Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 672821 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.

Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#452886 Jun 16, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, the Church never taught selling indulgences or torture of the Jews. Those things were done by bad guys contrary to Church teachings.
Bl. John Paul II apologized for those bad guys.
--------
Historical facts per a participant and an eye witness...Luther.....
31. The man who actually buys indulgences is as rare as he who is really penitent; indeed, he is exceedingly rare.
35. They who teach that contrition is not necessary on the part of those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessional privileges preach unchristian doctrine.
42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend that the buying of indulgences should in any way be compared with works of mercy.
43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better deed than he who buys indulgences.
45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a needy man and passes him by, yet gives his money for indulgences, does not buy papal indulgences but God's wrath.
46. Christians are to be taught that, unless they have more than they need, they must reserve enough for their family needs and by no means squander it on indulgences.
47. Christians are to be taught that they buying of indulgences is a matter of free choice, not commanded.
48 Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting indulgences, needs and thus desires their devout prayer more than their money.
51. Christians are to be taught that the pope would and should wish to give of his own money, even though he had to sell the basilica of St. Peter, to many of those from whom certain hawkers of indulgences cajole money.
57. That indulgences are not temporal treasures is certainly clear, for many indulgence sellers do not distribute them freely but only gather them.
66. The treasures of indulgences are nets with which one now fishes for the wealth of men.
69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of papal indulgences with all reverence.
82. Such as: "Why does not the pope empty purgatory for the sake of holy love and the dire need of the souls that are there if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a church? The former reason would be most just; the latter is most trivial.
You're not a follower of Luther are you?

Your best bet in this discussion would be to locate any official Church teaching wherein the selling of indulgences is permitted.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#452887 Jun 16, 2013
Roberta G wrote:
<quoted text>
No, they didn't, but that is what the buyers were PROMISED. Oxbow is right about that.
Thanks for speaking up for the truth!!!!!
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#452888 Jun 16, 2013
Roberta G wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, Anthony, unless you're able to see into their hearts, souls and minds, I don't think you're qualified to say that.
Hey, I agree with you about the creeds, the problem is the fundamentalist evangelicals don't, and they'll tell you that.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#452889 Jun 16, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
St. Peter's was financed with donations. It's the spiritual home to 1.2 billion Catholic Christians 500 years later, open to us all. Today's televangelists finance their personal fortunes with donations. Hardly a fair comparison.
It was financed PARTLY by donations, yes. Fortunately for the peace of mind of millions of Christians then and now, financing it THROUGH EMOTIONAL BLACKMAIL failed.

Anthony, I happen to be glad that St. Peter's was built. Among other things, it's a very beautiful building, and is appropriately important to and symbolic of Christians worldwide. But you seem to be trying to whitewash a dark chapter in the history of the Roman Catholic Church. Denying that the RCC of the 16th century used unethical--unCHRISTIAN practices--to raise money, not just for building programs but for other things is just plain inaccurate. It is also defeatist, because when you attempt to rationalize the wrongs of the past, you call into question the trustworthiness of the Church today.
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#452890 Jun 16, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for speaking up for the truth!!!!!
What a sucker.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#452891 Jun 16, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
Very few of your protestant brethren who call themselves Christian confess, believe and teach the creed.
To my knowledge the SBC has no canned prayers...when we pray we are led by the Holy Spirit...something completely foreign to Catholics...

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#452892 Jun 16, 2013
Human Being wrote:
<quoted text>
Black Thunder 42:
So you don't believe truth, beauty, and goodness exists.
Then neither do you.
Sitting serenely in a cesspool is the same as sitting serenely in a meadow for you?
(I hope you see the hyperbole?)
You answered, "No".
In order for there to be a reflection, there has be an subject which is reflected.
Otherwise, enjoy the cesspool.(smile).
Don't twist my words. I know there is truth, beauty., and goodness. I don't believe they are the product of your particular deity, I thought that was made quite clear in the preceding post.
If you twist that arrangement of words in an effort to obfuscate or deflect, I will correct you.
You picked one word of an entire post, and neglected the overall message.

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#452893 Jun 16, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for speaking up for the truth!!!!!
Actually, every Catholic knows that if they want their sins to be forgiven, they go through the Sacrament of Reconciliation (Confession). They do not seek an indulgence to have sins forgiven. That is not what an indulgence is for. That is basic Catholic knowledge.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#452894 Jun 16, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
Very few of your protestant brethren who call themselves Christian confess, believe and teach the creed.
How on earth would you know really?

If I confess to my Lord Jesus,you are nit there

If our Church pray e the creed are you there

Are you even allowed to participate in our services??

I am asking respectfully Anthony

Both sides who have had no experience in the other have some really crazy idea of what the other side does in worship.

That US why your Blessed Pope called for Unity..to bring us together.

We can talk about our differences..But why nit learn a bit too.

I went to a Catholic Church fir stations..this us nit forbidden by my faith.

Have you attended a Baptist worship I doubt it.

I had some odd ideas about them too as a,Catholic.

I found these people among the most loving and believing people U had ever met.

The ritual of Mass US beautiful. But I feel closer in a less ritualistic service..But at least I know about both BEFore I speak..

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#452895 Jun 16, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. The "pardon" comes in the sacrament of confession. An indulgence is not for the forgiveness or pardon of sin, it is for the remission of the punishment of sin.
That sounds like a similar type argument I heard when two old friends were in a heated argument...finally one stands up and says: Look....I never ever said your wife has warts on her stomach!!!! I only said it felt like she had warts on her stomach!!!

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#452896 Jun 16, 2013
Roberta G wrote:
<quoted text>
Having a high I.Q. doesn't make anyone wise.
The point was that deceitful persons used some statement Einstein made to obfuscate and twist his true beliefs to their advantage-which was dishonest. Can you guess who it was?=Christian apologetic twisters...and they STILL try to do it.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#452897 Jun 16, 2013
Roberta G wrote:
<quoted text>
Hebrews 11 Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see...
3 By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible...
...6 And WITHOUT FAITH IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO PLEASE GOD, BECAUSE ANYONE WHO COMES TO HIM MUST BELIEVE THAT HE EXISTS AND THAT HE REWARDS THOSE WHO EARNESTLY SEEK HIM.
__________
Read that again, June.
"WITHOUT FAITH IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO PLEASE GOD"
I don't think God is interested in "dogma" so much as He is in whether we believe He exists and whether we love Him.
Well, by all means...if he wants to be believed, have him show up and prove he exists.
Who in hell wants to please some deity that doesn't even exist. It would be like kicking sand in a rat hole.
Is that what you are doing?
I don't care to appear to be that stupid.

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#452898 Jun 16, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
How sanctimonious you are with your haughty attitude that YOU are loved by a god, and others are not.
I don't want another homosexual taking his/her life because some stupid preacher grabbed a bible and preached that homosexuals will go to hell for having sexual contact with each other.
I refer to my care of homosexuals as the closest emotion I can have to love.
How about YOU???
Do you use words in your bible to believe that homosexuals will go to hell, while you on your high horse go to heaven???
You can take your buy-bull and shove it where the sun doesn't shine.
June....you dont know me as a person. I AM A FAR CRY FROM HAUGHTY. I do not homosexual for it is NOT my place to judge them.I treat those around me with respect IF they treat me the same.And I am Not on a HIGH HORSE to Heaven.I will be lucky if I get there on a pony. You have so much anger in you for those who do believe in God.If you choose not to believe,its up to you.Well,I choose to believe.Honestly,I have never seen someone whos so full of meaness as yourself and I feel sorry for you.I say this because I care.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#452899 Jun 16, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
Full Question
One of the causes of the Reformation was the selling of indulgences. Does the Catholic Church still sell them?
Answer
That's like asking, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" The Catholic Church does not now nor has it ever approved the sale of indulgences. This is to be distinguished from the undeniable fact that individual Catholics (perhaps the best known of them being the German Dominican Johann Tetzel [1465-1519]) did sell indulgences--but in doing so they acted contrary to explicit Church regulations. This practice is utterly opposed to the Catholic Church's teaching on indulgences, and it cannot be regarded as a teaching or practice of the Church.
http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/does-t...
My question; do TV evangelicals like Benny Hinn and so many others not participate in even worse behavior as their own private fortunes are from gullible poor fools?
Was he excommunicated for it? If not, it was condoned by the established church. End of story.
Are these televangelists cathaholics? Then there is no need for comparisons, is there...unless you are trying for deflection from the original posit.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#452900 Jun 16, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
Faith is certainly in that which is unseen.
But we feel His presence in our souls.
I prefer to believe I will see Him someday..rather than have NO hope .
You can make believe all you want. It doesn't change the facts of reality and actuality.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#452901 Jun 16, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
There is a perfect example of people who claim to be Christians, which the Bible identifies as followers of Christ, by their very beliefs, say they are frauds...
the Athanasian Creed: No one knows who wrote the thing!!!!!!
Don't be silly. Yes, it's accepted today that Athanasius himself probably didn't write the Creed that bears his name. It's named after him because he staunchly upheld what the Creed says.

----------
"A medieval account credited Athanasius of Alexandria, the famous defender of Nicene theology, as the author of the Creed. According to this account, Athanasius composed it during his exile in Rome...This traditional attribution of the Creed to Athanasius was first called into question in 1642...and it has since been widely accepted by modern scholars that the creed was not authored by Athanasius...Athanasius' name seems to have become attached to the creed as a sign of its strong declaration of Trinitarian faith."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasian_Creed

__________


Why would that be a problem? We don't call the Apostles' Creed "the Apostles' Creed" because we think somebody named "Apostle" wrote it. We don't call the Nicene Creed "the Nicene Creed" because we think somebody called "Nicene" wrote it (it was developed by the Council of Nicaea under Constantine), and we don't call the Pledge of Allegiance the "Pledge of Allegiance" because we think somebody named Allegiance wrote it.
LTM

Marathon, Canada

#452902 Jun 16, 2013
Seraphima wrote:
<quoted text>June....you dont know me as a person. I AM A FAR CRY FROM HAUGHTY. I do not homosexual for it is NOT my place to judge them.I treat those around me with respect IF they treat me the same.And I am Not on a HIGH HORSE to Heaven.I will be lucky if I get there on a pony. You have so much anger in you for those who do believe in God.If you choose not to believe,its up to you.Well,I choose to believe.Honestly,I have never seen someone whos so full of meaness as yourself and I feel sorry for you.I say this because I care.
You care but June doesn't Sere.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#452903 Jun 16, 2013
Selene100 wrote:
<quoted text>
Historical facts do show that the Roman Catholic Church have always taught that the selling of indulgences was illegal. Martin Luther was referring only to some of the priests in Germany. There were a few Catholic priests in Germany who did not follow Catholic teachings and sold indulgences. The selling of indulgences was not widespread and some people think. It was only limited to a few errant priests in Germany.
However and but....the people selling indulgences were Catholic clergy...and if Luther could see the gross wrongness, so could every other Catholic clergy...including the pope...Luther was the only one to speak up....

The sale of indulgences was a byproduct of the Crusades in the 12th and 13th centuries. Because they risked dying without the benefit of a priest to perform the appropriate ceremonies, Crusaders were promised immediate salvation if they died while fighting to "liberate" the Christian holy city at Jerusalem. Church leaders justified this by arguing that good works earned salvation, and making Jerusalem accessible to Christians was an example of a good work. Over time, Church leaders decided that paying money to support good works was just as good as performing good works, and it evened things up for people who were physically incapable of fighting a Crusade. Over several centuries, the practice expanded, and Church leaders justified it by arguing that they had inherited an unlimited amount of good works from Jesus, and the credit for these good works could be sold to believers in the form of indulgences. In other words, indulgences functioned like "confession insurance" against eternal damnation because, if you purchased an indulgence, then you wouldn't go to hell if you died suddenly or forgot to confess something.

A. The 12th and 13th centuries equal 200 years....that is much more than "a little while"...

B. NOTE: Church leaders justified this by arguing that good works earned salvation, and making Jerusalem accessible to Christians was an example of a good work. "Church leaders" include da pope....

C. HEY ANTHONY!!!!! Look!!!!"In other words, indulgences functioned like "confession insurance" against eternal damnation because, if you purchased an indulgence, then you wouldn't go to hell if you died suddenly or forgot to confess something."

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#452904 Jun 16, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey, I agree with you about the creeds, the problem is the fundamentalist evangelicals don't, and they'll tell you that.
Who ars you referring to really .

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#452905 Jun 16, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, by all means...if he wants to be believed, have him show up and prove he exists.
Who in hell wants to please some deity that doesn't even exist. It would be like kicking sand in a rat hole.
Is that what you are doing?
I don't care to appear to be that stupid.
Then why are you working so hard to look stupid?

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
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 2 min New Age Spiritual... 104,442
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 8 min New Age Spiritual... 445,837
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 37 min servants of satan 981,134
Gay/bi Skype Sex ? (Mar '14) 1 hr Mylilsexcrete 19
Dem Libs Has Need Of Gay Rabbits 1 hr WTF 1
News Michael Jackson's doctor: 'I told the truth' (Aug '09) 1 hr Spotted Wee 388
Ryan et al The Infinity Code 2 hr maher86 1
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 4 hr Choir Loft 286,298
More from around the web