 2000 years old, your gonna have a few ghost in your closet!

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I have a theory about why the catholic church is targeted more than any other group much of the time. Its because the worldly people take the RCC more seriously than other religious groups.

Sometimes Catholicism is “targeted” because it deserves to be, needs to be, because people have taken its teaching sufficiently to heart to criticise it when it needs to be criticised, & because criticism of it is an appropriate reaction to its actions. Which is surely a very healthy thing (unwelcome maybe, but healthy too). The same applies to any Church.​

This is not an attack or denigration of those groups. Its just that the RCC has been around the longest, and is the most well known

That depends where one lives. If you mean, in the US, that needs to be made clearer. There are probably parts even of the US where Catholicism is as remote from people’s experience as the unicorn, & as little-known.​

and among the most outspoken, and its also the one which has changed the least overall, and is probably the least likely to compromise or negotiate beliefs to fit the world.

IOW - your words could be read as a denigration of “other religious groups” ​

The CC, “changed least” ? That’s highly debatable - any comparison has to compare like with like, & if the CC has been around longest & the others are much more recent, it is hard to see how any fair comparison is possible. There are too many value-judgements here, & too few comparisons of things not dependent on values, for comparison to be possible.

 

[ckempston]

So even if we study it, understand it … you still consider it done ‘blindly’?
This just isn’t so.

michel

Do you understand or agree with all that the church teaches? I realize as a Catholic you are bound to submit to the church’s teachings even when you don’t agree with them, but there’s no time when you say, “Gee, that’s not the way I’d do it, but oh well…”??? That’s what I mean by following blindly. Maybe “blindly” isn’t the right way to describe it.

 

[ckempston]

If Jesus DID found and church, at it IS still around, that church should say so.
It has every right to.

I agree that it does not matter how many people believe something … numbers don’t matter.

michel

I’d agree. It’s the Catholic definition of church that I think is unbiblical.

 

[cswalters]

I have a theory about why the catholic church is targeted more than any other group much of the time. Its because the worldly people take the RCC more seriously than other religious groups. This is not an attack or denigration of those groups. Its just that the RCC has been around the longest, and is the most well known and among the most outspoken, and its also the one which has changed the least overall, and is probably the least likely to compromise or negotiate beliefs to fit the world.

Seems reasonable, but some of the other religions who attack the RCC, might do it because it’s a easy target, meaning it’s been around for so long and has such a colorful past that they might nit-pick at something.

 

[ckempston]

True but VERY OLD NEWS!

When your 2000 years old, your gonna have a few ghost in your closet!

I agree. If any other church lasts 2000 more years, I’m sure it will have as many “ghosts.” I try to keep this in mind when making criticisms, but I think that the Catholic church has, in some ways, painted itself into a corner so that it ends up inconsistent with itself. Of course, you will disagree. In my humble opinion, throughout most of history, Christians would have been better off if they just kept their mouths shut and stuck to the basics.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Its not too obvious yet, mostly now its just speeches about how we need to change, or how we suck because of scandals, differing opinions. Most protestant/fundamentalists don’t get it as bad as we do. The blatant targeting is coming in the near future, as catholic churches and hospitals are forced to close over abortion, gay marriage, etc…

Why not wait until evils happen **before **deploring them ? Matt. 6.28 is definitely appropriate here If you simply must be miserable, why not be miserable about evils, that are not potential future events, but are real & present ? There is no lack of them.​

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

traillius;5062167:

I have a theory about why the catholic church is targeted more than any other group much of the time. Its because the worldly people take the RCC more seriously than other religious groups. This is not an attack or denigration of those groups. Its just that the RCC has been around the longest, and is the most well known and among the most outspoken, and its also the one which has changed the least overall, and is probably the least likely to compromise or negotiate beliefs to fit the world.

FACT is stranger than fiction!

The Rcc is the Oldest Chrsitian Church (2000 continueous years and climbing.)

**## So what ? **

The Rcc is the Largest Christian church (By far)

## So what ?

The Rcc is the ONLY church actually founded by God Himself!

**## So what ? **

The Rcc is the SEAT / The FOUNT of all Moral Truths, and all Faith related truths!

**## So what ? **

So, if not us who?

Simple - if the CC committed apostasy, which it cannot help doing, if God does not preserve it, He would find disciples elsewhere. If all the Churches in creation became enthusiastic Satanolaters overnight, God would raise up servants to Himself somehow He needs no Churches; they, need Him. If they sin & refuse to repent, they will be swept away, just like any other evil-doers. Why should we suppose that God has any obligation not to punish the Church when it sins ? God is “no respecter of persons”.​

A better question might be, why they struggle so with accepting THE TRUTH even when its in the BIBLE?

Talk about conceited LOL.​

None of that, even if it were not debatable or over-simplified, would for one moment give the CC any advantage whatever over anyone else. BTW, the Truth is much more a Person, than a book. The CC is not needed for eithers to have either kind of truth. Size, & age, & extent, and similar rubbish, have absolutely no relation to whether God is at work. Let’s leave nonsense like size & the rest of it to these ridiculous “world powers”, none of which is worth anything without God, all of which will die, like all those that preceded them.

“Begone, Satan” is also in the Bible, at Matthew 16.23 - it’s understandable that you don’t mention the naming of Peter as Satan by Christ Himself.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Satan! … just as hawkeye says.
He will not succeed though.

Just the fact that the church survived this long is a testament to God’s good promise that the gates of hell will not prevail against it.

No human institution has come close to surviving as long as the Catholic Church.
THIS tells you that the Catholic Church is not a human institution, but from God.

michel

The Pharaohs ruled for a mere 2,600 years - so where does that leave the argument from comparative longevity ? Judaism has survived every persecution, included the worst that Christians could do for 1600 years. It’s older than Christianity, & its life-span goes back 35 centuries, & possibly longer. As for Hinduism, that’s even older. The Japanese Empire goes back 2,000 years. So the longevity of Christianity is not unusual, nor is it unsurpassed.​

 

[Peter_J]

Let’s say you have two sons that were with you as you wrote the book. We go to the sons and ask them to clarify what the meaning is. They disagree. Which one do we believe? This is, in essence, the situation with the Catholic and Orthodox faiths.

Yes, I think I understand what you’re saying.

But what about the “Undivided Church of the first millennium”?

 

[Peter_J]

It’s not intended as an insult, but a statement of fact. If the Magesterium says it, Catholics believe it, regardless of how much sense it makes. That is following blindly.

Are you referring to the various statements about “docility”?

No, it is about sin and truth. If the sin of an individual or group (Catholics) does not affect the truth for one group, then the sin of another individual or group (Protestants) does not affect the truth.

Amen.

Having sinners in your church does not ‘prove IT is wrong’.
We are a church of sinners.
That is why Jesus came for us.

Makes you stop and think, though, when you compare the degree of disunity among Protestants, vs. the degree of disunity among Catholics and Orthodox. (Kind of like how the recent Gallup poll makes you stop and think, but in reverse.)

 

[Peter_J]

Catholics are engaging in special pleading when they point to disunity among Protestants as proof that it is wrong, but then do not allow Protestants to point out the numerous problems in the Catholic church as proof that IT is wrong.

Yes, I suppose so. But don’t Protestant do the same thing, in reverse? (I believe they do, although I admit I don’t know for sure – I don’t spend a lot of time on Protestant forums.)

 

[ckempston]

Yes, I think I understand what you’re saying.

But what about the “Undivided Church of the first millennium”?

I think this is still largely illusory.

 

[ckempston]

Are you referring to the various statements about “docility”?

Depends on the definition you’re using and if Catholics use that word in some kind of special way.

Amen.

Makes you stop and think, though, when you compare the degree of disunity among Protestants, vs. the degree of disunity among Catholics and Orthodox. (Kind of like how the recent Gallup poll makes you stop and think, but in reverse.)

I think the main point is that there is nobody that can claim perfect unity. The level of disunity among “Protestants” is indeed alarmingly excessive when compared to Catholicism vs. Orthodoxy.

 

[ckempston]

Yes, I suppose so. But don’t Protestant do the same thing, in reverse? (I believe they do, although I admit I don’t know for sure – I don’t spend a lot of time on Protestant forums.)

Yes, they do. Although I would never engage in such fallacious reasoning.