Catholicism wrong?

[Lisa0315]

THIS faith, which is the faith in the Eucharist.
Specifics, not generalization.

Luther generalized faith to mean that is all it takes without cooperation of the free will to choose to abstain from sin.
But the notation above is a specific faith.

2. To deny that in a child after baptism sin remains is to treat with contempt both Paul and Christ.

This implies that baptism removes sin, i.e. that a work done on behalf of another person can pardon sin.

 

[WarriorAngel]

I know very little about the sacraments except for baptism and The Lord's Supper. I would like to know more especially as they are defined in the Bible.

Baptism
Communion [Eucharist]
Confession [John 20; 23]
Marriage
Holy Orders [Ordination ~ John 14; 16]
Confirmaton [Acts 8; 17: Acts 1; 5]
Last rites [Healing the sick ~ Mark 16; 18]

I do believe that God would have ordained a perfect united church under whose banner we should have all remained. What I do not believe is that this church was incorruptible.

Well, Lisa, it is either perfect which means incorruptible, or it is corruptible.
But bear in mind John 14; 16.
The Paraclete will abide in them for all time. All time does not end. Even if their mortal deaths end, the life of their doctrines would continue with the Paraclete.

As far as the splits with the church...I think that fault was on both sides. Luther did not want a split. He wanted change, and change was warranted. On the other hand, it seems as if Luther allowed himself to be used as a political tool by equally corrupt and politically minded factions.

Well, the Church didnt want to lose Luther, they sent him something to sign and return so he would not be excommunicated. He threw it in the fire and refused to commune. And yes it became quite a political issue....

To me, if the Catholic Church had prayed with Luther and admitted the errors that were going on at the time, there would not have been a split. Luther, on the other hand, even after being excommunicated, perhaps, should not have allowed new churches to spring up in his name.

Had Luther stayed, as he was requested, he would have seen that faction in the Church being changed.
It was not a world wide problem, it was a more local situation, whereas one man [name... ] was going about the selling of indulgences, which corrupted the use of indulgences, which if I am not mistaken indulgences are also Biblical. BUT the problem we have in that discussion is the canon. Because indulgences were in the books Luther disregarded. Macabbees in fact.

The problem with the doctrine of infallibility is that it traps the church into not being able to correct what is wrong. We know, and JPII agreed that we are not saved by any works, but rather by the grace of God. Grace alone saves us and 500 years later, the Catholic Church admits to this with the Lutheran agreement. With this admission, churches are returning to their mother.

Actually the use of infallibility maintains that the Pope can only speak on ancient doctrines and define them more clearly for the present state...or rather, they make the language more accessible to each era.
They cannot create anything new. But they can change doctrinal languages [such as the definition of Transubstantiation]...or make them Dogma.
WE never said works can save us, but faith without works cannot save us either.
Its less complicated when we understand the whole issue.
Here is my equation which simplifies things.
Grace = faith = works = salvation.
BY our consent to work with God's Grace which is the faith we have by grace...then with our cooperation, we do works which gives us salvation.
Matthew 25; 35
Otherwise we are just goats.

Now, before we get into the whole works vs grace issue, let me say that I understand that abusing grace is possible. Works are a result of saving grace, but works do not generate grace. Grace is freely given by God and regenerates the believer. Works are made manifest in the believer as a result. Do we both agree on this? This is my understanding of the Lutheran agreement and this is in full agreement with the church that I attend. (Independent Baptist)

I say all of this with all due respect. I realize how touchy of a subject this is for both sides, but I would greatly enjoy discussing this further. I believe that they will never be unity unless we can heal from the past. There are great and old wounds on both sides. I feel that if we cannot at least talk about it, we will continue being separate.

So...it all comes down to the doctrine of infallibility.

I hope I already made a clear case. I use simpler terms. DID it come out clear?

Peace!

 

[WarriorAngel]

2. To deny that in a child after baptism sin remains is to treat with contempt both Paul and Christ.

This implies that baptism removes sin, i.e. that a work done on behalf of another person can pardon sin.

Quite a complicated matter Lisa.

You are seeing baptism of removing sin...and it does. Completely...UNTIL we choose to sin.

See, a murderer who was previously baptized b4 he committed the murder, has choosen to sin after being baptized, so he choose to sin after and is a sinner.

We do not become sinless permanently, but sinless up to that point,

Unless... I am not understanding you.

 

[Carrye]

15. Great is the error of those who approach the sacrament of the Eucharist relying on this, that they have confessed, that they are not conscious of any mortal sin, that they have sent their prayers on ahead and made preparations; all these eat and drink judgment to themselves. But if they believe and trust that they will attain grace, then this faith alone makes them pure and worthy.

From the link I was given...The above is one of the "errors" that Luther was condemned for. See words in bold.

Luther spoke against the necessity of sacramental Confession, and that's what this is addressing.

 

[Lisa0315]

Quite a complicated matter Lisa.

You are seeing baptism of removing sin...and it does. Completely...UNTIL we choose to sin.

See, a murderer who was previously baptized b4 he committed the murder, has choosen to sin after being baptized, so he choose to sin after and is a sinner.

We do not become sinless permanently, but sinless up to that point,

Unless... I am not understanding you.

Let me explain. I do not believe that baptism in of itself removes sin. My church teaches that baptism is an act of obedience and nothing more. However, God sees the heart. If a person has been taught that remission of sin is obtained through baptism and in that person's heart is a sincere desire to surrender to God, then, baptism can be a conductor of salvation. It is not the water that cleanses sin, but the heart turned over to God.

Let me further add...There are some Protestant churches that do not baptise at all. It was an unbaptised Friends minister who witnessed to my unsaved father-in-law as he lay dying in the hospital. My father-in-law died just two weeks later, unbaptised, but as saved as I am.

One requirement of salvation is repentance. A baby may be born into sin, but it has no awareness of sin. How can a baby repent of something it is not concious of nor capable of repenting? Can parents repent on behalf of their child?

 

[WarriorAngel]

Let me explain. I do not believe that baptism in of itself removes sin. My church teaches that baptism is an act of obedience and nothing more. However, God sees the heart. If a person has been taught that remission of sin is obtained through baptism and in that person's heart is a sincere desire to surrender to God, then, baptism can be a conductor of salvation. It is not the water that cleanses sin, but the heart turned over to God.

Let me further add...There are some Protestant churches that do not baptise at all. It was an unbaptised Friends minister who witnessed to my unsaved father-in-law as he lay dying in the hospital. My father-in-law died just two weeks later, unbaptised, but as saved as I am.

One requirement of salvation is repentance. A baby may be born into sin, but it has no awareness of sin. How can a baby repent of something it is not concious of nor capable of repenting? Can parents repent on behalf of their child?

So, what about retarded people?
It says that ALL must be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Retarded ppl cannot discern this, but they must also be baptized as it says 'all' must be.
Besides whole households.

 

[Ann M]

When I asked my father about being a Catholic or Protestant Christian, he said that Catholics don't do right in following the Bible and what the Lord has commanded of us.

Reasons:

- They use rosary beads in their worship, and in the Bible God frobids that. He used the golden calf as an example, and said that God expects us to worship him through out heart and souls alone.

- The priest they call father that you confess to he was also talkinga bout, and how once Jesus came that whole structure was abolished with priests and clergy, so there's another thing that isn't right.

- Another big thing he said was that no where in the Bible does it say to pray to Blessed Virgin Mary, yet they do.

Does his arguments he presented to me have any validity?

You know, there are days when I think Protestantism seems to resemble the Pharisee's in the Bible. They were the "Book Boys" of Judaism, but Christ still condemned them, for in their devotion to the words they often missed/lost the meaning.

 

[thereselittleflower]

Oh, ok. What I meant by singing is, like, 30-45 minutes of only singing, and getting up and clapping, and songs that aren't all "formal".

Hi AS . . I hope I can jump in here even though this post is from earlier in the thread . .

I know the type of service you mean . . I was protestant for over 30 years before becoming Catholic. I was part of a church where singing easily went on for 30-45 minutes . . . I know how it feels and why you desire such and like it so much.

I can honestly tell you this . . .and I am not exaggerating at all . . if anything, I am understating the facts.

The reason we don't have long periods of singing like you are used to, is simply because we don't need it. We have something FAR GREATER than any such singing can give.


From your perspective that may be hard to believe, but this is coming from one who has been there, done that, and now is doing this . .


And there is absolutely NO comparison!





Peace

 

[Lisa0315]

So, what about retarded people?
It says that ALL must be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Retarded ppl cannot discern this, but they must also be baptized as it says 'all' must be.
Besides whole households.

We believe that infants, children who have not yet reached an age of accountability, and those who do not have the mental capacity to understand sin/salvation are exempted from God's judgement. This includes anyone where the gospel has not yet reached. That would be very few places today. But think back to before North and South America was colonized. Thats a lot of people who had never heard of the God of Abraham much less Jesus Christ.

A good example for this would be the death of David's baby whom David said he would see in heaven. Surely, this baby was born in sin. His death was punishment to David for having committed murder and adultery. Yet, David believed that this child would be with him again in heaven. There was no such thing as infant baptism then

 

[AureateDawn]

thereselittleflower, how so? I would love to go to a Catholic church, but mom and her boyfriend won't let me. Once I mentioned it to them yesterday, they said they had raised me to liberal and told me that we were going to a Christian church again...

Lisa, that is exactly what I believe, and is probably the thing I disagree with in Catholocism. I mean, there are many who haven't even heard his name, such as tribal people in Africa today, or have the mental capacity to understand.

 

[Debi1967]

When I asked my father about being a Catholic or Protestant Christian, he said that Catholics don't do right in following the Bible and what the Lord has commanded of us.

Reasons:

- They use rosary beads in their worship, and in the Bible God frobids that. He used the golden calf as an example, and said that God expects us to worship him through out heart and souls alone.

- The priest they call father that you confess to he was also talkinga bout, and how once Jesus came that whole structure was abolished with priests and clergy, so there's another thing that isn't right.

- Another big thing he said was that no where in the Bible does it say to pray to Blessed Virgin Mary, yet they do.

Does his arguments he presented to me have any validity?

Here ya go

http://www.scripturecatholic.com/

A great way to debunk all those that think we do not have validity Scripturally.... This site is all Scripture...

 

[WarriorAngel]

We believe that infants, children who have not yet reached an age of accountability, and those who do not have the mental capacity to understand sin/salvation are exempted from God's judgement. This includes anyone where the gospel has not yet reached. That would be very few places today. But think back to before North and South America was colonized. Thats a lot of people who had never heard of the God of Abraham much less Jesus Christ.

Catholics also believe in the fact not all have heard of Jesus AND can be saved by the Mercy of the Lord.
He judges hearts, and we do not judge others.
Now for infants, parents are responsible for their lives, this includes their spiritual lives.
And the Earliest fathers baptized.
BUT I will give you a thread link to respected members in here. This should help you understand the position better.
http://www.christianforums.com/t2939143-biblical-basis-for-infant-baptism.html

A good example for this would be the death of David's baby whom David said he would see in heaven. Surely, this baby was born in sin. His death was punishment to David for having committed murder and adultery. Yet, David believed that this child would be with him again in heaven. There was no such thing as infant baptism then

There is infant baptism, and is an ancient custom, since babies are ppl too. BUT I do not fear they are judged like us.
God can purify them because of their innocence, but infant baptism has its importance.
Read the thread, it should shed some light on the subject for you, and it will stop me from writing a book in this post.

That is something to be thankful for. lol

 

[Lisa0315]

thereselittleflower, how so? I would love to go to a Catholic church, but mom and her boyfriend won't let me. Once I mentioned it to them yesterday, they said they had raised me to liberal and told me that we were going to a Christian church again...

Lisa, that is exactly what I believe, and is probably the thing I disagree with in Catholocism. I mean, there are many who haven't even heard his name, such as tribal people in Africa today, or have the mental capacity to understand.

AS,
I know it is hard at your age. You are caught between having adult knowledge and feelings, but are still under parental authority. For now, you should be obedient to your parents and go to the church that they take you to. A wise man would reasonably discuss with his parents why he feels so strongly about exploring other churches, but a wise man would also obey his parents wishes once the discussion is over. When you are older and are independent from your parents, then, you may explore other churches if they forbid it now.

This is only a few years. I have a son who is exactly your age. He will be 16 in August. This is one of the best ages especially in your spiritual life. This is a time when God will test and try you for service. Be patient, endure the chaffing of your parents authority. It will teach you a great deal about leadership and service to others. If you cannot obey your parents, how will you obey God?

I believe it is natural for you to become uncomfortable under your parents authority now, but this serves only to help you grow into maturity and independence. You must first learn responsibility before you can enjoy freedom. You will find as an adult that while we may make choices for ourselves, we are burdened with heavy responsibilities to those who are under our authority. You, too will experience this in time.

For now, I ask you to challenge yourself with the Book of Proverbs. It contains 31 chapters. I asked my daughter to do this when she was around 17 and it helped her a great deal. Read the Book of Proverbs and keep a journal of your thoughts in how this book applies to your life and your future. Go through it slowly and even more than once, but use this as a tool to understand why God has gifted parents with authority over their children. I think you will be very blessed.

Finally, spend these last several years as preparation for your adult life. Study and show yourself approved before God. Pray to find His purpose for your life. And, in all things honor your mother and father even if they are wrong. Be obedient to them as a way to honor them, and God will bless you for it. As you are waiting for God to reveal His plan to you, spend your time in service to others. There are so many things that you can do that will greatly glorify and please God.

God bless you!

Lisa

 

[WarriorAngel]

Ok, wanted to pull this out of the site, that skripper put in the other thread I pasted above, and I believe Deb resurrected.



Acts 2:38 - Peter says to the multitude, "Repent and be baptized.." Protestants use this verse to prove one must be a believer (not an infant) to be baptized. But the Greek translation literally says, "If you repent, then each one who is a part of you and yours must each be baptized” (“Metanoesate kai bapistheto hekastos hymon.&#8221 This, contrary to what Protestants argue, actually proves that babies are baptized based on their parents’ faith. This is confirmed in the next verse.

Acts 2:39 - Peter then says baptism is specifically given to children as well as adults. “Those far off” refers to those who were at their “homes” (primarily infants and children). God's covenant family includes children. The word "children" that Peter used comes from the Greek word "teknon" which also includes infants.
Luke 1:59 - this proves that "teknon" includes infants. Here, John as a "teknon" (infant) was circumcised. See also Acts 21:21 which uses “teknon” for eight-day old babies. So baptism is for infants as well as adults.

AS for obeying parents that are wrong, I just want to say a small thing here....
It depends on what it is they are wrong about.

A parent to tell a child to steal, should not be listened to. Or if they are teaching a child to sin or otherwise disobey God and or the law.

Just thot that consideration was missed.

Peace!

 

[Lisa0315]

Ok, wanted to pull this out of the site, that skripper put in the other thread I pasted above, and I believe Deb resurrected.



Acts 2:38 - Peter says to the multitude, "Repent and be baptized.." Protestants use this verse to prove one must be a believer (not an infant) to be baptized. But the Greek translation literally says, "If you repent, then each one who is a part of you and yours must each be baptized” (“Metanoesate kai bapistheto hekastos hymon.”) This, contrary to what Protestants argue, actually proves that babies are baptized based on their parents’ faith. This is confirmed in the next verse.

Acts 2:39 - Peter then says baptism is specifically given to children as well as adults. “Those far off” refers to those who were at their “homes” (primarily infants and children). God's covenant family includes children. The word "children" that Peter used comes from the Greek word "teknon" which also includes infants.
Luke 1:59 - this proves that "teknon" includes infants. Here, John as a "teknon" (infant) was circumcised. See also Acts 21:21 which uses “teknon” for eight-day old babies. So baptism is for infants as well as adults.

AS for obeying parents that are wrong, I just want to say a small thing here....
It depends on what it is they are wrong about.

A parent to tell a child to steal, should not be listened to. Or if they are teaching a child to sin or otherwise disobey God and or the law.

Just thot that consideration was missed.

Peace!

Oh, yes, I totally agree. I completely missed that one. Parents should be honored and obeyed, but if they ask a child to do something against the law of God or man, then, no, that child is free from obeying his parents on that point. Thank you for catching that!

Now, back to our chat...I am on vacation this week so I hope to have lots of forum time. However, I need to research, study and pray over this point. So, I will get back to you about infant baptism and the verses you cited.

I just want to say how much I am enjoying this discussion with you.

Okay, off to run errands. Be back later!

 

[WarriorAngel]

Oh, yes, I totally agree. I completely missed that one. Parents should be honored and obeyed, but if they ask a child to do something against the law of God or man, then, no, that child is free from obeying his parents on that point. Thank you for catching that!

Now, back to our chat...I am on vacation this week so I hope to have lots of forum time. However, I need to research, study and pray over this point. So, I will get back to you about infant baptism and the verses you cited.

I just want to say how much I am enjoying this discussion with you.

Okay, off to run errands. Be back later!

There was this protestant man who argued against Catholicism, and he read the earlier writings and researched the history of the Church...when he finished the book, he threw it down off something........and stomped away.... [not quite sure of details] he soon after converted to Catholicism.

NOW I forget who he was, or where I read that......but I found it interesting.

I am enjoying this dialogue too. IT is much better than in GT where its cut throat sometimes.

Have fun doing errands. [Yeck!] I have alot to do because when I was my sickest the past 6 days, it was hardest to clean, and now with me feeling a tad better......I have to soon get the whole house done.

 

[thereselittleflower]

For him in a way that is more pleasing to us.... though I guess that isn't entirely what God would want... but it's hard for me to stay awake in "formal" and "boring" sermons and song. I don't feel the spirit unless I sing vibrantly and clap, etc. with a shouting preacher.

Please understand that what I am about to share, I learned the hard way . . . as I said above, been there, done that . . .

The Holy Spirit is GOD Himself. One does not muster up God. He is not at our beck and call . . .

We do not sing or clap or shout until we "feel" the spirit . . that is not God's way.

I am going to be very honest with you . . I want you to resist the urge to toss aside what I am about to say . . for it is, indeed, the truth.


What you are doing when you spend so much time in singing, clapping, shouting, and especially when the singing involves repetitive choruses, over and over and over again, is simply this . .

You are inducing an altered state of consciousness. Nothing more.

This altered state of conscousness makes one highly suggestable and what messages are given go deep into your subconcious with great force, so you are probably feeling a great deal of resistance to my words right now.

That is not the Holy Spirit putting up red flags . . that is what was introduced into your subconscious under such highly suggestable states.

My sister tried to tell me this years ago . . I didn't believe her either . . it wasn't until God brought me out of a congregation which employed music like this, and on my journey into the Catholic Church (which lasted 3 years) I discovered the truth of this. Did they do this understanding what they were doing? Absolutely not. I knew the pastor and his family well. They were the most wonderful people. But this was happening none-the-less.

In such a highly suggestable state, one 'feels' the spirit. But this simply confuses things, and it can become impossible to distinguish between the real and the manipulated expereinces.

That feeling you are wanting, is not what God wants you to be seeking. He wants you to grow in spiritual maturity, and to do this there is only one way .. to deny self, take up one's cross, and follow Him.

Holding onto, and desiring such emotional experiences will only hold us back in our growth into spritual maturity.

Feelings, and desiring experiences of the spirit, are never supposed to be our guide in the Christian life . . . in fact, the great saints of old learned to greatly distrust the seeking and desiring of such experiences.


I hope that what I shared above will be helpful to you.


Peace

 

[thereselittleflower]

thereselittleflower, how so? I would love to go to a Catholic church, but mom and her boyfriend won't let me. Once I mentioned it to them yesterday, they said they had raised me to liberal and told me that we were going to a Christian church again...

Hi AS, I am not sure what the "how so?" refers to exactly. If you could clarify, I will try to answer. :_

Lisa, that is exactly what I believe, and is probably the thing I disagree with in Catholocism. I mean, there are many who haven't even heard his name, such as tribal people in Africa today, or have the mental capacity to understand.

What was it Lisa said that made you say this?



Peace

 

[Lisa0315]

There was this protestant man who argued against Catholicism, and he read the earlier writings and researched the history of the Church...when he finished the book, he threw it down off something........and stomped away.... [not quite sure of details] he soon after converted to Catholicism.

NOW I forget who he was, or where I read that......but I found it interesting.

I am enjoying this dialogue too. IT is much better than in GT where its cut throat sometimes.

Have fun doing errands. [Yeck!] I have alot to do because when I was my sickest the past 6 days, it was hardest to clean, and now with me feeling a tad better......I have to soon get the whole house done.

I am sorry to hear about your illness. I will be praying for you.

Lisa

 

[WarriorAngel]

I am sorry to hear about your illness. I will be praying for you.

Lisa

Thank you kindly.

And let us know what the research shows.