Becoming Catholic?

Brian:

Concerning: The beginning of the church was an acorn.

Again.....What church?

Church as being the body of believers of all time or just those in the Catholic Church.??

If "the faith" is exclusive to "Catholic faith", then how can I have faith (which I do) ?

 

That is redundant.

As a believer, one is a member of the Catholic Church. It is simply a matter of degree of unity.

See my answer above.

 

At the time of the acorn, aren't those the same thing? At the time of the acorn, those who were in the church were in the church regardless of whether the RCC can claim to be the trunk later on. I don't think anyone claims the RCC in its present form always existed. That's the whole point of the acorn analogy, the oak tree *doesn't* look like the acorn, yet it is the same entity.

I'm not sure I understand the question. Maybe a Catholic can better answer it.

 

I knew I should've gotten those patent applications filed sooner!

Mark

 

Which Church you ask? The Church that Christ established before HE left the earth, the Church who HE gave the keys of the kingdom to, represnted by the first pope, Peter....that Church.

The Catholic Church does not deny that other religions have faith. The teaching is that due to error along the way other religions only have parts of the faith as opposed to the fullness of faith found in the Catholic Church. If you look at most non-Catholic (yet Trinitarian religions) you will find this to be true (the pieces/parts of faith) in teachings and 'trappings' as well.


LaRae

 

Brian,

Even if you appeal to the authority of the church, bottom line it is still your personal interpretation. You use your mind to decide that their teachings are authoritative and most in line with Scripture. So please, like I have pointed out to others before, stop using this personal interpretation vs. someone else's argument. Catholics decide on beliefs just like Protestants, using their mind. Just because they yield their mind to the church's teaching doesn't mean they don't use their mind. They willing accept their teachings, thus revealing their personal interpretation that they believe the RCC's teachings are correct.

And you forgot to point out that the Bereans tested Paul's, and apostle, message by looking to Scripture. And was Paul just crazy in Romans 14 and other places when he talks of believers being convinced in their own minds about different things? Bottom line, we are each responsible individually before God Almighty. When I realize that, I cannot willingly yield my mind to a group of men's interpretations. And to me that is one of my major problems with the RCC: they elevate and emphasize man and his goodness. As I have studied the issue more and more, I am led further and further away from accepting the RCC. Of course, that is just my personal opinion.

All Praise, Honor, and Glory to God Almighty!
Neal

 

Brian,

Even if you appeal to the authority of the church, bottom line it is still your personal interpretation. You use your mind to decide that their teachings are authoritative and most in line with Scripture. So please, like I have pointed out to others before, stop using this personal interpretation vs. someone else's argument. Catholics decide on beliefs just like Protestants, using their mind. Just because they yield their mind to the church's teaching doesn't mean they don't use their mind. They willing accept their teachings, thus revealing their personal interpretation that they believe the RCC's teachings are correct.

And you forgot to point out that the Bereans tested Paul's, and apostle, message by looking to Scripture. And was Paul just crazy in Romans 14 and other places when he talks of believers being convinced in their own minds about different things? Bottom line, we are each responsible individually before God Almighty. When I realize that, I cannot willingly yield my mind to a group of men's interpretations. And to me that is one of my major problems with the RCC: they elevate and emphasize man and his goodness. As I have studied the issue more and more, I am led further and further away from accepting the RCC. Of course, that is just my personal opinion.

All Praise, Honor, and Glory to God Almighty!
Neal </font>[/QUOTE]I disagree....it's not the same Neal. There is quite a difference here.

I choose to cede authority to the Church that Christ himself established....however I am not my own personal interpertor of scripture and doctrine.

How many non-Catholic Churches have split and split and split over disagreements over how to define what scripture is saying? How do you know that you have the right one? You are relying on a Church founded by men.

The Catholic Church was founded by Christ, is led by the Holy Spirit, the same Church who preserved and cannonized the very scripture you have...if you trust her to preseve the Word of God then you should submit yourself to her authority....or toss your Bible out.


LaRae

 

"Even if you appeal to the authority of the church, bottom line it is still your personal interpretation. You use your mind to decide that their teachings are authoritative and most in line with Scripture. So "

Proverbs 3:5
Trust in the LORD with all your heart
And do not lean on YOUR OWN UNDERSTANDING.

Jeremiah 3:15
"Then I will give you shepherds after My own heart, who will feed you on knowledge and understanding.

 

whoops, double post

 

True. I guess I don't understand your objection.

True.

The Church was promised to be guided by God. What is the Church, if not made of people? The early church yielded to the interpretations of a group of men. Christ started his church with a group of men, and not a book. Was the early church correct in yielding to the interpretations of this group of men? Yes, because the group of men had authority, and were guided by God.

But aren't you doing yielding to men's interpretations anyways (even besides your own)? What *proof* do you have that the Apostle Paul's or Peter's or John's interpretations as written in their epistles are correct? Obviously, we do that because we believe Scripture is God's word and authoritative. But how do we know even that, since it was men who wrote that into scripture in the first place?

I see it as believing the promises that Christ would always be with the Church, the Holy Spirit would guide the Church, that Christ gave authority to the Church, and that the Church is the pillar and ground of the truth. Either the Church is authoritative, the pillar and ground of the truth, guided by God, or it is not. If it is, we should recognize it and submit to it. If it isn't, we have nowhere to hang our hat (for scripture thus would have lied) and we should just pack up and go home.

As I study this more and more, I see from history that those that moved further and further away from accepting the RCC resulted in thousands and thousands of different denominations, each with different and conflicting interpretations, each going in a different direction. And then I read about *unity* of faith (Rom 15:6, Eph 4:13, 1 Cor 1:10, Phl 1:27, etc.), and conclude that having people do all interpretation for themselves simply doesn't lead to that unity of faith. Of course, that is just my personal opinion.

God bless,
Brian

 

Did either of you guys use your brain and assess what the RCC claimed and decided that it was true and you believed their claim?

In Christ,
Neal

 

The interpretations of men can't be avoided with regard to determining Christian doctrine. Man is certainly in the way. In fact, we can't even get to the truth of Jesus without the Apostles. If the Apostles hadn't relayed the message all about Jesus, none of us would be even posting on this web board! The question isn't about getting around men.. the question is.. which men have the authority of Jesus Christ?

Brian,

With regard to the tree, the trunk, and its branches, Protestant "churches" are not branches on the tree because they aren't really "churches" at all. They're orphanages that take care of Christians who are no longer visibly a part of the tree; they're merely "communities" of separated brothers and sisters who are longing to be reunited fully with the one tree. Remember, there is only one Church - only one tree, and it is in union with the successor of St. Peter, upon whom Christ continually builds his Church (Mt 16:16-19).

 

Did Paul teach that all believers would be unified in everything they believe? Or did he allow for differnces? Were there differences of opinions concerning days, meat, etc? What is the unifying faith of all true Christians? Jesus Christ and his work. So see, I don't have a problems of all the "thousands" of denominations. I have heard RCC folks disagree theologically, yet they all claim unity. I don't see the big happy family they claim. Plus, American Catholicism is very different than that in third world countries. Hearing some of the stories from missionaries and pastors in these other countries deeply concerns me about what the RCC truly teaches at times. And you don't seem to understand that I see God active in his Church now. When I see "Church" I see all true believers, not the RCC organization.

In Christ,
Neal

 

So now a church is not a group of believers but an organization? I think not. And the orphan bit is amusing. A true believer is indwelled by the Holy Spirit. However, you say if they are not a part of your church they are an orphan. So now church membership is more important than the seal of the Holy Spirit? If these "communities" are orphans, you seem to imply that they have no father, namely they are not children of God. So are you willing to say that they are not children of God? And "longing to be reunited?" My friend, I do not long for this. I long to be fully united to Christ, not the RCC.

God Bless,
Neal

 

Hi Neal,

American Catholics comprise only 6% of the current Catholic population in the world, just to give you an idea of what Catholicism means on an international scope.

You asked, "Did Paul teach that all believers would be unified in everything they believe?"

Well, here's what Paul said.

Eph 4:3-6 - one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God & Father
Rom 16:17 - avoid those who create dissensions
1 Cor 1:10 - I urge that there be no divisions among you
Phil 2:2 - be of same mind, united in heard, thinking one thing
Rom 15:5 - God grant you to think in harmony w/ one another
1 Cor 12:13 - in one spirit we were baptized into one body
Rom 12:5 - we, though many, are one body in Christ
Eph 4:4 - one body, one Spirit, called to one hope
Col 3:15 - the peace into which you were called in one body

What is the unifying faith of all true Christians?

The 12 Articles of the Apostles' Creed.

I have heard RCC folks disagree theologically, yet they all claim unity.

The difference between Catholicism and Protestantism is that our doctrine does not equal our theology, whereas these are equal in Protestantism. In Catholicism, there are legitimate pluralities of theology, but one body of doctrine that all agree upon and which does not change; there are different theological schools, but one faith. In Protestantism, each theological school is its own faith.

 

So he didn't teach that some would believe things that others wouldn't, such as in regard to days, meats, etc?

So faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God who was crucified, buried, and resurrected for our sins according to Scripture is not enough? Interesting.

Umm....no.

In Christ,
Neal

 

Neal...if you trust the Church to have preserved the Bible then why do you not submit yourself to that same authority?


LaRae

 

See one of my previous posts. I do not equate Church = RCC.

So did you use your brain in assessing the claims of the RCC and decided to place your faith in their authority becuase to you it squared with what Jesus said?

In Christ,
Neal

 

Hi Neal,

So he didn't teach that some would believe things that others wouldn't, such as in regard to days, meats, etc?

What is this, a trick question?

It's clear that Paul calls for doctrinal and visible unity among all Christians.

So faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God who was crucified, buried, and resurrected for our sins according to Scripture is not enough? Interesting.

Nope, it's not. Before Jesus, you gotta believe in the Father, the maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen, and after Jesus, you gotta believe in his Spirit, who is cosubstantial with the Father and the Son, and you gotta believe in those sacred truths the Spirit has revealed and those ways in which he works in our lives, such as through baptism and the Mystical Body of Christ, the Church.

Umm....no.

Oh yes, Neal. For instance, if you're a Lutheran, you hold to consubstantiation; if you're a Calvinist, you hold to a "mystical" real presence at the point of consumption, if you're an Anabaptist, you hold to a pure symbol; if you're an Anglican, well, whatever your theology is.. is what goes. If you're a Catholic, you believe in transubstantiation. Period. There is no "different belief" that Catholics can have with regard to the Eucharist, whereas in Protestantism, your theological school determines your belief. The faith is one; we are unified.

 

See one of my previous posts. I do not equate Church = RCC.

So did you use your brain in assessing the claims of the RCC and decided to place your faith in their authority becuase to you it squared with what Jesus said?

In Christ,
Neal </font>[/QUOTE]Neal what Church do you think preserved scripture....the Catholic Church (there is no Roman Catholic Church by the way).....it's historical fact ....the Bible didn't fall out of the sky bound ready to read.

For myself it was a combination (if you are trying to insult me by implying I didn't use my brain, try again) of researching and placing my trust in the Church Christ established and gave authority to.


LaRae