"Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Faith" - Has 500 Years Taught Us Nothing?

[GodsGrace]

English is trash language because you can say something and be mistaken to easy, Latin does not.
Vagueness of I would say, one could be talking to you about some topic and you will all agree but the fact of the matter is you do not agree, It may of come across that one was with you but they are not, because they have a different perception some what of what the word maybe conveying on some point that can be missed somewhat. words can have different meanings and you can be tricked up in court with such or legal interpretation of things.

I have a mate that claims strongly that all words used by professionals is just rubbish, or made up to only delude others, I say to him that ignorance is bliss, but I do not use layman's words for things in my business because it's just stupid to use such to another who is in the same business, as they would think you a amateur or just a ignorant fool.

I know what you're talking about.
I was a secretary and knew that language...
I was a bookkeeper and knew that language...
I was a travel agent for a few years and had to learn that language too.
So, yeah, I agree.

And very right on about not understanding each other.
I say "works" and something is understood that I may not even mean.
I don't know latin, but I do know that you can say the same idea with very few words.

I'll only add that KIDS need liturgy...it's good for them; it makes them remember things. When I taught catechism, I'd make special things for Easter and Christmas that they could be involved in and learn from it. I'd take them to special things in church for kids...do the Statons of the Cross for Easter...all this helps them to remember things. I find this is sorely lacking in Protestantism...OTOH, they're taught the bible and this stays with them forever. ( I taught the bible to MY kids, but the other catechists did not).

 

[GodsGrace]

Please go back and read my post. Catholic doctrine says:

• God made forgiveness and salvation available to mankind based on His approval of Christ's obedient life WITHOUT the need for Christ to shed His blood to atone for our sins
• that forgiveness is obtained by asking for it from the priesthood, period.
• Christ NEVER died for our sins - though we are forgiven of our sin, we must pay for it through penance/Purgatory before entering heaven
• Christ's life of obedience supplies and endless amount of "merit" which the priesthood grants to the faithful through an "indulgence" which can be purchased with donations or earned through performing works

Luther REJECTED transubstantiation as a legit doctrine- though he wrote that "Christ is present in the Eucharist, which is Biblical. So what. Do we Protestants not believe He is present at Communion? It's probably a good idea to brush up on your studies about the Reformation and also what is core Catholic doctrine.

I really would like to understand better why some are so mad at the CC. Let them believe what they will --- why do you care so much? Those that will be saved, will be saved - even if the doctrine they follow is not correct in our view. Not every Protestant is saved either...even though we believe WE are right.

I'll answer to each of your bullets above:

1. The Catholic church does not believe in the substitutionary atonement theory.
Not every Protestant does either. I'll can be corrected by @BreadOfLife but I do believe it approves of the Payment Theory; Jesus paid the price so that we could be freed from the sting of death and our bondage to satan.

2. The cc believes God forgives sin. It does require that mortal sins are forgiven.
Venial sins can be forgiven directly by God. Priests do believe that some kind of absolution is necessary...it could even be communal. There's a reason for the mortal sin being spoken to a priest, but it's complicated.

3. You're correct here. I don't agree with the scripture they use for proof texts for purgatory; but, again, what do we care? The ultimate destination is heaven and no one really knows too much about purgatory...they're position has changed a lot regarding this place.

4. I don't care for the system of indulgences. I will say this...they are NOT paid for. I do wonder when the cc will end this practice, which, to me, is one of the worst.

As to communion. Do we believe He's present?
In a way different from all other times?
Is that different from the "Real Presence"?

 

[GodsGrace]

Antichrist = against Christ or in place of Christ. As the self proclaimed "Vicar of Christ" = in place of Christ, many see the papacy as the Antichrist.

Yes. I understand this...but it doesn't make it true.
He is not against Christ
He does not take the place of Christ...at least not in the sense that I'm sure you mean it. It's like when a priest gives absolution...HE is not forgiving the sin, God is, but the priest proclaims it as Jesus would. Can this be considered in place of?
Maybe...in a certain sense...but no one can take the place of Jesus literally and the cc knows this...

Vicar of Christ (from Latin Vicarius Christi) is a term used in different ways and with different theological connotations throughout history. As the original notion a vicar is of "earthly representative of Christ" but also used in sense of "person acting as parish priest in place of a real person"[1] The title is now used in Catholicism to refer to the bishops[2] and more specifically to the Bishop of Rome (the pope).[3]

source: Vicar of Christ - Wikipedia

The entire article should be read.

 

[Dave L]

Yes. I understand this...but it doesn't make it true.
He is not against Christ
He does not take the place of Christ...at least not in the sense that I'm sure you mean it. It's like when a priest gives absolution...HE is not forgiving the sin, God is, but the priest proclaims it as Jesus would. Can this be considered in place of?
Maybe...in a certain sense...but no one can take the place of Jesus literally and the cc knows this...

Vicar of Christ (from Latin Vicarius Christi) is a term used in different ways and with different theological connotations throughout history. As the original notion a vicar is of "earthly representative of Christ" but also used in sense of "person acting as parish priest in place of a real person"[1] The title is now used in Catholicism to refer to the bishops[2] and more specifically to the Bishop of Rome (the pope).[3]

source: Vicar of Christ - Wikipedia

The entire article should be read.

I'm only saying what the Protestant's convey in writing. I can see their point. We should devote a thread to this topic and look at some of the evidence.

 

[GodsGrace]

I'm only saying what the Protestant's convey in writing. I can see their point. We should devote a thread to this topic and look at some of the evidence.

If you start one, make sure to let me know.
I do think we protestants go a little overboard at times with our beliefs.
I'm pretty familiar with catholic doctrine, maybe I see things differently...

 

[Dave L]

If you start one, make sure to let me know.
I do think we protestants go a little overboard at times with our beliefs.
I'm pretty familiar with catholic doctrine, maybe I see things differently...

Most Evangelicals look for a future Antichrist and don't think the Papacy is he. But if you are interested, google Antichrist Papacy or something like that. There is plenty of interesting discussion centered on it. Also, the Protestants thought that Islam along with the Papacy formed the complete picture.

 

[GodsGrace]

Most Evangelicals look for a future Antichrist and don't think the Papacy is he. But if you are interested, google Antichrist Papacy or something like that. There is plenty of interesting discussion centered on it. Also, the Protestants thought that Islam along with the Papacy formed the complete picture.

Gosh D, I'm not too interested in end times stuff. I'm having problems with TODAY!
But, yeah, I know this is how many protestants think. It's not new to me, I just don't agree with it.

As to the muslims, I used to know someone that was convinced the anti-Christ would come from Mecca, which makes more sense to me. As to that completing the pix...yeah, it does seem the Pope wants to get along with everyone. I believe he said our God is the same. Their God is Muhhamad so I can't agree.

So...maybe if they teamed up?
I don't see it.

 

[epostle]

No they had to brake away because there church was becoming to worldly and it was not they who did change, but the RCC that changed, many Priest were in horror of the change back in the day and many left and many stayed but did not swallow all that the Popes were peddling and now we have this Freemason Pope Frances that is the most popular Pope in history with Atheist and ever other ding bat, but is despised by many older generation in the RCC who say he is the worst pope ever..

Any Catholic who joins the Freemasons is automatically excommunicated. Pope Francis prefers to eat with homeless rather than big shots, and has washed the feet of prisoners in jail. Sorry that disturbs you. Catholics who didn't like Vatican II changes were the liberals because the changes were not radical enough. That was over 50 years ago and you weren't even born yet. Just because a pope communicates with atheists does not mean atheism is endorsed, that is plain stupid.
If you are going to be critical of Vatican II teachings, you should know what they are instead of adopting blind prejudice from ignorant anti-Catholics.

Why don't you pick one from this list, and make an INFORMED criticism: Documents of the Second Vatican Council

President Plutarco Calles, center, came to power to execute
the Masonic plan to destroy the Church (late 1920's)

The world ignored the Calles' government massacre of Mexican Catholics

"...Therefore the Church’s negative judgment in regard to Masonic association remains unchanged since their principles have always been considered irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church and therefore membership in them remains forbidden. The faithful who enroll in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion..."
Declaration on Masonic Associations Nov 26, 1983

Yet anti-Catholics today still make the charge of Freemasonry in the Church.

 

[amadeus]

BTW, I DO have friends my age that learned Latin in church.

Probably then I am close to your age for some of those words remain with me as for example:
Dominus Vobiscum. Et cum Spiritu tuo.

There are likely others but those came immediately to mind when I read your post.

 

[GodsGrace]

Probably then I am close to your age for some of those words remain with me as for example:
Dominus Vobiscum. Et cum Spiritu tuo.

There are likely others but those came immediately to mind when I read your post.

I think we're exactly the same age,,,you had mentioned yours once.
46.

 

[GodsGrace]

Any Catholic who joins the Freemasons is automatically excommunicated. Pope Francis prefers to eat with homeless rather than big shots, and has washed the feet of prisoners in jail. Sorry that disturbs you. Catholics who didn't like Vatican II changes were the liberals because the changes were not radical enough. That was over 50 years ago and you weren't even born yet. Just because a pope communicates with atheists does not mean atheism is endorsed, that is plain stupid.
If you are going to be critical of Vatican II teachings, you should know what they are instead of adopting blind prejudice from ignorant anti-Catholics.

Why don't you pick one from this list, and make an INFORMED criticism: Documents of the Second Vatican Council

President Plutarco Calles, center, came to power to execute
the Masonic plan to destroy the Church (late 1920's)

The world ignored the Calles' government massacre of Mexican Catholics

"...Therefore the Church’s negative judgment in regard to Masonic association remains unchanged since their principles have always been considered irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church and therefore membership in them remains forbidden. The faithful who enroll in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion..."
Declaration on Masonic Associations Nov 26, 1983

Yet anti-Catholics today still make the charge of Freemasonry in the Church.

I've been speaking to @Reggie Belafonte .
I sure hope you're not calling me an ignorant anti-catholic.

As to the rest...the world has ignored many massacres..we each feel our own.
And the Masonry and Illuminati WOULD like to destroy the church...this is the opposite of believing the church is involved --- but it does not mean some of its high ranking members are not involved.

 

[CoreIssue]

Most Evangelicals look for a future Antichrist and don't think the Papacy is he. But if you are interested, google Antichrist Papacy or something like that. There is plenty of interesting discussion centered on it. Also, the Protestants thought that Islam along with the Papacy formed the complete picture.

The pope, I believe, will be the false prophet.

Catholics have a prophecy about what they call the Black Pope (not meaning race).

 

[Dave L]

The pope, I believe, will be the false prophet.

Catholics have a prophecy about what they call the Black Pope (not meaning race).

Many think the papacy was the Antichrist from the 10th century on. Received a deadly wound in the French Revolution. And the deadly wound being healed in 1929 when they restored the Vatican to sovereign statehood. Pretty interesting stuff.......

 

[GodsGrace]

Many think the papacy was the Antichrist from the 10th century on. Received a deadly wound in the French Revolution. And the deadly wound being healed in 1929 when they restored the Vatican to sovereign statehood. Pretty interesting stuff.......

What about Pope John Paul II?
He received an almost deadly wound.
The bullet has been placed in the crown of Mary at Fatima.
Is the anti-Christ SUPPOSED to receive a deadly wound, or almost deadly?

 

[amadeus]

I think we're exactly the same age,,,you had mentioned yours once.
46.

I was born in December of 1943.

 

[GodsGrace]

I was born in December of 1943.

Oops.
3 years younger than you.
But I feel like I'm 40.
OK. 50...

 

[Dave L]

What about Pope John Paul II?
He received an almost deadly wound.
The bullet has been placed in the crown of Mary at Fatima.
Is the anti-Christ SUPPOSED to receive a deadly wound, or almost deadly?

Most that I've read think General Berthier's capture of the pope in the French Revolution was the deadly wound. And the healing of it happened in 1929 when the Vatican received sovereign statehood status.

 

[epostle]

After distorting the text and history to read what they want into the Bible, and thereby obtaining God's "blessing" on their hatred of the Catholic Church, some "Christians" ignore the only texts of Scripture which tells us about the religious leanings of the Antichrist.
In St. John's letters (1 John 4, 2 John 1), he tells us that the spirit of the Antichrist denies the Incarnation (the Son of God becoming man) and thereby also the Trinity (the Father and the Spirit, too).THIS IS THE SPIRIT OF ANTI-CHRIST.

There is not a single text in 2000 years, including the new Catechism of the Catholic Church, where the Catholic Church, her popes, her bishops, her official teachings, her saints, or her acknowledged ecclesiastical authors, deny the Word-made-flesh or the Blessed Trinity. Instead, all of Christianity owes the preservation of these Truths to the Catholic Church, whose great Councils formulated them and whose saints and popes have defended them to this day, often at the cost of martyrdom.

 

[BreadOfLife]

The Protestants = those of the Reformation and their off shoots.

Yup - and there are literally tens of thousands of disjointed and perpetually-splintering Protestant sects that ALL teach different doctrines while ALL claiming to have the "Truth".
YOU said that "MOST" of them had - in their CREEDS - that the Papacy was the Antichrist.

NOW - can you show me tens of thousands of Protestant creeds that state this?
OR - would you care to REVISE your bogus claim?

 

[bbyrd009]

I sure hope you're not calling me an ignorant anti-catholic.

lick the ring or join the crowd i guess