Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 670552 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

United States

#458766 Jul 3, 2013
Disciple wrote:
<quoted text>
In case you missed it I've already stated my position.
His understanding of truth is well aligned with catholics, on the other hand and unfortunately he is out of alignment with God.
Sorry Anthony no middle ground and no compromise.
He says his understanding is in line with God an the apostles. His theological academic credentials are beyond question. What are your credentials? And by what authority do you declare he is in error and you are not?
Anthony MN

United States

#458767 Jul 3, 2013
LTM wrote:
<quoted text>show me the scripture where Jesus said to drink his blood
I thought you were a student of the bible. Do you skip the parts you don't like?
LTM

Kingston, Canada

#458768 Jul 3, 2013
The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Holy Eucharist are one single sacrifice: "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." "And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner ... this sacrifice is truly propitiatory."

In the book of Malachi, the prophet predicts elimination of the old sacrificial system and the institution of a new sacrifice: "I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord of hosts, and I will not accept an offering from your hand. For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name will be great among the nations, and in every place incense will be offered to my name, and a pure offering. For my name will be great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts" (Malachi 1:10-11). This means that God will one day be glorified among the Gentiles, who will make pure offerings to Him in all places. The Catholics see this as the Eucharist. However, the apostle Paul seems to have a different slant on it: "I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship" (Romans 12:1). The Eucharist can only be offered in select places: churches consecrated and blessed according to Catholic canon law. The idea of offering our bodies as living sacrifices fits better with the language of the prediction, which says that the sacrifices will be offered "in every place."

cont
LTM

Kingston, Canada

#458769 Jul 3, 2013
The Roman Catholic Church believes that the bread and wine of the Holy Eucharist become the actual body and blood of Jesus. They attempt to support their system of thought with passages such as John 6:32-58; Matthew 26:26; Luke 22:17-23; and 1 Corinthians 11:24-25. In A.D. 1551, the Counsel of Trent officially stated, "By the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation" (Session XIII, chapter IV; cf. canon II). By sharing in the Eucharistic meal, the Church teaches that Catholics are fulfilling John 6:53: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you."

What does that really mean? Jesus goes on to say that "it is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is of no avail. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life" (John 6:63-64). So, if "the flesh is of no avail," why would we have to eat Jesus' flesh in order to have eternal life? It does not make sense, until Jesus tells us that the words He speaks are "spirit." Jesus is saying that this is not a literal teaching, but a spiritual one. The language ties in perfectly with the aforementioned statement of the apostle Paul: "Present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship" (Romans 12:1).

In Jewish thought, bread was equated with the Torah, and "eating of it" was reading and understanding the covenant of God (cf. Deuteronomy 8:3). For example, the apocryphal book of Sirach states, "'He who eats of me will hunger still, he who drinks of me will thirst for more; he who obeys me will not be put to shame, he who serves me will never fail.' All this is true of the book of Most High's covenant, the law which Moses commanded us as an inheritance for the community of Jacob" (Sirach 24:20-22). Quoting from Sirach here is not endorsing it as Scripture; it only serves to illustrate how the Jewish people thought of Mosaic Law. It is important to understand the equating of bread with the Torah to appreciate Jesus' real point.
LTM

Kingston, Canada

#458770 Jul 3, 2013
In John 6, Jesus is actually telling the crowd that He is superior to the Torah (cf. John 6:49-51) and the entire Mosaic system of Law. The passage from Sirach states that those who eat of the Law will "hunger still" and "thirst for more"; this language is mirrored by Jesus when He says, "He who comes to Me will never be hungry, he who believes in Me will never be thirsty" (John 6:35). Jesus is not commanding people to literally eat His flesh and drink His blood, He is telling them the core of all Christian doctrine: belief in Jesus Himself ("The work of God is this: to believe in the One He has sent," John 6:29, emphasis added). Therefore, the Catholic interpretation of John 6 is unbiblical.

Second, there is a very clear analogy in John 6 to the days of Moses and the eating of manna. In the days of Moses, manna was God’s provision for food for the Israelites as they wandered in the wilderness. In John 6, however, Jesus claimed to be the true manna, the bread of heaven. With this statement Jesus claimed to be God’s full provision for salvation. Manna was God’s provision of deliverance from starvation. Jesus is God’s provision of deliverance from damnation. Just as the manna had to be consumed to preserve the lives of the Israelites, so Jesus has to be consumed (fully received by faith) for salvation to be received.

It is very clear that Jesus referred to Himself as the Bread of Life and encouraged His followers to eat of His flesh in John 6. But we do not need to conclude that Jesus was teaching what the Catholics have referred to as transubstantiation. The Lord’s Supper / Christian communion / Holy Eucharist had not been instituted yet. Jesus did not institute the Holy Eucharist / Mass / Lord's Supper until John chapter 13. Therefore, to read the Lord’s Supper into John 6 is unwarranted. As suggested above, it is best to understand this passage in light of coming to Jesus, in faith, for salvation. When we receive Him as Savior, placing our full trust in Him, we are “consuming His flesh” and “drinking His blood.” His body was broken (at His death) and His blood was shed to provide for our salvation. 1 Corinthians 11:26,“For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes.”

Whether the Catholic definition of Holy Eucharist is a "re-sacrifice" of Christ or a "re-offering" of Christ's sacrifice, the concept is unbiblical. Christ does not need to be re-sacrificed. Christ's sacrifice does not need to be re-offered. Hebrews 7:27 declares, "Unlike the other high priests, He (Jesus) does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins ONCE for all when He offered Himself." Similarly, 1 Peter 3:18 exclaims, "For Christ died for sins ONCE for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God..." Christ's once-for-all death on the cross was sufficient to atone for all of our sins (1 John 2:2). Therefore, Christ's sacrifice does not need to be re-offered. Instead, Christ's sacrifice is to be received by faith (John 1:12; 3:16). Eating Christ's flesh and drinking His blood are symbols of fully receiving His sacrifice on our behalf, by grace through faith.

www.gotquestions.org
Disciple

San Diego, CA

#458771 Jul 3, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
He says his understanding is in line with God an the apostles. His theological academic credentials are beyond question. What are your credentials? And by what authority do you declare he is in error and you are not?
What are yours to say his credentials are beyond question?
See that is the problem with catholics they believe anything they are tod even when Biblical evidence is hitting them in the head.
He is a heretic in the right place and out of alignment.
Keep him.
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#458772 Jul 3, 2013
LTM wrote:
The Roman Catholic Church believes that the bread and wine of the Holy Eucharist become the actual body and blood of Jesus. They attempt to support their system of thought with passages such as John 6:32-58; Matthew 26:26; Luke 22:17-23; and 1 Corinthians 11:24-25. In A.D. 1551, the Counsel of Trent officially stated, "By the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation" (Session XIII, chapter IV; cf. canon II). By sharing in the Eucharistic meal, the Church teaches that Catholics are fulfilling John 6:53: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you."
What does that really mean? Jesus goes on to say that "it is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is of no avail. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life" (John 6:63-64). So, if "the flesh is of no avail," why would we have to eat Jesus' flesh in order to have eternal life? It does not make sense, until Jesus tells us that the words He speaks are "spirit." Jesus is saying that this is not a literal teaching, but a spiritual one. The language ties in perfectly with the aforementioned statement of the apostle Paul: "Present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship" (Romans 12:1).
In Jewish thought, bread was equated with the Torah, and "eating of it" was reading and understanding the covenant of God (cf. Deuteronomy 8:3). For example, the apocryphal book of Sirach states, "'He who eats of me will hunger still, he who drinks of me will thirst for more; he who obeys me will not be put to shame, he who serves me will never fail.' All this is true of the book of Most High's covenant, the law which Moses commanded us as an inheritance for the community of Jacob" (Sirach 24:20-22). Quoting from Sirach here is not endorsing it as Scripture; it only serves to illustrate how the Jewish people thought of Mosaic Law. It is important to understand the equating of bread with the Torah to appreciate Jesus' real point.
You must've called in sick the day John 6 was covered.

53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#458773 Jul 3, 2013
053
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
He said drink His blood. Tell Him He's wrong.
You can't answer my question Aunt, because it will reveal the truth!!!! And that is a no no for you and your ilk....

Word History: A coward is one who "turns tail." The word comes from Old French couart, coart, "coward," and is related to Italian codardo, "coward." Couart is formed from coe, a northern French dialectal variant of cue, "tail" (from Latin cda), to which the derogatory suffix -ard was added. This suffix appears in bastard, laggard, and sluggard, to name a few. A coward may also be one with his tail between his legs. In heraldry a lion couard, "cowardly lion," was depicted with his tail between his legs. So a coward may be one with his tail hidden between his legs or one who turns tail and runs like a rabbit, with his tail showing.

I see your tail!!!!!
Clay

Saint Paul, MN

#458774 Jul 3, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
But and however....Catholics say the Bible is not the only Word of God!!!!! They say their "traditions" and their "magnastrium" (misspelled am sure)are also the Word of God....So, they can "trump" and Scripture they want by evoking these two other sources of the Word of God...that they...and only they have!!!!!
And they have the gall to say that Christ is the redeemer of the world!!! Imagine that!!!!Christ, a Jew on earth for thirty-three years or so, of the Race that God repeatedly calls His chosen, has abandoned them and because He favors the Catholics, and only the Catholics, He gave them "the inside track" that only they have!!!!
It ain't our fault some Protesters showed up and put a false label on our Bible. You may think by doing that, you just established a truth. In reality, you opened up a doctrinal mess that is ever evolving.
Truth is truth, Ox.
Jesus Christ never established a Bible for the foundation of His Ministry. He established a visible hierarchal Church that is still here today. This same Church established a Bible 400 yrs after the crucifixion.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#458775 Jul 3, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
You must've called in sick the day John 6 was covered.
53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
And you said you knew of no Catholics whom drinks the blood of Christ......why is that????
Clay

Saint Paul, MN

#458776 Jul 3, 2013
Tiger Lily wrote:
<quoted text>
King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.__John 3:13
Plain and simple.
Hi Tiger, could you please provide Book, chapter and verse where Christ tells us the Books of the KJV are 'the Bible'?
Could you also show where Jesus Christ says those particular set of Book are to be the sole authority on His Ministry?
Thanks.
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#458777 Jul 3, 2013
Disciple wrote:
<quoted text>
What are yours to say his credentials are beyond question?
See that is the problem with catholics they believe anything they are tod even when Biblical evidence is hitting them in the head.
He is a heretic in the right place and out of alignment.
Keep him.
I say the biblical evidence supports Catholicism, so does he. What is your authority to declare us out of alignment?
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#458778 Jul 3, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
053
<quoted text>
You can't answer my question Aunt, because it will reveal the truth!!!! And that is a no no for you and your ilk....
Word History: A coward is one who "turns tail." The word comes from Old French couart, coart, "coward," and is related to Italian codardo, "coward." Couart is formed from coe, a northern French dialectal variant of cue, "tail" (from Latin cda), to which the derogatory suffix -ard was added. This suffix appears in bastard, laggard, and sluggard, to name a few. A coward may also be one with his tail between his legs. In heraldry a lion couard, "cowardly lion," was depicted with his tail between his legs. So a coward may be one with his tail hidden between his legs or one who turns tail and runs like a rabbit, with his tail showing.
I see your tail!!!!!
The truth is Jesus said;

53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

You say; "No way, ahs ain't no cannibal!!"
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#458779 Jul 3, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
And you said you knew of no Catholics whom drinks the blood of Christ......why is that????
Never said that.

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

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

#458780 Jul 3, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
It ain't our fault some Protesters showed up and put a false label on our Bible. You may think by doing that, you just established a truth. In reality, you opened up a doctrinal mess that is ever evolving.
Truth is truth, Ox.
Jesus Christ never established a Bible for the foundation of His Ministry. He established a visible hierarchal Church that is still here today. This same Church established a Bible 400 yrs after the crucifixion.
~~~

YOU WROTE...

"It ain't our fault some Protesters showed up and put a false label on our Bible. "

YOU ROMAN CATHOLICS HAVE NO HOLY BIBLE..AS DEFINED IN GREEK

Bible
BI'BLE, n.[Gr. a book.]

THE BOOK, by way of eminence; the sacred volume, in which are contained the revelations of God, the principles of Christian faith, and the rules of practice. It consists of two parts, called the Old and New Testaments.

The Bible should be the standard of language as well as of faith.

That is unless you call your CATECHISM YOUR BIBLE...
LTM

Kingston, Canada

#458781 Jul 3, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought you were a student of the bible. Do you skip the parts you don't like?
I thought your church gave the world the bible, yet you don't read it, or believe it.
Jesus is our Passover lamb, when we have communion we do it in remembrance of what Jesus did for us. Every time we sit down to a meal with family and say grace over the meal, every communion we share with our Christian brothers and sister in
Christ we are celebrating the Passover meal in remembrance of Jesus..
The wafer and wine doesn't change to the flesh and blood of Jesus.
That is insane to think it would.
Sorry I am not trying to be cruel Anthony.
Tiger Lily

Auckland, New Zealand

#458782 Jul 3, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi Tiger, could you please provide Book, chapter and verse where Christ tells us the Books of the KJV are 'the Bible'?
Could you also show where Jesus Christ says those particular set of Book are to be the sole authority on His Ministry?
Thanks.
There you go again, Clay. I simply quoted text from a KJV and you go into some absurd conjecture that it is not scripture.
You Catholics are not impressing any of us that you know ANYTHING of what scripture is about let alone what the apostle John wrote.

NO MAN HAS EVER DIED AND GONE TO HEAVEN.

Though a very few were translated and taken up to Heaven as scripture tells us.

Douay-Rheims Bible
For David ascended not into heaven; but he himself said: The Lord said to my Lord, sit thou on my right hand,... Acts 2:34

David is not in Heaven????! He is yet with us in a sepulchre.

Acts 2:29-34
29 “Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day.

30 Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne

31 he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption.

32 This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses.

33 Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear.

34 “For David DID NOT ascend into the heavens...

Clay, you may believe something CONTRARY to scripture.
Suit yourself if you don't believe we die and rest in a grave until Jesus awakes us, resurrects us and translates us. Pity you.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#458783 Jul 3, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
They're called Saints. They are in the presence of God. They pray to Him for us if we ask, just like you asking one of your SBC friends to pray for you.
Call him or her by whatever name you want....how do you and/or the pope know that any particular person is in Heaven???????? Just declaring him to be in Heaven does not equate to him being there...

My SBC friends are alive and well...and I can prove it.. I know they hear me and can prove it..I have no problem asking them to pray for me, because I know they will pray to God the Father in the name of my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

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

#458784 Jul 3, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
The truth is Jesus said;
53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
You say; "No way, ahs ain't no cannibal!!"
~~~

By Websters definition of Cannibal you are.. a
Cannibal

CANNIBAL, n. A human being that eats human flesh; a man-eater, or anthropophagite.

Maneater
MAN'EATER, n. A human being that feeds on human flesh; a cannibal; an anthropophagite.
Disciple

San Diego, CA

#458785 Jul 3, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
I say the biblical evidence supports Catholicism, so does he. What is your authority to declare us out of alignment?
What is your authority to declare that catholicism aligns with anything other than itself?

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
hurricane hyjinks by yin katz 7 min yin katz 4
lsexting 1 hr splashshane 1
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 1 hr River Tam 101,199
what are the physical differences between india... (Jun '09) 2 hr Pres Mr Donald J ... 91
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 4 hr btcmacroecon 286,473
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 8 hr Peter Ross 445,673
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 9 hr Joe Fortuna 980,324
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 10 hr Sky Writer 31 184,309
More from around the web