Did Peter create the Catholic Church?

Patently false on multiple counts.

We do not worship idols, nor do we place anything ahead of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. If your church teaches what you posted, then let me recommend that you seek out a church that doesn’t use lies-- which I did a bit over 50 years ago.


Don’t feed the troll. This poster has made similar posts in several places. Just report it.


This was a denominations

Cant you see the irony? You are universal but exclude part of the whole?

1 Like

The part that is excluded is not part of the whole.

As noted that is not quite what the Catholic Church teaches:-

[838] "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 With the Orthodox Churches , this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord’s Eucharist.

1 Like

The incongruence begins. To me it is telling of the faultiness of the original proposition.

Reminds me of the quagmire of abortion. On one hand a doctor can terminate the life in a mothers womb and its just a legal abortion. On the other hand a man assaults the pregnant mother causing the unborn baby to die and it’s murder. Schizoid.Incongruent legal thought.
Like we are torn between the truth and justifying what we want .

So on one definition of church we are excluded. By another definition/ decree we are brethren, how be it imperfectly united or not in fullness. Therefore we must be a community, but can not be a church. Therefore we have saving graces but are in peril having no valid eucharist or reconcilliation/ confession. We are to be true to our God given conscience and convictions, yet if we knowingly refuse the CC per same convictions we are in peril.

Something is wrong when tongue speaks out of both sides of the mouth.

Reminds me a bit of the unclarity of Peter towards gentiles that Paul had to correct.

On one hand you have your hardliners, that literally there is no salvation outside the CC. On the other you have realists who have eyes and ears to see the spiritual life in Christ in non Roman Catholics, and a somewhat faulty or problematic biblical and historical basis to reject them.

A. Nowhere does that say non Catholics are part of the Church
B. The shifty language of Vatican II (especially the word subsistit) is one of the reasons the Church is in bad need of clarification.

What an er, interesting way of referring to Vatican II. As an agnostic currently I don’t really have a canine in the brawl so much any more mind you.

Reminds me of a somewhat agnostic Benjamin Franklin, who had more clarity than other Christians when he suggested formal prayer preceeding the stalled constititional convention one hot and sticky summer. More than one have testified to the winds picking up thereafter taking them to the finish line…

So you are not ignorant of our ways and therefore can see some things others (and me) may need to be reminded of perhaps…anyways, lol, feel free to back me up anytime

This is the perfect opportunity to explain how non Catholics can be in imperfect communion with the CC without being a part of it. I have been waiting for someone to explain that for a long time so please explain.

For a Catholic to state that the shifty language of Vatican II is but one of the reasons the Church is in bad need of clarification is in my mind stating that the CC is not pure and perfect and has not formulated it’s decrees totally relying on the direction of the Holy Spirit but rather is mixed with the will of men.

If you are sincere and honest in your presentation it would seem to this non-Catholic that you may in fact be a Protest-ant.

1 Like

Rather it represents an internal, shall we say, debate about Vatican II that’ has been raging ever since that took place.

Am I wrong in understanding that individual laity are obligated to accept whatever the Hierarchy has determined to be the leading of the Holy Spirit?

No, but it is more nuanced that once again and it is often hard to explain these things to people who didn’t grow up Catholic. For example, and I don’t cite this to have a pop at you but just to illustrate a point, your posts earlier about Lent show how easily a communication breakdown can occur. I class myself as agnostic but grew up in a devoutly Catholic family and I hadn’t realized till I was an adult how difficult it was to communicate things I took for granted culturally to those not brought up in a similar background.

I am sure you are 100% correct. I think that difficulty would represent itself within any church.
The problem as I see it, is when a Church claims to be the one and only true perfect Church. Within the non-Catholic realm, most churches would readily admit that they may have some incomplete understanding that comes with assimilated culture…those that claim to be the one and only true pure are dangerously cultish.

Whoa. Stop there please. I don’t view myself as more than culturally Catholic but references to the Catholic Church as ‘dangerously cultish’ are something I won’t countenance either. It shows echoes of talk of Catholics as the ‘Whore of Bablyon’ and that sort of tripe.

Those groups don’t qualify because they were founded long after the time of Christ and the apostles.

Oh boy, your response just verifies how easily communication becomes distorted Lol! If you would please read the beginning of my last sentence…it was not any reference to the CC but to those within the non-Catholic realm.

Fair enough, I withdraw my point then. Bear in mind for Irish Catholics in particular and those of us who grew up in the diaspora after leaving Ireland we heard an awful lot of stuff all the time about the Catholic Church via certain fringe elements of Christianity in the UK which was very, very negative. It tends to produce a mentality where we are cautious about how the Church is talked about, even when we ourselves don’t view ourselves as active members as such talk often went hand-in-glove with less than pleasant outlooks of us as a nation or people.

1 Like

Thank you…I understand for I believe what you describe is also how I/we feel when all non-Catholic Churches are lumped together as Protestants in a derogatory fashion.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.