Author Topic: Why I am Catholic  (Read 20941 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

CatholicCrusader

  • Guest
Why I am Catholic
« on: September 05, 2012, 08:04:03 AM »
Jesus said his Church would be "the light of the world." He then noted that "a city set on a hill cannot be hid" (Matt. 5:14). This means his Church is a visible organization. It must have characteristics that clearly identify it and that distinguish it from other churches. Jesus promised, "I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:1 8 ). This means that his Church will never be destroyed and will never fall away from him. His Church will survive until his return.
 
Among the Christian churches, only the Catholic Church has existed since the time of Jesus. Every other Christian church is an offshoot of the Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox churches broke away from unity with the pope in 1054. The Protestant churches were established during the Reformation, which began in 1517. (Most of today’s Protestant churches are actually offshoots of the original Protestant offshoots.)
 
Only the Catholic Church existed in the tenth century, in the fifth century, and in the first century, faithfully teaching the doctrines given by Christ to the apostles, omitting nothing. The line of popes can be traced back, in unbroken succession, to Peter himself. This is unequaled by any institution in history.
 
Even the oldest government is new compared to the papacy, and the churches that send out door-to-door missionaries are young compared to the Catholic Church. Many of these churches began as recently as the nineteenth or twentieth centuries. Some even began during your own lifetime. None of them can claim to be the Church Jesus established.
 
The Catholic Church has existed for nearly 2,000 years, despite constant opposition from the world. This is testimony to the Church’s divine origin. It must be more than a merely human organization, because any merely human organization would have collapsed early on. The Catholic Church is today the most vigorous church in the world (and the largest, with a billion members: one sixth of the human race), and that is testimony not to the cleverness of the Church’s leaders, but to the protection of the Holy Spirit.
 
FOUR MARKS OF THE TRUE CHURCH
 
If we wish to locate the Church founded by Jesus, we need to locate the one that has the four chief marks or qualities of his Church. The Church we seek must be one, holy, catholic, and apostolic.
 
The Church Is One (Rom. 12:5, 1 Cor. 10:17, 12:13)
Jesus established only one Church, not a collection of differing churches (Lutheran, Baptist, Anglican, and so on). The Bible says the Church is the bride of Christ (Eph. 5:23–32). Jesus can have but one spouse, and his spouse is the Catholic Church. His Church also teaches just one set of doctrines, which must be the same as those taught by the apostles (Jude 3). This is the unity of belief to which Scripture calls us (Phil. 1:27, 2:2).

The Church Is Holy (Eph. 5:25–27, Rev. 19:7–8 )
By his grace Jesus makes the Church holy, just as he is holy. This doesn’t mean that each member is always holy. Jesus said there would be both good and bad members in the Church (John 6:70), and not all the members would go to heaven (Matt. 7:21–23). But the Church itself is holy because it is the source of holiness and is the guardian of the special means of grace Jesus established, the sacraments (cf. Eph. 5:26).
 
The Church Is Catholic (Matt. 28:19–20, Rev. 5:9–10)
Jesus’ Church is called catholic ("universal" in Greek) because it is his gift to all people. He told his apostles to go throughout the world and make disciples of "all nations" (Matt. 28:19–20). For 2,000 years the Catholic Church has carried out this mission, preaching the good news that Christ died for all men and that he wants all of us to be members of his universal family (Gal. 3:28 ). Nowadays the Catholic Church is found in every country of the world and is still sending out missionaries to "make disciples of all nations" (Matt. 28:19). The Church Jesus established was known by its most common title, "the Catholic Church," at least as early as the year 107, when Ignatius of Antioch used that title to describe the one Church Jesus founded. The title apparently was old in Ignatius’s time, which means it probably went all the way back to the time of the apostles.
 
The Church Is Apostolic (Eph. 2:19–20)
The Church Jesus founded is apostolic because he appointed the apostles to be the first leaders of the Church, and their successors were to be its future leaders. The apostles were the first bishops, and, since the first century, there has been an unbroken line of Catholic bishops faithfully handing on what the apostles taught the first Christians in Scripture and oral Tradition (2 Tim. 2:2). These beliefs include the bodily Resurrection of Jesus, the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, the sacrificial nature of the Mass, the forgiveness of sins through a priest, baptismal regeneration, the existence of purgatory, Mary’s special role, and much more —even the doctrine of apostolic succession itself. Early Christian writings prove the first Christians were thoroughly Catholic in belief and practice and looked to the successors of the apostles as their leaders. What these first Christians believed is still believed by the Catholic Church. No other Church can make that claim.
 
Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth
 
Man’s ingenuity cannot account for this. The Church has remained one, holy, catholic, and apostolic—not through man’s effort, but because God preserves the Church he established (Matt. 16:18, 28:20).
 
He guided the Israelites on their escape from Egypt by giving them a pillar of fire to light their way across the dark wilderness (Exod. 13:21). Today he guides us through his Catholic Church.
 
The Bible, sacred Tradition, and the writings of the earliest Christians testify that the Church teaches with Jesus’ authority. In this age of countless competing religions, each clamoring for attention, one voice rises above the din: the Catholic Church, which the Bible calls "the pillar and foundation of truth" (1 Tim. 3:15).
 
Jesus assured the apostles and their successors, the popes and the bishops, "He who listens to you listens to me, and he who rejects you rejects me" (Luke 10:16). Jesus promised to guide his Church into all truth (John 16:12–13). We can have confidence that his Church teaches only the truth.


Adapted from this source: http://www.catholic.com/documents/pillar-of-fire-pillar-of-truth



Offline IronDioPriest

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10828
  • I refuse to accept my civil servants as my rulers
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #1 on: September 05, 2012, 10:18:18 AM »
CC, I respect your faith and respect the Catholic Church. But I have reasoned disagreements with some very basic tenets and assumptions of Catholic doctrine. I will withhold those disagreements, unless you indicate that the purpose of your thread is to have a discussion of them on the merits. The last thing I want to do is get in an argument over sectarian Christianity that leads only to people trying to convince each other of the rightness or wrongness of one sect over the other.
"A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means."

- Thomas Jefferson

Offline LadyVirginia

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5168
  • Mt. Vernon painting by Francis Jukes
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #2 on: September 05, 2012, 11:10:41 AM »
CC, I know a Catholic young lady who has found this new social site very interesting. She's been participating in discussions and has been trying to get more people to join as it's new and she's helping the creators get the word out. That's all I know about it.  I thought perhaps you might be interested or know someone who might be.

https://www.awestruckglobal.com/
"And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."

CatholicCrusader

  • Guest
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #3 on: September 05, 2012, 12:04:57 PM »
CC, I respect your faith and respect the Catholic Church. But I have reasoned disagreements with some very basic tenets and assumptions of Catholic doctrine. I will withhold those disagreements, unless you indicate that the purpose of your thread is to have a discussion of them on the merits. The last thing I want to do is get in an argument over sectarian Christianity that leads only to people trying to convince each other of the rightness or wrongness of one sect over the other.

You know what? I had a little deja vu reading your post. Did I do a thread like this once before? I forget. Oh well.

Anyways, I have no problem being challenged on my beliefs and debating them, as long as the challenge is factual and not one of the many false allegations I have heard lo these many years.

CatholicCrusader

  • Guest
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #4 on: September 05, 2012, 12:05:26 PM »
CC, I know a Catholic young lady who has found this new social site very interesting. She's been participating in discussions and has been trying to get more people to join as it's new and she's helping the creators get the word out. That's all I know about it.  I thought perhaps you might be interested or know someone who might be.

https://www.awestruckglobal.com/

I'll check it out.

Offline ChrstnHsbndFthr

  • Established Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1003
    • Affordable Bail Bonds of NC, LLC
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #5 on: September 07, 2012, 06:30:35 PM »
This could be interesting, but let us consider the premise, rather, of "Why we should be a member of the church Christ built."  There is much in what you postulated that I agree with. Jesus only built ONE church. The concept of sects, divisions, or denominations, are anathema to him, and to his teachings in scripture.  There are quite likely identifiers we can find in scripture, even beyond the ones you list.
First and foremost, I would say is authority. Christ said, I will build MY church."Matthew 16:18
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
So, according to scripture, which I assume we agree is the word of God, Jesus is the builder. Not Peter. The one, UNIVERSAL church, is founded by Christ himself, not anyone else. In fact, if someone else claims to be the founder, then it is most certainly already NOT the church that Christ built. Agreed? 
“My mission today is to go forth and tell people about why I follow Christ and also what the Bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together.

“However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity. We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.”
Phil Robertson an elder in the church of Christ

Offline ChrstnHsbndFthr

  • Established Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1003
    • Affordable Bail Bonds of NC, LLC
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #6 on: September 07, 2012, 07:12:11 PM »
The next question is When was that church that Christ built founded? For assuredly we can say, that if the scriptures are the word of God, and I believe they are, then the church had to be established at the scriptural time. That turns out to be the day of Pentecost, some fifty days after Jesus was raised from the dead. All scripture previous to this refers to the church and kingdom, which are synonyms, as future tense.
Acts 2:47
"Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved."(Since we know that you cannot add to that which does not already exist, we know that upon this particular day, the church had been built. We can quibble over the precise moment in time, but this is the first record of the church being in existence, since it is the first time souls were added to the church. It also clears up WHERE the church was established, which is Jerusalem, according to scripture.

This was according to prophecy:Isaiah 2:2   "And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.   3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem."
And:Micah 4:1   "But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the LORD shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it.  2 And many nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for the law shall go forth of Zion, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. (KJV)"

Lest there by any doubt that the term " house of God" is synonymous with the church see: 1Tim 3:15   But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. (KJV)
“My mission today is to go forth and tell people about why I follow Christ and also what the Bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together.

“However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity. We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.”
Phil Robertson an elder in the church of Christ

Offline ChrstnHsbndFthr

  • Established Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1003
    • Affordable Bail Bonds of NC, LLC
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #7 on: September 07, 2012, 07:17:09 PM »
Notice that before the day of Pentecost the kingdom is spoken of as future tense:

Mark 1:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. (KJV)

Matt 10:7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. (KJV)

Luke 10:9 And heal the sick that are therein, and say unto them, The kingdom of God is come nigh unto you. (KJV)

Matt 6:9 After this manner therefore pray ye:   Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.   10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. (KJV)

Matt 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (KJV)

Mark 9:1 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power. (KJV)

Luke 22:18 For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come. (KJV)

Luke 19:11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear. (KJV)

Acts 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? (KJV)
“My mission today is to go forth and tell people about why I follow Christ and also what the Bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together.

“However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity. We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.”
Phil Robertson an elder in the church of Christ

Offline ChrstnHsbndFthr

  • Established Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1003
    • Affordable Bail Bonds of NC, LLC
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #8 on: September 07, 2012, 07:24:31 PM »
Now notice that the kingdom is referred to in the present tense after the events on the day of Pentecost:After Acts chapter two the Church is always spoken of as being in existence.

Acts 2:47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.   (KJV)

Acts 5:11 And great fear came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things.  (KJV)

Acts 8:1 And Saul was consenting unto his death.   And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles. (KJV)

Acts 11:22 Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem: and they sent forth Barnabas,   that he should go as far as Antioch.  (KJV)

Acts 13:1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. (KJV)

Acts 14:27 And when they were come, and had gathered the church together, they rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles. (KJV)

Col 1:13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: (KJV)

Rev 1:9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ. (KJV)

Notice how clearly we have established that the builder was Christ, that the location was Jerusalem, and the time was the day of Pentecost? 

There are many more scriptures within this context to establish what the true church that Christ built is, but I will leave them for another day. But give consideration to this: If the builder establishes a building(in this context his people) and gives us a blueprint, whatever does not match that blue-print is not that same building is it? So, if it is established that any denomination was built at a different time or a different place, or by a different builder, then it is also equally established that it is NOT the church that He built, isn't it?
“My mission today is to go forth and tell people about why I follow Christ and also what the Bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together.

“However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity. We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.”
Phil Robertson an elder in the church of Christ

CatholicCrusader

  • Guest
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #9 on: September 08, 2012, 06:53:27 AM »
Okay, you're throwing a whole lot at me. How about going with one thing at a time.
And bear in mind, I don't log in all that often so don't be surprised if it takes while for me to respond.

Offline ChrstnHsbndFthr

  • Established Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1003
    • Affordable Bail Bonds of NC, LLC
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #10 on: September 09, 2012, 12:45:44 AM »
Okay, let us simplify. The church was founded by Christ, as prophesied. The church was founded at Jerusalem, as prophesied. And the church was founded on the day of Pentecost, as prophesied. 
The point being, the ONE world-wide church was founded by Christ, at Jerusalem, on the Day of Pentecost. Any church founded by anyone else, at any other place, and any other time, is NOT the church that Christ built, at least according to scripture, which I hold to be the word of God, and is therefore infallible, does not contradict itself, and is always fulfilled. Right?
“My mission today is to go forth and tell people about why I follow Christ and also what the Bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together.

“However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity. We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.”
Phil Robertson an elder in the church of Christ

CatholicCrusader

  • Guest
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #11 on: September 09, 2012, 06:24:47 AM »
Okay, let us simplify. The church was founded by Christ, as prophesied. The church was founded at Jerusalem, as prophesied. And the church was founded on the day of Pentecost, as prophesied.........

1) The Church was founded by Christ: Correct.
2) The Church was founded at Jerusalem: Correct, but irellevant because the Church is for all nations and all peoples.
3) The Church was founded on the day of Pentecost: Thats arguable. I would probably say the Church was founded by Jesus, but had its life breathed into it on Pentecost. But we won't quibble over that.


..........The point being, the ONE world-wide church was founded by Christ, at Jerusalem, on the Day of Pentecost. Any church founded by anyone else, at any other place, and any other time, is NOT the church that Christ built, at least according to scripture, which I hold to be the word of God, and is therefore infallible, does not contradict itself, and is always fulfilled. Right?

You are half right:

Yes, any church founded by anyone else, at any other place, and any other time, is NOT the church that Christ built. So therefore we can exclude all protestant denominations because they are no older than 500 years, and most of them are far younger than that.

No, the Bible is not infallible. Evangelicals and Fundamentalists commonly say the Bible is infallible but that is a misconstrual of the word. I know they mean well, but they are abusing a good and useful theological term.

Fallible means able to make a mistake or able to teach error. Infallible means the opposite: the inability to make a mistake or to teach error. When we use these words, we use them regarding an active agent—that is, we use them about someone making a decision that either may or may not be erroneous (in which case that someone is fallible) or that definitely cannot be erroneous (in which case that someone is infallible).

Put another way, the active agent is alive and capable of making decisions. A human being is an active agent. Normally human beings are fallible. Sometimes they decide rightly, and sometimes they decide wrongly. In a few instances (such as the pope when speaking ex cathedra or the bishops united with the pope when speaking through an ecumenical council) human beings may decide infallibly.

But a rock is never infallible. Nor is it fallible. It is neither because it makes no decision about anything. Ditto for a plant. No sunflower ever made the right decision—or the wrong decision. In fact, no sunflower ever made any decision, properly speaking. The same can be said of a book. No book, not even the Bible, is capable of making a decision. This means it would be wrong to say that the Bible is either infallible or fallible—such terms should not be used about it or about any other book.

The proper term to use, when we are saying that the Bible contains no error, is inerrant. In its teaching, a particular book may contain truth or may contain error; most likely it will teach some of each. The one exception is the Bible. The Church teaches that everything the Bible asserts (properly understood, of course) is true and therefore without error. Like other disciplines, theology has words of art. For them to convey their true meaning, we must use them accurately.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2012, 06:30:22 AM by CatholicCrusader »

Offline ChrstnHsbndFthr

  • Established Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1003
    • Affordable Bail Bonds of NC, LLC
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #12 on: September 09, 2012, 04:31:05 PM »
We need not waste time quibbling over terms. The idea, as you expressed it is correct, and you clearly understood the meaning of what I wrote.  The scriptures give us all knowledge needed for life and Godliness and it contains no error or contradiction. It will not fail us, if we will heed it.

Responding to your belief that it is irrelevant where a church started, as we discuss the marks of the true church, it can be said and I think clearly supported that ANY church not fitting ALL the marks of the true church is by definition, NOT the true church.  And that is QUITE relevant.

You are getting close to the truth on denominationalism. There is no division in the church that Christ built. The ONLY church that he built was ONE church. It does  not matter if the denomination was founded in 300 AD or in 2012 AD. It is not the church that Christ built.    I am merely a Christian. The bible being the word of God, containing everything we need for life and Godliness, ("2 Peter 1:3
According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:") we need add nothing to it. And we must certainly take nothing away from it.(Revelation 22:19
King James Version (KJV)
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.) That authority is given to NO man. Jesus gave the Apostles the authority to speak his word, as the spirit gave them remembrance. "John 14:26 also: "Matthew 24:35
Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away."
King James Version (KJV)
26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." Jesus' words to his Apostles were clear. No man has the right to change the word of God. They could tell his word as he had given it to them and they did. But, the word stands, even today. We need nothing else, according to the scriptures themselves. Since the last Apostle died at the end of the 1st century, there will be no further inspired writings, according to scripture. See also:1 Corinthians 2:9-13
King James Version (KJV)
9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
“My mission today is to go forth and tell people about why I follow Christ and also what the Bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together.

“However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity. We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.”
Phil Robertson an elder in the church of Christ

Offline Libertas

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 63653
  • Alea iacta est! Libertatem aut mori!
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #13 on: September 09, 2012, 05:20:25 PM »
I like the KISS principle (Keep It Simple Stupid!), it helps clarify things.  I would argue the "early church" did not have any of the trappings and rituals found in most denominations now, so most denominations could be viewed as comprising modern contrivances.  I favor a church that regardless of denomination focuses on the basics - Christ is the Son of God; Christ was born a man and died for our salvation, Christ rose from the dead and ascended into Heaven, Christ will come again; Baptism; Communion; The Lords Prayer; prayers and salvation is through Jesus alone.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2012, 05:23:26 PM by Libertas »
We are now where The Founders were when they faced despotism.

Offline ChrstnHsbndFthr

  • Established Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1003
    • Affordable Bail Bonds of NC, LLC
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #14 on: September 09, 2012, 06:08:48 PM »
I like the KISS principle (Keep It Simple Stupid!), it helps clarify things.  I would argue the "early church" did not have any of the trappings and rituals found in most denominations now, so most denominations could be viewed as comprising modern contrivances.  I favor a church that regardless of denomination focuses on the basics - Christ is the Son of God; Christ was born a man and died for our salvation, Christ rose from the dead and ascended into Heaven, Christ will come again; Baptism; Communion; The Lords Prayer; prayers and salvation is through Jesus alone.
Amen!
“My mission today is to go forth and tell people about why I follow Christ and also what the Bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together.

“However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity. We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.”
Phil Robertson an elder in the church of Christ

CatholicCrusader

  • Guest
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #15 on: September 11, 2012, 05:52:41 AM »
......Responding to your belief that it is irrelevant where a church started, as we discuss the marks of the true church, it can be said and I think clearly supported that ANY church not fitting ALL the marks of the true church is by definition, NOT the true church.  And that is QUITE relevant.

......

But the physical location of where the Church was founded has nothing to do with the marks of the true Church. Again, the marks of the church are as stated in the OP. The Church is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic. Where it was founded is not relevant to those four marks.

.......You are getting close to the truth on denominationalism.....

I know.

........There is no division in the church that Christ built......

Not true. There is division. You see, just because I believe the Pope and Bishops of the Catholic Church are the true successors of the Peter and the Apostles does not mean that I don't think my protestant brethren are part of the Church as well: I do. They are my brethren, but they are my seperated brethren. I would liken the situation to a brother who runs away from home and disavows our parents. Technically he is still my brother, but yet he has chosen to forsake all the family traditions and special days we get together and everything else.

Protestants are Christians and accepted as brothers, something that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is actually quite clear about (something that you may not have known). Yet, they are seperated from us.

.........The bible being the word of God, containing everything we need for life and Godliness.....

Again, not true. Can the Bible break bread with you? Can the Bible pray for you and you for it? Can a Bible baptise you? Christianity and the Church came before the Bible did, not the other way around. The Church gave us the Bible as we know it today; the Bible does not give us the Church. Show me someone who says, "My church is Bible-based", and I will reply, "My Bible is Church-based, for it came to us from the Church." Don't misunderstand me: The Bible is the only book that is God-breathed; I know this. But to say it is all we need is simply not true.

And by the way, the Word of God is not confined to the pages of a book. The Word lives; the Word is Jesus. All that Jesus said and did is the Word of God, yet all that Jesus said and did is not written in the Bible. Divine Revelation is transmitted in writing and orally. Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition together make up the Word of God.


II. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRADITION AND SACRED SCRIPTURE

One common source. . .

80
"Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal." Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own "always, to the close of the age".

. . . two distinct modes of transmission

81 "Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit."

"And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching."

82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."



- Catechism of the Catholic Church
« Last Edit: September 11, 2012, 12:42:07 PM by CatholicCrusader »

Offline IronDioPriest

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10828
  • I refuse to accept my civil servants as my rulers
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #16 on: September 11, 2012, 09:29:11 AM »
...Christianity and the Church came before the Bible did, not the other way around. The Church gave us the Bible as we know it today; the Bible does not give us the Church. Show me someone who says, "My church is Bible-based", and I will reply, "My Bible is Church-based, for it came to us from the Church."...

That is a fair point. I've always known this, but have never pondered the chronology, and the chronology is not unimportant. Christianity in its purest form; closest to Christ and those who knew Him; preceded both the Bible and the Catholic Church.

Pure Christianity as practiced and preached by those who new Jesus, and those who were then touched by their evangelism - certainly looked nothing whatsoever like the religious institution of Catholicism. Catholicism evolved from those apostolic Christians, as surely as protestant churches evolved from Catholicism.

There are Christians whose religion is based on faith. That encompasses almost every Christian who ever existed.

But there are the select few Christians whose religion is based not on faith, but on knowledge; those who touched and spoke with the risen Christ. Their religion did not require faith, because they had first-hand knowledge. That knowledge is what drove them from cowering in the upper rooms after the crucifixion, to joyful martyrdom after the resurrection.

Those men - the ones who didn't just believe, but who knew - those men were not Catholic. And no matter the tradition that names Peter a "Pope". He wasn't. He was a Jew who knew the truth of Jesus Christ and died to tell it. He was certainly an instrumental historical link between those early Christians who knew Jesus and the "church" they established that evolved into Catholicism, but he wasn't Catholic.


« Last Edit: September 11, 2012, 09:40:04 AM by IronDioPriest »
"A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means."

- Thomas Jefferson

Offline ChrstnHsbndFthr

  • Established Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1003
    • Affordable Bail Bonds of NC, LLC
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #17 on: September 11, 2012, 11:10:13 AM »
But the physical location of where the Church was founded has nothing to do with the marks of the true Church. Again the marks of the church are as stated in the OP. The Church is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic. Where it was founded is not relevant to those four marks.

Well that is an interesting assertion.  I wonder how you get there?  If I am searching for a cow, and someone gives me a detailed description, as Christ has given us for the church, to say it has these particular four marks there for it MUST be THE cow, could lead to some interesting misunderstandings.  It has four legs, horns, a tail, and is black.  If that is the only part of the description you looked at, you might come up with two African trombone players, being followed by the cops.....technically accurate, but not at all what you are looking for. The other parts of the description, such as cloven hoofed, ruminant, gives milk, four nipples, wearing a bell, and with a green numbered tag in the left ear, gives a much greater chance that you get THE cow. Or at least a cow at all.  
Not true. There is division. You see, just because I believe the Pope and Bishops of the Catholic Church are the true successors of the Peter and the Apostles does not mean that I don't think my protestant brethren are part of the Church as well: I do. They are my brethren, but they are my seperated brethren. I would liken the situation to a brother who runs away from home and disavows our parents. Technically he is still my brother, but yet he has chosen to forsake all the family traditions and special days we get together and everything else.

Protestants are Christians and accepted as brothers, something that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is actually quite clear about (something that you may not have known). Yet, they are seperated from us.

Here is one of these places that we surely have some misunderstanding. There ARE denominations. I do not and did not deny that. But, THE church was commanded not to be divided. THE church that Christ built was not built to be divided. And the key to removing divisions is to go all the way back to the beginning and BE the church that Christ built. What ever divisions men have built afterwards are NOT of Christ. They are of men. The fact that men choose to divide the church means men are the problem.  How terrible is it, that even after the clear teachings, we have some men saying I follow Pope Benedict, and others saying, I follow Martin Luther, and yet others saying I follow Calvin, and others following Wesley?  Is Christ divided? God forbid. I choose to follow Christ and Christ alone. The teachings he gave us through his Apostles are everything we need to know on life and Godliness.
1 Corinthians 1:10-21
King James Version (KJV)
10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

14 I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;

15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.

16 And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.

17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.

20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.


Again, not true. Can the Bible break bread with you? Can the Bible pray for you and you for it? Can a Bible baptise you? Christianity and the Church came before the Bible did, not the other way around. The Church gave us the Bible as we know it today; the Bible does not give us the Church. Show me someone who says, "My church is Bible-based", and I will reply, "My Bible is Church-based, for it came to us from the Church." Don't misunderstand me: The Bible is the only book that is God-breathed; I know this. But to say it is all we need is simply not true.

I believe it is all we need to KNOW. Christians surely have each other and surely need each other. We have INSTRUCTION on that, and I think it was clear enough that I was talking about knowledge and instruction, but if I was not, certainly, we need the body of Christ, the blood of Christ, we need to be baptized, we need each other, clearly.  
It is a basic belief for me, when I get into thinking about questions and cannot find certain answers, that I do not need to know. (perhaps sometime we can enjoy some of those discussions) But, I trust the scriptures when they tell me that everything is there pertaining to life and Godliness, that all the knowledge that I MUST have to serve Christ is contained there.  


And by the way, the Word of God is not confined to the pages of a book. The Word lives; the Word is Jesus. All that Jesus said and did is the Word of God, yet all that Jesus said and did is not written in the Bible. Divine Revelation is transmitted in writing and orally. Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition together make up the Word of God.

Half true, at best.  Yes, there is more that is not recorded, that would fill all the books of the world, but these were recorded that we might believe.
John 21:24-25
King James Version (KJV)
24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.

25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.
1 John 5:12-14
King James Version (KJV)
12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

14 And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us:


The sacred tradition argument is directly opposed to the word of God and Jesus taught strongly against substituting the traditions of men for the word of God.
Matthew 15:2*3
Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.
But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

Matthew 15:6
And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

Mark 7:3
For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.

Mark 7:5
Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands?

Mark 7:8
For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.

Mark 7:9
And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Mark 7:13
Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Galatians 1
King James Version (KJV)
1 Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)

2 And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:

3 Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ,

4 Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:

5 To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.

11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.

12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:

14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,

16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.

18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.

19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.

20 Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not.

21 Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia;

22 And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ:

23 But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed.

24 And they glorified God in me.

Colossians 2:8
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.


I am afraid that scripture teaches STRONGLY against the traditions of men argument. The inspired word of God I am happy to obey as best I can. But any attempt to modify the word of God must be met with suspicion and held up to the light of scripture.    And then what good is it?  If they say LESS than Christ taught us, it has no value, for it is less. If they say MORE than Christ taught us it has no value, for it has added to the word of God, and attempted to bind the traditions of men as the word of God. And if it says something DIFFERENT then it has no value because it is different from the word of God.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2012, 11:15:35 AM by ChrstnHsbndFthr »
“My mission today is to go forth and tell people about why I follow Christ and also what the Bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together.

“However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity. We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.”
Phil Robertson an elder in the church of Christ

CatholicCrusader

  • Guest
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #18 on: September 11, 2012, 12:56:14 PM »
.........Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

I am afraid that scripture teaches STRONGLY against the traditions of men argument...........

Yes it does. The problem, though, is that Sacred Tradition that I mentioned is not a tradition of men. It is authentic Tradition of apostolic origin. As Paul said, "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle" ( 2 Thessalonians 2:15).

Pay attention to that: He said by word (oral) or epistle (written). That mirrors exactly what I said: "Divine Revelation is transmitted in writing and orally. Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition together make up the Word of God."

Many protestants hear the word "tradition" and automatically go to Colossians 2:8. That is a mistake. In this discussion it is important to keep in mind what the Catholic Church means by tradition. The term does not refer to legends or mythological accounts, nor does it encompass transitory customs or practices which may change, as circumstances warrant, such as styles of priestly dress, particular forms of devotion to saints, or even liturgical rubrics. Sacred or apostolic tradition consists of the teachings that the apostles passed on orally through their preaching. These teachings largely (perhaps entirely) overlap with those contained in Scripture, but the mode of their transmission is different.
 
They have been handed down and entrusted to the Churchs. It is necessary that Christians believe in and follow this tradition as well as the Bible (Luke 10:16). The truth of the faith has been given primarily to the leaders of the Church (Eph. 3:5), who, with Christ, form the foundation of the Church (Eph. 2:20). The Church has been guided by the Holy Spirit, who protects this teaching from corruption (John 14:25-26, 16:13).
 
Paul illustrated what tradition is: "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures. . . . Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed" (1 Cor. 15:3,11). The apostle praised those who followed Tradition: "I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you" (1 Cor. 11:2).
 
The first Christians "devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching" (Acts 2:42) long before there was a New Testament. From the very beginning, the fullness of Christian teaching was found in the Church as the living embodiment of Christ, not in a book. The teaching Church, with its oral, apostolic tradition, was authoritative. Paul himself gives a quotation from Jesus that was handed down orally to him: "It is more blessed to give than to receive" (Acts 20:35).
 
This saying is not recorded in the Gospels and must have been passed on to Paul. Indeed, even the Gospels themselves are oral tradition which has been written down (Luke 1:1–4). What’s more, Paul does not quote Jesus only. He also quotes from early Christian hymns, as in Ephesians 5:14. These and other things have been given to Christians "through the Lord Jesus" (1 Thess. 4:2).
 
Fundamentalists say Jesus condemned tradition. They note that Jesus said, "And why do you transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?" (Matt. 15:3). Paul warned, "See to it that no one makes a prey of you by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ" (Col. 2:8). But these verses merely condemn erroneous human traditions, not truths which were handed down orally and entrusted to the Church by the apostles. These latter truths are part of what is known as apostolic tradition, which is to be distinguished from human traditions or customs

Offline Weisshaupt

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5731
Re: Why I am Catholic
« Reply #19 on: September 11, 2012, 02:10:30 PM »

The first Christians "devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching" (Acts 2:42) long before there was a New Testament. From the very beginning, the fullness of Christian teaching was found in the Church as the living embodiment of Christ, not in a book. The teaching Church, with its oral, apostolic tradition, was authoritative. Paul himself gives a quotation from Jesus that was handed down orally to him: "It is more blessed to give than to receive" (Acts 20:35).
 
This saying is not recorded in the Gospels and must have been passed on to Paul. Indeed, even the Gospels themselves are oral tradition which has been written down (Luke 1:1–4).

This is one of the problems that I tend to have with the entire concept.  I believe and accept a man named Christ lived, preached and said pretty much what is given in the New Testament.  But I have also played "Telephone" - the New Testament wasn't written down for generations after his death. Add in the failings of man, the temptation to bend those words to aggrandize ones own position and power,  and  both intentional and unintentional translation mistakes through at least 3 languages, and the chances that the written words that have reached us are the exact ones Jesus spoke are pretty remote.  Anyone who has read or translated text in both languages, knows that often the precise nuances and meanings are somewhat difficult to convey.  Compromises are made. Subtle meanings are lost, and new ones introduced. Not only within the text, but as the language itself changes.  

You speak English right?
The Lord's Prayer (Fæder ure) in Anglo Saxon (Old English)
Not in the 11th century you didn't, and the text of the lords prayer was probably originally spoken by Jesus in Aramaic, translated and  first  written down in Greek,  and then variously translated  to Latin for Catholic Mass, and later into  English and other Germanic languages, from Latin or Greek manuscripts after the reformation, when a more widespread ability to read the text on one's own was demanded.

Granted, one can argue that God has protected his word through  the centuries - and divinely inspired the translators and printers to make the specific meanings of the words in whatever "authoritative edition" a  perfect translation of the original spoken words. If so, it is a miracle of God's that I seldom hear celebrated.

Thomas Jefferson made his own version of the bible "cutting verse by verse out of the printed book, and arranging the matter which is evidently his, and which is as easily distinguishable as diamonds in a dunghill." - and before we blame Jefferson for his blasphemy, lets remember the Catholic Church did the same thing when it canonized the current selection of works found in the new Testament - a process that took at least 35 years and wasn't made formal until over another 300 years later.  If God had wanted to, he could have written everything  in flaming letters in  the sky for all to see, presented in a language each could understand, , and none could deny their meaning or the  divinity of their origin.   He didn't.  I believe that is a fact well worth pondering upon.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2012, 02:35:43 PM by Weisshaupt »