Featured Are There Any Catholics On This Forum?

Non - Catholics are allowed to come and worship with us, but their reception of Holy Communion is not allowed because they do not recognize the "Real Presence" of Jesus in the Holy Eucharist.

 

Good grief, do you even realize what you are saying here? There would be no reason to be a Catholic Christian if one did not subscribe to it's doctrines. What's the point?

Our liturgical form of worship is full of Catholic doctrine and it makes no sense at all for you to worship in a Catholic Church if you do not accept what the Church teaches.

 

Your opinion has been duly noted - and rejected!

 

Scripture does not interpret Scripture. The Church in conjunction with the Holy Spirit interprets Scripture. You misinterpret what the Apostles were saying, you and your fellow rejectionists who only came into being in the 15th century.

 

[

As was explained by someone else in a previous thread, the Council of Trent was written in a different time and was directed at those people who rejected the Holy Catholic Church in favor of one of the new man made institutions that were then cropping up.

 

And what are those sacraments, those "sacred" things? Is not your marriage a sacred thing? Your baptism? A man's ordination? Reconciling with God? Praying for healing when sick? Believing in the Holy Spirit? Receiving Holy Communion?

The free gift of grace (God's work in men) flows organically from each and every one. They are not bondage my friend, but a means to help us live holy and pleasing lives to God.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Scripture is quite plain: "For by Grace you are saved through Faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the Gift of God; not of works lest any man should boast; for we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works which God has before ordained that we should walk in them." Ephesians 2: 8-10.

I was always taught by Rome that one must keep sacraments to maintain salvation. Also that baptism is a sacrament which is integral to salvation. The catechism teaches such. The Scripture teaches something completely different.

Which shall we believe? The Word of God or the commandments of men?

Where will we be in 100 years? Choose wisely.

Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

 

Jesus Christ is a Catholic. You don't have the holy spirit to call him a baptist. Just the fact you have to stop to think makes you dead wrong.


Name one baptist from the year 200ad. Zero they don't exist.


1st baptist was a Anglican priest. John Smyth 1609. So I guess Anglicans got to vote you in. Folks already hijacked anglican bibles.

The guy who started the baptist church later left it because he knows he made it rather then Christ.


There is no history of Christians being outraged or shocked by some new heresy called catholic, not till 1500 when 2 dumb catholics split to invent the doctrines you stand for.

You know i'd love to see some baptist get together to determine what the bible is, rather then go on the authority of Anglican priests.



"Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead."

"Letter to the Smyrnaeans", paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.



^That is from a bishop who was taught and hand picked by apostles to be bishop while they are still alive and you still have to wait hundreds of years for a complete bible.

He is already fighting against the heresy that they don't believe the bread and wine is the body and blood of Jesus.

That is not a baptist at all.

 

None of these things have any benefit without faith (Hebrews 11:6). They do not work ex opera operato as the Church of Rome teaches Thus infant baptism, especially, is of no value, but ordination likewise is of no benefit unless the candidate is born again by the Spirit of God and has been experimentally called. An unregenerate ministry is a disaster, not only within the Church of Rome, but in the Protestant churches as well.

 

How do you know this? Do you ask them first?

 

Sure they do. God is there with them (omnipresent), but he's not physically turning nestle wafers into his own body or turning cheap wine into his own blood. He is present by God the Spirit's presence being there.

 

I see. So believing those things then made you anathema, but believing them now is just fine?

When, specifically, did the Catholic Church rescind those pronouncements?

Also, why do the anathema declarations address belief and not "man made institutions"?

 

How fitting is it how the RCC today reacts just like the Pharisees of Judaism. The Pharisees hated the fact that anyone would go against their interpretations of the Scriptures. How dare the common folk think that they could search the Scriptures for themselves and discover the truth.

Now when Paul encountered the men of Berea, these men did not turn to the church for answers to these "strange doctrines" Paul was preaching. No, they turned to the Scripture, to allow the Scripture to interpret if these things Paul was preaching was indeed Scripture. Scripture interpreting Scripture.

Then along comes the Pharisees again, demanding that only the church can interpret the Scripture. It is ironic that the RCC would end up imitating the Pharisees of Judaism.

I believe Paul spoke of the very birth of the RCC in this passage....

"But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.....For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. (2Co 11)

 

One really can only depend on a person's honesty in these instances, that they have some respect for the belief's of others. I myself could not receive Holy Communion when I went to an Eastern Orthodox service one Sunday. Out of respect I asked the priest if I could receive Communion and was told it was not possible as I was not a baptized EO person.

At funerals and weddings in a Catholic Church when non-Catholics could be present, the priest asks those who are not Catholic to refrain from receiving the Holy Eucharist. It is what it is.

 

The "Church", at least the Christian Church, was then in the process of being formed. We do not reject the Scriptures, we accept and revere them and look to them as we have arrived at our doctrines. The fact is, Jesus did indeed establish the Church as a governing and teaching authority. This often repeated claim that the RCC church is like the Pharisees is one of the many standard charges against us by those who reject the authority of the Universal Church.

 

We have faith also. As for your words on infant baptism, they are only your opinion and I will look at it in that vein.

 

This deserves my best, most thought out, "whatever!"