Incomplete Christianity Is Not Enough


Over the last few decades many Catholics have left the Church, many dropping out of religion entirely, many joining other churches. But the traffic has not been in only one direction.
The traffic toward Rome has increased rapidly. Today we are seeing more than a hundred and fifty thousand converts enter The Catholic church each year in the United States, and in some other places, like the continent of Africa, there are more than a million converts to the Catholic faith each year. People of no religion, lapsed or inactive Catholics, and members of other Christian Churches are "coming home to Rome."
They are attracted to the church for a variety of reasons, but the chief reason they convert is the chief reason you should be Catholic: The solid truth of The Catholic Church.

Our seperated brethren hold much Christian truth, but not all of it. We may compare their religion to a stained glass window in which some of the original panes were lost and have been replaced by opaque glass: Something that was present at the beginning is now gone, and something that does not fit has been inserted to fill up the empty space. The unity of the original window has been marred.
When, centuries ago, they split away from the Catholic Church, the theological ancestors of these Christians eliminated some authentic beliefs and added new ones of their own making. The forms of Christianity they established are really incomplete Christianity.

Only The Catholic Church was founded by Jesus, and only it has been able to preserve all Christian truth without any error–and great numbers of people are coming to see this.


The earliest Christian churches were most likely in the Presbyterian-Methodist vein like yours truly.:wink:



The Presbyterian Church was started by John Knox in 1560 in Scotland.

The Methodist Church was started by John Wesley in the 1740s in the United Kingdom.


Presbyterian-Methodism was started in 2006 by William Potter:)
It is the best of both with all nonsense cast aside.
Much like the early church.


Much like your imagination. :thumbsup:


I always find it perplexing when Catholics claims that the Church was founded by Jesus…as though Jesus was a Catholic. Instead, I would think the Church would claim to express some kind of continuity with Jesus’ message, an expression of his mission in new circumstances and shifting contexts.

There is no doubt about it. Jesus was a Jew, the first followers of the Yeshua movement were Jewish and thought of themselves as Jewish. Time and circumstances created a Christian Church out of this. The Catholic Church is drastically different than the Yeshua faith movement within the Judaism of 1st century Israel.

Christianity isn’t as much a religion founded by Jesus as it is a religion about Jesus.


It is amazing how many “error free” religions there are.


But only one of them is right. :wink:



It’s generally considered proper to use citations when quoting someone.

That’s from “Pillar of Fire; Pillar of Truth”

I am not sure what you’d like us to say to this.

It’s a position statement, not an argument. It’s just grandstanding really.

Again, what can we say except, “Okay, yeah, that’s pretty much what we thought you believed.”

As for how many people are swimming the Tiber in either direction, I couldn’t care less, for our part, we’re not counting.

I will say though that I would rather see someone in a good Catholic Church than in a seeker sensitive evangelical mega-stadium church.


Yes, that is where I got it from so you would understand. :slight_smile:


You are correct. Paragraph 816 of The Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

The sole Church of Christ [is that] which our Savior, after his Resurrection, entrusted to Peter’s pastoral care, commissioning him and the other apostles to extend and rule it… This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in communion with him.

The Second Vatican Council’s Decree on Ecumenism explains: “For it is through Christ’s Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help toward salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained. It was to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the head, that we believe that our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant, in order to establish on earth the one Body of Christ into which all those should be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the People of God.”

God bless you,


Well said. If anything, the Catholic church is a result of Paul’s teachings which in some cases contradicted Jesus.

Therefore it wasnt founded by Jesus, rather by Paul agaisnt the teachings of Jesus (Paul v legitamate church at the time)


Hehehe. It sure is interesting to see how many ways people can view the same set of events.

No educated catholic denies that Jesus was a Jew. The Catholic Church is the spiritual descendent and the fruition of Judaism. The Church is what God intended Judaism to become when the Messiah arrived. Jesus clearly ordered his apostles to ‘go forth and make disciples of all nations.’ They did (and are). And they appointed successors as some were martyred and the good news spread. There is a remarkably robust historical record of the lineage of popes and many of the bishops. It’s not just a religious claim that the catholic church makes to being the church Jesus established, it’s historical fact. We are, to put it bluntly and non-ecumenically, the real Jews in spite of that fact that our elder brothers retain the name and we’ve taken a new one to differentiate us. The old covenant has been fulfilled and the new covenant will last forever!

Any group 1200, 1500 or 2006 years later that attempts to restart christianity in the image of what they read in scripture inevitably lacks at LEAST one element possesed by the original: the demonstrable sanction by Jesus himself for doing so!

P.S. The catholic church LOOONG ago resolved any and ALL apparent discrepancies between what Christ said and what Paul preached by understanding the principles espoused by each in context with the people and subject at hand when it was said. You can construct flimsy apparent contradictions, but none withstand serious scrutiny.


What about Jesus saying that he brings no new laws. That the laws of the Torah are still to be upheld (all of them)

As opposed to Pauline view that they are no longer valid?


Jesus didn’t say that he brought no new laws. What he did say was:

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (Matt 5:17)

The new law that Jesus brought was the law of love, which fulfills all the Mosaic law.

For this, “YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, YOU SHALL NOT MURDER, YOU SHALL NOT STEAL, YOU SHALL NOT COVET,” and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, “YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.”

Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law. (Rom 13:9-10)

St. Paul never taught anything that was at odds with what Jesus taught. If you think he did, please provide some examples and we can discuss them.

God love you,


Gah I will, but for now I must sleep! If you want you can look at Corininthians and Galatians where he badmouths other missionaries (who are sent by James) calling them ‘dogs’ and ‘minions of Satan’ in the mean I must finish this paper :frowning:


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