The Church At Rome

[aspen]

Can you point me to this explanation?
Hard to convince someone if they never say it as well. Whats to disagree about? nether you or selene will explain the importance of this knowing who succeeded who. Apparently its very important to Catholics. Who cares If Christ is taught.. Is it necessary to believe in this. It kind of reminds me of the Da Vinci code. The passing on of the secret knowledge or power, secret hand shakes and signs. Who has the white gold ring sort of thing. Who is the successor of peter ??? does it matter??? stay tuned same vat channel same vat time.

I can't help but poke a little fun at your big secret. I promise not to tell.
And it makes little sense to debate an issue and not have the proponent explain why its important, would you agree?

The reason it is important to Catholics is because it is apart of Church history. Everyone in the early church put a great deal of importance in the succession. Eusebius wrote a history of the early church and talks a great deal about the succession - you might want to check it out. Polycarp, who was a disciple of John also writes about it. Basically, Apostolic Succession is just another connection to the Early Church that Catholics still follow, like the Real Presence in the Eucharist and praying for the dead.

Also, it became important because of the teaching of Holy Orders, which became important during the Eastern Orthodox schism and even more important during the Reformation.

As far as making fun of the teaching, I do not think that is really very helpful - it tends to shutdown conversation.

Here is a link:

Catholic Answers

http://www.catholic...._Succession.asp

Catholic Catechism:

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s1c2a2.htm#I

I think that is about all the information I can provide. If it is not convincing, I am fine with that - all I can do is present the information.

 

[jacobtaylor]

The reason it is important to Catholics is because it is apart of Church history. Everyone in the early church put a great deal of importance in the succession. Eusebius wrote a history of the early church and talks a great deal about the succession - you might want to check it out. Polycarp, who was a disciple of John also writes about it. Basically, Apostolic Succession is just another connection to the Early Church that Catholics still follow, like the Real Presence in the Eucharist and praying for the dead.

Also, it became important because of the teaching of Holy Orders, which became important during the Eastern Orthodox schism and even more important during the Reformation.

As far as making fun of the teaching, I do not think that is really very helpful - it tends to shutdown conversation.

Here is a link:

http://www.catholic...._Succession.asp

There you go all you had to do was man up and point out there is no biblical support for it. Its all founded on some guys that thought it important in the 3rd century. And then they used this standard I'll call it (the Midis touch) to determine whether some one taught correctly or not.. Wow they had some pretty strange ideas about how Gods works back then didn't they.

Now tell me whats the difference between (the Midas Touch) and say being born of the spirit. There had to be more born of the spirit than Paul and Peter at the time of their death. So whats the difference? Midis touch vs born again? What did these people believe?

 

[aspen]

There you go all you had to do was man up and point out there is no biblical support for it. Its all founded on some guys that thought it important in the 3rd century. And then they used this standard I'll call it (the Midis touch) to determine whether some one taught correctly or not.. Wow they had some pretty strange ideas about how Gods works back then didn't they.

Now tell me whats the difference between (the Midas Touch) and say being born of the spirit. There had to be more born of the spirit than Paul and Peter at the time of their death. So whats the difference? Midis touch vs born again? What did these people believe?

I thought you realized that Catholicism relies on Sacred Tradition and Sacred Text as authoritative. I am sorry I missed that. Also, if you follow the link I provided to the Catholic Catechism and then looked around a bit - you would see the scriptural backing for the belief.

The difference between the Midas Touch and being born again is that the Midas touch is a term used in a Grimm's Fairy Tale and being born again is the result of justification. Based on the language you are using to describe a teaching I hold sacred, this conversation is over.

blessings!

 

[jacobtaylor]

I thought you realized that Catholicism relies on Sacred Tradition and Sacred Text as authoritative. I am sorry I missed that. Also, if you follow the link I provided to the Catholic Catechism and then looked around a bit - you would see the scriptural backing for the belief.

The difference between the Midas Touch and being born again is that the Midas touch is a term used in a Grimm's Fairy Tale and being born again is the result of justification. Based on the language you are using to describe a teaching I hold sacred, this conversation is over.

blessings!

Sorry dude I don't know all the fancy terminology. all were doing is discussing what Catholics believe I didn't realize I had to know the sacred words. Sacred tradition and sacred text? is that like the book of Mormon? You know an addition to the bible. Some Mormon guy talked to an angel and wrote a book with golden pages, is that sacred as well?All Im really trying to figure out is where do these people get this special privilege, to write sacred text and traditions?

 

[aspen]

Sorry dude I don't know all the fancy terminology. all were doing is discussing what Catholics believe I didn't realize I had to know the sacred words. Sacred tradition and sacred text? is that like the book of Mormon? You know an addition to the bible. Some Mormon guy talked to an angel and wrote a book with golden pages, is that sacred as well?

Do you really need me to give you a reason to discredit this teaching?

How much do you know about Catholic teaching? How much do you know about Church History?

 

[jacobtaylor]

Do you really need me to give you a reason to discredit this teaching?

How much do you know about Catholic teaching? How much do you know about Church History?

I expect you to presume I know nothing about it, just like little kid. And explain to me why you believe what you do? It that really such a difficult thing? You have sacred text and tradition well the Mormon guy at my door said the same thing. Why should I believe you and not him? What makes you right and him wrong? Is that to much to ask?

 

[jacobtaylor]

Maybe you can see the problem I have, nether Catholics or Mormons can claim biblical support for there sacred teaching. In fact the bible warns about other gospels.
With out biblical support what is man to use as a baseline. Some other mans testimony? I don't think thats a wise choice.

 

[aspen]

I expect you to presume I know nothing about it, just like little kid. And explain to me why you believe what you do? It that really such a difficult thing? You have sacred text and tradition well the Mormon guy at my door said the same thing. Why should I believe you and not him? What makes you right and him wrong? Is that to much to ask?

I am not presuming anything - I am asking you.

You can believe whatever you want, Jacob.

Since you are asking why I believe Catholicism to be true, I will answer you.

I was not raised in church. Jesus made Himself known to me when I was young and attending a Protestant Church Camp. I went on to a Protestant College and became a youth director at a Presbyterian Church. Later, I went to graduate school and met a Catholic in my program. I assumed that she was Catholic because she had never heard about Christianity. I was arrogant and believing it was my job to expose her religion for what it was - an empty shell - gutted and refined by the Reformation. After our first conversation, I realized that I was talking to an educated Catholic - someone who knew her faith, doctrine, church history and apologetics. I didn't know anything about Church history and barely anything about Catholicism. She taught me a great deal about the Catholic Church and I spent the next 2 years learning everything I could about Church history and Catholic doctrine. Then, I decided to join the church - it was a year long process. Later, I got involved in a local monastery and became a Benedictine oblate.

I believe the Catholic Church is the Church Jesus started on Earth - I believe it because I had a spiritual revelation after taking the Eucharist and all of the study I did regarding Church History is congruent with Catholic doctrine. I also realized that sola scriptura - the scriptural basis for Protestantism is not supported by the Bible. Also, the Reformation has failed to reform the church - it has replaced Catholic Tradition with it's own traditions, but fails to admit it.

The good thing and the most important thing about Protestantism is that it has adopted many truths from Catholicism like the Trinity, the doctrine of the incarnation and most of the cannon of the Bible. I believe the Pope is correct when he affirmed that enough of the truth has been preserved with Protestantism to remain Christian. I believe i was justified before I became Catholic. I consider all born again Protestants my brothers and sister in Christ.

As far as Mormonism is concerned - it is a result of the Protestant Reformation. It is one of the 19th century cults, like the Millerites, Shakers, Quakers, Christian Scientists, JWs and Seventh Day Adventists - although, to be clear - none of these religions have enough of the truth to be considered Christian. You should reject Mormon doctrine because they reject the true nature of God as a Trinity. There are a lot of other reasons to reject their doctrine, but they do not even matter because Mormons are not even Trinitarian.

Do you have anymore questions?

 

[jacobtaylor]

Nope you said your piece. You believe because you believe. Nothing about the bible or sacred scripture.

I want to note one point.

I also realized that sola scriptura - the scriptural basis for Protestantism is not supported by the Bible.

Heres the problem between you and I and perhaps others as well. You have no problem adding or taking away from scripture. In fact your belief system encourages it except for the verses that support your churches theology. You bring that same standard with you in your post. You and I have been in debate about it for several days. You are acceptant and to a point encouraged to accept extra biblical doctrine from your churches sacred text. Your church has no problem at all with its members accepting the flood as a truth or not along with other biblical accounts. So long as it does not conflict with the validity of the churches teachings. I don't and that is exactly where our indifference with one another begins. And instead of pointing this out to others about your faith as you make un biblical statements, you simply make another un biblical statement to cover the first. I sugest you save everyone the headache and just admit like you did here you don't believe in sola scripture. You believe men are entitled to add to or take away scripture at liberty so long as it doesn't conflict with your perception.

Later dude

I'll be referring to this post in the future. If you insist on arguing un biblical doctrine. Lets just tell everyone you don't believe in sola scripture. The truth is always the proper avenue. you do agree dont you?

 

[aspen]

Nope you said your piece. You believe because you believe. Nothing about the bible or sacred scripture.

I want to note one point.


Heres the problem between you and I and perhaps others as well. You have no problem adding or taking away from scripture. In fact your belief system encourages it except for the verses that support your churches theology. You bring that same standard with you in your post. You and I have been in debate about it for several days. You are acceptant and to a point encouraged to accept extra biblical doctrine from your churches sacred text. Your church has no problem at all with its members accepting the flood as a truth or not along with other biblical accounts. So long as it does not conflict with the validity of the churches teachings. I don't and that is exactly where our indifference with one another begins. And instead of pointing this out to others about your faith as you make un biblical statements, you simply make another un biblical statement to cover the first. I sugest you save everyone the headache and just admit like you did here you don't believe in sola scripture. You believe men are entitled to add to or take away scripture at liberty so long as it doesn't conflict with your perception.

Later dude

I'll be referring to this post in the future. If you insist on arguing un biblical doctrine. Lets just tell everyone you don't believe in sola scripture. The truth is always the proper avenue. you do agree dont you?

Boy, I think everyone here knows that I don't believe in sola scriptura.....since when has that been a secret? I do not believe it because it is an oxymoron. It is an extra-biblical doctrine that claims that all extra-biblical doctrines are false doctrines. It kind of strange that you are point this out as if I have been hiding it - I am Catholic remember? I belong to the Church that predates sola scriptura by 1500 years. I am a part of the church that recognizes that all Christians rely on sacred tradition + the Bible - we just admit it and have been doing so long before Luther decided it was unChristian. Sorry dude, but you are the new comer in the faith (Reformation or after) and this board - it is your job to defend your new Reformation beliefs - I have nothing to defend.

Also, as far as believing whatever we choose - the Catholic Church does not accept new revelation, anything that contradicts sacred scripture or the Bible. It is true that my personal beliefs on certain subjects fall outside Catholic teachings - I am not secretive about these beliefs, nor am I stubborn about them. Like I said before, I am sure God will correct me someday and we will have a good laugh about it.

BTW, was I just hoodwinked? Did you just ask me to spend a bunch of time telling you a personal story just so you could expose the Catholic guy? There is no need to pantse the Catholic, Jacob - I been on this board long enough that everyone knows what I believe already.

As always, I am praying for you!

blessings

 

[Anastacia]

I am not presuming anything - I am asking you.

You can believe whatever you want, Jacob.

Since you are asking why I believe Catholicism to be true, I will answer you.

I was not raised in church. Jesus made Himself known to me when I was young and attending a Protestant Church Camp. I went on to a Protestant College and became a youth director at a Presbyterian Church. Later, I went to graduate school and met a Catholic in my program. I assumed that she was Catholic because she had never heard about Christianity. I was arrogant and believing it was my job to expose her religion for what it was - an empty shell - gutted and refined by the Reformation. After our first conversation, I realized that I was talking to an educated Catholic - someone who knew her faith, doctrine, church history and apologetics. I didn't know anything about Church history and barely anything about Catholicism. She taught me a great deal about the Catholic Church and I spent the next 2 years learning everything I could about Church history and Catholic doctrine. Then, I decided to join the church - it was a year long process. Later, I got involved in a local monastery and became a Benedictine oblate.

I believe the Catholic Church is the Church Jesus started on Earth - I believe it because I had a spiritual revelation after taking the Eucharist and all of the study I did regarding Church History is congruent with Catholic doctrine. I also realized that sola scriptura - the scriptural basis for Protestantism is not supported by the Bible. Also, the Reformation has failed to reform the church - it has replaced Catholic Tradition with it's own traditions, but fails to admit it.

The good thing and the most important thing about Protestantism is that it has adopted many truths from Catholicism like the Trinity, the doctrine of the incarnation and most of the cannon of the Bible. I believe the Pope is correct when he affirmed that enough of the truth has been preserved with Protestantism to remain Christian. I believe i was justified before I became Catholic. I consider all born again Protestants my brothers and sister in Christ.

As far as Mormonism is concerned - it is a result of the Protestant Reformation. It is one of the 19th century cults, like the Millerites, Shakers, Quakers, Christian Scientists, JWs and Seventh Day Adventists - although, to be clear - none of these religions have enough of the truth to be considered Christian. You should reject Mormon doctrine because they reject the true nature of God as a Trinity. There are a lot of other reasons to reject their doctrine, but they do not even matter because Mormons are not even Trinitarian.

Do you have anymore questions?

You said you had a spiritual revelation....it sounds like you fell in love with the Catholic religion.

I'm not Protestant. My beliefs are that of the first Christians, as taught by Jesus and the apostles of the New Testament. And in the New Testament, there is no Catholic church, no anything resembling it as far as the true beliefs go. There is no name "Catholic." There is no calling of a man "Holy Father," nor "pope." There is no talk and about making statues; nor keeping material objects from "Saints" and venerating those objects. There are no incidences of digging up the deceased and displaying them in glass caskets, and venerating the decayed.. There are no examples in the Bible about praying to the dead; nor venerating and praying to the Lord's mother. There are no restrictions on getting married, and eating meat, like the Catholics. There isn't an example in the Bible about any apostle turning the bread and wine into the real body and blood of Jesus. There is no confession box. There are no examples of special clothing and hats for the leader of the church, no special chairs, like that of the Catholics leaders. No instructions and use of "holy water."
The Catholics believe they can add to the teachings found in the Bible. But the Bible warns about adding or subtracting from God's word. Deuteronomy 4:2, Proverbs 30:5-6 and Revelation 22:18-19.
The Catholics believe in what they call oral Traditions. But Jesus warns against traditions.
Jesus denounced tradition as keeping man from the reality of the truth:
Matthew 15:6-9 "... Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."

We displease God when we follow tradition or church laws or any human standard as the source of authority for the church (Matthew 15:1-14; Colossians 2:8; Galatians 1:6-9; Proverbs 14:12; 2 John 9-11; Jeremiah 10:23).
The original apostles received all the truth we need to guide us to eternal life, and they wrote this down in the Scriptures (John 16:13; 2 Pet. 1:3; Acts 20:20,27; Matt. 28:20; I Cor. 14:37; 2 Tim. 3:16,17).

Only Jesus can furnish our right standing and peace with God. Repent of all else and rest on the faithfulness of Christ Jesus alone,
"forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot."
1Peter 1:18

 

[aspen]

[font="'Book Antiqua"]Romans 8:1
[sup][/sup][sup]1[/sup] Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, [sup]2[/sup] because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you[sup][a][/sup] free from the law of sin and death.


I am praying for you sister, Anastacia[/font]

 

[Anastacia]

Romans 8:1

[sup]
[/sup]
[sup]1[/sup] Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, [sup]2[/sup] because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you[sup][a][/sup] free from the law of sin and death.


I am praying for you sister, Anastacia

You need to seek out God's Truth, not the Catholic religion's. I'm praying for you.

 

[Anastacia]

The good thing and the most important thing about Protestantism is that it has adopted many truths from Catholicism like the Trinity, the doctrine of the incarnation and most of the cannon of the Bible.

True believers read the Bible and know that there is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I don't even use the word Trinity, since it's not in the Bible. "Incarnation" is not in the Bible either. We don't have to make up names to explain things. And the Catholics didn't give us the Bible, as you say. It was not church councils determining what books were to be included in the biblical canons, more like the councils recognized or acknowledged those books that had already obtained prominence from usage among the various early Christian communities.

 

[mcorba]

Denominational disputes, while the devil smirks and enjoys it all.

Don t foster division. We are all one in Christ. Focus yourselves.

There is a lot of evil out there to fight against.

 

[rockytopva]

Denominational disputes, while the devil smirks and enjoys it all.

Don t foster division. We are all one in Christ. Focus yourselves.

There is a lot of evil out there to fight against.

Shall we call it abominational disputes? Again, if we have people of other Christian persuasions here we should treat them with dignity and honor. While we are still in the church ages God chooses the gentleman's approach and so should we. As far as the protestant arguments I have got to say that the church existed before Luther's 95 thesis. The Catholic church has its issues and so does yours!

 

[jacobtaylor]

Boy, I think everyone here knows that I don't believe in sola scriptura.....since when has that been a secret? I do not believe it because it is an oxymoron. It is an extra-biblical doctrine that claims that all extra-biblical doctrines are false doctrines. It kind of strange that you are point this out as if I have been hiding it - I am Catholic remember? I belong to the Church that predates sola scriptura by 1500 years. I am a part of the church that recognizes that all Christians rely on sacred tradition + the Bible - we just admit it and have been doing so long before Luther decided it was unChristian. Sorry dude, but you are the new comer in the faith (Reformation or after) and this board - it is your job to defend your new Reformation beliefs - I have nothing to defend.

Also, as far as believing whatever we choose - the Catholic Church does not accept new revelation, anything that contradicts sacred scripture or the Bible. It is true that my personal beliefs on certain subjects fall outside Catholic teachings - I am not secretive about these beliefs, nor am I stubborn about them. Like I said before, I am sure God will correct me someday and we will have a good laugh about it.

BTW, was I just hoodwinked? Did you just ask me to spend a bunch of time telling you a personal story just so you could expose the Catholic guy? There is no need to pantse the Catholic, Jacob - I been on this board long enough that everyone knows what I believe already.

As always, I am praying for you!

blessings

I send a bit of time on the catholic answers forum. In spite of all the official requirements and regulations concerning what you must believe and what sacraments must be observed most catholics don't practice their religion. On the other hand they nearly as I can tell all agree on one thing no sola scripture "by scripture alone" Its easy to understand the necessity of this teaching by men that desire to exult themselves over another. No Sola scripture teaching destroys the only source and method of comparative error checking. With out it the compliment that the Briens recieved in Acts, searching the scriptures daily, is of no value. If Paul had taught there is no such thing as sola scripture as catholic do Paul would have told them to put the scriptures away. I'll tell you what they say and mean, I'll tell you what is left unsaid as well as what needs to be added. But we see no such thing in scripture. I'm sure you know the verses about accepting another gospel, well isn't that what the RCC does? In fact they go so fare as to tell people they can not understand scripture, only the heads of the church are able to understand it. The bible never makes this claim, Its simply an additional teaching ensuring control is maintained to the selected leaders. I'll go so far as to say this is population mind control, no different than a cult leader would expect of his followers. If you resist you will be cast aside never to receive salvation, same thing the JW and the Mormons teach.

My other observation from time spent on catholic answers is most catholics don't know what scripture is sacred and what is not. Its clear the several NT passages that are used to support sacrements and Mt 16 as the foundation threw Peter are uncompromisable. But the OT is open to any number of personal revelations. Now you may point and say non catholic denominations don't agree on the meaning of scripture that is true. But they do limit the scope to scripture alone. So if men can't agree on the meaning of certain biblical context how does taking the liberty of adding to or subtracting from, bring agreement closer? It cant, never will and only adds to an already controversial topic. Catholic believed they had found the solution by election and susesion. By giving one man supreme dominion. Well history proves this to be a big mistake in both the OT and in the histry of the RCC.

You are a great example of a RCC believer, you are committed to supporting the church but because of the liberty non sola scripture provides you have formulated your own interpretation that differs from Roman teachings as well as non Roman teachings. Your the perfect high-breed catholic. I can hear your reply even now. Your going to claim you do follow and defend catholic doctrine. Well the truth is nearly every catholic I have met doesn't. And openly admit that fact on the forum.Theres the whole list of necessary sacraments that must be preformed by the catholic church along with being a member to be in a state of full sanctification. You as well as 99% of professing Catholics never mention it or follow it. I think its largely due to the fact that 99% of Catholics simply dont comply with there church requirements. Marys special place in Catholicism is a good example its a church dogma but Catholics on the forum tell other members they can take it or leave it. If the pope enforced strict compliance on the professing members I would say he would be obligated to excommunicate 99% of his church. My over all observation is the RCC breads nothing but high-breed believers today, followers of the catholic faith in word alone. The Roman church seams to be fine with this policy so long as everyone professes they are Catholics.

One more thing I think the numbers of members are way out of whack. For example a catholic mother can take 12 kids to the church and have them baptized. Their names go on the roll as members whether these kids ever step into a catholic church again in their life. The only way to get off is to send a letter and ask to be removed and just how many do that. Their are no doubt 1000s on the list that probably don't even know there on it.

I am a part of the church that recognizes that all Christians rely on sacred tradition + the Bible - we just admit it and have been doing so long before Luther decided it was unChristian.

Funny you mention the above. I've had catholics tell me Im catholic whether I like it or not. By virtue of the Pope being the head of all christians on earth, that God works exclusively threw the Pope and then to the catholic church and then to all other Christians. Im like wow dude thats a scary thought. Its like you really think that. Like give me the paper to sign that says I want the pope to stay out of my business forever. I always thought that no man knows where the spirit comes from or goes. But these people adamantly insist all christians are catholic, thou they are not in full communion with Rome they might still get to heaven but it will be a rough ride. And in the same forum these catholics take any number of exceptions to church regulations for them selves but insist I compile. It's like after you become catholic the rules no longer apply. Your now a high-breed and can pick or choose at your leisure. Well I'll take the hard road alone if need be thank you. No special crackers or sacraments that have no power to save or guarantee salvation for me. I'll take my chances with the bible alone.
[sup]
This verse tells me the pope has no control over the Holy Spirit.

7[/sup] Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ [sup]8[/sup] The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

But of course with no such thing as sola scripture, the above scripture is subject to being trumped every time. So why bother even bother reading the bible? Just be a high-breed catholic and dream your own dream. Sounds a bit like Oprah or one of her guru guest teachers. But In my opinion thats just what the RCC has become in today's world. It seeks to satisfy everyone as long your a professing member. I say these things from my experiences on the catholic answers forum.

BYW they have like zero tolerance for people that question the Roman church, catholic answers forum that is. Makes you wonder what would happen if the RCC was enforced by governmental law again yiks Catholic should be thankful they are allowed the liberty to frequent forums like this, the catholic forums have no such tolerance. Your pro catholic or your gone. The shoe fits only one way the catholic way.

 

[Anastacia]

Denominational disputes, while the devil smirks and enjoys it all.

Don t foster division. We are all one in Christ. Focus yourselves.

There is a lot of evil out there to fight against.

I'm no denomination. And the devil is enjoying you trying to stop the truth from being talked about. You also need to read more about the apostles if you think they didn't debate, argue, refute, sharply dispute, contend and correct others in the truth. And you are a Catholic, mcorba, therefore you would go against my speaking the truth.

Shall we call it abominational disputes? Again, if we have people of other Christian persuasions here we should treat them with dignity and honor. While we are still in the church ages God chooses the gentleman's approach and so should we. As far as the protestant arguments I have got to say that the church existed before Luther's 95 thesis. The Catholic church has its issues and so does yours!

Are you kidding, rockytopva? You are the one who keeps popping up with posts saying all Protestants are Spiritually dead.

 

[Anastacia]

Your going to claim you do follow and defend catholic doctrine. Well the truth is nearly every catholic I have met doesn't. And openly admit that fact on the forum.Theres the whole list of necessary sacraments that must be preformed by the catholic church along with being a member to be in a state of full sanctification. You as well as 99% of professing Catholics never mention it or follow it. I think its largely due to the fact that 99% of Catholics simply dont comply with there church requirements[sup]

[/sup]

And you know what, Jacob, there are writings from the "infallible" Catholic popes who say that if a Catholic doesn't agree with everything taught by the Catholic religion---then that person is a heretic and apostate!

 

[rockytopva]

Anastacia... That is one Sardisean gal we got here! Oh Brother!