Posted on 05/18/2015 6:05:47 PM PDT by Old Yeller
For years, growing up as a Roman Catholic, we were taught that we were members of the one true church. It was impressed upon us regularly by the parish priest during Mass while giving his homily; by the nuns all throughout my Catholic parochial school years of second through seventh grade.
It was impressed upon us during our preparation to receive for the first time the sacraments of Penance, Communion and Confirmation. And while attending CCD classes all the way through high school. (CCD is the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, an association established at Rome in 1562 for the purpose of giving religious education, normally designed for children.)
It was an established fact that we understood and we never questioned the validity of it. And to be honest, it was a matter of pride, that we were privileged enough to be members of the correct church, while all others had belonged to something else that didn’t quite measure up to the status of the Roman Catholic Church.
After all, how could it be possible that Roman Catholicism is not the one true church?
Look at what Rome has to offer: It has the priests, the nuns; the bishops; the cardinals; and of course, the Pope. They have the Sacraments; the statues; the holy water; the incense; the Stations of the Cross; the Eucharist - in which Chris supposedly physically manifests Himself into the wafer after the consecration by the priest during the Mass; the Marian apparitions—which appear mainly to Roman Catholics.
And they have the Vatican, where the Vicar of Christ (who they believe is Christ’s representative on earth), governs the faithful and makes infallible proclamations and doctrine. How can this not be the one true church? No other organization on the face of the earth comes close to offering to its flock what Rome provides for its faithful.
But, of course, to be true, one must adhere to what has been established as truth and not teach or practice what is contrary to the truth. We read in Scripture a few passages that declare what is truth and what is not. Jesus proclaimed in John 14:6:
“I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes to the Father, but by me.”
So what happened to "All Christians until the 16th century accepted the full canon as determined by the Catholic Church."
Then, after 1,500 years or so, there was suddenly disagreement to suit the needs of those inventing their own religions.
As said, either admit you were wrong or try to argue that all Christians until the 16th century accepted the full canon, that of 73 books as being wholly inspired Scripture.
And also complete the argument behind the frequent "the Catholic Church gave you the Bible." For to have any polemical weight, you must hold that this means Rome must be submitted to in all other things. Like others, do you agree that an infallible magisterium is essential to even know for sure what writings (and men) are of God?
Which is still wrong, and which means you are parroting refuted propaganda. Again. There was no sudden disagreement, as even Luther's adversary Cajetan did not affirm all the apocryphal books, and had freedom to do so, as did Luther. Thus his canon was not part of the list of things Rome condemned him for.
I'm not following you - what is it? My statement? The quotes from the Protestants-turned-Catholics? By what reasoning would you conclude that I hadn't read whatever it is?
If you would post the references of some Catholic clergy who have swam away from Rome, I would certainly read them.
Frankly, I would hope that you'd rely on more reliable evidence than testimony. I'm not in a habit of providing a bunch of quotes because regardless of the relevance of the quote and the credibility of the quoted individual, the bottom line is that it is still an opinion and every person (including popes speaking ex cathedra) is subject to human frailty and may be wrong. Only God's testimony is true.
Insisting that quotes or experiences must be accepted as valid reminds me of Mormons insisting that the indefensible is true because of their burning in the bosom.
Hallelujah! Blessed is the Father, who gives us eyes to see!
Paul could not have said it any better!
And that leads us to John, who says we know we love Yahovah when we are walking in His commandments...
So the commandments are a bellwether for you and I - They let us know whether we are following YHWH, or man, or the 'natural man'... I do not try to keep Torah to attain salvation - I keep Torah because I love Yahovah and in order to follow Yeshua...
What then do we do with an institution that says the Sabbath has moved, or that there is a difference between moral law and ceremonial law, or that establishes holy days, rites and rituals not found in Torah? Even when they claim authority to do so?
It is an easy question.
>>>This is a false statement - ALL of the Apostles promote Torah, as they must...<<<
The OC Law is for sinners, not for saints (believers). Saints by definition do not sin. The Law has been fulfilled for them by Christ. I addressed this in this thread, On the Infallibility of Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium posts #53 and #55.
James insists that saints must keep the Law. Peter and Paul disagree. There is the contradiction (I provided the passages in earlier posts in this thread).
>James insists that keeping the OC Law provides freedom, while Peter and Paul again disagree, instead teaching that keeping the OC Law is akin to slavery<
>>>Again, a false statement.<<<
Again, I have provided the passages in previous posts that illustrate this contradiction.
You and editor-surveyor seem to be trolling this thread, attempting to take it off topic from the OP. I will not respond to you about keeping the OC Law unless you link it to the OP. Like I told editor-surveyor, if you wish to discuss keeping the OC Law apart from the topic of this thread, start a new thread.
>>>Yes, to be consistent with some RCs, the man had no authority to operate in the name of the Lord apart from their sanction, and one could reject him doing so and not be rejecting Christ.<<<
In fact, I only make the comparison between myself and the black sheep. I do not consider today’s RCs the equivalent of the disciples in this story - they would be more equivalent to Pharisees (not included in this story). I simply see the disciples here as disciples only. But it is only a quibble - I just don’t want to give the RCs more credit than they deserve. [wink]
I’ve heard it called similar.
I can see how you'd know this and I didn't.
Wise folks never do!
Yes, I learned about it by reading your posts.
8 Yet I am writing you a new command; its truth is seen in him and in you, because the darkness is passing and the true light is already shining.
I would attend to this obvious breach with reality, how it breaks Torah, and how it breaks the words of Yeshua, but my FRiend editor-surveyor has already replied in a suitable fashion.
There is the contradiction
I would submit that if you are seeing contradiction, you are reading it wrong... For the Spirit of Prophecy IS the Testimony of Yeshua the Messiah.
You and editor-surveyor seem to be trolling this thread, attempting to take it off topic from the OP. I will not respond to you about keeping the OC Law unless you link it to the OP. Like I told editor-surveyor, if you wish to discuss keeping the OC Law apart from the topic of this thread, start a new thread.
No one is attempting anything except in rising to defend against your statement. That does nothing to the integrity of the thread except to enhance it.
Here is a FR thread from last year that gives some of them:
Testimonies from ex-Roman Catholic Priests
They are excerpted from Richard Bennet's Far from Rome, Near to God: Testimonies of 50 Converted Roman Catholic Priests.
Oh noes!! ex-snook. Somebody called your bluff (I was too lazy). What will you do? Go rely on Peter or do a Hail Mary?
>>>my FRiend editor-surveyor has already replied in a suitable fashion.
No one is attempting anything except in rising to defend against your statement. That does nothing to the integrity of the thread except to enhance it.<<<
Your friend’s post has been removed.
Truth be told, I didn't really want to have look up the quotes - so I guess I was too lazy as well. I have other things to do rather than collect information which I consider of limited value, at best.
Thanks, Boatbums. Now we'll see if ex-snook will read them as claimed.
Patient Placemarker for Steelfish’s Official List of Sacred Pauline Traditions with proof.
NOTE: This list has been requested numerous times. Nothing has ever been posted as proof that such a list ever existed. I am awaiting Steelfish to post ANYTHING to back up what he repeatedly claimed.
Patiently waiting... perhaps eternally.
.
>> “Your friend’s post has been removed.” <<
.
Not, of course, at your request, I trust?
Truth erased is then no longer truth; obama showed us that.
.
.
Chirp! chirp!
.
Thank you for your post. Although it is based on testimonies almost 20 years old, it still is valid for my purposes. I wanted to see what the reasons are for leaving the Catholic Church. Reasons from these prominent people were personal interpretation of the Bible, the real presence, worship of statutes and salvation based on works. My conclusions are, First, more needs to be done to acquaint Protestants of what is, and is not, a Catholic belief. Second better selection and formation of priests.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.