Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 641543 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

Lawrence, MA

#479360 Sep 30, 2013
Chuck wrote:
<quoted text>
I haven`t been on here in days and the first thing I read is Clay the Clown.
Tell me..did you call Confront an idiot maybe a week ago? Tell me you didn't please so I can catch you in a lie...again.
Yeah I called Confrint an idiot and I'm certain I've called you one too. What's your point? I would say its few and far between for me.
I think I called Confrint one after the 500th time he falsely accused me of worshiping a statue. I probably won't do it again until number 700. It takes a good dosage of the man's ignorance to cause me to say an insult back. Do you see the difference?
Its obvious to anyone who's on this thread, we Catholics show remarkable restraint. You on the other hand, can not post one single reply without calling someone a name in order to defend your position. That's called insecurity. You don't actually buy into what your telling us... I don't see how any of you can buy into it at this point. I believe you're trying to sustain the lie of sola scripture and your frustration shows.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#479361 Sep 30, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
But the Pope never said its ok for Catholics to use contraception. Ever. Do you seriously not think we can see what you're about, Ox?
You're a liar and a cheat; a manipulator of scripture. There is not one hint of Christ in anything you say. I don't get you.
Anyway, your only desire is to get under peoples skin and you almost did it with me .
The issue of contraception has always been a heavily contested issue in the Catholic Church. That’s why a headline in this morning’s Telegraph “The Pope drops Catholic ban on condoms in historic shift” stopped me in my tracks.

Pure logic escapes you..

The Catholics had a ban on condoms..The Catholic ban on condoms affected only the Catholics!!!! The lifting of this ban affects only Catholics!!!!
CHUCK

Sunbury, OH

#479362 Sep 30, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah I called Confrint an idiot and I'm certain I've called you one too. What's your point? I would say its few and far between for me.
I think I called Confrint one after the 500th time he falsely accused me of worshiping a statue. I probably won't do it again until number 700. It takes a good dosage of the man's ignorance to cause me to say an insult back. Do you see the difference?
Its obvious to anyone who's on this thread, we Catholics show remarkable restraint. You on the other hand, can not post one single reply without calling someone a name in order to defend your position. That's called insecurity. You don't actually buy into what your telling us... I don't see how any of you can buy into it at this point. I believe you're trying to sustain the lie of sola scripture and your frustration shows.
Just making the point you're a hypocrite ...thanks.
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#479363 Sep 30, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
Birth Control | Catholic Answers
www.catholic.com/tracts/birth-control&#82... ;
Few realize that up until 1930, all Protestant denominations agreed with the Catholic Church's teaching condemning contraception as sinful.
Seems to me, when catlicks condemn the use of condoms and the pope says it is OK to use them, constitutes a change!!!!!
If he said it, it would be a change, but he didn't say it. Why would you listen to the lame stream media?

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#479364 Sep 30, 2013
One will never be able to prove incontrovertibly that the Catholic Church changed dogma. Any effort to do so will fizzle. It is futile to undertake the argument.

At the same time, it is less taxing to claim that the Church changes a teaching, although there are church responses for this as well.

Lets take the first undertaking.

One insurmountable obstacle to proving the Church changed a dogma is with the exception of basic tenets of Christianity, when something is proposed by the Church, it is not made crystal clear where it belongs in a range of categories used by the Church.
Here are presented a few. purpose is to more clearly illustrate my point not to mock the Church.

The Division of Dogma follow the lines of the divisions of faith.

(1) GENERAL OR SPECIAL (2) MATERIAL OR FORMAL (3) PURE OR MIXED (4) SYMBOLIC OR NON-SYMBOLIC;
==========

Dogmas also can differ according to their various degrees of necessity.

SPECIAL DOGMAS are the truths revealed in private revelations. Special Dogmas, therefore, are not, strictly speaking, dogmas at all. They are not Revealed Truths transmitted from the Apostles They are not Defined or Proposed by the Church for the Acceptance of the Faithful Generally.

==========
MATERIAL DOGMAS (or Divine Dogmas, or Dogmas in themselves, in se) when abstraction is made from their definition by the Church, when they are considered only as Revealed; and they are called Formal Dogmas (or Catholic, or "in relation to us", quoad nos) when they are considered Both as Revealed and Defined.

PURE DOGMAS ( can be known only from Revelation), as the Trinity, Incarnation, etc.;

==========
The infallibility of the Magisterium extends also to teachings which are deduced from such truths (FIDES ECCLESIASTICA). These Church teachings or Catholic truths (VERITATES CATHOLICAE) are not a part of divine revelation, yet are intimately related to it. The rejection of these "secondary" teachings is not heretical, but involves the impairment of full communion with the Catholic Church.

FIDES ECCLESIASTICA
There are three categories of these "SECONDARY" TEACHINGS (FIDES ECCLESIASTICA):
•THEOLOGICAL CONCLUSIONS:(conclusiones theologicae) religious truths, deduced from divine revelation and reason.
•DOGMATIC FACTS (facta dogmatica) historical facts, not part of revelation but clearly related to it. For example the legitimacy of the papacy of Pope Benedict XVI, and the Petrine office
•PHILOSOPHICAL TRUTHS, such as existence of the soul, "freedom of will", philosophical definitions used in dogmas such as transubstantiation

==========
1.De fide Divine revelations with the highest degree of certainty, considered infallible revelation
2.Fides ecclesiastica Church teachings, which have been definitively decided on by the Magisterium, considered infallible revelation
3.Sententia fidei proxima Church teachings, which are generally accepted as divine revelation but not defined as such by the magisterium
4.Sententia certa Church teachings without final approval but clearly deduced from revelation
5.Sententia communis Teachings which are popular but within the free range of theological research
6.Sententia probabilis Teachings with low degree of certainty
7.Opinio tolerata Opinions tolerated within the Catholic Church, such as pious legends
==========

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#479365 Sep 30, 2013
Moving onto doctrines. Or Teachings. "Changes" ( the Church would say Clarifications) can be identified in the following doctrines/teachings: Original Sin ( less emphasis of juridical in tome). whether those outside the church is saved,the assumption, receiving 1 or 2 forms of the Eucharist, limbo, etc.

I could provide resource material on each issue identified here, but length prohibits this.

Yes, one could say the items changed.

But the Church would argue they were not changed. changed but However, according to the position of doctrinal development, they were not changes. A deeper truth re each of these items were revealed re these items or the Church better clarified what it had already taught.
----------
I welcome correction. I presented this information in an effort to help the 2 differing sides of the "doctrines change" issue understand each other.
hojo

Saint Paul, MN

#479366 Sep 30, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
....he just willingly agress that the doctrine was "finalized" in the late 4th C.
.
"Finalized IN WRITING, and had NEVER CHANGED, from the time that Apostles, in Acts 2 (from the oral teachings of Jesus HIMSELF) ministered, preached and taught the early Christians in the Churches of Antioch, Philippi, Corinth, Ephesus, Galatia, Thessalonica, etc.
You think that you can "get away" with lying about this, attempting to (pit) Regina (and other Catholics) against me, just like you "fundies" do (to each other) with your other 42,000 contradicting and inconsistent bible only "fundies" ....Sorry NEW AGE! It's not going to work with us Catholics. We'll leave the constant confusion, conflict and chaos to you Protestant "fundies"
You people have become "experts" at distorting and manipulating the truth!!!
marge

Leesburg, GA

#479368 Sep 30, 2013
You have Opinions Hojo, just like those who were taught by the Apostles, mere opinions, Unlike the Word of God which is flawless, perfect, are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
truth

Southern River, Australia

#479369 Sep 30, 2013
be bless every mother
Which walk trough this planet earth since her foundation exist.
First commandments with them fulfill
Earth will be fullfill
first command is
you will have in birth every child in pain

Creator plain is woman's too
be bless you are highly favor

Jesus recommend
-Spirit in Father hand
- nmother John

by
marge

Leesburg, GA

#479370 Sep 30, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
If he said it, it would be a change, but he didn't say it. Why would you listen to the lame stream media?
I thought he did too, ok'd it to stop the spread of aids in Africa I think, but everyone is equal.
truth

Southern River, Australia

#479371 Sep 30, 2013
every spirit is not holy
trough evil spirit coming evil mind

Your Creator correction is
natural biological existence nobody fully destroy
not yet.

Possessors and deceivers are deference.

Holy Scripture explain fully.

-be bless every mother on this planet earth
with mothers Creator fulfill as it is written

Possessors and deceivers, as well destroyers can't rich point not yet.

-life will be preserve
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#479372 Sep 30, 2013
marge wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought he did too, ok'd it to stop the spread of aids in Africa I think, but everyone is equal.
No. He didn't.

http://catholic.org/national/national_story.p...
marge

Leesburg, GA

#479373 Sep 30, 2013
2 Samuel 22:31
"As for God, his way is perfect: The LORD's word is flawless; he shields all who take refuge in him.
marge

Leesburg, GA

#479374 Sep 30, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
He's wrong to comment on that subject in that way, it encourages them.
truth

Southern River, Australia

#479375 Sep 30, 2013
not at all righteousness people don't have any rights
it is written

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#479376 Sep 30, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
I believe the Pope's comments shows spiritual insight. I believ you posted a quote before from him along a similar vein re moving people forward based on the spet they are capable of taking.
marge

Leesburg, GA

#479377 Sep 30, 2013
Hermeneutics Smutics wrote:
Moving onto doctrines. Or Teachings. "Changes" ( the Church would say Clarifications) can be identified in the following doctrines/teachings: Original Sin ( less emphasis of juridical in tome). whether those outside the church is saved,the assumption, receiving 1 or 2 forms of the Eucharist, limbo, etc.
I could provide resource material on each issue identified here, but length prohibits this.
Yes, one could say the items changed.
But the Church would argue they were not changed. changed but However, according to the position of doctrinal development, they were not changes. A deeper truth re each of these items were revealed re these items or the Church better clarified what it had already taught.
----------
I welcome correction. I presented this information in an effort to help the 2 differing sides of the "doctrines change" issue understand each other.
More opinions on opinions, no interest but I gave my opinion:)

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

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

#479378 Sep 30, 2013
who="Anthony MN"
The CC doesn't claim to be smarter than the bible, they just claim to be taught the proper meaning of the bible by those who wrote the bible and those who were taught by those same writers. Why are there other sola scriptura "Webster's" out there who say the bible says something different than you and Webster?

Anthony...you know the answer to your question. There are millions of different beliefs. Why does the Hindu teach differently than you do? Or why do they teach differently in other 'religions'?

There are those who are 'babes in Christ' who teach differently than others, though they read the same Bible. When/as the Holy Spirit teaches them, they will 'say the same thing', even as the Bible instructs us.

The world teaches that the Bible often contradicts itself. LOL
I have discovered that, as I learn the Truth, all of those supposed contradictions fade away.
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#479379 Sep 30, 2013
Hermeneutics Smutics wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe the Pope's comments shows spiritual insight. I believ you posted a quote before from him along a similar vein re moving people forward based on the spet they are capable of taking.
Agreed. I believe the concept is beyond the comprehension of some posters here.
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#479380 Sep 30, 2013
marge wrote:
<quoted text>
He's wrong to comment on that subject in that way, it encourages them.
Wrong. Read the article. He's saying if a bank robber is bound and determined to rob a bank at gunpoint no matter what you say or do to stop him, it's morally acceptable to try and convince him to do it without bullets so as to keep him from killing anyone. If he agrees, he at least takes a step towards recognizing the value of life.

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 Lbj 38,140
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 15 min RiccardoFire 104,671
Play "end of the word" part 2 30 min WasteWater 1,723
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 31 min RiccardoFire 44,365
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 32 min WasteWater 18,694
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 32 min Pegasus 280,879
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 48 min The Hangman 969,962
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 2 hr Janitor Of The LORD 618,390
More from around the web