Featured Renouncing the Catholic faith formally

Bob, most Catholics that become non-Catholic be it agnostic, atheism or a member of a Protestant, Mormon, JW etc. never knew their Catholic Faith in the first place. That was the problem I had, as a young Catholic going to Mass I never really was listening when the Bible was being read, [ at every Mass ] I was more interested in the young ladies back then. Jesus was always there but I just wasn't ready for Him, much as many young Catholics.[ when they become a little older they become susceptible to these evangelical guitar- playing entertainers, most of these non- Catholic churches like to entertain themselves rather than glorify and give thanks to our Lord/God. Some people prefer perpetual trend to eternal Truth.]

 

I have literature written by former priests, nuns, etc. They converted, that is they were truly born again and became Christians. You are now saying that they "never knew their Catholic Faith in the first place."?
I don't think you know your "Catholic Faith in the first place," and if you did and diligently compared it with the Bible you would run as fast as you could and as far as you could from it.

 

The RCC confesses the Nicene Creed, which all orthodox Christian bodies hold to.

 

Compare its doctrines to scripture, and I believe you will see that it is not the "one true church". It makes up new doctrines and has done that for centuries, papal infallibility being one such recent innovation. If you want ancient "catholicism" which hasn't changed in about 1900 years, try the EOC.
Better yet, if you want scriptural Christianity, study how the first century church was organized and what they believed. You can go directly to scripture for that. You won't find any hierarchy there, infant baptism, Mariolatry, etc.

 

Some of what you said reminds me of myself, at a much younger age. Try to find a church whose doctrine you can be as close to believing as possible, and just as importantly, a church which practices the love of Jesus Christ toward its members and others. That will go a long way to making up for a few possibly "wrong" views.

 

Don't look at Baptists or any other denomination when searching for truth and apostolic teaching. Look at the foundation document of the faith and the church -- the Bible, particularly the New Testament. It's the only written record of the teachings and experiences of the apostles and Jesus. Sure, read the early church Fathers, but don't use them to establish doctrine, only to confirm it.

The truth is that the RCC is the greatest innovator in Christian history, adding to scripture and departing from it. And the continue to do it to the present day. Look how recent papal infallibility is, for example.

Examine why the Eastern Orthodox separated from the RCC. That will tell you a lot. And there was much more involved than just the "filioque" controversy.

Once you have studied the NT thoroughly, then compare what you have found with the denominations, and see which you think is closest to that. I guarantee that it is not the RCC. The RCC has made more innovations than any other body claiming to be Christian, except the Mormons.

 

JonC, Jesus gave His Authority only to His Apostles and they to their replacements/ successors. As Bible explains.

Jesus never intended the Holy Bible to be the sole rule for salvation.

Jesus to make sure that His Teaching would not be a myriad of confused, conflicting interpretations established His Church first, the completed Bible [Both OT and NT ] came later, like three- four hundred years later.

I repeat;Jesus established His Universal/ Catholic Church on His Apostles.

You can recognize this Church today, Luke 10: 16

A direct connection to the Apostles is very important because Jesus gave His One True Church the authority to teach and rule in His name. { John 20:21 }{ Matt. 28: 18-20 }

Jesus wants unity not dis-unity as we find in all non-Catholic churches when it comes to doctrinal teaching.
{ John 17: 20-21 }

When His True Apostolic Church teaches [ official doctrines of Faith and Morals } it is still Christ teaching in the world - St. Paul calls the church " Christ" [ 1 Cor. 12:13 }
Jesus Himself identifies with His church and refers to it as " Me" { Acts 9: 4 }
Jesus said that listening to His church we are listening to Him - { Luke 10:16 }

Jesus gave to His church a special gift to safeguard against error all of it's members to receive the Holy Spirit, it's members are all men and women and clergy, with different jobs within His church [ 1 Cor.3:16 } { John 16: 13 }

That church which is only formed on His Apostolic Traditional Teaching along with the Holy Bible will never be destroyed { Matt.16: 18} { Dan.2: 44 }

 

You know Rebel, you make some valid points that I wish I had the mindset to deliberate over 6 years ago now. From a spiritual perspective, no single church or church denomination will completely be your guide post....they will teach their doctrine yes but then you will get only one side of it. One needs to be resolute in the study of scripture ...of course with the help of the HS. The truth is (for me anyway) is that I find more spirituality outa the church than I find in it. There you find people in all stages of experiences in wrestling with what is real & what is super imposed. And we are all sinners (whether or not you feel its inherited from Adam or its self imposed)....we are all sinners in need of a Savior. From there we learn if we have been saved--despite ourselves & on what path we are supposed to follow to rebuild ourselves into solid & compassionate creatures.

So Croyant, what I would advise brother is don't jump...don't send letters resigning from anything....don't embrace any system of faith that's corporate in nature....rather embrace Christ, study Christ, believe in Christ, love & commit to Christ.....and the rest will flow.

 

Originally Posted by Rebel View Post
Don't look at Baptists or any other denomination when searching for truth and apostolic teaching. Look at the foundation document of the faith and the church -- the Bible, particularly the New Testament. It's the only written record of the teachings and experiences of the apostles and Jesus. Sure, read the early church Fathers, but don't use them to establish doctrine, only to confirm it.

The truth is that the RCC is the greatest innovator in Christian history, adding to scripture and departing from it. And the continue to do it to the present day. Look how recent papal infallibility is, for example.

Examine why the Eastern Orthodox separated from the RCC. That will tell you a lot. And there was much more involved than just the "filioque" controversy.

Once you have studied the NT thoroughly, then compare what you have found with the denominations, and see which you think is closest to that. I guarantee that it is not the RCC. The RCC has made more innovations than any other body claiming to be Christian, except the Mormons.


Please explain the part about looking for the Truth by not looking at Apostolic Teaching. So I take it that you do not believe in the Full Teachings of Jesus to His Apostles and that Jesus would not make sure that His Apostolic Teachings would never be changed or left out, is that how you believe ? You believe in essence that Jesus is incompetent to safeguard His Teachings to His Apostles from corruption?
Why do you not believe in the Apostolic Traditional Teachings of Jesus ?

 

Regarding what I put in bold: I have often found that to be the case. And my wife would agree with you 100%.

 

I believe in the teachings of the apostles and Jesus. Did you not read my post, or can you see things only through the lens of RC dogma? Not meaning to be mean, but where do you find apostolic teaching if not in the only record written by them, the NT? The Fathers are not the apostles; the Fathers have no authority other than confirming what the apostles and Jesus teach in the NT. If they contradict the NT, they are not to be believed. If anyone, any hierarchy, any institution, contradicts the teachings of Jesus and the apostles as recorded in the NT, they should not be believed or followed. That's what the NT says directly. That's what the RCC has done. The RCC is thus not the apostolic church, not the church of the NT. It's doctrines, organization, and practices do not line up with the NT. It has consistently and continually added to scripture, contradicted scripture, and introduced innovations which are diametrically opposed to apostolic teaching as recorded in scripture. Even the EOC would agree with that.

 

Rebel, please point out all the Sacred Books written by the Apostles.

 

Those that are inspired by God? You can find them in the index of any Bible.
They are 66 in number: 39 in the OT, and 27 in the NT.

 

Please point out any NT book not written by an apostle and not written before the close of the first century. The New Testament is the only certain record we have of the teachings of Jesus and the apostles. It, therefore, is and must be ultimately authoritative, not the opinion of any human being who came after. If any man or institution teaches any doctrine or introduces any practice in opposition to that presented in the NT, it must be considered false. Thus, reason, experience, tradition may all be instructive but not the ultimate authority, and they may be considered "an" authority, a secondary authority, as long as they do not contradict or diametrically oppose scripture. If something or someone teaches anything in opposition to the apostolic teaching, it must be considered false. And the only place apostolic teaching is recorded is in the New Testament. It is the divinely inspired, written record of what the apostles saw and heard from Jesus Christ Himself. No one else can claim that, so no one else can establish doctrine -- not a Father, not a "bishop", not a pope, not even an angel. They can only point to the doctrine already established and recorded in the NT. The Bible warns about preaching and teaching any other doctrine. This is what the RCC has done and continues to do. The claim of papal infallibility is blasphemous, as no one is infallible but God. The last time I checked, the pope had not achieved that status, although the papacy has tried to achieve it by proclaiming its infallibility.