If We Protestants Truly Hated Catholics...

[Phoneman777]

Ah, now we're getting somewhere, because Ignatius gives a very clear picture of the role of the bishop, the Eucharist, and many other things...

Now you mention Constantine... Are you suggesting that it is after the Council of Nicea that the Church in Rome apostized, or before?

Do you acknowledge that council as authoritative, in the same manner as the prototype council of Jerusalem?

Pax!

Please don't misunderstand me - Paul is clear that even before he died that there were "many who corrupt the Word of God". Anyone saying things like the Eucharist was legit was mistaken. Whether he was doing it intentionally or not remains to be seen.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Dead Bread, prophets of the Old Testament were men Peter says "were moved by the Holy Ghost" - which Holy Ghost Paul says is given "to them that OBEY Him". Their spoken testimony is as sure as the written word of God.

However, those from whose lips you claim dropped inspired "oral tradition" were never once inspired by God - because the Holy Spirit is not given to those who are led to follow "the commandments of men" -

• like confessing one's sins to pedophile prelates rather than to God in prayer
• like seeking forgiveness through impotent rituals and sacraments rather than from the Savior Himself
• like the image worship which was facilitated by the removal of the Second Commandment
• like time off from Purgatory - which exists only in the minds of the deceived - by works in order to obtain "saints'" merits
• like praying repetitiously as the heathen - with use of stupid beads like is done in wicked Satanic Islam

Catholic oral tradition doesn't have a leg to stand on - unless you count the "pag" leg of paganism

Why do ignorant anti-Catholics like YOU persist in proliferating the myth that molestation and pedophelia happens exclusively in the Catholic Church??

The actual numbers show that YOUR Protestant sects are rampant with this filth - even MORE so than the Catholic Church. Every time you sling an insult at "pedophile priests" - it simply shows YOUR pathetic denial of this fact . . .
Evangelical Sex Abuse Record ‘Worse’ Than Catholic, Says Billy Graham’s Grandson
Protestant Churches Grapple With Growing Sexual Abuse Crisis : NPR
Protestants can no longer dismiss abuse as a ‘Catholic problem’
Child Sex Abuse More Prevalent Among Protestants Than Among Catholics
There Is More Sexual Abuse In The Protestant Churches Than Catholic
Catholic priests no guiltier of sex abuse than other clergy
Data Shed Light on Child Sexual Abuse by Protestant Clergy

As to your ridiculously stupid comments about "image worship" - The Church has ALWAYS condemned this behavior. BUT, I think you already know that. You just like repeating this lie because it makes you feel good while you're violating the Commandment against bearing FALSE witness, Einstein . . .

As for your moronic and Biblically-bankrupt comment about repetitious prayer being a "heathen" act - that's NOT what the Bible says.

Matt. 6:7, Jesus was speaking about the nonsensical babbling of pagans to their gods – NOT the sincere prayers of the faithful. We read about them in 1 Kings 18:26-29, where the pagan prophets on Mount Carmel tried to invoke Baal all day long, repeatedly calling on his name and performing ritual dances

In Matt. 26:44, our Lord himself prayed the exact same prayer - THREE TIMES in a row in the Garden of Gethsemane after the Last Supper.

In the Parable of the Determined Widow in Luke 18:-87, Jesus emphatically states that God hears those who keep petitioning him in sincere faith: “Will not God then secure the rights of his chosen ones who call out to him day and night? Will he be slow to answer them? I tell you, he will see to it that justice is done for them speedily.”

In Luke 18:13, the tax collector kept beating his breast and praying, “God be merciful to me, a sinner.”
This was pleasing to God

We see in Rev. 4:8 that the angels pray the exact same prayer day and night without ceasing in the presence of almighty God, “Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord God Almighty.”

Psalm 136 goes on for TWENTY-SIX VERSES in a row, repeating the exact same prayer, “God's love endures forever”.

In Dan. 3:56-88 we read the exact same prayer for THIRTY-TWO VERSEDS, which is “bless the Lord; praise and exalt him above all forever.” This is far more repetitious than a decade of the Rosary.

Shall I go on, Einstein??
Do your HOMEWORK . . .

.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You, Dead Bread, are really becoming unhinged. You are the most obtuse Catholic apologist I've ever come across - to the point where you will deny reality.

I've exposed your propagandist claim that Protestantism has been the only institution to use the phrase "Roman Catholic church" to refer to the Roman Catholic church by digging up that encyclical by Pius XII in which he plainly uses the phrase "Roman Catholic church" to refer to the entire Roman Catholic church - and not just an "order" or "rite" as you so weakly claimed.

Instead of admitting your error then and there, you dug in your heels by insisting it was an "olive branch" extended to Protestants as a means of showing commonality with them - which I exposed as no olive branch at all, seeing that your "olive branch" extension came before Vatican II, a time when the church's position was clear that all non-Catholics will go straight to hell; a position so horrifyingly offensive to Protestantism that it makes your "olive branch" look like dropping a bandaid down to the men who took Daniel's place in the lion's den - and yet you refuse to admit your errors.

There was no universal papal rule of both religiosity and secularism before 538 A.D. - therefore, there was no papacy until that time.

Hmmmmm - another stupid and false claim.

Ummmmmm, can you present the Church document that made the claim that "ALL non-Catholics" went "straight to Hell"??
Surely, you must have some evidence of this fallacy??

I eagerly await your well-researched response . . .


PS - you've already been repeatedly schooled about the definition and etymology of "Papacy" - yet you keep misfiring with your stupidity about "Church and state", which has absolutely NOTHING to do with the word "Papacy".

 

[Enoch111]

Ummmmmm, can you present the Church document that made the claim that "ALL non-Catholics" went "straight to Hell"??

Why don't you explain to the less enlightened what is meant by all those "anathemas" in the Council of Trent proceedings? That one document is sufficient to confirm that as far as the RCC is concerned all non-Catholics are destined for Hell.

Regarding excommunication (under the entry for Anathema), here is what the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia quotes: "... we declare him excommunicated and anathematized and we judge him condemned to eternal fire with Satan and his angels and all the reprobate, so long as he will not burst the fetters of the demon, do penance and satisfy the Church..."

 

[Philip James]

Please don't misunderstand me - Paul is clear that even before he died that there were "many who corrupt the Word of God". Anyone saying things like the Eucharist was legit was mistaken. Whether he was doing it intentionally or not remains to be seen.

Ignatius learned these things directly from the apostles, was made bishop of the Church in Syria, commended by Polycarp, martyred for the Faith, and not one apostolic church disagrees with his teachings on the Eucharist...

You want to see the 'biblical Church'? You'll find it in Ignatius' letters...

Pax!

 

[BreadOfLife]

Why don't you explain to the less enlightened what is meant by all those "anathemas" in the Council of Trent proceedings? That one document is sufficient to confirm that as far as the RCC is concerned all non-Catholics are destined for Hell.

Regarding excommunication (under the entry for Anathema), here is what the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia quotes: "... we declare him excommunicated and anathematized and we judge him condemned to eternal fire with Satan and his angels and all the reprobate, so long as he will not burst the fetters of the demon, do penance and satisfy the Church..."

THANK YOU for showing your complete ignorance about anathemas.
Allow me to educate you.

The Anathemas issued at Trent were aimed at CATHOLIC heretics. They don't apply to all Protestants.
ALL of your Protestant Fathers at the time were CATHOLICS who were preaching heresy.

As a matter of fact - you CAN'T even be a "heretic" unless you are a CATHOLIC. A heretic, by definition is a CATHOLIC who espouses heresy - NOT a Protestant who does. You can espouse heresy - but you can't BE a heretic unless you are a CATHOLIC.

There ends the lesson . . .

 

[epostle]

Hmmmmm - another stupid and false claim.

Ummmmmm, can you present the Church document that made the claim that "ALL non-Catholics" went "straight to Hell"??
Surely, you must have some evidence of this fallacy??

I eagerly await your well-researched response . . .

PS - you've already been repeatedly schooled about the definition and etymology of "Papacy" - yet you keep misfiring with your stupidity about "Church and state", which has absolutely NOTHING to do with the word "Papacy".

“Catholic” or “Roman Catholic”? (Proper Titles) (w J. Akin)
James Akin, a highly respected apologist from Catholic Answers explains in detail, proper titles. I will summarize.
"Roman Catholic" is appropriate when used in relation to the Latin rite.
"Roman" is appropriate when used in relation to the centrality of jurisdiction for all 20 rites. This usage is rare.
"Roman Catholic" is incorrectly used as a blanket term for all rites. For example, a Melkite Catholic would object to being called a Roman Melkite Catholic, such a term is absurd. The Melkite Catholics in Syria were recently exterminated by the ISIS.
"Roman Catholic" is not found in the catechism.
Roman Catholic is used in the derogatory sense by anti-Catholics, some refuse to be taught.

How a title is used depends on the CONTEXT.

 

[epostle]

That's not the issue. The issue is "Why are the Five Solas rejected by the RCC when all other Christians accept them?" That is more relevant for you.

Do you seriously believe that all the Reformers would hold to the Five Solas if they could not be supported by Scripture? Many were martyred for their beliefs and all were called "heretics" by the RCC. Fortunately the political power of the RCC does not exist any more and they cannot burn heretics.

Of course since you are committed to the false teachings of your church, you have to reject them, but all conservative non-Catholics believe that they are true.

.

His point is that wilful blindness prevents people from seeing the truth. All of his Scripture references point to Sola Scriptura. And then we have these words of Christ, which clearly estabish Sola Scriptura: But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. (Mt 4:4)

Why don't you explain to the less enlightened what is meant by all those "anathemas" in the Council of Trent proceedings? That one document is sufficient to confirm that as far as the RCC is concerned all non-Catholics are destined for Hell.

Regarding excommunication (under the entry for Anathema), here is what the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia quotes: "... we declare him excommunicated and anathematized and we judge him condemned to eternal fire with Satan and his angels and all the reprobate, so long as he will not burst the fetters of the demon, do penance and satisfy the Church..."

Not many of your posts are relevant to the flow of the discussion and off topic to the OP.
I checked the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia under the entry for anathema and excommunication.
anathema: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01455e.htm
excommunication: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05678a.htm

Your quote, in red, is a total fabrication. It is IMPOSSIBLE for the historic Church to condemn anyone to hell.

Excommunication is modeled after St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 5, always with a merciful intent.
Anathema shows up five times as a noun in the New Testament (Rom 9:3; 1 Cor 12:3, 16:22; Gal 1:8, 9) The Church has not used that word in over 200 years.

What will be your reply? A second lie to back up the first lie?
What's the point in discussing sola scriptura with you when you attack with such barbarism?
Next time you quote from any Catholic source, provide a link so we know you're not making up lies.

 

[Enoch111]

Your quote, in red, is a total fabrication. It is IMPOSSIBLE for the historic Church to condemn anyone to hell.

You are accusing me of lying when your church has been lying ever since its inception. So you can tender an apology after reading this larger quote from New Advent:

Anathema remains a major excommunication which is to bepromulgated with great solemnity. A formula for this ceremony was drawn up by Pope Zachary (741-52) in the chapter Debent duodecim sacerdotes, Cause xi, quest. iii. The Roman Pontifical reproduces it in the chapter Ordo excommunicandi et absolvendi, distinguishing three sorts of excommunication: minor excommunication, formerly incurred by a person holding communication with anyone under the ban ofexcommunication; major excommunication, pronounced by the Pope in reading a sentence; and anathema, or the penalty incurred by crimes of the gravest order, and solemnly promulgated by the Pope. In passing this sentence, the pontiff is vested in amice, stole, and a violet cope, wearing his mitre, and assisted by twelve priests clad in their surplices and holding lighted candles. He takes his seat in front of the altar or in some other suitable place, amid pronounces the formula of anathema which ends with these words: "Wherefore in the name of God the All-powerful, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, of the Blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and of all the saints, in virtue of the power which has been given us of binding and loosing in Heavenand on earth, we deprive N-- himself and all his accomplices and all his abettors of the Communion of the Body and Blood of Our Lord, we separate him from the society of all Christians, we exclude him from the bosom of our Holy Mother the Church in Heaven and on earth, we declare him excommunicated and anathematized and we judge him condemned to eternal fire with Satan and his angels and all the reprobate, so long as he will not burst the fetters of the demon, do penance and satisfy the Church; we deliver him to Satan to mortify his body, that his soul may be saved on the day of judgment." Whereupon all the assistants respond: "Fiat, fiat, fiat." The pontiff and the twelve priests then cast to the ground the lighted candles they have been carrying, and notice is sent in writing to the priestsand neighbouring bishops of the name of the one who has beenexcommunicated and the cause of his excommunication, in order that they may have no communication with him. Although he is delivered to Satan and his angels, he can still, and is even bound to repent. The Pontifical gives the form for absolving him and reconciling him with the Church. The promulgation of the anathema with such solemnity is well calculated to strike terror to the criminal and bring him to a state of repentance, especially if the Church adds to it theceremony of the Maranatha.

 

[epostle]

Well, I can safely accuse you of failing to provide a link like I asked. "Debent duodecim sacerdotes" does not exist in any Vatican source, BECAUSE IT IS TOO ANTIQUATED. As for your quote, I found the link, after doing your work for you.
First, it says the excommunicant has the option to repent.
Second, the Church is a living organism, we are not locked in the seventh century. Jesus uses seeds and bodies as metaphors for the Church. Seeds and bodies grow and expand. The Church develops. You project your statue like church onto Catholicism. I see it all the time. Would you have a 7th century trained surgeon operate on you? A dentist???

You found (or your hate cult found) 2 obscure lines out of an encyclopedia referring to a 1300 year old document that no one reads that is meaningless to Catholics today that has nothing to do with today's procedures which still doesn't justify your psychotic hatred for a cartoon image of the Church.

The encyclopedia is referring to a document about anathema that is not infallible. The essence is in scripture, but the understanding of that essence was in error. Pope Zachary never had the authority to commend anyone to hell, and I am sure the disciplinary viewpoint was reformulated shortly after. It's matter of discipline, not faith and morals.

Since your hate cult is so good at straining gnats (and swallowing a camel in the process) why don't they find a document where a person, with a name, has been sent to hell by the pope. Because you suggest he has, and your only evidence is 2 lines from a 1300 year document take from an encyclopedia with little historical context.
Straining a gnat, turning it into a baseball bat to beat Catholics with is proverbial sorcery, IMO. It doesn't matter how many times it's explained, you refuse to learn what the encyclopedia is, what it is for, and how to use it. You don't care. Your "infallible" sources tells you how to convert it into weapons.

 

[Marymog]

His point is that wilful blindness prevents people from seeing the truth. All of his Scripture references point to Sola Scriptura. And then we have these words of Christ, which clearly estabish Sola Scriptura: But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. (Mt 4:4)

Hmmmm.....so if one doesn't accept the teachings of the five sola's then they are blind and can't see the truth. But if one accepts the 5 sola's they are not blind and see the truth.

By whose authority has this been decided?

Curious Mary

BTW......Scripture also talks about unlearned and unstable men (2 Peter 3:16). Who decides who those men are? I suspect you do since you have already decided about the 5 sola's

 

[Enoch111]

By whose authority has this been decided?

By God's authority as given in His Word. Believe it.

 

[Marymog]

Acts 17:11 "They searched THE SCRIPTUREs daily to SEE IF those things spoken to them by the APOSTLE Paul - WERE SO"

How is that NOT - "Sola Scriptura"???

They searched scripture (the Old Testament) to see if what Paul was telling them about Jesus, that he was the Son of God and the savior the Jews have been waiting for, was true. They relied on Paul's ORAL testimony and then they checked it against scripture. They relied on ORAL and WRITTEN testimony. You capitalized "THE SCRIPTURES" in that passage but you didn't capitalize the words "things spoken". Why???

So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold to the traditions you were taught, whether by what we said or what we wrote.
I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Mark 7
6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’
8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”

1. How is that NOT "sola scriptura" testing tradition.
2. How is that NOT calling the Word of God = Commandment of God = Moses said.
3. How is that NOT sola-scriptura hammering the tradition of the accepted magesterium of the nation-church that GOD started at Sinai - in the days of Christ

Jesus was condemning the Jewish leaders for practicing an unsacred tradition. He wasn't condemning all traditions.

Jesus didn’t tell the apostles to write down everything he taught them. He commanded them to teach it (word of mouth). As scripture states, much of his teaching wasn't even written down. What wasn't written was still talked about (oral tradition).

The NT has several passages talking about traditions and holding fast to them. (1 Cor. 11:2, 2 Thess. 3:6, 2 Thess. 2:15) If you choose to disregard those passages then you are right. Scripture does not support oral tradition.

BTW....if scripture alone is the final authority then by what authority do you teach this??? Because my interpretation is different than yours.

Curious Mary

 

[Marymog]

By God's authority as given in His Word. Believe it.

Soooooo @BobRyan and YOU are speaking on behalf of God and I should believe as TRUTH everything you two tell me??? That doesn't sound like sola scriptura to me. That sounds like sola @BobRyan and sola @Enoch111

Mary

 

[Enoch111]

Soooooo @BobRyan and YOU are speaking on behalf of God and I should believe as TRUTH everything you two tell me??? That doesn't sound like sola scriptura to me. That sounds like sola @BobRyan and sola @Enoch111

Mary, Mary, quite contrary... You were directed to SCRIPTURE AS YOUR SOLE AUTHORITY.

So that's what you have to deal with regardless of what the pope or any non-Catholic says. God will hold you personally accountable for how you have regarded His Word. And I already showed you from Scripture that the sacraments are NOT necessary for salvation. So now you are between a rock and a hard place. Believe God or believe the RCC.

 

[BreadOfLife]

“Catholic” or “Roman Catholic”? (Proper Titles) (w J. Akin)
James Akin, a highly respected apologist from Catholic Answers explains in detail, proper titles. I will summarize.
"Roman Catholic" is appropriate when used in relation to the Latin rite.
"Roman" is appropriate when used in relation to the centrality of jurisdiction for all 20 rites. This usage is rare.
"Roman Catholic" is incorrectly used as a blanket term for all rites. For example, a Melkite Catholic would object to being called a Roman Melkite Catholic, such a term is absurd. The Melkite Catholics in Syria were recently exterminated by the ISIS.
"Roman Catholic" is not found in the catechism.
Roman Catholic is used in the derogatory sense by anti-Catholics, some refuse to be taught.

How a title is used depends on the CONTEXT.

Don't waste your breath. I already showed Phoneyman similar evidence and - like all other ignorant anti-Catholics - his eyes and ears are tightly-sealed . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Mary, Mary, quite contrary... You were directed to SCRIPTURE AS YOUR SOLE AUTHORITY.

Funny - that's NOT what the Bible says. NOWHERE does the Bible teach the fairy tale that is Sola Scriptura. The Bible tells us explicitly that the CHURCH is our final Authority on earth:

Matt 16:16-19
And so I say to YOU, YOU are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
I will give YOU the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever YOU bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever YOU loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Matt. 18:15-18
"If your brother sins (against you), go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother.
If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that 'every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.'
If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.
Amen, I say to you, whatever YOU bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever YOU loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

John 16:12-15
“I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear it now.
But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to ALL truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to YOU the things that are coming.
He will glorify me, because he will TAKE from what is MINE and declare it to YOU.
Everything that the Father has is MINE; for this reason I told you that he will TAKE from what is MINE and declare it to YOU.

John 20:21-23
Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the holy Spirit. Whose sins YOU FORGIVE are forgiven them, and whose sins YOU RETAIN are retained.”

Luke 10:16
Whoever listens to YOU listens to ME. Whoever rejects YOU rejects ME. And whoever rejects ME rejects the ONE who sent ME."

So that's what you have to deal with regardless of what the pope or any non-Catholic says. God will hold you personally accountable for how you have regarded His Word. And I already showed you from Scripture that the sacraments are NOT necessary for salvation. So now you are between a rock and a hard place. Believe God or believe the RCC.

And YOU'D be dead wrong about that.
The Bible that YOU uphold as our "final authority" clearly proves you wrong . . .

Mark 16:16
Whoever believes and is BAPTIZED will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

1 Pet. 3:21
". . . and this water symbolizes BAPTISM that now saves you also--not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God."

John 6:53-56
Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, YOU DO NOT HAVE LIFE WITHIN YOU.
WHOEVER EATS MY FLESH AND DRINKS MY BLOOD HAS ETERNAL LIFE, and I will raise him on the last day.
For MY FLESH IS TRUE FOOD, and MY BLOOD IS TRUE DRINK.
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.

These verses speak about Sacraments and SALVATION.

 

[Philip James]

Mary, Mary, quite contrary... You were directed to SCRIPTURE AS YOUR SOLE AUTHORITY.

So that's what you have to deal with regardless of what the pope or any non-Catholic says. God will hold you personally accountable for how you have regarded His Word. And I already showed you from Scripture that the sacraments are NOT necessary for salvation. So now you are between a rock and a hard place. Believe God or believe the RCC.

You mean like this?:

Do not work for food that perishes but for the food that endures for eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on him the Father, God, has set his seal."

 

[Enoch111]

NOWHERE does the Bible teach the fairy tale that is Sola Scriptura.

Why would men have been willing to be martyred for this "fairy tale"? You need to sit down and ask yourself some tough questions. And then turn away from the fantasies created by the Catholic Church.