CATHOLIC BASHING THREAD TITLES

[Enoch111]

Each non-Catholic denomination has its own doctrines. All 40,000 of them.

If we delete the last three zeros, we will be closer to the truth.

Excluding Catholic and Orthodox churches, we have about half of 40 (20) denominations. Sub-groups are not denominations, since there are plenty of sub-groups among Catholic and Orthodox churches.

1. Presbyterians
2. Reformed
3. Lutherans
4. Anglicans/Church of England
5. Methodists
6. Baptists
6. Pentecostals
7. United Church
8. Free Evangelicals
9. Open Brethren
10. Closed (Plymouth) Brethren
11. Mennonites
12. Apostolic churches
13. Church of God
14. Church of Christ
15. Calvary Chapels
16. Vineyard Churches
17. Christian and Missionary Alliance
18. Restoration Movement churches
19. Seventh Day Adventists (classified as a cult)
20. African non-Catholic churches

 

[epostle1]

.

Each group, community, or area of Lutherans hold quarterly synods. This is where "changes" to Lutheranism takes place. But I know it's not "changes". I wouldn't denigrate the Lutheran Church the way you do.
http://www.ctsfw.net/media/pdfs/MacKenzie-SearchUsableLuther.pdf
LSQ
Synod of Alberta | Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
First Lutheran Church ← Lutheran Church – Canada
I googled "Lutheran Synod" and got 1,280,000 Results
According to your absurd criteria of "changes" to the Catholic catechism, you guys make "changes" to your teachings 4 times a year, all over the world. You can't have it both ways. Being a troll is more important to you than the truth of development within your own church.

If the Bible is the sole rule of faith as Martin Luther taught, why do you need a catechism at all?? Isn't that an addition to the Bible???
If the Lutheran catechism of 1529 has never changed as you claim, why was there a third edition in 1531? Luther's Catechisms. A. D. 1529.
Glancing over the 1529 Lutheran catechism, I couldn't find opposition to Nazism, human cloning, test tube babies, euthanasia, human slavery, etc. If the Lutheran catechism is all you need (no real Lutheran would say that), then all you need is a dinosaur.
The love between a man and a woman is the foundation of civilization. Why have certain Lutheran churches caved in to pressure from gay fascists to endorse same sex unions?
Same-sex unions accepted by Evangelical Lutherans
Lutherans refuse to bless same-sex unions - ChristianWeek
Can you spell s-c-h-i-s-m?

 

[Philip James]

IF your point is that the RCC agrees with ITSELF (

My point is that "thousands of particular churches made up of hundreds of millions of people"

Are docrtrinally in agreement and in communion with one another.
And in communion with their brothers and sisters back through the centuries, sharing one Bread, one Cup, the SAME Bread and Cup that our Lord Himself gave to the apostles...one Loaf, one Body, one Sprit in Christ, Who was and Who is, and Who is to come.

Peace!

 

[Josiah]

Each group, community, or area of Lutherans hold quarterly synods.

You speak of all this "unity" that the RC denomination has..... I simply asked "with what? WHAT other denominations is it in full unity?" But you haven't answered, you just keep going on and on about this "unity" it has.


I don't deny that OFFICIALLY, CURRENTLY, DENOMINATIONALLY, the RC denomination itself alone is in full agreement with it itself alone in those matters that it itself alone currently holds is good for it itself concerning. But at least as much can be said of any other denomination, including my own (The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod); currently agreeing with the ONE self sees by looking in the mirror (in this very limited way) is hardly "unity." Generally, self currently agrees with self in those things that self thinks self should agree upon. It doesn't mean they have all the "unity" of which you keep speaking - "unity with WHAT?" IMO, you likely keep evading the question because you realize: it's just unity with it itself (and even that in an absurdly limited sense).


Friend, I'm not "attacking" your denomination on this point, I'm only pointing out this "talking point" (SO popular for some Catholics, repeated over and over and over, without any thought or substantiation) is simply WRONG (and silly). The LDS agrees with the LDS (and no other) - that doesn't make the LDS somehow in grand unity and doesn't make it right - it just means when self alone looks in the mirror at self alone, self tends to see self. Happens in every denomination. No other denomination is worse than the RC one in this regard since it is not possible to be in fully unity with less than none, but there are many other denominations just as bad as the RC one in this regard.

This is where "changes" to Lutheranism takes place

Don't reverse our positions....

It is YOU who claimed that the teachings of YOUR denomination never change. I never said that about any denomination, YOU said it about YOURS. I again just noted the absurdity of the claim, the baselessness of it. Of course, if the teachings of your denomination are identical now to what they always have, then we can go to whatever date you claim your denomination was established and look at the official Catechism of that year, and we'd fine the EXACT SAME 2,865 points as in the 1994 one - nothing more, nothing less, nothing different. But you KNOW that's not the case, we all KNOW its teachings have changed over the centuries - it's absurd to argue otherwise. And yet here again, another "Catholic Talking Point" - parroted over and over and over endlessly and mindlessly - when everyone knows it's false.

Again, I never remotely made the same (absurd) claim about ANY denomination, so don't try to evade it by trying to turn the table. I think it likely that nearly all denominations change their teachings over time - probably not as much as the RCC does, but yup. I'm not rebuking your denomination (it's typical in this way), just the absurd "talking point" you inserted into this discussion that has nothing to do with the thread at all.

I'll say one thing more: PART of the reason some are critical of Catholicism is precisely because of CLAIMS made that are clearly, obviously false and baseless, or clearly egotistical and baseless. Friend, as a former Catholic myself, there is MUCH - very, very MUCH - that is excellent about your denomination. So much good Catholics could speak of! So many GOOD and TRUE reasons people should consider the RC denomination. Catholics almost never mention those. They just keep parroting - over and over and over and over and over - the same old, tired, worn and obviously false things. That non-Catholics seem to "ridicule" them is not "anti-Catholicism" or "hate" it's just noting the obvious... and I think if a Catholic will STOP and consider the old, old "talking point" and "spin" - they will do what I did: stop it.


Thank you for the discussion


- Josiah



.

 

[epostle1]

You speak of all this "unity" that the RC denomination has..... I simply asked "with what? WHAT other denominations is it in full unity?" But you haven't answered, you just keep going on and on about this "unity" it has.

If you use the term "RC denomination" once more, my discussions with you will permanently cease. It's insulting and the only reason you do it is to aggravate. It's been explained to you over and over again, the CC is not a denomination. Catholics enjoy doctrinal unity with all other Catholic churches and parishes and 20 rites around the world, which is about 1.2 billion. We do not have full doctrinal unity with non-Catholic churches. Degrees of separation means non-Catholic churches teach Jesus is God, but could for example, deny infant baptism. I've spoon fed you 817-820 that explains all this, but you either didn't understand it, or you ignored it. Catholicism is closer to Lutheranism than any other church. Please stop repeating your self over and over again, it's getting tiresome.

I don't deny that OFFICIALLY, CURRENTLY, DENOMINATIONALLY, the RC denomination itself alone is in full agreement with it itself alone in those matters that it itself alone currently holds is good for it itself concerning.

But at least as much can be said of any other denomination

, including my own (The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod); currently agreeing with the ONE self sees by looking in the mirror (in this very limited way) is hardly "unity." Generally, self currently agrees with self in those things that self thinks self should agree upon. It doesn't mean they have all the "unity" of which you keep speaking - "unity with WHAT?" IMO, you likely keep evading the question because you realize: it's just unity with it itself (and even that in an absurdly limited sense).

This is psychotic babbling.

Friend, I'm not "attacking" your denomination on this point, I'm only pointing out this "talking point" (SO popular for some Catholics, repeated over and over and over, without any thought or substantiation) is simply WRONG (and silly). The LDS agrees with the LDS (and no other) - that doesn't make the LDS somehow in grand unity and doesn't make it right - it just means when self alone looks in the mirror at self alone, self tends to see self. Happens in every denomination. No other denomination is worse than the RC one in this regard since it is not possible to be in fully unity with less than none, but there are many other denominations just as bad as the RC one in this regard.

Prove doctrinal disunity with any Catholic Church anywhere in the world with any other Catholic church anywhere in the world. You can't. But you repeatedly babble on about a church that doesn't exist. I am losing patience with your stupid assertions. You have been warned.








Don't reverse our positions....

It is YOU who claimed that the teachings of YOUR denomination never change. I never said that about any denomination, YOU said it about YOURS. I again just noted the absurdity of the claim, the baselessness of it. Of course, if the teachings of your denomination are identical now to what they always have, then we can go to whatever date you claim your denomination was established and look at the official Catechism of that year, and we'd fine the EXACT SAME 2,865 points as in the 1994 one - nothing more, nothing less, nothing different. But you KNOW that's not the case, we all KNOW its teachings have changed over the centuries - it's absurd to argue otherwise. And yet here again, another "Catholic Talking Point" - parroted over and over and over endlessly and mindlessly - when everyone knows it's false.

Again, I never remotely made the same (absurd) claim about ANY denomination, so don't try to evade it by trying to turn the table. I think it likely that nearly all denominations change their teachings over time - probably not as much as the RCC does, but yup. I'm not rebuking your denomination (it's typical in this way), just the absurd "talking point" you inserted into this discussion that has nothing to do with the thread at all.

I'll say one thing more: PART of the reason some are critical of Catholicism is precisely because of CLAIMS made that are clearly, obviously false and baseless, or clearly egotistical and baseless. Friend, as a former Catholic myself, there is MUCH - very, very MUCH - that is excellent about your denomination. So much good Catholics could speak of! So many GOOD and TRUE reasons people should consider the RC denomination. Catholics almost never mention those. They just keep parroting - over and over and over and over and over - the same old, tired, worn and obviously false things. That non-Catholics seem to "ridicule" them is not "anti-Catholicism" or "hate" it's just noting the obvious... and I think if a Catholic will STOP and consider the old, old "talking point" and "spin" - they will do what I did: stop it.


Thank you for the discussion


- Josiah



.[/QUOTE]

 

[Josiah]

Prove doctrinal disunity with any Catholic Church anywhere in the world with any other Catholic church anywhere in the world.

SURE, the RC denomination agrees with IT ITSELF ALONE. How does that show it has unity with any BUT it itself alone? I can't think of any other denomination on the planet that doesn't agree with it itself alone (at least in the very, very limited sense that the RCC also does), but it is in unity with NO OTHER.

Noting that the LDS denomination agrees with it itself alone - currently, officially, denominationally, in those areas where it itself alone currently holds that it itself alone should agree with it itself - is true enough but doesn't indicate any unity beyond it's own singular, individual self. Ten thousands denominations (the RCC among them) each in full unity ONLY with each individual self ALONE is hardly full "unity" in my opinion. If it does to you, then we just disagree.


TRUE, there are other denominations just as "bad" as the RC one in this regard - in full unity ONLY with it itself exclusively - but there are none worse than the RC one simply because, my brother, it is IMPOSSIBLE to be in full unity with less than none.



Don't reverse our positions....

It is YOU who claimed that the teachings of YOUR denomination never change. I never said that about any denomination, YOU said it about YOURS. I again just noted the absurdity of the claim, the baselessness of it. Of course, if the teachings of your denomination are identical now to what they always have, then we can go to whatever date you claim your denomination was established and look at the official Catechism of that year, and we'd fine the EXACT SAME 2,865 points as in the 1994 one - nothing more, nothing less, nothing different. But you KNOW that's not the case, we all KNOW its teachings have changed over the centuries - it's absurd to argue otherwise. And yet here again, another "Catholic Talking Point" - parroted over and over and over endlessly and mindlessly - when everyone knows it's false.

Again, I never remotely made the same (absurd) claim about ANY denomination, so don't try to evade it by trying to turn the table. I think it likely that nearly all denominations change their teachings over time - probably not as much as the RCC does, but yup. I'm not rebuking your denomination (it's typical in this way), just the absurd "talking point" you inserted into this discussion that has nothing to do with the thread at all.

I'll say one thing more: PART of the reason some are critical of Catholicism is precisely because of CLAIMS made that are clearly, obviously false and baseless, or clearly egotistical and baseless. Friend, as a former Catholic myself, there is MUCH - very, very MUCH - that is excellent about your denomination. So much good Catholics could speak of! So many GOOD and TRUE reasons people should consider the RC denomination. Catholics almost never mention those. They just keep parroting - over and over and over and over and over - the same old, tired, worn and obviously false things. That non-Catholics seem to "ridicule" them is not "anti-Catholicism" or "hate" it's just noting the obvious... and I think if a Catholic will STOP and consider the old, old "talking point" and "spin" - they will do what I did: stop it.


Thank you for the discussion


- Josiah



.

 

[epostle1]

If you use the term "RC denomination" once more, my discussions with you will permanently cease. It's insulting and the only reason you do it is to aggravate. It's been explained to you over and over again, the CC is not a denomination.

Catholics enjoy doctrinal unity with all other Catholic churches and parishes and 20 rites around the world, which is about 1.2 billion. We do not have full doctrinal unity with non-Catholic churches. It's amazing I have to dummie down this far. Degrees of separation means non-Catholic churches teach, for example Jesus is God, that is doctrinal unity, but could for example, deny infant baptism, that is partial doctrinal unity, a degree of separation. Get it? I've spoon fed you CCC 817-820 that explains all this, but you either didn't understand it, or you ignored it. Catholicism has less a degree of separation with Lutheranism and has a greater degree of separation with a store front fundamentalist church. Get it?. Please stop repeating your self over and over again, it's getting tiresome.

I explained "degree of separation", you ignored it.
I explained "development of doctrine", you ignored it.
I explained "doctrinal unity", you ignored it.
I explained what a parish is, you ignored it.
Yet you keep parroting the same lunacies.

Prove doctrinal disunity with any Catholic Church anywhere in the world with any other Catholic church anywhere in the world. You can't. But you repeatedly babble on about a church that doesn't exist. I am losing patience with your stupid assertions.

Don't reverse our positions....

Reversing positions gets the point across. You boast about how your 1527 catechism hasn't changed but some Lutherans have same sex unions. Show me that in your catechism. Put up or shut up.

It is YOU who claimed that the teachings of YOUR denomination never change.

That's not what I said. You have asserted this lie 3 times, even after development of doctrine has been explained at least twice. . I said the essential truths have never changed. Big difference. But you don't care.

I never said that about any denomination, YOU said it about YOURS. I again just noted the absurdity of the claim, the baselessness of it. Of course, if the teachings of your denomination are identical now to what they always have, then we can go to whatever date you claim your denomination was established and look at the official Catechism of that year, and we'd fine the EXACT SAME 2,865 points as in the 1994 one - nothing more, nothing less, nothing different. But you KNOW that's not the case, we all KNOW its teachings have changed over the centuries - it's absurd to argue otherwise. And yet here again, another "Catholic Talking Point" - parroted over and over and over endlessly and mindlessly - when everyone knows it's false.

If you actually read my posts you would not be making such a fool of yourself.

Again, I never remotely made the same (absurd) claim about ANY denomination, so don't try to evade it by trying to turn the table. I think it likely that nearly all denominations change their teachings over time - probably not as much as the RCC does, but yup. I'm not rebuking your denomination (it's typical in this way), just the absurd "talking point" you inserted into this discussion that has nothing to do with the thread at all.

You have repeated this ridiculous insult about 5 times, and not once have you given an example of a "changed teaching", nor have you given an example of a change in essential truths which was my original claim in the first place (that you keep changing) I defend against your parroted absurd lies and you accuse me of going off topic. What a phony. One question: did you honor your parents by abandoning their faith?

I'll say one thing more: PART of the reason some are critical of Catholicism is precisely because of CLAIMS made that are clearly, obviously false and baseless, or clearly egotistical and baseless.

3 pages and you have failed to give one single example, after being asked each time you make up this lie.

Friend, as a former Catholic myself,

Real Catholics fall in love with the Church, ex-Catholics just quit, or become anti-Catholics, Anti-Catholics are like the guy who breaks up with his girlfriend and spends the rest of his life bad-mouthing her.

are ex is MUCH - very, very MUCH - that is excellent about your denomination. So much good Catholics could speak of! So many GOOD and TRUE reasons people should consider the RC denomination. Catholics almost never mention those.

Yea, right. Mention St. Mother Teresa and watch the taurus excretum hit the fan. You are a phony.

They just keep parroting - over and over and over and over and over - the same old, tired, worn and obviously false things.

No example, just blind prejudice. If we weren't attacked with the same old, tired, worn and obviously false things thrown at us by anti-Catholics we wouldn't have much to say.

That non-Catholics seem to "ridicule" them is not "anti-Catholicism" or "hate" it's just noting the obvious... and I think if a Catholic will STOP and consider the old, old "talking point" and "spin" - they will do what I did: stop it.

95% of Catholics who post in this board, and in the CARM board (where you got your venom) are DEFENSIVE. We are called Mary worshipers, satanists, pagans, statue worshipers, papists, romanists, mockery of our sacraments etc., etc. They are just noting the obvious??? But you are too blind to notice what we defend against. Undermining Church Authority is in their blood stream.

I don't have discussions with a 13 year old mentality that knows everything, and defies dictionary terms (denomination, unity, doctrine, development, teaching etc., etc. ) I was going to give you one more chance, but I changed my mind. You are not capable of adult discussion with your bizarre language problem and rebellious attitude. I have 15 spoiled arrogant brats in my ignore bin that have similar problems. I provide crayons, blocks and coloring books. Enjoy your stay. Good bye.

P.S. Did you honor your mother by going to Mass with her on Mothers Day, or were you preoccupied with the undignified portion of your anatomy?

 

[Josiah]

Catholics enjoy doctrinal unity with all other Catholic churches and parishes and 20 rites around the world, which is about 1.2 billion.

Wrong. epostle1, that's just obviously wrong.

Now you are changing your claim to an even more baseless one.... now you are claiming that it's not The Catholic Church that has some unity with any but itself.... but that all 1.2 Catholic PEOPLE all are in full unity with all others.

How absurd. And anyone who knows more than one Catholic person knows how silly this is. Virtually every member of my family is Catholic, and I can tell you with absolute confidence, NONE of them agrees with NONE of them in all matters of religion. But okay, if you want to prove that EVERY CATHOLIC - all 1.2 billion you claim - are in actually, full, complete doctrinal unity with every other of the 1.2 Catholics, go ahead. But you won't. Because you can't. Because it's just not true (and we all know it). More silly, baseless claims we all know just aren't true.

Now, I'm NOT "bashing." I'd never be so absurd to claim that all 72 million Lutherans in the world totally agree with one another on ALL theological issues... that not ONE person who is Lutheran holds even ONE view a bit differently than the other 71,999,999. That would be silly and laughable and of course wrong. If you want to go down a list of thousands of doctrinal pov(or even the 2,865 points in my 1994 Catechism) - and prove all 1.2 billion Catholic persons of all ages, etc. are in FULL and complete agreement on every single one of them, go ahead: prove it. But I can tell you, not one Catholic in my family does. In fact, I agree with the Catholic Church more than most of them do.

Now amending your claim to "The Catholic Church is in full agreement only and exclusively with it itself alone - but its DISUNITY with others is in varying degrees" is just a nice way of saying the same point: The Catholic Church is in full agreement ONLY and EXCLUSIVLY with it itself alone. And of course, just noting the obvious: AT LEAST the same is true of EVERY denomination on the planet. The LDS only agrees with itself - but it has more doctrinal agreement with some other denominations than some others. Just like the RCC. And a LOT of denominations. So what?

YOUR original claim is that the CATHOLIC CHURCH agrees with THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. No one disputes that, it just says very little about "unity". And of course AT LEAST the same can be said of every other denomination, sect, cult or whatever: the LDS agrees with the LDS, too (at least in the very, very limited sense in which the RC denomination agrees with itself). SO WHAT? And I agree, there certainly are other denominations just as bad in this regard as the RC one (in full doctrinal unity ONLY with ITSELF alone) but none that are worse than the RC one in this regard, for the simple and unavoidable reason that it is impossible to be in unity with fewer than none.

development of doctrine has been explained

You need to look up the words "change" and "development" in a dictionary....

No, it's NOT a case of further explaining something (which of course IS changing it). At the very, very least - it's ADDING. Since you need explained the obvious, let's say someone publishes a recipe for meatloaf. Mary writes: 2 pounds of ground beef, 3/4 cup bread crumbs, 1 beaten egg, one small onion, salt and pepper to taste. Then, 10 years later, Mary puts out a new cookbook with new "improved" recipes. NOW the meatloaf recipe has added 1 eight-ounce can of tomato sauce. Has the recipe CHANGED? Is the meatloaf now different? I think it's obvious.....


I never said that about any denomination, YOU said it about YOURS. I again just noted the absurdity of the claim, the baselessness of it. Of course, if the teachings of your denomination are identical now to what they always have, then we can go to whatever date you claim your denomination was established and look at the official Catechism of that year, and we'd fine the EXACT SAME 2,865 points as in the 1994 one - nothing more, nothing less, nothing different. But you KNOW that's not the case, we all KNOW its teachings have changed over the centuries - it's absurd to argue otherwise. And yet here again, another "Catholic Talking Point" - parroted over and over and over endlessly and mindlessly - when everyone knows it's false.

95% of Catholics who post in this board, and in the CARM board (where you got your venom) are DEFENSIVE.

I've only responded to your irrelevant old Catholic talking points.....

I've posted very positive things about your denomination (while you've posted nothing positive about mine).

I've not picked on the RCC..... indeed, I've gone to great lengths to say that what is true about the RCC is generally true of all denominations (some maybe not as badly, but that's not the point). I've NEVER claimed that the Lutheran Church as full doctrinal unity with any other than it itself. I've never claimed that all 72 million Lutheran people are in totally doctrinal agreement with every other one. YOU are the one parroting the old Catholic talking points (all very familiar to me - I'm a former Catholic).

No, I got ALL my views of the Catholic Church from being a Catholic. From my Catholic teachers and classes, from my Catholic pastors and deacons, from my Catholic family members, from my own Catholic experiences at Mass every Sunday (plus Lent and Advent services, etc., etc. etc.). And nearly everything I think and hold about the Catholic Church is very positive. I DO disagree on a very FEW things - the exact same things that the RCC disagrees with Lutherans on - but I hold the Catholic Church to be a perfectly valid church (one of the best denominations there is), I hold all Catholics to be my FULL and UNseparated and in every way EQUAL brothers and sisters in Christ, I accept all her Sacraments as valid. You likely won't say the same things about The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod or me so the actually bigger "attacker" here perhaps is you.

Mary worshipers, satanists, pagans, statue worshipers

How absurd to identify me as such..... quote me where I stated any of those things.

And how my pointing out the obvious - that the CC is in full unity ONLY with itself (just like most other denominations) and how the CC changes its teachings (just like most denominations) - how does that prove that I believe Catholics are Mary worshippers? Satanists? Pagans? How dare you! How absurd of you! How that reaction to me discredits you!

I have 15 spoiled arrogant brats in my ignore bin that have similar problems. I provide crayons, blocks and coloring books. Enjoy your stay. Good bye.

Probably a good idea. PLEASE don't change that or mention me again.





.

 

[epostle1]

I had some "Bible-Christian" moron try to tell me that wearing a small cross/crucifix was a form of witchcraft. Seriously. You can see it for yourself here, post #45.
Another reason I am putting Josiah on ignore is that he is illiterate. He interprets "we are called this, this and this..." to "I accuse you of this this and this." The misquotes and straw man fallacies are too numerous to list.

 

[BreadOfLife]

If we delete the last three zeros, we will be closer to the truth.

Excluding Catholic and Orthodox churches, we have about half of 40 (20) denominations. Sub-groups are not denominations, since there are plenty of sub-groups among Catholic and Orthodox churches.

Actually - you're WRONG here.

There are no "sub-groups" in the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is monolithic in its teachings ad beliefs. Anybody claiming to be "Catholic" and does NOT submit to the Authority of the Magesterium is a different entity - NOT a "sub-group." In other words - they are Protestant denominations.

Anyway - there are MANY sects you didn't put on your list including Assmblies of God, Cornerstone, Church of God, Church of Christ, Iglesia ni Cristo, Calvary Chapel, Grace Brethren, Unitarians, Congregationalists - and the list goes on.

These don't include the thousands of offshoots that differ slightly in their doctrines.

 

[Enoch111]

There are no "sub-groups" in the Catholic Church.

Here's a list.

Catholic Charismatic Renewal – 160 million
 Blue Army of Our Lady of Fátima – 20 million
 Legion of Mary (active and auxiliary) – 10 million
 International Catholic Conference of Scouting – 8 million
 Cursillo – 5 million
 Worldwide Marriage Encounter – 5 million couples
 Marian Movement of Priests – 5 million
 Militia Immaculatae – 3 million
 International Alliance of Catholic Knights – several million
Knights of Columbus – 1.9 million
 Schoenstatt Apostolic Movement – several million
 Nocturnal Adoration Societies - 2 million
 Neocatechumenal Way – 1 million
 Couples for Christ - 1 million
 Society of Saint Vincent de Paul – 0.8 million
 Secular Franciscan Order – 0.4 million
 Young Christian Workers (JOC) - 0.2 million
 School of the Cross - 0.2 million
 Focolare Movement – 0.14 million
 Christian Life Community - 0.12 million
 Opus Dei – 0.095 million
 Pax Romana (organization) - 0.06 million
 Community of Sant'Egidio – 0.05 million
 Communion and Liberation - 0.05 million
 Salesian Cooperators Association - 0.03 million
 Christian Life Movement - 0.025 million
 Regnum Christi – 0.02 million
 Our Lady's Rosary Makers – 0.017 million
 Personal Ordinariate for former Anglicans – 0.012 million

You cannot claim that the beliefs of all these sub-groups are identical. Charismatic Catholics would be at odds with some of the more conservative Catholics.

Also, I did list Church of God, Church of Christ (includes Iglesia ni Cristo), Calvary Chapels, and Open Brethren (to include Grace Brethren). Unitarians are a cult, and Congregationalists are distributed among various Protestant Groups groups.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Here's a list.

Catholic Charismatic Renewal – 160 million
 Blue Army of Our Lady of Fátima – 20 million
 Legion of Mary (active and auxiliary) – 10 million
 International Catholic Conference of Scouting – 8 million
 Cursillo – 5 million
 Worldwide Marriage Encounter – 5 million couples
 Marian Movement of Priests – 5 million
 Militia Immaculatae – 3 million
 International Alliance of Catholic Knights – several million
Knights of Columbus – 1.9 million
 Schoenstatt Apostolic Movement – several million
 Nocturnal Adoration Societies - 2 million
 Neocatechumenal Way – 1 million
 Couples for Christ - 1 million
 Society of Saint Vincent de Paul – 0.8 million
 Secular Franciscan Order – 0.4 million
 Young Christian Workers (JOC) - 0.2 million
 School of the Cross - 0.2 million
 Focolare Movement – 0.14 million
 Christian Life Community - 0.12 million
 Opus Dei – 0.095 million
 Pax Romana (organization) - 0.06 million
 Community of Sant'Egidio – 0.05 million
 Communion and Liberation - 0.05 million
 Salesian Cooperators Association - 0.03 million
 Christian Life Movement - 0.025 million
 Regnum Christi – 0.02 million
 Our Lady's Rosary Makers – 0.017 million
 Personal Ordinariate for former Anglicans – 0.012 million

You cannot claim that the beliefs of all these sub-groups are identical. Charismatic Catholics would be at odds with some of the more conservative Catholics.

Also, I did list Church of God, Church of Christ (includes Iglesia ni Cristo), Calvary Chapels, and Open Brethren (to include Grace Brethren). Unitarians are a cult, and Congregationalists are distributed among various Protestant Groups groups.

The groups you mentioned amount to "clubs" within the Church.
They're not separate entities or denominations of it. They don't profess different doctrines.

You should REALLY do your homework . . .

 

[Josiah]

The groups you mentioned amount to "clubs" within the Church.
They're not separate entities or denominations of it. They don't profess different doctrines.

You should REALLY do your homework . . .

Since your (very odd) definition of a "denomination" is a inter-congregational organization with a common set of doctrines, then you insist the RCC is a denomination - one with unity with NONE but with it itself uniquely. There goes your whole silly point about the RCC somehow being "different" and "not a denomination."

 

[BreadOfLife]

Since your (very odd) definition of a "denomination" is a inter-congregational organization with a common set of doctrines, then you insist the RCC is a denomination - one with unity with NONE but with it itself uniquely. There goes your whole silly point about the RCC somehow being "different" and "not a denomination."

Actually - that's false.
I never "insisted" that the Catholic Church is a mere "denomination".

As Protestant historian, Kenneth Samples wrote in His treatise, "What Think Ye of Rome?":
"The Catholic Church is the Tree from which Protestantism originally splintered."

The first Protestant sects were offshoots (denominations) of the Catholic Church. NOW, there are tens of thousands of offshoots from those offshoots - and their offshoots.

Finally - I know that your favorite mantra is "the Catholic Church has unity with NONE" - but the same is true for every Protestant denomination. NONE of them have identical doctrinal unity - so your claim is as silly as it is impotent . . .

 

[brakelite]

Actually - that's false.
I never "insisted" that the Catholic Church is a mere "denomination".

As Protestant historian, Kenneth Samples wrote in His treatise, "What Think Ye of Rome?":
"The Catholic Church is the Tree from which Protestantism originally splintered."

The first Protestant sects were offshoots (denominations) of the Catholic Church. NOW, there are tens of thousands of offshoots from those offshoots - and their offshoots.

Finally - I know that your favorite mantra is "the Catholic Church has unity with NONE" - but the same is true for every Protestant denomination. NONE of them have identical doctrinal unity - so your claim is as silly as it is impotent . . .

A tree with splinters. Interesting analogy. I prefer though the analogy the scripture give us. Like a mother and daughters.

 

[BreadOfLife]

A tree with splinters. Interesting analogy. I prefer though the analogy the scripture give us. Like a mother and daughters.

Actually - that's not the way the Church is described in Scripture.
Allow me to educate you . . .

- Jesus established ONE Church (Matt. 16:16-19). He prayed fervently that this Church remain ONE - as He and the Father are ONE (John 17:20-23). There is NO other.
- Jesus is Truth itself (John 14:6).
- Jesus promised His Church that the Holy Spirit would guide her to ALL Truth (John 16:12-15).
- The Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth (1 Tim. 3:15).
- The Church is the Body of Christ and He is the Head (1 Cor. 12:12-31, Eph. 4:3-6, Col. 1:8).
- The Church is the FULLNESS of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23).
- Jesus identifies His very SELF with His Church (Acts 9:4-5).
- Jesus gave the Church supreme Authority on earth and whatever it ordains on earth is also ordained in heaven (Matt. 16:18-19, 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 20:21-23).

There ends the lesson.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Actually - that's not the way the Church is described in Scripture.
Allow me to educate you . . .

- Jesus established ONE Church (Matt. 16:16-19). He prayed fervently that this Church remain ONE - as He and the Father are ONE (John 17:20-23). There is NO other.
- Jesus is Truth itself (John 14:6).
- Jesus promised His Church that the Holy Spirit would guide her to ALL Truth (John 16:12-15).
- The Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth (1 Tim. 3:15).
- The Church is the Body of Christ and He is the Head (1 Cor. 12:12-31, Eph. 4:3-6, Col. 1:8).
- The Church is the FULLNESS of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23).
- Jesus identifies His very SELF with His Church (Acts 9:4-5).
- Jesus gave the Church supreme Authority on earth and whatever it ordains on earth is also ordained in heaven (Matt. 16:18-19, 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 20:21-23).

There ends the lesson.

The Ratings await you.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Actually - that's not the way the Church is described in Scripture.
Allow me to educate you . . .

- Jesus established ONE Church (Matt. 16:16-19). He prayed fervently that this Church remain ONE - as He and the Father are ONE (John 17:20-23). There is NO other.
- Jesus is Truth itself (John 14:6).
- Jesus promised His Church that the Holy Spirit would guide her to ALL Truth (John 16:12-15).
- The Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth (1 Tim. 3:15).
- The Church is the Body of Christ and He is the Head (1 Cor. 12:12-31, Eph. 4:3-6, Col. 1:8).
- The Church is the FULLNESS of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23).
- Jesus identifies His very SELF with His Church (Acts 9:4-5).
- Jesus gave the Church supreme Authority on earth and whatever it ordains on earth is also ordained in heaven (Matt. 16:18-19, 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 20:21-23).

There ends the lesson.

So which building in the catholic church does God live in?
You do realize you are describing the church as an organization and not individual people who have given their hearts to Jesus.

 

[epostle1]

So which building in the catholic church does God live in?
You do realize you are describing the church as an organization and not individual people who have given their hearts to Jesus.

*********************BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!************************
Organizations are made of people!!!
Anti-institution, anti-authority "Christians" are often in rebellion against their own reformist principles.

The Jerusalem Council certainly regarded its teachings as infallible, and guided by the Holy Spirit Himself.
The Bible repeatedly teaches that the Church is indefectible; therefore, the hypothetical of rejecting the (one true, historic) Church, as supposedly going against the Bible, is impossible according to the Bible. It is not a situation that would ever come up, because of God’s promised protection.

What the Bible says is to reject those who cause divisions, which is the very essence of the onset of Protestantism: schism, sectarianism, and division. It is Protestantism that departed from the historic Church, which is indefectible and infallible (see also 1 Tim 3:15).

We reject any form of Protestantism, because all fail the test of allegiance to God’s Word in Holy Scripture, and the historical pedigree that the fathers always taught was necessary. Every heretic in the history of the world thumbed their nose at the institutional Church and went by Scripture alone. It is the heretical worldview to do so, precisely because they know they can’t prove that their views were passed down through history in an unbroken succession.

Therefore, heresies and Protestantism either had to play games with history in order to pretend that it fits with their views, or ignore it altogether.

It is the pitting of the ultimate source against the secondary, human source (the Church) which is the problem in your approach and that of Protestantism in general. You guys don’t like human, institutional authority and don’t have enough faith to believe that God can and does preserve it, so you try to undermine it by fallacious arguments, as presently.

No doubt you aren’t even aware that you are doing it. To do this is automatic in Protestantism; it’s like breathing. It’s like the fish that doesn’t know it’s in water. It all comes from the rejection of the infallibility of the Church (which is one thing that sola Scriptura always entails).

In Galatians 1-2 Paul is referring to his initial conversion. But even then God made sure there was someone else around, to urge him to get baptized (Ananias: Acts 22:12-16). He received the revelation initially and then sought to have it confirmed by Church authority (Gal 2:1-2); then his authority was accepted or verified by James, Peter, and John (Gal 2:9). So we see that the Bible doesn’t pit the divine call directly from God, against Church authority, as you do. You do it because it is Protestant man-made tradition to do so; period, and because the Protestant has to always undermine the authority of the Church, and the Catholic Church, in order to bolster his own anti-system, that was set up against the historic Church in the first place.

We believe in faith that the Church is infallible and indefectible, based on many biblical indications. It is theoretically possible (speaking in terms of philosophy or epistemology) that the Church could stray and have to be rejected, but the Bible rules that out. We believe in faith that it has not and will not.

Protestants don’t have enough faith to believe that God could preserve an infallible Church, even though they can muster up even more faith than that, which is required to believe in an infallible Bible written by a bunch of sinners and hypocrites.

We simply have more faith than you guys do. It’s a supernatural gift. We believe that the authoritative Church is also a key part of God’s plan to save the souls of men. We follow the model of the Jerusalem Council, whereas you guys reject that or ignore it, because it doesn’t fit in with the man-made tradition of Protestantism and a supposedly non-infallible Church.
Dialogue with a Calvinist: Was Paul a "Lone Ranger"?

 

[BreadOfLife]

So which building in the catholic church does God live in?
You do realize you are describing the church as an organization and not individual people who have given their hearts to Jesus.

No, I'm describing Christ's Church - directly from the Word of God.
If that's something YOU reject, then take it up with HIM - not me . . .