Your thoughts please

If "Truth: exist, it MUST be singular.

So there can be but One True Church

Why is your church the one? Or why is it not the One?:shrug:

God Bless you,

The One Church is under the Vicar of Christ.

Hi Patrick. The one true Church is the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, of which you and I are both members. Certainly, the pure form of His truth exists in the Church Triumphant, which is unaffected by sinful humans. I pray we see each other there.


I can kind of give you a Baltimore Catechism answer.
The Catholic Church is the one true church because it has the four marks of the one true church. It is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic. Does that answer your question in some way?

This will be true if there is only one true definition of “Church”…

So the first discussion would need to be - what is that True definition of “Church”…


Not to be a devil’s advocate, but I always look at the assumption a statement is built on.

So there aren’t “truths”?

that simply cannot be.

Since we have different beliefs about very critical issues, both cannot be “truth”. Only one can have all truth. Other can have some, but truth is not a moving target.

I simply cannot accept that Luther somehow had a better idea than Jesus.

Hence the need to understand what each person means by “Church”…:shrug:


Your “a priori” is not necessarily correct, it is based upon Human perception, Human rationalizations, Human experience. “Truth” can encompass anything God creates from Himself. Does one “religious belief” contain ALL “truth”? How can that be, since that belief is directly dependent upon Human reportage, Human response, Human imagination, Human everything? I think the greatest TRUTH has been recently discovered by (of all things) “science” which has now proclaimed that the Universe was created in ONE TRILLIONTH OF A SECOND. I make the analogy: we are the mouse on the “space station”; we understand our surroundings within our limitations and we believe in that understanding; we have adapted to survival within those self perceived limitations; we have no concept of space, let alone the space station we are on; we cannot design a space station; we cannot credibly interpret other things on that space station (i.e., we are basically, on this planet, ignorant of things that exist in the oceans).

SO: what is at least ONE “truth” we can rest upon: that Jesus lived, that He suffered, that He died, that He rose. I have no doubt. Many other “christian” denominations have erred seriously because of Martin Luther and we know this. However: do we absolutely KNOW that OUR specific beliefs are “right”? I don’t think it’s possible, really, for any creature to understand the Creator. I think, perhaps, what Jesus intended was to free us of “laws” and self condemnation. I think, rather, He intended us to pray as he taught us (which, by the way, came from the prayers taught to Him by the Blessed Mother as faithful to Judaism in His time). Superstitious behavior is a very well known attribute of “learning” and can be seen at every level in every species. Let us not suffer from the hubris that imagines we, the creatures, can have any full understanding of our Creator.

It’s a tricky question…There is only one ultimate truth…but there can be various “truths” in support of that one ultimate Truth.

To take a somewhat silly example…It is True that I have always lived in a house. Of course one of these was actually my parents house…two were frame houses, one a log house and 4 were brick houses.
One Truth = house. Many variations on how that Truth was built…

Does that make sense?


It’s true you always lived in a house.
It’s also true that they weren;t always the same.
It’s also true that you didn’t own them all.
It may also be true that you went to school(s).

Lots of TRUTHS
Doesn’t seem at all “tricky” to me.

Catechism . No. 2089

Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth, or wilful refusal to assent to it. Heresy is the obstinate post baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed.

Schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him

And so it is that simple…But there is one ultimate “Truth” to which all other truths need to point - if they are to be considered worthwhile.

I don’t know if it can really be explained - - at least not by me…:shrug:

What about if this “Truth” is not accessible to us humans.
There might be a Truth but it is beyond our understanding.

Just a thought

What IS is Truth. That might include the idea of church, or some variant, as there has been some sort of explanation for the Unknown called that, or religion, since man fell from animal instinct, or as that seems to have been called in your faith’s Bible, Eden. But the lesser cannot encompass the greater. There then cannot be a “true” church, only one that thinks it is, based on the bias of its members, who are also incapable of either containing the Truth or presenting any useful facsimile of it, especially as an intellectual proposition. There is no container for Truth as such, as that to the human mind is incomprehensible. And one doesn’t have to go to a church to know that.

So it is on you to make a link between the singularity of Truth and the notion that there is, or might be, or could be, or needs to be, a church that is equal to it, or even hypothetically represents it, as Totality can have no useful representation, save perhaps, as very insufficient ad hoc pointers, “1,” “I AM THAT I AM,” or perhaps “1=0.” Any church is necessarily less than Truth itself. The OP proposition is a semantically null, and the question, as does the proposition, makes unwarranted assumptions.

It feels like, from other things you have posted, that you like to make grand assumptions that appear to have value of being proved in your favor. You claim to identify as your accomplishment in being educated on a kind of line of thinking which is not accepted by any means to be as Universal as you feel your claim to that is. Therefore the “shrug” is hubris.

And what do you men “If?”

It’s philosophical, but:

“Truth” is singular. What is “true” is one of many, hence plural.

There are many (plural) that called themselves Churches (just as even scripture talks of the many who are called gods and the one True God), but only one of them is the True Church.

Pilate asked, “What is truth?”, not what are the (many) truths, because truth is the (singular) set of everything true.

peace and all Good!

what next…we discuss what the meaning is IS is?
I give up…I have no idea what you’re getting at.

Giving up is in a sense a way to get to what JRKH’s statement might be pointing to. Only it can’t be just about some small item, but everything. How else would one have a taste of what IS is? What are you without your ideas and thoughts about them?? For me, JRKH’s questions make great sense. As I pointed out, there are profound assumptions behind the OP’s presentation, and a great leap.

If "Truth: exist, it MUST be singular.

So there can be but One True Church

Why is your church the one? Or why is it not the One

the premise is false -

get yourself a copy of Logic by Pascal

but to humor one-all the believers in Christ are the Church -there are different sects if you will but in the Episcopal Church we believe that all are doing God’s work-for example the Pope is a holy man who is doing God’s work so is Bishop Tutu of my Church as are the Lutheran Medical Missions and the work of the Moravian Church with the poor

It sounds good, but it’s Pascal’s wager, and just because it deals with the logic of the belief in God, it doesn’t really apply to what the OP is talking about.

peace and all Good!

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