Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 591352 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.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#457000 Jun 27, 2013
Seraphima wrote:
<quoted text>LOLOL...I like that! That was funny!
I jist couldn't resist it...
7TH Day Catholics Rock

Poplar Bluff, MO

#457001 Jun 27, 2013
Holy Ghost before Baptism

Acts 10

44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all

them which heard the word.

45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as

many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was

poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then

answered Peter,

47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized,

which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.

Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#457002 Jun 27, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Only Oxbow would think that by noting exceptions to "all have sinned", it supports his claim that somehow God couldn't exempt Mary from sin.
Not making exceptions....unless you are capable of committing sin...you are sinless!!!!

Mary was capable...She knew she was a sinner...she expressed thankfulness for her Savior...sinless people do not need a Savior..

And...I am not saying God could not have exempted Mary from sin...I am saying He did not....there is no Scripture that supports your erroneous belief that He did....none...nada..

The Bible says she was a sinner...your pope says God was wrong..she was sinless....you believe him...that is as un Christian as you can get...
Human Being

Welsh, LA

#457003 Jun 27, 2013
ReginaM wrote:
<quoted text>
Dan -- Robert is NOT an atheist. The posts you've been reading were from years ago and were dredged up out of spite.
A grave injustice has been done to Robert.
How many others like yourself will MIS-read those old posts and come to a false conclusion as you have about Robert?
To her credit, June has apologized and set the record straight. The other who is attempting to demean Robert will likely continue in his evil. As you said, Robert is a kind and intelligent person (no matter what his beliefs), so it's not surprising that satan in his jealousy is attacking him.
ReginaM

Thanks.

I don't think its an injustice.

I rather take it as a fantastic opportunity to be more patient and charitable(fruits of the Spirit).

And if someone gets confused in the issue, perhaps they are confused already, and may learn too.

I will say, that if one has not had their faith attacked, they haven't been tested. And the reason it is not tested is because they had no faith to begin with....Being stubborn is not being faithful, its just a mindset we all share(and need to get rid of).

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#457004 Jun 27, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure He does.
Like 7 or 8 times, each time more emphatically than previously.
No matter how often you repeat the same lie...it will not turn into the truth...

I showed the definitions of "eat" and drink" in the verses you and your ilk quote...

Both can be taken literally or figuratively....you chose to read the Scripture regarding this matter in the literal sense...

And you know what that makes you...that is why you and your cohorts will not answer my question: What do you call a person what eats human flesh????

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#457005 Jun 27, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Sera, the Orthodox have an awesome devout faith. The Orthodox Mass is from the Apostles - just like the Catholic Mass is. We both have the Eucharist...Why can't you leave it at that? I mean, you're bashing us for saying the same thing you're saying. I don't get it. Why belong to a religion if you're not 150% convinced its the TRUTH?
I would hope everyone on this forum is sure they believe in the correct faith. If not, then they need to seriously examine their conscience.
The Orthodox liturgy is NOT like that catholic mass. We do have the same Eucharist BUT, the Orthodox partake in both bread and wine. The are many differences between both churchs and one of them is that ALL ORTHODOX believe in the same way as to the catholic church of today IS NOT the Original Church as you claim it to be.Its that simple.Let me make one thing clear,it is important FOR ALL PROTESTANT FAITHS to learn the history of the Original Church going back to Pentecost and not starting at 1054 when the Reformation began. And may I also add Clay,you wouldnt get it. That's what makes you a catholic and myself an Orthodox.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#457006 Jun 27, 2013
Seraphima wrote:
<quoted text>It is important that every Protestant learn the history of the Original Church and not from the Catholic's eyes but from the EYES OF TRUTH!
Yes, it is...and even before...It would be best to go back to Abrum's roots.
Human Being

Welsh, LA

#457007 Jun 27, 2013
wilderide wrote:
<quoted text>
Grace is not at all the same thing as sinlessness or perfect. It seems to me that the passage in Luke was simply referring to the fact that Mary was lucky enough to be chosen as Jesus' mother, and was very virtuous, but not perfect. If Mary was sinless, why not simply say so clearly? And moreover, again, if Anne wasn't sinless, then Mary would have "inherited" Original Sin (another Catholic concept that has problems of it's own, scriptually and morally) as every other human did too.
wilderide:

I certainly understand how you can see it that way. And gave you the Greek, which may have flown past you a bit.

Biblically speaking, there is only one other person that was "full of grace", and that was Jesus.

Also, when one accepts Jesus as Savior, one becomes justified by grace, which is the Gift of God.

In a much broader sense Creation exists by the Grace of God, and I think that is another reason you "sense" Mary as lucky and virtuous.

Mary, like all of us did not exist(except in the Mind of God), before our conception. If God decides at the time of Mary's conception for her to be under His Grace, then that is His Decision.

Like I wrote, already, our English language is not accurately descriptive in the meaning of "full of grace", or "highly favored one", from the Greek, which is much better in stating the case.
(And that is why you interpret what you think it to mean. The ambiguity is in the English language, not in the Greek.)

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#457008 Jun 27, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
He uses the Greek word "to gnaw, to chew meat" His flesh. There are plenty of words in Greek for symbolic and figurative. He doesn't use them.
I gave you links refuting your "cannibalism" tripe.
Show me from scripture where He says it's symbolic or figurative. Thanks.
And He does not say it is in the literal sense......

Answer my question....what do you call a person what eats human flesh????

You will not answer my question because you know the answer will reveal what you are believing is utter garbage...
Clay

Saint Paul, MN

#457009 Jun 27, 2013
Hermeneutics Smutics wrote:
A very objective way to determine which church schismed, Orthodox or Catholic, study the Original Church before 1054 nand see which continued the ways of the Original Church and which changed.
==========
PRIOR TO 1054 SCHISM
1 Ancestral Sin not Original Sin
2 Church Government- Conciliar
3 Bishop carries the Apostolic Succession
4 Each Local Church is the Entire Church so no need for Universal Bishop
5 Church is not Secular
6 Priests can Marry
Divine Liturgy of John Chrysostom- During the period of the fourth to sixth centuries, the shape of the Eastern Divine Liturgy reached its final form under the guidance of liturgists such as St. John Chrysostom. In this same period the major formative changes occurred, most of which resulted in liturgical components that corresponded to the Church's developing theological understanding
7 Chanting
Ancient Hymns- not Modern- the hymn "Only-Begotten Son" ( composed around the 4th or 5th Centuries )and the "The Trisagion Hymnn (408-450), this period and on through the ninth century, hymns were composed and added to the Divine Liturgy, such as the Cherubic Hymn, sung while the priest recites the prayer that is now called "The Prayer of the Cherubic Hymn." ( In either 573 or 574, Justinian I had the Cherubic Hymn added to the standard liturgy.) These hymns have continued to be heard every Sunday from then until today.
8 No Infallibility
----------
AFTER 1054 ORTHODOX CHURCH CONTINUED THE ABOVE
AFTER 1053 CATHOLIC CHURCH CHANGED ORIGINAL CHURCVH PRACTICES AS FOLLOWS:
Original Sin not Ancestral Sin
Church Government Monarchial, not Conciliar
3 Pope carries the Apostolic Succession. Bishops receive authority from Pope
4 Each local Church is not a Church in itself but one part, with all the other Cath Churches, in the Catholic Church
5. Church became heavily involved in secular gopvernment
6. Priests cannot Marry
7 Mass changed many many times
8 Scattered Chanting during service
9. Modern Music- some historical hymns
Line 7:(Catholic Church) became heavily involved in secular government.
Herm, you're an Orthodox. You guys have been very involved- if not entwined - with secular governments for yrs.
Line 3: I believe Apostolic succession isn't strictly Papal. Every Bishop ordained is involved in the continuity of Apostolic succession.
Line 6: you know Orthodox Bishops do not marry?Your Priests are only allowed one marriage, unlike the laity. Celibacy is practiced in Orthodox just like Catholicism is my point.
line 8: What the heck is "scattered chanting"?
line 7: " Mass changed many times" . Oh? I would like more info on that. Because if you're talking about language and order of the service, then the Orthodox (I would think) would be just as 'guilty' in that. But the meaning of the Mass hasn't changed in neither of our Churches.
Human Being

Welsh, LA

#457010 Jun 27, 2013
wilderide wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the story. And it was also supposedly done by Jesus himself. Presumably, Jesus did not pray to himself to hear Malchus' ear.
wilderide:

I think we can presume that.

It doesn't appear that Jesus prayed for miracles. He just did them, as an expression of His Glory.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#457011 Jun 27, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
"The objection Memorialists raise regarding the Jewish dietary laws and the Eucharist reduces the doctrine of Real Presence to a purely physical process which is a straw-man fallacy. That is, if the reception of Christ’s Body by Christians is a purely physical process, we would be guilty of cannibalism and therefore a violation of the Jewish dietary laws. Now the contemporary Memorialists are not the first to accuse the Catholic Church of cannibalism. This unsubstantiated claim was widely used against us by the pagans of the second century. We emphatically do not hold the Eucharistic reception to be a purely physical process and we are not guilty of cannibalism because receiving the Eucharist is not the equivalent of taking a bite out of Jesus’ Arm nor of drinking His Blood from the Cross. Those things would be a violation of the Jewish dietary laws. The substance of the host has been changed into the risen Body of Christ which although fully corporeal and real, does not physically belong to this universe. The Jewish dietary laws pertain to the natural; what we are partaking of in the Eucharist is supernatural. So our reception of Christ in the Eucharist is not a mere physical event. It is an event where the supernatural meets the natural. The benefit of the Eucharist is spiritual not physical; namely: grace. We cannot receive grace via digestion. Moreover, we do not digest Christ."
http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2009/03/real...
You are a coward....that is why you are not answering my question...what do you call a person that eats human flesh???
Human Being

Welsh, LA

#457012 Jun 27, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
Before you die, is this what you will still be arguing about, or will you think back to how you could have been kinder to your neighbors while you had the chance?
I remember one senior dying from cancer bemoaning the idea that she wished she had been more kind to others.
That is a sad way to go to one's own death.
June:

Love is kind.
Clay

Saint Paul, MN

#457013 Jun 27, 2013
Seraphima wrote:
<quoted text>The Orthodox liturgy is NOT like that catholic mass. We do have the same Eucharist BUT, the Orthodox partake in both bread and wine. The are many differences between both churchs and one of them is that ALL ORTHODOX believe in the same way as to the catholic church of today IS NOT the Original Church as you claim it to be.Its that simple.Let me make one thing clear,it is important FOR ALL PROTESTANT FAITHS to learn the history of the Original Church going back to Pentecost and not starting at 1054 when the Reformation began. And may I also add Clay,you wouldnt get it. That's what makes you a catholic and myself an Orthodox.
We partake in the wine too.(not usually at daily mass) but almost always on Sundays.

I could be swayed into joining the Orthodox faith, Sera. The Pope won't arrest me ya know.
So why won't I? I believe you guys split from the Catholic Church. I believe Christ wanted a Pope. I believe the Orthodox in fact obeyed the authority of the Bishop of Rome, before language and culture drew a wedge and finally, they went about their own way.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#457014 Jun 27, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, it is...and even before...It would be best to go back to Abrum's roots.
Wow!
I am judged mean, nuts, and clueless for suggesting christians go back to their religions roots and learn from it?
You "judges" really don't want your people to know any truth about your religion do you?
What are you so afraid of?
TRUTH?
I bet you are too!

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#457015 Jun 27, 2013
Human Being wrote:
<quoted text>
wilderide:
I think we can presume that.
It doesn't appear that Jesus prayed for miracles. He just did them, as an expression of His Glory.
None of the early writings show Jesus doing any miracles at all. Not until the "universal church" do we find any injection of him performing "miracles".
That is "elaboration"(fabric ation) at it's best.
Clay

Jersey City, NJ

#457016 Jun 27, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
No matter how often you repeat the same lie...it will not turn into the truth...
I showed the definitions of "eat" and drink" in the verses you and your ilk quote...
Both can be taken literally or figuratively....you chose to read the Scripture regarding this matter in the literal sense...
And you know what that makes you...that is why you and your cohorts will not answer my question: What do you call a person what eats human flesh????
leave Christian discussions for the Christians.
You know as well as me, if we Catholics leave, your fellow fundies will turn their sights on you. They do not consider you a Christian, in case you haven't figured that out.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#457017 Jun 27, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
edited for space
line 7: " Mass changed many times" . Oh? I would like more info on that. Because if you're talking about language and order of the service, then the Orthodox (I would think) would be just as 'guilty' in that. But the meaning of the Mass hasn't changed in neither of our Churches.
==========

Orthodox Liturgy is closest to the Liturgy the Early Church. The Catholic Church has had many revisions which have continued through the modern age.

1. REIGN OF CONSTANTINE Secular influences on liturgy starting in the reign of CONSTANTINE in the early part of the 4TH CENTURY, Research into Roman imperial court ceremonial reveals inescapable parallels in Church liturgy.

Once the Church had joined in partnership with the state, it was necessary to integrate the bishops etc into the Imperial status system ishops and other clerics began to enjoy the privileges and ceremonies of the imperial court and of high ranking officials.. Thus, the Pope was accorded some of the ceremonial privileges of the Emperor himself, such as having people kissing his foot. The bishops became entitled to wear the dress and insignia of the highest ranking Romans..

3 The Roman Liturgy changed from what we see in Justin Martyr to that of Gregory The change is radical, especially as regards the most important element of the Mass, the Canon.

4. BY AROUND 1000 AD, THE LITURGY OF ROME WAS A MIXTURE OF THE GREGORIAN LITURGY AND TWO VERSIONS FROM BEYOND THE ALPS, THE GELASIAN (ORIGINALLY FROM ROME) AND THE ANCIENT GALLICAN.

5.During the c10th the Papacy went through a bad period and the liturgical life of the city came close to extinction, saved only by devoted efforts in some of the Cluniac monasteries newly founded there.

6 WHEN A LITURGICAL REVIVAL TOOK PLACE AT THE END OF THE CENTURY, IT SHOWED DEVELOPMENTS THAT WERE FRANCO-GERMAN IN ORIGIN. This Franco-German influence is explicable in terms of partly of the Cluniac presence, but mainly of the efforts of the Saxons, Otto I (912-973) and Otto II (955-983),‘religious men’[p 76], who tried to reform the Papacy during their interventions in Italy and supplied liturgical books from beyond the Alps.

7 BUT IN THE LONG AND GRADUAL SUPPLANTING OF THE GALLICAN RITE THE ROMAN WAS ITSELF AFFECTED BY ITS RIVAL, SO THAT WHEN AT LAST IT EMERGES AS SOLE POSSESSOR IT IS NO LONGER THE OLD PURE ROMAN RITE, BUT HAS BECOME THE GALLICANIZED ROMAN USE THAT WE NOW FOLLOW

8 PRE-TRIDENTINE MASS The term Pre-Tridentine Mass here refers to the variants of the liturgical rite of Mass in Rome before 1570, when, with his bull Quo primum, Pope Pius V made the Roman Missal, as revised[1] by him, obligatory throughout the Latin-Rite or Western Church, except for those places and congregations whose distinct rites could demonstrate an antiquity of 200 years or more.

9 TRIDENTINE COUNCIL OF TRENT (1545 1563 1570, WHEN, WITH HIS BULL QUO PRIMUM, POPE PIUS V MADE THE ROMAN MISSAL, AS REVISED[1] BY HIM, OBLIGATORY THROUGHOUT THE LATIN-RITE OR WESTERN CHURCH, EXCEPT FOR THOSE PLACES AND CONGREGATIONS WHOSE DISTINCT RITES COULD DEMONSTRATE AN ANTIQUITY OF 200 YEARS OR MORE.
10 IN THE FACE ON THE ONE HAND OF THE ATTACK ON THE MASS BY THE PROTESTANTS, LUTHER (1483-1546) AND ZWINGLI (1484-1531), AND ON THE OTHER HAND OF THE ‘CHAOTIC STATE OF LITURGICAL PRACTICE’[P 117], THE COUNCIL OF TRENT (1545-1563) DETERMINED ON REFORM OF THE MISSAL AND THE BREVIARY

11 The Latin Tridentine Mass remained the standard eucharistic liturgy in the Roman Catholic Church in the West until the Second Vatican Council. In 1963, the Council adopted, by an overwhelming majority, the Constitution On Sacred Liturgy "SacrosantumConcilium Following Vatican II, Pope Paul VI instituted a new form of the Mass : THE “NEW MASS”,

12 MASS CATHOLIC 2011 UNDERGOING FIRST CHANGES IN 40 YEARS New translation will go into effect in Sep 17, 2011

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#457018 Jun 27, 2013
During my 40 years as a Catholic, when taking communion, myself and all of the congregation so partaking, only got the host(so said the body of Christ)....why was that????

I though Christ spoke of His body and His blood...did He not say "This is my body" and when taking the cup, did He not say "This is my blood"....

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#457019 Jun 27, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
We partake in the wine too.(not usually at daily mass) but almost always on Sundays.
I could be swayed into joining the Orthodox faith, Sera. The Pope won't arrest me ya know.
So why won't I? I believe you guys split from the Catholic Church. I believe Christ wanted a Pope. I believe the Orthodox in fact obeyed the authority of the Bishop of Rome, before language and culture drew a wedge and finally, they went about their own way.
Say no more Clay....."ALMOST always on Sundays says it all! Believe the man "behind the curtain" after all "there's no place like home"

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) 3 min Aura Mytha 841,614
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 11 min nanoanomaly 4,772
Why do white men hate white women who want blac... (May '11) 16 min nanoanomaly 3,093
Beautiful Contemporary Instumental NEW AGE MUSI... 54 min Doctor REALITY 3
Tamil vs Kannada. Which one is the oldest langu... (Oct '12) 1 hr The swamiji 1,468
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 1 hr MUQ2 40,578
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr MUQ2 271,466
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 3 hr Truths 612,276
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 3 hr RiccardoFire 100,205
More from around the web