It is not love to say someone is correct when they are not correct. If a Baptist honestly believes I am incorrect to believe what the Church teaches, I do not count it against them for saying so.
The papal church is the apostolic church. The Bishop of Rome - the Pope - is the successor of the Apostle Peter.
“One, holy, catholic, and apostolic” is the beginning of the last section of the Nicene Creed. This creed dates back to the fourth century, and I’m pretty sure that’s before any of the currently-enduring schisms occurred.
Many Protestant sects today profess the Nicene Creed, though I believe they reduce the four marks to characteristics of the “invisible church,” rather than the original (and Catholic) understanding as marks of a visible and identifiable entity. It seems like they’d have to. No Protestant denomination is one, holy, catholic, or apostolic.
I said the sacrament of baptism was available, but Lutherans and other Protestants do not have actual sacraments of communion or confirmation, regardless of what they believe.
I said they’re imperfectly part of Christ’s Church and his body. Hard truths do not imply a lack of love. They are still Christians properly baptized into his Church and many do bear wonderful fruit.
Everyone is imperfect. Nobody walks a perfectly straight path. Catholics have the aid of the institution Christ established, the successors of the apostles, and the sacraments and the graces they provide in keeping to the narrow road, but many Catholics still go astray, and some may very well end up in Hell.
But, Petra, can you still love them?
Correcting error can be an act of love. Love does not mean being nice all the time.
Nice is different than good.
Nice is different than love.
Not that there aren’t areas of overlap. Correction should be done with charity, though, not malice or pride or any other negative motivation. That doesn’t mean it never sounds harsh.
Well, of course. What can another human being do to prevent you from loving them? We are commanded to love everyone, which means it is of course an attainable goal. That doesn’t mean we are to pretend that no one in the world can do anything wrong or have an incorrect belief.
If it were true to say it is unloving to say someone is wrong, how could Our Lord have ever corrected anyone?
Would I want someone to let me walk around all day with my skirt tucked into my underpants because it isn’t “loving” to point out my error? That is not love. That is just conflict avoidance.
Yes, I agree…but, what aid is given?
What do you mean by actual…regardless of what they believe? To me that is rather judgmental, something I thought Catholics would consider sinful.
Correct moral and pastoral support. See Church teaching on marriage, marital relations for an example of where society and many Christian denominations have gone astray in the past century. Guidance and truth, the pillar of truth.
Actual grace imparted through the sacraments through the Church. The grace you speak of at justification? That grace can be received, restored, and increased through the sacraments if the receiver is properly disposed. Protestant denominations do not have this. Not that there isn’t any grace, but there’s no formalized sacraments through which they’re given routinely.
Their communion is only bread and wine. They lack the real presence. Christ can be present in such communities, sure, but imagine if Christ bodily came down from Heaven and stood in the building with you letting you touch the wounds in his hands and feet as he did for Saint Thomas, surely you’d say his presence in that way is different than his presence when he’s spiritually amongst a community of believers. So it is with the real presence and an actual Eucharist, found only in Catholic and Orthodox Churches. Likewise, the strengthening of sacramental grace found in Catholic and Orthodox confirmation/chrismation is not ordinarily within a Protestant confirmation as their ministers do not have the authority to impart it in Christ’s name, though we can’t exclude God acting extraordinary in some cases if He so chooses.
As for judgment, that’s a buzzword people like to throw around as an accusation nowadays. I cannot condemn someone to Hell or judge them saved. No one can do that but Jesus. We all will be judged. But that does not mean people can’t exercise their rational faculties or advise on what the Church teaches, or advise what is moral and what is not, or what is right doctrine and what is not.
The Catholic church is Incarnational. The characteristics and reasons God became man are characteristics the Church carries on in the World.
So what? If one does not believe that a priest cannot do this and the Catholic Church in thinking so, is a lie, that person not better to be a Catholic.
Well, I did not use it as a buzzword to throw around or really personally accuse you. If I did, I apologize.
I’ll start from the very beginning. We can cite all the good reasons why it is better to be a Catholic. But, other churches really believe that they are the way and have the real truth too. I do believe in all that you say, but I am walking in others shoes at the same time. They too really believe in their church and all in all, all these roads lead to Jesus, a good thing, regardless of how we celebrate or praise Him.
Why is the idea of religion/personal faith an either-or proposition? My religion informs, enriches, and bolsters my faith - which is a very personal relationship with God.
Jesus never made his Jewish religion a big deal? Oh dear. He - and his parents - obeyed every single tiny little jot and tittle of the Jewish law. His virginal father Joseph is labeled “the just man” in the Bible. That’s not a small thing! Jesus himself originally limited his ministry to Jews only.
You’re right. Jesus didn’t come here to create another religion. He came as the fruition of the religion that was already here. He came to fulfill the Judaic Law perfectly, and thus to usher in the Age of Grace.
Jesus did say, “I am the Way.” And there’s only one Church that goes all the way back to the very Head of the Way, i.e. the very beginning of God’s incarnate ministry on earth. Just one.
Have you never failed to understand or misunderstood something the Holy Spirit said to you? God protects the Church from error, but not individuals. (Except, in particular faculties, the pope.) This is in part so that we will rely on each other. Almost no one can learn perfect love in isolation, and perfect love is the goal of our lives. So he put us together, so that we would rub up against each other, and help each other, and hurt each other, and stay anyway, and forgive each other, and learn his kind of love.
We do need Jesus, and nowhere on earth is a more intimate relationship with him found than in the Catholic Church, which is both his Body and his Bride.
Of course they do, but they can’t all be right. The person was asking why the Catholic Church. The Catholic position is that only in the Catholic Church do you find all that there is to offer. Certainly one should have reasons to believe in the Catholic Church over other denominations, but it should be clear that the CC does not teach that all things are equal everywhere and so it doesn’t really matter, and the Catholic (and Orthodox) teaching on ecclesiology is certainly a lot different than many Protestant teachings on it.
They can all be right for the reason that all roads to Christ even though the paths may be different.
With all due respect, how do you know that, "the Catholic Church do you find all that there is to offer? Perhaps, we could be missing something. Just saying.
Are you really promoting easily disprovable factual errors about Catholic Church – here? On the Catholic Answers forums? There are too many fallacies in your post to address in this format. Please go visit the website and do a little reading. It’s some pretty interesting stuff.
Because the Catholic Church is the one established by the apostles who were commissioned by Christ to spread His Church throughout the world. It’s the Church that Christ promised the gates of Hell would never prevail against and which is the pillar and bulwark of the truth. It’s not an attempt to re-invent the faith by trying to reconstruct an ancient text outside of the tradition it arose within (some denominations are guilty of this, others not so much). It’s apostolic in origin and in teachings. You may as well ask why I believe in Christ and why I believe in that over Mohammad or Judaism or Hinduism or wiccanism. The Catholic Church, the Body of Christ, is the basis for my faith in Christ and in Scripture. I know the Bible is scripture because it’s vouched for by the Church, and I believe history validates the origins, authenticity, and legitimacy of the Catholic Church.
Again, Catholics and Orthodox see the Church as something very different than many Protestants do.
I’ve done a good deal of reading all the way back to Catholicism’s roots. Based on these readings, compared to Jesus & His disciples, Catholicism is a system of religious thought not promoted by the Bible (yes the Resurrection, believing Jesus is Messiah, etc. is true, but I am speaking in terms of “religious teachings/doctrine/theology”). I am not sure what easily disprovable factual errors you are referring to.
It seems that you may have taken offense to what I said, and it was not my intention to upset anyone but rather to answer the question asked.
See the encyclical Nostra Aetate
What exactly did they teach in regards to keeping traditions. You do realize the old covenant doesn’t apply to Christians right?
The main point is that it seems logical that Christ would have left us something to interpret scripture accurately and to ensure we do not adopt false doctrines: a teaching authority. And when we look at scripture, we can find Christ doing exactly that.
“And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church…I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and what ever you loose on earth shall be loose in heaven”.
Now, giving someone the “keys to the kingdom” actually meant something at the time of Christ. That’s what kings did with their vicars when they would be away, it was a sign of giving the vicar his full authority. So this would have made perfect sense to the apostles.
So it starts with having a teaching authority, that’s why we are Catholic.
Next, we are Catholic, because it is a sacramental Church. The more you study the early church and church fathers, you find that it too was a sacramental church. So we believe we have the fullness of the sacraments, which are the means of sanctifying grace that Jesus left for all of us.
Finally, we are Catholic because it is universal and one. Jesus created one Church, and desired us all to be one.
I apologize for coming across that way. I did not take offense. I was merely shocked.
Easily refutable factual errors:
Catholicism is heavily polluted with pagan traditions, customs, and anti-semitism, and biblical contradiction.
Jesus was a Jewish Rabbi that came to restablish the teachings God gave to His people at Mt Sinai (the Torah, Matthew 5:17-20) that Phariseeism had corrupted. Walk in Torah, keep the Feasts (Leviticus 23), and keep the (biblical Sabbath). This is what Jesus and all of His disciples (including Paul) taught.
You can find factual responses to all of your assertions in the first quote - very easily - on Catholic Answers. The second is simply a gross misreading of Scripture, which it is not possible to address in this format.
In addition, if such is your honest understanding of Scripture, I’m afraid I must suspect your reading of Church history. I wish that I could sit you down with my husband, who has a Protestant degree in Biblical and Theological Studies, and thus has some formal training in the reading of the Bible, which is not an easily-understood text. He took that training, used it through 18 months of reading on the Catholic Church from its own perspective, chose to submit his understanding to the Church Christ founded, and will officially convert in a few days. He is much more knowledgeable on these matters than I.
But I can offer you what I have, which is prayer. I will pray that Jesus, who alone knows your heart, will draw you closer to him. That’s pretty much my standard prayer with someone I can’t figure out how to understand, because it’s good for every single one of us.
I am a believer, and I’m not trying to debate. But I wil answer your questions briefly.
•Christmas & Easter (the big ones) - there’s plenty more (praying to dead people, statues/icons, sacraments, symbols, dressings like the Pope’s hat)
•Read Panarion 29, and Martin Luther’s “the Jews & their lies”. Jesus was Jewish, yet Catholicism has him depicted as a white person & stripped all Jewishness from him (Sabbath change, no biblical Feasts)
• 3 days & 3 nights
Why does the “Old Covenant” not apply? That’s directly opposed to what Jesus taught (Matthew 5:17-20), Paul (Romans 3:31, 15:4, Acts 21:19-26), James 1:22-25, 2:8). 1 John 3:4 defines sin as breaking the Law (Torah).
The “New Covenant” is ONLY for Israel, not Gentiles (Jeremiah 31:31-34). We are grafted in to Israel as believers (Romans 11:17), therefore God’s commands (Torah) for Israel are for believers in the Messiah.
Jesus is the Word (John 1:1), and the Word endures forever (Isaiah 40:8, 1 Peter) and God does not change (Malachi 3:6). Therefore, how can the “word of God” that He spoke at Sinai (Torah) be “done away with” or changed? It cannot be.
This was simply a brief answer.