Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 646602 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.

Liam

Saint Paul, MN

#552261 Jul 30, 2014
USA Born wrote:
<quoted text>
Why is it you refuse to read the scriptures? You can't see the difference between what men wrote and what God and Christ said. The Catholic church uses the KJV of the Bible, know as the "protestant" Bible. Why keep trashing it, throw it away.
If you dont like that the gnosrics were removed, go get a book on the gnostics. They are not considered scripture but, if you want to dive into them, they're available.
Because I think the reality of how the Bible developed debunks the Protestant argument of sola scripture. Why is Hebrews and James in the Bible, but the Didache, epistle of Barnabas and Clement not? What I'm saying is: Jesus and His Apostles never gave us a list. Therfore any notion that the Bible is the pillar and foundation of Christianity can't be true. I know its difficult to understand. Nobody told you about the Catholic and Orthodox Churches and the order of Bishops. This was installed by the Apostles before they wrote a single line of the NT.

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#552262 Jul 30, 2014
The following assumption would mean that the Gnostics believe that the creator that created the world IS indeed IMPERFECT!

I suggest that the world was NOT created by any "plan" whatsoever.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>

The Gnostic World View

All religious traditions acknowledge that the world is imperfect. Where they differ is in the explanations which they offer to account for this imperfection and in what they suggest might be done about it. Gnostics have their own -- perhaps quite startling -- view of these matters: they hold that the world is flawed because it was created in a flawed manner.

http://gnosis.org/gnintro.htm
Regina

Toms River, NJ

#552263 Jul 30, 2014
Liam wrote:
<quoted text>
How old were you when you left Catholic school? I went in the 80's and I too remember identifying myself as Roman Catholic because that's what I am. I suppose being 10-11 yrs old, the nuns didn't get into the details of why we're Roman Catholic. The fact is: the proper name of the church is "Catholic". And the Pope never said "Roman" Catholic Church only true Church. He said "Catholic".
Hey Liam!

This should take care of it once and for all....but sadly it won't sink in. Still, it's a good article, and personal reflections, read it in full if you get a chance, it's not long. Notice how he points out THE MASS....the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass....that the ancient community of Chaldean Catholics celebrated there until very recently....ancient as in since the time of Christ!

==========

Wednesday, July 23, 2014
It's Not a Smiley Face

"The "N" stands for Nasara. Nazarene. It marks the dwelling places and the property of "the Nazarenes." This is a derogatory Muslim term for those who follow "the Nazarene," the man from Nazareth.

The "N" marks the property of Christians. It indicates, ironically, that this property no longer belongs to them.

In fact, the Chaldean Christians have been in this region since the time of Jesus of Nazareth. They are the ancient inhabitants of this region, the children of Abraham's cousins. They have remained distinct from the Arabs who conquered them in the first millennium, but they have lived with them. Along with other ancient Christian communities, they have contributed to the formation of complex societies in the lands of Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq (and also Egypt). These societies built up centuries of religious tolerance.

But these societies could not endure the political exigencies of globalization. It is an atmosphere where radicals flourish, and ancient peoples are worn down relentlessly.

The West has experienced terrorism at the hands of radical jihadists. Chaldean Christians, however, are being subjected to the horror of genocide.

THE MASS IS NO LONGER OFFERED IN MOSUL. The people who have given continuous witness in the land of Abraham to Him who is the son of Abraham are perhaps finishing the long journey into exile that began a decade ago, when radical groups emerged following the downfall of the secular dictatorship.

We must pray and make sacrifices for our suffering brothers and sisters. We must remember them. We must embrace them in our hearts, in solidarity.

We pray, above all, that their faith will endure. A heritage may pass away. A people may disappear from history. But they will rise again, by the power of the One who dies no more, over whom death has no power. Because the Man from Nazareth is risen from the dead.

Jesus of Nazareth."
http://www.johnjanaro.com/2014/07/its-not-smi...
hojo

Chanhassen, MN

#552264 Jul 30, 2014
USA Born wrote:
<quoted text>
At least the "fundies" read the bible!
They "most definitely read it ---with over 42,000 hodge-podge ofvinconsistent and contradicting interpretations create " nothing but division, chaos and confusion for those bible only self appointed and self opinionated Protestant preachers that "throw out more whoppers than Burger King.....God NEVER was nor EVER will be the author of your bible only make-it-up-as-you-go half-truth, half-heresy Christianity

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#552265 Jul 30, 2014
I quite agree that if a creator exists, it is definitely responsible for all the suffering.

That is (in part) why I refuse to believe that a creator DOES exist. It would be an insult to my sense of fair play to worship such an image of a cruel monster.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>

The Gnostic World View

The blame for the world’s failings lies not with humans, but with the creator. Since -- especially in the monotheistic religions -- the creator is God, this Gnostic position appears blasphemous, and is often viewed with dismay even by non-believers.

http://gnosis.org/gnintro.htm
USA Born

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#552266 Jul 30, 2014
Liam wrote:
<quoted text>
Because I think the reality of how the Bible developed debunks the Protestant argument of sola scripture. Why is Hebrews and James in the Bible, but the Didache, epistle of Barnabas and Clement not? What I'm saying is: Jesus and His Apostles never gave us a list. Therfore any notion that the Bible is the pillar and foundation of Christianity can't be true. I know its difficult to understand. Nobody told you about the Catholic and Orthodox Churches and the order of Bishops. This was installed by the Apostles before they wrote a single line of the NT.
The Didache
http://www.topix.com/forum/post/reply
The Didache is also called the "Teaching of the Twelve Apostles." It was possibly written around A.D. 65-80 and is supposed to be what the twelve apostles taught to the Gentiles concerning life and death, church order, fasting, baptism, prayer, etc. There is debate as to its authenticity. The work is cited by Eusebius who lived from 260-341 and Athanasius 293-373. It seems to be referenced by Origen who lived from 185-254. In the Didache, 16:2-3 is quoted in the Epistle of Barnabas in 4:9, or vice versa.1 The Epistle of Barnabas was written in A.D. 130-131. The Didache is not inspired but is valuable as an early church document

They are not in the KJV because they are not considered scripture or the inspired Word of God. Look at the dates they were written.

You preach a gospel of men.

Psalms 18:31 For who is God save the LORD? or who is a rock save our God?

If Peter is your rock, then we beieve in a different God.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#552267 Jul 30, 2014
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
Are people who refer to their selves as "Spiritual ONLY" not inclined to be violent???
I don't know.

I've never compared "being spiritual" as a manner to show negative actions.

Humans have the ability to choose passiveness over violence, so being violent would also be a choice someone makes.
USA Born

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#552268 Jul 30, 2014
Liam wrote:
<quoted text>
You call that Idolatry? Lol. How about this: do you think your Bible is god? Because that's how many of you act towards the Holy Bible (minus 7 Books that y'all removed). The Bible has become your god....that's idolatry!
My Bible is the Word of God. It's not a statue I parade around.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#552269 Jul 30, 2014
USA Born wrote:
<quoted text>
Why is it you refuse to read the scriptures? You can't see the difference between what men wrote and what God and Christ said. The Catholic church uses the KJV of the Bible, know as the "protestant" Bible. Why keep trashing it, throw it away.
If you dont like that the gnosrics were removed, go get a book on the gnostics. They are not considered scripture but, if you want to dive into them, they're available.
Why is it that you refuse to accept all of what Jesus taught?

You would be able to see these difference within Jesus, and realize that he was just human and made decisions based upon that.

How is it that you and other men are able to discern "God's inspiration"?

Please try to be more honest - just a little - when speaking about what "God" authorized and what men had.
USA Born

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#552270 Jul 30, 2014
Regina wrote:
<quoted text>
The Church doesn't use the KJV.
Some do. The 1985 version of your Bible hasn't causght on comletely.
USA Born

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#552271 Jul 30, 2014
caught on
Just Sayin

United States

#552272 Jul 30, 2014
USA Born wrote:
<quoted text>
Who are you or the pope to tell God what is fitting? You only know of Enoch and Elijah because God told Moses to write. You only know of Mary because of the writings of the Apostles. Why not do what Paul said and study the scriptures so you can learn the truth.
2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Someone in the RCC made up a story about the mother of Jesus and you believe it as though God said it. It's nowhere in scripture.
The Trinity is nowhere explicit in Scripture either, yet it was believed from the earliest days of the Church. Just as it was always believed that Mary was assumed into heaven and remained a virgin all her life. Protestants like to keep certain Traditions and not others.
Liam

Saint Paul, MN

#552273 Jul 30, 2014
USA Born wrote:
<quoted text>
The Didache
http://www.topix.com/forum/post/reply
The Didache is also called the "Teaching of the Twelve Apostles." It was possibly written around A.D. 65-80 and is supposed to be what the twelve apostles taught to the Gentiles concerning life and death, church order, fasting, baptism, prayer, etc. There is debate as to its authenticity. The work is cited by Eusebius who lived from 260-341 and Athanasius 293-373. It seems to be referenced by Origen who lived from 185-254. In the Didache, 16:2-3 is quoted in the Epistle of Barnabas in 4:9, or vice versa.1 The Epistle of Barnabas was written in A.D. 130-131. The Didache is not inspired but is valuable as an early church document
They are not in the KJV because they are not considered scripture or the inspired Word of God. Look at the dates they were written.
You preach a gospel of men.
Psalms 18:31 For who is God save the LORD? or who is a rock save our God?
If Peter is your rock, then we beieve in a different God.
Are you saying the DATE the Didache was written is why its not in the Bible??? You need to rethink that. Revelation most certainly came after that. The first book of the NT came 20-30 yrs after the resurrection....
And of course Jesus is my Rock., my God, my Savior. But he also changed Simon's name to Rock and Rock established the order of Bishops to be the visible head of His Church.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#552274 Jul 30, 2014
Just Sayin wrote:
<quoted text>
Isaiah 7:14
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
"A Son", not "a body."
Luke 1:31
And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus.
"A Son", not "a body."
I know this is difficult stuff for you, but think of it this way:
A woman named Sally has a baby boy and names him Bill.
Therefore, Bill is Sally’s son, and Sally is Bill’s mother.
Does that make it clearer?
What does that have to do with:

HS (horror show)
Christ was in the form of God....equal to God...so says Scripture...
Php 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
Just Sayin

United States

#552275 Jul 30, 2014
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
So...Mary was to bear a Son that had no body????? Christ did not have a body???? Don't tell me I have been wrong for 82 years!!!!!
It is clear enough from the New Testament that Jesus has a human body. John 1:14 means at least this, and more:“The Word became flesh.” Jesus’ humanity is one of the first tests of orthodoxy (1 John 4:2; 2 John 7). Jesus was born (Luke 2:7). He grew (Luke 2:40, 52). He grew tired (John 4:6) and got thirsty (John 19:28) and hungry (Matthew 4:2). He became physically weak (Matthew 4:11; Luke 23:26). He died (Luke 23:46). And he had a real human body after his resurrection (Luke 24:39; John 20:20, 27).
"Son" includes the body, doesn't it? The mother gives birth to a son who has a body. She does not only give birth to his soul.
I know it's complicated.
Just Sayin

United States

#552276 Jul 30, 2014
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
-
-
Unfortunately, Catholics don't understand the difference between Pagan Rites and Rituals, and Christianity.
-
Catholics brought all the Pagan nonsense to "Christianity." There IS NO EXPLANATION for Pagan presence in Christianity - except that the RCC could not let it go.
Speaks to integrity of their teachings.
So you don't put up a Christmas tree at Christmas time?

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#552277 Jul 30, 2014
Just Sayin wrote:
<quoted text>
"Son" includes the body, doesn't it? The mother gives birth to a son who has a body. She does not only give birth to his soul.
I know it's complicated.
"Son" includes the body, doesn't it?" Why are you crawfishing???..
USA Born

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#552278 Jul 30, 2014
Liam wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you saying the DATE the Didache was written is why its not in the Bible??? You need to rethink that. Revelation most certainly came after that. The first book of the NT came 20-30 yrs after the resurrection....
And of course Jesus is my Rock., my God, my Savior. But he also changed Simon's name to Rock and Rock established the order of Bishops to be the visible head of His Church.
No. Didache was not, is not the "inspired Word of God". It may have a good use but, it is not scripture.

Now, for the first time you say Jesus is your rock. Never is Peter called rock. The O.T. gives us a clear that the Rock is God and in the N.T. it is Christ only. The RCC can call Peter their rock, who cares. The issue is with the RCC saying the scriptures call Peter the rock and not the Words reaveld to him by the Father.

Psalms 18:31 For who is God save the LORD? or who is a rock save our God?
Psalms 18:46 The LORD liveth; and blessed be my rock; and let the God of my salvation be exalted.
Psalms 27:5 For in the time of trouble he shall hide me in his pavilion: in the secret of his tabernacle shall he hide me; he shall set me up upon a rock.
Psalms 28:1 Unto thee will I cry, O LORD my rock; be not silent to me: lest, if thou be silent to me, I become like them that go down into the pit
Psalms 31:2 Bow down thine ear to me; deliver me speedily: be thou my strong rock, for an house of defence to save me.
Psalms 31:3 For thou art my rock and my fortress; therefore for thy name's sake lead me, and guide me.

While Peter's walk was much better than mine and an inspiration, he was still just a man.

I like the idea of seeing you and I as having a different God and Christ. It's more like you telling me about yours and vice versa. I don't dislike you but IMO, the Catholic church in Rome and later, the RCC are adversaries to the Word of God and Christ.
Just Sayin

United States

#552279 Jul 30, 2014
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes they were - in fact many were killed just because some guy "pointed" them out.
If not mental thoughts - what exactly were people killed for?
A: a different belief - other than the so-called "Church" or "Catholic Church"
You do know this part of history, right?
"Heresy" - a belief in something other than what is prescribed.....religion is a thought based edict....thus - thought based crime that would have allowed for burning at the stake to occur.
The Spanish Inquisition was established in 1478, with the aim of preserving Catholic orthodoxy; some of its principal targets were formally converted Jews, called "Marranos" thought relapsing into Judaism, or the Moriscos, formally converted Muslims thought to have relapsed into Islam. The public executions of the Spanish Inquisition were called autos-da-fé; convicts were "released" (handed over) to secular authorities in order to be burnt.
Estimates of how many were executed on behest of the Spanish Inquisition have been offered from early on; the historian Hernando del Pulgar (1436 - c. 1492) estimated that 2,000 people were burned at the stake between 1478 and 1490.[34] Estimates range from 30,000 to 50,000 burnt at the stake (alive or not) at the behest of the Spanish Inquisition during its 300 years of activity have previously been given and are still to be found in popular, not specialist academic books,[35] but modern scholars tend to place the number of persons (not just Maranos or Moriscos) actually executed by the Spanish execution at between 3,000–5,000 during its existence.[citation needed]
In February 1481, in what is said to be the first auto-da-fé, six Marranos were burnt alive in Seville. In November 1481, 298 Marranos were burnt publicly at the same place, their property confiscated by the Church.[36] Not all Maranos executed by being burnt at the stake seems to have been burnt alive. If the Jew "confessed his heresy", the Church would show mercy, and he would be strangled, prior to the burning. Autos-da-fé against Maranos extended beyond the Spanish heartland. On Sicily, from 1511-1515, 79 were burnt at the stake, while from 1511 to 1560, 441 Maranos were condemned to be burned alive.[37] In Spanish American colonies, autos-da-fé were held as well. For example in 1664, a man and his wife were burned alive in Rio de la Plata, and in 1699, a Jew was burnt alive in Mexico City.[38]
In 1535, five Moriscos were burnt at the stake on Majorca, the images of a further four were also burnt in effigy, since the actual individuals had managed to flee. During the 1540s, some 232 Moriscos were paraded in autos-da-fé in Zaragoza; five of those were burnt at the stake.[39] For the local Inquisition in Granada, some 917 Moriscos appeared before the tribunal from 1550-1595, 20 were burnt at the stake.[40] 45 Moriscos are said to have been burnt for heresy in 1728
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_by_burning
And don't think I disagree that there were other reasons for people to be burned, because I understand very well that there was. BUT - they were not the only reasons.
You really need to expand your knowledge base - outside of just a few reasons.
I know a fair amount about the inquisition. Just because I haven't posted lengthy paragraphs about it indicates nothing.
People's thoughts did not remain in their heads; they were carried out in action. That's what got them into trouble. And you must already know that the Church provided every opportunity for them to return to the right path. They weren't yanked out of bed and thrown on a fire.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#552280 Jul 30, 2014
Liam wrote:
<quoted text>
How old were you when you left Catholic school? I went in the 80's and I too remember identifying myself as Roman Catholic because that's what I am. I suppose being 10-11 yrs old, the nuns didn't get into the details of why we're Roman Catholic. The fact is: the proper name of the church is "Catholic". And the Pope never said "Roman" Catholic Church only true Church. He said "Catholic".
I went to school in the,FIFTIES AND SIXTIES.....IT WAS the Roman Catholic Church...period...why don't you get that ....the pope, bishops, priests nuns,called it Roman Catholic..it was actually diocese in two different states..two orders,of nuns,...different priests,all called it Roman Catholic Church...my baptism certificate .most likely all my other certificates.....all exams and papers identified the Church I belonged to headed by the Pope in Rome...the HOLY ROMAN CATHOLUC CHURCH...question 133 in that catechism...learned by memorization....

You may only use Catholic now,but back then we called it Roman Catholic....no out of disrespect or some Protestant agenda, I don't think I knew,any ...all my friends,were in my school or the local parochial school ...it was,THE,NAME OF THE CHURCH......period, Clay

And I may be old but thank God I can still read AND REMEMBER.

It's like,you guys cannot understand ...THINGS WERE DIFFERENT ...but the head,of your Church is,still in Rome .....the Vatican runs your religion....it's in ROME ....

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) 3 min nanoanomaly 48,746
Jesus and Muhammad were FRAUDS 12 min DebraE 12
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 23 min WasteWater 105,618
Play "end of the word" part 2 (Dec '15) 26 min WasteWater 2,062
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 40 min bad bob 182,651
Ladies, what is the sexual act you most enjoy? 1 hr Mustang GT Girl 12
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 1 hr Classic 3,684
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 2 hr Joe Fortuna 971,681
Things poping up while i was sitting on my dads... (Jun '11) 22 hr Bluehair79 67
More from around the web