Assume you are wrong.

[Rhamiel]

HowaredDean, I know you did not mean anything by it but the commemt, I was catholic and now I am a christian, was not the most tactful way of putting it. You were catholic now you are a protestant

 

[icedtea]

It was a hypothetical question. We all assume we are right, we have conviction of our beliefs.
So these are just what ifs. We will find out someday, Then we can all discuss it (up there).

 

[icedtea]

HowaredDean, I know you did not mean anything by it but the commemt, I was catholic and now I am a christian, was not the most tactful way of putting it. You were catholic now you are a protestant

Its weird the way my story translates.
Of course Catholics are Christian. My story is I was not a christian when my parents made me go to church when young; I was just occupying the pew. It happened to be the Catholic church, but could've been any protestant one also.

 

[vrunca]

On the flip side, I didn't care for the
stuff I read over here.
Here's just a small taste of it.

I'm glad you don't care for it...that is a flipantly anti-Catholic site you are looking on and they are taking things completely out of context and in turn spreading lies.

 

[Uphill Battle]

I've seen very little of people assuming (for the sake of this argument) that they are wrong!

 

[sunlover1]

I've seen very little of people assuming (for the sake of this argument) that they are wrong!

I assumed.
(I hate it when that happens, you
know what they say )

 

[Uphill Battle]

I'm glad you don't care for it...that is a flipantly anti-Catholic site you are looking on and they are taking things completely out of context and in turn spreading lies.

Yes, it is an extremely anti RCC site.

however, How do you take some of those statements out of context? What other context is there to "you must obey the pope, or you are damned?"

 

[icedtea]

Is it obey him, or believe what he states? I don't think the pope is ordering anyone about.

 

[sunlover1]

I'm glad you don't care for it...that is a flipantly anti-Catholic site you are looking on and they are taking things completely out of context and in turn spreading lies.

I agree, it is definitely anti Catholicism.
But I have read this type of sentiment
before:

"Remember and understand well that where Peter is, there is the Church; that those who refuse to associate in communion with the Chair of Peter belong to Antichrist, not to Christ. He who would separate himself from the Roman Pontiff has no further bond with Christ." Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, quoted in "Acts of Leo XIII: Supreme Pontiff", Rome: Vatican Press, 1896,

I don't see how this could be changed
by context, maybe you could explain what
it really means.

You do disagree with this quote, rigth?

ty,
sunlover

 

[Rhamiel]

"Remember and understand well that where Peter is, there is the Church; that those who refuse to associate in communion with the Chair of Peter belong to Antichrist, not to Christ. He who would separate himself from the Roman Pontiff has no further bond with Christ." Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, quoted in "Acts of Leo XIII: Supreme Pontiff", Rome: Vatican Press, 1896,

The Church is the Body of Christ, to reject His Church is to reject Him. Now you must have full knowledge to be held to full accountability. If anyone knew what the Catholic Church really was and left it then they would go to hell.

 

[HisKid1973]

What if they let it to go where God is leading them..Can you deny the spiritual maturity of non Cath's..All true believers are part of the "one holy, apostolic, catholic(universal) body of Christ..pax..Kim

 

[setmeonfire]

sort for the rant but this thread filled fast and didnt have time to respond....b16urock, in response to your post on pg 4:

Now, someone still might have a problem, with the explanation that I just gave, and not agree with it, however you can see, that the Church doesn't teach, everyone has to be a Catholic, inorder to obtain salvation. We are all made members, thru our baptism, into the Mystical Body of Christ, with Christ as Her Head. ----The Church. So when it reads, that those outside of the Church, there is no salvation, it is referring to non-christians

papal bull "unam sanctum" 1302 written by boniface viii (ex cathedra mind you, therefore speaking "infallibly" ad cannot be contradicted) : "Furthermore we declare, state, define, declare that it is altogether neessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman pontiff"

reiterated in different words by Vatican I:"If anyone therefore shall say that blessed Peter the Apostle was not appointed the Prince of all the Apostles and the visible Head of the whole Church militant; or that the same directly and immeadiately recieved from the same Lord Jesus Christ a primacy of honor only, and not of true and proper jurisdiction let him be anathema....if, then any should deny...that the Roman Pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy; let him be anathema"
-Dogmatic Decrees of the Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution of the Catholic Faith ch. I and II

 

[repentant]

I have a question..

Would being wrong that Mary was ever Virgin, and did not commit sin in life, bring a wrath of judgement on anyone?

Now I am not saying we are, or can be wrong..but I would rather be wrong in saying that she was EV and sinless, then to say she wasn't. I couldn't imagine what Jesus would say to you about dishonoring His mother like that...

 

[setmeonfire]

the bible says that 1 john 1:8 "If we claim we are without sin, we decieve ourselves and the truth is not in us.....if we claim to be without sin we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives."

if thats not enough she called jesus "savior" and matthew says joseph had no union with her "til" after she birthed Christ. it was custom with women in that day to bear many children not stay chaste. it would be illogical to think mary was sinless or EV. the above scripture should be enough to settle the issue of her sinless. if there were any exceptions it would be CLEARLY said in scripture. and it does....jesus.

isaiah 46:9 "remember the former things of old, for I am God and ther is none like me, I am God and there is none like me." I like how God says it twice incase we missed it the first time. NONE are like him.

 

[Libre]

I once had a pastor who said it is OK to question every doctrine we ever held. God can take it, and we will be stronger for it. I have found that this is true.

Libre

 

[setmeonfire]

I once had a pastor who said it is OK to question every doctrine we ever held. God can take it, and we will be stronger for it. I have found that this is true.

mine too. he says if you think you are 110% correct then you cant be teachable if there is a place you need to be taught. there the obvious exepctions, christ divinity etc.

 

[Libre]

Actually, it's OK to question even the divinity of Christ. You will be stronger, and if you are on forums long enough, someone will challenge you on it. You best be ready. What I do is take the opposite position and try to prove it. Like prove He was just a man, or whatever.

Logically, you can't prove a negative, like you can't prove you weren't at a certain place, but witness can say you were - or now with surveillance tape I guess they can prove you weren't there, lol. Anyway, that's the principle. You will find, as I did, that the divinity of Christ holds up.

Libre

 

[setmeonfire]

Actually, it's OK to question even the divinity of Christ. You will be stronger, and if you are on forums long enough, someone will challenge you on it. You best be ready. What I do is take the opposite position and try to prove it. Like prove He was just a man, or whatever.

your right. and i actually have tried to prove against christ divinity. i dont know why i had said I hadnt in the previous post. its getting late. a good book to read concerning one who would deny the divinity of christ is "more than a carpenter" by josh mcdowell. its a 5.00 dollar book less than 100 pgs but is full of good logical arguments.

I think what i meant in my previous post was that there is only one way to take christ. he was god-man, sacrifice, etc. there really isnt much more to elaborate or to teach i n that area of scripture. where as concerning annihilationism and eternal suffering. there are really good points for each one. if you are 110% of one you are now stubborn and unteachable. see what im getting at. im kind of bad with words at times...its definatly good though to know what arguements there are against what we hold as truth. it only reaffirms my beliefs when they stand firm...

 

[B16uRock]

sort for the rant but this thread filled fast and didnt have time to respond....b16urock, in response to your post on pg 4:


papal bull "unam sanctum" 1302 written by boniface viii (ex cathedra mind you, therefore speaking "infallibly" ad cannot be contradicted) : "Furthermore we declare, state, define, declare that it is altogether neessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman pontiff"

This quote, does not support the false claim, that the Catholic Church teaches, that one has to be Catholic inorder to obtain salvation.

First of all, this was for a Catholic audience, and specifically targeted at King Phillip of France. Who thought his authority in France as King, superceded the Pope's authority on monies and properties, that were in possession of the Church in France. King Phillip, had demanded from the Pope, money to support the war he was having with England. Both England and France had ask for money from the Pope to support the war, the Pope said, he didn't think it was right for The Church, to support both sides of the same war.

As a result, King Phillip ransack and robbed Churches, and put priest in jailed. I even believe several priest where killed, try to protect Church property. Don't remember exactly, because it has been so long, since I read about it. Those things I mentioned and a few other reasons, resulted in the Pope writting the Papal Bull.

reiterated in different words by Vatican I:"If anyone therefore shall say that blessed Peter the Apostle was not appointed the Prince of all the Apostles and the visible Head of the whole Church militant; or that the same directly and immeadiately recieved from the same Lord Jesus Christ a primacy of honor only, and not of true and proper jurisdiction let him be anathema....if, then any should deny...that the Roman Pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy; let him be anathema"
-Dogmatic Decrees of the Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution of the Catholic Faith ch. I and II

Once again, these decrees from Vatican Council I, are directed to an Catholic audience, and the anathemas do not apply to a non Catholic. Now if a Catholic was to say and believe these things, that is a different story.

What I posted back in post # 32 is the Church's position on non Catholic Christians. Once again, from the CCC, on the sacramental bond of the unity of Christians.

The sacramental bond of the unity of Christians

1271 Baptism constitutes the foundation of communion among all Christians, including those who are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church: "For men who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in some, though imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church. Justified by faith in Baptism, [they] are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church."81 "Baptism therefore constitutes the sacramental bond of unity existing among all who through it are reborn."82
An indelible spiritual mark . . .

1272 Incorporated into Christ by Baptism, the person baptized is configured to Christ. Baptism seals the Christian with the indelible spiritual mark (character) of his belonging to Christ. No sin can erase this mark, even if sin prevents Baptism from bearing the fruits of salvation.83 Given once for all, Baptism cannot be repeated.

1273 Incorporated into the Church by Baptism, the faithful have received the sacramental character that consecrates them for Christian religious worship.84 The baptismal seal enables and commits Christians to serve God by a vital participation in the holy liturgy of the Church and to exercise their baptismal priesthood by the witness of holy lives and practical charity.85

1274 The Holy Spirit has marked us with the seal of the Lord ("Dominicus character") "for the day of redemption."86 "Baptism indeed is the seal of eternal life."87 The faithful Christian who has "kept the seal" until the end, remaining faithful to the demands of his Baptism, will be able to depart this life "marked with the sign of faith,"88 with his baptismal faith, in expectation of the blessed vision of God - the consummation of faith - and in the hope of resurrection

 

[PassthePeace1]

I was walking down the sidewalks of Main Street, the other day, and saw a sign posted at the curb...it said, No Parking, all violators will be towed away. It even had a little image of a car being towed, to drive (pardon the pun) home the intent of the message.

I didn't let it bother me, because, hey, I was walking.