Focus: CATHOLICS Anti Christ or CHRISTIANS?

THIS DISCUSSION IS CLOSED!



The Manager says so.
unless of course you have some fresh understanding

From: openairpreacherman Sent: 10/06/2006 08:28
I think every permutation of this thread has been written.

Dognox your view is different to mine and others here.

You are not going to change your view obviously and we are not going to change ours.

Its time to give it a rest.

Steve
From: Merry20004 Sent: 10/06/2006 15:07
Amen!
From: Dunggate Sent: 10/06/2006 15:13
Agreed Merry and Steve. Unless anyone have something fresh to say I would say this thread has been truly exhausted.

Found this on Managers Helping Managers Group I think 6 applies here.
La la land calling.

From: Dogknox Sent: 10/06/2006 04:05
Gavin My computer was Busted ..
for the past week I could not get on the internet....
Here I am trying to catch up ...

You seem to think "Vatican ll" somehow contradicts the Pope...
You said..
religous freedom is Catholic Dogma, ...Vatican II which grants everyone on the planet religous freedom? Or do we go back ...to the Church and rewrite off the teachings of the officail Catholic Church since the 60's and Vatican II since as shown previously...

I don't find any contradictions ..
The Catholic Church says... "All men have the right to freedom of religion" ...
SOOO what is the problem...

The Pope is still infallible..
UNLESS you are trying to imply; the Pope taught "Men don't have freedom of religion"!
Are you saying the Pope sat on the chair of Peter and made a proclamation
"Ex cathedra"
ON Faith or Morals... !!!

Something like this..
(Pope talking) "Only Catholics have freedom of religion" !!
And now you are trying to say;
"Vatican ll tells us "All men have freedom of religion"???

Well you are wrong...
They both; Pope and Vatican ll tell us:
"All men have freedom of religion"...
BUT ..
is the Pope sitting "exCathedral"???
Is he sitting on the offical Chair of Peter making an Infallible statement?
..............OR.....
Is he just making a statement, a "Opinion" of one man?????

I said it before ..the Pope .. Like all men is a sinner...
all men make mistakes the Pope is not an exception...
BUT
When the Pope sits on Peters Chair.
Speaking for the whole Church on "Faith and Morals" ...
THEN and ONLY then "He is Infallible"!!

History shows I am right!!!

Dogknox

From: Gavin Sent: 05/06/2006 10:18
Dognox,

Post 101 is from the official Vatican II document which says that every person has religous freedom that is why it is Dogma, because it is, because it is what was published in the Vatican II document (am I pointing this out simply enough for you?), which is something that you are not granting us, take out the fact that pope John Paul II so called privately (however since his book is one of the most widely read in the catholic church and helps formulate opinion and doctrine) wrote extensivley about the rights of every person to religous freedom and expanded upon the notions that came out of Vatican II. I have quoted to you the chapter and page that the quote comes from, there is no way of ducking the FACT that religous freedom is Catholic Dogma, that is infalible, unless of course you are saying that the Vatican II counsel was of course an illegal (as in catholic law) counsel and that the Popes since Vatican II are infact antipopes?

Again I put it two you Dognox, which Catholic Church do we believe, the one that has contraicted thousands of years of Catholic teaching by publishing Vatican II which grants everyone on the planet religous freedom? Or do we go back to the original mother (your words for the catholic church not mine) Church and rewrite off the teachings of the officail Catholic Church since the 60's and Vatican II since as shown previously.

Questions for you

Was the council of Vatican II inspried and directed by the Holy Spirit
Can the Holy Spirit contradict Himself?
Can the Holy Spirit deliever two types of Truth?

If you have answered Yes to any of those then you have some serious questions to ask yourself and ofcourse God.

From: Missy Sent: 04/06/2006 16:34
Iamsaved,

you cannot talk to people like that here. Its not even as if you've been involved in the discussion. You have no right to make comments like that. Perhaps you ought to GROW UP?

MISSY.

From: Dogknox Sent: 04/06/2006 15:16
Gavin ... You said..
That is Dogma, so if you please will you allow us to exercise our religious freedom and worship God and Christ as we see fit, that is what the catholic church says we are allowed to do, however you seem very good at ignoring that.

The thread is "Are Catholics Anti-Christ!!!!!!!"

I read this and you want me to say nothing????

You want "Freedom" to slander and spread lies??????"

If you read my post #99
I said The pope when speaking ex cathedra (decrees on doctrine and morals are then infallible.)
When He sits on the Chair of Peter and decrees a doctrine!!!
Which I add: did not happen very often in Church History!!!

A pope’s private theological opinions are not infallible, only what he solemnly defines is considered to be infallible teaching.

What infallibility does do is prevent a pope from solemnly and formally teaching as "truth" something that is, in fact, error.
It does not help him know what is true, nor does it "inspire" him to teach what is true.

Dogknox

From: openairpreacherman Sent: 04/06/2006 07:33
The silence of deafening

Steve
From: 1amSaved Sent: 04/06/2006 07:40
and here as well!
you just want to have an argument, dont you openairpreacherman?
GROW UP and let it drop!
God bless you
From: openairpreacherman Sent: 04/06/2006 08:35
No thats not what l want to do. I do not want an arguement. l was commenting on the fact that there was no response to the last post.

I dont know why you say l should grow up. I am mature and your comment is unkind.

Steve.
From: Dunggate Sent: 04/06/2006 10:50
IamSaved

and here as well!
you just want to have an argument, dont you openairpreacherman?
GROW UP and let it drop!
God bless you

Managers of WWC will decide when a thread is to be dropped. and would be expressed with a difference to your post to Openairpreacherman.
Elaine Manager WWC

From: Gavin Sent: 01/06/2006 09:55
Dognox,

Do you know anything at all about anything? Catholic.Net is one of the officail catholic websites (not anti catholic). truecatholic.com is also as it says TRUE CATHOLIC, it is not anti catholic, have a look at them if you do not believe me. So instead of trying to discredit my posts by saying that my sources are anti catholic, please go and look at them first.

However your posts are full of contradiction and error.

No Pope has ever made a statement that was in error!!!!

then you immediatly go on to say

Listen... All Popes are men just like you and I are.
They can and do make mistakes!

Popes sin, they have temptations like all men!
Even Jesus was tempted!!!

(at this point I will say that yes Jesus was tempted but Jesus did not sin, it is not sin to face temptation)

However a mistake is an error, can the Holy Spirit make mistakes? So you have a holy spirit that makes mistakes a god that makes mistakes no wonder you have a saviour that can not save you and needs your help.

I however have a God that is complete, that is flawless, I have his Spirit that guides and heals and is flawless and I have a perfect redeemer that has died for my sins and was risen from the dead.

I notice how you do not comment on the on the post which quotes John Paul II and his stance on religous freedoms and that everybody is saved through Christ regardless of what Church (and actually he says person that believes in God) they belong to.

So please stop sowing your seeds of anti-protestant dogma and understand what the catholic church (your church) teaches. That every Christian is saved by the grace of Christ, and that every believer in God (no matter religon) is also saved, that is your churches official stance so please start to adopt it.

This is from the Official document from Vatican II it is on page 679 paragraph 2

"The Synod (of Vatican II) further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person, as this dignity is known through the revealed Word of God and by reason itself. This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed. Thus it is to become a civil right. …… Therefore, the right to religious freedom has its foundation, not in the subjective disposition of the person, but in his very nature. In consequence, the right to this immunity continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering to it. Nor is the exercise of this right to be impeded, provided that the just requirements of public order are observed."

That is Dogma, so if you please will you allow us to exercise our religious freedom and worship God and Christ as we see fit, that is what the catholic church says we are allowed to do, however you seem very good at ignoring that.

From: Missy Sent: 01/06/2006 09:47
Yes popes are just ordinary people. What I cannot understand is why they are worshipped to, driven around in golden carraiges and catholics screaming at them like they are special. Catolics even have big framed pictures of them on the walls in their homes. Look at the recent popes funeral, such a big event for an ordinary person!

MISSY.

From: Dogknox Sent: 31/05/2006 17:05
Gavin I said it before.. Stay away from those Anti-Catholic Web sites.... AT VERY VERY BEST thay have half truths... Most are out right lies or twisted facts!!!

No Pope has ever made a statement that was in error!!!!

WHAT you say???

Listen... All Popes are men just like you and I are.
They can and do make mistakes!

Popes sin, they have temptations like all men!
Even Jesus was tempted!!!

All you have to do is look at Peter, if you want an example of a fumble bum, Peter was temped and Peter even denied Christ!!!! Because all men are sinners (except Jesus of course) all men need salvation, all men need redemption, No man is Perfect!!!!

There was some scoundrels in Pope history, (Not many) NONE of the Scoundrels ever mada a Statement on Church Doctrine!!!

You confuse the charism of papal "infallibility" with "impeccability.

Gavin you say "Scripture is infallible" but that the Church that tells us which books belong in Scripture is not???

The Pope is Infallible and also the body of bishops as a whole, when, in doctrinal unity with the pope, they solemnly teach a doctrine as true.

We have from Jesus himself, who promised the apostles and their successors the bishops, the magisterium of the Church:
Luke 10:16 "He who hears you hears me".
Matt 18:18 "Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven". Gavin do you believe Jesus???
Gavin What is Jesus telling you in Luke 10:16 and Matt 18:18?
Gavin Do you have Faith in Jesus; The Word; The Bible??
Gavin Do you believe some or most of Jesus' words but these you don't??
Gavin Are you saying; "God made heaven and earth, stars and sky but the one thing God CAN'T do is protect his Body from error ???


How can the Pope be infallible, how can the Pope be guaranteed without error??????

Answer is: He is guided by the Holy Spirit!
Quote from Vatican ll (The Church vioce)
"Although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they can nevertheless proclaim Christ’s doctrine infallibly. This is so, even when they are dispersed around the world, provided that while maintaining the bond of unity among themselves and with Peter’s successor, and while teaching authentically on a matter of faith or morals, they concur in a single viewpoint as the one which must be held conclusively. This authority is even more clearly verified when, gathered together in an ecumenical council, they are teachers and judges of faith and morals for the universal Church. Their definitions must then be adhered to with the submission of faith" (Lumen Gentium 25).

....... it is a charism the pope "enjoys in virtue of his office, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith (Luke 22:32), he proclaims by a definitive act some doctrine of faith or morals. Therefore his definitions, of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, are justly held irreformable, for they are pronounced with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, an assistance promised to him in blessed Peter."

The infallibility of the pope is not a doctrine that suddenly appeared in Church teaching; rather, it is a doctrine which was implicit in the early Church. It is only our understanding of infallibility which has developed and been more clearly understood over time. In fact, the doctrine of infallibility is implicit in these Petrine texts: John 21:15–17 ("Feed my sheep . . . "), Luke 22:32 ("I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail"), and Matthew 16:18 ("You are Peter . . . ").
END Quote..

The pope when speaking ex cathedra decrees on doctrine and morals are then infallible.
When He sits on the Chair of Peter and decrees a doctrine!!!
Which I add: did not happen very often in Church History!!!

You ask how could infallibility exist if some popes disagreed with others.
This, shows an inaccurate understanding of infallibility, which applies only to solemn, official teachings on faith and morals, not to disciplinary decisions or even to unofficial comments on faith and morals.
A pope’s private theological opinions are not infallible, only what he solemnly defines is considered to be infallible teaching.

What infallibility does do is prevent a pope from solemnly and formally teaching as "truth" something that is, in fact, error.
It does not help him know what is true, nor does it "inspire" him to teach what is true.
He has to learn the truth the way we all do—through study—though, to be sure, he has certain advantages because of his position.

Gavin; you cannot denyPeter wrote two infallible epistles of the New Testament while under protection against writing error.
So, if Peters behavior at Antioch was not incompatible with this kind of infallibility, neither is bad behavior contrary to papal infallibility in general.

Gavin you ERROR in searching Anti-Catholic Web sites, to get dirt on Christ!!!!!
If you want to understand His Church Ask a Catholic NOT Jack Chick!!!!!

Dogknox

From: Gavin Sent: 31/05/2006 15:02
I think that you may be right, as Dognox is incapable to understand that the Roman Church is not perfect in the way that he precieves it to be, far from it infact. He also refuses to acknowledged some basic tenents of catholic faith and goes a lot further then current catholic dogma does. Infact by saying that we are not saved and that we are heritics goes against the freedom of religon catechism from Vatican II, which has been espoused on by both John Paul II and the now Benedict XVI (which he did while he was mearly a cardinal), which says that there is God in all religons.

Do you believe these words Dognox

(highlighted mine)

The Council speaks of membership in the Church for Christians and of being related to the Church for non-Christian believers in God, for people of goodwill (cf. Lumen Gentium 15-16). Both these dimensions are important for salvation, and each one possesses varying levels. People are saved through the Church, they are saved in the Church, but they always are saved by the grace of Christ. Besides formal membership in the Church, the sphere of salvation can also include other forms of relation to the Church. Paul VI expressed this same teaching in his first encyclical, Ecclesiam Suam, when he spoke of the various circles of the dialogue of salvation (cf. Ecclesiam Suam 101-117), which are the same as those indicated by the Council as the spheres of membership in and of relation to the Church. This is the authentic meaning of the well-known statement "Outside the Church there is no salvation."

It would be difficult to deny that this doctrine is extremely open. It cannot be accused of an ecclesiological exclusivism. Those who rebel against claims allegedly made by the Catholic Church probably do not have an adequate understanding of this teaching.

Although the Catholic Church knows that it has received the fullness of the means of salvation, it rejoices when other Christian communities join her in preaching the Gospel. This is the proper context for understanding the Council's teaching that the Church of Christ "subsists" in the Catholic Church (cf. Lumen Gentium 8; Unitatis Redintegratio 4).

The Church, precisely because it is Catholic, is open to dialogue with all other Christians, with the followers of non-Christian religions, and also with all people of good will, as John XXIII and Paul VI frequently said. Lumen Gentium explains convincingly and in depth the meaning of "people of good will." The Church wants to preach the Gospel together with all who believe in Christ. It wants to point out to all the path to eternal salvation, the fundamental principles of life in the Spirit and in truth.

Now I know that there is probably alot for you to take in there Dognox, but let me break this down for you, what it is saying and then I will tell you who wrote it and where to find it, then you can tell me if it is right or wrong.

the first higlighted bit says that membership of the Church is for Chrisitans that is all people who believe in Christ and non-Christian beilivers in God - this means that as long as you believe in God no matter what your religon you belong to the Church, never mind the people on this board who profess Christ that you have said do not belong to the Church, this article says that all you have to do is believe in God and you are part of the Cchurch - do you believe that Dognox.
the second highlighted bit says that people are saved through the Church (note above about what the church is) and in the Church but always through the Grace of Christ - basically this is saying that any faith in God is given through the Grace of Christ.
the red highlighted bit says that we (meaning anyone) does not need to formally belong to the church (as in the roman church) to recieve salvation and that salvation is actually included in different relations to the church.
The highlighted bit actually contradicts what you say and sums all this up and says that what you have been saying is a misunderstanding of catholic dogma
the next red bit says that the Catholic church rejoices when we spread the gospel, and it is this rejoicing that means that Christ subsists in the roman church
The next bit again contradicts you and all you have said in that it says that because it is catholic it is open to dialouge with other Christians - but you say there is no other Christians outside of the catholic church
and lastly, the roman church wants to preach the good news alongside all who believe in Christ, those outside of the Catholic church.
Now Dognox, do you agree with that or not, are you going to pick it apart and call me a liar, are you going to say that I got it from a catholic hating anticatholic website, well I have a little surprise for you. That is just a sample from out of a book called "crossing the threshold of hope" by Pope John Paul II it is from the Chapter on "Is Only Rome Right?" and the link is here

http://www.catholic.net/RCC/POPE/HopeBook/chap21.html

others can go and read what Pope John Paul II had to say on other fiaths in this book as well a link can be found here. You can read any chapter you want online. http://www.catholic.net/RCC/POPE/HopeBook/toc.html

So Dognox I ask you again, was John Paul right? Was he led by the Holy Spirit? does this not contradict other catholic teaching, does this not contradict most of what you have said.

I forgive you for your harshness and your ignorance.

From: openairpreacherman Sent: 31/05/2006 13:51
Very interesting Gavin. Thanks

Steve
From: Missy Sent: 31/05/2006 14:04
Thanks Gavin,

I think this thread is a bit like he salvation one, played out!!!

List of abbreviations

AAS Acta Apostolicae Sedis. Commentarium officiale, Rome, 1909 (Tomus I) ff.
ACA Ad Catholicos Angliae, Pope Paul IV
ALL Allocution (a private audience with the Roman Curia)
C. Canon number cited from 1917 Code of Lanon Law of Pope Benedict XV
CCC Catechism of the Catholic Church, of John Paul II, 1992, Liguori Publications
CCT Catechism of the Council of Trent, Pope St. Pius V, TAN Books, Rockford, IL
CH Crossing the Threshold of Hope, by John Paul II, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. 1994
CN Communionis Noito, Letter to Bishops on "Communion," May 28, 1992
CT Catechesi Tradendae, Exhortation of John Paul II, Oct. 16, 1979, Pauline Books
D. Enchiridion Symbolorum, "The Sources of Catholic Dogma," edited by Fr. Henry Densinger, B. Herder Book Co., Imprimatur, 1955
DJP De Jejun. Pent., sermon 129, II:3, of Pope St. Leo the Great
DM Dives in misericordia, Encyclical of John Paul II, Nov. 30, 1980, Pauline Books
EIC Epistle to the Corinthians of Pope St. Clement I
EDA Ecclesia Dei Afflicta, motu proprio of John Paul II, Jyly 2, 1988, Pauline Books
ENL Exima Nos Laetitia, Decree of Pope Leo XIII
EP5 Exposition on Psalm V Poenit., tom. 3 of Pope St. Gregory the Great
ETC Epistle to the Cledonius, of Pope St. Gregory the Great
ETN Epistle to the Count of Nevers, 1208 AD, of Pope Innocent III
EV Evangelium Vitae, Encyclical of John Paul II, March 25, 1995, Pauline Books
GOH Gate of Heaven, Sister Catherine Clarke, MICM, Boston: Ravengate Press, 1952
FC Familiaris Consortio, Encyclical of John Paul II, Nov. 22, 1981, Pauline Books
FCR The Freedom of Conscience and Religion, letter of John Paul II to the heads of state of the nations who signed the Helsinki Final Act., Sept. 1, 1980, Pauline Books
LC La Croix, a French Periodical
LFH Letter to the French Hierarchy of Pope St. Pius X in 1910, C.M.R.I. Center
LG Lumen Gentium: A Vatican II Council Decree, Nov. 21, 1964
LOR L'Osservatore Romano, Vatican City, Italy, English edition
MA Mortalium Animos, Encyclical Letter of Pope Pius XI on Fostering True Religious Unity, Jan. 6, 1928, AAS 20 (1928), 5ff. Angelus Press
MC Mystici Corporis, Encyclical of Pius XII, June 29, 1943, AAS 35 (1943), 202ff.
P Pascendi, the Encyclical of Pope St. Pius X, Sept. 8, 1907, AAS 40 (1907), 593ff.
PA The Pope Comes to America, Publications International, Ltd. Stokie, IL, 1987
PM Peter Lovest Thou Me? Abbe Daniel Le Roux, Angelus Press
PP Path to Peace: A Contribution. Liturgical Publications Inc., Brookfield, WI, 1987
QA Quod Aliquantulum, of Pope Pius VI
RCH Readings in Church History, Fr. Barry, Westminster, MD, Newman Press, 1965
RH Redemptor Hominis, Encyclical of John Paul II, March 4, 1979, Pauline Books
Rmi Redemptoris Missio, Encyclical of John Paul II, Dec. 7, 1990, Pauline Books
SC Sacrosanctum Concilium, Vatican II Council Decree, Dec. 4, 1963
SCG Satis Cognitum, Encyclical of Leo XIII, June 29, 1896, AAS 28 (1896/96), 711 ff.
SCN Sacrorum Conciliorium, Archbishop John Mansi, Thomas Florentiae: 1759
SJS Summo Jugiter Studio, Encyclical of Pope Gregory XVI, May 27, 1832
Sqi-Sqa Singulari Quidem and Singulari Quandem, Encyclical of Pope Pius IX
SME Syllabus of Modern Errors: Papal Series, 1996, Michael Malone. Sacred Heart Press, 1419 Springcrest, Mesquite, TX 75149
TBR The Brotherhood Religion: Is it Anti-Christian? Rev. Edward F. Brophy, 1954, The Christian Book Club of America, P.O. Box 638, Hawthorne, CA 90250
UUS Ut Unum Sint, Encyclical of John Paul II, May 25, 1995, Pauline Books
VS Veritatis Splendor, Encyclical of John Paul II, Aug. 1993, Pauline Books



The great thing is that if you really wanted to, anyone can just type in any of the volumes above and look at what is actually written there and find out for yourselves that the catholic church is not infalible, that it does not speak with the voice of the Spirit, or that as Dognox wants us to believe that the Holy Spirit contradicts himself.

From: Gavin Sent: 31/05/2006 10:07
Continued...

Heresies of Anti-Pope John Paul II Truth of Divine and Catholic Faith
71. All nations form but one community.
CCC:842, 10/11/1992 Heresy: all nations form but one community.
Pius XII, MC:18
72. The UN is the supreme forum of peace and justice.
PP:112, 10/02/1979 The Church is the supreme forum of peace.
Pius XI, MA:1-17
73. The Catholic Church respects the Islamic spirutial tradition.
PP:2443, 08/19/1985 It is heresy to say: all religions are true.
St. Pius X, P:14
74. All men are brothers with a human dignity.
PP:826, 09/05/1983 Only Catholics have a human dignity in Christ.
St. Pius X, LFH
75. Goodness and truth are found in false religions.
CCC:842, 10/11/1992 It is heresy to say: all religions are good.
Pius XI, MA:2
76. The religious experience of Islam deserves respect.
CH:93, 1994 It is heresy to say: Muslims can experience God.
St. Pius X, P:14
77. Modernism renews and unites the Church of Christ.
CH:76, 1994 Modernism attempts to destroy the Church.
St. Pius X, P:23
78. In Hinduism men take refuge in God with love and trust.
CH:80, 1994 It is heresy to say: Hindus can experience God.
St. Pius X, P:14
79. Buddhists by higher help reach liberty and supreme illumination.
CH:80, 1994 It is heresy to say: Buddhists can experience God.
St. Pius X, P:14
80. The Church rejects nothing holy and true in false religions.
CH:80, 1994 Outside the Church the Truth cannot be found.
Gregory XVI, D.1617
Heresies of Anti-Pope John Paul II Truth of Divine and Catholic Faith
81. The Holy Spirit works effectively a common root in all religions.
CH:81, 1994 It is heresy to say: all religions are true.
St. Pius X, P:14
82. Praying with false religions can bring peace.
CH:81, 1994 Praying with false religions for peace is heresy!
Pius XI, MA:1-17
83. Animist religions prepare many to be Christians.
CH:82, 1994 It is heresy to say: Animists can experience God.
St. Pius X, P:14
84. John Paul II prayed with animists and was amazed at it.
LC, 08/23/1985 It is heresy to think: all religions are good.
Pius XI, MA:2
85. The sphere of salvation includes those not in the Church.
CH:140, 1994 No one can be saved who is not in the Church.
Pius IX, D.1716
86. With God, man creates his personal salvation.
CH:195, 1994 No one can be saved outside the true faith.
Pius IV, D.1000
88. The Catholic Church is present in all its elements in heretical sects.
CN, 05/28/1992 Outside the Catholic Church there is no holy unity.
St. Leo IO, DJP:129,II:3
89. Vernacular languages should be used for Mass.
SC:36, 12/04/1963 Heresy: popular language should be used for liturgy.
Pius VI, D.1566
90. Unbaptized catechumens are members of the Church.
LG:14, 11/21/1964 The unbaptized are not members of the Church.
Paul III, D.895
Heresies of Anti-Pope John Paul II Truth of Divine and Catholic Faith
91. Outside the Church there is remission of sins.
LOR, 11/20/1989 Outside the Church there is no remission of sins.
Boniface VIII, D.468
92. Man's dignity is: Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.
ALL, 04/1980 Freemasonry is: Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.
St. Pius X, LFH
93. Evolution is more than just an hypothesis.
LOR, 10/23/1996 Evolution is the doctrine of the Modernists.
St. Pius X, P:26
94. Worship in common with heretics is good.
UR:8, 1965 Worship in common with heretics is condemned!
Benedict XV, C.1258
95. The rite of Mass should be simplified.
SC:34,50, 1965 The rite of Mass should be simplified: is heresy!
Pius VI, D.1533
96. John Paul II prayed with sorcerers, calling out the "spirits."
LOR, 08/11/1985 John Paul II worshiped the Devil.
Gregory XVI, SJS
97. Outside the Church there is no salvation is not Catholic exclusively.
CH:141, 1994 The Catholic Church is the only way of salvation.
Eugene IV, D.714
98. John Paul II did not profess the filioque with eastern schismatics.
UUS:24, 12/06/1987 JPII was anathematized for patronizing heretics.
Innocent III, RCH:1:441
99. All deceased men "are standing before" God as saints.
LOR, 11/01/1993 No one can be saved who is not in the Church.
Pius IX, D.1716
100. It is unevangelical to condemn heretics.
UUS:15, 05/25/1995 It is evangelical to condemn heretics.
St. Martin I, D.271-272
101. Buddhism is a religion of salvation.
CH:84-85, 1994 Buddhism is a religion of damnation
Eugene IV, D.714
Heresies of Anti-Pope John Paul II Truth of Divine and Catholic Faith

From: Gavin Sent: 31/05/2006 09:50
So you answer about Pope Honorius, but leave out Pius IX, Cannon Law about freedom of religon which is then over turned by John Paul II when he said that Christians have freedom of religon (which actually goes against what you believe as well since you believe that all non catholics are unsaved).

Here is a bunch of statement called the syllabus of errors that Pope Pius IX declared as infalable and true I have highlighted the ones that have now been over turned by the catholic church.

THE SYLLABUS OF ERRORS CONDEMNED BY PIUS IX
I. PANTHEISM, NATURALISM AND ABSOLUTE RATIONALISM

1. There exists no Supreme, all-wise, all-provident Divine Being, distinct from the universe, and God is identical with the nature of things, and is, therefore, subject to changes. In effect, God is produced in man and in the world, and all things are God and have the very substance of God, and God is one and the same thing with the world, and, therefore, spirit with matter, necessity with liberty, good with evil, justice with injustice. -- Allocution "Maxima quidem," June 9, 1862.

2. All action of God upon man and the world is to be denied. -- Ibid.

3. Human reason, without any reference whatsoever to God, is the sole arbiter of truth and falsehood, and of good and evil; it is law to itself, and suffices, by its natural force, to secure the welfare of men and of nations. -- Ibid.

4. All the truths of religion proceed from the innate strength of human reason; hence reason is the ultimate standard by which man can and ought to arrive at the knowledge of all truths of every kind. -- Ibid. and Encyclical "Qui pluribus," Nov. 9, 1846, etc.

5. Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to a continual and indefinite progress, corresponding with the advancement of human reason. -- Ibid.

6. The faith of Christ is in opposition to human reason and divine revelation not only is not useful, but is even hurtful to the perfection of man. -- Ibid.

7. The prophecies and miracles set forth and recorded in the Sacred Scriptures are the fiction of poets, and the mysteries of the Christian faith the result of philosophical investigations. In the books of the Old and the New Testament there are contained mythical inventions, and Jesus Christ is Himself a myth.

continued........

From: Dogknox Sent: 30/05/2006 21:48
Reply to Gavin.. Nice try.. BUT WRONG..
Pope Honorious did not claim to teach Monothelitism. A heresy that held that Christ had only one will (a divine one), not two wills (a divine one and a human one) as all orthodox Christians hold. Pope Honorious did NOT make a decision at all. One way or the Other... He was Not a Hieratic!!! Get your facts stright...
Quote.. .......
Ronald Knox explained, "To the best of his human wisdom, he thought the controversy ought to be left unsettled, for the greater peace of the Church. In fact, he was an inopportunist. We, wise after the event, say that he was wrong. But nobody, I think, has ever claimed that the pope is infallible in not defining a doctrine."
End Quote...

Ignatius of Antioch. In his second-century letter to the church in Smyrna, he wrote, "Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church" (Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 8, 1 [A.D. 110]).

Gavin I think you should stay away from those "Anti-Catholic" web sites!!!

The Church Jesus gave, the Apostles to keep is a VISIBLE Body. Since he would be gone from earth, a method, by which he could preserve his teachings intact, had to be a Visible Body. So it could be found!!!
All others outside of the body are teaching or can teach error.
Why?
Because they are NOT protected, by the Holy Spirit! !!!

Apostolic succession of bishops, and the preservation of the Christian message, in its fullness, was guaranteed through the gift of infallibility, of the Church as a whole, but mainly through its Christ-appointed leaders, the bishops (as a whole) and the pope (as an individual).

It is the Holy Spirit who prevents the pope from officially teaching error, this follows necessarily from the existence of the Church itself.
If, as Christ promised, the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church then it must be protected from fundamentally falling into error and away from Christ.
It must be a perfectly steady guide in matters pertaining to salvation.

Gavin do you have Faith in Jesus; Question Did the Gates Prevail against Christ???

Since Christ said the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church, this means that his Church can never pass out of existence. But if the Church ever apostasized by teaching heresy, then it would cease to exist; because it would cease to be Jesus’ Church.
Thus the Church cannot teach heresy, meaning that anything it solemnly defines for the faithful to believe is true.
This same reality is reflected in the Apostle Paul’s statement that the Church is "the pillar and foundation of the truth".
If the Church is the foundation of religious truth in this world, then it is God’s own spokesman.
As Christ told his disciples:
Luke 10:16 "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me".

Gavin it is Biblical. The words of Jesus. Do you believe Jesus? Do you have Faith in Jesus?

Dogknox

PS Satan has ways of twisting seemingly good ideas against Christ and His people..
Example Faith Alone.. Sounds good at first.. But Faith ALONE, Faith ONLY, faith by its self, Leaves OUT LOVE!!!

Bible ALONE seems good at first... But again further examination shows Bible by its self... Leaves Church out of the picture... EVEN THOW the bible tells us "The Church is the TRUTH!

From: Merry20004 Sent: 30/05/2006 20:31
Since my last post, (which I have now deleted) a chorus has been running round my head non-stop.............here it is...........

We are One in the Spirit
We are One in the Lord
We are One in the Spirit
We are One in the Lord
And it's by the blood of Jesus that our One-ness is restored
And they'll know we are Christians by our love, by our love,
And they'll know we are Christians by our love!

From: Gavin Sent: 30/05/2006 10:11
And here is another essay (actually written by a catholic priest) which points out contradictions and dismisses the current pope(s) and vatican II.

I will link this one though as I know the last one was long and this is long also but well worth the 5-10 mins it will take to read,

Dognox if you are going to respond then please quote from the articles and show us why the contradictions between a so called Holy Spirit led Church are there and that they are not infact contradictions.

Link to essay... http://www.stjosephschurch.net/pope.htm

From: Gavin Sent: 30/05/2006 09:49
You see we have a problem here then don't we if we do bend the knee to the Apostolic succession of the Catholic Church and their way of interpritation of scripture and the infalibility of Pope and Church council, since there has been many many many contradictions down that line between popes, even to the extent that current doctrine which is dogma (and must be observed to call yourself a catholic) was once written off by a pope, so which is falible, which one isn't listening to the Holy Spirit or does the Holy Spirit contradict himself?

Here is an essay NOT written by me that points out some of the contradictions that have happened by a so called infalible holy spirit led church.

Remember that the bible tells us that if a prophet tells us to follow another god then we are to stone them to death. Deut 13.

Infallibility



Mary Ann Collins
(A Former Catholic Nun


www.CatholicConcerns.com

February, 2002

According to Roman Catholic doctrine, popes and Catholic church councils are infallible. This means that whenever they make official declarations concerning matters of faith or morals, God supernaturally protects them from making errors. Infallibility applies to all Roman Catholic popes and church councils: past, present, and future. [Note 1

“Webster’s Dictionary” defines “infallible” as “not capable of erring”. It says that “infallible” as used by the Roman Catholic Church means “incapable of error in defining doctrines touching faith or morals”.


What happens if a pope or a Catholic church council makes an “infallible” declaration which directly contradicts the “infallible” declaration of another pope or church council
Truth does not contradict truth. Therefore, if the “infallible” pronouncements of the popes and Catholic church councils really are infallible, they will never contradict other “infallible” pronouncements. So if there is even one contradiction, then the doctrine of infallibility cannot be correct



The claim for papal infallibility does not stand up to the test of history. Pope Zosimus (417-418 A.D.) reversed the pronouncement of a previous pope. He also retracted a doctrinal pronouncement that he himself had previously made. Pope Honorious was condemned as a heretic by the Sixth Ecumenical Council (680-681 A.D.). (This means that Honorious made doctrinal statements which are contrary to the Roman Catholic faith.) He was also condemned as a heretic by Pope Leo II, as well as by every other pope until the eleventh century. So here we have “infallible” popes condemning another “infallible” pope as a heretic. In 1870, the First Vatican Council abolished “infallible” papal decrees and the decrees of two “infallible” councils. [Note 2]

The doctrine of the Assumption of Mary was officially declared to be a dogma of the Roman Catholic faith on November 1, 1950. This means that every Roman Catholic is required to believe this doctrine without questioning it. However, as we will see, the teaching of the Assumption of Mary originated with heretical writings which were officially condemned by the early Church.

In 495 A.D., Pope Gelasius issued a decree which rejected this teaching as heresy and its proponents as heretics. In the sixth century, Pope Hormisdas also condemned as heretics those authors who taught the doctrine of the Assumption of Mary. Here we have “infallible” popes declaring a doctrine to be a heresy. Then on November 1, 1950, we have Pope Pius XII (another “infallible” pope) declaring the same doctrine to be official Roman Catholic doctrine, which all Catholics are required to believe. [Note

So before November 1, 1950, any Catholic who believed in the Assumption of Mary was a heretic (because of “infallible” declarations of popes). But after November 1, 1950, any Catholic who failed to believe in the Assumption of Mary was a heretic (because of the “infallible” declaration of Pope Pius XII).


In 1864, Pope Pius IX “infallibly” declared that the idea that people have a right to freedom of conscience and freedom of worship is “insanity,” “evil,” “depraved,” and “reprobate”. He also declared that non-Catholics who live in Catholic countries should not be allowed to publicly practice their religion. In 1888, Pope Leo XIII “infallibly” declared that freedom of thought and freedom of worship are wrong. These encyclicals are available on-line. [Note 4 gives addresses for them.]
The Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) produced a document entitled “Declaration on Religious Liberty” which states that all people have a right to freedom of religion. [Note 5

Now I certainly agree with the idea of freedom of religion. However, it totally contradicts the “infallible” declarations of Popes Pius IX and Leo XIII. It also contradicts the anathemas of the Council of Trent, the killing of “heretics,” the Inquisition, the burning of people who translated the Bible into the language of the common people, and the persecution of Protestants.
Freedom of religion also contradicts modern Canon Law (1988). Canon 1366 says that parents are to be punished with “a just penalty” if they allow their children to “be baptized or educated in a non-Catholic religion”. The reference to baptism shows that this refers to Christian religions which are not Roman Catholic. [Note 6] (During the Inquisition, “a just penalty” included things like torture and being burned at the stake. The Inquisition was based on Canon Law.) (See the article “Hunting ‘Heretics’”.)

Here the Catholic Church is on the horns of a dilemma. If it says that people have a right to freedom of religion, then it admits that it is not infallible. If it says that it is infallible, then it admits that it really does not believe that people have a right to freedom of religion.

The Catholic Church can claim infallibility, or it can claim that it has seen the error of its ways and it now supports freedom of religion. But it can’t have it both ways

Two Roman Catholic organizations have found contradictions between “infallible” doctrinal declarations of the Second Vatican Council and “infallible” doctrinal pronouncements of Pope Pius IX. [Note 7 gives addresses of on-line articles dealing with these contradictions.]


The conservative group (True Catholic) concludes that, therefore, the Second Vatican Council must not be legitimate. The liberal group (Women Priests) concludes that, therefore, Pope Pius IX taught “errors”. Either way, there are contradictions between official doctrinal declarations of an “infallible” pope and an “infallible” church council.

True Catholic also claims that Pope John Paul II has taught 101 things which are contrary to “infallible” Catholic doctrines which were declared by “infallible” popes and church councils. They conclude that John Paul is therefore a heretic, which, according to Canon Law, means that he is not a valid pope. So they call him an anti-pope. [Note 8 gives the address of an on-line article.]

If John Paul II is not a valid pope, then the papal chair has been vacant. In order to rectify this situation, True Catholic has elected a pope. On May 20, 1998, Pope Pius XIII was elected. [Note 9 gives the address of an on-line article>

So we now have two men who claim to be Pope: John Paul II and Pius XIII. It seems that having two popes at the same time is not confined to the Middle Ages.

SUMMARY


There are “infallible” doctrinal declarations which contradict one another. Therefore, the doctrine of infallibility is not valid

The contradiction of “infallible” doctrines has caused some very conservative Catholics to believe that John Paul II is not a valid pope, and the Second Vatican Council was not a valid council. It has also caused some very liberal Catholics to believe that Pope Pius IX taught doctrinal errors.

NOTES
1. “Catechism of the Catholic Church” (Washington, DC: U.S. Catholic Conference, 2000), paragraph 891. This book comes in numerous editions and languages. Because it has numbered paragraphs, statements can be accurately located in spite of the variety of editions. You can get the book in regular bookstores and at Amazon.com

2. William Webster, “The Church of Rome at the Bar of History” (Carlisle, Pennsylvania: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1995), pages 63-71

3. William Webster, “The Church of Rome at the Bar of History,” pages 81-85

4. Pope Pius IX, “Quanta Cura” (“Condemning Current Errors”), December 8, 1864. The “error” is given in Section 3, second paragraph. (Most numbered sections consist of only one paragraph. This section has two paragraphs.) The condemnation of all of the “errors” described in the encyclical is given in paragraph 6. [To read this online, search for “Pius IX” + “quanta cura”]

Pope Pius IX, “The Syllabus of Errors,” December 8, 1864, paragraphs 15, 77, and 78. The “Syllabus of Errors” accompanied the encyclical “Quanta Cura”. In reading it, remember that Pius condemned every statement that you are reading. [To read this online, search for “Pius IX” + “syllabus of errors”]

Pope Leo XIII,”Libertas Praestantissimum” (“On the Nature of Human Liberty”), June 20, 1888, paragraph 42. [To read this online, search for “Leo XIII” + Libertas]



5. “Dignitatis Humanae” (“Declaration on Religious Liberty”) in Austin Flannery (editor), “Vatican Council II, The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents,” New Revised Edition, Volume 1 (Northport, New York: Costello Publishing Company, 1975, 1996), pages 799-812.



6. Canon 1366, “Code of Canon Law,” Latin English edition, New English Translation. (Washington, DC: Canon Law Society of America, 1988), page 427. Canon Laws provide the legal basis for everything that the Roman Catholic Church officially does. Even the Inquisition and the persecution of Protestants were supported by Canon Law.


7. “The Errors of Pope Pius IX”. This article gives extensive quotations, with references to Pope Pius IX’s encyclicals and documents from the Second Vatican Council. It is on-line.

http://www.womenpriests.org/teaching/piusix.htm



“Summary of the Principal Errors of Vatican II Ecclesiology.” This article is on-line.

http://www.truecatholic.org/v2ecclesio.htm



Lucian Pulvermacher, “Vatican II Council -- Accepts Freedom of Religion, Teaches Heresy” in “Caritas Newsletter,” August 19, 1989. This article is on the Internet.

http://www.truecatholic.org/car8908.htm



8. Patrick John Pollock, “101 Heresies of Anti-Pope John Paul II.” Internet article.

http://www.truecatholic.org/heresiesjp2.htm



9. Lucian Pulvermacher, “Papal Election,” “Caritas Election News #1". Internet article

http://www.truecatholic.org/electionnews1.htm

From: Dogknox Sent: 29/05/2006 23:34
Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries
Honorius III (1216 - 1227)
Gregory IX (1227 - 1241)
Celestine IV (1241)
Innocent IV (1243 - 1254)
Alexander IV (1254 - 1261)
Urban IV (1261 - 1264)
Clement IV (1265 - 1268)
Bl. Gregory X (1271 - 1276)
Bl. Innocent V (1276)
Adrian V (1276)
John XXI (1276 - 1277)
Nicholas III (1277 - 1280)
Martin IV (1281 - 1285)
Honorius IV (1285 - 1287)
Nicholas IV (1288 - 1292)
St. Celestine V (1292)
Bonaface VIII (1292 - 1303)
Bl. Benedict XI (1303 - 1304)
Clement V (1305 - 1314)
John XXII (1316 - 1334)
Benedict XII (1334 - 1342)
Clement VI (1342 - 1352)
Innocent VI (1352 - 1362)
Bl. Urban V (1362 - 1370)
Gregory XI (1370 - 1378)
Urban VI (1378 - 1389)
Bonaface XI (1389 - 1404)
Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries
Innocent VII (1404 - 1406)
Gregory XII (1406 - 1415)
Martin V (1417 - 1431)
Eugene IV (1431 - 1447)
Nicholas V (1447 - 1455)
Callistus III (1455 - 1458)
Pius II (1458 - 1464)
Paul II (1464 - 1471)
Sixtus IV (1471 - 1484)
Innocent VIII (1484 - 1492)
Alexander VI (1492 - 1503)
Pius III (1503)
Julius II (1503 - 1513)
Leo X (1513 - 1521)
Adrian VI (1522 - 1523)
Clement VII (1523 - 1534)
Paul III (1534 - 1549)
Julius III (1550 - 1555)
Marcellus II (1555)
Paul IV (1555 - 1559)
Pius IV (1559 - 1565)
St. Pius V (1566 - 1572)
Gregory XIII (1572 - 1585)
Sixtus V (1585 - 1590)
Urban VII (1590)
Gregory XIV (1590 - 1591)
Innocent IX (1591)
Clement VIII (1592 - 1605)
Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries
Leo XI (1605)
Paul V (1605 - 1621)
Gregory XV (1621 - 1623)
Urban VIII (1623 - 1644)
Innocent X (1644 - 1655)
Alexander VII (1655 - 1667)
Clement IX (1667 - 1669)
Clement X (1670 - 1676)
Bl. Innocent XI (1676 - 1689)
Alexander VIII (1689 - 1691)
Innocent XII (1691 - 1700)
Clement XI (1700 - 1721)
Innocent XIII (1721 - 1724)
Benedict XIII (1724 - 1730)
Clement XII (1730 - 1740)
Benedict XIV (1740 - 1758)
Clement XIII (1758 - 1769)
Clement XIV (1769 - 1774)
Pius VI (1775 - 1799)
Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries
Pius VII (1800 - 1823)
Leo XII (1823 - 1829)
Pius VIII (1829 - 1830)
Gregory XVI (1831 - 1846)
Pius IX (1846 - 1878)
Leo XIII (1878 - 1903)
St. Pius X (1903 - 1914)
Benedict XV (1914 - 1922)
Pius XI (1922 - 1939)
Pius XII (1939 - 1958)
John XXIII (1958 - 1963)
Paul VI (1963 - 1978)
John Paul I (1978)
John Paul II (1978 - )


A UNBROKEN LINE OF POPES BACK TO PETER THE FIRST POPE Historical FACT!!! No other Church is Apostolic!!!!!!

From: Dogknox Sent: 29/05/2006 23:32
Fifth and Sixth Centuries
St. Innocent I (401 - 417)
St. Zosimus (417 - 418)
St. Bonaface I (418 - 422)
St. Celestine I (422 - 432)
St. Sixtus III (432 - 440)
St. Leo I (440 - 461)
St. Hilary (461 - 468)
St. Simplicius (468 - 483)
St. Felix III/II (483 - 492)
St. Gelasius I (492 - 496)
Anastasius II (496 - 498)
St. Symmachus (498 - 514)
St. Hormisdas (514 - 523)
St. John I (523 - 526)
St. Felix IV/III (526 - 530)
Bonaface II (530 - 532)
John II (533 - 535)
St. Agapitus I (535 - 536)
St. Silverius (536 - 537)
Vigilius (537 - 555)
Pelagius I (556 - 561)
John III (561 - 574)
Benedict I (575 - 579)
Pelagius II (579 - 590)
St. Gregory I (590 - 604)
Seventh and Eighth Centuries
Sabinian (604 - 606)
Bonaface III (607)
St. Bonaface IV (608 - 615)
St. Deusdedit I (615 - 618)
Bonaface V (619 - 625)
Honorius I (625 - 638)
Severinus (640)
John IV (640 - 642)
Theodore I (642 - 649)
St. Martin I (649 - 655)
St. Eugene I (654 - 657)
St. Vitalian (657 - 672)
Deusdedit II (672 - 676)
Donus (676 - 678)
St. Agatho (678 - 681)
St. Leo II (682 - 683)
St. Benedict II (684 - 685)
John V (685 - 686)
Conon (686 - 687)
St. Serius I (687 - 701)
John VI (701 - 705)
John VII (705 - 707)
Sisinnius (708)
Constantine (708 - 715)
St. Gregory II (715 - 731)
St. Gregory III (731 - 741)
St. Zachary (741 - 752)
Stephen (II) (752)
Stephen II/III (752 - 757)
St. Paul I (757 - 767)
Stephen III/IV (768 - 772)
Adrian I (772 - 795)
St. Leo III (795 - 816)
Ninth and Tenth Centuries
Stephen IV/V (816 - 817)
St. Paschal I (817 - 824)
Eugene II (824 - 827)
Valentine (827)
Gregory IV (827 - 844)
Serius II (844 - 847)
St. Leo IV (847 - 855)
Benedict III (855 - 858)
St. Nicholas I (858 - 867)
Adrian II (867 - 872)
John VIII (872 - 882)
Marinus I (882 - 884)
St. Adrian III (884 - 885)
St. Stephen V/VI (885 - 891)
Formosus (891 - 896)
Bonaface VI (896)
Stephen VI/VII (896 - 897)
Romanus (897)
Theodore II (897)
John IX (898 - 900)
Benedict IV (900 - 903)
Leo V (903)
Sergius III (904 - 911)
Anastasius III (911 - 913)
Lando (913 - 914)
John X (914 - 928)
Leo VI (928)
Stephen VII/VIII (928 - 931)
John XI (931 - 935)
Leo VII (936 - 939)
Stephen VIII/IX (939 - 942)
Marinus II (942 - 946)
Agapitus II (946 - 955)
John XII (955 - 964)
Leo VIII (963 - 965)
Benedict V (964 - 966)
John XIII (965 - 972)
Benedict VI (973 - 974)
Benedict VII (974 - 983)
John XIV (983 - 984)
John XV (984 - 996)
Gregory V (996 - 999)
Silvester II (999 - 1003)
Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries
John XVII (1003)
John XVIII (1004 - 1009)
Sergius IV (1009 - 1012)
Benedict VIII (1012 - 1024)
John XIX (1024 - 1032)
Benedict IX (1) (1032 - 1044)
Silvester III (1045)
Benedict IX (2) (1045)
Gregory VI (1045 - 1046)
Clement II (1046 - 1047)
Benedict IX (3) (1047 - 1048)
Damasus II (1048)
St. Leo IX (1049 - 1054)
Victor II (1055 - 1057)
Stephen IX/X (1057 - 1058)
Nicholas II (1059 - 1061)
Alexander II (1061 - 1073)
St. Gregory VII (1073 - 1085)
Bl. Victor III (1086 - 1087)
Bl. Urban II (1088 - 1099)
Paschal II (1099 - 1118)
Gelasius II (1118 - 1119)
Callistus II (1119 - 1124)
Honorius II (1124 - 1130)
Innocent II (1130 - 1143)
Celestine II (1143 - 1144)
Lucius II (1144 - 1145)
Bl. Eugene III (1145 - 1153)
Anastasius IV (1153 - 1154)
Adrian IV (1154 - 1159)
Alexander III (1159 - 1181)
Lucius III (1181 - 1185)
Urban III (1185 - 1187)
Gregory VIII (1187)
Clement III (1187 - 1191)
Celestine III (1191 - 1198)
Innocent III (1198 - 1216)

From: Dogknox Sent: 29/05/2006 23:30
Reply to KIM... You said.. we all read things different, and inturpret things different thats why God made us with our own mind. and when we are not in a "religion" we can see faults with it but none of us like our own choice of religoin being torn apart.

Kim this reading and INTURPRETING, thing is what got Martin Luther started..
From him in 1554 (?) onward it has not stopped!!!
Thousands of thousands of people with THEIR idea on such and such "Interpretation"!
All claim TRUTH no two equally the same!!!!

Jesus is not a God of Chaos!

He has ONE Church!

He did NOT say "I will build my Churches".
He did NOT say "You are Peter and on this rock, I will build my BODIES! (Churches)
NO Christ has only ONE body, like all men, have just one!
Jesus is not a freak; with many bodies!!!

The Church is supposed to do the "Interpretation"! WHY? Because it is "The Church" that is guided by the Holy Spirit!
Not; Martin Luther, Calvin, Smith, Knoxs, Eddie, King Henry, White, etc ... all men! The ONLY Church started by Jesus was the Catholic Church!

The Catholic Church is the ONLY Apostolic Church. WHY? Because no other can trace there roots back to the Apostles.
NONE OTHER!
Lots claim they are Apostolic but none can prove it!
The Anglican might say they are the "Other Catholic ".
But in reality they are Protestant (Protesters) started by a Hieratic!!! Like all others!!!
The Protestant of today "Born into the dark" is not a Hieratic!
King Henry was!!!

Martin Luther was!!!
John 20:23 If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven."

Luke 17:1 Jesus said to his disciples: "Things that cause people to sin are bound to come, but woe to that person through whom they come.

Matt 6:14 For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

Matt 9:6 But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins...." Then he said to the paralytic, "Get up, take your mat and go home."

Matt 18:17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

Matt 18:18 "I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

Mark 3:28 I tell you the truth, all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them. 29 But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin."

Martin Luther was a Catholic Priest...
He was guided by the Holy Spirit!
He turned his back on TRUTH!!!

Galatians 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to and different from that which we preached to you, let him be accursed (anathema, devoted to destruction, doomed to eternal punishment)!
9As we said before, so I now say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel different from or contrary to that which you received [from us], let him be accursed (anathema, devoted to destruction, doomed to eternal punishment)!

2 Peter 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves.

Acts 5:1 Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. 2With his wife's full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles' feet.
3Then Peter said, "Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4Didn't it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn't the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God." 5When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died.

Notice KIM... Ananias and Sapphira were Part of "The CHURCH" like Martin Luther was!

Peter the first Pope questioned them .. What are Peters words to them ("Ananias and Sapphira")??? You have sinned against the "Holy Spirit"!!!

The Guide of "The Newly formed Church"

Notice it is "The head of the Church that "CONVICTS" them!? Peter!!!

Bishops of Rome: Popes
First and Second Centuries
St. Peter (42 - 67)
St. Linus (67 - 79)
St. Anacletus (79 - 92)
St. Clement I (92 - 101)
St. Evaristus (101 - 105)
St. Alexander I (105 - 115)
St. Sixtus I (115 - 125)
St. Telesphorus (125 - 136)
St. Hyginis (136 - 140)
St. Pius I (140 - 155)
St. Anicetus (155 - 166)
St. Soter (166 - 175)
St. Eleutherius (175 - 189)
St. Victor I (189 - 199)
St. Zephyrinus (199 - 217)
Third and Fourth Centuries
St. Callistus I (217 - 222)
St. Urban I (222 - 230)
St. Pontian (230 - 235)
St. Anterius (235 - 236)
St. Fabian (236 - 250)
St. Cornelius (251 - 253)
St. Lucius I (253 - 254)
St. Stephen I (254 - 257)
St. Sixtus II (257 - 258)
St. Dionysius (259 - 268)
St. Felix I (269 - 274)
St. Eutychian (275 - 283)
St. Gaius/Caius (283 - 296)
St. Marcellinus (296 - 304)
St. Marcellus I (308 - 309)
St. Eusebius (309)
St. Miltiades (311 - 314)
St. Sylvester I (314 - 335)
St. Mark (336)
St. Julius I (337 - 352)
Liberius (352 - 366)
St. Damasus I (366 - 384)
St. Siricius (384 - 399)
St. Anastasius I (399-401)

From: openairpreacherman Sent: 29/05/2006 20:12
I was surprised to see this thread. I think it has been informative. I know that some people might be shocked to find that their previously long held opinions are questioned but l dont think that does anyone any harm. I fact it causes us to go back to the foundations of our faith and rethink. If that shakes the foundations then they need to be shaken.

Steve

From: Missy Sent: 29/05/2006 16:33
Yes I agree Kem. I know what you mean about heavens doorway and all that but we do all have to believe exactly what the bible tells us. It cannot be changed. Thanks for your thoughts here, great to see you posting.

MISSY

From: _ailikeformulaone_ Sent: 29/05/2006 15:40
i'm not very good putting things up on these boards, and please feel free missy if you wish to delete it.
this discussion has been really great to read, maybe we have to learn to take other religion as much as we see wrong or right.
when we get to heaven i don't think there will be a title over the door that says just catholic's or church of england or any other title, its going to say Christians, people that had Jesus in their heart and was saved by His love.
we all read things different, and inturpret things different thats why God made us with our own mind. and when we are not in a "religion" we can see faults with it but none of us like our own choice of religoin being torn apart.
maybe if we stoped as Christians tearing each others beliefs apart we would see the real picture that Christians are being squashed by society. we can't have prayers in schools, Christmas can't be called Christmas any more, jerry springer can take the micky out of us. maybe if for one moment we stoped looking at faults in other religions, we would start standing together all religions and stop people treating Christians like it and start making a stand together. i hope it was ok to post this. kem