Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 641322 comments on the CBC News story from Jul 10, 2007, titled Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican. In it, CBC News reports that:

The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CBC News.

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#413424 Jan 5, 2013
disciple wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree that the Republicrats are at fault. But I don't put the blame on the people that govern I put it in the people that elect them.
By the way I'm not a republican nor a democrat. I'm a tea partier which you may consider as most lefties do worse than republicans.
I believe that as a father I need to give my children a biblical based education so they can come up with their own conclusions about their government and life in general.
They won't be blaming they will be achieving.
You are fortunate to see grandchildren, I would like to get there if the Lord gives me that much time.
tho I am not interested in politics, I still do keep up alittle bit with the trends of today, and I answerd because some people may not have known what you were referring to.
I hope that you too live long enough to have many grandchildren, but if not, you have been blessed with your children
Pad

Fishers, IN

#413425 Jan 5, 2013
ReginaM wrote:
<quoted text>
Dan, what you described is a conversion...and I thank you for sharing it, it's lovely.
Conversion is not a one time event. We must essentially go through that conversion process every day. Each morning we awake to the world, and it is good as God proclaimed it in Genesis. And each day we have the free will to follow Him or reject Him. Each day we must be converted to Him. But that is not being 'born again' as set out in the NT. I know Anthony has given you links to some good materials so I hesitate to overload you, but I like this article:
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/apo...
If you're really interested, maybe you can print these things out and read them at your leisure.
Again, I appreciate your explanation and sharing your conversion story. There is more rejoicing in heaven over one repentant sinner...
In Jesus, Mary and Joseph,
Regina
Read your aticle,not being long,was comprehensive enough.I agree with baptism and Repentance and faith all being part of the "Born-again experience". Many Catholics by the way may know about their infant baptism,but do not know about the life in the Spirit,unless they are properly shown the Biblical roots of their faith in the New Testament.

Baptism is part of the Born-again experience,not the only reality of such.

Being born-again Regina is Conversion,and it is Believing,Repentance and Baptism. As you saw some Evangelicals on here stating emphatically that baptism is not a requirement for being saved,it is not on its own.There are many people in the church world of Christianity,who see baptism as the saving key. The fact is,it should be the last blessed thing done to a convert to Christ. First one must believe,as they cannot repent unless they believe that God does exist and that He sent His Son.

Repentance is so important because one cannot be baptized unless they are willing to die with Christ in the waters of baptism,and their sin bars them from having anything to do with Christ to begin with.

A baby or infant especially cannot believe,nor repent,thus baptism is basically in regards to making them a Christian,a DEDICATION,and to use a not so popular word here Initiation.

Biblical conversion requires Believing,Repenatance and baptism,all three are harmonious and fulfill even the Godhead: As believing in God the Father,faith,as Repentance of sin embracing the Cross of Christ as the only remedy to cancel sin,and Baptism as when we are immersed we are regenerated in the Spirit,as He completely overwhelms our person in the waters.

Later however we would do well to be baptized in the Holy Spirit,which gives us the power to WITNESS unto Christ,and to begin a life in the Spirit,AS HE S E A L S us unto the day of Redemption."Can any two walk together unless they agree?" that question is strongly a challenge to a person (human being) who should walk and continue to walk in the Spirit.Unless we agree with the Holy Spirit,we are often apt to walk our own way,and not His.

The Holy Spirit is given to us to reveal the Living Christ,but also to know the life of the Spirit,with all of His requirements and that which is given to HIM by the Father and the Son,that ultimately points back to the Father and the Son.

Being born-again is the total work of the Holy Spirit,it has nothing to do with church practices or human view of theology.It is the work of the Holy Spirit,and the beginning of our life of faith.The Bible corresponds to that life in the Spirit.Both are discerned by the SAME Spirit,and agree with each other.

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

"ISA 53:1.--6 "MATT 10:27"

#413426 Jan 5, 2013
Robert Dye wrote:
<quoted text>
Awfully convenient that you would read "70 priests and ministers" as "70 priests."
.
Says quite a bit about you.
.
Rob
Attacking and making derogatory statements about the contributor of the truth does not change the truth...

The first step to recovery that has been committed is to find out the truth.

secondly to present it

thirdly to bring it to a court of law and due process.

fourthly is to punish/pass sentence on the criminals.

fifthly to repair the collateral damage.

NO ONE HERE IN THIS FORUM (at least I hope) IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TH3 CRIMES...

SO WHY NOT LET THE LAW TAKE IT'S COURSE, AND GET ON WITH BEING OBEDIENT TO GOD, AND PREVENTING A REPETITION SUCH OFFENSES.

It is quite evident that something was missing in the Roman Catholic Church that allowed such evil to be propagated..

FIX THE LEAK,
REPAIR THE BREACH,
MAKE UP THE HEDGE..
REPENT, AND
BELIEVE THE GOSPEL AND
GET WITH THE PROGRAM GIVEN IN GOD'S WORD.

JESUS IS COMING SOON ..ARE YOU READY?..
Free Mind

Melbourne, FL

#413427 Jan 5, 2013
Robert Dye wrote:
<quoted text>
Awfully convenient that you would read "70 priests and ministers" as "70 priests."
.
Says quite a bit about you.
.
Rob
I agree. No need to embellish the facts.

FACT: The Vatican has used "diplomatic immunity" and other "sovereign state" protections to avoid accountability -- and not just in child abuse cases.

Question: in your experience, how do the Priests feel about the Vatican using, yet alone having diplomatic immunity?

To you, does this sound contrary in any way to Jesus' teachings?
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#413428 Jan 5, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
<quoted text>
70 priests in Boston alone...and only a fraction of priests are guilty?
And you can believe/defend THAT ?
"let he who is without sin cast the first stone"

No one is defending anything. It's about putting the numbers in perspective.

Did you know that protestant minsters are much more likely to be guilty of illicit sexual behaviour?

"In a 1984 survey, 38.6 percent of ministers reported sexual contact with a church member, and 76 percent knew of another minister who had had sexual intercourse with a parishioner.[xiii] In the same year, a Fuller Seminary survey of 1,200 ministers found that 20 percent of theologically “conservative” pastors admitted to some sexual contact outside of marriage with a church member. The figure jumped to over 40 percent for “moderates”; 50 percent of “liberal” pastors confessed to similar behavior.[xiv]

In 1990, in a study by the Park Ridge Center for the Study of Health, Faith and Ethics in Chicago, it was learned that 10 percent of ministers said they had had an affair with a parishioner and about 25 percent admitted some sexual contact with a parishioner.[xv] Two years later, a survey by Leadership magazine found that 37 percent of ministers confessed to having been involved in “inappropriate sexual behavior” with a parishioner.[xvi]

In a 1993 survey by the Journal of Pastoral Care, 14 percent of Southern Baptist ministers said they had engaged in “inappropriate sexual behavior,” and 70 percent said they knew a minister who had had such contact with a parishioner.[xvii] Joe E. Trull is co-author of the 1993 book, Ministerial Ethics, and he found that “from 30 to 35 percent of ministers of all denominations admit to having sexual relationships—from inappropriate touching to sexual intercourse—outside of marriage.”[xviii]"

Do you consider these protestant minsters to be "repentant"?
Free Mind

Melbourne, FL

#413429 Jan 5, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
What happened to the John Jay report?
What do you mean? Its 12 yrs old now. That's all.
Its history.. it was a courageous and noble report initiated by the Roman Catholic Church to figure out what was going on. Its independent findings show that the Church is no more infested with pedophiles then any other group.(more facts you and mike don't want people to hear)
Now, 12 yrs later, there were 7 cases. 7!!
There were probably 20 just in your Florida school district.
Amazing.
More spin with half-truths.

No matter -- none of it has anything to do with the topic.

Did Jesus' only true church lie and COVER-UP child sex-abuse on a worldwide scale for at least 50 years?

Ask Ireland.
Michael

Canada

#413430 Jan 5, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
If the Church fought every single allegation in court, they'd be broke just from lawyer fees.
The day after the first check was issued there must of been ten thousand new accusations.
All you can do is pray for the false accusers and the Priest they taint. And there have been many many innocent Priest who's lives have been ruined by this. The bigots don't care about them though. They're collateral casualties in the bigots agenda.
Clay says.....

....All you can do is pray for the false accusers and the Priest they taint. And there have been many many innocent Priest who's lives have been ruined by this.

Michael says......So, why don't you lay blame to the ones who caused this mess in the first place?

No one outside your church has falsely accused any priest of wrong doing, its all from within.

STOP! blaming everyone else for the mistakes your own church leaders have made.

.... Its always somebody elses fault they say.



Michael

Canada

#413431 Jan 5, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said "no big deal" you jackass, I said it's part of the human condition. Sin will never be eradicated as long as the human race exists. And there are tons of official documents produced over the centuries and 99.99% of them DON'T deal with sexual abuse, so you have no point.
Mike, there were 7 credible accusations in 2011. That's 0.000175% of the priest population.
That IS being accountable.
Remember Anthony the bulk of clergy caught committed the crimes years before when the victims were children. Today 20-25 years later the victims now have to courage to come forward and accuse the perpitrators for the crimes they committed in the 1980s or 90s.

You don't believe that there are many more who have never been caught?

Have you received a speeding ticket EVERY time you went over the speed limit? NO! Did you get a ticket everytime you coasted slowly through a stop sign without a complete stop? NO!

..... You don't believe that a large number of victims WOULD NEVER come forward out of embarassement and shame and many of their parents would fear in never accusing a clergy member of such wrong doing.

I would bet there are many.

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#413432 Jan 5, 2013
disciple wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree that the Republicrats are at fault. But I don't put the blame on the people that govern I put it in the people that elect them.
By the way I'm not a republican nor a democrat. I'm a tea partier which you may consider as most lefties do worse than republicans.
I believe that as a father I need to give my children a biblical based education so they can come up with their own conclusions about their government and life in general.
They won't be blaming they will be achieving.
You are fortunate to see grandchildren, I would like to get there if the Lord gives me that much time.
as I looked over this post again, this sentence of yours sticks out.

By the way I'm not a republican nor a democrat. I'm a tea partier which {you may consider as most lefties do} worse than republicans.

why would you wish to insult me by calling me a "leftie" which is symbolic of a communist and they are athestic?

I thought that we (you and I) had agreed to leave the insults behind us, and besides that, it is impossible for a person like myself who is "apolitical" to be on the right, the left, the center or a tea partier
Michael

Canada

#413433 Jan 5, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Try clicking on Michaels link and tell me if his quote is found in it.
I did and couldn't see it. Its not in there.
His goal is to slander the CC for his own pathetic agenda. He succeeded.
Try this link. 276 catholic clerics (boston)

They wouldn't list the names if credible information wasn't available.

Know any of these priests?

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/ma_bosto...
Pad

Fishers, IN

#413434 Jan 5, 2013
preston wrote:
<quoted text>sometime, and I hope it never happens to you, but dad was in lots of pain from a tumor fastened onto his heart, and my mon did, in his last day, allow him to drink in our home.
the pain of the cancer along with withdrawal symptoms was more than she could bear. and dad laid there and hardly ever complained, I know that I couldnt bear that pain as he did.
sometimes a person has to do what is right, not what is correct.
If in fact that your family had to use alcoholic beverages to aid in the bearing of Pain,who am I preston to argue with you? It is not for me to condemn anyone who uses alcohol and for whatever reason.Your statement points a finger at me as that I would condemn you somehow,or your family.Don't even go there.

If you know the proper use,and your family has been able to use the alochol beverages to alleviate some sort of suffering,I would be the last person to claim you folks were wrong to do so.I reject any notion from you that places me in a judging manner toward especially those who suffer!
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#413435 Jan 5, 2013
Free Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
1% of priests, 10% of priest, or 4% as shown by the John Jay Report -- none of these individual crimes have anything to do with the DECADES-LONG, WORLDWIDE COVER-UP -- by a single institution claiming to be uniquely selected and guided by Jesus.
The point is.......... BUSTED!!!!
It's not a "cover-up" when the prevailing course of treament in the psychiatric community recommends counseling and being sent to a new parish. If we knew then what we know now about recidivism, things would have been different.

And if it was 4% decades ago and now it's 0.000175%, that tells me the Church is trying to be accountable.
Michael

Canada

#413436 Jan 5, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said "no big deal" you jackass, I said it's part of the human condition. Sin will never be eradicated as long as the human race exists. And there are tons of official documents produced over the centuries and 99.99% of them DON'T deal with sexual abuse, so you have no point.
Mike, there were 7 credible accusations in 2011. That's 0.000175% of the priest population.
That IS being accountable.
So, your saying throughout the years it hasn't really been a big problem.......I see.

Check out this list below start with the A's and go through to the Z's.

It might take awhile.....

http://bishop-accountability.org/priestdb/Pri...
Michael

Canada

#413437 Jan 5, 2013
ANTHONY this might be easier. Pick out your state of Minnesota, then pick your, diocese out of the 6 in Minnesota and see if you recognize any of these names?

http://bishop-accountability.org/priestdb/Pri...

Pad

Fishers, IN

#413438 Jan 5, 2013
LTM wrote:
<quoted text>
I am glad you don't want to fight neither do I.
I just want to share bibical truth with you.
Jesus did not disobey Leviticus 10:9-10 by “creating” alcoholic wine to be consumed against His Father’s will. He created unfermented “wine” or high quality grape juice.
Not to mention that fermentation is an aging process that happens over a long period of time. It’s a process of decay. Decay is death. Jesus created that high quality grape juice instantly, not over time, without decay and without death! All of Jesus’ miracles are rooted in Life and Love. God’s Life. God’s Love.
People who use the “water into wine” excuse are simply being deceived by one verse of Scripture taken completely out of Biblical context. They need to be delivered. This is why Jesus said we must have two or three confirming passages of Scripture, in context, to verify all doctrine or behavior. Otherwise, we shouldn’t accept it at all.(Matthew 18:16)
Often, after sharing this revelation with shocked,“wine bibbing” Believers, they almost always respond,“Well, Paul told Timothy to take a little wine for his stomach. I’m just doing it for my stomach.”(1Timothy 5:23)
I then explain that Paul knew the difference between fermented and unfermented “wine” and obeyed the Bible, too. It was common in his day to put grape juice in water to kill water-borne bacteria, which caused stomach ailments such as Timothy’s. This is what Paul told Timothy to do. He was not telling Timothy that it was acceptable to “catch a holy buzz in the Name of the Lord.”
The Bible calls fermented wine and all strong drink a “mocker.” It calls those who use it “deceived” and “unwise.”(Proverbs 20:1)
It leads to poverty.(Proverbs 21:17)
It will bite you like a serpent.(Proverbs 23:32)
The Bible also calls God’s children “Kings”(Revelation 1:5,6) and says,“Wine is not for Kings.”(Proverbs 31:4)
Say,“Jesus, I choose You and Your Word.”(Romans 10:13) He’ll forgive you for what you didn’t know. However, now you do know!
Oh, yes, my intoxicated friend who insisted that Jesus was a wine drinker, which makes it okay for everyone. Within weeks of rejecting my Scriptural, loving correction, he raped a 13 year old child while intoxicated. He’ll pay for that for the rest of his life. He was bitten by the mocking serpent of strong drink.
Someone always says,“Something like that would never happen to me. I can handle it.” Interesting I have never met one person who could handle it, they are lying to themselves.
Alcoholic drinks are destroyer of mind, body, and soul Jesus would never approve drinking it not even a little, because a little is to much for some people.
VERY well put!And i agree with it as we human beings have proven over the centuries that often we cannot control what happens to us when we are drunk.
I cannot tell you haow many guys I have known who got drunk at parties or social gatherings,and tried to have sex with an unwilling woman.
Michael

Canada

#413439 Jan 5, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not a "cover-up" when the prevailing course of treament in the psychiatric community recommends counseling and being sent to a new parish. If we knew then what we know now about recidivism, things would have been different.
And if it was 4% decades ago and now it's 0.000175%, that tells me the Church is trying to be accountable.
What a bunch of baloney!

So what you are saying is if 30 years ago someone witnessed a man raping a child he would call a psychiatrist instead of calling the police?

I remember 30, 40, 50 years ago if a man raped a woman THE POLICE WERE CALLED, not a psychiatrist.

What about the lies Anthony anytime a parishioner would ask why is Father Smith being moved? The answer from the rest of the clergy would be, he is needed elsewhere. THE TRUTH WAS NEVER TOLD, because the church didn't want the truth to be told.

If you witnessed a young boy being abused 30 years ago, would you call a psychiatrist or 9-1-1!

I rest my case!

Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#413440 Jan 5, 2013
Robert Dye wrote:
<quoted text>
I think the argument he is making is that legislation against an offense proves knowledge that the offense is taking place, or has taken place in the past.
.
This argument has some merit.
.
Where I think it falls apart is what the anti-Catholics think it means.
.
When there is a directive against disclosures regading abuse committed during the sacrament of confession, the anti-Catholic folks call that a cover-up.
.
And it COULD have been ... but there is a quite reasonable explanation of it.
.
If Suzy comes to me and tells me that Fr. Smith sexually abused her when she went to him for confession, I cannot repeat that with breaking the seal, nor can I grant Fr. Smith the right to confront his accuser.
.
It would be much simpler if Suzy would just go th the Civil Authority and report. If she won't do that, there is very little I can do, except under the utmost secrecy.
.
This is not to protect the accused ( well, except that he REALLY should be able to confront his accuser, but I don't know that this is an absolute in Canon Law. Should be, but may not be), but rather to protect the right of the accuser, who has a right to secrecy over the fact that she went to confession.
.
I *never* have the right to divulge that fact, any more than I could divulge what she confessed.
.
The directive from the pope that all accusations regarding an offense committed DURING THE SACRAMENT OF CONFESSION be held in a diocese's "secret archives" (roughly equivalent to "personnel files" for any group or corporation, as these are considered "confidential documents") was an attempt to address the confidentiality of the matte, to not break the seal of the confessional.
.
Our directive is that we are to make IMMEDIATE report of any allegation of sexual abuse of a minor to DHS. I have never seen a directive as to what to do if someone tells me in the contexts of the confessional. I would push such a person to make the report themselves.
.
If someone told me that Fr. Smith had commited sexual abuse (and they are telling ME this outside of the confessional), my response would be to call DHS, and tell them Suzy had made an accusation against Fr. Smith. "When?" Why, she just told me. "No,*when* does she say this occurred?" I forget. You have your job. Go ASK the peson who made the accusation.
.
Rob
Point taken father, yet I'm certain Mike doesn't care one whit about what it does mean.

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#413441 Jan 5, 2013
Pad wrote:
<quoted text>If in fact that your family had to use alcoholic beverages to aid in the bearing of Pain,who am I preston to argue with you? It is not for me to condemn anyone who uses alcohol and for whatever reason.Your statement points a finger at me as that I would condemn you somehow,or your family.Don't even go there.
If you know the proper use,and your family has been able to use the alochol beverages to alleviate some sort of suffering,I would be the last person to claim you folks were wrong to do so.I reject any notion from you that places me in a judging manner toward especially those who suffer!
it was not the pain per se, it was the withdrawal from the beer to go with it,

and you know me well enough to know that If I want to say something to you, I would. it was more that I would not want it to happen to you, in any way shape of form.

imagine him dying, as we saw it, and in pain that drugs cant alleviate, and we knew that, a woman who had loved her man and saw him sufferring and him wanting a beer(or more). so she broke her cardinal rule and relented.

that and that alone was the only point that I was wanting to make.
Michael

Canada

#413442 Jan 5, 2013
Why would Roman Catholic priests have to form a UNION if there wasn't issues between them and their superiors?

To date nearly 1,000 roman catholic priests have joined the ranks of forming an association in the USA. Modeled after the Priest Associations in Ireland, Germany, and Austria with more to come.

...They want a greater voice in the church and they indicate there appears to be a BRICK WALL between them and the hirearchy when it comes to dialouge.

..They indicate there are 3 distinct groups of priests with different agendas in the church.

So much for one big happy family!

http://fathernormsnotebook.blogspot.ca/2012/0...
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#413443 Jan 5, 2013
Michael wrote:
<quoted text>
Remember Anthony the bulk of clergy caught committed the crimes years before when the victims were children. Today 20-25 years later the victims now have to courage to come forward and accuse the perpitrators for the crimes they committed in the 1980s or 90s.
You don't believe that there are many more who have never been caught?
Have you received a speeding ticket EVERY time you went over the speed limit? NO! Did you get a ticket everytime you coasted slowly through a stop sign without a complete stop? NO!
..... You don't believe that a large number of victims WOULD NEVER come forward out of embarassement and shame and many of their parents would fear in never accusing a clergy member of such wrong doing.
I would bet there are many.
In 2011 there were 7 credible accusations. That's 0.000175% of the priest population. If you multiply that by 100 it's 0.0175%. That's less than any other large organization on the planet. It's still terrible and the guilty should go to prison, but the Church is making tremendous improvement. That's being accountable.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 1 min Seentheotherside 18,664
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 5 min Peter Ross 37,975
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 8 min The Hangman 969,931
ye olde village pub (Jun '07) 10 min okimar 53,753
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 12 min WasteWater 280,867
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 48 min Anna 104,627
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 49 min Peace_Warrior 618,363
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 5 hr Steve III 44,310
More from around the web