Especially for those considering the Catholic Church or new to the Catholic Church.
This will be a continuing series.
Have Catholic questions?
When you're a beginning Catholic, questions arise. Frequently. Too often, the answers aren't easy to find.
Before I decided to join the Catholic Church, I had many questions about Catholicism. It turns out that many of them were fairly common Catholic questions. But even so, I had to do a lot of digging to find many of the answers.
Most sources for questions & answers about Catholicism refer you to the Catechism or other Church documents for sources. This can be a problem for those becoming Catholic: before accepting the authority of the Catholic Church, one doesn't see those sources as being authoritative!
To ease your entry into the Catholic Church, here are some of the more common questions about the Catholic Church.
I use Scriptural sources to provide answers for these Catholic questions, where possible. This approach is more neutral for many who have questions about Catholicism.
Well Salvation I commend your effort.
I hope you have your fire retardant suit ready.
These threads draw more fire than Mormonism, Gnosticism, Paganism, Atheism and devil worship combined.
Hard to have a discussion about the founding of the Catholic Church without talking about Constantine.
I am at a different computer, adn may not have the up-to-date ping list. If I missed you, I apologize.
Prevuiously posted:
On Salvation Outside the Catholic Church
The Great Heresies
SALVATION PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE
JUSTIFICATION IN CATHOLIC TEACHING
Hermits and Solitaries [Ecumenical]
THE PRIESTHOOD DEBATE
RIGHTEOUSNESS AND MERIT
A Well-Rounded Pope [Ecumenical]
A Monastery to Last 1,000 Years [Ecumenical]
Explaining Purgatory from a New Testament Perspective [Ecumenical]
In the Crosshairs of the Canon [How We Got The Bible] [Ecumenical]
'An Ordinance Forever' - The Biblical Origins of the Mass [Ecumenical]
“Ekklesia” means assembly, a called out assembly, an assembly called out for a specific purpose. Christ’s “ekklesia”? is an assembly called out for a specific purpose, namely, to fulfill His will, to keep and teach His ordinances and commandments.
Jesus begin His “ekklesia” the day He called out the very first persons who became the first members of the “ekklesia.” ( John 1:35-43)
35 Again the next day after John stood, and two of his disciples: And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God! And the two disciples heard him speak, and they followed Jesus.
38 Then Jesus turned, and saw them following, and saith unto them, what seek ye? They said unto him, Rabbi, (which is to say, being interpreted, Master), where dwellest thou?He saith unto them, Come and see. They come and saw where he dwelt, and abode with him that day: for it was about the tenth hour.
40 One of the two which heard John, speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him. We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ. And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.
43 The day following Jesus would go forth into Galilee, and findeth Philip, and saith unto him, Follow me.”
This was the beginning of Christ’s calling out His assembly. Those called out had been baptized by John the Baptist and were thus “prepared” for composing the Lord’s “ekklesia.” The church did not begin on the occasion mentioned in Mark 3:13-19; that was when the twelve disciples were “set” in the church as apostles. Neither does Matthew 16:18 indicate the time of the church’s beginning. The Greek word for “build” means “build up” and does not refer to the initial beginning of the church.
Before Mark 3 and Matthew 16 Christ had an assembly of baptized disciples. He was their Head and they were following Him and serving Him. What else is necessary before a group is an “ekklesia”? It is true that He was not through with the church in teaching it and commissioning it; but He had an “ekklesia,” and had had one from the day He called those first disciples and they began to follow Him. John had “prepared” them, the Master assembled them as His “ekklesia”. God wanted it that way, John wanted it that way, Christ wanted it that way, the disciples wanted it that way, and that is the way it was. God said, “Hear ye Him;” John said, “Behold the Lamb of God:” Christ said, “Follow me:” the disciples “followed Him”. That is how and when the assembly of Jesus Christ had its beginning. In Matthew 18 Jesus gives instructions on disciplining within the “ekklesia” and in verse 20 explains it is not numbers or leaders that constitute the “ekklesia” but the gathering (of two or three) in His name.
The day of Pentecost marks the beginning of the definite, organic life of the followers of Christ. The descent of the Holy Spirit, according to the promise of the Lord, was the preparation for the great missionary advance, of which the conversion of three thousand on that one day was the first fruits. Not only did this multitude hear the word and believe, but on the same day they were “added to the church,” which had been in existence since the first two disciples of John the Baptist were called to follow Jesus.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
I don't believe the scriptures supports salvation outside of the church; you are either a part of God's church or you're not. Given the author's conclusion, there is no salvation outside of the church. So can you be saved and not be a member of the Catholic Church, or not? Is that what our Catholic friends would like to say?
I would offer another point of view:
There are a few things you haven’t mentioned here:
For the first 280 years of Christian history, Christianity was banned by the Roman empire, and Christians (not catholics) were persecuted. This changed after the “conversion” of the Roman Emperor Constantine. Constantine “legalized” Christianity at the Edict of Milan in A.D. 313. Later, in A.D. 325, Constantine called together the Council of Nicea, in an attempt to unify Christianity. Constantine envisioned catholicism as a religion that could unite the Roman Empire, which at that time was beginning to fragment and divide. While this may have seemed to be a positive development for the true Christian church, the results were anything but positive. Just as Constantine refused to fully embrace the Christian faith, but continued many of his pagan beliefs and practices, so the catholic church that Constantine promoted was a mixture of Christianity and Roman paganism.
Constantine found that with the Roman Empire being so vast, expansive, and diverse – not everyone would agree to forsake their religious beliefs and instead embrace catholicism. So, Constantine allowed, and even promoted, the “Christianization” of pagan beliefs. Completely pagan and utterly unbiblical beliefs were given new “Christian” identities. Some clear examples of this are as follows:
(1) The Cult of Isis, an Egyptian mother-goddess religion, was absorbed into catholicism by replacing Isis with Mary. Many of the titles that were used for Isis, such as “Queen of Heaven,” “Mother of God,” and “theotokos” (God-bearer) were attached to Mary. Mary was given an exalted role in the catholic faith, far beyond what the Bible ascribes to her, in order to attract Isis worshippers to a faith they would not otherwise embrace. Many temples to Isis were, in fact, converted into temples dedicated to Mary. The first clear hints of catholic Mariology occur in the writings of Origen, who lived in Alexandria, Egypt, which happened to be the focal point of Isis worship.
(2) Mithraism was a religion in the Roman Empire in the 1st through 5th centuries A.D. It was very popular among the Romans, especially among Roman soldiers, and was possibly the religion of several Roman emperors. While Mithraism was never given “official” status in the Roman empire, it was the de-facto official religion until Constantine and succeeding Roman emperors replaced Mithraism with catholicism. One of the key features of Mithraism was a sacrificial meal, which involved eating the flesh and drinking the blood of a bull. Mithras, the god of Mithraism, was “present” in the flesh and blood of the bull, and when consumed, granted salvation to those who partook of the sacrificial meal (theophagy, the eating of one’s god). Mithraism also had seven “sacraments,” making the similarities between Mithraism and Roman catholicism too many to ignore. Constantine and his successors found an easy substitute for the sacrificial meal of Mithraism in concept of the Lord’s Supper / catholic Communion. Sadly, some early Christians had already begun to attach mysticism to the Lord’s Supper, rejecting the Biblical concept of a simple and worshipful remembrance of Christ’s death and shed blood. The Romanization of the Lord’s Supper made the transition to a sacrificial consumption of Jesus Christ, now known as the catholic mass / eucharist, complete.
(3) Most Roman emperors (and citizens) were henotheists. A henotheist is one who believes in the existence of many gods, but focuses primary on one particular god, or considers one particular god supreme over the other gods. For example, the Roman god Jupiter was supreme over the Roman pantheon of gods. Roman sailors were often worshippers of Neptune, the god of the oceans. When the Catholic Church absorbed Roman paganism, it simply replaced the pantheon of gods with the saints. Just as the Roman pantheon of gods had a god of love, a god of peace, a god of war, a god of strength, a god of wisdom, etc., so the catholic church has a saint who is “in charge” over each of these, and many other categories. Just as many Roman cities had a god specific to the city, so the catholic church provided “patron saints” for the cities.
(4) The supremacy of the Roman bishop (the papacy) was created with the support of the Roman emperors. With the city of Rome being the center of government for the Roman empire, and with the Roman emperors living in Rome, the city of Rome rose to prominence in all facets of life. Constantine, and his successors, gave their support to the bishop of Rome as the supreme ruler of the church. Of course it is best for the unity of the Roman empire that the government and state religion be centered in the same location. While most other bishops resisted the idea of the Roman bishop being supreme, the Roman bishop eventually rose to supremacy, due to the power and influence of the Roman emperors. When the Roman empire collapsed, the popes took on the title that had previously belonged to the Roman emperors – Pontificus Maximus.
Of course the Roman catholic church denies the pagan origin of its beliefs and practices. The catholic church disguises its pagan beliefs under layers of complicated theology. The catholic church excuses and denies its pagan origin beneath the mask of “church tradition.” Recognizing that many of its beliefs and practices are utterly foreign to Scripture, the catholic church is forced to deny the authority and sufficiency of Scripture.
The origin of the catholic church is the tragic compromise of Christianity with the pagan religions that surrounded it. Instead of proclaiming the Gospel and converting the pagans, the catholic church “Christianized” the pagan religions, and “paganized” Christianity.
God is more interested in whether a church is doing His will and obeying His Word than whether it can trace a line of succession back to Jesus’ apostles. Jesus was very concerned about abandoning the Word of God to follow the traditions of men (Mark 7:7). Traditions are not inherently invalid…there are some good and valuable traditions. The issue must be whether a doctrine, practice, or tradition is Biblical. How then does the Roman catholic church compare with the teachings of the Word of God?
Salvation: The Roman catholic church teaches that salvation is by baptismal regeneration and is maintained through the catholic sacraments unless a willful act of sin is committed that breaks the state of sanctifying grace. The Bible teaches that we are saved by grace which is received through simple faith (Ephesians 2:8-9), and that good works are the result of a change of the heart wrought in salvation (Ephesians 2:10; 2 Corinthians 5:17) and the fruit of that new life in Christ (John 15).
Assurance of salvation: The Roman catholic church teaches that salvation cannot be guaranteed or assured. 1 John 5:13 states that the letter of 1 John was written for the purpose of assuring believers of the CERTAINTY of their salvation.
Good Works: The Roman catholic church states that Christians are saved by meritorious works (beginning with baptism) and that salvation is maintained by good works (receiving the sacraments, confession of sin to a priest, etc.) The Bible states that Christians are saved by grace through faith, totally apart from works (Titus 3:5; Ephesians 2:8-9; Galatians 3:10-11; Romans 3:19-24).
Baptism: In the New Testament baptism is ALWAYS practiced AFTER saving faith in Christ. Baptism is not the means of salvation; it is faith in the Gospel that saves (1 Corinthians 1:14-18; Romans 10:13-17). The Roman catholic church teaches baptismal regeneration of infants, a practice never found in Scripture. The only possible hint of infant baptism in the Bible that the Roman Catholic Church can point to is that the whole household of the Philippian jailer was baptized in Acts 16:33. However, the context nowhere mentions infants. Acts 16:31 declares that salvation is by faith. Paul spoke to all of the household in verse 32, and the whole household believed (verse 34). This passage only supports the baptism of those who have already believed, not of infants.
Prayer: The Roman Catholic Church teaches catholics to not only pray to God, but also to petition Mary and the saints for their prayers. Contrary to this, we are taught in Scripture to only pray to God (Matthew 6:9; Luke 18:1-7).
Priesthood: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that there is a distinction between the clergy and the “lay people,” whereas the New Testament teaches the priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:9).
Sacraments: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that a believer is infused with grace upon reception of the sacraments. Such teaching is nowhere found in Scripture.
Confession: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that unless a believer is hindered, the only way to receive the forgiveness of sins is by confessing them to a priest. Contrary to this, Scripture teaches that confession of sins is to be made to God (1 John 1:9).
Mary: The Roman catholic church teaches, among other things, that Mary is the Queen of Heaven, a perpetual virgin, and the co-redemptress who ascended into heaven. In Scripture, she is portrayed as an obedient, believing servant of God, who became the mother of Jesus. None of the other attributes mentioned by the Roman Catholic Church have any basis in the Bible. The idea of Mary being the co-redemptress and another mediator between God and man is not only extra-biblical (found only outside of Scripture), but is also unbiblical (contrary to Scripture). Acts 4:12 declares that Jesus is the only redeemer. 1 Timothy 2:5 proclaims that Jesus is the only mediator between God and men.
source: http://www.gotquestions.org/origin-Catholic-church.html
Other issues that separate catholicism from Christianity are the crusades and the Spanish Inquisition. Nowhere does the scriptures condone using torture as a means of converting people to the true Church Jesus set up in this earth. Both the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition were used by the catholic church to steal land and money, torture, and kill people that refused to deny Christ and join the catholic church. The catholic church is not, nor has it ever been, the true church that Christ established here on earth.
This is not an ‘imaginary’ attack on catholicism. These are
all historical facts that cannot be denied.