Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Catholic Church & Jesus Christ-Why No One Should Be A Catholic
Apostolic Messianic Fellowship ^ | August 30, 2005 | Why No One Should Be A Catholic

Posted on 03/04/2007 8:21:23 AM PST by Iscool

Catholic Church & Jesus Christ By Pastor G. Reckart International Copyright All Rights Reserved August 30, 2005

Why No One Should Be A Catholic

The first thing a Catholic learns when they open their Bible is they cannot buy their way out of hell fire.

When a Catholic looks in the Bible they will not find purgatory. They will not find priests taking money to say a Mass to get souls out of the fires of hell. The Catholic church is popular because many do not want much out of religion and the Catholic church offers them the little they want. Yet many do want more of God and to obtain it they must leave the Catholic church. In the past 30 years it is estimated over 150 million Catholics have left the Catholic church seeking more of God from other religions. Catholicism remains popular because a Catholic can sin all the way to purgatory and someone can buy their way out of hell fire right into heaven. Over 150 million Catholics read the Bible and could not find purgatory and giving priests money to say a Mass to get souls out of the flames of hell fire. If a Catholic will open their Bible and search they will not find these either. No where in the New Testament is there a priest who takes money to say a Mass to get souls out of hell. Maybe God has been dealing with you showing you the Catholic church is not right? Now is the time to accept God's will and leave.

One of the good things about Catholics is their desire to help people. So if a loved one dies and they did not live a holy life it is understood they must go to Purgatory and suffer in hell fire until a priest can get them released to go to heaven. Catholics are very loving and ready to give large sums of money to help these poor souls. They really believe that by buying a Mass for these dead souls in Purgatory they will be released from hell fire to go to heaven. This is great love for people no doubt about that. But, all this love and all this money will never save a soul who has died lost and is in hell fire torment. The Catholic church has used the love and affection of its members to make billions of dollars in profit saying a Mass for loved ones. This has been fraud for many centuries. The Catholic church developed this money scheme to milk loving Catholics who cared for a deceased loved one. According to Catholicism, its members can pay money to the priests and empty purgatory hell fire of all Catholics. This is not true and it has not been true for 1600 years. Why do good and honest people put up with this scheme from the Catholic church? They do so because they are scared of the Catholic church and its priests. Those Catholics who look into the Bible will not find Purgatory, priest collecting money to say a Mass, or the Catholic church. This is why a person should not be a Catholic.

Thousands of Catholics each year are leaving the church of Rome. Why? They are leaving because they no longer believe the Catholic church is the true Church of the Bible. They discover the Catholic church is filled with falsehood, lies, and deceptions. They learn it has no biblical authority for its religious rituals and the majority of its teachings are perversions of scripture. When they look for the Catholic church in the New Testament of the Bible they cannot find it at all. When they look for the rituals practiced they cannot find them. When they search for a pope or priest performing the Mass they cannot find one. When they look for Jesus Christ to be a Catholic they are shocked he was not a Catholic and never attended a Catholic church. When a Catholic takes a good look in the Bible he/she will learn they have been in a false religion all along and brainwashed to believe they were in the true one and only. True Christianity is not Catholic. Christianity existed 295 years before the Catholic church was founded.

Catholics are right to leave the Catholic church. After all they must save their souls and if the Catholic church does not have the true Gospel message of salvation that will save sinners THEY SHOULD ESCAPE and quick! Of course the priest will try numerous tricks to keep Catholics in the church.

No one can be a true Christian and a Catholic at the same time.

The second thing a Catholic learns is that Jesus was not the founder of the Catholic Church.

When a Catholic opens their Bible they will never find Jesus in or near a Catholic church. When they open their Bible they will learn that Jesus was not a Catholic and was not the founder of the Catholic religion. They learn the word "Catholic" is not in the Bible. They then learn the Catholic church took up the name "Catholic" from Latin which means "universal." The Catholic church claims it is "universal" or world wide. It claims it is the oldest and ONLY WORLD WIDE RELIGION OF CHRISTIANITY STARTED BY JESUS CHRIST. When Catholics discover this is false, that Jesus started a Jewish religion, they soon learn the Catholic church is not Jewish at all but is Gentile owned, Gentile operated, and a Gentile controlled business enterprise whose product is paganized religion. When Catholics open their eyes and see that the Catholic church has adopted many pagan and heathen celebrations and practices and adapted these to Christian teachings, they know they have to leave. No, they know they have to run! It is right here, they know Jesus Christ was not the founder of the Catholic church. Because Jesus would not start a Church and then allow the gates of hell to conquer it by adopting pagan religious practices. No, Jesus would keep his Church pure and free from all evil and sin. The Catholic church is not such a Church. Jesus was not the founder of the Catholic church and Catholics learn they must leave it immediately.

The third thing a Catholic learns, is they do not receive Jesus Christ as Savior when the Eucharist wafer is placed on their tongue.

When a Catholic opens their Bible they will not find the small wafer as pictured on the left. They will not find anyone sticking out their tongue to have the wafer placed there by a Catholic priest. Catholics are taught that when they go forward at the end of the Mass, they do so to receive the flesh of Jesus. The devout Catholic presents him/her self before the priest, open their mouth, stick out their tongue, and he deposits the flesh of Jesus in the form of this wafer. The Catholic is now told he has eternal life because he has eaten the flesh of Jesus. Salvation in the Catholic church is totally and completely in the Mass. They do not preach Acts 2:38 and the necessity of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, and through Christ alone. According to the Catholic religion, a person must attend Mass, believe the pope is the vicar of God, accept the Catholic church as the one and only true Church, and then receive the Eucharist on the tongue to be saved. But when a Catholic searches the Bible for the Mass and the Eucharist wafer they cannot find them. They discover the Catholic church has never followed the Biblical Lord's Supper (Communion or Passover). In fact they will learn the Catholic church does not follow the New Testament at all in the Communion observance of the Lord's flesh and blood.

The Catholic church departed from the ancient practice of Jerusalem and the Eastern churches of Asia in observing the Lord's Passover on the evening of the 14th of Nisan. The church of Rome has tried to destroy this ancient Passover observance since 325AD and the Council of Nicaea. At issue here is if the Church Jesus founded observed an annual celebration of his death on the annual Jewish Passover as he commanded (do this in remembrance of me--which includes the Cup, the unleavened bread, and washing of feet). Any Catholic who studies history will learn the early Christians did indeed celebrate the Lord's Passover on an annual basis on the same day the Jews observed their Passover. This practice was brought to Asia not only by the Apostle Paul, but the Apostle John and the Evangelist Philip.

The Asian Christian Churches followed the ancient custom of Jerusalem, celebrating the annual day of the death of Jesus on the Jew's Passover evening. This is certified by no less then such great men of God as Polycarp and Polycrates both of Ephesus. The whole of the Asian Churches held the eve of the 14th of Nisan as the annual celebration of the Lord's Passion on the same day the Jews observed their annual Passover. All the Asian Churches held a conference and refused to change to practice Easter and sent a letter to Victor Bishop of Rome, who then wrote letters to all the Bishops of the world to excommunicate them from the Christian Church (although he had no such power). The response of Polycrates (190AD) is documented history. The Catholic church at the Council of Nicaea in 325AD, formerly adopted the practice of observing the Easter resurrection of Jesus AND NOT HIS DEATH! Jesus instituted the memorial of his death in the new Passover and sealed this as an annual celebration. He sealed the memorial of his resurrection in New Testament baptism.

Out of the Council of Nicaea came the Catholic law not to observe the Lord's Passover on the day, evening, and time he instituted it. The Bishops at the Council switched over to celebrate the Easter resurrection and held this as an annual day. Easter is now an annual day while the Lord's Communion was moved inside newly adopted pagan mystery Mass. The Mass is held many times a day contrary to what Jesus instituted for the Communion Passover. When a Catholic sees this, they know Rome and the Council of Nicaea falsified the command of Jesus to observe the annual Passover held in honor of his death as the Passover Lamb. A Catholic has every right to leave the Catholic church and go back to what Jesus instituted and he did not institute the Mass. Jesus was not the founder of the Catholic church or its Mass.

So, the Eastern Asian Churches continued the Jerusalem practice of the Lord's Passover on the eve of the 14th of Nisan. The Western and African churches controlled by Rome began to observe the resurrection which they called Easter (Easter is the spring pagan goddess Eostre). Those who celebrate Easter are observing a pagan holiday manufactured by the papacy.

It is here that Catholics learn the Catholic church adopted a pagan name for the resurrection of Jesus. This is shocking to Catholics when they see it. It is shocking to Catholics to learn that no Church in the Bible ever observed the day of the resurrection on an annual basis: but instead observed it on the occasion of each and every baptism of a convert. But the Churches did observe the Lord's Passover on the same day the Jews celebrated their Passover.

When Catholics learn the Councils were not holy meetings of the True Apostolic Church, they want out and leave. Over 500 million people world-wide have rejected the claims of the Catholic church. When a Catholic has Bible study and learns what the true Church really believed and practiced, they see the real Church Jesus established. They will eagerly accept the Lord's Communion and observe it because it is the Thanksforgiving Feast of the Lord's Passover. They are willing to give up the paganism of Easter. It is right here that the Catholic learns the bread and wine are only symbols and do not turn into the real flesh and blood of Jesus. When they learn they cannot receive Christ as Savior by sticking out their tongue, they will leave the Catholic church. When they come to the truth that the Catholic Eucharist is a falsehood they will never stick out their tongue again to receive it. Catholic priests, monks, archbishops, cardinals, and popes will shudder of this, but no one in the Bible received Jesus Christ as Savior by sticking out their tongue and receiving a wafer that is said to be the real flesh of Jesus. When a Catholic gets a firm grip on the Word of God and understands the true Passover of the Lord Jesus they will never return to a Catholic church ever again.

The fourth thing a Catholic learns is the Mass is not found in the Bible any where.

When a Catholic opens the Bible they will not find the Mass. They will not find a crucifix used by the New Testament Church. They will not find a Catholic style altar at all. All Catholics know the center of the Catholic religion is the Mass. It is the ritual artificial re-crucifixion of Jesus by a priest as he takes the cup of wine and presents it to a crucifix of Jesus on the cross and recites a prayer in Latin. Concluding his prayer the wine magically is turned into the blood of Jesus. He then gulps this down and does not share a drop with the members attending. Where did this practice originate that only priests can drink from the Cup? Paul did not teach this to the Corinthians! Next the priest picks up the IHS wafer and holds it high before the crucifix as he mumbles another prayer in Latin. Usually there is music and a song immediately after the consecration that turns the bread and wine into the flesh and blood of Jesus. This is to embellish the moment of the occasion and give it a sense of holiness. The priest then summons the faithful to come forward and receive Christ as Savior. Believing they are receiving Christ as Savior they flock to the front and stick out their tongue to receive Jesus.

But when a Catholic looks into the Bible for this mystery ritual Mass they will not find it. They learn the Mass is nothing but a borrowed pagan ritual from the temple of Jove. They learn there is no Mass found anywhere in the New Testament. They cannot find a single person sticking out their tongue to receive Christ as their Savior. They cannot find a Latin Mass. They cannot find a priest drinking the cup of wine all to himself. These things are not in the Bible any where. The New Testament records everything about the Christian Church. And the Catholic Mass is not found there. One Catholic woman said: "when I tried to find the Mass in the Bible and it was not there, I knew in my heart I had been deceived."

What is the Mass? It is an artificial sacrifice. It is a mock sacrifice. It is the priest recrucifying Jesus in the emblems of the Eucharist and the Cup. Where in the Bible are we to think that observing the Lord's Communion or Passover memorial we are recrucifying Jesus on the Cross? It is not there! When a Catholic looks in the Bible for a priest to hold in his hands the Eucharist wafer and turn it into the flesh of Jesus, he/she will not find it. When they look in the Bible for a place where a priest blesses the cup and turns it into the blood of Jesus he/she cannot find it. This is shocking! Why is the Catholic church doing something that is not in the Bible . Why are they performing a ritual that no Apostle or Minister of the Christian Church did? Why is the central religious ritual of the Catholic church completely missing from the Bible? It is not there. The Catholic who learns this discovers also that the daily multiple Mass observance to recrucify the Lord Jesus is not in the Bible. Yes, the Mass is a recrucification of Jesus every time the priest holds it. There must be fresh flesh and fresh blood of Jesus in the Catholic church several times a day or the Catholic church has no Mass. How many times a day in all the Catholic churches throughout the world is Christ recrucified every day? In the Bible those who crucify to themselves Christ afresh are accursed. There is not one Mass to be found any where in the Bible. Just because the Catholic church points to Jesus observing the Jewish Passover does not make it a Mass. Jesus observed the Passover and then instituted his own annual Passover. He did not institute the ritual of the Mass as the Catholic church practices today. And what of washing feet which Jesus did and commanded of his Apostles. Why, in over 1,700 years has the Catholic church NEVER PRACTICED WASHING OF FEET at the Communion as Jesus established? It does not because the Mass is not a true representation of the annual Passover Memorial Jesus instituted. At no time did Jesus hint or indicate his Memorial was to be a daily ritual. When Catholics learn this, they know in their heart of hearts this is not the true Church.

What is the fifth thing a Catholic learns is there is no confession booth in the Bible.

They discover the confession booth is all a fraud and a sham. They cannot find it any where in the Bible either. The Catholic church just made up religious stuff and got people to believe it. People who never read the Bible to check if what they are doing is even in there. When a Catholic searches the Bible for the confession booth and cannot find it they know going to a priest to confess their sins was nothing but the way the Catholic church learns everything sinful that is taking place in a person's life or home. They learn the priest has used the confessional to extract sex stories out of young girls and boys. Many altar boys were homosexualized using the confession booth as a tool of contact and seduction by the priest. What is so shocking about this instrument of the church is that no where are Christians told they must go to a New Testament Minister or Preacher to confess their sins to receive forgiveness. When the Catholic learns they can go straight to God in their own prayer, at home, in the car, at work, or at a place of worship: they have no need for a confessional ever again. And, how is it that a sinful priest can tell a sinner to say five hail-Marys and put some money in the poor box and this is the penance for their stealing, lying, adultery, fornication, gambling, homosexuality, lesbianism, drug use, and other sins? How can a priest guilty of most of the same sins who has not confessed himself to some other sinful priest, going to be able to grant indulgences and pardons? When a Catholic really thinks about this, they know they were members of a church that was not the Christian Church of the Bible. They know they must read their Bible and find a Church that matches the Church of the Bible.

The sixth thing a Catholic learns is there is no Pope in the Bible and Peter was not the first Pope.

A Catholic who opens the Bible will discover there is no pope. Yes, they learn the claim Peter was the first pope is false. They will not find a pope in the Bible, and what's more they will not find the pope's fish hat or his fancy gold worn by Peter. No, they will discover the Pontiff title is another religious title stolen from the high priest of the temple of Jove. They learn Peter never was a pope and never was the recognized leader of the Christian Church. Indeed, he was given the keys to the Kingdom in Matthew 16:19 but these when used on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), in Samaria (Acts 8), and in Caesarea (Acts 10), afterward ceasing to be needed. He opened up the Kingdom gates of the Church to the whole world. He was not given the keys as a signal he held the position of Pope. Once the gates to the Kingdom were opened no man could shut them. No where in the Bible did Peter pass these keys on to a successor.

Who was the man who presided over the New Testament Church? Was it Peter? No! It was Jacob (James) the firstborn son of Mary by Joseph after Jesus was born. This half-brother of the Lord arose and took over the leadership of the Church and we find him in that position in Acts 15. Peter never was the head of the Christian Church so he could not have been the first pope of a fictitious Catholic church. How come, if Jesus is the founder of the Catholic church he is not the first pope? Most Catholics never seem to get out of the Catholic box far enough to ask themselves some important questions. The invention of a Gentile pope to run the Catholic church was in the fourth century.

All the pre-Nicene books were rewritten in such a way to create a legacy of supposed Western or Latin Roman pontiffs who ruled the entire Christian Church world. The title of Pontiff comes from Latin paganism. The title Pontiff is not in the Bible any where (it is another Catholic falsehood).

There are men mentioned in the history of the Catholic church as popes who may have never existed. They can be proven to exist only in the post Nicene books written to reinforce Rome's claim to legitimate power and control over the Christian Church. The falsehood of the donation letter supposedly written by Constantine is an example of forgery and fraud within the Catholic church.

The whole idea, theory, and development of a succession of Latin pontiff popes from Peter to the present pope is all a massive fraud. There is no pope in the Bible and there never was a pope over the true Christian Church. Jesus reigns as King over the Church and his Ministers act as his ambassadors throughout the nations. This you will find in the Bible. You will not find a religious system with nuns, monks, archbishops, cardinals, prelates, and popes. A Catholic will not find a religious hierarchy of ascending ranks from laity to the pope as is found in the Catholic church. When a Catholic learns there is no pope in the Bible, they know once more they had been deceived by religious trickery and mental seduction. They know the Catholic church is not the true Church founded by Jesus Christ.

Take a look on the left at an ancient image of the fish god Dagon found in Mesopotamia. Look at his fish hat and that of the pope above. Any Catholic can see the Catholic church has adopted Dagan idolatry in hats to embellish their popes and priests and make them look religious to the world. The popes of Rome need to jerk that fish hat off, throw it down, stomp on it, and take it out and burn it. The pope should issue a Papal Bull it is never to be worn again by any pope or priest. Will they do it? No they will not do it and this is the reason the Catholic must run from the Catholic church and never look back. The Catholic church is not going to correct any of this falsehood, rituals, or heresies. It is a paganized Christian religion that has entrenched itself in many nations by bloodshed, threats, violence, and deception.

The seventh thing a Catholic learns is the 12 Apostles and New Testament Saints were not Catholic.

When a Catholic opens their Bible and tries to find the 12 Apostles and the Saints attending a Catholic church they will not find it. They learn from Bible study that all the New Testament Apostles and Saints were not Catholic. They learn the Catholic church surrounds themselves with images and idols of the Apostles and New Testament Saints to deceive members that the 12 Apostles and Saints were Catholic. It makes members think if these were all Catholic then they should be Catholic also. When they look at the images of the Apostles, Mary, Joseph, and Jesus, they are led to believe these chose the Catholic church because it is God's church. They never stop to think these images are put around a Catholic church to make people think it is the Church of God when it is not. Idols and images around a Catholic church is one of the biggest deceptions of the priests of Rome. It is an important tool used by the Catholic church to deceive the minds of members. The members are forced to think in a box. They never consider these were never Catholics. But when they open the Bible and see these were not Catholic their eyes come open and they see the Catholic church is not the Church of the Bible.

A Catholic who studies will learn there are no nuns, monks, priests, or popes in the Bible. They learn Mary was not worshiped. They learn she held no special position other then the Mother of the Messieh. They learn the Catholic church invented a white religion that is racist and portrays Mary, Joseph, Jesus as white people when they were black or brown. They learn that Rome deceives not only with false doctrine but with pictures, idols, and icons. They learn that the veneration, worship, and prayers to saints is not in the Bible. They learn the Catholic church did not give the world the Bible. The Bible existed before there was a Catholic church. They learn the Catholic church makes use of these so-called saints to embellish its pomp, rituals, church decor with images, and to make people think all these were Catholic.

None of the Saints of the New Testament Church were Catholic. None of them had ever been in a Catholic church. None were sprinkle baptized in the trinity. None ever doused themselves with holy water. None of them ever went to confession. Never prayed on the rosary. None attend a Mass. None celebrated Easter. In fact, when a Catholic looks in the Bible for adoration and veneration of saints he/she cannot find the practice of it any where. One of the claims of the Catholic church to Catholics is this: "You can believe the Catholic church is the true Church because it produced all the saints and such holy men and women as St Francis of Assisi, St Teresa of Avila, St. John Vianney, St Therese of Lizieux." Rome claims these and other holy saints produced by the Catholic church proves it is the true Church. But where is the adoration and veneration of saints in the Bible? Where in the Bible is there the making of idols and images of saints to stand around the church, in the foyer, outside the church, and in every nook and cranny? Idols and images are condemned in the Bible.

Where in the Bible did Christians make medallions to hang from one's neck as a luck charm or a fetish to ward off sickness, disease, or some other bad omen? There is none. The whole use of these so-called saints is to make Catholics think no other religion claiming to be Christian has such people in its ranks. The Catholic church uses these saints and their lives as a means to teach Catholic doctrine and compliance to the rules and codes. If a person rebels against the Catholic church they might lose the prayers of a saint on their behalf or the behalf of another loved one. So, to keep close to God a Catholic prays to these idols and gives money to their favorite saint-fan-club. When a Catholic learns there is no such practices found in the Bible they know they were deceived again. They know they must leave the Catholic church quickly because it is not the Church Jesus founded.

The eighth thing a Catholic learns is that Mary was never a Catholic.

When a Catholic opens their Bible they will not find Mary attending a Catholic Church. They will not find her as a Nun. They will not find a perpetual virgin. If Mary is not a Catholic there is no Catholic church. When a Catholic opens the Bible and learns Mary was not a Catholic and not the mother of God, they know they must leave the Catholic church.

Mary was the mother of the seed of David in which God was incarnated upon birth (1Tim 3:16). There is no greater deception and lie of the Catholic church then that Mary was a Catholic. Mary never attended a Catholic church in her life. She never heard of one in her life. She never saw or met a Catholic nun, monk, priest, or pope in her life. She never attended a Mass in her life. She was never sprinkle baptized by a priest of the Catholic church. She never prayed on a rosary. She never crossed herself with the sign of the Cross. She never doused herself with holy water. She never went to a confession booth. She never received penance from a Catholic priest.

Mary was not a Catholic. She was Jewish and a member of the Christian Jewish Church. This Christian Jewish Church was not Catholic. The Jewish Church did not develop into the Catholic church. The Catholic church is a complete Gentile creation of men established many centuries after Mary's death.

Mary was a Jewish woman of the tribe of Judah and the mother of Jesus the Messieh of Israel. She was mother of the seed of David, the man-child, and she was the unrecognized queen of Israel. She did not birth a God into the world.

Such teachings that she is God's mother makes Catholicism a laughing stock. How can the created birth the uncreated? Impossible you say! Agreed. Where was Mary when God created the heavens and the earth? She was not living yet. Where was Mary when God created Adam and Eve? She did not exist. To say Mary was the mother of God cannot be found any where in the Bible. When a Catholic looks for this verification and cannot find it, they know this is one more reason to leave the Catholic church. They ask themselves: if Mary was not a Catholic why should I be?

The Catholic church goes above honor of Mary, they make her a co-mediator with Christ. The Catholic church claims a Catholic can pray to Mary who will talk to her son who will talk to his Father and favor is granted because Mary is the mother of the Father's Son. Catholics are led to believe Mary can get the Father to do for them what they ask because God the Father would never deny the Mother of his Son. Is this procedure of praying to Mary any where in the Bible? It is not found there.

What is the theory behind this? In ancient times a person might be afraid to go directly to a king because they did not know how their situation might turn out. So, they sought a way to influence the king and who better to do this than his mother. So, a person might get the mother to mention something to the king and thereby soften up his attitude and or provoke him to do something good for a person his mother knows. After all, it is reasoned what king would not want to show honor and respect to his mother's wishes. So, a Catholic believes if they ask Mary, she will ask the Son and the Son will ask the Father and the Father will not deny the mother of his Son.

When a Catholic learns this is not in the Bible any where they know the Catholic church is not the true Church founded by Jesus. When they learn Mary was not a go-between to Jesus and to God the Father for others, this causes Catholics to see all this Maryology as nothing but a big religious sham. They should take this treasured Lady down from her place among idols throughout the world. They should stop praying to her because this is not in the Bible. They should stop teaching lies and falsehoods about Mary. Have they no respect for her? They should remove her from their churches because she was Jewish and not Catholic. When a Catholic learns that Mary was not a Catholic they have discovered the last thing they need to know that proves the Catholic church is not the Church Jesus founded.

As the light of Truth comes into the life of a Catholic they will see the Catholic church as an impostor. They will then take a second look at its sins, evils, and scandals. They will know from its birth in Nicaea in 325AD until today 2005 it is an evil religion that has cheated millions of true Bible salvation by its falsehood. The Catholic church has killed more people to establish and enforce the Catholic religion then any other religion in the world. Thousands have been murdered. Hundreds have been burned at the stake. More hundreds have been tortured. There are thousands of killed babies whom nuns birthed and the fathers were priests. Homosexuality is so out of control in the Catholic church among the priests, monks, and popes. If ever there was a church the gates of hell have prevailed against, it is the Catholic church. Catholic apologist claim these are just scars of sinners upon Christ and they are wounds to his body that Catholics and the world should overlook. No, we cannot overlook something so evil, when we know it is not the true Church of Jesus Christ. The Catholic church will continue to be the most shameful religious group in the world. When a Catholic comes to see the shame of the Catholic church they will know it is not the true Church Jesus founded.

So, why should a Catholic leave the Catholic church and find the true Church of the Bible?

Because as members of the Catholic church they are in a false church. As a member in the Catholic church they are forced to believe the Catholic church does not have to be found in the Bible. They are forced to believe in many things they cannot find in the Bible.

If a Catholic does not leave the Catholic church they are not baptized properly as found in the Bible. They are not saved by faith as found in the Bible. If they remain Catholic their soul will be lost. If they remain a Catholic after they are shown the Catholic church is not in the Bible they will go to hell.

A Catholic must ask themselves: "If Jesus and the Apostles were not in the Catholic church why should I be a member?"

A Catholic must believe Jesus was the founder of a Jewish Christian Church and Peter preached how to be saved in Acts 2:38.

A Catholic must ask him/her self this question: "If Peter was the first Pope how come the Catholic church does not follow him and baptized in the name of Jesus Christ as Peter preached in Acts 2:38?

Catholics are not dumb people. They do not want their soul to be lost. My final advice to all our Catholic friends is: "don't let anyone fool you or convince you to stay in the Catholic church."

Closing prayer:

Lord Jesus I pray for all the good people in the Catholic church. I pray our Lord that you would open their eyes to see you were not a Catholic and they should not be either. As they open their Bible Lord Jesus and begin to seek for the true Church, guide them, love them, and lead them as our Good Shepherd. Lord I pray now you will bring them into the one fold of the True Church of Jesus Christ. Amen!

Pastor G. Reckart

Return to Studies Page Read Mary Was Not A Catholic

Booklet Print Version PDF Format


TOPICS: Apologetics; History; Ministry/Outreach; Theology; Worship
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,961-1,9801,981-2,0002,001-2,020 ... 2,361-2,378 next last
To: Iscool

These are very strange ideas. Where are you getting them?


1,981 posted on 03/18/2007 9:58:47 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1926 | View Replies]

To: Ping-Pong

We just studied this in our Bible Study of Revelation, but I would have to get the book. There is more than just this one reference to this many days.


1,982 posted on 03/18/2007 10:19:19 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1941 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
**Peter was crucified upside down** Peter requested that he be crucified in this position rather than in the position in which Christ died. Did you google it as Mark suggested?

Actually the myth that he was crucified upside down originates in the late 2nd century apocryphal book The Acts of Peter and susequent Clementine literature. Christian writers often erroneously believed some of what was in these obvious works of fiction to be true and repeated the information there as if true when it had no basis in history or reality.

It is a pure myth, probably invented by the disciples of Simon Magus who wanted their founder to be associated with Simon Peter and later venerated as him. And they were successful.

Since the bones of Peter [Simon Bar Jonah] are all intact and accounted for in his ossuary at the Monastery of Dominus Flevit on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem where they were discovered in 1953, then Peter couldn't have died in Rome.

However it is entirely possible that Simon Magus was crucified upside-down by Nero there in Rome, and his body buried in that pagan cemetery with the other soothsayers on Vatican Hill. Since his mausoleum would have had to have been moved in order for Constantine to build St Peter's Basilica, his bones are more than likely in that tomb under the altar of the basilica. The Vatican should recheck those bones to see if they are the bones of a certain Samaritan sorcerer from Gitto.

And while a person who is crucified actually dies by suffocation, how exactly does someone who is crucified upside down actually die???? and why would the Romans diverge from their normal practice of capital punishment just because someone requests it???

BTW do Catholics have any idea what an UPSIDE DOWN CROSS actually symbolizes??? Do they realize that it is an occult symbol worn by soothsayers and sorcerers?

1,983 posted on 03/19/2007 4:15:04 AM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1977 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
We just studied this in our Bible Study of Revelation, but I would have to get the book. There is more than just this one reference to this many days.

Any help you could give with this would be appreciated. I am studying it again, in Daniel, and just finished Revelation - I took lots of notes. I understand the overall idea but certainly not enough to explain to another. If it's still confusing to me I would really confuse someone else. I'm looking forward to your thoughts on this subject.

1,984 posted on 03/19/2007 6:20:27 AM PDT by Ping-Pong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1982 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Hiya Salvation!

I went to Mass LAST week - in a wheel chair. It's that "scrutinies" time of year, y'know and I'm sponsoring somebody so I have to be there to keep her in line!

Saturday we had an alleged 'retreat' or day of recollection for the catechumens and candidates and I was there, in my wheelie, and gave a talk! And they didn't fall asleep! And then we all went to the vigil Mass for the second scrutinies.This has been the greatest Lent EVER! Thanks for your prayers!

God is so good I can't even come up with a metaphor! In His kindness to the rest of you, He has rendered me speechless!

1,985 posted on 03/19/2007 6:55:56 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Tactical shotty, Marlin 1894c, S&W 686P, Sig 226 & 239, Beretta 92fs & 8357, Glock 22, & attitude!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1978 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
BTW do Catholics have any idea what an UPSIDE DOWN CROSS actually symbolizes??? Do they realize that it is an occult symbol worn by soothsayers and sorcerers?

Why should we care what soothsayers and sorcerers think? They're nuts and evil and wrong.

1,986 posted on 03/19/2007 7:07:06 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Tactical shotty, Marlin 1894c, S&W 686P, Sig 226 & 239, Beretta 92fs & 8357, Glock 22, & attitude!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1983 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; Uncle Chip
to me the significance of this introductory material is that UNLESS you want to stipulate that the RC Church is nothing but intentional delusion and lies, they establish NOT NECESSARILY that the letters were written to Gentiles, but that it is NOT a slam dunk that they were written to Jewish Christians.

But it was presented as a slam-dunk. That's a serous problem to me, very serious.

1,987 posted on 03/19/2007 7:14:36 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Tactical shotty, Marlin 1894c, S&W 686P, Sig 226 & 239, Beretta 92fs & 8357, Glock 22, & attitude!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1975 | View Replies]

To: irishtenor
This article first appeared in the Belfast Gazette in 1672. The author was a stranger to English, Logic, and Theology.

Call me hyper-sensitive, but I think I detect a slight anti-Catholic tone?

1,988 posted on 03/19/2007 7:25:45 AM PDT by Kenny Bunk (Hillary: A sociopath's enabler in the White House?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk

The author of this piece needs to educate himself in order to communicate more effectivly before trying to argue a position. It appeared to be a middle school term paper gone bad.


1,989 posted on 03/19/2007 7:54:44 AM PDT by irishtenor (Save the whales. Collect the whole set.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1988 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

I find it even more curious that what we apparently have here is a contingent of individuals who are engaging in duelling Bible verses.

When one verse is brought up, another one which apparently differs in intent is immediately shot back. The discussion of the first verse is limited to either denial or dispensed with altogether.

The foremost reasons seem to be justification for, well frankly, hubris. I have known many evangelicals and fiercely non-denominational Protestants, as well as Christian liberals, who focus on verses that give them freedom to interpret and do things which amaze and astound, given the Bible as a whole.

I feel sorry for those who are not in full communion with the Church and with God. Why would one not participate in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass instead of being entertained, lectured or shouted at by a man on a stage? Why would one give up rather lengthy community prayer at the Mass? Why would one give up public confession as well as partake of the Sacrament of Reconciliation in favour of pretending that one's inner voice is sufficient? Why would one give up Communion - His Body and Blood, as He commanded - for symbolic crackers and grape juice, or, nothing. Why would one give up whole portions of the Bible, or, as one individual here believes, even dispensing with the Commandments in favour of one's one religion, created by hand-picking selected portions of the Bible regardless of context?

I interpret this as justification for creating God in one's own image. Why else would one reject God's own creation in favour of man-made ones? But what a poor, poor compromise. Heading up one's own theology means that you reject Him. And theoretically, since many of the modern Protestant movements have gone to individual theologies, we could have millions of different and conflicting interpretations of the Bible, with each individual convinced that the Holy Spirit is within them, aiding their interpretation.

One Church of Christ, now fragmented by men. I'm sure that Satan is now laughing with delight...


1,990 posted on 03/19/2007 9:19:11 AM PDT by MarkBsnr (When you believe in nothing, then everything is acceptable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1976 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Hmmmm. Thinking on that. No, I tend to agree. LOL!

I admit to being argumentative (always have been).

I also admit to being confused regarding the subject of Religion by those who claim such as "I have the One True Religion", "I have the truth, the whole truth, and the only truth", "My way is the only way", "My way or the highway (Hell)", and the like, and yet have diametrically opposed "truths". (I'm certain you get my drift).

Further, the older I get, the more I hear, the more I read, the more I know how little I really know. I've just decided to admit this and leave myself in the loving hands of God.
1,991 posted on 03/19/2007 9:44:44 AM PDT by OLD REGGIE (I am most likely a Biblical Unitarian? Let me be perfectly clear. I know nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1973 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

It's a shame that someone of your obvious intelligence posted this.

http://www.seiyaku.com/customs/crosses/peter.html says that:

"Peter is believed to have been crucified upside down at his own request, as he did not feel worthy to die the same way as Jesus. Therefore many Christian sects use this cross as a symbol of humility.

He was an early missionary in Asia Minor and the Roman Empire and founded the Church of Rome with Paul, Emperor Nero saw this new church as a threat, and began a campaign to eradicate these troublemakers. Peter was imprisoned, tortured and finally crucified. Such was his faith, it is believed, he remarkably succeeded in persuading his sadistic captors to change from the normal way of executing prisoners. Apostle Andrew also was crucified, and he too requested that a cross different to Christ's Latin Cross be used. Therefore we have another cross form, the 'X' shaped St. Andrew's Cross.

In 1920, Archbishop Joachim of Nizhny Novgorod was also crucified upside down, on the Royal Doors of the Cathedral in Sevastopol, a Black Sea port of southern Ukraine.

Sometimes this cross is called Satan's Cross because it points downward to Hell. But this is a misnomer; Satan was never crucified on a cross, rather he fell to his death1. This inverted cross is sometimes used by Satanists to mock the Latin Cross and its meaning."

Step back a little. There is more to Heaven and Earth...


1,992 posted on 03/19/2007 10:14:29 AM PDT by MarkBsnr (When you believe in nothing, then everything is acceptable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1983 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

"My entire family of well-educated and knowledgeable Catholics"

Uncle Chip, were you baptized in the Catholic Church?


1,993 posted on 03/19/2007 12:04:54 PM PDT by nanetteclaret (“Wherever the Catholic sun doth shine, there's always laughter and good red wine." Hilaire Belloc)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1937 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

Really, Uncle Chip! Even when I was Presbyterian, I knew the early Christians worshipped in the Catacombs. Whose tombs do you think they were? They certainly weren't all Christians, it was too soon for that.

You have yet to post the citations for your sources on the "Simon Magus as the first pope" theory, so I will post an article from the New Advent Catholic Encylopedia on Simon Magus, the first Christian heretic (his doctrine seeming to have been a heathen type of Gnosticism):

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13797b.htm



1,994 posted on 03/19/2007 12:51:32 PM PDT by nanetteclaret (“Wherever the Catholic sun doth shine, there's always laughter and good red wine." Hilaire Belloc)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1852 | View Replies]

To: nanetteclaret
My entire family of well-educated and knowledgeable Catholics" Uncle Chip, were you baptized in the Catholic Church?

Yes as an infant. But then I was baptized after I received the Gospel as an adult --- the way it should be.

1,995 posted on 03/19/2007 2:32:57 PM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1993 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
Peter is believed to have been crucified upside down at his own request, as he did not feel worthy to die the same way as Jesus. Therefore many Christian sects use this cross as a symbol of humility.

That is pure myth. Everyone was crucified the same way no matter who he was. One might just as well reason that the one who wanted to be crucified upside down just wanted to be different, to stand out from the others who were crucified normally. So rather than a symbol of humility it might be construed as a symbol of pride.

A gruesome death by suffocation occurs in a normal cricifixion, but how does one die upside down? Wouldn't he pass out first.

BTW Thanks for the link with all those crosses --- amazing. Every religious order and group had their own distinctive cross --- obviously a lot of cross-breeding going on in the church at that time --- but very few upside down crosses.

1,996 posted on 03/19/2007 2:50:10 PM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1992 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; Uncle Chip; Ping-Pong; kerryusama04
**But note how unwilling Peter was to go down there. He had to be dragged kicking and screaming into Cornelius' house, the house of a Gentile to give them the Gospel.** What is your source for this statement please?

Uncle Chip's post #1874.

I'm not so sure that he had to be dragged kicking and screaming....but he was hesitant about associating with Gentiles. The Holy Spirit was involved here (on both sides) as Acts 10:7 and Acts 10:19 points out and the vision was to show Peter that no man was to be considered unclean [Acts 10:28].

This had taken place after Paul's conversion. [Acts 9] You still see Peter slipping back into this mode at Antioch and Paul has to chastise him [Galatians 2:11-13] But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.. Very strange behavior for the great leader of the faith that had been directed to preach to the Gentiles!

So....some years after Our Lord was crucified and buried you still have Peter (Ostensibly the leader) hesitant about dealing with Gentiles. Don't some of you folks think this strange if, as according to you....the Apostles were instructed to go to the Gentiles in [Matthew 28:19]? It has been my contention that Peter....and the other eleven, had been told specifically to stay away from the Gentiles and tend only to the "Lost Sheep of the House of Israel" [Matthew 10:5-6].

Let's revisit the incident with Cornelius and look at [Acts 10:44-47] While Peter was saying these words, the Holy Spirit came on all those who were hearing the word. And the Jews of the faith, who had come with Peter, were full of wonder, because the Holy Spirit was given to the Gentiles, And they were talking in tongues, and giving glory to God. Then Peter said, Will any man say that these may not have baptism who have been given the Holy Spirit as we have?

Again....let me point out. This is a long time after.... you say, the Apostles received this direction to go to the Gentiles in Matthew 28!

And......Acts 11:1-3] Now the Apostles and the brothers who were in Judaea had news that the word of God had been given to the Gentiles. And when Peter came to Jerusalem, those who kept the rule of circumcision had an argument with him, Saying, You went to men without circumcision, and took food with them.

Now, I don't really think that where you stand on the "WAS PETER EVER IN ROME" debate has much to do with this, but if you are honest, you will admit that the Apostles did not receive a so called "Great Commission" to go and preach to the Gentiles. That's why the Lord called Paul and that's why....I say, Peter was never in Rome!

Matthew 28:19 is an incorrect translation (Matthew was written in the Hebrew) to the Greek....and I have just proved it. Why would Peter be hesitant, and the other Apostles astonished, about giving the Holy Spirit to the Gentiles.....some years later?

1,997 posted on 03/19/2007 2:56:34 PM PDT by Diego1618
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1980 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

Going for 2000 posts :)

How can you say that it's a myth? Do you claim that St. Andrew's crucifixion story is a myth too?

I trust though, that your fears about the Catholic Church creating a Satanic symbol have been allayed.


1,998 posted on 03/19/2007 3:15:58 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (When you believe in nothing, then everything is acceptable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1996 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

Were you brought up in the Catholic Church? Did you go to pariochial school? If so, what turned you against the Church?


1,999 posted on 03/19/2007 6:03:45 PM PDT by nanetteclaret (“Wherever the Catholic sun doth shine, there's always laughter and good red wine." Hilaire Belloc)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1995 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip; Diego1618

Since you both like to quote Early Church Fathers, here are some quotes to help you understand their views on the authority of Bishops, the Primacy of Rome, on the Eucharist, and on Schism:

“Our Apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop. For this reason, therefore, having received perfect foreknowledge, they appointed those who have already been mentioned, and afterwards added the further provision that, if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry."
St. Clement of Rome, Letter to the Corinthians, 44:1-2, c. AD 80

"You must follow the bishop as Jesus Christ follows the Father, and the presbytery as you would the Apostles. Reverence the deacons as you would the command of God. Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop, or by one whom he appoints. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there, just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."
St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 8:1-2, AD 107

"The Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although she is disseminated throughout the whole world, yet guarded it, as if she occupied but one house. She likewise believes these things, just as if she had but one soul and one and the same heart and harmoniously she proclaims them and teaches them and hands them down, as if she possessed but one mouth. For, while the languages of the world are diverse, nevertheless, the authority of the Tradition is one and the same."
St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1, 10, 2, c. AD 190

"They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the Flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, Flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His goodness, raised up again."
St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 7:1, AD 107

“We call this food Eucharist; and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration, and is thereby living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by Him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus.”
St. Justin Martyr, First Apology 66, A.D. 151

“Owing to the sudden and repeated calamities and misfortunes which have befallen us, we must acknowledge that we have been somewhat tardy in turning our attention to the matters in dispute among you, beloved…Accept our counsel, and you will have nothing to regret…If anyone disobey the things which have been said by Him through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger…You will afford us joy and gladness if, being obedient to the things which we have written through the Holy Spirit, you will root out the wicked passion of jealousy.”
St. Clement of Rome*, Letter to the Corinthians, 1: 58–59, 63, A.D. 80

“Ignatius…to the church also which holds the presidency in the place of the country of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of blessing, worthy of praise, worthy of success, worthy of sanctification, and, because you hold the presidency in love, named after Christ and named after the Father.”
St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Romans, 1:1, A.D. 110

"It is possible, then, for every Church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the Apostles which has been made known throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the Apostles, and their successors to our own times…But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the successions of all the Churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient Church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, that Church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the Apostles. For with this Church, because of its superior origin, all Churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world; and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the Apostolic tradition."
St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3, 3, 1-2, c. AD 190 **

“The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ He says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church’…On him He builds the Church, and to him He gives the command to feed the sheep; and although He assigns a like power to all the Apostles, yet He founded a single chair, and He established by His own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was; but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the Apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?”
St. Cyprian of Carthage, The Unity of the Catholic Church, 1st edition, A.D. 251 ***

“(T)hey have not the succession of Peter, who hold not the chair of Peter, which they rend by wicked schism; and this, too, they do, wickedly denying that sins can be forgiven even in the Church, whereas it was said to Peter: “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven, and whatsoever thou shall loose on earth shall be loosed also in heaven.” And the vessel of divine election himself said: “If ye have forgiven anything to any one, I forgive also, for what I have forgiven I have done it for your sakes in the person of Christ.”
St. Ambrose of Milan, On Penance, Book One, Ch. VII, v. 33, c. A.D. 390.

“For as many as are of God and of Jesus Christ are also with the bishop. And as many as shall, in the exercise of repentance, return into the unity of the Church, these, too, shall belong to God, that they may live according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren. If any man follows him that makes a schism in the Church, he shall not inherit the kingdom of God. If any one walks according to a strange opinion, he agrees not with the passion of Christ.”
St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Philadelphians, 3.2, ca. A.D. 110

“There is nothing more serious than the sacrilege of schism because there is no just cause for severing the unity of the Church.”
St. Augustine, Treatise On Baptism Against the Donatists, Bk 5, Ch. 1, A.D. 400




These quotes were compiled by Marcus Grodi for his show tonight on “The Journey Home” on EWTN. Mr. Grodi is a former Presbyterian minister who converted to the Church several years ago. His website can be found here: http://www.deepinscripture.com/

*St. Clement was a friend of St. Paul, as mentioned in Philippians 4:3:" “And I intreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellowlabourers, whose names are in the book of life.” Clement went to Rome with Paul and was ordained a Bishop by Peter. According to Tertullian, Linus became Bishop of Rome after Peter was martyred, then Cletus became Bishop of Rome. When Cletus died in about 91 AD, Clement was made Bishop of Rome. He was, therefore, the fourth Pope.

**You will note that St. Irenaeus wrote - in AD 190 - concerning “the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient Church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, that Church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the Apostles.” So, from earliest Christianity, the Church at Rome was seen to have primacy.

***You will also note that St. Cyprian says the “primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair.” He also asks: “If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” St. Cyprian wrote in AD 251, at least 30 years before Constantine was even born.


2,000 posted on 03/19/2007 6:59:29 PM PDT by nanetteclaret (“Wherever the Catholic sun doth shine, there's always laughter and good red wine." Hilaire Belloc)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1834 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,961-1,9801,981-2,0002,001-2,020 ... 2,361-2,378 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson