Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 701775 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.

truth

Dianella, Australia

#534756 May 4, 2014
marge

Leesburg, GA

#534757 May 4, 2014
confrinting with the word wrote:
well now it looks like some one read my post
confrinting with the word wrote:
TO ATTEMPT TO COMPARE ROMAN CATHOLICISM WITH CHRISTIANITY IS
INAPPROPRIATE....
THERE IS NO COMPARISON...
THE BIBLES DOES NOT SAY...
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ...that whosoever believeth in THEM should not perish, but have everlasting life.
DID YOU ROMAN CATHOLICS ..GET THE TRUTH...
THE BIBLES SAYS...
Joh 3:15 That whosoever believeth IN HIM (IN JESUS ) should not perish, but have eternal life.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him (IN JESUS) should not perish, but have everlasting life.
~~~~
The golden text of the BIBLE denounces the AUTHORITATIVE CLAIMS of Roman Catholicism....
READ IT...
JESUS DIED FOR WI SO EVER WILL BELIEVE ON HIM...
NO ONE EXCLUDED...
Yep!

marge

Leesburg, GA

#534758 May 4, 2014
truth wrote:
How you call people who take ''advantage'' over you or somebody else?
A false gospel swindler, the Catholic church does this, they try to 'lord' it over you..
truth

Dianella, Australia

#534759 May 4, 2014
see
now
you know how I think

Did holy spirit working differently?
Did every spirit is holy?
truth

Dianella, Australia

#534760 May 4, 2014
no margice
see word
invest
When you invest money in something its clear profit!
Many took advantage on front and calculated carefully include accident
as sure to have insure!

They know how control to have win overpower.

To be target how its calculation working on front you can find small things
into pure perfection.

God always listen,
others too who don't liked us!!!
truth

Dianella, Australia

#534761 May 4, 2014
many many many will come in my name
its not meeeeeeeeeee
its written
truth

Dianella, Australia

#534762 May 4, 2014
see jealous diploma
and jealous authority

choose pro;character

Why you liked accusers?
truth

Dianella, Australia

#534763 May 4, 2014
truth

Dianella, Australia

#534764 May 4, 2014
does meter what corrupt authority say

dear children
god is upon all of us
keep your historic land for yourself

corrupt authority must gooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oo
&fe ature=relmfu
Chess

Columbus, OH

#534765 May 4, 2014
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
Slither back to your favorite rock...lying snake
More nonsense from the thief.
truth

Dianella, Australia

#534766 May 4, 2014
hojo

Waconia, MN

#534767 May 5, 2014
Dust Storm wrote:
<quoted text>
If Paul were teaching the Corinthians to reject oral traditions and believe only in what the Bible strictly teaches, Paul would have seriously contradicted himself, and the problem Paul was trying to solve by writing 1 Corinthians 4:6 would have also been exacerbated rather than solved. Paul's preaching, which was the Gospel, was already in the form of oral doctrines, since only some of the NT books had been written at the time 1 Corinthians was written and since John 21:25 teaches that it was impossible to record the whole Gospel. So if Paul had told the Corinthians not to go "beyond what is written", then all the oral doctrines he was preaching to them at the time would have been considered to be "beyond what is written" and therefore everything that he and the Apostles had been preaching would have been invalid while they were trying to spread the Gospel. Also, it does not make sense for Paul to make Scripture superior to Tradition when he had already praised the Corinthians for preserving the oral Apostolic traditions in 1 Corinthians 11:2 and he was still preaching oral doctrines not yet recorded in the unfinished NT of the time. If he were telling them not to believe any doctrine not written in Scripture, then why were they expected to believe any of his oral they were written down? Why were they praised for accepting his oral doctrines in 1 Corinthians 11:2? Why believe anything Paul, Apollos, and the other Apostles orally preached? Yet throughout the NT Paul defends his oral preaching (what the people heard, not read) as being as necessary as Scripture itself (2 Timothy 1:13, 2:2; Colossians 1:5, Ephesians 1:13, etc.).
But even if Paul were speaking of a finished NT when he told them not to go "beyond what is written", Apostolic Biblical exegesis, the Corinthians would have simply continued forming more and more divisions, which Paul was trying to stop. Anyone can read into Scripture anything one wants to find in it. For instance, the Bible can be made to say that James 5:14 is a Sacrament or it can be made to say that it was applicable only in Apostolic times. Yet only one of these oral traditions interpreting Scripture can be Apostolic. Thus, allowing the Corinthians to stay within the bounds of Scripture alone would have allowed each Christian to interpret the Bible in any way desired, or to develop different systems of theology. The Corinthians were already doing this, as Paul states in the 3rd chapter of 1 Corinthians, so it would not make sense for Paul to initiate more ways to divide this church.
http://www.onearthasinheaven.com/tradition12x... Much more
This is an interesting "tidbit" of information that was originated from a Protestant perspective " by a Protestant" who obviously "slants" his conclusions which has " very little credibility" based upon the TRUTH of TRUE Apostolic Church history with regards to to Early Churcch Fathers who translated the original manuscripts, documents, letters and parchments from the Apostles in 397AD...The a Church Fathers took over 350 years to discern, contemplate, ponder and pray for wisdom and guidance before concluding exactly what Jesus was actually teachings His Apostles when He told them to preach the "Good News" of Salvation to the Christians in the Churches at Antioch, Colossus, Thessalonica, Corinth, ect.....The Canon of Scripyure" contains the essence of the teachings of Jesus and the TRUE Bible Interetation of those teachings came over 1500 years ago--by non other than "The Early Church Fathers" who wrote the Bible..........I put "very little credibility" in a 21st century "self-interpreting" Protestant bible
(editorializing preacher or writer) that can't even find common ground with ANY ONE of his other 42,000 contradicting and inconsistent bible only conflicting denominations!!!
truth

Kardinya, Australia

#534768 May 5, 2014
light can go anywhere
accusers always think they are better then others
as well accusers always act
who can and who can't
very easy find how they act destroy credibility of others

Who always try take advantage over others?

Everything stay in circle as boomerang=kut+ shestar!
Liam

Denver, CO

#534769 May 5, 2014
concerned in Brasil wrote:
<quoted text>
List of Sola Scripture, did you drink to much Eucharist wine today.
You never have asked for a list of Sola Scripture by Jesus or his Apostles.
You're using the 66 Books of your yellow highlighted Bible to make your case against the Catholic Church. Now you need to provide a verse where Jesus or His apostles give us the list of those 66 Books and ONLY those Books for Sola Scripture.
You've made cases against my faith for things like, praying for the departed. Well, its in my Bible. In order for you to be successful, you gotta demonstrate why 1Maccabees is not Biblical.
Where do the apostles say that Maccabees, Barnabas, Clement1 are not Scripture and Hebrews is?
Liam

Aurora, CO

#534770 May 5, 2014
None of the fundamentals bothered to ask a Jewish Rabbi why Maccabees is not in their Bible.
why dont you call a synagogue today, and ask them if Jews had an agreement on a set collection of Scripture in the first century. Their response to you would be: "we still do not have an agreement, as the Ethiopian Jews have the Septuigent as part of Sacred Scripture."

So, if most Jews didnt compile a canon until 70 yrs after the Resurrection, why did future Protestants submit to the authority of these guys? These men excluded the 27 NT Books as well as the Septuagint.
yon

Miami Beach, FL

#534771 May 5, 2014
Does the RCC follow the 10 Commandments or their own dogmas?
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#534772 May 5, 2014
concerned in Brasil wrote:
Quotes above from the following.
16. Catechism of the Catholic Church (New York: Doubleday Image, 1995), paragraphs 490-
492. The Catechism comes in numerous editions and languages. Because it has numbered
paragraphs, statements can be accurately located in spite of the variety of editions.
17. William Webster, The Church of Rome at the Bar of History, pp. 72-77, op. cit.
18. Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 411, 493.
19. Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 496-511.
20. William Webster, The Church of Rome at the Bar of History, pp.79-80, op. cit.
21. Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 963, 971, 2677.
22. Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 963, 975.
23. Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 966, 974.
24. William Webster, The Church of Rome at the Bar of History, pp. 81-85, op. cit.
25. Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 968-970, 2677.
26. Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 966.
27. Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 971, 2675.
Nice try Brazil Nut. Except your argument falls flat on its face when one admits the fact that ALL of the ancient Churches, the Eastern Orthodox, the Oriental Churches, etc., believe and teach Mary was Ever-virgin, Mary is the the Mother of God, she intercedes from heaven on our behalf. They ALSO believe as the Latins on baptism, the Eucharist as the body and blood of Christ, confession, confirmation, Holy Orders, apostolic succession, last rites, communion of saints, reject sola scriptura, reject faith alone, reject the 66 book canon, etc.

How can this be if the "RCC" made it all up after the schism? Lol.

William Webster? What a joke. He even admits this about baptism:

"The doctrine of baptism is one of the few teachings within Roman Catholicism for which it can be said that there is a universal consent of the Fathers....From the early days of the Church, baptism was universally perceived as the means of receiving four basic gifts: the remission of sins, deliverance from death, regeneration, and the bestowal of the Holy Spirit." (Webster, page 95-96)

Since your buddy Webster admits this, it's obvious you DON'T believe as the Church Fathers, or maybe you will finally find the courage to give me the name of ONE father who you believe was an evangelical fundamentalist who shared your beliefs?
Michael

Canada

#534773 May 5, 2014
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
I have "little regard" for liberal pollster hacks" who target their own specific liberal groups ( by telephone surveys) in order to arrive at the liberal conclusions that they want !!!.... The Catholic Church is growing, and expanding world wide at a faster rate greater than in the 1960's in all areas ---- attendance at Sunday AND daily Mass, in the Seminaries which are overflowing iwith new vocations to the priesthood in the majority of the dioceses of throughout the United
States and worldwide . In the convents we see the same story in which the majority of these convent of new vocational sisters are up by 80% ALL wearing habits and ALL in dedication to the Jesus Christ and the magesterium of the Catholic Church.
(lol). You NEVER give stats you just get defensive and make assumptions based on wishful thinking.

....Tell us the latest conservative numbers of how many practicing catholics are n america?

..... Most of my statistics are based on information from american bishops conferences that are reported by Pew research center and Cara the TWO most notable religion statistic gathering organizations.

....Are you claiming you disagree with the bishops?

...You have no statistics. You are just a blowhard with no substance.

....and as usual your reply will be defensive with nothing to back it up.

...Big talker with nothing to show for it.
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#534774 May 5, 2014
Michael wrote:
<quoted text>
(lol). You NEVER give stats you just get defensive and make assumptions based on wishful thinking.
....Tell us the latest conservative numbers of how many practicing catholics are n america?
..... Most of my statistics are based on information from american bishops conferences that are reported by Pew research center and Cara the TWO most notable religion statistic gathering organizations.
....Are you claiming you disagree with the bishops?
...You have no statistics. You are just a blowhard with no substance.
....and as usual your reply will be defensive with nothing to back it up.
...Big talker with nothing to show for it.
So your agenda then is to use the statistics of non-practicing Catholics in the USA as your justification for rejecting the Catholic faith.

Your too easy Mikey.
Michael

Canada

#534775 May 5, 2014
.....Hojo says the total number of nuns in america is growing Hahahah!
...1965 there were 180,000 nuns in america and Most wore their habit..
...2012 there were 57,500 nuns in america MOST do not wear habits.
..2013 there were 52,000 nuns in america, 46,000 of those under investigation by the Vatican. Average age of american nuns 70.
...Where are your numbers to back up your false claims?
Your just a big talker with no numbers and no credibility. Yes there are a handful of women who have entered some convents, but with the average age of 70 they are dying at a much faster rate than new ones joining.
....Within a few years there will be less than 10,000, where just two generations before there were 18 times that number.
....Most new priests in america are imported from foreign countries as new american recruits aren't even coming close with those who die of old age, disease and those that quit and move on.
....Where are you numbers Mr big talker? I don't have any Michael.
BUSTED!!....again...(lol)
....

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.

Pope Benedict XVI Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Pope Francis reportedly tells gay man: 'God mad... 7 hr The Lightbearer 9
News Pope Tells Bishops Not to Accept Gay Seminarians 9 hr Andy 3
News United House of Prayer for All People: Bishop's... (Apr '08) 12 hr ChristIsTheAnswer 10,773
News Pope to gay sex abuse victim: 'God loves you' 16 hr RalphB 8
News God made you gay' pope tells victim of clergy s... May 22 Hahahlolahah 6
News What Pope Francis and Obama may talk about (Sep '15) May 8 Serial deserters 54
News Alfie Evans' dad meets POPE to plead for asylum... Apr 24 C Kersey 1