Would God expect................?

Tayla

I don't really understand how I fit into this whole Christianity community.
I was baptised a Catholic, made my communion, confirmation and baptised my first child but I never go to mass or pray.
I believe in heaven, I believe in God ( I think there is some higher power) but I do not believe in the Church.
For the last year or so when people have been asking me when I was going to baptise my second child I have found myself hating the church and getting angry even thinking about them.
After the abuse scandals and their unwillingness to allow the victims to have any peace I can't help but see them as evil.
We're always told if you believe then it is the most important thing and as I said I do believe in some way about God and I believe in a Heaven but that is probably more because I want to believe in a Heaven.
As it is now I won't be getting my baby christened as I find it ridiculous that you cannot leave the church now.

Say i'm wrong and it gets to judgement day and God asks me why I didn't believe/practice or pray then I think in my own head that God would never have expected people to believe in him in this country with the representatives of the church we have in the country.

I don't think anyone would be judged for not believing or practicing........I think the Church themselves have made it very very hard to believe.......what do you think......would God expect complete faith in him and the church regardless of his representatives?

PDN

My own opinion, for what it's worth, is that God wants us to seek Him and make a decision about how we should worship him and serve Him.

On judgement day God will ask you about what you did, not about what anyone else did. I'm not trying to be unkind here - but it does sound as if you want to use the Catholic Church as an excuse for your own actions or inaction.

I think the Church themselves have made it very very hard to believe.......what do you think......would God expect complete faith in him and the church regardless of his representatives?

As a non-Catholic myself I don't believe the Catholic Church are God's representatives, but I do think God still expects me to have faith in Him.

georgieporgy

do you know any good catholics? or good church representatives?

perhaps your mother for example?

There are many good catholics. It's the bad ones you have to avoid. Good catholics will generally tell you that things like child abuse and rape are wrong. The pope, for example, if you would listen to him, would tell you that.

homer911

In a word, Yes. Once we hear the word of God, we are responsible for our response to it.

There are may fine Catholic priests out there as well as many fine non-Catholic churches - you seem to be judging the Catholic church by the actions of a few within the hierarchy - this simply isn't fair to them.

You say you never go to mass or pray - well do that, get to know your local priests, or find a church further away from home where you will feel less under scrutiny and get involved there. Christians are going to be spending a lot of time together in the future - its important to get used to it now! Then find out about home groups, bible studies or an Alpha course to learn more about your faith - if your church doesnt promote/run these then find one that does.

As regards having your child baptised - I suggest there is plenty of time for that later when you understand what promises you are making to God on the child's behalf, or you could simply leave it for your child to make their own decision in later life (although I'm sure there are plenty of Roman Catholics who would disagree with me on that)

Tayla

PDN wrote: »

On judgement day God will ask you about what you did, not about what anyone else did. I'm not trying to be unkind here - but it does sound as if you want to use the Catholic Church as an excuse for your own actions or inaction.

No, not at all, I am a good person and have nothing to fear if I were to be judged tomorrow, why I need the church to prove that I do not know


In fact the main reason it is an issue now is because everyone keeps asking about a christening, no one on either side of the family is religious, they do not believe in God at all.

I hate the whole thing about babies being born with original sin, I do not believe that and I think it is a pretty horrible thing for the church to preach

Tayla

homer911 wrote: »

In a word, Yes. Once we hear the word of God, we are responsible for our response to it.

But how? I don't think God would or could expect people to listen to people that they do not trust.

homer911 wrote: »

There are may fine Catholic priests out there as well as many fine non-Catholic churches - you seem to be judging the Catholic church by the actions of a few within the hierarchy - this simply isn't fair to them.

I don't think it was the actions of a few, I think there are those who committed these crimes and that there are those who allowed them to happen, I believe although cannot prove that this made up the vast majority of the church.

homer911 wrote: »

As regards having your child baptised - I suggest there is plenty of time for that later when you understand what promises you are making to God on the child's behalf, or you could simply leave it for your child to make their own decision in later life (although I'm sure there are plenty of Roman Catholics who would disagree with me on that)

Thanks, I guess I have some thinking to do.

Donatello

This is a good information site:
http://www.catholicscomehome.org/

PDN

Tayla wrote: »

No, not at all, I am a good person and have nothing to fear if I were to be judged tomorrow, why I need the church to prove that I do not know

It's nothing to do with the church needing to prove anything. But it does sound like you need to read the Bible.

Tayla

Tayla wrote: »

No, not at all, I am a good person and have nothing to fear if I were to be judged tomorrow, why I need the church to prove that I do not know


In fact the main reason it is an issue now is because everyone keeps asking about a christening, no one on either side of the family is religious, they do not believe in God at all.

I hate the whole thing about babies being born with original sin, I do not believe that and I think it is a pretty horrible thing for the church to preach

Why don't you explore some other area of christian faith than catholicism then? It seems the best plan for you

enda1

All you have ot do is ask for forgiveness before you die and you'll be grand. He's an infinitely forgiving lord, him. So live a life of pleasure and don't fret over the bible's rules for in the end all will be forgiven!

Tayla

PDN wrote: »

It's nothing to do with the church needing to prove anything. But it does sound like you need to read the Bible.

I don't believe in the bible, Only Jesus.

Tayla

Tayla wrote: »

I don't believe in the bible, Only Jesus.

How do you know anything about jesus and what he wants without the bible?

Tayla

bluewolf wrote: »

How do you know anything about jesus and what he wants without the bible?

I did learn about Jesus, I had no reason to doubt his existence, I believe he could heal people, whether or not he was the son of God I do not know,

I also believe in many other healers.

Fanny Cradock

I mean this in a kind sense, Tanya, but you need to first understand what Christianity is and what it says.

If you want to hear a general defence of the Christian faith (and that does not mean a defence of the RCC - not all of us are Roman Catholic, you know) this interview with John Lennox is interesting.

If you want to get into the specifics of what Christianity is about then I would suggest checking out these talks (14 in all!) by Don Carson.

Donatello

This is somewhat relevant. This famous author left the Church. Fr. Barron tries to talk her back!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxv1xU1ZOdM

Zombrex

Tayla wrote: »

I did learn about Jesus, I had no reason to doubt his existence, I believe he could heal people, whether or not he was the son of God I do not know

Did you learn about Jesus from source other than the Bible?

HugoDrax

OP,

The only true church is the Catholic Church.
Outside of the church there is no salvation.
That's it.
End of.

newmug

Tayla wrote: »

I don't think it was the actions of a few, I think there are those who committed these crimes and that there are those who allowed them to happen, I believe although cannot prove that this made up the vast majority of the church.

I've come across some sweeping generalisations in my time, but this just takes the biscuit!

So out of the billion and a half of us, you think the vast majority "allowed" child sexual abuse to occur? I assume thats the crime you're talking about. Well I can tell you here and now, I am a member of the Catholic Church, and until all this came out into the public domain, I knew as much about it as you did!

Paedophiles exist. Thats just a horrible fact of life. I personnally think we should bring back capital punishment for them, but that contravenes Jesus's wishes (thou shalt not kill), so jail will have to do. Every paedophile looks for cover, something to hide their deeds. Most paedophiles get married and abuse their own children!!! So this arguement that paedophilia is caused by not letting priests get married is a load of crap. Some become swimming instructors so they have easy access to kids, others become teachers for the same reason, some work in developing countries where children are vunerable and child prostitution is rampant etc. So in other words, they all try to find cover for their crimes.

Unfortunately for our religion, some became priests. It was a good cover as Catholicism is the religion of love and kindness and trustworthiness, the complete opposite to paedophilia. They preyed on disadvantaged kids, orphans who had no parents to turn to, kids in mental institutions, sick children who would die anyway, children who had no voice. This is why these things went unnoticed for so long. When an odd case would come to the fore, it was seen as an isolated incident. Most times it could be explained away by the paedophile, and the Guards wouldn't even have enough evidence to prosecute. Thats how cunning and evil these paedophiles were. Without proof of any wrongdoing, the Catholic Church would just move these paedophiles somewhere else to appease the alleged victim. Knowing what we know now, that was a bad idea, but it was done in good faith at the time.

When the victims reached adulthood and became organised, it was far easier to get those bastard paedophiles convicted. When the extent of the crimes these people committed was discovered, it was shocking to everybody, the vast majority of Catholics included. The Catholic Church who employed these people are not the Guards however, and legally could not do a thing about it. I understand that due to the way the Catholic Church is sometimes percieved, some people may be frustrated with us, but look at it this way. If a boardsie was caught committing a criminal act, would you blame the boards.ie? Would you avoid boards and not let your family use it? Would you accuse all boards.ie members of being criminals? If boards happened to be their employers, what would you expect boards to do? Even if they kicked out a computer using member, he's still a computer user! Its the same with paedophiles. The Catholic Church dont deserve the flak we get for the actions of this handful of evil infiltrators. Our purpose is to worship God and do his will, and the "church" part is only the clerical administration associated with that. I'm not belittling the suffering of the victims here, but we were conned and used by these paedophiles too.

When the Ryan report came out, Archibishop Diarmud Martin apologised to the victims. That is all he could do. He didnt abuse anyone, he didnt know it was happening, he didnt "allow" it to happen, he helped the victims and the Guards in any way he could. The Pope gave the priests of Ireland a bollocking for not noticing what was going on. We, the Catholic Church, are not responsible for the actions of these paedophiles. These paedophiles are evil, and did not, and still do not in any way represent Jesus Christ, Catholicism, priests, or normal members of the church like me.


OP, Catholicism is the truest path to God. I know there are a lot of non-Catholics on boards, its very biased like that, but I respect their opinions even if they are wrong sometimes. Remember that boards does not represent a true cross-section of Irish society. However, Jesus was the first Catholic, and Catholicism is the direct continuation of his Word. Its also the only religion that takes the super-natural seriously. If you really want to worship God and have a happy afterlife, re-ignite your Catholic faith and put your heart, soul, and trust into Jesus.

wolfsbane

Tayla wrote: »

I don't really understand how I fit into this whole Christianity community.
I was baptised a Catholic, made my communion, confirmation and baptised my first child but I never go to mass or pray.
I believe in heaven, I believe in God ( I think there is some higher power) but I do not believe in the Church.
For the last year or so when people have been asking me when I was going to baptise my second child I have found myself hating the church and getting angry even thinking about them.
After the abuse scandals and their unwillingness to allow the victims to have any peace I can't help but see them as evil.
We're always told if you believe then it is the most important thing and as I said I do believe in some way about God and I believe in a Heaven but that is probably more because I want to believe in a Heaven.
As it is now I won't be getting my baby christened as I find it ridiculous that you cannot leave the church now.

Say i'm wrong and it gets to judgement day and God asks me why I didn't believe/practice or pray then I think in my own head that God would never have expected people to believe in him in this country with the representatives of the church we have in the country.

I don't think anyone would be judged for not believing or practicing........I think the Church themselves have made it very very hard to believe.......what do you think......would God expect complete faith in him and the church regardless of his representatives?

You are right not to get involved with something you don't believe in. But you really need to find what the truth is, so that you can believe IT. Since you already believe in the Creator, ask Him to reveal Himself to you, to enable you to discern false religion from the true, and to recognise His word so that you can obey it.

************************************************************************************
Acts 17:26 And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings, 27 so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us;

newmug

Well OP, what way are you thinking now?

Fanny Cradock

These things take time.

philologos

Hey Tayla. I'm not going to say anything other than to help you to work this out for yourself.

I would highly recommend that you read the Bible at some point in your life. It is a book that has changed the world forever and has changed countless lives for the better. I was very surprised at what I read when I read the Bible. I thought I knew a lot of it already but I really didn't.

I'd encourage you to read the Bible (I recommend reading the New Testament first and then reading the Old Testament, it makes better sense this way) and listen to these podcasts.

If you have any questions about this just PM me. I think that irrespective of the Roman Catholic Church, or any other church, you should start with the basics and try to find out more about God and about Jesus.

If you've any friends who are actively Christian you should definitely meet up with them and find out what motivates them.

Wishing you the best in every inquiry,
philologos

newmug wrote: »

Well OP, what way are you thinking now?

If I were the OP I'd be very confused right now. Isn't it more important to introduce people to the general idea of Christianity first?

Fanny Cradock

I recommended exactly the same podcasts earlier in the thread. Great minds and all that.

mcmoustache

HugoDrax wrote: »

OP,

The only true church is the Catholic Church.
Outside of the church there is no salvation.
That's it.
End of.

Hello Mr Ratzinger.....

On topic, as Bluewolf suggested, take a look outside the Catholic Church. There are loads of non-catholic versions of Christianity out there and I'm sure you can find one to suit your needs.

newmug

philologos wrote: »

If I were the OP I'd be very confused right now. Isn't it more important to introduce people to the general idea of Christianity first?

I agree. Just asking.

mcmoustache wrote: »

On topic, as Bluewolf suggested, take a look outside the Catholic Church. There are loads of non-catholic versions of Christianity out there and I'm sure you can find one to suit your needs.

Well its not exactly an a-la-carte menu!?! Jesus was the first Christian, and I'd be sticking as closely as possible as I could to his teachings. Your "needs" dont concern God the Father.

Also, Catholicism is original Christianity, and we recieve a lot of flak sometimes for sticking to Gods will. But there ya go, you either love God and are concerned about his will and your afterlife (you're REAL life, thats going to last a LOT longer than this one!!!), or you're not.

newmug

Interesting read, perhaps it will help th OP

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padre_Pio

Keylem

mcmoustache wrote: »

Hello Mr Ratzinger.....

On topic, as Bluewolf suggested, take a look outside the Catholic Church. There are loads of non-catholic versions of Christianity out there and I'm sure you can find one to suit your needs.

Exactly.... ONE Catholic Church, 30,000 other churches.

Douay-Rheims Bible

John 10:16

And other sheep I have, that are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd.

philologos

Keylem wrote: »

Exactly.... ONE Catholic Church, 30,000 other churches.

Here's a rudimentary primer in logic. I can just as easily say:
Exactly.... ONE Lutheran Church, 30,000 other churches.
Exactly.... ONE Anglican Church, 30,000 other churches.
Exactly.... ONE Redeemed Church of God, 30,000 other churches.
One could question why what the RCC says should be regarded as any more valid.

Although don't you think that this is detracting from talking about the general rudimentary claims of Christianity.

PDN and Fanny Craddock: Please please please can we open the megathread again. It would save us from a lot of these detractions into denominationalism :pac:

Keylem

philologos wrote: »

Here's a rudimentary primer in logic. I can just as easily say:
Exactly.... ONE Lutheran Church, 30,000 other churches.
Exactly.... ONE Anglican Church, 30,000 other churches.
Exactly.... ONE Redeemed Church of God, 30,000 other churches.
One could question why what the RCC says should be regarded as any more valid.

It's the ORIGINAL Church and the OLDEST!

philologos

Keylem wrote: »

It's the ORIGINAL Church and the OLDEST!

There is no sound historical basis for that claim. There are other churches which predate the RCC, including the Mar Thomas Church in India.

Is it not possible for you just to leave your pot-shots at Protestantism aside for one thread and focus on mere Christianity?

newmug

Keylem wrote: »

It's the ORIGINAL Church and the OLDEST!

Catholicism = Christianity. No difference. Anything else is not Christian.

wolfsbane

newmug wrote: »

Catholicism = Christianity. No difference. Anything else is not Christian.

I appreciate your honest approach. 100% mistaken, but honest.

And an honest man should read the Bible without papal spectacles, to see if it squares with papal teachings. If it doesn't he has the option of ignoring his findings and submitting his conscience to Rome, or obeying the Bible and forsaking the commandments of men.

***************************************************************************
3 John 1:9 I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to have the preeminence among them, does not receive us. 10 Therefore, if I come, I will call to mind his deeds which he does, prating against us with malicious words. And not content with that, he himself does not receive the brethren, and forbids those who wish to, putting them out of the church.

Donatello

Faith Clips by Fr. Robert Barron
In light of the recent series of questions answered by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Fr. Barron explains why the Catholic Church is the one true church founded by Jesus Christ.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roum4zbJ8ZQ

If I can nitpick at one point, it would be Fr Barron's use of the word church for the Protestant ecclesial communities.

philologos

Donatello - I have the policy of ignoring videos and articles you post. I want to see you explain your own faith yourself in totality.

newmug

wolfsbane wrote: »

I appreciate your honest approach. 100% mistaken, but honest.

And an honest man should read the Bible without papal spectacles, to see if it squares with papal teachings. If it doesn't he has the option of ignoring his findings and submitting his conscience to Rome, or obeying the Bible and forsaking the commandments of men.

***************************************************************************
3 John 1:9 I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to have the preeminence among them, does not receive us. 10 Therefore, if I come, I will call to mind his deeds which he does, prating against us with malicious words. And not content with that, he himself does not receive the brethren, and forbids those who wish to, putting them out of the church.

100% honest, and 100% correct! You'll find out the hard way! How many times have YOU recieved what Jesus asked us to eat, that which is paranormal, supernatural, otherworldly? I'm talking of course about the Eucharist. Not once I'd bet! You need to be doing this stuff, the road to hell is paved with good intentions my friend!

I just want to take this oppertunity to dispel a myth about Catholicism, you touched on it there Wolfsbane. What makes you think we all "submit our conscience to Rome"?

I know nothing about Rome, I've never been there. Do you read the Bible with London or Saxony spectacales? I doubt you do! I find it quite ignorant and it saddens me, when non-Catholic people try to insist that there's some link between Catholicism and some Italian city. I reeeeeeeeeally hate when some unenlightened people call me a "Roman" Catholic. I'm not Italian, I'm Irish! From a religious point of view, I'd prefer to be called an Original Christian.

Yes its true that the administration buildings of Jesus's intended religion are indeed in Rome, but they could just as easily have been in Berlin, Jerusalem, Karachi, ANYWHERE! Jesus himself appointed the first pope, Saint Peter. He said to Saint Peter, who happened to be the leader of the apostles, to spread His word through a network, when He famously said "You now have the keys to Heaven. Whatever you loose on Earth, you loose in Heaven, whatever you bind on Earth, you bind in Heaven." Hence the popular idea that St. Peter stands at the "Gates" of Heaven!!! St. Peter just happened to be stationed in Rome when he was martyred, hence the official headquarters of this "network" stuck there!

Another thing, I have read the Bible! It says divorce is wrong, gayness is wrong, and Mary is a Virgin! Hard as it may be for you to swallow all that in this materialistic age, thats what you have to abide by if you sincerley want to do Gods will.

partyatmygaff

Keylem wrote: »

It's the ORIGINAL Church and the OLDEST!

Technically speaking both the Western Catholic and Eastern/Oriental Orthodox Churches stemmed from the same source and split at the great schism.

So both the Orthodox and Catholic churches are equally old and equally original. Therefore I reject this definiton of

Catholicism = Christianity. No difference. Anything else is not Christian.

Quo Vadis

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Technically speaking both the Western Catholic and Eastern/Oriental Orthodox Churches stemmed from the same source and split at the great schism.

So both the Orthodox and Catholic churches are equally old and equally original. Therefore I reject this definiton of

No, the Orthodox split away from and left the original church and papal (St. Peter's) authority.

wolfsbane

Quo Vadis wrote: »

No, the Orthodox split away from and left the original church and papal (St. Peter's) authority.

Or: the Catholics split away from and left the original church and apostolic (Scripture's) authority. Unless Rome is essential to the nature of the true Church - which newmug denies.

*******************************************************************************
3 John 1:9 I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to have the preeminence among them, does not receive us. 10 Therefore, if I come, I will call to mind his deeds which he does, prating against us with malicious words. And not content with that, he himself does not receive the brethren, and forbids those who wish to, putting them out of the church.

Donatello

wolfsbane wrote: »

Or: the Catholics split away from and left the original church and apostolic (Scripture's) authority. Unless Rome is essential to the nature of the true Church - which newmug denies.

*******************************************************************************
3 John 1:9 I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to have the preeminence among them, does not receive us. 10 Therefore, if I come, I will call to mind his deeds which he does, prating against us with malicious words. And not content with that, he himself does not receive the brethren, and forbids those who wish to, putting them out of the church.

All the particular Churches must be in communion with Rome. Sadly, the Orthodox broke away and broke Communion with the Bishop of Rome, which is vital for Catholicity. When that vital link is severed, error creeps in, hence we see the irony that the Orthodox do not retain the orthodox position on the prohibition on artificial birth control for example. Only the Catholic Church has held fast to this teaching of Jesus.

wolfsbane

newmug said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfsbane
I appreciate your honest approach. 100% mistaken, but honest.

And an honest man should read the Bible without papal spectacles, to see if it squares with papal teachings. If it doesn't he has the option of ignoring his findings and submitting his conscience to Rome, or obeying the Bible and forsaking the commandments of men.
100% honest, and 100% correct! You'll find out the hard way! How many times have YOU recieved what Jesus asked us to eat, that which is paranormal, supernatural, otherworldly? I'm talking of course about the Eucharist. Not once I'd bet!

I have received both the spiritual and symbolic food Christ commanded us to eat. I received/came to Him by faith when I repented and believed the gospel. Every week I eat the bread and drink the wine to remember Him and what He did for me. I do not offer Him again for my sins, as He suffered once and that was completely sufficient to save both me and all who believe in Him.

Nor do I eat His glorified body - not the muscle and tendons; nor do I drink His blood cells and plasma. I eat bread and wine, symbols of His body and blood, to show that He laid down his life for me. Doing so, I proclaim His death for me.

You need to be doing this stuff, the road to hell is paved with good intentions my friend!

What you are doing is an insult to Christ's completed work, and in ignorance of His spiritual meaning, just as were the Jews.

I just want to take this oppertunity to dispel a myth about Catholicism, you touched on it there Wolfsbane. What makes you think we all "submit our conscience to Rome"?

I know nothing about Rome, I've never been there. Do you read the Bible with London or Saxony spectacales? I doubt you do! I find it quite ignorant and it saddens me, when non-Catholic people try to insist that there's some link between Catholicism and some Italian city. I reeeeeeeeeally hate when some unenlightened people call me a "Roman" Catholic. I'm not Italian, I'm Irish! From a religious point of view, I'd prefer to be called an Original Christian.

Yes its true that the administration buildings of Jesus's intended religion are indeed in Rome, but they could just as easily have been in Berlin, Jerusalem, Karachi, ANYWHERE! Jesus himself appointed the first pope, Saint Peter. He said to Saint Peter, who happened to be the leader of the apostles, to spread His word through a network, when He famously said "You now have the keys to Heaven. Whatever you loose on Earth, you loose in Heaven, whatever you bind on Earth, you bind in Heaven." Hence the popular idea that St. Peter stands at the "Gates" of Heaven!!! St. Peter just happened to be stationed in Rome when he was martyred, hence the official headquarters of this "network" stuck there!

I meant Rome, the church/institution. I assumed all would know that in the context.

Yes, Peter and all the apostles were given the 'keys of the kingdom': Matthew 18:18 “Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Their teaching is our precept. We are condemned or set free as we obey it.

Another thing, I have read the Bible!

Good!

It says divorce is wrong,

Correct. But it also says there is an exception.

gayness is wrong,

Yes, without exception.

and Mary is a Virgin!

Wrong. It says Mary was a virgin when she conceived Jesus. The idea that she remained so is a doctrine of men, not God.

Hard as it may be for you to swallow all that in this materialistic age, thats what you have to abide by if you sincerley want to do Gods will.

Whatever the Scripture commands is what we need to practice. One of those commands is this:
******************************************************************************
1 Thessalonians 5:21 Test all things; hold fast what is good.

wolfsbane

Donatello wrote: »

All the particular Churches must be in communion with Rome. Sadly, the Orthodox broke away and broke Communion with the Bishop of Rome, which is vital for Catholicity. When that vital link is severed, error creeps in, hence we see the irony that the Orthodox do not retain the orthodox position on the prohibition on artificial birth control for example. Only the Catholic Church has held fast to this teaching of Jesus.

So newmug was mistaken - the Bishop of Rome is an essential for the true Church.

But your assertion is not found in the Bible, so any bishop looking to rule the rest could make the claim. The Bishop of Jerusalem; the Bishop of Antioch; Constantinople; Moscow; etc.

It all presupposes one-bishop rule being Biblical - which it is not. It was just a later perversion of the NT plurality of elders. The doctrines of men, just like the re-institution of a priesthood, something unknown in the NT Church, and utterly impossible to square with its doctrine.

Face it, my friend, the RCC is nothing like the NT Church, and hasn't been for at least a millennium and a half. Christ, in Revelation 2-3, warned erring churches what would happen if they did not quickly mend their ways. Their witness removed. The RCC has been in rebellion for so long that we can only conclude she is apostate.

True Christians in it should not defend it, but seek to reform it - or leave and meet with their brethren in other churches.

***************************************************************************
Revelation 2:5 Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent and do the first works, or else I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place—unless you repent.

Donatello

wolfsbane wrote: »

Or: the Catholics split away from and left the original church and apostolic (Scripture's) authority. Unless Rome is essential to the nature of the true Church - which newmug denies.

*******************************************************************************
3 John 1:9 I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to have the preeminence among them, does not receive us. 10 Therefore, if I come, I will call to mind his deeds which he does, prating against us with malicious words. And not content with that, he himself does not receive the brethren, and forbids those who wish to, putting them out of the church.

No, because Christ promised that Peter's faith would not fail and that he would strengthen his brothers. The communion with successor of Peter is the guarantor that we are in the Church. Peter was given the keys and the power of binding and loosing. Th other Apostles received the power to bind and loose, but only Peter got the keys, so the Apostles must stick with Peter. The Pope and the Bishops in union with him lead the Church. Those who do not gather, scatter.

"And he says to him again after the resurrection, 'Feed my sheep.' It is on him that he builds the Church, and to him that he entrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single Chair, thus establishing by his own authority the source and hallmark of the (Church's) oneness. No doubt the others were all that Peter was, but a primacy is given to Peter, and it is (thus) made clear that there is but one flock which is to be fed by all the apostles in common accord. If a man does not hold fast to this oneness of Peter, does he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he still confidence that he is in the Church? This unity firmly should we hold and maintain, especially we bishops, presiding in the Church, in order that we may approve the episcopate itself to be the one and undivided." Cyprian, The Unity of the Church, 4-5 (A.D. 251-256).

Quo Vadis

wolfsbane wrote: »

Or: the Catholics split away from and left the original church and apostolic (Scripture's) authority. Unless Rome is essential to the nature of the true Church - which newmug denies.

A bit like trying to say the Republic of Ireland split from the UK but it's the real UK.

PDN

Since this has degenerated into a Protestant/Catholic thing please take it to that thread.

Lock time.