Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 673337 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.

truth

Morley, Australia

#423327 Feb 18, 2013
now please don't pretend what is in mind as well hearts of people..
LTM

Marathon, Canada

#423328 Feb 18, 2013
guest wrote:
no wonder he's too pooped to pope
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-...
Is this man kidding, even as a child I knew this was not normal.
The Pope has never read the Bible,
How many catholic's agree with this. statement from the Pope or believe he is telling the truth.

The Pope

21 December 2010

Victims of clerical sex abuse have reacted furiously to Pope Benedict's claim yesterday that paedophilia wasn't considered an “absolute evil” as recently as the 1970s.

In his traditional Christmas address yesterday to cardinals and officials working in Rome, Pope Benedict XVI also claimed that child pornography was increasingly considered “normal” by society.

“In the 1970s, paedophilia was theorised as something fully in conformity with man and even with children,” the Pope said.

“It was maintained — even within the realm of Catholic theology — that there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself. There is only a ‘better than' and a ‘worse than'. Nothing is good or bad in itself.”
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#423329 Feb 18, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't be so hard on yourself. You're not completely useless.
John 6 for the Eucharist, John 3 for salvific baptism.
Should I dare go in this circle again and ask this person yet again to explain the significance of these two items? The definition of doing something over and over expecting a different result is insanity, right? Therefore I am not asking.

I will only inform that we do practice the Lord's Supper in a biblical way and we do baptize in the biblical way.
truth

Morley, Australia

#423330 Feb 18, 2013
You liked say others is not worthy..why?
LTM

Marathon, Canada

#423331 Feb 18, 2013
The Bible does not specifically use the term “child abuse.” There is no record of a single instance in the Bible where a child is being abused. What the Bible does tell us is this: children have a special place in God’s heart and anyone who harms a child is inviting God’s wrath upon Him. When Jesus’ disciples tried to keep children from coming to Him, He rebuked them and welcomed little children to His side, saying,“Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these”(Mark 10:14). Then He took the children in His arms and blessed them (v. 16).
hojo

Minneapolis, MN

#423332 Feb 18, 2013
guest wrote:
The gates of hell will not prevail against the TRUTH.
Oh Yes------twist, pervert, and spin the "true interpretation" of the bible which is what, we, as Catholics, is about all that we can expect from you Protestants. You bible only "fundies" have become "experts" at manipulating the words of Jesus, as well as the "entire bible" to mean "only what you want it to mean"!!....... Matthew 16:18 Jesus said "the gates of hell shall not prevail against (HIS CHURCH). This my friend, is the ONLY TRUTH!---NOT----your 42,000+ contradicting, inconsistent and conflicting "relative truths"!!! You are not "fooling anyone" but yourself with this anti-catholic bible only (self-interpretation) hog-wash!!!!
Dan

Omaha, NE

#423333 Feb 18, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
And you've not proven your statement is correct.
http://lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVarticles/B...
You don't understand my point.

Scripture tells us that Christ established the Church to teach.

Thus, scripture cannot be the sole means to instruction of the faith. The Church teaches and scripture teaches. Both are authoritative.

If you contend that "scripture only" is authoritative, you are, in fact, going against scripture.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#423334 Feb 18, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
Should I dare go in this circle again and ask this person yet again to explain the significance of these two items? The definition of doing something over and over expecting a different result is insanity, right? Therefore I am not asking.
I will only inform that we do practice the Lord's Supper in a biblical way and we do baptize in the biblical way.
You knew what I meant, so why the whining?

Christ taught that we were to partake in His Body and Blood, and that baptism was necessary for salvation.

If you believe otherwise about these two, you believe in direct contradiction to the teachings of Christ.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#423335 Feb 18, 2013
Justice wrote:
<quoted text>
Are these critics of the RCC so charitable? Do they think Catholics are saved, or just their own particular group?
Well, look at the board.
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#423336 Feb 18, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, it's not in the "manual" you think He left you.
He quoted from the "manual" (v. 1) quite often. Knowing that he was updating the "manual" with the new covenant he was putting in place for man, it seems logical to logical people that He would inspire the writing of that new covenant to highlight for mankind the fulfilled prophesies and to chronicle His life, death, resurrection, church and any changes in implementation of worship etc. that His being our Savior would change from that Law of Moses he quoted so often.

I don't understand how the Catholics on this thread could attempt to tarnish the validity of the Bible in one statement, say that everything they do is scriptural in the next and then immediately say statements like it is unscriptural to be scriptural. Sounds eerily similar to Obama defending his policy and actions.
Free Mind

Melbourne, FL

#423337 Feb 18, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't understand my point.
Scripture tells us that Christ established the Church to teach.
Thus, scripture cannot be the sole means to instruction of the faith. The Church teaches and scripture teaches. Both are authoritative.
If you contend that "scripture only" is authoritative, you are, in fact, going against scripture.
We know the claim. It is a claim of faith, but there is so much real-world historical reality that contradicts it.

If Jesus established the RCC to teach "perfect morals" for the purpose of saving souls, why would Jesus not provide better guidance for this wonderful teacher?

Only about 5% of humanity today practices the "one-true" faith fully. Germany has lost almost 1/3 in the past 10 years alone -- and that was with a German Pope.

Jesus suffered and died for that? Who screwed up?

Or maybe your claim is absurd and the RCC is no better or worse on balance than most other Christian churches?
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#423338 Feb 18, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't understand my point.
Scripture tells us that Christ established the Church to teach.
Thus, scripture cannot be the sole means to instruction of the faith. The Church teaches and scripture teaches. Both are authoritative.
If you contend that "scripture only" is authoritative, you are, in fact, going against scripture.
I don't think you read the link.

I KNOW, once again, you provided NO scripture to justify your opinion.
Free Mind

Melbourne, FL

#423339 Feb 18, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
You knew what I meant, so why the whining?
Christ taught that we were to partake in His Body and Blood, and that baptism was necessary for salvation.
If you believe otherwise about these two, you believe in direct contradiction to the teachings of Christ.
According to who?

Where's the beef?

You claim "perfect teachings on faith and morals" yet you can't even tell us which teachings are "perfect" and which are not.

For good reason that you have never considered.
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#423340 Feb 18, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
You knew what I meant, so why the whining?
Christ taught that we were to partake in His Body and Blood, and that baptism was necessary for salvation.
If you believe otherwise about these two, you believe in direct contradiction to the teachings of Christ.
The way you've stated it, I don't believe otherwise about those two teachings. Didn't you tell me that was where the Catholic Church was so different and superior to the church of Christ?

Now, we do practice those God's way. Basing our actions on the scriptural instructions we were given. Ex: we don't serve the Lord's Supper on Saturday, we don't sprinkle of pour and we don't baptize infants because they don't know what's going on and they cannot perform necessary requirements for being saved - repentance or confession, like that of Peter's which was the ROCK upon which the foundation of the church would be laid.
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#423341 Feb 18, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't understand my point.
Scripture tells us that Christ established the Church to teach.
Thus, scripture cannot be the sole means to instruction of the faith. The Church teaches and scripture teaches. Both are authoritative.
If you contend that "scripture only" is authoritative, you are, in fact, going against scripture.
Why did Paul warn us in Galatians about anyone teaching anything they had not already taught?

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

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

#423342 Feb 18, 2013
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes!----- you've got it "exactly" right which is "precisely" what Jesus Christs One True Catholic Church--teaches, proclaims and believes (each and every day) at Daily Mass.
The fact is Confrinting, its about the "only thing" that you have "ever said" that has ANY crediblity!...being born again of water and of the Spirit.......... In John 3:3 Jesus said, "unless a person is born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven". The Catholic Church has adhere to and proclaim "these words of Jesus Christ for over 2000 years. You're not telling us "anything new" that has not been done since Our Lord formed, initiated and established His first Church in Antioch!!
~~~

You said
You're not telling us "anything new" that has not been done since Our Lord formed,

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
Rom 1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

i AM NOT ASHAMED OF THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST AS YOU CATHOLIC'S ARE..

I have no intentions to tell you any thing new...
I don't edit... change... delete from... or add to the... GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST

I DON'T ADD WORSHIP OF MARY...idolatry or attempt to alter the word of GOD to fit fables As you CONSTANTIN'S DO.

I HAVE NO DESIRE TO INSULT THE HEAVENLY FATHER IGNORING HIS WORD AND AND ATTEMPTING TO WRITE MY OWN AS YOU CATHOLICS HAVE DONE.

YOU WILL RECEIVE ETERNAL HELL TO PAY FOR YOU FOOLISHNESS.

Rom_3:4 .... yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED NUMEROUS TIMES...

But like a dumb brute beast you turn and rend those that attempt to give you the truth...and help you escape the wrath to come...

Jud 1:10 But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.
Free Mind

Melbourne, FL

#423343 Feb 18, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
The statement you (or FM) put into play was dependent upon the Catechism, since it was framed as Catholic teaching.
The Catechism IS Church teaching.
Again, this hissy fit from you lets me know that you are indeed "busted", since you're diverting.
Thanks.
Dan could never find the statement that FM supposedly "put into play" because somehow magically FM had it removed maybe.

LOL, I have been given credit for this many times here.

The inner defenses are unconscious. They consist of a kind of magic aura which the mind builds around cherished belief.

Dan uses specious rationalization.

Dan is able to read and twist my words in his own mind. I deny the words and rationally ask for Dan to show us where these words are supposedly written.

Arguments which penetrate into the magic aura are not dealt with rationally but by a specific type of pseudo-reasoning.

FM supposedly wrote something, which FM cannot challenge or re-state, because no one can find where these supposed words exist.

Thus Dan is able to avoid in his mind the central point.

RCC teachings at the time of Thomas Jefferson's death would have placed Mr. Jefferson among the ranks of -- how should I put it -- the un-saved :o)

Absurdities and contradictions are made acceptable by specious rationalization and avoidance.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#423344 Feb 18, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
He quoted from the "manual" (v. 1) quite often. Knowing that he was updating the "manual" with the new covenant he was putting in place for man, it seems logical to logical people that He would inspire the writing of that new covenant to highlight for mankind the fulfilled prophesies and to chronicle His life, death, resurrection, church and any changes in implementation of worship etc. that His being our Savior would change from that Law of Moses he quoted so often.
I don't understand how the Catholics on this thread could attempt to tarnish the validity of the Bible in one statement, say that everything they do is scriptural in the next and then immediately say statements like it is unscriptural to be scriptural. Sounds eerily similar to Obama defending his policy and actions.
Christ did not quote the Bible, I don't believe, as His life predicated NT scripture.

Also, although you persist in saying so to construct your argument, no Catholic denies the valildity of scripture.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#423345 Feb 18, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
The way you've stated it, I don't believe otherwise about those two teachings. Didn't you tell me that was where the Catholic Church was so different and superior to the church of Christ?
Now, we do practice those God's way. Basing our actions on the scriptural instructions we were given. Ex: we don't serve the Lord's Supper on Saturday, we don't sprinkle of pour and we don't baptize infants because they don't know what's going on and they cannot perform necessary requirements for being saved - repentance or confession, like that of Peter's which was the ROCK upon which the foundation of the church would be laid.
I didn't say superior. You asked which church had belief and practice akin to the Church described in scripture.

You partake in the body and blood of Christ at your services?

You just told me that you don't believe in salvific baptism. The church of scripture believed that baptsim was salvific, not that people had to agree to it for it to be salvific.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#423346 Feb 18, 2013
Free Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
Dan could never find the statement that FM supposedly "put into play" because somehow magically FM had it removed maybe.
LOL, I have been given credit for this many times here.
The inner defenses are unconscious. They consist of a kind of magic aura which the mind builds around cherished belief.
Dan uses specious rationalization.
Dan is able to read and twist my words in his own mind. I deny the words and rationally ask for Dan to show us where these words are supposedly written.
Arguments which penetrate into the magic aura are not dealt with rationally but by a specific type of pseudo-reasoning.
FM supposedly wrote something, which FM cannot challenge or re-state, because no one can find where these supposed words exist.
Thus Dan is able to avoid in his mind the central point.
RCC teachings at the time of Thomas Jefferson's death would have placed Mr. Jefferson among the ranks of -- how should I put it -- the un-saved :o)
Absurdities and contradictions are made acceptable by specious rationalization and avoidance.
That FM has to supply such a windy backpedal is indicative that FM cannot inform his prior claim.

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
النبى ي... 3 min maher86 1
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 4 min nanoanomaly 104,740
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 5 min Catcher1 981,317
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 16 min FireyFellow44 445,815
............"I never HAD any toys"....... 47 min Doctor REALITY 2
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 1 hr Holy child Jehova... 46,176
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr Holy child Jehova... 619,350
More from around the web