One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Faith, Religion, Spirituality
The Problem With Protestantism ?
Oct 16, 2017 02:58:03   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
01/17/2017 The Problem With Protestantism

Fr. Dwight Longenecker
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2017/01/the-problem-with-protestantism.html

One of the complaints of Protestant converts to the Catholic religion from is that they miss the “fellowship” they enjoyed in their previous church community.

By “fellowship” they mean the warm friendship, camaraderie, sense of shared faith and personal commitment.

When they come to the local Catholic church they are likely to find not only that it is five times larger than their Protestant church, but the members are from a wider range of socio-economic, ethnic and racial backgrounds.

My parish in South Carolina is a small one by Catholic standards, but we have three Masses every weekend and welcome between eight hundred and a thousand worshippers.

A French executive from Michelin’s headquarters in our town might be sitting next to a Mexican immigrant construction worker. 

A Nigerian family sits beside a family of El Salvadoran political refugees who rub shoulders with a couple who fled Vietnam.

I can spot a heart surgeon sitting by a truck driver next to a college professor next to a waitress next to a suburban dad, mom and five kids next to an elderly widow and an unemployed drifter with mental health problems.

Its tough to achieve fellowship from such a wonderfully varied congregation.

This strength of Catholicism (“Catholic” after all, means “universal”) however, reveals one of the intrinsic weaknesses of the Protestant religion.

The many different forms of Protestantism cannot transcend their particular socio economic, historical and cultural origins to achieve an organic unity.


Protestants find fellowship easy because, for the most part, their churches are rooted in the same cultural and historical milieus as their devotees.

Many Protestants do an admirable job of evangelizing others.

But invariably, if people from other ethnic groups join their church they tend to adopt not only the religion, but the cultural and socio economic values.

When Protestant missionaries have converted people of other cultures they have invariably and unintentionally converted them not only to Christianity, but to their own Protestant European-based culture.

There is something quaintly English about African Anglicans and something oddly Scottish about Presbyterians in Togo.

Catholicism can also be accused of cultural hegemony in the name of evangelization, but there has always been at the heart of Catholic evangelization a desire to adapt Christianity to the native culture wherever possible.

When Protestantism does succeed in adapting to other cultures or ethnicities it loses its sense of identity, splits off and creates a new entity.

There are Korean and Vietnamese Presbyterian churches, and African American Protestantism, is vital and growing, but for these non-European expressions of Protestantism to flourish they had to become something different.

And their establishment continues to contribute to the thousands of fissiparous Protestant denominations.


A Protestant denomination can only maintain unity by adherence to its own cultural, historical and ethnic boundaries or sacrifice those boundaries and thereby foster further division by the creation of new denominations.

They may have unity if they keep to their cultural boundaries or break those boundaries to achieve a universal reach.

If you like, they either sacrifice unity for universality or they sacrifice universality for unity.

John Henry Newman noticed a similar clash within Protestantism.

Without an infallible, final authority Christians must separate into ever smaller denominations of opinion or they must dispense with any notion of an objective truth.

And fabricate a false unity which is no more than a toleration of personal opinions.


So in his famous essay on the development of doctrine he wrote, “If Christianity is both social and dogmatic, and intended for all ages, it must, humanly speaking, have an infallible expounder.

Else you will secure unity of form at the loss of unity of doctrine, or unity of doctrine at the loss of unity of form;

You will have to choose between a comprehension of opinions and a resolution into parties;

Between latitudinarian and sectarian error… You must accept the whole or reject the whole…it is trifling to receive all but something which is as integral as any other portion.

Thus it would be trifling indeed to accept everything Catholic except the head of the body of Christ on earth.”


Put more simply, the problem with Protestantism is that Protestants have rejected the authority of the Pope.

And in rejecting one Pope, they have ended up with thousands of popes.

Reply
Oct 20, 2017 08:07:34   #
Zemirah Loc: Sojourner En Route...
 
Never have I read such unmitigated ignorance.

Bible believing non-Catholics, who are the true church, the church that Jesus envisioned, may or may not be "Protestants."

For at least the first three hundred years of Christianity, before Constantine, Christianity was what God intended for it to be.

Small local home churches was the plan, for "we" each are now a holy temple. We have no need for elaborate buildings.

Christianity was never intended to be a spectator sport, like football or basketball.

In the ideal New Testament church congregation, all were to participate, with a song, a scripture reading, a personal testimony or a prophecy, etc., and all things were to be done decently and in good order.

Anyone who can read knows that.

If that pattern had been maintained there would be literally millions of "churches," but they would all be one.

All the individual churches of true believers today all together form a spiritual unity of one, all baptized by Jesus Christ with the same Holy Spirit, all worshiping the same triune God who has revealed Himself in His Holy Scripture. They have a spiritual unity which the church of Rome will never be able to approximate or to emulate, or even to understand.

That is why Jesus said, "Wherever there are two or three gathered in my name, there am I, in their midst."

We have no need of a man made hierarchal structure, men claiming great authority, but with no authorization from God, wearing satin robes and waving giant crucifixes, keeping Jesus Christ on a cross, or as a baby on Mary's lap, or being worshiped in a baked cookie... while they attempt to claim His position and usurp His authority, as the only head of His church, for themselves.

The independent churches which truly do make up the Body of Christ will never join with Rome. The "separated brethren," as Rome calls them, those mainline churches which split from Rome, will soon return.

There have always been churches of Scripture readers and believers, outside the Roman Catholic Institution, even during the dark ages, and there will always be so, for Jesus said so.

Hell will not prevail against His church, His little flock.

As for the colossal Roman edifice, Jesus never knew you.

The "problem" is all yours.


Doc110 wrote:
01/17/2017 The Problem With Protestantism

Fr. Dwight Longenecker
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2017/01/the-problem-with-protestantism.html

One of the complaints of Protestant converts to the Catholic religion from is that they miss the “fellowship” they enjoyed in their previous church community.

By “fellowship” they mean the warm friendship, camaraderie, sense of shared faith and personal commitment.

When they come to the local Catholic church they are likely to find not only that it is five times larger than their Protestant church, but the members are from a wider range of socio-economic, ethnic and racial backgrounds.

My parish in South Carolina is a small one by Catholic standards, but we have three Masses every weekend and welcome between eight hundred and a thousand worshippers.

A French executive from Michelin’s headquarters in our town might be sitting next to a Mexican immigrant construction worker. 

A Nigerian family sits beside a family of El Salvadoran political refugees who rub shoulders with a couple who fled Vietnam.

I can spot a heart surgeon sitting by a truck driver next to a college professor next to a waitress next to a suburban dad, mom and five kids next to an elderly widow and an unemployed drifter with mental health problems.

Its tough to achieve fellowship from such a wonderfully varied congregation.

This strength of Catholicism (“Catholic” after all, means “universal”) however, reveals one of the intrinsic weaknesses of the Protestant religion.

The many different forms of Protestantism cannot transcend their particular socio economic, historical and cultural origins to achieve an organic unity.


Protestants find fellowship easy because, for the most part, their churches are rooted in the same cultural and historical milieus as their devotees.

Many Protestants do an admirable job of evangelizing others.

But invariably, if people from other ethnic groups join their church they tend to adopt not only the religion, but the cultural and socio economic values.

When Protestant missionaries have converted people of other cultures they have invariably and unintentionally converted them not only to Christianity, but to their own Protestant European-based culture.

There is something quaintly English about African Anglicans and something oddly Scottish about Presbyterians in Togo.

Catholicism can also be accused of cultural hegemony in the name of evangelization, but there has always been at the heart of Catholic evangelization a desire to adapt Christianity to the native culture wherever possible.

When Protestantism does succeed in adapting to other cultures or ethnicities it loses its sense of identity, splits off and creates a new entity.

There are Korean and Vietnamese Presbyterian churches, and African American Protestantism, is vital and growing, but for these non-European expressions of Protestantism to flourish they had to become something different.

And their establishment continues to contribute to the thousands of fissiparous Protestant denominations.


A Protestant denomination can only maintain unity by adherence to its own cultural, historical and ethnic boundaries or sacrifice those boundaries and thereby foster further division by the creation of new denominations.

They may have unity if they keep to their cultural boundaries or break those boundaries to achieve a universal reach.

If you like, they either sacrifice unity for universality or they sacrifice universality for unity.

John Henry Newman noticed a similar clash within Protestantism.

Without an infallible, final authority Christians must separate into ever smaller denominations of opinion or they must dispense with any notion of an objective truth.

And fabricate a false unity which is no more than a toleration of personal opinions.


So in his famous essay on the development of doctrine he wrote, “If Christianity is both social and dogmatic, and intended for all ages, it must, humanly speaking, have an infallible expounder.

Else you will secure unity of form at the loss of unity of doctrine, or unity of doctrine at the loss of unity of form;

You will have to choose between a comprehension of opinions and a resolution into parties;

Between latitudinarian and sectarian error… You must accept the whole or reject the whole…it is trifling to receive all but something which is as integral as any other portion.

Thus it would be trifling indeed to accept everything Catholic except the head of the body of Christ on earth.”


Put more simply, the problem with Protestantism is that Protestants have rejected the authority of the Pope.

And in rejecting one Pope, they have ended up with thousands of popes.
01/17/2017 The Problem With Protestantism br br F... (show quote)

Reply
Oct 21, 2017 18:08:09   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
Zemirah,

No Zemirah, . . . The "ignorance and problem," is all yours.

You obsessively can't handle a Anglican Reformist criticism's, about Protestant-ism and his observations and facts. . . .

But you sure can, . . . really dish out your Anti-Catholic opinions, . . . out. . . .

How un-Christian, impetuous, ardent and vehement of you . . .

You get so carried away with your anti-catholic rhetoric and Religious anti-Catholic rancor "Pope Zemirah."


This article and opinion comes from a former Anglican Priest convert to Catholicism, . . .

Who would know better than with these differences, no other than the author of this article, Fr. Dwight Longenecker.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2017/01/the-problem-with-protestantism.html


Here's Fr. Longenecker summation as former Anglican Priest, his thoughts and religious observations on Protestantism.

1. One of the complaints of Protestant converts to the Catholic religion from is that they miss the “fellowship” they enjoyed in their previous church community. By “fellowship” they mean the warm friendship, camaraderie, sense of shared faith and personal commitment.

When they come to the local Catholic church they are likely to find not only that it is five times larger than their Protestant church, but the members are from a wider range of socio-economic, ethnic and racial backgrounds.


2. This strength of Catholicism (“Catholic” after all, means “universal”) however, this reveals one of the intrinsic weaknesses of the Protestant religion. The many different forms of Protestantism cannot transcend their particular socio-economic, historical and cultural origins to achieve an organic unity.


3. When Protestantism does succeed in adapting to other cultures or ethnicities it loses its sense of identity, splits off and creates a new entity. There are Korean and Vietnamese Presbyterian churches, and African American Protestantism, is vital and growing, but for these non-European expressions of Protestantism to flourish they had to become something different.

And their establishment continues to contribute to the thousands of fissi-parous Protestant denominations.


4. They may have unity if they keep to their cultural boundaries or break those boundaries to achieve a universal reach. If you like, they either sacrifice unity for universality or they sacrifice universality for unity. John Henry Newman noticed a similar clash within Protestantism.

Without an infallible, final authority Christians must separate into ever smaller denominations of opinion or they must dispense with any notion of an objective truth. And fabricate a false unity which is no more than a toleration of personal opinions.


5. “If Christianity is both social and dogmatic, and intended for all ages, it must, humanly speaking, have an infallible expounder. Else you will secure unity of form at the loss of unity of doctrine, or unity of doctrine at the loss of unity of form;
You will have to choose between a comprehension of opinions and a resolution into separate religious parties;

Between latitudinarian and sectarian error, . . . You must accept the whole or reject the whole, . . . it is trifling to receive all but something which is as integral as any other portion. Thus it would be trifling indeed to accept everything Catholic except the head of the body of Christ on earth.”


6. Put more simply, the problem with Protestantism is that Protestants have rejected the authority of the Pope. And in rejecting one Pope.

Protestant's and Evangelicals have ended up with thousands of popes.


And you Zemirah, are the "New-Evangelical-Pope" . . . Preaching your new Evangelical Christian theology and philosophy.

All one has to do is look below, and read, then re-cant your 14, anti-Catholic bigoted rants and see your religious anti-Catholic anger, and anti-Catholic responses.


All hail the "New-Pope-Zemirah, and his Evangelical religious zealot response's . . . .


No Zemirah, . . . The "ignorance and problem," is all yours.

You just proved my Anti-Catholic "Point," . . . "Exactly" . . .


Zemirah wrote:


1. Never have I read such unmitigated ignorance.

2. Bible believing non-Catholics, who are the true church, the church that Jesus envisioned, may or may not be "Protestants."

3. For at least the first three hundred years of Christianity, before Constantine, Christianity was what God intended for it to be.

4. Small local home churches was the plan, for "we" each are now a holy temple. We have no need for elaborate buildings.

5. Christianity was never intended to be a spectator sport, like football or basketball.

6. In the ideal New Testament church congregation, all were to participate, with a song, a scripture reading, a personal testimony or a prophecy, etc., and all things were to be done decently and in good order.

7. Anyone who can read knows that.

8. If that pattern had been maintained there would be literally millions of "churches," but they would all be one.

9. All the individual churches of true believers today all together form a spiritual unity of one, all baptized by Jesus Christ with the same Holy Spirit, all worshiping the same triune God who has revealed Himself in His Holy Scripture. They have a spiritual unity which the church of Rome will never be able to approximate or to emulate, or even to understand.

That is why Jesus said, "Wherever there are two or three gathered in my name, there am I, in their midst."

10. We have no need of a man made hierarchal structure, men claiming great authority, but with no authorization from God, wearing satin robes and waving giant crucifixes, keeping Jesus Christ on a cross, or as a baby on Mary's lap, or being worshiped in a baked cookie... while they attempt to claim His position and usurp His authority, as the only head of His church, for themselves.

11. The independent churches which truly do make up the Body of Christ will never join with Rome. The "separated brethren," as Rome calls them, those mainline churches which split from Rome, will soon return.

12. There have always been churches of Scripture readers and believers, outside the Roman Catholic Institution, even during the dark ages, and there will always be so, for Jesus said so.

13. Hell will not prevail against His church, His little flock.

14. As for the colossal Roman edifice, Jesus never knew you.


The "problem" is all yours.

br br 1. Never have I read such unmitigated igno... (show quote)

Reply
 
 
Oct 21, 2017 23:59:47   #
Zemirah Loc: Sojourner En Route...
 
There have always been those who convert from one faith to another since the first day an alternate false religion was established on earth to oppose the faith of the one true God.

Defending the Christian faith is a command: Jude 1:3 "Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints."

Calling me names is childish, but by all means knock yourself out.


Doc110 wrote:
Zemirah,

No Zemirah, . . . The "ignorance and problem," is all yours.

You obsessively can't handle a Anglican Reformist criticism's, about Protestant-ism and his observations and facts. . . .

But you sure can, . . . really dish out your Anti-Catholic opinions, . . . out. . . .

How un-Christian, impetuous, ardent and vehement of you . . .

You get so carried away with your anti-catholic rhetoric and Religious anti-Catholic rancor "Pope Zemirah."


This article and opinion comes from a former Anglican Priest convert to Catholicism, . . .

Who would know better than with these differences, no other than the author of this article, Fr. Dwight Longenecker.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2017/01/the-problem-with-protestantism.html


Here's Fr. Longenecker summation as former Anglican Priest, his thoughts and religious observations on Protestantism.

1. One of the complaints of Protestant converts to the Catholic religion from is that they miss the “fellowship” they enjoyed in their previous church community. By “fellowship” they mean the warm friendship, camaraderie, sense of shared faith and personal commitment.

When they come to the local Catholic church they are likely to find not only that it is five times larger than their Protestant church, but the members are from a wider range of socio-economic, ethnic and racial backgrounds.


2. This strength of Catholicism (“Catholic” after all, means “universal”) however, this reveals one of the intrinsic weaknesses of the Protestant religion. The many different forms of Protestantism cannot transcend their particular socio-economic, historical and cultural origins to achieve an organic unity.


3. When Protestantism does succeed in adapting to other cultures or ethnicities it loses its sense of identity, splits off and creates a new entity. There are Korean and Vietnamese Presbyterian churches, and African American Protestantism, is vital and growing, but for these non-European expressions of Protestantism to flourish they had to become something different.

And their establishment continues to contribute to the thousands of fissi-parous Protestant denominations.


4. They may have unity if they keep to their cultural boundaries or break those boundaries to achieve a universal reach. If you like, they either sacrifice unity for universality or they sacrifice universality for unity. John Henry Newman noticed a similar clash within Protestantism.

Without an infallible, final authority Christians must separate into ever smaller denominations of opinion or they must dispense with any notion of an objective truth. And fabricate a false unity which is no more than a toleration of personal opinions.


5. “If Christianity is both social and dogmatic, and intended for all ages, it must, humanly speaking, have an infallible expounder. Else you will secure unity of form at the loss of unity of doctrine, or unity of doctrine at the loss of unity of form;
You will have to choose between a comprehension of opinions and a resolution into separate religious parties;

Between latitudinarian and sectarian error, . . . You must accept the whole or reject the whole, . . . it is trifling to receive all but something which is as integral as any other portion. Thus it would be trifling indeed to accept everything Catholic except the head of the body of Christ on earth.”


6. Put more simply, the problem with Protestantism is that Protestants have rejected the authority of the Pope. And in rejecting one Pope.

Protestant's and Evangelicals have ended up with thousands of popes.


And you Zemirah, are the "New-Evangelical-Pope" . . . Preaching your new Evangelical Christian theology and philosophy.

All one has to do is look below, and read, then re-cant your 14, anti-Catholic bigoted rants and see your religious anti-Catholic anger, and anti-Catholic responses.


All hail the "New-Pope-Zemirah, and his Evangelical religious zealot response's . . . .


No Zemirah, . . . The "ignorance and problem," is all yours.

You just proved my Anti-Catholic "Point," . . . "Exactly" . . .
Zemirah, br br No Zemirah, . . . The "ignor... (show quote)

Reply
Oct 22, 2017 14:07:49   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
Zemirah,

Unless you three: Zemirah, mwdegutis, and dummy-boy can provide your religious affiliation ? Religious denomination ? And religious background ?

There is nothing more to say in this post thread.

I will not argue with a supposed charlatin Christian's, that have independent view's from Jesus's Christ's Orthodoxy religious biblical tenant's, teaching and basic biblical understanding principles by Jesus Christ and the 4 Gospel accounts and Jesus's ministry and the Church that he founded.

The Roman Catholic Magisterium teaching has not changed in One thousand, NineHundred and Eighty-Five years these same tenants of Jesus's Christ's Orthodoxy religious biblical, teaching and basic biblical understanding principles are one and the same.

You three can only quote from Saint Paul's letters to the gentile's, on teaching adherence, encouragement and strict religious formation given by Saint Paul. These letters are to these Christian churches having problems and are only a guidance in these Christian matters.


You three Zemirah, mwdegutis, and dummy-boy all hide in the independent Christian religious shadows, and lies of Evangelical Christian theology.

All three of you are religious cowards . . . .

You three are not priests or pastors. At best you don't even belong to a Christian church laity ?


I will not be at a religious Catholic Christian disadvantage, either you come clean in your Christian theological beliefs, church denomination ? In which, you three, do take advantage, of all the time, by avoidance of any question's asked. You never respond, you only attack, that is not a conversation its a one way Anti-Christian dialogue.

And you three call your selves Christians ? You three are-not adheres of the Christian faith.

You make up your own theological viewpoint all the time. By what authority has God or a church given this authority to you too do this ?

Here is a article that explains; The Gospel Priestly Method, "A Brief History of Priestly Formation."
http://sck.ca/priestly-formation/history-of-priestly-formation/

The simple but comprehensive profile of the first seminary is sketched in the words of the Gospel: “He appointed twelve to be with him, and to be sent out to preach and have authority to cast out demons” (Mark 3:14-15).

This being three full years with the Master, Jesus Christ, would set the pattern for priestly formation in the Western church down through the centuries. The apostle Paul followed the same method of personal accompaniment when he selected St. Timothy whom he “wished to go forth with him,” (Acts 16:3)

As Paul delivered to his newly founded gentile churches the decision reached by the Council of Jerusalem ca. AD 49. Saint Paul also deferred many decisions to "Peter's," Apostle leadership ("send away, send forth) with the same consistent teaching pattern to the Gentiles and their Christian conversion requirements separate from the Jews laws.


Pope Zemirah, You yourself are "Unable" unable to claim authority from God. Your a blasphemer and a religious heretic . . .

What are you even blathering about ? Provide copies ? If you have them?

Your a Evangelical Protestant "nut-case," you spew regurgitated compost information and religious nonsense . . .

You have only danced around these coined contrived anti-Catholic vitriol statements and ridiculous religious Anti-Catholic sentiments.

I really challenge you, to provide "One-False-Teaching" by The Holy Roman Catholic Universal Church that was founded by Jesus Christ, that is written in the Gospel's of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

Here are your Christian references to use.
a. Catechism of the Catholic Church http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM
b. Text, which you access from the index or from the concordances. Footnotes, word lists: are linked to the concordances;
lists comprising every occurrence of a particular word in the text. Each occurrence is displayed in the centre of a short
extract from the text; statistics: http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_AIUTO.HTM#concordanze
c. Compendium - Catechism of the Catholic Church
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-
dott-soc_en.html
e. Code of Canon Law http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM
f. Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-
dott-soc_en.html
g. The Three Levels of Magisterial Teaching - Catholicism.org www.catholicism.org/the-three-levels-of-magisterial-teaching
Catholic doctrine of the infallibility of the Magisterium in these matters.
h. https://www.biblegateway.com And the Douai-Rheims Bible http://www.drbo.org
And the Summa Theologica by St Thomas Aquinas http://www.drbo.org/sum/index.htm


Yes I want to see you dance, over the fires, is it getting hot yet . . . Don't burn your feet over the two-step dance.

The real Christian challenge is on. The 7 biblical Sacraments is a starting point . . . ?

Answer the Question's ?

Unless you three: Zemirah, mwdegutis, and dummy-boy can provide your religious affiliation ? Religious denomination ? And religious background ? Then this religious Christian thread post is over.


I still say, you are all religious cowards, in hiding, and provide lying compost, exhaled against the Catholic Church . . .

Zemirah wrote:
There have always been those who convert from one faith to another since the first day an alternate false religion was established on earth to oppose the faith of the one true God.

Defending the Christian faith is a command: Jude 1:3 "Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints."

Calling me names is childish, but by all means knock yourself out.
There have always been those who convert from one ... (show quote)

Reply
Oct 25, 2017 22:15:08   #
Zemirah Loc: Sojourner En Route...
 
You Sir, have clearly lost your way.

Being a Christian by following the guidance the Bible provides is the only "religious affiliation that Jesus requires.

As an "independent" Christian, I enjoy the freedom all Christians are ordered to maintain.

Galatians 5:1 "Christ has truly made us free: therefore stand fast in your free condition and let no man put a yoke on you again."

Together, the independent and nondenominational churches of the U.S. constitute the third-largest cluster of religious adherents in the country and the second-largest cluster of churches. In 2014, an estimated 6 percent (6%) of the U.S. population, over 46,000 churches representing more than 18,300,000 (eighteen million, three hundred thousand +) adherents, worshiped in an independent or nondenominational church.

You have no authority to question my own, or anyone's "religious affiliation."

As an adult, mature Christian in God's Word, I am sorry to say that you, Sir, are a babe in arms.

In the Bible, the evidence points to each church as self-governing and answerable directly to God Himself. In the book of Acts, where we read of the first missionary journeys and the establishment of many churches, there is no indication of a hierarchy of authority beyond the local elders of the church.

The countless Roman Catholic doctrines that are in direct opposition to the Bible, especially their denial of the doctrine of Justification by faith alone in Christ alone, throughout the New Testament," prove the Roman Catholic church to be a false religious system.

Not only is their doctrine heretical, their practice is an abomination. In Latin America, and throughout the world, the gross idolatry, church sponsored fiestas where all the people get wasted, syncretism with the pagan local religions and the horrendous hypocrisy bring out the true colors of Rome and it's false anti-christian religion.


AD
607 Boniface III made the first Pope

709 Kissing the Pope’s foot

786 Worshiping images and relics (breaking the 2nd commandment)

850 Use of “holy water” begun

995 Canonization of dead saints

998 Fasting on Fridays and during Lent

1079 Celibacy of the priesthood (Marriage of the priests outlawed)

1090 Prayer beads

1184 The Inquisition

1190 Sale of Indulgences

1215 Transubstantiation (required belief that priests invisibly convert the Eucharistic bread's elements literally into that of Christ’s body and blood).

1220 Adoration of the wafer (Host) (the worshiping of a piece of bread that one must believe is the Lord Jesus Christ)

1229 Reading of the Bible forbidden to "laymen" (who are the saints of God)

1414 Cup forbidden to people at communion

1439 Doctrine of purgatory decreed

1508 The Ave Maria approved

1534 Jesuit Order founded

1545 Tradition granted equal authority with the Bible

1562 Changed the 10 commandments (Exodus 20) by removing the 2nd commandment, which is, “do not make for yourself graven images”, and splitting the 10th into two to keep 10 commandments.

1854 Immaculate Conception of Mary

1864 Syllabus of Errors proclaimed

1870 INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE DECLARED

1950 Assumption of the Virgin Mary (the belief that the Virgin Mary ascended bodily into heaven without dying)

1965 Mary proclaimed “Mother of the Church” Since the above, changes and additions have been made as sustained by history.

Revelation 22: 18-19:
18 "For I testify unto every man that hears the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 "And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

The Bible does not change. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and forever. (Hebrews 13:8.)

Nevertheless, throughout history, the Roman Catholic Church and its doctrines have continued to change and can be expected to continue to change, according to the whim of the current pope in any month or year.

To one who argues on behave of a church both apostate and heretical, there is indeed nothing more to say.


Doc110 wrote:
Zemirah,

Unless you three: Zemirah, mwdegutis, and dummy-boy can provide your religious affiliation ? Religious denomination ? And religious background ?

There is nothing more to say in this post thread.

I will not argue with a supposed charlatin Christian's, that have independent view's from Jesus's Christ's Orthodoxy religious biblical tenant's, teaching and basic biblical understanding principles by Jesus Christ and the 4 Gospel accounts and Jesus's ministry and the Church that he founded.

The Roman Catholic Magisterium teaching has not changed in One thousand, NineHundred and Eighty-Five years these same tenants of Jesus's Christ's Orthodoxy religious biblical, teaching and basic biblical understanding principles are one and the same.

You three can only quote from Saint Paul's letters to the gentile's, on teaching adherence, encouragement and strict religious formation given by Saint Paul. These letters are to these Christian churches having problems and are only a guidance in these Christian matters.


You three Zemirah, mwdegutis, and dummy-boy all hide in the independent Christian religious shadows, and lies of Evangelical Christian theology.

All three of you are religious cowards . . . .

You three are not priests or pastors. At best you don't even belong to a Christian church laity ?


I will not be at a religious Catholic Christian disadvantage, either you come clean in your Christian theological beliefs, church denomination ? In which, you three, do take advantage, of all the time, by avoidance of any question's asked. You never respond, you only attack, that is not a conversation its a one way Anti-Christian dialogue.

And you three call your selves Christians ? You three are-not adheres of the Christian faith.

You make up your own theological viewpoint all the time. By what authority has God or a church given this authority to you too do this ?

Here is a article that explains; The Gospel Priestly Method, "A Brief History of Priestly Formation."
http://sck.ca/priestly-formation/history-of-priestly-formation/

The simple but comprehensive profile of the first seminary is sketched in the words of the Gospel: “He appointed twelve to be with him, and to be sent out to preach and have authority to cast out demons” (Mark 3:14-15).

This being three full years with the Master, Jesus Christ, would set the pattern for priestly formation in the Western church down through the centuries. The apostle Paul followed the same method of personal accompaniment when he selected St. Timothy whom he “wished to go forth with him,” (Acts 16:3)

As Paul delivered to his newly founded gentile churches the decision reached by the Council of Jerusalem ca. AD 49. Saint Paul also deferred many decisions to "Peter's," Apostle leadership ("send away, send forth) with the same consistent teaching pattern to the Gentiles and their Christian conversion requirements separate from the Jews laws.


Pope Zemirah, You yourself are "Unable" unable to claim authority from God. Your a blasphemer and a religious heretic . . .

What are you even blathering about ? Provide copies ? If you have them?

Your a Evangelical Protestant "nut-case," you spew regurgitated compost information and religious nonsense . . .

You have only danced around these coined contrived anti-Catholic vitriol statements and ridiculous religious Anti-Catholic sentiments.

I really challenge you, to provide "One-False-Teaching" by The Holy Roman Catholic Universal Church that was founded by Jesus Christ, that is written in the Gospel's of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

Here are your Christian references to use.
a. Catechism of the Catholic Church http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM
b. Text, which you access from the index or from the concordances. Footnotes, word lists: are linked to the concordances;
lists comprising every occurrence of a particular word in the text. Each occurrence is displayed in the centre of a short
extract from the text; statistics: http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_AIUTO.HTM#concordanze
c. Compendium - Catechism of the Catholic Church
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-
dott-soc_en.html
e. Code of Canon Law http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM
f. Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-
dott-soc_en.html
g. The Three Levels of Magisterial Teaching - Catholicism.org www.catholicism.org/the-three-levels-of-magisterial-teaching
Catholic doctrine of the infallibility of the Magisterium in these matters.
h. https://www.biblegateway.com And the Douai-Rheims Bible http://www.drbo.org
And the Summa Theologica by St Thomas Aquinas http://www.drbo.org/sum/index.htm


Yes I want to see you dance, over the fires, is it getting hot yet . . . Don't burn your feet over the two-step dance.

The real Christian challenge is on. The 7 biblical Sacraments is a starting point . . . ?

Answer the Question's ?

Unless you three: Zemirah, mwdegutis, and dummy-boy can provide your religious affiliation ? Religious denomination ? And religious background ? Then this religious Christian thread post is over.


I still say, you are all religious cowards, in hiding, and provide lying compost, exhaled against the Catholic Church . . .
Zemirah, br br Unless you three: Zemirah, mwdegut... (show quote)

Reply
Oct 25, 2017 22:31:20   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
The Question Is ? "Why should we Catholics, re-invent the Mouse-Trap” ?
I strongly urge you, to read, all articles, and go to all the URL sites.

You may even learn a thing or two. . . . I doubt it though with some skepticism. Their could be hope, I Pray, and pray to Our Lord for some spark of life of discernment, instead of this Anti-Catholic hatred and bigotry.

If you don’t read the Articles, Then I will “hammer” you with the facts of the article’s and the URL site’s against your anti-Catholic disbelief. . . .

As you Protestant’s and Independents Bible thinkers, you equivocate, your anti-Catholic sentiments, here on the Christian OPP forum thread and elsewhere.

Clearly you have a . . . Independent Church and personal, . . . "Ax To Grind,” . . . here, on this OPP post thread.

Your against all Catholics and or, any other Christian Church or denomination that is contrarian, to your Biblical orthodoxy theology belief system.

That’s very unfortunately, which has seriously hampered any Christian laity and scholarly efforts to understand Christian “Ecumenism.”

1. Ecumenism: 
a. “Separated Brethren” Term Before Vatican II (1962-1965) [3-25-13]
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2015/10/separated-brethren-term-before-vatican-ii-1962-1965.html
b. On Whether Vatican II Taught “Novelties” Concerning Religious Liberty and Ecumenism [Facebook, 2-10-17]
https://www.facebook.com/dave.armstrong.798/posts/1459789207389393?__fns&hash=Ac2Eyd56kirruhiA
c. Random Thoughts on Conversion, Development of Doctrine, Ecumenism, Etc. [5-13-03]
https://web.archive.org/web/20150909080340/http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2006/03/random-thoughts-on-conversion.html

So you mwdegutis, You All have “The Log in the eye disease.” Religious biasses’s have a way of doing, just that.

2. Catholic Magisterium Teaching Infallibility:
a. Jesus’ Self-Knowledge & the Catholic Magisterium Teaching Infallibility (w J. Akin)
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2016/03/jesus-self-knowledge-the-magisterium-w-j-akin.html

So you want to fight “Fire with Fire,” So Be IT. Hell Hath No Fury, Than A Roman Catholic Scorned. . . . It will be done with Catholic Apologists.

So why, re-invent the perfect “Protestant Evangelical Independent," Mouse-Trap” ?

Why ? The Catholic retort, It’s already been done for me. . . .

By countless Biblical theologians, Christian writers, Pope’s, Bishops, Cardinals, Priest’s Deacons, and lay Catholic Christians.

That’s why ?

10/21/2017 Article: The Protestantism Authors, Contains Many Serious Errors and Omissions. Roman but Not Catholic: What Remains at Stake 500 Years after the Reformation: By Kenneth J. Collins

Which Contains Many Serious Errors and Omissions: Roman but Not Catholic: What Remains at Stake “500-Years” after the Reformation:

David G. Armstrong
a. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2017/10/odd-trio-jerry-walls-ken-collins-anti-catholic-john-bugay.html
b. https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R3A16U8YTSOZUQ/ref=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?

3. Development of Catholic Doctrine: Full disclosure: I'm a Catholic.
a. Development of Catholic Doctrine
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2006/11/development-of-doctrine-index-page-for-dave-armstrong.html
b. Baptism: Baptism: Apostolic Teaching & Doctrinal Development [3-8-06]
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2016/03/baptism-apostolic-teaching-doctrinal-development.html

I'd like to start with a few words of commendation.

It's nice and refreshing to see such a book from authors who are not anti-Catholics (i.e., deny that Catholicism as a system of theology and beliefs is Christian).

Also, the authors, by and large, present Catholic doctrine accurately, and for the most part, they don't fight “Straw-Men” fallacy arguments.

But they also ignore many pro-Catholic arguments that -- if they had been interacted with -- would have made the book a lot more effective and "comprehensive" than it is.
4. Protestantism the Protestant Reformations the factual errors are legion:
a. William Webster’s Misunderstanding of Development of Doctrine [2000] With particular reference to the papacy, Vatican I, Pope Leo XIII, St. Vincent of Lerins, and Blessed John Henry Cardinal Newman
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2017/06/william-websters-misunderstanding-development-doctrine.html
b. Is Development of Doctrine an Exclusively Catholic Concept? [10-17-02]
https://web.archive.org/web/20150607062613/http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2004/02/is-development-of-doctrine-exclusively.html
c. Refutation of Protestant Polemicist William Webster’s Critique of Catholic Tradition and Newmanian Development of Doctrine (vs. William Webster) [4-10-03]
https://web.archive.org/web/20150608093040/http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2006/08/refutation-of-protestant-polemicist.html

d. Response to Rev. Michael Pahls on “Theological Humility” and the Protestant “Non-Quest” Regarding Christian Certainty (vs. Rev. Michael Pahls) [3-15-06]
https://web.archive.org/web/20150606234526/http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2006/03/response-to-rev-michael-pahls-on.html

In ch. 16, taking on Cardinal Newman, it's claimed (with a straight face: I kid you not!) -- following a 19th c. argument by Newman's brother-in-law and fellow Tractarian, J. B. Mozley (as discussed by Jerry Walls elsewhere). http://www.newmanreader.org

5. Blessed John Henry Cardinal Newman:
a. The Philosophical Premises of Newman’s Views on Doctrinal Development and Religious Belief [12-4-02]
https://web.archive.org/web/20150607235655/http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2006/11/philosophical-premises-of-newmans.html
b. John Henry Cardinal Newman’s Importance and Influence [5-22-03]
https://web.archive.org/web/20150612015454/http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2006/11/john-henry-cardinal-newmans-importance.html
c. Was Cardinal Newman a Modernist?: Pope St. Pius X vs. Anti-Catholic Polemicist David T. King (Development, not Evolution of Doctrine) [1-20-04]
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2016/04/was-cardinal-newman-a-modernist.html
d. Armstrong vs. Collins & Walls #1: Newman’s Mariology [10-17-17]
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2017/10/armstrong-vs-collins-walls-1-newmans-mariology.html

That Newman would apply the following titles to Mary: “having an ineffable origin before all worlds,” “the Object of worship, the Image of the Father,” “God of the Evangelical Covenant,” and “Creator of the Universe.”

6. Mary: The Blessed Virgin:
a. Cardinal Newman, Apologist of Our Lady
http://www.therealpresence.org/archives/Mariology/Mariology_039.htm
b. Dialogue on Whether the Assumption and Immaculate Conception of Mary are Legitimately Part of Apostolic Tradition (vs. James White) [June 1996]
https://web.archive.org/web/20150607050051/http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2004/02/dialogue-on-whether-assumption-and.html
c. ”Whitewashing History": Critique of James White's Book, "Mary -- Another Redeemer?” [2-12-04]
https://web.archive.org/web/20150607045251/http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2004/02/whitewashing-history-critique-of-james.html
d. “Live Chat” Debate: Mariology of the Church Fathers (vs. James White) [12-29-00]
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2015/12/live-chat-debate-on-mary-vs-james-white.html
e. Armstrong vs. Collins & Walls #1: Newman’s Mariology [10-17-17]
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2017/10/armstrong-vs-collins-walls-1-newmans-mariology.html
f. ’The Catholic Mary’: Quite Contrary to the Bible?” [10-18-2010]
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2010/10/books-by-dave-armstrong-catholic-mary.html
g. Mariology Index (47): Father John A. Hardon, S.J. Archives
http://www.therealpresence.org/archives/Mariology.htm
h. Marian Catechist Index (11) Father John A. Hardon, S.J. Archives
http://www.therealpresence.org/archives/Marian_Catechist.htm

Zemirah wrote:
You Sir, have clearly lost your way.

Being a Christian by following the guidance the Bible provides is the only "religious affiliation that Jesus requires.

As an "independent" Christian, I enjoy the freedom all Christians are ordered to maintain.

Galatians 5:1 "Christ has truly made us free: therefore stand fast in your free condition and let no man put a yoke on you again."

Together, the independent and nondenominational churches of the U.S. constitute the third-largest cluster of religious adherents in the country and the second-largest cluster of churches. In 2014, an estimated 6 percent (6%) of the U.S. population, over 46,000 churches representing more than 18,300,000 (eighteen million, three hundred thousand +) adherents, worshiped in an independent or nondenominational church.

You have no authority to question my own, or anyone's "religious affiliation."

As an adult, mature Christian in God's Word, I am sorry to say that you, Sir, are a babe in arms.

In the Bible, the evidence points to each church as self-governing and answerable directly to God Himself. In the book of Acts, where we read of the first missionary journeys and the establishment of many churches, there is no indication of a hierarchy of authority beyond the local elders of the church.

The countless Roman Catholic doctrines that are in direct opposition to the Bible, especially their denial of the doctrine of Justification by faith alone in Christ alone, throughout the New Testament," prove the Roman Catholic church to be a false religious system.

Not only is their doctrine heretical, their practice is an abomination. In Latin America, and throughout the world, the gross idolatry, church sponsored fiestas where all the people get wasted, syncretism with the pagan local religions and the horrendous hypocrisy bring out the true colors of Rome and it's false anti-christian religion.


AD
607 Boniface III made the first Pope

709 Kissing the Pope’s foot

786 Worshiping images and relics breaking the 2nd commandment

850 Use of “holy water” begun

995 Canonization of dead saints

998 Fasting on Fridays and during Lent
1079 Celibacy of the priesthood Marriage of the priests outlawed

1090 Prayer beads

1184 The Inquisition

1190 Sale of Indulgences

1215 Transubstantiation required belief that priests invisibly convert the Eucharistic bread's elements literally into that of Christ’s body and blood.

1220 Adoration of the wafer Host the worshiping of a piece of bread that one must believe is the Lord Jesus Christ.

1229 Reading of the Bible forbidden to "laymen" who are the saints of God

1414 Cup forbidden to people at communion

1439 Doctrine of purgatory decreed

1508 The Ave Maria approved

1534 Jesuit Order founded

1545 Tradition granted equal authority with the Bible

1562 Changed the 10 commandments (Exodus 20) by removing the 2nd commandment, which is, “do not make for yourself graven images”, and splitting the 10th into two to keep 10 commandments.

1854 Immaculate Conception of Mary

1864 Syllabus of Errors proclaimed

1870 INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE DECLARED

1950 Assumption of the Virgin Mary the belief that the Virgin Mary ascended bodily into heaven without dying

1965 Mary proclaimed “Mother of the Church” Since the above, changes and additions have been made as sustained by history.

Revelation 22: 18-19:
18 "For I testify unto every man that hears the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 "And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

The Bible does not change. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and forever. Hebrews 13:8.

Nevertheless, throughout history, the Roman Catholic Church and its doctrines have continued to change and can be expected to continue to change, according to the whim of the current pope in any month or year.

To one who argues on behave of a church both apostate and heretical, there is indeed nothing more to say.
You Sir, have clearly lost your way. br br Being ... (show quote)

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Faith, Religion, Spirituality
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.