Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 665121 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.

Clay

Garden City, MI

#431525 Apr 6, 2013
Pad wrote:
<quoted text>I have been for the last 2 years EWTN's Journey Home.It is all the same Clay. Evangelicals who find JESUS in their particular persuasion,than they are discontent with the idea that Authority should remain illusive,and there must be one church that has that Authority.
Some evangelicals or Anglicans find the worship wanting in their former persuasions,and want a Liturgy.The Anglicans are rightfully concerned about the Episcopal apostasy which is happening daily.Moral decline can be found throughout the Christian world.But really Clay just because the RCC stands against immorality,and most Christians do,should we all leave our churches to join with a church that has emerging Liberal theology,and is facing immoral scandals with the most precious of their offspring?
I marvel at how all of those converts have to go through the conflict of the use of statues,praying to saints,and the ultraveneration of Mary. ALSO the converts fail to elaborate on the most greatest hurdle ((Infant baptism)).
The Word is more than clear concerning conversion,baptism and regeneration,RC Baptism of infants and the theology or dogma that is attached to it is non-Biblical.The Believer's Baptism is not only Biblical,it was practiced in the first century AD,infant baptism was not even mentioned till the 2nd century. If baptism of a believer was both biblical and practiced even to the death in the first century,than it should be the NORM for all of Christianity.
Of course you are more than welcome to believe what you want,but,to expect that we should forsake our basic Christian living anpractices for a church that is in moral upheaval is questionalbe.Not only that all of those converts to your Church to me Clay are no testimony to the greatness of your church in contrast to what the rest of Christianity is before GOD.
You think infant Baptism is the greatest hurdle? To me, it couldn't be any clearer what the Apostles taught, based on the writings of the early Church fathers. And Pad, most Protestant sects practice infant Baptism. Your teaching on it is quite new. In fact, no where in the Bible can you find where infants were not Baptized. Grant it, it doesn't say they were either.
Now, thank you for stating that we do not worship statues. However, please don't say creating a statue for use if worship is forbidden either. God didn't say that. In fact, God commanded the Jews to create graven images of Angels. Hello??

In order for God to get jealous of statues we would have to think of them as a diety or something equivalent of a god. Creating something to honor a great witness to the faith- a saint- couldn't make God jealous. That's ridiculous..

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#431526 Apr 6, 2013
468 429
7th Day Catholics Rock wrote:
<quoted text>
John 1
King James Version (KJV)
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
That does not disprove the belief in flying pigs!!!!

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#431527 Apr 6, 2013
470
MICHAEL wrote:
<quoted text>
Most follow the teachings of christianity/Islam/Judiasm/Hin dus because mom and dad said so, or because of the geographical location in the world one resides, and determines what God one prays to.
Religions are just opinions, thats why they are just called beliefs.
There is no religion that has the smoking gun of truth. If one did, we would all belong to that religion.
Is there a God for everyone? I don't know, but if I discover one I will be the first to tell you.
What does that have to do with:

348 266 257 580 575
Christians follow the teaching of Christ.....that's why we are called Christians..
socci

Osceola, MO

#431528 Apr 6, 2013
Religion - A Delusion wrote:
That's just plain silly. Yes you can, if it were that important.
There is ten thousand times more verifiable information about me than there is about any god.
In fact, I can answer you here and there are witnesses to this fact.
How is posting about verifiable reality and truth somehow negative?
There have been many gods throughout history, and zero proof of any. It's a delusion.

Jesus is a historic fact. There is no proof for any other gods. There is no proof for your caveman either.

Try harder.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#431529 Apr 6, 2013
Catholic catechism: CHRIST IS NOT GOD THE FATHER

254 The divine persons are really distinct from one another. "God is one but not solitary."86 "Father", "Son", "Holy Spirit" are not simply names designating modalities of the divine being, for they are really distinct from one another:

"He is not the Father who is the Son, nor is the Son he who is the Father, nor is the Holy Spirit he who is the Father or the Son."87

They are distinct from one another in their relations of origin: "It is the Father who generates, the Son who is begotten, and the Holy Spirit who proceeds."88 The divine Unity is Triune.
socci

Osceola, MO

#431530 Apr 6, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
Catholic catechism: CHRIST IS NOT GOD THE FATHER
254 The divine persons are really distinct from one another. "God is one but not solitary."86 "Father", "Son", "Holy Spirit" are not simply names designating modalities of the divine being, for they are really distinct from one another:
"He is not the Father who is the Son, nor is the Son he who is the Father, nor is the Holy Spirit he who is the Father or the Son."87
They are distinct from one another in their relations of origin: "It is the Father who generates, the Son who is begotten, and the Holy Spirit who proceeds."88 The divine Unity is Triune.

Then, the pope claims to be 'vicar of christ' the second person of their trinity.

The Godhead is true. The Catholic's Trinity is not.

http://youtu.be/Dk8M6YwTVVA
Clay

Garden City, MI

#431531 Apr 6, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
470
<quoted text>
What does that have to do with:
348 266 257 580 575
Christians follow the teaching of Christ.....that's why we are called Christians..
Someone who denies the divinity of Jesus Christ is not a Christian. You deny Christ and God are one.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#431532 Apr 6, 2013
531
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Someone who denies the divinity of Jesus Christ is not a Christian. You deny Christ and God are one.
I deny Christ is God the Father because He is not God the Fther.....

On this one, the Catholics got it right...

Catholic catechism:

254 The divine persons are really distinct from one another. "God is one but not solitary."86 "Father", "Son", "Holy Spirit" are not simply names designating modalities of the divine being, for they are really distinct from one another:

"He is not the Father who is the Son, nor is the Son he who is the Father, nor is the Holy Spirit he who is the Father or the Son."87 They are distinct from one another in their relations of origin: "It is the Father who generates, the Son who is begotten, and the Holy Spirit who proceeds."88 The divine Unity is Triune.

Which says:
While Christ was on earth, the Holy Trinity was:
The Father, the Incarnate Son, the Holy Spirit.....

That is based on Scripture.....

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#431533 Apr 6, 2013
531 479
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Someone who denies the divinity of Jesus Christ is not a Christian. You deny Christ and God are one.
I don't because He ain't...per Scripture:

Jesus was not..is not God the Father

Even as true worshipers of God recognize that the will or desire of God is superior to their own will or desire, Jesus acknowledged God's will was superior to his own. In acknowledging this, Jesus indicates that he was inferior to God. Thus, at the time just before his death, the Bible says, at Luke 22:41 & 42:

"And he was withdrawn from them about a stone's cast, and kneeled down, and prayed, saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless, not my will, but thine, be done."

At the time of Jesus' resurrection from the dead, Jesus spoke to Mary Magdalene, as described in the Book of John, at chapter 20 and verse 17, which reads:

"Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God."

Inasmuch as Mary was not ascending, but Jesus was, this passage is telling us that Jesus was going to ascend to heaven, where his father already was - the one he describes here as his God.

How can anyone, with an ounce of brain, read that, and say, "Jesus is God" is beyond me.
MountainHomeCath olic

Mountain Home, AR

#431534 Apr 6, 2013
I do believe the pope is right, however, our local church has been hijacked by a group who isolate themselves from our church, community, and fellow catholics. They seem to want the church community to bow to their needs instead of serving the Mountain Home Catholic community. Is this happening anywhere else?
hojo

Minneapolis, MN

#431535 Apr 6, 2013
jethro8 wrote:
<quoted text>if you were so sure of yourself,you'd answer my questions i keep asking,yet you do everything to duck,dodge and hide from them. give it a try instead of hiding from the truth.
I have told you before and I will say it again!! It is a "total waste of my time" to debate, discus or deliberate ANYTHING with "bible only" anti-catholic heretics, LIKE YOU, who "distort, manipulate, and "make up" your own Protestant CHURCH HISTORY and twisting the TRUE INTERPRETATION of the bible. You "fundies" have become (experts) at "personal opinionizing" EVERYTHING as well as EDITORIALIZING the meaning of Sacred Scripture---and have done so since the Protestant Reformation..... My time is better spent at Daily Mass, receiving Jesus Christs TRUE BODY AND TRUE BLOOD in the Eucharist, hearing, following and adhering to the TRUTH of the Gospel, and the other daily readings, the Sacraments and Daily Adoration and prayer before the Blessed Sacrament...... The fact is that there is NOTHING TO DISCUSS and NOT TO DEBATE..... We as Catholics ALREADY KNOW THE TRUTH! You "fundies" continue to "run around in circles" with your other 42,000 "relative truth" editorialist Christians. Again--Go read the Catholic Catechism and the Encyclicals which re-affirms the TRUTH of over 2000 years of TRUE BIBLICAL AND HISTORICAL WRITINGS that the Catholic Church believes and teaches!--You will also discover that "the vast majority of both Catholic and Protestant Apologistic authors and writers confirm, re-affirm, ratifies and validates EVERY DOCTRINE of TRUTH that authenticates that the One True Catholic Church --is, has and will always be the Church that Jesus HIMSELF established and initiated.
hojo

Minneapolis, MN

#431536 Apr 6, 2013
jethro8 wrote:
<quoted text>1 billion christian/pagans. why can't you realize it? the pope dresses in a pagan outfit, your pagan/christian church use all pagan dates for church holidays,how much more proof do you need?
Send your "fictitious" anti-catholic (editorial) comments to your local newspaper....... Liberal News media :hacks) are "always looking" for (National Inquirer) imaginative, invented and "made up" news!!!

Since: Nov 08

usa

#431537 Apr 6, 2013
21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired:

The Roman Catholic Church did not officially canonize the Apocrypha until the Council of Trent (1546 AD). This was in part because the Apocrypha contained material which supported certain Catholic doctrines, such as purgatory, praying for the dead, and the treasury of merit.
Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.
Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.
These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.
They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church.
They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves; as when, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in as many different places.
The Apocrypha inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.
And the day following Judas came with his company, to take away the bodies of them that were slain, and to bury them with their kinsmen, in the sepulchers of their fathers. And they found under the coats of the slain some of the donaries of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbiddeth to the Jews: so that all plainly saw, that for this cause they were slain. Then they all blessed the just judgment of the Lord, who had discovered the things that were hidden. And so betaking themselves to prayers, they besought him, that the sin which had been committed might be forgotten. But the most valiant Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves from sin, forasmuch as they saw before their eyes what had happened, because of the sins of those that were slain. And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachmas of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection,(For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,) And because he considered that they who had fallen asleep with godliness, had great grace laid up for them. It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.(2 Maccabees 12:39-46)
The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God's authorship.
Ecclesiasticus 25:19 Any iniquity is insignificant compared to a wife's iniquity.
Ecclesiasticus 25:24 From a woman sin had its beginning. Because of her we all die.
Ecclesiasticus 22:3 It is a disgrace to be the father of an undisciplined, and the birth of a daughter is a loss.
It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation.
The apocryphal books themselves make reference to what we call the Silent 400 years, where there was no prophets of God to write inspired materials.
And they laid up the stones in the mountain of the temple in a convenient place, till there should come a prophet, and give answer concerning them.(1 Maccabees 4:46)
And there was a great tribulation in Israel, such as was not since the day, that there was no prophet seen in Israel.(1 Maccabees 9:27)
And that the Jews, and their priests, had consented that he should be their prince, and high priest for ever, till there should arise a faithful prophet.(1 Maccabees 14:41)
Josephus rejected the apocryphal books as inspired and this reflected Jewish thought at the time of Jesus

Since: Nov 08

usa

#431538 Apr 6, 2013
"From Artexerxes to our own time the complete history has been written but has not been deemed worthy of equal credit with the earlier records because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets." ... "We have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another, but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine..."(Flavius Josephus, Against Apion 1:8)
The Manual of Discipline in the Dead Sea Scrolls rejected the apocrypha as inspired.
The Council of Jamnia held the same view rejected the apocrypha as inspired.
They debated the canonicity of a few books (e.g., Ecclesiastes), but they changed nothing and never proclaimed themselves to be authoritative determiners of the Old Testament canon. "The books which they decided to acknowledge as canonical were already generally accepted, although questions had been raised about them. Those which they refused to admit had never been included. They did not expel from the canon any book which had previously been admitted.'The Council of Jamnia was the confirming of public opinion, not the forming of it.'" (F. F. Bruce, The Books and Parchments [Old Tappan, NJ.: Fleming H. Revell, 1963], p. 98])
Although it was occasionally quoted in early church writings, it was nowhere accepted in a canon. Melito (AD 170) and Origen rejected the Apocrypha,(Eccl. Hist. VI. 25, Eusebius) as does the Muratorian Canon.
Jerome vigorously resisted including the Apocrypha in his Latin Vulgate Version (400 AD), but was overruled. As a result, the standard Roman Catholic Bible throughout the medieval period contained it. Thus, it gradually came to be revered by the average clergyman. Still, many medieval Catholic scholars realized that it was not inspired.
The terms "protocanonical" and "deuterocanonical" are used by Catholics to signify respectively those books of Scripture that were received by the entire Church from the beginning as inspired, and those whose inspiration came to be recognized later, after the matter had been disputed by certain Fathers and local churches.
Pope Damasus (366-384) authorized Jerome to translate the Latin Vulgate. The Council of Carthage declared this translation as "the infallible and authentic Bible." Jerome was the first to describe the extra 7 Old Testament books as the "Apocrypha" (doubtful authenticity). Needless to say, Jerome's Latin Vulgate did not include the Apocrypha.
Cyril (born about A.D. 315)- "Read the divine Scriptures - namely, the 22 books of the Old Testament which the 72 interpreters translated" (the Septuagint)
The apocrypha wasn't included at first in the Septuagint, but was appended by the Alexandrian Jews, and was not listed in any of the catalogues of the inspired books till the 4th century
Hilary (bishop of Poictiers, 350 A.D.) rejected the apocrypha (Prologue to the Psalms, Sec. 15)
Epiphanius (the great opposer of heresy, 360 A.D.) rejected them all. Referring to Wisdom of Solomon & book of Jesus Sirach, he said "These indeed are useful books & profitable, but they are not placed in the number of the canonical."

Since: Nov 08

usa

#431539 Apr 6, 2013
posted wrong this should of been first...21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired:

The Roman Catholic Church did not officially canonize the Apocrypha until the Council of Trent (1546 AD). This was in part because the Apocrypha contained material which supported certain Catholic doctrines, such as purgatory, praying for the dead, and the treasury of merit.
Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.
Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.
These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.
They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church.
They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves; as when, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in as many different places.
The Apocrypha inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.
And the day following Judas came with his company, to take away the bodies of them that were slain, and to bury them with their kinsmen, in the sepulchers of their fathers. And they found under the coats of the slain some of the donaries of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbiddeth to the Jews: so that all plainly saw, that for this cause they were slain. Then they all blessed the just judgment of the Lord, who had discovered the things that were hidden. And so betaking themselves to prayers, they besought him, that the sin which had been committed might be forgotten. But the most valiant Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves from sin, forasmuch as they saw before their eyes what had happened, because of the sins of those that were slain. And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachmas of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection,(For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,) And because he considered that they who had fallen asleep with godliness, had great grace laid up for them. It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.(2 Maccabees 12:39-46)
The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God's authorship.
Ecclesiasticus 25:19 Any iniquity is insignificant compared to a wife's iniquity.
Ecclesiasticus 25:24 From a woman sin had its beginning. Because of her we all die.
Ecclesiasticus 22:3 It is a disgrace to be the father of an undisciplined, and the birth of a daughter is a loss.
It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation.
The apocryphal books themselves make reference to what we call the Silent 400 years, where there was no prophets of God to write inspired materials.
And they laid up the stones in the mountain of the temple in a convenient place, till there should come a prophet, and give answer concerning them.(1 Maccabees 4:46)
And there was a great tribulation in Israel, such as was not since the day, that there was no prophet seen in Israel.(1 Maccabees 9:27)
And that the Jews, and their priests, had consented that he should be their prince, and high priest for ever, till there should arise a faithful prophet.(1 Maccabees 14:41)
Josephus rejected the apocryphal books as inspired and this reflected Jewish thought at the time of Jesus

Since: Nov 08

usa

#431540 Apr 6, 2013
oops double post sorry

Since: Nov 08

usa

#431541 Apr 6, 2013
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
I have told you before and I will say it again!! It is a "total waste of my time" to debate, discus or deliberate ANYTHING with "bible only" anti-catholic heretics, LIKE YOU, who "distort, manipulate, and "make up" your own Protestant CHURCH HISTORY and twisting the TRUE INTERPRETATION of the bible. You "fundies" have become (experts) at "personal opinionizing" EVERYTHING as well as EDITORIALIZING the meaning of Sacred Scripture---and have done so since the Protestant Reformation..... My time is better spent at Daily Mass, receiving Jesus Christs TRUE BODY AND TRUE BLOOD in the Eucharist, hearing, following and adhering to the TRUTH of the Gospel, and the other daily readings, the Sacraments and Daily Adoration and prayer before the Blessed Sacrament...... The fact is that there is NOTHING TO DISCUSS and NOT TO DEBATE..... We as Catholics ALREADY KNOW THE TRUTH! You "fundies" continue to "run around in circles" with your other 42,000 "relative truth" editorialist Christians. Again--Go read the Catholic Catechism and the Encyclicals which re-affirms the TRUTH of over 2000 years of TRUE BIBLICAL AND HISTORICAL WRITINGS that the Catholic Church believes and teaches!--You will also discover that "the vast majority of both Catholic and Protestant Apologistic authors and writers confirm, re-affirm, ratifies and validates EVERY DOCTRINE of TRUTH that authenticates that the One True Catholic Church --is, has and will always be the Church that Jesus HIMSELF established and initiated.
you can not debate me, because you have nothing to debate with,you can not prove anything about your church is true.
Garlic man

Troy, OH

#431542 Apr 6, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
<quoted text>
~~~~
Garlic is good for you physical health
but it STINKS AN ISOLATES THOSE THAT EAT IT...
It has a tendency to divide/separate those that indulge.
you must be a terribly lonely person...
the Bible speaks of fellowship.
1Jn_1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

Confi,
Your assumptions are wrong, just like your assumptions regarding the catholic Church.

What does walking in the light of Christ have to do with eating garlic? Yes, the blood of Christ cleans us from sin, but garlic cleans the mind from confusion and crazy assumptions such as yours. Looks like you are not only in need of the forgiveness of Christ but also of a good dose of garlic!
Garlic man

Troy, OH

#431543 Apr 6, 2013
JUST-A-CHRISTIAN wrote:
<quoted text>
You too, 7th!!:)
You could also use some garlic ...
LOL!

Since: Nov 08

usa

#431544 Apr 6, 2013
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
Send your "fictitious" anti-catholic (editorial) comments to your local newspaper....... Liberal News media :hacks) are "always looking" for (National Inquirer) imaginative, invented and "made up" news!!!
There isn't a single line of Scripture that says God handed power over to a "church" or any human to be able to change His Word. So what does God have to say about His own Word? Man must not live according to the Word of the pope, but according to the word of who?... Matthew 4:4 ...'But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.'... There we have Jesus' own Words, confirming that we live by the Word of God alone.

Hebrews 4:12 ...'For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.'

1 Peter 1:25 ...'But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.'

The Word of God lasts forever, and it is by that Word alone that we are to live.

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
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 2 min Gabriel 977,192
News Sean Hannity offers to fly Obama to Kenya - and... 9 min Caesar 3
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 25 min RADEKT 284,468
Christians cannot debate with ATHEISTS 52 min Liamm 445
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 55 min Bongo 87,868
The Future of Politics in America 1 hr Nohweh 174
Secular Humanism VS Christianity 1 hr Nohweh 15
More from around the web