Is the Catholic Church infallible?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Ask Jesus : One Thread

No, of course not. Romanists claim that the Early Church was "Catholic" and that the Roman Church is infallibe.

Well, I've heard flip flops on this claim...perphaps Satan is planting a seed of doubt so that in another hundred years Romanists can acuse True believers of "misinterpeting" Romanist Doctrine. (or haveing "misconceptions".

Anyways, the Early Churches in the Apostles time were in error too, they were not "infallible". So then, if the Early Church was truly "Catholic", couldn't today's "Catholic" church be wrong about some things too?

I see no reasons to believe the Romanist claim that Roman Church is infallible ,and the "one true church".

Too much rhetoric in Roman arguments.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), September 25, 2003

Answers

Hi David. I am trying to understand why you don't believe that the early Church is the same as the Catholic church today.

The word "catholic" means whole or universal. Jesus Christ founded His Church on earth. This is from the King James Version, since you like that one: John 20 20:21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: 20:23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.

I'm sure you're familar with all the verses where Christ gave the disciples the power to bind and loose, gave a refresher course on the 10 commandments, instructed them to eat his Body and drink his Blood until he returns, and founded the Church on Peter. What I want to know is, do you believe that

A. Christ did all these things and that was the original Church, which somehow became corrupted along the centuries into Catholic beliefs and the reformation was part of bringing back the original Church? If so, it musta been corrupted pretty early on, like in the second century. Because Christians of that time talked about the Eucharist in a literal way, used the word 'catholic' and sounded, well, Catholic.

Or are you more of the mind that

B. the Church Christ founded was not a visible one but a spiritual body of believers? The sacraments that he instituted are not to be taken quite as literally as Catholics do?

Check this out: Ignatius of Antioch

"Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop or by one whom he ordains [i.e., a presbyter]. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church" (Letter to the Smyrneans 8:2 [A.D. 110]).

Was the Church corrupt by this time, or was he not speaking literally? gwen

-- gwen (gwen@panam.edu), September 27, 2003.


Those are fine points, Gwen. Considering my heretical status, I also wonder about the Vatican descision throughout the Church history. I haven't read them all and I do not have an educated grasp on their significance, but I do wonder about their effect on the faith.

I have read that to question Vatican II is to play with fire. I don't mean simple questions of explanation; I mean questioning the validity of Vatican II. To desire the Traditional mass is not a favorable desire in the Church' eyes.

rod..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), September 27, 2003.


Hi rod. I mean questioning the validity of Vatican II. To desire the Traditional mass is not a favorable desire in the Church' eyes.

A hot topic lately and growing hotter.

To desire the Traditional Mass, if you mean by that the Tridentine, is actually perfectly fine in the eyes of the Church. The Ecclesia Dei decree acknowledges the right of the faithful who have a preference for the 1962 liturgy to worship at this Mass. I think it's when people get confused between this and the schismatic breakaway traditionalists... Personally I do prefer the Tridentine mass but we don't have one around here. Defintely more later, family calls...

-- gwen (gwen@panam.edu), September 27, 2003.


For me, the Tridentine Mass made a great impact in my worship, even if I was just a little kid. People pious back then; they would knee at the altar. I've seen many people today present themselves in a casual demeanor during mass. I'm getting too old, I guess.

rod..

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), September 27, 2003.


I don't think it's that you're getting old, it's more that people are losing their sense of mystery and awe and fear of God. The first time I attended a Tridentine Mass, I was scared. The beauty and reverence drew me in.

We visited different parishes before settling on the one we attend. It's probably a small issue, but I don't care for altar girls or eucharistic ministers, and our parish has neither. Nothing against the people themselves.

The Mass we attend is in Latin (when I can get my husband up in time). One thing that has irked me in other parishes is that certain parts of the Mass were meant to remain in Latin. At the last Mass outside our parish I attended, everything was in English including the Sanctus, and it was all sung like one long folk song. My concern with that is that people may think it's just a song they sing at church, rather than understanding that the Sanctus is the "Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty " that the angels are singing in the Bible. Then again, maybe that's their flavor of worship. I'm not one who says that these masses are invalid, but they're way too Protestanty for me. I need to remember the fear of God every week.

Another thing that gets to me is that a lot of these parishes are wrapped up in politics, both personal and local. We're there to worship, not to put on a show or use the Church to further our political agenda.

-- Gwen (gwen@panam.edu), September 27, 2003.



I attend a musical every Sunday....and Bible study. This is really beginning to get to me. I miss the mass.

I hope Kevin doesn't misunderstand my reference to "musical" worship.

rod..

..

..

.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), September 27, 2003.


The Catholic Church has NEVER been and NEVER WILL BE the Lord's Church.

This organization has absolutely NO resemblance to the church Jesus established in the New Testament.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), September 27, 2003.


What we know about the Church of the New Testament is primarily from the Bible, a collection or writings compiled by the Catholic Church. Obviously the Catholic Church, in compiling the Bible at the end of the 4th century did not include any writings which conflicted in any way with its own teaching. It was compiling the book for its own use and the spiritual instruction of its own people. Therefore it is logically necessary that the book could not possibly contain anything that is contrary to Catholic teaching. Therefore the description of the early Church contained in its pages must necessarily reflect the nature of the Catholic Church which compiled it.

A principle characteristic of the early Church was its unity of belief and worship, a characteristic which persists in that one true Church to the present day. No denominations. No conflicting teachings. Truth cannot conflict with truth. Conflicting beliefs mean untrue beliefs. Denominationalism means untrue beliefs. Christ said that the Holy Spirit would guide HIS Church to "all truth". Obviously denominational religion cannot be the fulfillment of that promise. You cannot have truth except in unity, and you cannot have unity without genuine authority - the keys to the kingdom.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 08, 2003.


No, the Holy Spirit did NOT say He would guide "His Church into all truth".

He said He would guide the Apostles (which is who Jesus was speaking to in John chapter 16) into all truth.

By inspiration of the Holy Spirit they (the Apostles) were guided into ALL TRUTH as Jesus had promised. (John 16:13; Acts 2:1-4).

When we read the things they wrote, WE CAN UNDERSTAND their knowledge in the mystery of Christ.(Eph. 3:3-4).

ALL THINGS of the will of Christ are recorded in the WRITTEN NT of Christ (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Pet. 1:3).

It contains ALL that God has bound upon us and ALL by which we will be judged in the last day.

Paul says that he shunned not to declare the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:27).

The book of Jude says that the faith was "once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3).

Thus, the revelation of the will of Christ was completed BEFORE all of the apostles died.

It was duly confirmed and is absolutely infallible. God's Word is truth (John 17:17).

Though the Catholic Bible says of itself that it is perfect and complete, Catholic doctrine says that it is incomplete and fragmentary.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), November 08, 2003.


"No, the Holy Spirit did NOT say He would guide "His Church into all truth". He said He would guide the Apostles (which is who Jesus was speaking to in John chapter 16) into all truth"

A: And who were the Apostles, if not the first leaders of His Church?. Obviously He could not guide the Church into all truth except by guiding its leaders. If the Church were not the repository of all truth, the Word of God would not refer to it as "the pillar and foundation of truth" (1 Tim 3:15)

"ALL THINGS of the will of Christ are recorded in the WRITTEN NT of Christ (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Pet. 1:3)."

A: 2 Tim 3 makes no such claim. It says that scripture is (1) INSPIRED, and (2) PROFITABLE. No Catholic would disagree with either of those statements! It also says that these disciples to whom Paul was writing, who had already learned the fullness of Christian truth through the preaching and teaching of the Church, could become even better equiped to preach the Word of God by studying the Old Testament prophecies concerning Jesus. Paul's reference to the Scriptures here of course referes to the Hebrew Scriptures, since those were the only Scriptures that existed at the time.

"It contains ALL that God has bound upon us and ALL by which we will be judged in the last day."

A: How do you know that? Scripture makes no such claim, so I have to assume this idea is just a modern tradition of men. And when I look at Christian history, and see that no Christian on earth believed such a thing until a few hundred years ago, my suspicion is confirmed. The Bible actually tells us there was actually MUCH more - so much more that writing it all down would fill literally hundreds of "Bibles". But that doesn't mean we are missing any truth - for even though Jesus did NOT say that the fullness of truth would be present in a book, He DID say that it would be present in His Church.

"Thus, the revelation of the will of Christ was completed BEFORE all of the apostles died."

A: Well of course it was. In fact it was completed before ANY Apostle died. In fact, it was completed before a single word of the New Testament was written. Christ's revelation was completed as soon as He spoke His last words on earth. Everything Christ said was the Word of God from the moment He said it. The fact that an Apostle later recorded some of it for posterity, or mentioned it in his personal correspondence, didn't make it any more authoritative than it already was. His Church taught the fullness of His revealed Word for 40 to 80 years before it was put into written form, and for 350 years before such writings were formally recognized as Sacred Scripture.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 09, 2003.



I wrote, "No, the Holy Spirit did NOT say He would guide "His Church into all truth". He said He would guide the Apostles (which is who Jesus was speaking to in John chapter 16) into all truth"

To which Paul replied: And who were the Apostles, if not the first leaders of His Church?. Obviously He could not guide the Church into all truth except by guiding its leaders. If the Church were not the repository of all truth, the Word of God would not refer to it as "the pillar and foundation of truth" (1 Tim 3:15)"

My reply: Did the Holy Spirit guide the Apostles into ALL TRUTH? Yes or No? If your answer is no, please provide book, chapter and verse where a "continuing revelation" would occur.

I wrote, "ALL THINGS of the will of Christ are recorded in the WRITTEN NT of Christ (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Pet. 1:3)."

To which Paul replied: "2 Tim 3 makes no such claim. It says that scripture is (1) INSPIRED, and (2) PROFITABLE. No Catholic would disagree with either of those statements! It also says that these disciples to whom Paul was writing, who had already learned the fullness of Christian truth through the preaching and teaching of the Church, could become even better equiped to preach the Word of God by studying the Old Testament prophecies concerning Jesus. Paul's reference to the Scriptures here of course referes to the Hebrew Scriptures, since those were the only Scriptures that existed at the time."

My reply: How do you know that the Hebrew Scriptures were the ONLY Scriptures that existed at the time??? That statement is NOT true for Peter stated in 2 Peter 3:15-16 the FACT that there WAS NT Scripture available during this time for he writes, "?as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has WRITTEN TO YOU, as also in ALL HIS EPISTLES, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand?" So your statement "Paul's reference to the Scriptures here of course referes to the Hebrew Scriptures, since those were the only Scriptures that existed at the time." is a LIE.

I wrote, "It contains ALL that God has bound upon us and ALL by which we will be judged in the last day."

To which Paul replied: "How do you know that? Scripture makes no such claim, so I have to assume this idea is just a modern tradition of men. And when I look at Christian history, and see that no Christian on earth believed such a thing until a few hundred years ago, my suspicion is confirmed. The Bible actually tells us there was actually MUCH more - so much more that writing it all down would fill literally hundreds of "Bibles". But that doesn't mean we are missing any truth - for even though Jesus did NOT say that the fullness of truth would be present in a book, He DID say that it would be present in His Church."

My reply: Scripture DOES MAKE THIS CLAIM for Jesus said in John 12:48, "He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him--the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day." Do we have ALL of Jesus words that He has spoken??? No, but we have ALL that is required for John 20:30-31 states we have enough things WRITTEN to believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God!!!

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), November 09, 2003.


It's great that Kevin keeps on quoting from the Most Holy Catholic Bible but it's horrible that he keeps on misinterpreting nearly every letter.

The New Testament was not written by Catholics until many decades after the Ascension of Our Lord Jesus Christ. In the meantime, the Catholic christians relied on the Unwritten Word of God ~ The Sacred Traditions ~ which came from the very Mouth of Jesus Christ ~ and passed on ORALLY from Catholic Christian to Catholic Christian. So in essence, Catholic Doctrine was In Effect right from the very Mouth of Jesus Christ ~ and will Always Be In Effect.

Furthermore, The Holy Spirit breathed on The Catholic Church (Mary, the 12 Apostles, and Catholic christians) during Pentecost.



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), November 12, 2003.


James,

If I am "misinterpreting the Bible" as you allege, then I would like to suggest that you get busy in correcting my "misinterpretations" otherwise, don't waste your time in saying that I am misinterpreting Scripture unless you make the effort to PROVE that this is indeed the case!!!

It is interesting to note that someone can say that I am misinterpreting the Bible but yet this same person CANNOT even have his own private interpretation and has to have someone explain what God has revealed in His word. Man can read a book and understand it EXCEPT when it comes to reading and understanding a book given by his Creator!!! Incredible!!!!!!!!

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), November 12, 2003.


Kevin,

If you are not misinterpreting the Bible as you allege, then I would like to suggest that you get busy in correcting your misinterpretations, otherwise, don't waste your time in saying that you are not misinterpreting Scripture unless you make the effort to PROVE that this is indeed the case!!!

It is interesting to note that Kevin can say that he is not misinterpreting the Bible but yet all he has is his own extremely faulty private interpretation and does not want the Sacredness and Erudition and Infallibility of the Most Holy Eternal Catholic Church to explain to him what God has revealed in His word. Man can read a book and misunderstand it MOST ESPECIALLY when it comes to reading and misunderstanding a book given by his Creator!!! Incredible!!!!!!!!



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), November 12, 2003.


James continues to prove that he does NOT know God NOR does he offer to correct any of my supposed "misinterpretations".

This doesn't surprise me in the least, nor should it surprise any of the readers lurking here in this forum.

There is NO such thing as "infallibility" and I CHALLENGE James to prove that a man can be "infallible" FROM the Bible. There is NOT even the slightest hint that a "man" has the ability to be "infallible" this is another Catholic FALSE doctrine that has NO basis in the truth!!!

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), November 13, 2003.



Kevin continues to MOCK the Church of Christ ~ the Eternal Most Holy Catholic Church.

Kevin continues to prove that he does NOT know God NOR does he offer to correct any of his own misinterpretations. This doesn't surprise me in the least, nor should it surprise any of the readers in this forum.

The Most Holy Spirit is not with the one who continues to malign the Most Holy St. Peter and his Most Holy Successors.

There is such a thing as Infallibility ~ the Infallibility given by Jesus upon the Eternal Most Holy Catholic Church ~ "the gates of hell shall never prevail against her." I CHALLENGE Kevin to prove that St. Peter and his Holy successors can not be infallible FROM the Bible. Infallibility is another SACRED Catholic TRUE doctrine that has EVERY basis in the Written and Unwritten Word of Jesus Christ!!!



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), November 15, 2003.


Once again James continues to mock what I say with NO scriptural proof provided for his false doctrines.

When are you going to grow up James???

Can you defend your doctrines from God's word???

Or are you here to just cause trouble???

If you cannot defend your Catholic doctrine from God's word, then I would suggest that you go back to your Catholic forum.

I have repeatedly asked you to PROVE your doctrines and this has fallen on deaf ears for ALL that you can do is MOCK the words that I have posted.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), November 15, 2003.


The Most Holy Catholic Church is Eternal.

Saint Elizabeth prayed, "Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus." Luke 1:42

Once again Kevin continues to mock what I say with NO scriptural proof provided for his false doctrines.

The Archangel Gabriel prayed, "Hail Mary! Full of Grace! The Lord is with thee! Blessed art thou among women!" Luke 1:28

The Most Holy Catholic Church is Apostolic.

When are you going to grow up Kevin???

The Most Holy Catholic Church prays, "Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen."

Kevin, Can you defend your doctrines from God's word???

I have repeatedly asked you to PROVE your doctrines and this has fallen on deaf ears for ALL that you can do is MOCK the words that I have posted.

The Most Holy Catholic Church has been reigning for 2000 years.

St. Peter, pray for us.



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), November 20, 2003.


Was Mary "sinless From birth" as Catholics allege??? The Bible Teaches that Mary was Highly Favored.

In Luke 1:28, an angel said to Mary, "Hail, favored one!" (kecharitomene - from Strong #5487). Then in v30, the angel said again that Mary had "found favor with God" (both these quotes are directly from the NAB; interestingly, the Saint Joseph Edition, a Catholic Bible, has a footnote that says v28 is omitted in some notable MSS).

Some prefer to translate kecharitomene as "full of grace" (as rendered in some Catholic Bibles). Thayer gives this definition: "1. To make graceful i.e. charming, lovely, agreeable. 2. To pursue with grace, compass with favor; to honor with blessings." Strong says it means: "to grace, i.e. indue with special honor; make accepted, be highly favoured." In other words, the meaning of the word is consistent with the practice of honoring Mary as a special person in history.

Mary was highly favored to be chosen as the earthly mother of Jesus however, as special as Mary was in her role, there is no further mention of her in Scripture after Acts 1:14.

The RCC teaches that being "full of grace" means that Mary was sinless (perhaps in connection with their teaching that grace is given little by little to help one become sinless). All those who are Christians are full of grace. We don't need a little grace, we need to be full of grace, because without the grace of God we stand guilty of sin and can have no relationship with Him.

Furthermore, God wonderfully keeps us in a state of grace, and away from the stain of sin, as long as we are walking in the light (1 John 1:7). Thank God that we can all be thus favored with His grace that comes through Jesus Christ. The Catholic Church Teaches Mary was Sinless. CCC #490-493 "To become the mother of the Saviour, Mary "was enriched by God with gifts appropriate to such a role." The angel Gabriel at the moment of the annunciation salutes her as "full of grace". In fact, in order for Mary to be able to give the free assent of her faith to the announcement of her vocation, it was necessary that she be wholly borne by God's grace. Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, "full of grace" through God, was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854: The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin. The "splendour of an entirely unique holiness" by which Mary is "enriched from the first instant of her conception" comes wholly from Christ: she is "redeemed, in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son". The Father blessed Mary more than any other created person "in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places" and chose her "in Christ before the foundation of the world, to be holy and blameless before him in love". The Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God "the All-Holy" (Panagia), and celebrate her as "free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature". By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long."

CCC #722 states that Mary had to be sinless in order for her to be a fitting vessel for the sinless Christ: "The Holy Spirit prepared Mary by his grace. It was fitting that the mother of him in whom "the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily" should herself be "full of grace." She was, by sheer grace, conceived without sin as the most humble of creatures, the most capable of welcoming the inexpressible gift of the Almighty." Statement by the Pope. On December 8, 1854 Pope Pius IX solemnly defined the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary as a dogma of faith in the bull Ineffabilis Deus. The decree of the bull reads: "Accordingly, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, for the honor of the holy and undivided Trinity, for the glory and adornment of the Virgin Mother of God, for the exaltation of the Catholic faith and for the furtherance of the Catholic religion, by the authority of Jesus Christ Our Lord, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul and our own, We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instant of her Conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by God and therefore to be believed firmly and constantly by all the faithful. "Our Lady was "full of grace" (Lk 1:28) from the first instance of her existence. She always possessed the Divine life of God within her soul. God bestowed this "singular grace and privilege" upon Mary because He had predestined her to be the Mother of the Divine Savior. "The Fathers of the Church spoke of the sinlessness of Mary, but they did not explicitly assert that she was free from original sin. But the Virgin Mary's Immaculate Conception was implied in many of their statements. St. Ephraem wrote that "Certainly you alone and your Mother are from every aspect completely beautiful, for there is no blemish in thee, my Lord, and no stain in thy Mother."

"During the Middle Ages, many theologians opposed the belief that the Virgin Mary was always free from original sin. (The Church had not taught it as a revealed doctrine at that time.) Blessed John Duns Scotus, a Franciscan theologian, made a significant advance in the development of the theology of the Immaculate Conception. He indicated that Mary could have been and indeed was pre-redeemed by Christ. In other words, the remarkable grace of the Immaculate Conception was accorded to the Virgin Mary in view of the redemption that Christ was to effect for the human race. Our Lady therefore was "pre-redeemed" by the anticipatory merits that Christ would win through the Cross.

"The royal House of Spain exerted much influence on the Papacy in support of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. And the Society of Jesus made important contributions in defending and promoting the Immaculate Conception of Mary. The Papacy proved to be more and more receptive to the doctrine over the centuries culminating in Pope Pius IX's solemn definition of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception.

"Two authentic private revelations in 19th century France aided in the spread of popular devotion to the Immaculate Conception: The Holy Virgin's gift of the Miraculous Medal (originally known as the Medal of the Immaculate Conception) to St. Catherine Laboure and the apparition of the Immaculate." Historical Teaching on Mary. Donald Flanagan, in "The Theology of Mary" (published by Clergy Book Service w/imprimatur), said, "Mary's holiness is viewed as an exception to a universal law of sinfulness... In the writings of some of the Fathers we find certain reservations about Mary's complete holiness expressed. Origen, Clement of Alexandria, Basil, Chrysotom find certain faults in her, like motherly ambition or wavering in her faith... Some of the greatest names in the history of Christian theology took sides against the doctrine, e.g., Thomas Aquinas and Bonaventure. Their reason for opposition was their fear that to say that Mary was without sin was to say she was not in need of Christ as her Redeemer."

Flanagan went on to say, "Mary occupies a peripheral place in the gospels. She does not appear as a public figure taking part in Jesus' public mission in an official capacity. The evangelist John underlines this point very clearly in the way he constructs his gospel. He very significantly introduces Mary at the opening of the public life of Jesus Christ at Cana, and then very pointedly re-introduces her at the Cross when Christ has already been 'lifted up' (Jn. 12:32) and all is accomplished. The one who accomplishes all is the Son. Mary appears in the gospels basically as a hearer and a doer of the word (cf. Lk. 11:28). She is disciple, follower of Christ, receiver of his grace. She is NOT a redeeming or saving figure. The praise which Jesus directs at her during his public life focuses precisely on her fidelity in hearing and keeping the word of God."

Some scholars have stated that many of the church fathers, as well as many early popes, opposed this doctrine (such as St. Bernard, St. Augustine, St. Peter Lombard, St. Albert the Great, St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Antonius). Pope Leo I (440) said: "The Lord Jesus Christ alone among the sons of men was born immaculate" (Sermon 24 in Nativ. Dom.). Pope Gelasius (492) said: "It belongs alone to the Immaculate Lamb to have no sin at all" (Gelassii Papae Dicta, vol. 4, col.1241, Paris 1671). The Bible Teaches that Christ Alone was Sinless.

"For he hath made him (Jesus) to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him" (2 Corinthians 5:21).

"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23).

"As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one" (Romans 3:10).

"They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one" (Romans 3:12).

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" (Romans 5:12).

"But the scripture hath concluded all under sin" (Galatians 3:22).

"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us... If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us" (1 John 1:8, 10).

Furthermore, the Bible says that Mary needed a Savior. "And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour" (Luke 1:46-47). The Catholic Church responds by saying that Jesus saved her from original sin and kept her from never sinning, but that as well CONTRADICTS basic Scriptural teaching that we need a Savior because of sin. If Mary never sinned, then she DIDN'T NEED A SAVIOR.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), November 20, 2003.


The Blessed Virgin Mary stated, "I am the Immaculate Conception" in her apparitions to St. Bernadette and St. Catherine Laboure in the 1800s. The Immaculate Conception is a Sacred Truth of the Eternal Most Holy Catholic Church for 2000 years; no brand-new deceived protestant can prove otherwise.



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), November 25, 2003.


James, here is my reply from the "Is baptism required for Salvation" thread.

I do believe that your catholic church was formed from the original true church, and that as the churches of God grew in number, some became organized-the catholic church was formed. However, Jesus said in Mark 3:35 "Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother."

The Roman Catholic Church may have the heritage of Christ's church, but that is nothing to those who actually OBEY the Holy Bible.

-- Luke Juarez (hubertdorm@yahoo.com), November 25, 2003.


Luke said, "I do believe that your catholic church was formed from the original true church."

You have great hope. THE ETERNAL MOST HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE ORIGINAL TRUE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST. Focus on the writings of the early church Fathers and your eyes will be opened to the UNCHANGING Eternal Truth of the Most Holy Catholic Church.

Luke said, "However, Jesus said in Mark 3:35 "Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother." The Roman Catholic Church may have the heritage of Christ's church, but that is nothing to those who actually OBEY the Holy Bible."

You just simply misunderstand THE CHURCH ~ the Most Holy Catholic Church. We most certainly obey the Bible we wrote and identified. And we obey the Sacred Traditions of Jesus Christ given to His Holy Apostles. We faithfully obey John 6; heretics notoriously don't. We have countless Holy Saints and Martyrs to prove our unflagging obedience to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), November 25, 2003.


"The Blessed Virgin Mary stated, "I am the Immaculate Conception" in her apparitions to St. Bernadette and St. Catherine Laboure in the 1800s. The Immaculate Conception is a Sacred Truth of the Eternal Most Holy Catholic Church for 2000 years; no brand-new deceived protestant can prove otherwise."

Mary CANNOT state anything for she is dead and buried and CANNOT speak.

Those who believe that Mary can speak from the dead have been DECEIVED.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), November 28, 2003.


Mary is the Mother of Jesus Christ.

Mary is the Mother of God.

Mary is the Mother of The Church.

Mary is the Mother of ALL Christians.

Without Mary, Christ would not have been born; therefore, without Mary there would have been no salvation for fallen humankind.

Mary is not dead; The Most Holy Trinity gave her the Grace to be Assumed into Heaven , therefore she is is ALIVE ~ Body and Soul ~ in Heaven right Now, worshipping the Most Holy Trinity, and Reigning as the Queen of Heaven alongside her Son Jesus, the King of Heaven.

Mary has made many holy apparitions on earth, sanctioned by The Church as holy and true : to St. Bernadette in Lourdes, to St. Catherine Laboure in France, to Juan Diego in Mexico, etc.

Jesus Christ Himself is the enemy of those who blaspheme and malign the Sacred Truth of His Most Holy Mother, the Blessed Virgin Mary.

THE ROCK ~ THE PILLAR AND FOUNDATION OF TRUTH ~

THE 2000 YEAR OLD MOST HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH SAYS :

A parsimonious notion of God's Glory has been one result of the revulsion felt by so many over the honor paid to Mary, as though to say, If God alone is all-glorious, then no one else is glorious at all. No exaltation may be admitted for any other creature, since this would endanger the exclusive prerogative of God.

But this is to imagine a paltry court. What King surrounds himself with warped, dwarfish, worthless creatures? The more glorious the king, the more glorious are the titles and honors he bestows. The plumes, cockades, coronets, diadems, mantles, and rosettes that deck his retinue testify to one thing alone, his own majesty and munifecence. He is a very great king, to have figures of such immense dignity in his train, or even better, to have raised them to such dignity. These great lords and ladies, mantled and crowned with the highest possible honor and rank are, precisely His vassals. This glittering array is his court! All Glory to Him and, in Him, Glory and Honor to these others. ~ Thomas Howard, An Ex-Evangelical, Now a Catholic



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), November 28, 2003.


Moses and Elijah are "dead", but yet they appeared to Jesus and his two Apostles. Explain to me why these two "dead" people were able to appear and talk???

rod...

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), November 28, 2003.


Man! the Apostles were so convinced of their presence, they wanted to build tents for them. Elpidio mentioned "altars".

.....

.....

.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), November 28, 2003.


James still does not provide any Scriptural proof to PROVE his beliefs about Mary. Yes Mary was a virgin before Jesus was born, and Yes Mary is considered to be blessed among women, but that is ALL. There is NO mention that Mary is the "mother of God" it is the HOLY SPIRIT who conceived Jesus. All Mary did was carry Jesus in her womb and give birth to Him. Mary is NOT with us today on this earth, so she is DEAD and I CHALLENGE anyone here to PROVE that she is still alive and walking around.

rod you really don't know what you are talking about once again.

You wrote, "Moses and Elijah are "dead", but yet they appeared to Jesus and his two Apostles. Explain to me why these two "dead" people were able to appear and talk???"

Where are they now rod??? Are they alive here on this earth??? Yes or No??? If they are NOT here on this earth, then they ARE DEAD AND BURIED to this day.

You wrote, "Man! the Apostles were so convinced of their presence, they wanted to build tents for them. Elpidio mentioned "altars"."

I have already explained to you once why Moses and Elijah appeared with Jesus and there is no need to explain it to you again. Moses and Elijah are also NOT here on this earth, so they ARE DEAD AND BURIED to this day just the SAME as Mary.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), November 28, 2003.


Kevin is Incorrect. Kevin still does not provide any Scriptural proof to PROVE his false beliefs about Mary.

Kevin belittles Mary when he said, "Yes Mary was a virgin before Jesus was born, and Yes Mary is considered to be blessed among women, but that is ALL. There is NO mention that Mary is the "mother of God" it is the HOLY SPIRIT who conceived Jesus."

Mary is the Mother of Jesus, therefore she is the Mother of God.

Kevin treated Mary as a mere baby factory when he said, "All Mary did was carry Jesus in her womb and give birth to Him."

Mary's obedience to the Will of God provided salvation to humankind.

Kevin is in ERROR when he said, "Mary is NOT with us today on this earth, so she is DEAD and I CHALLENGE anyone here to PROVE that she is still alive and walking around."

Mary is Already Living Eternally in Heaven. She has Already achieved the Goal of Every Christian ~ Eternal Life.

Kevin you really don't know what you are talking about once again.

Rod made a good point when he said, "Moses and Elijah are "dead", but yet they appeared to Jesus and his two Apostles. Explain to me why these two "dead" people were able to appear and talk???"

Moses and Elijah are ALIVE.

Kevin killed Moses and Elijah AGAIN and Buried them AGAIN when he said, "Where are they now rod??? Are they alive here on this earth??? Yes or No??? If they are NOT here on this earth, then they ARE DEAD AND BURIED to this day."

Brand-new experimental protestantism is arrogant enough to bury Moses and Elijah AGAIN.

Rod made a good point when he said, "Man! the Apostles were so convinced of their presence, they wanted to build tents for them. Elpidio mentioned "altars"."

God had already given Moses and Elijah the Grace of Eternal Life.

Kevin is WRONG when he said, "I have already explained to you once why Moses and Elijah appeared with Jesus and there is no need to explain it to you again. Moses and Elijah are also NOT here on this earth, so they ARE DEAD AND BURIED to this day just the SAME as Mary."

Brand-new experimental protestantism has a wild imagination and many False notions.



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), November 28, 2003.


james wrote, "Kevin is Incorrect. Kevin still does not provide any Scriptural proof to PROVE his false beliefs about Mary."

No, this is not true, I have provided Scriptural proof, james just hasn't been paying attention.

The readers will decide who has or has not provided any proof.

james wrote, "Kevin belittles Mary" because I said, "Yes Mary was a virgin before Jesus was born, and Yes Mary is considered to be blessed among women, but that is ALL. There is NO mention that Mary is the "mother of God" it is the HOLY SPIRIT who conceived Jesus."

Then james continued by saying: "Mary is the Mother of Jesus, therefore she is the Mother of God."

No, this is another FALSE statement!!! Mary is NOT the Mother of God, NEVER has been and NEVER will be. Mary is the mother of the MAN Jesus, NOT the mother of God.

james wrote, "Kevin treated Mary as a mere baby factory when he said, "All Mary did was carry Jesus in her womb and give birth to Him." Mary's obedience to the Will of God provided salvation to humankind."

No, this is another FALSE statement for Mary did NOT give salvation to humankind, Jesus is the "author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him" NOT Mary. Mary's obedience to God allowed her to give birth to Jesus and that is ALL.

I CHALLENGE you james to give me a verse in scripture that tells us that Mary ever provided salvation to humankind as you assert above!!!

james wrote, "Kevin is in ERROR" because I said, "Mary is NOT with us today on this earth, so she is DEAD and I CHALLENGE anyone here to PROVE that she is still alive and walking around."

Then james continued by saying: "Mary is Already Living Eternally in Heaven. She has Already achieved the Goal of Every Christian ~ Eternal Life."

Let james PROVE from God's word where this is the case!!! If Mary is "already living eternally in heaven" as james asserts, then I say PROVE IT!!! If she is in heaven as you say, then you should have no problem proving this from God's word.

james continues to mock me when he says: "Kevin you really don't know what you are talking about once again."

This doesn't surprise me in the least, for Catholics are good at doing this sort of thing when they don't have an answer to the truth.

james wrote, "Rod made a good point when he said, "Moses and Elijah are "dead", but yet they appeared to Jesus and his two Apostles. Explain to me why these two "dead" people were able to appear and talk???"

James continued by saying: "Moses and Elijah are ALIVE."

Please notice that James does NOT provide any proof that Moses and Elijah are still alive.

james wrote, "Kevin killed Moses and Elijah AGAIN and Buried them AGAIN when he said, "Where are they now rod??? Are they alive here on this earth??? Yes or No??? If they are NOT here on this earth, then they ARE DEAD AND BURIED to this day."

Let james explain to everyone here how "Kevin" killed Moses and Elijah AGAIN and buried them AGAIN. How did I (Kevin) do this very thing? If Moses and Elijah are alive, then most assuredly they are here on this earth. Where is your proof that they are still alive and walking around here on earth?

james wrote, "Brand-new experimental protestantism is arrogant enough to bury Moses and Elijah AGAIN."

james is arrogant enough to make ANOTHER assertion with NO proof offered. If Moses and Elijah are alive, then where are they??? Hello???

james wrote, "Rod made a good point when he said, "Man! the Apostles were so convinced of their presence, they wanted to build tents for them. Elpidio mentioned "altars"."

Then james continued by saying: "God had already given Moses and Elijah the Grace of Eternal Life."

No one was talking about "Eternal Life" james. Not once does anyone mention Moses and Elijah (until this post of yours) about them having "Eternal Life". I did NOT say that they were NOT alive, I stated that they were "dead and buried" and this is a TRUE statement for I was speaking of their DEATH and BURIAL on this EARTH.

james wrote, "Kevin is WRONG when he said, "I have already explained to you once why Moses and Elijah appeared with Jesus and there is no need to explain it to you again. Moses and Elijah are also NOT here on this earth, so they ARE DEAD AND BURIED to this day just the SAME as Mary."

Please notice how james explains how I am wrong when he says: "Brand-new experimental protestantism has a wild imagination and many False notions."

This is a "typical" response from james.

David,

If you take a look at james replies to me, you will see that MOST of the time ALL he does is copy my words and CHANGE them to MOCK what I say and I am sure that he will do this once again with my replies to him on this thread.

You have already warned him once, and his continual MOCKING of my words PROVES that he really does not want to do anything here except cause trouble. I know you don't want to ban anyone, but please look at most of his replies they either MOCK me, or CALL ME NAMES.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), November 28, 2003.


I thought Elijah was swept up into Heaven.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), November 28, 2003.

Hi, I was searching for information ont 'deposits of the faith' when I stumbled on this thread. Now, quite intimidated by the ferocity of your banter and arguments, I wish to contribute my measly opinion before I leave this forum. Christ established One, Holy, Apostolic, Catholic Church for all as assurance of righteousness within the embrace of His most holy Covenant. That Church witnesses to the Way and the Truth, and by way of Sacraments (established by the Logos) welcomes the adopted sons and daughters of God into heaven on earth. And when we get to the new Jerusalem we will discover that there are many rooms in our Father's house and not all (of us) will sit at the marriage table of The Lamb. It is the Holy Spirit that convicts, through sacraments and the Word we grow, and it is grace, love, and obedience that keeps us true to His Covenant. If we fail in this, we go to hell! The revealed truth is available to all who have the love, grace and courage to search for it and to live it, regardless of denomination..

The Lord be with you ALL.

-- Archie Buchanan (cayan@iafrica.com), December 04, 2003.


I agree Archie. One Holy and Apostolic Church, outside of which no one will be saved. Invincible ignorance is just a crock.

The Protestants are just (literally) kidding themselves to death.

Hardly any Catholics will be saved, but Protestants"? Zero

-- Bubbles (0000@444.com), December 04, 2003.


this is what Pope Eugene IV has to say on the matter: this is Ex cathedra:

"It [the Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church] firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that none of those outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but neither Jews, or heretics and schismatics, can become participants in eternal life, but will depart "into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life they have been added to the Church; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those abiding in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practised, even if he has shed his blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has abided in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." (Council of Florence, 1442)

he was a successor of St Peter.

are you also claiming to St Peter's successor D.O? were you also given the power to loose and bind? and if so, by whom?

-- Ian (ib@vertifgo.com), December 04, 2003.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ