Why During Vatican 2 Would Catholicism Say It Was Not the True Church of Jesus Christ

I find that interesting particularly since the profession was clearly known for years and Vatican 2 comes along and the church stopped saying that it was Christ’s true church.

Catholics, I am seeking a sound answer — do not use the statement to attempt in convincing me that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is false and now I should come to that realization and begin going to my local parish’s RCIA, which began earlier this month.

I am not converting to Catholicism so I will await sound answers. Those of you who want to reply more hopwash false statements, spare your fingers from typing such garbage.

Please quote Vatican 2 where Catholicism states that it was not the true Church of Jesus Christ.

Why would you convert to Catholicism since you’ve already claimed to be Catholic?

Wow, this is news to me?

Do you have any documents, links, facts etc. for this statement?

I’m sure we would all like to see them, if they exist.

Now you did it.

He will abandon this thread just like the other(s) he started, where he got called on that.

Way to go!!! :smiley:

Yeah, I had to go recheck the other thread to recheck the exposure. Guess he can’t keep up his story. Of course he wouldn’t be “interested in converting to Catholicism” because previous posts say he already did! :rolleyes:

But anyway, I would like to see quotes from Vatican 2 where “Catholicism [said] it was not the true Church of Jesus Christ”.

:popcorn:

Making up bogus facts about the Church in an attempt to support your cult is not effective.

He was caught on another thread falsely stating that he was Catholic when his ID stated LDS. When he was called out on it he disappeared. Another time he said that he was Mormon but attended a Catholic Church monthly.

Not an honest fellow.

Hello Thecourt

Well, the sound answer is that the statement is not true, The catholic church has never ceased to declare it is Christ’s true church. I would be interested in seeing where you got that information from. It is worth remembering not all sources of information are equal in their trustworthiness.

I own a copy of the Vatican II documents, tell me where they allegedly said this, OP.

How sad that you try to discredit Catholicism with empty, dishonest statements. :frowning:

Where’d you find this falsehood? Or did you just misinterpret something?

Unfortunately, that is the norm for some of the LDS posters on here.

Another LDS poster tried the same thing on another thread, got called on it, and he tapped danced like crazy trying to get out of it.

The good thing is, he knew he got busted on it, (we kept dogging him) and hasn’t done it again. (so far)

There is one LDS poster on here that hasn’t fallen into that trap yet, which is a good thing.

And they talk about Catholics (or anyone else) trying to perpetuate myths and lies. :shrug:

Also, if I remember correctly, the OP is one that will try to respond to your posts by private message instead of in the threads he starts.

I finally had to tell him to quit pm’ing me

HI MetalMark, i was snooping and a thought came over me, What os it mean Vatican 1 from Vatican 2? I don’t understand, but i can tell you I once went a long time ago in the 80s to a revelation and daniel seminar, and the 7th day held it. It was interesting but i did hear them teach on someone getting pictures insde the vatican of documintations of thing’s written by the Pope and one was he claimed to be God on earth and we did see pictures of the paper work I am still trying to find out where i can get copy’s of ths again.There were alot of other things andi remember alot of catholics converted that night. I was never a 7th day but i did study with them because i was searching.

Looks to me like your post itself is a “hopwash false statement.” Perhaps you should have spared your own fingers from “typing such garbage”. Kind of reminds me of splinters and beams.

TheCourt,

Responding to your PM:

I want you to demonstrate your OP by showing us where Vatican 2 stated that Catholicism was not the true Church of Jesus Christ. This is your claim, and we are asking for you to substantiate it. Many of us are quite familiar with Vatican 2, so we will wait.

Also, you do not have to hide behind the shadows of private messaging. You started a thread, this is a discussion forum. You don’t start a thread then respond to it through private messaging individually. :rolleyes:

To Court:
LETTER TO A SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST
James Likoudis

Following is a letter from James Likoudis, president emeritus of Catholics United for the Faith, to a member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
Thank you for your recent letter with enclosures. I’m pleased that you take religious matters seriously, though I do think your “indignation” regarding the Catholic Church’s claim to infallibility quite misplaced.

If God has indeed founded a Church to “teach all nations” in His name and by His authority (and we Catholics have believed for 20 centuries that He did), what else could that Church be but infallible (that is, not able to err in its official teaching mission)? Obviously, too, its Chief Pastor and Teacher (the Pope) must in particular be infallible in the definition of doctrine. The Pope comes with the Church since he is the visible head of the Church on earth.

He is not God nor does he claim to be the equal of God as Seventh-day Adventists allege; rather, he is the “Servant of the Servants of God” as the Successor of Peter on whom Christ built His Church, gave the Keys of the Kingdom to, ordered to “confirm his brethren” in the faith, and made the Chief Shepherd of the entire flock of the disciples after the Resurrection (read: Matt. 16-18 ff., Luke 22:31; John 21:15-17).

Christ established only one Church and stated quite clearly, “If any man refuse to hear the Church, let him be as the heathen and publican” (Matt. 18:17). The Church Christ established must be able to trace its history back to the Apostles themselves, and as history demonstrates, the Catholic Church with its hierarchy, its Creed, and its distinctive worship and sacraments alone can trace its beginnings to apostolic times.

We Catholics believe the teachings of that Church under pain of not hearing her and being considered “heathens and publicans.” What was said to Peter and the Apostles is as true of the Pope and the bishops who succeed to the place of the Apostles in the Church: “He who hears you, hears me” (Luke 10:16-words of our Lord).

I can only ask: What church do you hear and obey that can trace its establishment to Christ Himself?

Since you do not believe that Christ established a real Church with divine authority to teach, rule, and sanctify, it is not surprising that you reject its decision to celebrate Christian worship on Sunday. As your own pamphlet admits, it was indeed the Catholic Church that determined Sunday to be the day for commemorating the Resurrection of Christ because it was the only Church around in apostolic times as “the pillar and ground of the truth” (I Tim. 3:15). You write that “the entire New Testament speaks of obeying His Commandments,” but you fail to observe that nowhere in the New Testament is the Saturday-Sabbath declared obligatory on Christians. Instead, one reads that the early Christians guided by the Holy Spirit celebrated the first day of the week as the “Lord’s day” (see St. Paul, I Cor. 16:2; and Acts 20:7).

Obviously, the Apostles themselves ordered the substitution of Sunday, the first day of the Christian week, for the Jewish Sabbath seventh day. It is true that the Church cannot change the moral law of God as found in the Commandments, but as the infallible teachers of the new Christian Church (the “teach-ye-all-nations” Church soon to be termed the Catholic Church by the year A.D. 107), they could and did change the time, the motive, and details of the Sunday observance. Attendance by these first Catholics at Sunday Mass is mentioned by St. Paul himself in Acts 20:7.

If the Church has rulers (the Pope and bishops as successors of the Apostles) who are not infallible (by the power of the Holy Spirit) and can be possibly mistaken and can teach error, it is not worthy of any credence at all. A Church that can err is unworthy of Christ and the belief of Christians. The Seventh-day Adventist sect came along 19 centuries too late to have any connection with the Church built upon Peter and the Apostolic College. It came too late to be credible concerning any interpretation of disputed biblical texts.

For example, the pamphlet you sent concerning the Beast and the Pope is really off the wall, to put it mildly. Most biblical commentators agree that 666 probably refers to the Roman Emperor Nero who was responsible for the martyrdom of Peter and Paul who had watered the Church of Rome with their blood. You may not find it amusing, but I recall reading that some writers playing the “numbers game” about 666 concluded that it quite fit the numerology of the visionary Ellen G. White, prophetess (and plagiarist) of the Seventh-day Adventists!

As the booklet The Beast, the Dragon, and the Woman points out, it is indeed on the authority of the Catholic Church that Sunday was substituted for the Sabbath for the worship of the Blessed Trinity. One can try to argue that this was wrong on the basis of certain scriptural allegations, but it is useless to try and use Scripture against the Church whose Scriptures they are.

The Old and New Testaments belong to the Church; they are her Book. You would not even have “the Bible” were it not for the councils of the Catholic Church in the fifth century determining the Bible’s exact contents of 76 books! As it is, when you appeal to your Bible, you will find that you do not even have all the Bible at all! You lack seven divinely inspired books of the Old Testament. There is no way a person living in the 20th century can know if God has a divinely inspired Bible unless there is a divine authority that can authenticate it, reveal its exact contents, and interpret it without fail as to what Christians must believe.

Where is your divine authority? We Catholics have it in the Catholic Church Christ Himself established in this world as His visible and Mystical Body and His virginal Spouse, and against which the gates of Hell have not triumphed for 20 centuries.

The only real question to be considered in the religious debates between Catholics and others who profess to be Christians is, “Where is the Church of Christ established and which appears throughout the New Testament writings?” Such a Church must have divine authority and be infallible if the gates of Hell are not to prevail against it. What all Protestants (28,000 sects stemming from private interpretation of “the Bible”) really profess is that they do not really believe in a visible Church as established by Christ or else they believe that the Church Christ did establish somehow became corrupt (despite Christ’s promise that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it).

They, in effect, make Christ a liar and mock St. Paul’s words about the Church being “the pillar and ground of truth.”

As early as the end of the second century, Christians (who offered the Sacrifice of the Mass on Sunday as the Christian day of worship) professed the Apostles’ Creed in which we read, “I believe … the holy Catholic Church.” We modern Catholics are in continuity with the earliest Christians because we are members of the same Catholic Church professing that same faith “which comes to us from the Apostles.” Many laws, ritual ceremonies, and practices have indeed changed across the centuries, but never the doctrines that make up the “Deposit of Faith” given in divine Revelation by Jesus Christ, the Lord of History.


This letter appeared in “Serviam”, March, 1995.


Provided Courtesy of:
Eternal Word Television Network
5817 Old Leeds Road
Irondale, AL 35210
www.ewtn.com

I hope that helped Court out:)

WOW! Nancy, that’s great, it says it all!

Thanks. :thumbsup:

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.