Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 665388 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

#475275 Sep 6, 2013
Tony17 wrote:
<quoted text>You advised me to get out of the scripture interpretation business. My friend,unlike you and the rest of the poor Catholic adherents,I do not interpret the scriptures. I let the scriptures interpret themselves. That way you won't go wrong and start butchering Gods word as the Catholics are guilty of. As for the rest of your statement I will not waste my time responding to it because just as Michael refused to argue or debate with Satan because he knew how fruitless and useless it would have been,I know the futility of arguing with one that follows the false religion of Catholicism.
I ask you to provide book, chapter and verse where Jesus (or anyone else) says that scripture interprets itself. That statement of yours is a lie from hell. The mere title of 'sacred scripture' for the Christian, came from an established Church. it did not come from scripture itself.

“YESHUA IS LORD”

Since: Apr 07

GAWGIA (GEORGIA)

#475276 Sep 6, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
I ask you to provide book, chapter and verse where Jesus (or anyone else) says that scripture interprets itself. That statement of yours is a lie from hell. The mere title of 'sacred scripture' for the Christian, came from an established Church. it did not come from scripture itself.
Aww Pookie. I sense that I have made you angry with me. I'll give you an example of how scripture interprets itself.In Genesis where we are told that Ham saw or uncovered his father Noah's nakedness,what does uncovering your fathers nakedness mean? It is interpreted in the scriptures and most people including the Catholics are clueless as to what uncovering your fathers nakedness means? They think it means to see your father naked.
OldJG

Rockford, IL

#475277 Sep 6, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Answer to propaganda leaflet #1
1. False. Prayers for the dead; Book of Maccabees 12:43 "For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would be foolish to pray for the dead. But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore, he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin.(purgatory)
2. Sign of the cross 310 AD? First off, that is still before the Roman Empire legalized Christianity and they were still persecuting Christians.....so Im not sure why you claim its 'Roman' Catholic teaching. Anyway, the sign of the cross was used much earlier when Christians Baptized infants and performed the sign on their forhead. ewtn.com/expert/sign_of_the_cross.htm
3. Wax Voltive candles? No comment.
4. Veneration of saints and Angels. You say 375 AD. I say it was always there in Christianity. But here is an Orthodox site that documents it in 150 AD (long before Constantine was born btw)
"Him indeed we adore as the Son of God; But the Martyrs we love as they deserve, for their surpassing love to their King and Master, as we wish also to be their companions and fellow-disciples"
orthodoxbridge.com/early-evidence-for-the-ven... ?
5. Mary was declared the Mother of God when Christ was born. The Church may have made a formative title in 425 AD, but so what? They were merely stating the obvious. Jesus is God. Mary is His Mother. You don't believe Christ is God?
1. Cly, cly. Maccabees? Maybe we should consult the book of Batman. Maybe he can shed some light on Roman Catholic theology.

2. cly said, quote, "Sign of the cross 310 AD? First off, that is still before the Roman Empire legalized Christianity and they were still persecuting Christians.....so Im not sure why you claim its 'Roman' Catholic teaching. Anyway, the sign of the cross was used much earlier when Christians Baptized infants and performed the sign on their forhead. ewtn.com/expert/sign_of_the_cross.htm" ; End quote.

Christians, real Christians never baptized babies nor did they put the sign of the cross on the forehead.

3. cly, cly. Here is the history for you....Saints have been honored since the early church. Special veneration was first given just to martyrs, but was extended in the fourth century to include "confessors," those who suffered for their faith but not to the point of martyrdom. Bishops began to regulate the cults of various martyrs in their dioceses, although veneration of particular martyrs often extended beyond a single diocese or country. Early church councils also addressed the subject.

What century cly???? The FOURTH.

4. cly said, quote, "Mary was declared the Mother of God when Christ was born. The Church may have made a formative title in 425 AD, but so what? They were merely stating the obvious. Jesus is God. Mary is His Mother. You don't believe Christ is God?" End quote.

Mary gave birth to God? Really? So Mary existed before God and how did she get pregnant? Who helped that along if she gave birth to God. Will you tell us Mary gave birth to God and became pregnant by God? No, cly, Mary gave birth to Jesus. The human Jesus. You do understand that don't you cly?
OldJG

Rockford, IL

#475278 Sep 6, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
propaganda leaflet answers continued:
6. I find no record of Priests beginning to wear vestments in 500 AD. But here is Lev 21:10 "The Priest who is chief among his brethren, upon whose head the anointing oil is poured, and whose been CONSECRATED to wear the garment..."
7. N/A
8. Temporal Papacy power granted by Phocas? I only find any mention of that under radical fundamental websites. It seems what you are trying to imply be this is not truthful.
9. So what?
10.'kissing the Popes feet'. Again, nobody kisses the popes feet or kisses his ring like you want to think, but rather, due to the authority he represents given by Jesus Christ Himself. The Pope can not error on teachings of faith and morals; No Pope has ever gone against sacred scripture or sacred tradition. He's protected. THATS why the honor is given. To the Chair, NOT really the human sitting in it. Got it?
11. N/a
12. We don't adore anyone but the Trinity. So your false tidbit is immaterial.
Holy Relics and there power is Biblical. I gotta pick my boy up from work. Continued later....
6. The liturgical vestments have by no means remained the same from the founding of the Church until the present day. There is as great a difference between the vestments worn at the Holy Sacrifice in the pre-Constantinian period, and even in the following centuries, and those now customary at the services of the Church, as between the rite of the early Church and that of modern times.

7. cly said, quote, "N/A". End quote. Yes cly this is very applicable. Latin was not the language of the common people so the priests could make up their own "theology". Imagine that! LOL LOL They have been doing just that for centuries.

8. Some historians identify the crowning of Charlemagne in 800 as the moment in which the Church started having an international importance in a modern sense, although the temporal power can be traced even earlier to either the Donation of Pepin in 754, or the crowning of Pepin by Pope Zachary in 752, the first time a secular sovereign was crowned by a pope.

9. cly said, quote, "so what". End quote. Why feast of days for Mary?

10. Kissing the popes ring and feet??? Hmmm? Did they kiss the feet of Jesus? Did Jesus even have a ring? No cly, kissing anything on the pope is stupid and not Biblical.

11. N/A?

12. cly said, quote, "We don't adore anyone but the Trinity. So your false tidbit is immaterial.
Holy Relics and there power is Biblical. I gotta pick my boy up from work. Continued later...." End quote.

We all know this is a lie and thus this confirms....cly is a liar.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#475279 Sep 6, 2013
ruggededge wrote:
forgetting the vatican for a moment jesus never
prescribed an enclosed religion show me where he
did.
Constantine began the practice when they altered
the gospels.FACT.
Fancy garb and places of worship would not impress
jesus do you really think he would be in agreement
with these garish trappings.
No. In fact I think he would consider them "pharisees".
OldJG

Rockford, IL

#475280 Sep 6, 2013
Page 1 of 2

History of the "glorious" Roman Catholic church.
And Jesus was the founder of this cesspool? I don't think so.

January 1992: "Father" Wilson Smart allegedly raped an altar boy years earlier and photographed him without clothes.

February 1992, Wisconsin: "Father" Bruce Hall was tried in Wisconsin for caressing a boy, 12 years of age, during visits to the rectory for counseling.

March 1992, California: "Father" Victor Ubaldi was charged by a San Diego woman for molesting her numerous times when she was a pre and early teenager.

April 1992, California: "Father" Patrick Kelly, aged 71, absconded to Ireland after being charged with molesting a little girl, having been forbidden to remain in the State of California.

May 1992, Arizona: "Father" Mark Lehman was sued by parents in the Diocese of Phoenix, AZ, who claimed he had molested their three children. He had received a ten year prison sentence only one month before for exploiting several other children.

June 1992, Massachusetts: "Father" Richard Lavigne in Shelbourne Falls, MA. was found guilty and jailed for 12 counts of child rape. For months he insisted that the accusations were part of a plot framed by a local group that had left his church.

July 1992, California: "Father" J.T. Monaghan (a retired priest) was charged with taking a 7 year old Sacramento girl, who he was counseling into the kitchen for cookies where he allegedly abused her.

August 1992, Indiana & Illinois: "Father" Patrick White, aldeady under indictment in the State of Indiana for his abuse of boys, was arrested in Illinois for criminal sexual assault of a minor. At the time of his arrest, law enforcement officers found Mr. White destroying snapshots of nude boys.

September 1992, Massachusetts: "Father" Ron Provost was charged and found guilty to having taken photographs of -2- unclothed boys (7 to 10 years old) in his rectory in Barre, MA. in order to obtain sexual pleasure. Some of the photos were 15 years old.

October 1992, New York: "'Father" Daniel Calabrese sodomized a minor in his Poughkeepsie, N.Y. rectory and was found guilty. After sentencing him to 90 days in jail, the District Attorney, William Grady reprimanded Cardinal John O'Connor for ignoring previous complaints concerning Calabrese's behaviour.

November 1992, Wisconsin: "Father" David Malsch was charged with taking a 14 year old boy in Wausau, Wisconsin, to a motel for two days, where he fondled him in the pool, gave him alcohol and took photos of the boy without clothes in the motel room. The boy had a learning disability,

December 1992, Massachusetts & New Mexico: "Father" David Holley after being accused of molesting children in Worcester, MA. was transferred to Alamogordo, NM, to a treatment center known as the Servants of the Paraclete. In New Mexico, he allegedly molested other children.

1993, California: In Santa Barbara over 30 children were molested in a seminary.

1993, Illinois: Bishop Joseph Imesch of Joliet, IL, was quoted saying: "These are times that shake our faith and confidence in our most cherished systems and institutions. We hear about sexual abuse and the shattering effect it has on the victims, their families and the community. I am particularly shocked and saddened when I hear of allegations that some of our priests have committed these acts." The bishop was speaking from experience as he had recently removed six molesting priests.
OldJG

Rockford, IL

#475281 Sep 6, 2013
Page 2 of 2

History of the "glorious" Roman Catholic church.
And Jesus was the founder of this cesspool? I don't think so.

1993, Massachusetts: Former priest, James Porter was sentenced to 18 - 20 years in a Massachusetts State Prison by Superior Court Judge, Robert L. Steadman, in New Bedford, MA. Porter, 58 pleaded guilty to 41 counts of sexual abuse between 1961 and 1967 in five parishes in south eastern Massachusetts. He could be eligible for parole in six years. More than 100 victims of the ex-priest reached a civil agreement with the local Archdiocese in 1992. The New Bedford Standard Times reported a $1.5 million settlement with 31 additional victims. Porter's case offers the largest example of clerical sexual abuse - or abuse by any individual - in American judical history. Judge Steadman lambasted Porter for his outrageous conduct and complete disregard for the physical, spiritual and psychological impact be had on his victims. He called Porter "an effigy" representing all the other named and unnamed child abusers. Porter's case was avidly pursued by victims who for many years had repressed memories of their abuse. Frank Fitzpatrick, now 43 said he was 39 before he could trace a lifetime of depression and lack of self esteem to the occasion on which he was drugged and molested by "Father" Porter.

1996, Ohio: An Ohio family suing the Roman Catholic Church says their retarded son who died of AIDS got the disease from members of a religious order who raped him while he lived at a church-funded home.

The Roman Catholic Church leadership can no longer hide the facts. Priests are molesting children throughout the land. Literally hundreds of priests in this country alone, are preying on children. To try to hush this unprecedented crisis the hierarchy of the Catholic Church has spent upwards of 500 million dollars in out-of-court settlements. Thousands of Americans will never be the same again because of molestation by their priest when they were children. Victims tell of drug and alcohol addiction, nightmares, depression and suicide attempts which they trace to the time when they were molested by a priest.

You should be concerned about how many of these molesters are still 'at-large' because Rome paid off the parents and the victims and then transferred the molesters to other parishes.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#475282 Sep 6, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
Jesus died for you, so that you could go to heaven. I can see where that would be very complicated :)
If Jesus died, how is it that he still lives and is coming nacl.
If that is the case, he never died, and there was only a token sacrifice, if any at all.
Why is that so difficult to understand?
Is your reasoning ability impaired or something?
truth

Perth, Australia

#475283 Sep 6, 2013
meybe he is she
what you think
n

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#475284 Sep 6, 2013
Plain Jane wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe because there are inner doubts that he cannot accept.
So he "honors" and "defends" Jesus by being nasty.
Which is contrary to the teaching of the very Jesus she believes in.
That is the very definition of hypocrite.
truth

Perth, Australia

#475285 Sep 6, 2013
be c au koze someone try make fun funny and money too
she=$he

o don't worry i will pray for you
Our Father=Oceanas

to you my lovely family in Christ
to you my brothers and sisters in Oceania

i wrote to you
what your Creator promise
renew face as well face of this planet earth
now who is been down will be up
what is up will be down..

-don't be scare of me my lovely fraud friends
very soon you all will be under fra- id..its very nice identification..yeeeeeee

I remind you pray for your mother..nobody can't cry and pray like her!

come come to me my lovely childreens

Did you see I'N'RI who stay there?

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#475286 Sep 6, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
Billy Graham has turned over a "new leaf" in his bible, as he preaches that humans no longer have to be Christian to go to heaven.
I wonder if non-human animals will be able to go to heaven if THEY are not Christian.
Sarcasm intended.
Well, it seems many jackasses will be in heaven, so he may be right!
truth

Perth, Australia

#475287 Sep 6, 2013
frayid
Friday is day of our lovely CROSS I'N'RI

my body mind soul hand lags this time stop there touch there and cover up all of you ..

its been very painful experience
crown too ..like never before

i insure you for further going and cover up
pure soul is always pure..

never give up soul in vain..

people usual do that for money pride power and so on..

by my lovely confe
e h..i am going now have nice cup of coffee
with my lovely chinecooking honey milky bikikiki..
truth

Perth, Australia

#475288 Sep 7, 2013
i am victim every victim stay on cross
spit over me my lovely confe
spit

“YESHUA IS LORD”

Since: Apr 07

GAWGIA (GEORGIA)

#475289 Sep 7, 2013
Wish you guys were here. One of my beloved colleagues is leaving so tonight we gave her a going away supper. It seems the tables are groaning under the weight of all the food we have.

God indeed has blessed us with the bounty of the land.

Sure wish you guys were here to help eat some of all this food.
truth

Perth, Australia

#475290 Sep 7, 2013
You still not believe fast my lovely friend and pray..game is not yet over..
your mother still dreaming funfunfafaroneneurone..

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#475291 Sep 7, 2013
Marylou wrote:
<quoted text>
And your version of "Christianity" is better because?.....
You nastily accuse him of being nasty and that should make us think you are somehow better?
When will someone show a real charitable spirit on this thread? It sure isn't the other so-called "Christians" that are pretending they are better than the Catholics and engaing in infantile name-calling.
Bunch of haters. Thats all you people are.
And then after all that, here comes Marylou to become the "master accuser" of accusers.
How ironic!
I thought that was your satan's job.
Are you trying to usurp his deity?
truth

Perth, Australia

#475292 Sep 7, 2013
remember
sun shine sun spirit and water provide cakarone makarone food..lots of nice eggs with nice wheat
pure flour minustruunione..o yes carrot and spinach is good too..

by

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#475293 Sep 7, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
So, then, if Jesus' miracles (and those of His disciples) were acts of regeneration, so is His Sacrament of Baptism. Indeed, it cannot be otherwise, UNLESS
(a) One wishes to say that Jesus possessed no personal power to heal or perform miracles, but that these miracles were merely "psychosomatic" responses from those who believed in Him, OR...
(b) Despite Mark 2:1-12, etc., Jesus' healing miracles had no connection to the forgiveness of sins (and, thus, Jesus made people physically whole while leaving them spiritually alienated from the Father -- a ridiculous proposition).
Yet, if one takes either of these positions, one must also be willing to ignore the Scriptures (viz. Mark 2:1-12 & Mark 5:30).
As for the orthodox Christian understanding of Baptism (that of Baptismal regeneration), we recognize that Christ still touches people through the ministry of His Church. In this, we recognize that two things are necessary for salvation:
(1) Christ's free offer of salvation, and ...
(2) Our willing acceptance of this free offer of salvation.
If this were not the case (i.e. if #2 above was not necessary), then everyone who ever existed would have been automatically saved when Jesus died on the Cross (1 Tim 2:4). And it is in the realm of #2 which our faith comes in.
Yet,#1 is also an intimate reality for those of us who understand the Traditional doctrine of Baptismal regeneration. In this, Christ does not merely offer us salvation through a promise made 2000 years ago. Rather, He offers it to us in personal intimacy through the Sacrament of His Church. And, through this Sacrament, He touches us directly, just as He directly touched the paralytic and the woman with the hemorrhage. And, thus, in Baptism, we have
(1) Christ's healing power, through the ministry of His Body (the Church), touching us and making us whole, and ...
(2) Our faith in Christ moving us to accept this healing power.
And this is how Christ takes us unto Himself.
So, according to the Scriptures, Baptism is regenerational, sacramental, and intrinsic to one's acceptance of Christ. For, as the Lord says, it cannot be otherwise:
"Amen, amen, I say to you, no one can enter the Kingdom of God without being born of water and the Spirit." -- John 3:5
http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/a25.htm
Why does John have to invoke the Egyptian god Amen to convey his message...unless Amen is the "real" god.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#475294 Sep 7, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
St. Paul didn't include chapter and verse when he wrote this.
Paul was no "saint".
He spoke contrary to the words of Jesus...in an effort to usurp his position in the church...and you know it.
The "story" of Paul is nothing more than a well elaborated version of the travels of Josephus, who was a traitor to the Jews, and a Roman accomplice in obfuscation of Jesus teachings through the pen of spurrious rewritings of history by less than honest scribes instructed by cathaholic bishops of the same caliber.

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
Secular Humanism VS Christianity 2 min another viewer 177
Christians cannot debate with ATHEISTS 16 min Seentheotherside 589
3 Newspapers in Eagle RIver AK 16 min eljay577 1
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 23 min RiversideRedneck 977,399
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 30 min RiversideRedneck 88,252
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 31 min Pegasus 284,577
The Future of Politics in America 37 min Nohweh 259
More from around the web