Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 596104 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.

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

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

#432320 Apr 13, 2013
jethro8 wrote:
All Scripture is inspired of God and is useful for teaching for reproof, correction, and training in holiness so that the man of God may be fully competent and equipped for every good work " (II Tim. 3: 16 17). "In reply he said to them:'Why do you for your part act contrary to the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition!'...This means that for the sake of your tradition you have nullified God's Word" (Mt. 15:3, 6).
The Catholic Church teaches that Tradition is a safer and clearer guide in religious matters than the Scriptures. It teaches that "Tradition is the way Christ's Church understands and lives his teachings" (Christ Among Us, p. 167). Therefore since the "Bible cannot be understood alone" it is necessary to refer to the Traditions of the Church in order to properly understand God's will. IF this is true, WHY did the Bereans in Acts 17 11 after hearing two "official spokesman" for the church STUDY THE SCRIPTURES to see if what Paul and Silas had taught were true? Remember we will be judged by God's Word and not the traditions of men (Jn. 12:48).

Anthony:
You got this blurb from an anti-Catholic protestant website. This is not what the Catholic Church teaches on the relationship between Scripture and Tradition. If you prefer to believe lies, that's on you. If you prefer to know what we really teach, just ask.

**********

Anthony, What jethro wrote is what I've been reading on this forum...BY Catholics.

KayMarie

Since: Nov 08

usa

#432321 Apr 13, 2013
Religion - A Delusion wrote:
<quoted text>
They cannot answer directly because it is a convoluted 1500 year old delusion.
Consider the priorities -- a church that claims infallible teachings condoned the burning of heretics and witches, but no one knows what these infallible teachings are?
In any other field except religion (delusion), this would be considered laughable.
religion or not it is laughable.

Since: Nov 08

usa

#432322 Apr 13, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
So all of the men who came before Constantine and who claimed membership in the Catholic Church were just making it up?
How do you account for the fact that there is evidence of the Catholic Church for over 200 years before Constantine came onto the scene?
Catholic Church for over 200 years before Constantine came onto the scene? jethro: prove it,can't use a catholic website
Anthony MN

Saint Paul, MN

#432323 Apr 13, 2013
jethro8 wrote:
Pope Francis named eight cardinals from around the globe Saturday to advise him on running the Catholic Church and reforming the Vatican bureaucracy, marking his first month as pope with a major initiative to reflect the universal nature of the church in key governing decisions.JETRHO:the pope hires 8 cardinals on how to run the Church?? i thought the pope was divinely inspired on decision making? he needs to hire men to help him run the church?? the vicar of christ listens to ordinary men on how to run (lmao)the so called true church.where is god? he on vacation?
The pope didn't "hire" anyone. The pope isn't divinely inspired when making "decisions" on governing. You should spend some time learning what the Church actually says and teaches, not reading anti-Catholic opinions.
Religion - A Delusion

Titusville, FL

#432324 Apr 13, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
So all of the men who came before Constantine and who claimed membership in the Catholic Church were just making it up?
How do you account for the fact that there is evidence of the Catholic Church for over 200 years before Constantine came onto the scene?
Think...

If there was only one big happy church, why did Constantine command them to meet in order to agree on the most basic principles?

About 60 years later, they had to meet again, because they forgot to add poor Mary to the first Creed.

Don't they have history books where Catholics come from?
Anthony MN

Saint Paul, MN

#432325 Apr 13, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
jethro8 wrote:
All Scripture is inspired of God and is useful for teaching for reproof, correction, and training in holiness so that the man of God may be fully competent and equipped for every good work " (II Tim. 3: 16 17). "In reply he said to them:'Why do you for your part act contrary to the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition!'...This means that for the sake of your tradition you have nullified God's Word" (Mt. 15:3, 6).
The Catholic Church teaches that Tradition is a safer and clearer guide in religious matters than the Scriptures. It teaches that "Tradition is the way Christ's Church understands and lives his teachings" (Christ Among Us, p. 167). Therefore since the "Bible cannot be understood alone" it is necessary to refer to the Traditions of the Church in order to properly understand God's will. IF this is true, WHY did the Bereans in Acts 17 11 after hearing two "official spokesman" for the church STUDY THE SCRIPTURES to see if what Paul and Silas had taught were true? Remember we will be judged by God's Word and not the traditions of men (Jn. 12:48).
Anthony:
You got this blurb from an anti-Catholic protestant website. This is not what the Catholic Church teaches on the relationship between Scripture and Tradition. If you prefer to believe lies, that's on you. If you prefer to know what we really teach, just ask.
**********
Anthony, What jethro wrote is what I've been reading on this forum...BY Catholics.
KayMarie
The Church does not say or teach "... that Tradition is a safer and clearer guide in religious matters than the Scriptures." And no Catholic has ever said that on this forum.

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

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

#432326 Apr 13, 2013
who="Anthony MN"
The pope didn't "hire" anyone. The pope isn't divinely inspired when making "decisions" on governing. You should spend some time learning what the Church actually says and teaches, not reading anti-Catholic opinions.

**********

A Vicar of Christ (His true successor on earth) would be 'inspired'.

KayMarie

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

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

#432327 Apr 13, 2013
who="Anthony MN"
The Church does not say or teach "... that Tradition is a safer and clearer guide in religious matters than the Scriptures." And no Catholic has ever said that on this forum.

**********

You continually tell us that we (sola scripture) folks are not safe without your Tradition...

KM
Religion - A Delusion

Titusville, FL

#432328 Apr 13, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
The pope didn't "hire" anyone. The pope isn't divinely inspired when making "decisions" on governing. You should spend some time learning what the Church actually says and teaches, not reading anti-Catholic opinions.
No one knows when the Pope is divinely inspired.

No? Then show us a list of these divinely inspire perfect teachings.

Don't worry, not even the Pope can give us such a list, because it's all a delusion. If it were real, the divine teachings would be numbered and categorized for all time.

But alas, not so divine after all, hence forgotten.
hojo

Minneapolis, MN

#432329 Apr 13, 2013
Apostolic Succession
The logic of the philosophy of the Protestant Faith is that all Church authority and teaching ended with the death of the Apostles. If you understand that Christ created a visible living Church for all time, the obvious is to acknowledge the succession to the Apostles to the current day. The Bishops of the Catholic Church can trace their ordination from today back to Peter, upon which Christ founded his Church. The following scripture passages point to clear evidence of Apostolic succession and the need for the Church as founded by Jesus to continue. "Brothers, select from among you seven reputable men, filled with the Spirit and wisdom, whom we shall appoint to this task, whereas we shall devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.
The community chose Stephen, a man filled with faith and the holy Spirit, also Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicholas of Antioch, a convert to Judaism. They presented these men to the apostles who prayed and laid hands on them." Acts 6:3-6
This scripture passage is an example of the expansion of the Church. It represents the ordination and continuation of the Faith. Much like today, hands are "laid upon" those being ordained. Many protestant religions have what is called "ordained" ministers. The question is ordained by whom. Since the Protestant Reformation was started by man, its authority is granted by man. The authority given by God to the Church is of God and cannot be claimed by just any man. You cannot storm the gates of heaven, you must be called. Christ created one Church, one authority. Just because someone professes to be called by God does not make it the case. God would not divide his kingdom. God would not divide his Church. "So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the capstone." Ephesians 2:19-20
The household of God is built upon the Apostles and Prophets. The successors of the Apostles are the Bishops (Acts 2)of the Catholic Church, not subsequent generations of the followers of Luther, Calvin, or Henry VIII. Many times we are who we are because we were brought up that way. For example, many Protestants are thus because their parents were. At some point we must all accept responsibility and answer for who we choose to follow. Do we follow the Church founded by Jesus or do we follow a "bible only "church" created by man? The position of Bishop of the Church is an office. It is not a one time position that dies with that person. It is an office that will continued to be filled when vacant. Christ created a "visible" living Church that will continue to the end of the age. He did not create a Church based on "words alone", but a breathing, living authoritative Church that will always be there for us. This is further illustrated in the following scripture passage.
In the early Church, there were only 12 Apostles. This was very symbolic in the twelve tribes of Israel. As an "office" became vacant, another was chosen to take his place. Another interesting point in this passage was the acknowledgement that Judas turned away. If a man, chosen by Jesus, would turn away is there any reason not to understand that others would turn away, like Luther, Calvin, Henry VIII, etc? But the primary point of this passage is that the church is to continue in an Apostolic ministry.
"They appointed presbyters for them in each church and, with prayer and fasting, commended them to the Lord in whom they had put their faith." Acts 14:23
All great heretics, like Judas, were once members of the Catholic Church. Even though the term "Catholic Church" was not used in the time of Jesus, all members were of the same faith community. The point to understand is that the Church appoints presbyters (priests) to meet the needs of the Church as they continue to do today. Any who turn away lose their authority.
Anthony MN

United States

#432330 Apr 13, 2013
jethro8 wrote:
<quoted text>Stand firm and hold fast to the Traditions you were taught, whether by an ORAL STATEMENT or by a letter from us.jethro: ok lets hear an oral statement? anything that proves the c.c. is true church?
St. Paul never says everything he taught was recorded in his letters. That's why he says both letter AND oral.

Besides the examples hojo gave, here's something written by Origen (50 years BEFORE Constantine BTW):

"For this reason, moreover, the Church received from the apostles the tradition of baptizing infants too." Origen, Homily on Romans, V:9 (A.D. 244).
hojo

Minneapolis, MN

#432331 Apr 13, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
who="Anthony MN"
The Church does not say or teach "... that Tradition is a safer and clearer guide in religious matters than the Scriptures." And no Catholic has ever said that on this forum.
**********
You continually tell us that we (sola scripture) folks are not safe without your Tradition...
KM
No KM! The fact is that "you are not safe" with YOUR OWN PERSONAL self-appointed interpretation" of the bible..... Look at the results since the Reformation!
Over 42,000 Protestant (hodge-podge of "denominations that are separated, conflicting and contradicting to each other. There (can be) and is only ONE TRUTH--not 42,000 's, RELATIVE TRUTHS---(what each person thinks) where (each belief) is based on (separate)"editorialized interpretations of Bible.(Many or most support abortion, gay marriage, euthenasia, homosexual ministers embroyonic stem cell research, woman ministers, and God only knows "whats next" depending on which way the political wind happens to blow!!!
hojo

Minneapolis, MN

#432332 Apr 13, 2013
jethro8 wrote:
<quoted text>Catholic Church for over 200 years before Constantine came onto the scene? jethro: prove it,can't use a catholic website
Sure jethro8! Just like YOU YOURSELF "can't prove ANYTHING" without the use of your ant-catholic (heretical) websites1!!
Anthony MN

Saint Paul, MN

#432333 Apr 13, 2013
jethro8 wrote:
<quoted text>Catholic Church for over 200 years before Constantine came onto the scene? jethro: prove it,can't use a catholic website
Um Jethro, we say the Church was called Catholic 200 years BEFORE Constantine. We say that because the writings of men who claimed to be Catholic exist and are available to anyone who wishes to read them. If you're asking for evidence from the time period from non-Catholic so-called "christians", I'm not aware of any such. There was only one Church, and it was the Catholic Church.

Here's some of the evidence from those who called themselves Catholic (note the time period. All well BEFORE Constantine):

"See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church." Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrneans, 8:2 (c. A.D. 110).

"[A]ll the people wondered that there should be such a difference between the unbelievers and the elect, of whom this most admirable Polycarp was one, having in our own times been an apostolic and prophetic teacher, and bishop of the Catholic Church which is in Smyrna. For every word that went out of his mouth either has been or shall yet be accomplished." Martyrdom of Polycarp, 16:2 (A.D. 155).

“…to be in honour however with the Catholic Church for the ordering of ecclesiastical discipline...one to the Laodicenes, another to the Alexandrians, both forged in Paul's name to suit the heresy of Marcion, and several others, which cannot be received into the Catholic Church; for it is not fitting that gall be mixed with honey. The Epistle of Jude no doubt, and the couple bearing the name of John, are accepted by the Catholic Church...But of Arsinous, called also Valentinus, or of Militiades we receive nothing at all.” The fragment of Muratori (A.D. 177).

"[N]or does it consist in this, that he should again falsely imagine, as being above this [fancied being], a Pleroma at one time supposed to contain thirty, and at another time an innumerable tribe of Aeons, as these teachers who are destitute of truly divine wisdom maintain; while the Catholic Church possesses one and the same faith throughout the whole world, as we have already said." Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 1:10,3 (A.D. 180).
“For it is evident that those men lived not so long ago,--in the reign of Antoninus for the most part,--and that they at first were believers in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the church of Rome under the episcopate of the blessed Eleutherus, until on account of their ever restless curiosity, with which they even infected the brethren, they were more than once expelled.” Tertullian, On the Prescription Against Heretics, 22,30 (A.D. 200).

”Whence you ought to know that the bishop is in the Church, and the Church in the bishop; and if any one be not with the bishop, that he is not in the Church, and that those flatter themselves in vain who creep in, not having peace with God's priests, and think that they communicate secretly with some; while the Church, which is Catholic and one, is not cut nor divided, but is indeed connected and bound together by the cement of priests who cohere with one another.” Cyprian, To Florentius, Epistle 66/67 (A.D. 254).
hojo

Minneapolis, MN

#432334 Apr 13, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
jethro8 wrote:
HOJO:I asked you a question about a hundred Provide a single example of where inspired apostolic "oral revelation" (tradition) differed from "written" (scripture)?
HOJO:
I'll give you more than one!
The Trinity, the Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed, the Sign of the Cross, the Seven Sacraments, etc. just to name a few!!
**********
The key word of jethro's question was 'differed'. Assuming also that the examples are 'inspired'.
The Bible teaches the Trinity. The Nicene Creed does not conflict with the Bible.
While baptism, healing, and marriage are all Biblical, they are MORE than childish rituals. The sign of the cross is a ritual. What do your right and left shoulders have to do with the Holy Spirit?
Salvation is by faith. "He that BELIEVETH on Me shall be saved." NOT 'he that makes the accepted rituals of men'.
KayMarie
NONE of the traditions that I listed conflict with the
bible if you "accurately study and interpret" Sacred Scripture, truthfully, prayfully and correctly the way it was "originally intended" to be interpreted!--which seems to be the "major obstacle and problem with bible only Protestants!!
Anthony MN

Saint Paul, MN

#432335 Apr 13, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
who="Anthony MN"
The pope didn't "hire" anyone. The pope isn't divinely inspired when making "decisions" on governing. You should spend some time learning what the Church actually says and teaches, not reading anti-Catholic opinions.
**********
A Vicar of Christ (His true successor on earth) would be 'inspired'.
KayMarie
The pope is not the successor of Christ on earth.

Where do you get this crazy stuff?

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

#432336 Apr 13, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
There was only one Church, and it was the Catholic Church.
I'm sure that if Jesus and his Jewish father had actually lived, they would find your insolent attitude that a Jewish Rabbi would favor Catholics and disown his own Jews ... as despicable.

That would be comparable to claiming that the pope left Catholicism to join up with the Protestants.

Those who started the Catholic religion were ex-Jews who simply wanted to branch off of Judaism, and so they used the word Jesus to create the image of a savior, and claim that Jesus thereafter in "spirit" went to work in Catholic confessionals.

Ludicrous lies indeed.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>

From the book,“History of Christianity,” by Clyde L. Manschreck … comes the following ……..

Christianity had its birth in Judaism. For a hundred years those within and without Christianity considered it a sect of Judaism, so close were the ties.


Anthony MN

Saint Paul, MN

#432337 Apr 13, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
who="Anthony MN"
The Church does not say or teach "... that Tradition is a safer and clearer guide in religious matters than the Scriptures." And no Catholic has ever said that on this forum.
**********
You continually tell us that we (sola scripture) folks are not safe without your Tradition...
KM
Before you condemn Sacred Tradition, you should probably understand what it is. It's not the same as tradition (small "t"). Let me give you an example;

You and I both look at the bible passages regarding baptism and come to different conclusions as to the meaning and necessity of baptism. You say John 3 doesn't mean that baptism is necessary, I say it does. Sacred Tradition tells us that the apostles taught their disciples that is IS necessary and they passed this teaching on down to the present day.

So yes, if your tradition says that baptism isn't necessary for salvation, I would say your tradition is not "safe".
Anthony MN

Saint Paul, MN

#432338 Apr 13, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sure that if Jesus and his Jewish father had actually lived, they would find your insolent attitude that a Jewish Rabbi would favor Catholics and disown his own Jews ... as despicable.
That would be comparable to claiming that the pope left Catholicism to join up with the Protestants.
Those who started the Catholic religion were ex-Jews who simply wanted to branch off of Judaism, and so they used the word Jesus to create the image of a savior, and claim that Jesus thereafter in "spirit" went to work in Catholic confessionals.
Ludicrous lies indeed.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>
From the book,“History of Christianity,” by Clyde L. Manschreck … comes the following ……..
Christianity had its birth in Judaism. For a hundred years those within and without Christianity considered it a sect of Judaism, so close were the ties.
You need to find another hobby unrelated to chatting on a discussion board.

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

#432339 Apr 13, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to find another hobby unrelated to chatting on a discussion board.
And you need to find more suckers that believe a Jewish god would send his Jewish son to earth to save only Catholics.

Had Jesus even lived, Jehovah would have been his one and only father. So for starters, you should as do the Jehovah Witnesses be worshipping Jehovah.

The book reads that Jesus was king of the Jews, meaning he would have been a faithful Rabbi, NEVER to leave Judaism.

I suggest you stop being so silly by preaching that the Catholic church is based on truth, as that is NOT at all possible.

However ... I don't believe that any religion (created out of mythical fantasies) WAS or IS based on truth ... so yours is just one among all the others that fall short of the claims concerning the existence of invisible deities.

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) 5 min Buck Crick 854,469
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 15 min I Am No One_ 444,253
"Hey!!!! Do you think I have an ODD-SHAPED HEAD... 17 min Knock off purse s... 22
Sex with demon possessed doll 21 min Knock off purse s... 45
Poll Doctor REALITY is: 22 min Knock off purse s... 17
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr Charlie Sheen 272,082
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr wilderide 100,734
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr Peace_Warrior 612,599
The Christian Atheist debate 1 hr Truthiness 861
More from around the web