Roman Catholic...Christian or Cult?

No. Please direct me to the section of the Catechism which directs this.

No. The question above is restated.

No. The question above is restated.

 

It admittedly can be a problem for some people (either because of theological objection and fears of idolatry as per your goodself or because it can develop unwittingly for some into actual idolatry; in both cases one is wise to observe Paul's dicta in Rom 14 and I Cor 10), Ann, but it is not so designed: we are encouraged to imitate the example of great men and women of the faith (eg: in Heb 12:1) and aids such as pictures, icons, statues, hagiographies etc are just that - aids.

 

That raises another issue: to what extent can the Church Triumphant be said to be united with the Church Militant ie: is it possible for a physically living saint to ask a physically dead saint for prayer (both of course being spiritually alive in Christ)? Answers on a postcard, please...

 

How did Erasmus who's position was that reform must come from within rather than being splintered. I have family who takes that position & they have reformed & indeed transformed from within. And then we have those like my brother & I who yes have left, who believe that NO DENOMINATION holds complete value to us. It cuts both ways. Both my mother & my grandmother both shame my brother & I in both their Christian & Moral lives.....My brother is a Fundamentalist minister & they are Catholic. They did not poison Christendom with hatred rather continued to love & forgive everyone whoever came in contact with them, all the while not judging them. If your suggesting to me is that nothing good ever came out of Catholicism, I would have to look to these good women, smile & then disagree with you.

So you want to know their value, it was in their raising my brother & I to love God & to accept Christ as our Savior & to pray for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Their goal for us was to be good Cristian Men, good fathers & husbands & indeed gentle men to who ever we came in contact with. I love them because I got my start as a Christian from them. It has enabled me to continue my focus of my salvation again thru Jesus Christ, My Lord & Savior.

 

:applause: Same here with my Catholic upbringing. Amen and AMEN!

 

I will do this privately....have questions for you Matt.

 

Nothing I've said warrents abuse by you.

Then your view of God is schizophrenic. You can see in the OT all the symbolism to help the people focus their consentration on God and his promises. You still buy your definition of what Catholics do rather than what it is they really do.

Statues and Icons aren't used as mediums between God and the Catholic either. They are pictoral referrences dipicting the gospel and the catholic is reminded of the gospel. Thus orders his/prayer. Apart from that the statue provides nothing else for the catholic. You've again misrepresent what they do.

I gave you a perfect example of the ARK OF THE COVENANT. BY YOUR OWN DEFINITION GOD SINNED BECAUSE HE COMMANDED MOSES TO MAKE IMAGES OF SARAPHIM. In which case you either explain it or hold that God is indeed schizophrenic.

And again catholics don't use pictoral referrances as objects of veneration or mediation. You called it wrong. You keep getting their beliefs wrong. I think you should actually study what it is they believe. Actually speak to an educated priest and ask him questions. Try brining up the same accusations.

Again misrepresenting the Catholic faith Dr? Nothing stands between the Catholic and God.

What are you talking about. Its rapture eschatology that brings back the old temple and sacrifices. Not Catholicism.

As you see nothing is concealed from the Catholic so no comparison. The symbology is ripe with providing Christian insite into the gospel and the gospel message. Nothing wrong with that.

 

"Cult" also has come to connotate the sense of a small, closed group that breaks off of the mainstream, and in that sense it would be hard to call it a cult.
They didn't break away from us; we broke away from them.

Perhaps that is why it was left out of Kingdom of the Cults and other authoritative apologetic sources. Those authorities are big on "historic Christianity" (Which JW's. Mormons and all the others diverge from), and they recognize that the RCC is apart of that history and passed down many of the doctrines they are defending. ("Cult" becomea a term for a group denying the Trinity primarily, and groups like the SDA and CoC who accept it but diverge on other points are questioned, but not solidly labeled cults by everyone).

So that's why there is such ambiguity on Rome, and why I'm the lone person saying "not sure".

 

That's your problem. You take what I say and place it in your quaint statement which doesn't in anyway hold my view. Niether forward nor backards adiquately holds my view or even simply describes it. You are attempting, in otherwords to redefine my view. I've given you a working definition of Salvation and Justification and explained what I believed. Go back and read it. And when comprehension avails itself to you then you can ask adiquate questions about it.
I have not justified their use of mediums because they don't. Big difference. Just because you accuse someone of something doesn't make it true. I've only given you an accurate Catholic view of how they see pictoral representations of the gospel.
Now that I've explained what it is they actually believe rather than what it is that is put on them. You can accuse me of what ever you want. Truth btw is what I'm getting at. You don't. Its like many atheist tell me the myth about christians. Such as our God is a tyrant and mentally unstable because he would kill his own son on our behalf. Or that were narcisist because our faith is all about us that we even put God in the position to subject himself to us. And I have to explain that first they misrepresent our faith. And how they are wrong. Then I explain what it is we really believe. And I'm doing that here for the Catholics because to get at the real issues you got to get past the Jack Chick stuff.

 

I agree whole hartedly with this.

I agree with this.

I've explained the Catholic consept of the Communion of Saints. Permament membership in the body of Christ no matter what state you find yourself in. Note when I'm sick and ask you Dr. Walter to pray for me am I asking you to take the place of christ? Are you my mediatior? In one sense you are interceding for me but you certainly aren't taking the place of Christ. In this same sense the Catholics ask the Saints for intercession which is different than requesting special devine providences from Manerva or Juno or whatever.

My father was a Diplomat and as his son I've been to many international engagements from bowing down before a foreign president and showing all sorts of respect to foreign dignataries. It was not Idolatry. See the difference?

Actually, here you have a good point. Save is it the picture that is honored or the person the picture represents? The good point you have is not so much in the bowing down before images as much as how much repect are we to provide to another person? Even the Mother of God? I'm using Theotokos in its original sense here so that you don't get confused not in the sense that is modernally conotated.

BTW didn't God replace the commandments by writing his law on our hearts? Or providing two summary commandments? Otherwise I agree with the first part of the statement.

 

Personally I believe you should allow Catholics in here to explain their position rather than intimidating them to silence but its your board and you can play your hand any way you want to.....In business its called "The Unfair Advantage" & in business, as a businessman I can admire it. However when it comes to Religion & the Revealing of Truth, ahhhh....Not So Much.

 

You haven't even properly define what it is they teach much less determine if they are obeying the gospel or not. You really need to study the Catholic Church not pick and choose outside context.

First accurately tell me what gospel they do teach and maybe we can get around to whether its accursed or not.

Yes, I do. Do you? And which is scriptural? How do you understand the gospel teaching of the Church? Or the Kingdom of God which the Son of Man (as spoken of by the prophet Daniel Chapter 7) is given leadership over which will have no end means?

Now I know your problem. You don't want to study what it is they actually believe because it takes too much work. Thats just lazy.

What nonsense? That Catholics are christian? Yes I believe believing Catholics are christian.

Your real question is are you a Christian that buys into my view of the gospel. You either believe exactly my view of the gospel/soteriology/ecclessiology or your not a chrisitan. I disagree with you. I don't believe the gospel is narrowed only to your view of it. In some ways I believe the gospel to be a lot more simple than you've made it and in other ways a lot more complex. But the simplicity aspect is for admission. Anyone who calls on the name of the lord will be saved.

 

Get it all out. Diatribe is good for the soul.

 

Whats discussing about it? You have to do more than just show disdaine.

 

Yeah, at least you got the civil powers right. But true Christians? People who believed that Jesus was a spirit? And that the material world was evil so sin was ok because in the end our spirits were good. They did not marry had multiple sexual partners etc... They don't sound christian to me. However, the Civil authorities from Otto felt it was their repsonsibility to enforce moral guideliness on their populace. They didn't understand nor have what we now have in the seperation of church and state.

 

Your first assumption is that the pope is the antichrist. There is nowhere that is proven. Only your opinion based on your bias.

I don't know if you understand this but the position of bishop incorporates teaching. Just like a pastor's job is also to teach. And if he's the head pastor he's the lead teacher? But then again you only piecemealed a quote and didn't run the whole document with all its implications by.

Again diatribe. What you need to do is verify the pope is the anti christ. Already many popes have come and gone and all of them called anti christ yet none of them where. So no different now. Unless you claim the position is anti Christ and again you are working with a definition not supported by scripture.

Now you're acting like a pope anathemizing people. Are the Catholics right about us that we are our own popes?

 

Many Catholics (majority i would say) don't even know their own faith. How many have read the catachism? Many catholics are idolaters against their own faith. And asking guidance from a saint. Again I gave an explination for the communion of saints that no matter what state they are in are part of the body of Christ pray for us. Its still just asking for intercession.

 

He was an atheist. However, doesn't mean everything he said wasn't true. In fact he said a lot of truths. And I like these quotes. I find them to be true. Plus he was a man of integrity though I'm sadden his soul is lost. But he was a genius scientist.

 

I hope they only imitate my good qualities which are few.

 

Yep you are a victim of poor catachesis. Sorry. But am glad you got to hear it from a bible believing church.