What errors and inventions arose in Roman Catholicism?

[MarkRohfrietsch]

No idea why they permit this, but to clarify, it is their words, not mine. You may teach (pretend to) and they may listen (pretend to). But make no mistake, they have zero shred of sincerity that your teaching is authoritative in any way, lest they contradict their own words as I quoted.

No, I was talking about Scriptural Interpretation, not dogmatics; as I thought you were... I should know better by now that you are a clever poster, and have employed a litterateur "bait and switch"; truth is that Roman Catholics and Confessional Lutherans employ the same interpretive standards to Scripture... there are reasons (most historic) why we interpret the same way, yet arrive at different conclusions.

Probably because they died as martyrs denying they ate flesh and blood. The majority agreed they ate flesh and blood, like the Romans, and lived.

You often complain how history and tradition colour our theologies; yet in bringing this up time and time again, you seem to like using a bit of history also... what's good for the goose is good for the gander they say.

PS. RC declared Anglican sacrament null and void. I've no doubt they think the same of yours for the same reason (no valid priest line and intent to offer sacrifice again).

Yes, we know that this is their tradition; we know better though. From our Lutheran and also from the Anglican position we define 'Apostolicity" as retaining the teaching of the Apostles, not in a non-genetic genealogy. So, since the teach the "real presence" (although we believe that their definition of transubstantiation is wrong; we also believe that any explanation, including consubstantiation, other than "it's a mystery" is wrong), they have a valid Eucharist, even if they don't admit we do. As I say, we know better.

 

[Standing Up]

No, I was talking about Scriptural Interpretation, not dogmatics; as I thought you were... I should know better by now that you are a clever poster, and have employed a litterateur "bait and switch"; truth is that Roman Catholics and Confessional Lutherans employ the same interpretive standards to Scripture... there are reasons (most historic) why we interpret the same way, yet arrive at different conclusions.

100 (ccc)The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him.

I am talking about interpretation, regardless of whether it leads to a dogma or not. They may invite you to talk, but they cannot change their opinion about whatever your talk is about.

For example, let's say you talk about the brothers of Christ that Mary/Joseph had. They cannot agree, even if God Himself said otherwise (see the bible).

You often complain how history and tradition colour our theologies; yet in bringing this up time and time again, you seem to like using a bit of history also... what's good for the goose is good for the gander they say.

I'm all for tradition that ties directly to apostles. Remember Polycarp (taught directly by apostles) and Rome's Anicetus (bishop lineage that ends at Sixtus).

Yes, we know that this is their tradition; we know better though. From our Lutheran and also from the Anglican position we define 'Apostolicity" as retaining the teaching of the Apostles, not in a non-genetic genealogy. So, since the teach the "real presence" (although we believe that their definition of transubstantiation is wrong; we also believe that any explanation, including consubstantiation, other than "it's a mystery" is wrong), they have a valid Eucharist, even if they don't admit we do. As I say, we know better.

Well, if someone called my Thanksgiving to God null and void, I'd have an issue with them. I'd take the opportunity at their next invitation to teach them otherwise. But oops, they can't listen or hear.

It's called a closed loop. Closed to all.

 

[Standing Up]

Like the list in Protestant errors, not everyone will agree on these. Feel free to suggest others. #27 is added from a suggestion.

1) Eucharist Adoration (the worship of the bread, rather than God).
2) Accepting bad theology from those who contradict scripture (devotions to "sacred" hearts, worship of angels).
3) Accepting "regenerative" baptisms of heretical groups as on par with Christian baptism.
4) Maintaining the clergy/laity split, rather than promoting the biblical priesthood of believers.
5) Believing Christ died on Good Friday.
6) Believing Christ rose in the night or at sunrise Easter Sunday.
7) Maintaining more than 66 books of the bible as inspired (God breathed).
8) Believing there is salvific information necessary for Christians apart from the bible.
9) Maintaining that Jesus Christ was not born in the normal human way (with afterbirth), thus ending virginity. Subsequently there was the substituting of “Mary” as the Great Goddess myth of Artemis/Diana.
10) Believing there is another way to God besides Christ (the Roman Church sums up this belief Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation.) .
11) Ignoring tradition that ties directly to scripture.
12) Defining "apostolic succession" as anything other than "teach the same" as apostles.
13) Believing Peter assigned anyone at Rome his authority (1 Peter 5:1-3 Peter calls the elders of Asia Minor and gives them the same authority (feed His sheep)).
14) Assumption of Mary as a salvific belief.
15) Immaculate conception as a salvific belief.
16) Sacerdotal sacrament.
17) Works necessary to maintain salvation.
18) Submission to the Roman Church’s Pope as salvific (unam sanctam and lumen gentium, confirming same doctrine)
19) Purgatory.
20) Transubstantian.
21) Ignoring Council decisions.
22) Failing to discern the Body of the Lord, calling them communities, rather than churches (or The Church).
23) Infallibility.
24) Failing to understand the Roman Church is a denomination.
25) The Roman Church pretends the authority of apostles (Firmilian 256ad).
26) RC believes neither EO, OO, Anglican, Baptist, Lutheran, etc can interpret the Word of God (bible/tradition).
The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him.
27) Praying to the dead, even though scripture forbids it.
28) Reserved

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Like the list in Protestant errors, not everyone will agree on these. Feel free to suggest others. #27 is added from a suggestion.

1) Eucharist Adoration (the worship of the bread, rather than God).
2) Accepting bad theology from those who contradict scripture (devotions to "sacred" hearts, worship of angels).
3) Accepting "regenerative" baptisms of heretical groups as on par with Christian baptism.
4) Maintaining the clergy/laity split, rather than promoting the biblical priesthood of believers.
5) Believing Christ died on Good Friday.
6) Believing Christ rose in the night or at sunrise Easter Sunday.
7) Maintaining more than 66 books of the bible as inspired (God breathed).
8) Believing there is salvific information necessary for Christians apart from the bible.
9) Maintaining that Jesus Christ was not born in the normal human way (with afterbirth), thus ending virginity. Subsequently there was the substituting of “Mary” as the Great Goddess myth of Artemis/Diana.
10) Believing there is another way to God besides Christ (the Roman Church sums up this belief Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation.) .
11) Ignoring tradition that ties directly to scripture.
12) Defining "apostolic succession" as anything other than "teach the same" as apostles.
13) Believing Peter assigned anyone at Rome his authority (1 Peter 5:1-3 Peter calls the elders of Asia Minor and gives them the same authority (feed His sheep)).
14) Assumption of Mary as a salvific belief.
15) Immaculate conception as a salvific belief.
16) Sacerdotal sacrament.
17) Works necessary to maintain salvation.
18) Submission to the Roman Church’s Pope as salvific (unam sanctam and lumen gentium, confirming same doctrine)
19) Purgatory.
20) Transubstantian.
21) Ignoring Council decisions.
22) Failing to discern the Body of the Lord, calling them communities, rather than churches (or The Church).
23) Infallibility.
24) Failing to understand the Roman Church is a denomination.
25) The Roman Church pretends the authority of apostles (Firmilian 256ad).
26) RC believes neither EO, OO, Anglican, Baptist, Lutheran, etc can interpret the Word of God (bible/tradition).
The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him.
27) Praying to the dead, even though scripture forbids it.
28) Reserved

I will have to leave that for knowledgable folks.
Keep up the good work SU


.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by MarkRohfrietsch

Yes, we know that this is their tradition; we know better though. From our Lutheran and also from the Anglican position we define 'Apostolicity" as retaining the teaching of the Apostles, not in a non-genetic genealogy.

So, since the teach the "real presence" (although we believe that their definition of transubstantiation is wrong; we also believe that any explanation, including consubstantiation, other than "it's a mystery" is wrong), they have a valid Eucharist, even if they don't admit we do. As I say, we know better.

Well, if someone called my Thanksgiving to God null and void, I'd have an issue with them. I'd take the opportunity at their next invitation to teach them otherwise. But oops, they can't listen or hear.

.

Can you speak louder, I can't hear you..........

Isaiah 6:
9 Then said He--"Go and say unto this people,--Hear on but do not discern, See on but do not perceive:
10 Stupefy thou the heart of this people, and their ears, make thou heavy and their eyes overspread,--
Lest they see with their eyes and with their ears, should hear, and their heart should discern and turn back.
And they be healed.

Matthew 13:15
For the heart of this people hath become dense, and with their ears heavily have they heard, and their eyes have they closed,--
Lest once they should see with their eyes, and with their ear should hear, and with their hearts should understand and return, when I would certainly heal them.
[Isaiah 6:9, 10]

 

[Root of Jesse]

The priest holds up a piece of bread. You don't give the bread latria?

Nope, we give God latria.

 

[stevenfrancis]

The Church itself, (that is, it's deposit of faith, and the magesteral protection regarding her teaching authority on faith and morals), has not made error. Many of the persons who occupy positions in the Church have fouled up some and tried to change some unchangeable doctrines before to ill effect. Not sure what is at the core of your question.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Nope, we give God latria.

Interesting siggy you have.

I have never heard of Mary being used as bait before. Is that a Catholic thang?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member of the Round Table
See my profile to visit my blogs:

Wise men STILL find Him with His mother...

God uses Mary as bait to capture the hearts of men.
-St. Theresa of Avila




.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Interesting siggy you have.

I have never heard of Mary being used as bait before. Is that a Catholic thang?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member of the Round Table
See my profile to visit my blogs:

Wise men STILL find Him with His mother...

God uses Mary as bait to capture the hearts of men.
-St. Theresa of Avila




.

It's a quotation from a Doctor of the Church, whom I attributed wrongly: I heard it from a speaker. It's actually this:

St. Catherine of Siena: “Mary is the most sweet bait, chosen, prepared, and ordained by God, to catch the hearts of men.”

 

[Standing Up]

Nope, we give God latria.

So you don't participate in eucharist adoration (worship of created bread). Good for you.

 

[Standing Up]

The Church itself, (that is, it's deposit of faith, and the magesteral protection regarding her teaching authority on faith and morals), has not made error. Many of the persons who occupy positions in the Church have fouled up some and tried to change some unchangeable doctrines before to ill effect. Not sure what is at the core of your question.

See post #703. Lots of errors. Feel free to pick one or two to discuss.

 

[Root of Jesse]

So you don't participate in eucharist adoration (worship of created bread). Good for you.

I do participate in Eucharistic Adoration. But not worship of bread. That would be a sin.

 

[Root of Jesse]

See post #703. Lots of errors. Feel free to pick one or two to discuss.

Problem is that the errors are errors of your own understanding of Catholic beliefs...

 

[tadoflamb]

I do participate in Eucharistic Adoration. But not worship of bread. That would be a sin.

I would submit that anyone who doesn't worship the Holy Eucharist doesn't really believe in the Real Presence.

 

[Rev Randy]

I would submit that anyone who doesn't worship the Holy Eucharist doesn't really believe in the Real Presence.

That's a bit tricky. What you quoted was adoration and you said worship.
Eucharistic Adoration is not in our Divine Liturgy. We do not display it in the manner of Roman Rite (held up to be adored). And I believe in the Real Presence. Looking upon it does not make one believe more perfectly.

 

[Standing Up]

I would submit that anyone who doesn't worship the Holy Eucharist doesn't really believe in the Real Presence.

Believe Lutherans and some Anglicans worship the bread in the same sense RC does. (hence MarkRohrfresch (SIC) comment earlier). They believe in RP. So, you're wrong.

 

[Standing Up]

Problem is that the errors are errors of your own understanding of Catholic beliefs...

Pretty disingenious of you to dismiss the words quoted from your own CCC and bulls and papal decrees, as if they were mine.

 

[Standing Up]

I do participate in Eucharistic Adoration. But not worship of bread. That would be a sin.

The bread is there for all to see. Call it species of bread. Whatever, there it is. Worship the bread and it is, what'd you say?

 

[squint]

That's a bit tricky. What you quoted was adoration and you said worship.
Eucharistic Adoration is not in our Divine Liturgy. We do not display it in the manner of Roman Rite (held up to be adored). And I believe in the Real Presence. Looking upon it does not make one believe more perfectly.

You mean the E.O. doesn't ring a little bell when it's held up to draw the attendee's attentions?

?

 

[WisdomTree]

You mean the E.O. doesn't ring a little bell when it's held up to draw the attendee's attentions?

?

Last time I went to an Orthodox liturgy, the priest would scoop out of the chalice and flick it into the mouth of the congregants. It looked pretty hygenic too.