Ten Facts Most Catholics Don’t Know (But Should!)

Every time I hear someone claim to be an “ex-Catholic”, a sense of sadness comes over me.  In just about every case, people leave the Catholic Faith due to a lack of understanding.  After all, if Catholics truly believed that they were members of the one, true Church founded by Christ (and necessary for their salvation), nobody would ever leave!  In an effort to help clarify what the Catholic Church teaches, I have compiled a list of 10 important facts that every Catholic should know.  More than simply Catholic trivia, these are important concepts that can help us to better understand and defend our beliefs.  In no particular order, these items have been compiled based upon my work at Following The Truth and my own study of the Catholic Faith.

1. Women Will Never Be Priests – Often incorrectly lumped in with the subject of married priests, this is a doctrine that has been infallibly decided and will not change.  In 1994, Pope John Paul II issued an Apostolic Letter, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, in which he declared once and for all that “the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.”  Unlike the issue of married priests (which could possibly change), women’s ordination is an impossibility that will not happen.  It is not a “glass ceiling” or the Church’s attempt to hold back women.  Instead, it is an infallible recognition that men and women have different roles and that Christ instituted a male priesthood.

2. Fridays Are Still Days Of Penance – Ask almost anyone and they will tell you that Catholics are no longer required to abstain from meat on Fridays throughout the year.  However, the current Code of Canon Law (CIC) states that, with the exception of solemnities, “All Fridays through the year and the time of Lent are penitential days and times throughout the entire Church.” (CIC 1250)  Furthermore, “Abstinence from eating meat or another food according to the prescriptions of the conference of bishops is to be observed on Fridays throughout the year unless they are solemnities.” (CIC 1251)  In the United States, the bishops have declared that it is permissible to substitute some other form of penance, but we are still urged to fast from “something” in remembrance of the Lord’s death on the cross.

3. The Bible Is A Catholic Book – Did you ever wonder how the Bible came into being?  A little known, but easily documented fact is that the books of the Bible were compiled by the Catholic Church.  For many years after Christ ascended into Heaven, there was debate about which scriptural writings were inspired by God.  The canon of Scripture (the books of the Bible) was first formally decided at the Synod of Rome in 382.  This decision was upheld at the Councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397).  At these Catholic Church councils, the same 46 Old Testament and 27 New Testament books that appear in today’s Catholic Bibles were declared to be inspired by God.  As a side note, approximately 1200 years after this decision was made, Martin Luther and the Protestant reformers removed 7 books from the Old Testament.  As a result, most Protestant Bibles are still missing these 7 books.

4. The Mass Is The Same Sacrifice As Calvary – The biggest mistake that many Catholics make is treating the Holy Mass as “just another church service”, similar to those held by other religions.  In the Mass, Christ’s Sacrifice on the Cross is made present, its memory is celebrated and its saving power is applied.  The Council of Trent teaches that Christ left a visible sacrifice to His Church “in which that bloody sacrifice which was once offered on the Cross should be made present, its memory preserved to the end of the world, and its salvation-bringing power applied to the forgiveness of the sins which are daily committed by us.”  When we attend Mass, we are mystically transported to Calvary, where we can unite ourselves with the Lord’s Sacrifice to the Father!

5. Annulments Are Not Catholic Divorces – Unlike the legal process known as “divorce” (in which a marriage is terminated), a declaration of nullity (annulment) states that a valid marriage never existed.  This decision is based upon the finding that on the day that marriage vows were exchanged, some essential elements were lacking.  This process is completely in conformity with the Catholic teaching regarding the indissolubility of marriage.  Incidentally, the granting of an annulment does not render children illegitimate.

6. In Vitro Fertilization Is Morally Unacceptable – Many Catholics suffering from infertility utilize this process in the hopes of conceiving children, while remaining unaware that the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) declares it “morally unacceptable”(CCC 2377).  In the Vatican Instruction, Donum Vitae, the Church states “…in conformity with the traditional doctrine relating to the goods of marriage and the dignity of the person, the Church remains opposed from the moral point of view to homologous ‘in vitro’ fertilization. Such fertilization is in itself illicit and in opposition to the dignity of procreation and of the conjugal union, even when everything is done to avoid the death of the human embryo.”

7. There Is No Salvation Outside Of The Catholic Church – Originally stated by St. Cyprian, the Latin axiom “Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus” reminds us that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church.  This dogma was declared at the Fourth Lateran Council and is a source of confusion for Catholics and non-Catholics alike.  According to the Catechism, all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is His Body.  It does not mean that non-Catholics cannot achieve salvation.  Individuals who are unaware that the Catholic Church is the one, true Church may still achieve salvation through the merits of the Church, despite their lack of knowledge.

8. In An Emergency, Anyone Can Baptize – Although the ordinary ministers of Baptism are bishops, priests and deacons, anyone can baptize in an emergency, even a non-baptized person.  This extraordinary decision can be attributed to the necessity of Baptism for salvation and the Church’s desire to make it readily available to all.

9. Hell And Purgatory Still Exist –  Contrary to the belief of many Catholics, the Church still teaches that “the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin, descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, eternal fire” (CCC 1035)  Furthermore, “all who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation, but after death they undergo purification, so to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.” (CCC 1030)  This purification process, formally declared by the Church at the Councils of Florence and Trent, is known as Purgatory.

10. Catholics Don’t Worship Mary And The Saints – Many Catholics are confused about the role of the Blessed Mother and the Saints.  Should we pray to Mary and the Saints or should we go “right to the top” and pray to God?  In a nutshell, the Catholic Faith teaches that we must worship God alone.  Mary and the Saints are to be honored, not worshipped.  However, their intercession can be extremely powerful and emulating their virtues can put us on the road to Heaven.

While the above list only scratches the surface of the robust Catholic Faith, it provides a glimpse into the depth of Catholic teaching.  Further explanation on these and other topics can be found by examining the Code of Canon Law and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, both of which can be found online at the Vatican website (www.vatican.va).  Not only will studying the teachings of the Catholic Church enable us to better defend her when challenged, it will help us to become closer to Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, who founded our Church 2,000 years ago.

Subscribe to CE
(It's free)

Go to Catholic Exchange homepage

  • Joe DeVet

    Thank you! Pretty basic stuff that “most Catholics” don’t know. I would add these:

    1) Contraception is intrinsically evil and therefore objectively sinful in all circumstances (based on same principle which makes ivf wrong even if no baby’s life is lost.)

    2) Formal cooperation in evil, and in appropriate circumstances material cooperation in evil both bear the same culpability as the evil act itself. Thus, referring or counseling for abortions or taking part in the legalization of abortion is gravely wrong. (I daresay most Catholics don’t understand why pro-abortion politicians should not receive communion.)

    3) It is wrong to do evil in order to bring about a perceived “greater good”, but under the right circumstances it may be moral to do something which itself is not wrong but which brings about an unintended bad consequence (double effect.) This seems obscure, but it is necessary for people to understand the recent abortion brouhaha involving Bishop Olmsted was all about.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Ten Facts Most Catholics Don’t Know (But Should!)  | Catholic Exchange -- Topsy.com

  • consecrata

    Thanks for your response Joe…this ‘formal cooperation with evil’ is not known by many Catholics. Joe Biden even went to Kenya to urge them to allow abortion to be legalized through their constitution telling them that if they did, then the money would flow to them…Nancy Pelosi rabidly supports abortion and advocates for abortion legislation at every opportunity…Arch. Burke, the Prefect of the Apostolic Signatorum in Rome, the highest Vatican Court, who is himself a Canon lawyer, has stated over and over and over again that Canon Law states that those like Pelosi and Biden must not be permitted to receive Communion, and that this is not a matter of Bishops’ opinions…yet, our Bishops do not enforce this because some of the Bishops say that this would be to politicize the Eucharist. I think that the failure to enforce this is politicizing the Eucharist – also, it is cutting off a way of conversion for those who are entrenched in supporting abortion…Nancy Pelosi once stated that if her Bishop were to tell her she could not receive the Eucharist because of her pro abortion stance, she would have been devastated. Perhaps that would have been the catalyst for conversion…a child who is engaged in harmful behavior and is told by his parents that he must stop and yet continues in his destructive behavior and is given no consequences will conclude that his behavior is no big deal…I believe that if the Bishops would take a stand and refuse the Eucharist to all those who publicly promote abortion there would be a radical change of heart on the part of some Catholic politicians who, at this time, are using the Bishops lack of courage as an excuse to let all know that the Catholic Church is on their side…even calling in radical anti Church Catholic organizations to support their point of view…this is not about punishment but conversion, about showing the grave moral evil as the taking of human life, the genocide of the human race…we need to pray that our Bishops will act before millions more human babies are exterminated in the wombs of their mothers.

  • Linda S

    I am a returning Catholic. I left because of the priest abuse which happened in my parish. Should you not be asking why people leave the church? Have they been hurt by the church? Will lists of church teachings help people return to the church? I know church rules did not bring me back. I would have looked at your list and ask why are you trying to hurt me more. Even though your list speaks of truth, I know it was the gentle love of Jesus that brought me back. I believe the Holy Spirit tugged at me for years to return to the truths of the Church. Once I was open to returning the Holy Spirit prompted me to study, take classes, and to learn the authentic teachings of the Church. Christ provided me gentle nonjudgmental people who lovingly guided me. I suggest compassion and prayer will work miracles in helping our fallen away brothers and sisters. May the peace of God’s love be with you.

  • rsmaxwell

    Linda S: While what you say is true, I have two questions. One, why would this list hurt you? And, two, why is this article failing to win back fallen away Catholics? I ask because I don’t think that this was intended to bring fallen away Catholics back into the fold, so I’m curious as to why this was brought up.

  • Jerry Rhino

    Gary,
    You wrote, “Often incorrectly lumped in with the subject of married priests, this is a doctrine that has been infallibly decided and will not change. In 1994, Pope John Paul II issued an Apostolic Letter, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, in which he declared once and for all that “the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.”
    My investigation as to infallible papal declarations, in order to document them, has turned up little. Besides these three, I have found little in the last two hundred years which theologians have apparently agreed upon:
    1 Auctorem fidei, Pope Pius VI, 1794, condemning seven Jansenist propositions of the Synod of Pistoia as heretical;

    2 Ineffabilis Deus, Pope Pius IX, 1854, defining the immaculate conception;

    3 Munificentissimus Deus, Pope Pius XII, 1950, defining the assumption of Mary.

    Would you inform us of how you made the determination that this was an infallible declaration, and where one might find a definitive list?

  • johnpaul87

    Here is what you said about no salvation outside the CC ; “Individuals who are unaware that the Catholic Church is the one, true Church may still achieve salvation through the merits of the Church, despite their lack of knowledge.” Youre not getting off the hook that easy. What is it ? No salvation outside the CC or there is salvation outside? What is this merits thing? You sure dismissed that subject real fast, and its the the utmost important subject on earth. Will someone get to heaven or not. All the rest is just smoke and mirrors. Rituals and dos and donts, none of that matters. Are you going to heaven. How are these merits given to people. I want to know cause i might need them.

  • noelfitz

    Apostolic Letters are not infallible. The Pope is infallible only when he speaks ex cathedra. The last time a pope spoke in this way was when the Assumption of Our Lady was defined by Pius XII in 1950.

  • v4victory

    Decent selection of concepts. A good start on a big job. I frequently make apologia for the sacraments.

  • http://followingthetruth.com Gary Zimak

    noelfitz and Jerry Rhino: Thanks for the comments, but you are overlooking the fact that the Church can teach infallibly by virtue of the Ordinary Magisterium and that’s what Pope John Paul II was doing in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis. In fact, then-Cardinal Ratzinger (the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) and now Pope Benedict XVI, addressed the infallibility of Pope JP II’s statement on the male priesthood in his letter of October 28, 1995:

    Dubium: Whether the teaching that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women, which is presented in the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis to be held definitively, is to be understood as belonging to the deposit of faith.

    Responsum: In the affirmative.

    This teaching requires definitive assent, since, founded on the written Word of God, and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium (cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium 25, 2). Thus, in the present circumstances, the Roman Pontiff, exercising his proper office of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32), has handed on this same teaching by a formal declaration, explicitly stating what is to be held always, everywhere, and by all, as belonging to the deposit of the faith.

    The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect, approved this Reply, adopted in the ordinary session of this Congregation, and ordered it to be published.

    Rome, from the offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on the Feast of the Apostles SS. Simon and Jude, October 28, 1995.

    Joseph Card. Ratzinger
    Prefect

  • http://followingthetruth.com Gary Zimak

    Linda S: First of all, welcome back to the Catholic Church! This article was my attempt to highlight some misunderstood and little known teachings of the Catholic Church. Unfortunately, many Catholics leave the Church because they don’t understand her teachings. For instance, if one understands that the Holy Mass is the Lord’s sacrifice at Calvary made present and that He is there Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity…do you think they would ever leave to join another church just because they may have better music or more dynamic preaching? While I’m in no way diminishing the harm done by the priestly abuse crisis, if one understands that the perfect Church founded by Jesus is made up of imperfect sinners then they would be much less likely to leave her. Just as the Jewish people revered the Law of the Lord (Look especially at Psalm 119), we can see the “gentle love of Jesus” in the teachings of His Church. Rather than looking at Church teachings as “rules”, I recommend that you view them as the Lord Jesus communicating directly with us. In that way, we can experience His loving care for each of us as He shows us the way to Eternal Life!

  • http://followingthetruth.com Gary Zimak

    johnpaul87, I apologize for the brevity of some of my explanations, but I had a lot of material to cover in a rather limited amount of space. I’m glad that you questioned this statement, because it can be complicated. Essentially, this is what is known as “invincible ignorance” which states that if someone is not familiar with the teachings of Christ or is not aware that the Catholic Church is the one, true way to salvation, then it is still possible for them to be saved. However, if one does know that the Church is necessary for salvation and they leave, then they could be “in trouble”. It gives us a great example of the Lord’s mercy. As I mentioned in the article, the Fourth Lateran Council declared that “The universal Church of the faithful is one outside of which none is saved.” Expanding on that idea, in the encyclical Mystici Corporis, Pope Pius XII stated “Nevertheless equally certainly it is to be held that those who suffer from invincible ignorance of the true religion, are not for this reason guilty in the eyes of the Lord.” Thanks again for your comments and I hope that this clears things up a bit.

  • http://www.catholicexchange.com Mary Kochan

    Also, whatever saving grace anyone, inside or outside of the Church receives, still comes through the Church. That is why we offer the Mass for all those whom the Son has gained for the Father and for all those whose faith is known to God alone.

  • johnpaul87

    Thanks gary for the reply. Dont take this personal, but yes, it cleared up something for me. Hard line catholics stand on the no salvation outside the CC idea. Not catholic, no heaven. You say some pope expanded on this. Fancy way of saying that this doctrine is wrong and an embarrasment. The CC maintains its teachings are infallable. Since you cant unsay something, you have to expand on it. 500 yrs ago the common man tended to believe anything said by a man in a fancy glittery robe and a tall funny looking hat. Well, that dont work anymore. Let me re state that. Modern man doesnt believe things that are obvious scams. But lots of modern men still fall for scams. Im not making much sinse. Now a days you get people fired up for saying politically incorrect things, like all Jews are going to hell, which is what the CC doctrine says. So its time to revise that doctrine. Time to admit that CC doctrine is not infallable. Anyway, Jesus said that you must be born again to enter heaven, so that is between each person and his maker, not up to some organization to dole out salvation.

  • http://www.catholicexchange.com Mary Kochan

    johnpaul87, how do you know Jesus said you have to be born again?

    What does it mean to be born again and how do you know it means that?

  • johnpaul87

    Hi Mary! How do i know Jesus said you have to be born again? Im taking the bibles word for it. I believe whats in that book because i have testes it and stood on the promises that are made. Havent you read any of the 4 gospels? In them, Jesus says you must be born again to enter into the kingdom of god. He goes on to explain that the unsaved man is eathly and cannot understand the ways of the spirit. This soul will not go to the kingdom. He goes on to say that only that which came down from heaven will go back up to heaven. When you are born again Jesus gives you a new spirit. One from heaven. Then you can see and understand the things of the spirit. Jesus said to make no mistake, the spirit blinds the natural man to the bible. Thats why people read it and still have unbiblical ideas and practices. Read the gospels and ask Jesus to give you this new spirit. He says he will,so believe.

  • http://followingthetruth.com Gary Zimak

    johnpaul87, I don’t take your comments personally at all! In fact, I welcome them and am pleased that you took the time to comment on my article. Firstly, I have to correct something that I wrote in my previous comment. The Papal citation was actually from Pope Pius IX and came from “Singulari quandem” on Dec 9, 1854. Pope Pius XII did address the topic in “Mystici Corporis”, but not in those words. I was a little cross-eyed when I was typing last night:-)

    As far as some of your other points about the Church “reversing doctrine”, I have to disagree with you. Doctrine can develop over time, but it does not change. There is still no salvation outside of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church (established by Christ) is still the only means for salvation. However, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, Holy Mother Church has expanded on that doctrine and stated that it is POSSIBLE (not certain, but POSSIBLE) for non-Catholics to be saved, HOWEVER that salvation still comes through the merits of the Church.

    It’s obvious that you revere the Holy Bible and that’s a good thing because it is the written Word of God. However, your use of the Bible indirectly implies your submission to the authority of the Catholic Church. As mentioned in my article, this is because the Catholic Church was responsible for compiling the Bible. That’s one reason why the Protestant doctrine of sola-scriptura is so flawed. If the Bible alone is all that is needed for salvation, where in the Bible does it list the books that should be in the Bible? I’m sure you’ll agree that it doesn’t. Rather, an outside authority (namely the Catholic Church) decided (under the guidance of the Holy Spirit) which books were considered to be inspired.

    As you stated to me, I hope you don’t take my comments personally. It’s obvoius that you’re a good person who is seeking the truth and I trust that you’ll recognize the same desire in me. Good, friendly dialog about the Lord is ALWAYS a good thing!

  • http://www.catholicexchange.com Mary Kochan

    LOL, johnpaul87, of course I have read the Gospels. My first question to you was for the sake of showing the point that Gary made above. Without the Catholic Church you have no Bible.

    My second question was to show that you would need to interpret the wrods of Jesus to mean SOMETHING. What that something you interpret them to mean is going to be based on your own ideas or the ideas of some preacher you have listened to or some book you have read. I notice that you do not connect being born again with baptism, even though that is the biblical connection:

    In John 3:5 Jesus says, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of WATER and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” Do you understand that Jesus is referring to baptism? See also: Rom. 6:3–4; Col. 2:12–13; Titus 3:5.

    Ah, but how do we Catholics know that that we have the correct understanding — not just the experential meaning you seem to be giving it. We know because the early Christians, who identified themselves as Catholic, who knew the apostles and had been taught by them to understand the meaning of scripture universally understood it just that way.

    No Church Father referred to John 3:5 as anything other than water baptism. Here are just a few examples.

    Justin Martyr

    “As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, and instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we pray and fast with them. Then they are brought by us where there is water and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father . . . and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit [Matt. 28:19], they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, ‘Unless you are born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:3]” (First Apology 61 [A.D. 151]).

    Irenaeus

    “‘And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’” (Fragment 34 [A.D. 190]).

    Tertullian

    “[N]o one can attain salvation without baptism, especially in view of the declaration of the Lord, who says, ‘Unless a man shall be born of water, he shall not have life’” (Baptism 12:1 [A.D. 203]).

    Hippolytus

    “The Father of immortality sent the immortal Son and Word into the world, who came to man in order to wash him with water and the Spirit; and he, begetting us again to incorruption of soul and body, breathed into us the Spirit of life, and endued us with an incorruptible panoply. If, therefore, man has become immortal, he will also be God. And if he is made God by water and the Holy Spirit after the regeneration of the laver he is found to be also joint-heir with Christ after the resurrection from the dead. Wherefore I preach to this effect: Come, all ye kindreds of the nations, to the immortality of the baptism” (Discourse on the Holy Theophany 8 [A.D. 217]).

    The Recognitions of Clement

    “But you will perhaps say, ‘What does the baptism of water contribute toward the worship of God?’ In the first place, because that which has pleased God is fulfilled. In the second place, because when you are regenerated and born again of water and of God, the frailty of your former birth, which you have through men, is cut off, and so . . . you shall be able to attain salvation; but otherwise it is impossible. For thus has the true prophet [Jesus] testified to us with an oath: ‘Verily, I say to you, that unless a man is born again of water . . . he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’” (The Recognitions of Clement 6:9 [A.D. 221]).

    Testimonies Concerning the Jews

    “That unless a man have been baptized and born again, he cannot attain unto the kingdom of God. In the Gospel according to John: ‘Except a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God’ [John 3:5]. . . . Also in the same place: ‘Unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye shall not have life in you’ [John 6:53]. That it is of small account to be baptized and to receive the Eucharist, unless one profit by it both in deeds and works” (Testimonies Concerning the Jews 3:2:25–26 [A.D. 240]).

    Cyprian of Carthage

    “[When] they receive also the baptism of the Church . . . then finally can they be fully sanctified and be the sons of God . . . since it is written, ‘Except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God’” (Letters 71[72]:1 [A.D. 253]).

    Council of Carthage VII

    “And in the gospel our Lord Jesus Christ spoke with his divine voice, saying, ‘Except a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.’ . . . Unless therefore they receive saving baptism in the Catholic Church, which is one, they cannot be saved, but will be condemned with the carnal in the judgment of the Lord Christ” (Seventh Carthage [A.D. 256]).

    Cyril of Jerusalem

    “Since man is of a twofold nature, composed of body and soul, the purification also is twofold: the corporeal for the corporeal and the incorporeal for the incorporeal. The water cleanses the body, and the Spirit seals the soul. . . . When you go down into the water, then, regard not simply the water, but look for salvation through the power of the Spirit. For without both you cannot attain to perfection. It is not I who says this, but the Lord Jesus Christ, who has the power in this matter. And he says, ‘Unless a man be born again,’ and he adds the words ‘of water and of the Spirit,’ ‘he cannot enter the kingdom of God.’ He that is baptized with water, but is not found worthy of the Spirit, does not receive the grace in perfection. Nor, if a man be virtuous in his deeds, but does not receive the seal by means of the water, shall he enter the kingdom of heaven. A bold saying, but not mine; for it is Jesus who has declared it” (Catechetical Lectures 3:4 [A.D. 350]).

    Now, if you have some contrary interpretation, we as Catholics would ask you, how do you know that your interpretation is correct? And if all you can offer for support is your own thoughts or your own interpretation, then we we would need to say to you, please, reconsider the kid of authority you are claiming for yourself.

    Yes, the man who is born again and who has the Spirit of God, understands the word of God. But that man does not seek to divorce the Word of God from the Church, which is the pillar and support of the truth and which gave us the written Word. Nor does he attempt to divorce the Holy Spirit from the Church, for He is the soul of the Church. Instead that man sees the harmony of the Spirit working in him to generate new life through the ministry of the Church and then to sanctify him as member of Christ’s body, both with the sacraments and by the Word of God.

    God bless you as you seek the truth.

  • cathmike

    One of the facts I would definitely include in any list is that the Catholic Church is NOT the Roman Catholic Church (a very common misconception) but is the communion of 22 ritual churches that are in communion with the Bishop of Rome. Typically these other churches are known as “the eastern rites” in the West. Many times people will say that one thing or another is “definitely Catholic” when it fact it is only “Roman Catholic.” Within the Catholic Church there is a great diversity – including Malankara Catholics from India, Chaldean Catholics from Iraq and Syria, Greek (or Byzantine) Catholics from Europe and the Middle East. “There are many mansions in my Father’s house” said Our Lord.

  • johnpaul87

    Thanks Mary and Mark. Mary, you gave quotes from men, sure a sentence or 2 of scripture is mingled in with them. I beg to differ about the CC giving us the bible. If people did praise god, the stones would cry out. God used some men to put togeather a bible.Or rather assemble books already written. Claiming to be good enough to give us the bible isnt quite right. The books were already there.God is strong, my god is. He uses whom he will to get done what he wants. Now the CC wants to take credit for the bible. Yrs after the book was put togeather, some of the CC leaders happened to look thru it saw that thier religion was suspect. Too late now, you cant unsay things. So, just forbid the people to own a bible much less read one. I know you guys know all this, its just a reminder. The penalty for being caught with a bible; torture and or death. When basking in the glory that the CC gave mankind the bible, you forget to mention the unspeakable torture men got when the CC found you with one.Never mind that. Jesus baptises with the holy spirit. John the Baptist made that clear. Being dunked in water is not a ticket to heaven. Anyone can be dunked. A man came to Jesus secretly one nite and asked; what must i do to enter into the kingdom of heaven? I dont have to tell you the answer. Tell me something, were the people dunked in water by John born again? Or were they saved?

  • http://www.catholicexchange.com Mary Kochan

    What do the Scriptures say about that? Acts 19: 1-5.

    It is pure silliness to say that getting dunked in water saves, or that that is what we claim. If you are not going to have a respectful conversation, then go away.

    If we thought that being dunked in water saves, then the act of giving a baby a bath would be quite sufficient and we wouldn’t bother with baptism. Even many Protestants conduct baptism and you demean all Christians when you call it getting dunked in water, because it is of course an invocation (calling upon) the Holy Spirit and is joined with the prayers of all Christains of all time and for adults requires preparation by preaching the Gospel to them and eliciting from them a confession of faith — see Romans 10: 6-17.

    Yes, I did give you quotes from men. So let’s see, you accept that those men were used by God to bring you the Bible (they were martyrs, BTW, not persecuters — please make some little attempt to get your history straight) but you don’t accept what they say about the meaning of Jesus words. So you want the Holy Spirit to be with them on the issue of the Bible and what books belong in it and then to leave them when they interpret Scripture. How do you know the Holy Spirit left them when they interpreted Scripture?

    It seems that the only way you have to judge is because they disagree with YOUR interpretation. Don’t you see any problem with that?

  • noelfitz

    Gary
    I am very grateful to you for your reply to my post. I appreciate it that you took the time to reply to me and you have given me food for thought.

  • johnpaul87

    Mary, the reason i dont put stock in those men is cause they tow the catholic line. They always end with saying that the CC is the way. I didnt mean to give the idea that i interpret scripture. I read it and believe it. You forgot to answer the question of whether the people who got Baptised by John were spirit filled by that action. The answer is no, they were not spirit filled, nor was thier place in heaven secured.It was just an outward sign to let them and others know they believed in the messiah.John was the first to baptise. He was the messenger of god predicted in the old test. Jesus gives men the holy spirit, thats when you are born again.

  • http://followingthetruth.com Gary Zimak

    noelfitz – You’re welcome. And I am grateful for you taking the time to post a comment about the article. God Bless You!

  • http://www.catholicexchange.com Mary Kochan

    I did answer that question with the Scriptural reference to Acts 19: 1-5. I’m sorry: I thought you would be familiar with it and recognize that it answered your question:

    While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”

    They answered, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”

    So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?” “John’s baptism,” they replied.

    Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.”

    On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.

    Yes, when a person is baptized as a Christian (which John’s disciples were not), he receives the Holy Spirit. That is HOW Jesus gives him the Holy Spirit — through baptism.

    I can’t help but notice that I keep giving you Scriptures that you keep ignoring, like all these Scriptures I gave you previously and to which you never responded: Rom. 6:3–4; Col. 2:12–13; Titus 3:5. Do you believe what they say about baptism?

    Please deal with them in your next answer or else just go and have a nice day somewhere else.

    God bless you.

  • johnpaul87

    Dear Mary, im away from home and at work, dont have my bible to check references. Im sorry but being born again is totally different from water baptism. On rereading your big post, i can across one obvious falsehood, twisting of scripture. I dont have time now to point out anymore. Heres one you can check for yourself; Tertullian

    “[N]o one can attain salvation without baptism, especially in view of the declaration of the Lord, who says, ‘Unless a man shall be born of water, he shall not have life’” (Baptism 12:1 [A.D. 203]).

    That is not a quote from the bible.The Jesus i know wouldnt talk like that. His sheep know his voice. You know Mary, these were not born again men. Just like i was at one time. I believed anything and everything. Your salvation now depends on you and Jesus. John baptised with water,but Christ is with the holy ghost.Two different operations. Try it. You might like it.

  • johnpaul87

    Justin and Irenaeous you quoted , both seem to think water baptism renews the spirit. Of course if they say it, its good enough for you. Jesus didnt come to save the healthy, he came to save the lost and the sick.They that be whole need not a physician.If you are “rite with god” then great for you. I started a blog a week or so ago at the prompting of a friend, The Joyfulpapist.the adress is; http://www.cherrybombcoutour.blogspot.com/ come in and feel free to make any comments or suggestion you like. I wont delet you. Im much more tolerant than most. thanks

  • boleggs49

    johnpaul87, you say that you read the Bible and believe, but your very act of reading and believing involves interpreting the Scriptures, otherwise there would be nothing to believe. Christ established His Church upon Peter and the other Apostles, giving them the power and authority to teach as He taught. This teaching authority was passed on from the Apostles to the Bishops and their successors they ordained. This is the Magisterium of the Church, which still today teaches and guides us. It was the from the Apostles and their successors that we received the books of the New Testament. The Apostles and their successors are the Church we speak of when we say that the Bible came to us from the Church. The Church took these New Testament Scriptures and combined them with the Old Testament Scriptures to make the Bible. It should also be noted here that the Old Testament Scriptures were from the Septuagint, which is what the Apostles and early Christians used. How do I know this? Most of the Old Testament quotations in the New Testament are from the Septuagint and not from the Hebrew translated into Greek. There is a big difference. Since the Bible came from the Church, we should therefore look to the Church, who is guided by the Holy Spirit, to understand the Scriptures and their interpretation. If we do not do that, then we are using our own personal interpretation, and we do not have the guarantee that our interpretation is guided by the Holy Spirit. Jesus tells us several times that we must be born of the water and the spirit, and this can only mean that we must be baptized. Any other interpretation is just plain wrong. It is not Mary who is twisting the Scriptures, but you to fit your own personal intention, just as did Martin Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, and the other Protestant reformers. I am surprised that a devout Christian as you seem to present yourself would not have a Bible with you at all times. In addition to my regular printed Bible, I have three versions of the Bible on my Palm Zire, so I can look up Bible references at anytime. Of course, the version you carry is also important, so my Bibles are all approved by the Church from whence they came, so I know I am getting the straight story since many Protestant Bibles contain writings that have been twisted to represent Protestant theology rather than the true Faith. I will pray that God will grant you a greater understanding of the Truth. God bless you.

  • johnpaul87

    Whooops, caught another fib.Cyril of Jerusalem; Nor, if a man be virtuous in his deeds, but does not receive the seal by means of the water, shall he enter the kingdom of heaven. A bold saying, but not mine; for it is Jesus who has declared it” (Catechetical Lectures 3:4 [A.D. 350]).
    Jesus never said that. As a matter of fact its anit -scriptural. The same guy says out of one side of his mouth that we must be born again of water and spirit, and out the other misquotes Jesus on water baptism as the decieding factor. Befor that he says that when you are in the water some spiritual thing comes on. This is how the unsaved talk. Its not a shame to be unsaved.Everyone is born unsaved. Its up to people like me to tell people like you the good news. What happened to those disciples in the room at pentacost can happen to you. They werent in water, they were sitting around in a room.The disciples werent born again while they were with the Master. Thats why , like some people, they didnt understand what Jesus meant most of the time.

  • boleggs49

    I don’t see any quotation marks anywhere. It is evident that Cyril was not quoting directly, but giving the sense of Jesus’ teachings, and there is nothing there that contradicts His sayings in the Bible. Jesus does say that in Mark 16:16, “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, whoever does not believe will be condemned.” Notice that He said “believes AND IS BAPTIZED” will be saved. This is the same as what Cyril said. Mary listed several other places where Jesus spoke of the necessity of being baptized. In charging the Apostles with the Great Commission, what does Jesus say? “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” Matthew 28:19-20. It is clear that baptism is necessary for salvation, otherwise He wouldn’t have charged the Apostles with the task.

  • boleggs49

    johnpaul87, I don’t understand why you place so much importance on being “born again” when it is mentioned only once in the New Testament, and yet “baptize” is mentioned 7 times, “baptized” is used 45 times, “baptism is used 20 times, and “baptizing” is used 11 times. It would seem to me that baptism is much more important than being “born again”, especially when the word used for born again is also translated begotten from above and born from above. But this is just the thing that some Protestants pick up on and twist out of shape, like they do with the so-called “rapture”.

  • vetusmores

    At the risk of feeding a troll …

    johnpaul87 said, “Now the CC wants to take credit for the bible.”

    No one said the Church *wrote* the Bible, but it was the Church councils that decided which books were divinely inspired, and thus worthy of inclusion in what we refer to today as “the Bible.”

    At the time the Bible was assembled, a great number of texts existed which either conflicted with those texts already generally accepted, or were of uncertain/unknown origin. Those were left out. Many still exist today. See, for example, the “Infancy of Jesus Christ,” the so-called “Lost Gospel of Peter,” and the recently discovered “Gospel According to Judas.”

    johnpaul87 wrote: “So, just forbid the people to own a bible much less read one. I know you guys know all this, its just a reminder. The penalty for being caught with a bible; torture and or death.”

    I don’t suppose you have a reputable citation for this?

    The idea that the Church forbade people to own Bibles stems from the fact that it was once necessary to chain Bibles down. Anyone could go into a Church and read the Bible, but they couldn’t take it home with them, because in the days before presses, Bibles were rare and extremely expensive. They had to be meticulously hand-copied onto sheepskin — an entire herd of sheep for a whole Bible. In today’s terms, a Bible in those days would cost about ten years’ wages to produce.

    Also, literacy rates in those days was nothing like it is now. In fact, it was a quite rare thing to be able to read (which alone puts the lie to the notion of /Sola Scriptura/). People didn’t own copies of the various books of the Old Testament in Jesus’ time and earlier, either, for the same reasons.

  • johnpaul87

    Vetusmores, Why did they, the CC, kill and torture those who had bibles? Its a matter of history. I know you would like that to just go away.Hey, im no better. Im a sinner royal.

  • johnpaul87

    Vetusmores, ive had catholics claim that the CC wrote the bible. Its entertaining to see the different ideas catholic put out. Who am i to point a finger? I was sinner galore until i was saved. Really, i wasnt that bad. I was saved at 15 yrs old. But unsaved die and go to the lake of fire, no matter how nice they are.

  • johnpaul87

    Ill tell you why catolics beat the drum. Cause they have loved ones who are departed. Instead of facing the obvious, that the CC is full of vice and no salvation is to be found there, they make claims of CC innocense and deny the news reports of truck loads of pervert priests. I feel sorry for them. Lost loved ones. I will not let my daughter die unsaved. The new test claims that if i get saved, i can save my house.Why do catholics hate the idea of being born again?

  • johnpaul87

    Vetusmores, im not going to site a source for the torture and murder of bible believers by the CC. I want your own catholic brothers and sisters to see that you deny history. I dont blame you. I wouldnt want to admit my ancesters are doomed. Its a terrible thing, and im not happy about it. save yourself

  • boleggs49

    johnpaul87, you won’t cite your sources on the Church torturing or killing people for owning Bibles because it is not true. It is a fact that Peter was an Apostle, especially selected by Jesus and given power and authority, by Jesus, over His Church, the Catholic Church. John was an Apostle, selected by Jesus and given power and authority in His Church. Paul was also an Apostle especially selected by Jesus and confirmed in his authority by Peter and the other Apostles. Matthew, Mark, Luke, James, and Jude also held positions in the Church. It was in the execution of their duties that they wrote the Gospels and Epistles that make up the New Testament. Since the writings were written by men who held authority in the Church, and since it was the Church who gathered and assembled those writings into the New Testament, and since it was the Church who coupled the New Testament and the Old Testament (Septuagint) together into the book we now know as the Bible, it can truly be said that the Bible came to us through the Church. There were two reasons for the Church to bring those books together into the Bible, 1) they were used in the Liturgy of the Church, most particularly in the Mass, and 2) they were brought together into a unified book so it would be easier for those wishing to read the Scriptures. The Church has always encouraged the reading of the Scriptures, and has guided the people in its understanding and interpretation so people wouldn’t be mislead as you are, and as Vestasmores stated, the Church even made the Bible readily available to the people by having it available for reading in the church, and yes, it was chained to the podium or stand to keep it from walking away because it was an extremely expensive book. Once the printing press was invented and the cost of Bibles came down, the Church encouraged the people to own their own Bibles as long as they were editions approved by the Church. I continue to pray for you. God bless you.

  • boleggs49

    Addressing the problem of sex abuse in the Church, the rate of abuse is 2.7 percent in the Catholic Church. What is it in the Protestant churches? Try on 10 percent, so that means that you are 3 to 4 times more likely to be abused by someone in authority in a Protestant church, so don’t talk to me about truckloads of pervert priests. As Jesus said, take the plank out of your eye before trying to remove the speck from the eye of someone else. You sir are a hypocrite to the nth degree, and I continue to pray for you. God bless.

  • boleggs49

    Regarding the Church on Bible reading: “the Catholic reader naturally questions whether the amount of good done is, after all, to be measured by the number of volumes distributed. A considerable number of Protestant missionaries have already answered the question negatively, and if we may judge from many letters from ministers in the mission field, there is a growing feeling among thinking Protestants that the promiscuous distribution of the Bible “without note or comment” is a doubtful means of propagating Christian doctrine. Even as a means of proselytism, the scattering of Bibles seems not to produce the expected results. A missionary on the Malay peninsula, among others, complains that although thousands of Bibles were distributed, it was, so far as he could learn, “with scarcely any perceptible benefit”. He “did not hear of a single Malay convert on the whole peninsula”. The natives of the missionary countries are, according to reports, eager to obtain books from the societies, but agents and missionaries and bishops have reported that in many cases the volumes were used for vulgar and profane purposes. Indeed, the reckless distribution of the Scriptures in too many cases becomes an occasion for the profanation of the written Word, rather than for the growth of religion. Instances of abuse of the Bible could be collected freely from the letters of missionaries, Catholic and non-Catholic alike.

    But for deeper reasons than this, the attitude of the Church toward the Bible societies is one of unmistakable opposition. Believing herself to be the divinely appointed custodian and interpreter of Holy Writ, she cannot without turning traitor to herself, approve the distribution of Scripture “without note or comment”. The fundamental fallacy of private interpretation of the Scriptures is presupposed by the Bible societies. It is the impelling motive of their work. But it would be likewise the violation of one of the first principles of the Catholic Faith — a principle arrived at through observation as well as by revelation — the insufficiency of the Scriptures alone to convey to the general reader a sure knowledge of faith and morals. Consequently, the Council of Trent, in its fourth session, after expressly condemning all interpretations of the sacred text which contradict the past and present interpretations of the Church, orders all Catholic publishers to see to it that their editions of the Bible have the approval of the bishop. Besides this and other regulations concerning Bible-reading in general, we have several acts of the popes directed explicitly against the Bible societies. Perhaps the most notable of these are contained in the Encyclical “Ubi Primum” of Leo XII, dated 5 May, 1824, and Pius IX’s Encyclical “Qui Pluribus”, of 9 November, 1846. Pius VIII in 1829 and Gregory XVI in 1844, spoke to similar effect. It may be well to give the most striking words on the subject form Leo XII and Pius IX. To quote the former (loc. cit.): “You are aware, venerable brothers, that a certain Bible Society is impudently spreading throughout the world, which, despising the traditions of the holy Fathers and the decree of the Council of Trent, is endeavouring to translate, or rather to pervert the Scriptures into the vernacular of all nations. It is to be feared that by false interpretation, the Gospel of Christ will become the gospel of men, or still worse, the gospel of the devil.” The pope then urges the bishops to admonish their flocks that owing to human temerity, more harm than good may come from indiscriminate Bible-reading. Pius IX says (loc. cit.): “These crafty Bible Societies, which renew the ancient guile of heretics, cease not to thrust their Bibles upon all men, even the unlearned, — their Bibles, which have been translated against the laws of the Church, and often contain false explanation of the text. Thus, the divine traditions, the teaching of the fathers, and the authority of the Catholic Church are rejected, and everyone in his own way interprets the words of the Lord, and distorts their mean, thereby falling into miserable errors”.

    Thus are given the chief reasons of the opposition of the Church. Furthermore, it can scarcely be denied that the Bible societies, by invading the Catholic countries and endeavouring to foist the Protestant versions upon a Catholic people, have stirred up much discord, and have laid themselves open to the charge of degrading the Sacred Book by using it as an instrument of proselytism. Still in almost all the books and pamphlets which are written to show the results of Bible propagandism, naïve complaints are made by the writers that the Catholic priests forbid the dissemination of the Scriptures among their people. The societies do not offer to supply Catholics with Catholic Bibles, fortified with the ecclesiastical Imprimatur, and supplied with the necessary notes of explanation. If such an offer were refused, there might be some pretext for the complaints of the societies, but so long as they follow their present course, it must be evident that they have small ground for wonder if the authorities of the Church oppose them. The true attitude of the Church towards the popular use of the Scriptures is shown by the establishment of the Societa di San Geronimo, for the translation and diffusion of the Gospels and other parts of the Bible among the Italian peoples.

    There have been many dissensions and some schisms among the members of the Bible societies themselves. At the very foundation of the British and Foreign Bible Society Bishop Marsh, consistently with the principles of the Church of England, objected to the printing of the text, “without note or comment”, and recommended the addition of the Book of Common Prayer. The objection was, of course, overruled. In 1831, the British and Foreign Bible Society decided to demand belief in the Trinity as a requisite to membership. This led to a schism and the foundation of the Trinitarian Bible Society. Another schismatic society, originating from a doctrinal difference, is the Bible Translation Society, a body composed of Baptists who were dissatisfied because the original society’s Bibles did not translate the texts which relate to baptism by words that would signify immersion. Again, from the American Bible Society, there has been a schism of Baptists, originating, as in England, over the translation of baptizein. This dissident body, founded in 1837, is called The American and Foreign Bible Society. This organization in turn experienced a secession, the recalcitrants forming the American Bible Union, in 1850.” This comes from the website NewAdvent.com.

  • boleggs49

    Attitude of the Church towards the reading of the Bible in the vernacular

    The attitude of the Church as to the reading of the Bible in the vernacular may be inferred from the Church’s practice and legislation. It has been the practice of the Church to provide newly-converted nations, as soon as possible, with vernacular versions of the Scriptures; hence the early Latin and oriental translations, the versions existing among the Armenians, the Slavonians, the Goths, the Italians, the French, and the partial renderings into English. As to the legislation of the Church on this subject, we may divide its history into three large periods:

    (1) During the course of the first millennium of her existence, the Church did not promulgate any law concerning the reading of Scripture in the vernacular. The faithful were rather encouraged to read the Sacred Books according to their spiritual needs (cf. St. Irenæus, Against Heresies III.4).

    (2) The next five hundred years show only local regulations concerning the use of the Bible in the vernacular. On 2 January, 1080, Gregory VII wrote to the Duke of Bohemia that he could not allow the publication of the Scriptures in the language of the country. The letter was written chiefly to refuse the petition of the Bohemians for permission to conduct Divine service in the Slavic language. The pontiff feared that the reading of the Bible in the vernacular would lead to irreverence and wrong interpretation of the inspired text (St. Gregory VII, “Epist.”, vii, xi). The second document belongs to the time of the Waldensian and Albigensian heresies. The Bishop of Metz had written to Innocent III that there existed in his diocese a perfect frenzy for the Bible in the vernacular. In 1199 the pope replied that in general the desire to read the Scriptures was praiseworthy, but that the practice was dangerous for the simple and unlearned (“Epist., II, cxli; Hurter, “Gesch. des. Papstes Innocent III”, Hamburg, 1842, IV, 501 sqq.). After the death of Innocent III, the Synod of Toulouse directed in 1229 its fourteenth canon against the misuse of Sacred Scripture on the part of the Cathari: “prohibemus, ne libros Veteris et Novi Testamenti laicis permittatur habere” (Hefele, “Concilgesch”, Freiburg, 1863, V, 875). In 1233 the Synod of Tarragona issued a similar prohibition in its second canon, but both these laws are intended only for the countries subject to the jurisdiction of the respective synods (Hefele, ibid., 918). The Third Synod of Oxford, in 1408, owing to the disorders of the Lollards, who in addition to their crimes of violence and anarchy had introduced virulent interpolations into the vernacular sacred text, issued a law in virtue of which only the versions approved by the local ordinary or the provincial council were allowed to be read by the laity (Hefele, op. cit., VI, 817).

    (3) It is only in the beginning of the last five hundred years that we meet with a general law of the Church concerning the reading of the Bible in the vernacular. On 24 March, 1564, Pius IV promulgated in his Constitution, “Dominici gregis”, the Index of Prohibited Books. According to the third rule, the Old Testament may be read in the vernacular by pious and learned men, according to the judgment of the bishop, as a help to the better understanding of the Vulgate. The fourth rule places in the hands of the bishop or the inquisitor the power of allowing the reading of the New Testament in the vernacular to laymen who according to the judgment of their confessor or their pastor can profit by this practice. Sixtus V reserved this power to himself or the Sacred Congregation of the Index, and Clement VIII added this restriction to the fourth rule of the Index, by way of appendix. Benedict XIV required that the vernacular version read by laymen should be either approved by the Holy See or provided with notes taken from the writings of the Fathers or of learned and pious authors. It then became an open question whether this order of Benedict XIV was intended to supersede the former legislation or to further restrict it. This doubt was not removed by the next three documents: the condemnation of certain errors of the Jansenist Quesnel as to the necessity of reading the Bible, by the Bull “Unigenitus” issued by Clement XI on 8 Sept., 1713 (cf. Denzinger, “Enchir.”, nn. 1294-1300); the condemnation of the same teaching maintained in the Synod of Pistoia, by the Bull “Auctorem fidei” issued on 28 Aug., 1794, by Pius VI; the warning against allowing the laity indiscriminately to read the Scriptures in the vernacular, addressed to the Bishop of Mohileff by Pius VII, on 3 Sept., 1816. But the Decree issued by the Sacred Congregation of the Index on 7 Jan., 1836, seems to render it clear that henceforth the laity may read vernacular versions of the Scriptures, if they be either approved by the Holy See, or provided with notes taken from the writings of the Fathers or of learned Catholic authors. The same regulation was repeated by Gregory XVI in his Encyclical of 8 May, 1844. In general, the Church has always allowed the reading of the Bible in the vernacular, if it was desirable for the spiritual needs of her children; she has forbidden it only when it was almost certain to cause serious spiritual harm.

    This information was taken from the website NewAdvent.com

  • louis

    I remember differently who first said: “Extra ecclesiam nulla salus.” In my view, it was St. Ignatius of Antioch. He was bishop of that city (the largest of the Roman empire after Rome itself) and he was arrested and taken to Rome for refusing to acknowledge the divinity of the emperor. He died there around 108 A.D. Some scholars say he was a disciple of St. John, the Evangelist. I think that the doctrine — that outside the Church there is no salvation — was formulated at the First Council of Nicea, in 325. Other Fathers of the Church taught it, prior to the said Council (St Cyprian of Carthage, St. Justin, Martyr, Origen, and Tertullian). The late Fathers Sts. Jerome and Augustin also taught it. The faithful have been reminded of it throughout the Church’s history. In more recent times, the First and Second Vatican Councils taught it, as did Popes Pius X, Paul VI, and John Paul II.

  • boleggs49

    Yes, Louis, Jesus established His Church, the Catholic Church, just for the purpose of bringing salvation to man. To those who say that the Catholic Church is not the same Church that Jesus established, the Greek word καθολικός (katholikos), from which Catholic is derived, means “universal”. It was first used to describe the Christian Church in the early 2nd century. That means that the Catholic Church is that same Church that Jesus established with Peter as His first pope.

    There are not over a hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church, which is, of course, quite a different thing. (Bishop Fulton Sheen)

    God bless you.

  • boleggs49

    Ignatius of Antioch wrote, “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]). This is the earliest text we have that refers to the Church as the Catholic Church, so this shows that the Church was known as the Catholic Church while it was in it’s early years and not from the 4th century or later as some Protestants claim. They do this trying to say that it is not the same Church Jesus established upon Peter, but a “Roman” church, usually established by Constantine or someone else. Some even deny that Peter was ever in Rome, however, Peter writes in 1 Peter 5:13, “The chosen one at Babylon sends you greeting,as does Mark, my son.” Babylon was code for Rome.

    God bless you.

  • johnpaul87

    Ignatious of antioc wrote this that and the other thing.He said this that and the other thing. Therefor it is all true.Where ever Christ is, there is the catholic church. Talk, thats all it is. Your salvation is a matter between you and Christ personally. Not some org.

  • johnpaul87

    Bro Bolegg, you talk a good game. Where were you when your history professor went over medieval history? A cold perhaps? Tell me mr bible scholar, why was the reign of the Cc called the dark ages?

  • boleggs49

    johnpaul87, Christ gave us His Church, the Catholic Church, as His instrument of Salvation. You dismiss all of the great early Fathers of the Church because they confirm that the Catholic Church is the one and only Church Christ established upon Peter and the other Apostles. You are so full of yourself that you cannot see the Truth. You interpret the Bible to fit your own perverted views, twisting the true meanings of the Scriptures to promote your own agenda. As a matter of fact, I did take courses on the Old Testament and Church History, and you know what I found? That the Catholic Church has been true to the teachings of Christ for all these years since He began His mission. Given the choice, I will always choose to believe the Church Christ established over all of the Protestant churches that have been established by fallible men like Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, and all the rest of the Protestant heretics. Can you explain why there are now over 25,000 Protestant denominations in the USA now? I can, it’s because of people just like you who think you know more than Christ’s own Church and who prefer their own personal interpretations of the Scriptures to the interpretation and guidance of the Church who gave us the Bible in the first place. You don’t talk a good game because you cannot back up any of your claims with real proof, not even from the Scriptures because you distort the true meaning of those Scriptures. You need to crawl back in your hole and pray that God will have mercy on your soul. I pray for you. May God have mercy on you.

  • boleggs49

    By the way, johnpaul87, here is what Wikipedia has to say regarding the dark ages, “”Dark Ages” is a term referring to the perceived period of both cultural and economic deterioration as well as disruption that took place in Western Europe following the decline of the Roman Empire.” It had nothing to do with the Catholic Church. You may go to the corner now and put your dunce cap back on. May God have mercy on you.

  • boleggs49

    johnpaul87, if I am your brother as you suggest, then the Blessed Virgin Mary is your mother. Though, in fact, she is because while Christ was on the cross, one of His seven final words was when He said to Mary, “Woman, behold your son.” Then He said to the disciple He loved, “Behold your mother.” Looking at these verses from John 19, we learn two things. First, Mary had no other children, only Jesus, because if she had other children, Jesus would not have needed to give her into the care of the Apostle John. Second, by giving Mary into John’s care, He is also giving her to all of Jesus’ brothers and sisters, His followers, as their mother, too. Those were very powerful and very important words Christ uttered as He was dying on the cross for our sins. I would very much like to carry on an intelligent discussion with you, however, all one has to do is look at your sentence construction, spelling, punctuation and ridiculous claims to see that you are just a fool trying to look important. That is probably why you distort the meaning of the Scriptures so badly. Remember the words of our Lord, “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord.’ will enter the kingdom of Heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in Heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name? Did we not drive out demons in your name? Did we not do mighty deeds in your name?’ Then I will declare to them solemnly, ‘I never knew you. Depart from me, you evildoers.’” Matthew 7:21-23 How do we know that we are doing the will of His Father? By following the guidance of His holy Church, the Church He established upon Peter when He said in Matthew 16:18-19, “And so I say to you, you are Peter(Kephas in Aramaic, which means large rock or boulder), and upon this rock (again Kephas, meaning large rock or boulder) I will build my church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of Heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven.” And Jesus promised His Church the guidance of the Holy Spirit when He said, “And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Advocate, to be with you forever. This is the Spirit of Truth, whom the world cannot receive because it neither sees Him nor knows Him.You know Him because He abides with you, and He will be in you.” John 14:16-17 And, “I have said these things to you while I am still with you. But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything, and remind you of all that I have said to you.” John 14:25-26. And again in John 15:26-27, Jesus said, “When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of Truth, who comes from the Father, He will testify on my behalf. You also are to testify because you have been with me from the beginning.” Therefore, it is truly said that the Spirit of Truth resides in Christ’s Church, the Catholic Church. Protestant churches cannot claim to have the Holy Spirit residing in them because they have departed from the Truth, and there is no unity of Truth among them since each preaches their own doctrine and holds their own interpretation of the Scriptures. I will continue to pray for you. May God have mercy on you.

  • http://www.catholicexchange.com Mary Kochan

    boleggs49, it is not quite accurate to to say that the Dark Ages had nothing to do with the Church. The Church was the entity that preserved civilization through that period. When the barbarians overran Europe, they destroyed a lot of the libraries and Roman infrastructure. Waves of invasions and disease greatly reduced the populations and because so many teachers were also priests who cared for the sick, a lot of teachers died and this greatly reduced the education that was available for several generations.

    In response, the monasteries, as well as some convents, became centers of economic activity and technological advancement. They started schools and hospitals. (The entire modern university system began in the monastery schools.) But most importantly, the Church set about converting the barbarian tribes to Christianity.

    In fact modern historians have learned so much about this that they no longer even use the term “Dark Ages” — they call it the medieval period now.

  • boleggs49

    The term was not applied because of the Church as johnpaul87 said. And, yes, I know that modern scholars do not use the term any longer. However, you are incorrect in saying that the Church controlled or was responsible for civilization following the collapse of the Roman Empire. It was a several centuries before the Church gained the prominence it was later known for.

  • boleggs49

    The idea of a Dark Age originated with Petrarch in the 1330s.[5][4] Writing of those who had come before him, he said: “Amidst the errors there shone forth men of genius; no less keen were their eyes, although they were surrounded by darkness and dense gloom”. Christian writers, including Petrarch himself, had long used traditional metaphors of “light versus darkness” to describe “good versus evil”. Petrarch was the first to co-opt the metaphor and give it secular meaning by reversing its application. Classical Antiquity, so long considered the “dark” age for its lack of Christianity, was now seen by Petrarch as the age of “light” because of its cultural achievements, while Petrarch’s time, allegedly lacking such cultural achievements, was seen as the age of darkness.

    As an Italian, Petrarch saw the Roman Empire and the classical period as expressions of Italian greatness. He spent much of his time travelling through Europe rediscovering and republishing classic Latin and Greek texts. He wanted to restore the classical Latin language to its former purity. Humanists saw the preceding 900-year period as a time of stagnation. They saw history unfolding, not along the religious outline of Saint Augustine’s Six Ages of the World, but in cultural (or secular) terms through the progressive developments of classical ideals, literature, and art.

  • Barry V

    If the Catholic faith teaches that we must worship God alone, then why are there prayers for most, if not all, of the saints?

  • Michael

     ” their intercession can be extremely powerful”

    These are not prayers of worship, but intercessory prayers.

  • Pingback: Convert Journal – 7 Quick Takes Friday (set #8)

  • Someone in cyberspace

    No confusion here on point 7 from this non-Catholic…..I believe that salvation comes from Christ alone (not through the church).  

  • Guest

    The Church is the Body of Christ.  Can’t separate Christ from His body… 

  • Danielle5

    …Then why not pray directly to Jesus? It takes no more effort to pray directly to Jesus than it does Mary and Jesus is the biblically stated intermediary who makes intercession on our behalf. 
    I saw an interview with the actor Jim Caviezel on the Catholic channel and he said he prays throughout the day, but then added….”Always through Mary, always through Mary.” -as if not doing so was some sort of abomination. I’m sincerely interested in why you don’t believe Jesus hears a person’s sincere prayer, any time and any place, but Mary does.

  • Onstergenetics

    Ok let’s go to the beginning. Jesus. Mary is merly a vessel uses by god to bring forth his one and only son. Mary was a virgin UNTIL the birth of Jesus Christ. scriptural fact). she had other childrenbetween herself and Joseph. (See gospels) . Jesus is the one and only mediator. ( see scripture ) we receive communiojn in rememberance of him, and anyone with a just heart can do this. ( not just through a priest) marriage is a gift from god and should not be prohibited from anyone . ( peter and Mary were both married ). the pope is not infalable period. ( note it was the catholic church and the pope that were in on the crusades Salem witch trials and killed around 150,000,000 people. infallibility? I think not. ) the Roman catholic church is not the true religion, Christianity is the one true religiong wich is accepting Jesus Christ as your lord and savior.i could go on forever about this but believe me. if you truly seek the truth of Christ and read the scripture and let god sleek to you, you will see that the catholic church is highly mistaken.

  • Bomber

    What a hoot!

    You must be getting your history facts from inside a cornflake packet.

    The Crusades were launched to prevent the Muslim hordes from overrunning Europe – which they very nearly did. The saving of Jerusalem was a secondary objective. 150 Million – there weren;t that many people living in Europe at that time. Laughable.

    The Catholic Church is the one set up by Jesus. It’s His church – you ask him. Please refer to scripture for this one.
    As for the rest of this sorry blurb well I got a good laugh out of it.

  • KernowUK

    Besides, other churches don’t have confessions, yet Jesus made it very clear that you must confess to one another and repent.
    Also, protestants do not take Jesus literally when he said “This is my body,” “This is my blood” they take it symoblic though none of the apostels took it symbolic nor did Jesus die on the cross symbolic.

  • Aero

    I have a question
    how did you know that the catholic church is real
    ?

  • Elissa by Grace

    Obviously the other 31,000 verses of the Bible have not influenced your top ten otherwise, they’d argue in the other direction backed by the scriptural authority that backs them.

    1) Priests are not a part of the new testament- the sole mediator between God and man is Jesus Christ. Hebrews 5:

    For every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in things
    pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins:
    2 Who can have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the
    way; for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity.
    3 And by reason hereof he ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins.
    4 And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.
    5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he
    that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.
    6 As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

    2) Penance as a practice denies the sufficiency of Jesus’ sacrifice- man can not obtain salvation by his own works nor can he obtain forgiveness of sin without the cost of sin being paid in a sacrifice of blood- to practice any philosophy or doctrine contrary to the word of God is a heretical sin, as is catholicism’s practice of penance.

    Psalm 51:14 Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God, thou God of my salvation: and my tongue shall sing aloud of thy righteousness

    Luke 1:76And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways;
    77 To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins,
    78 Through the tender mercy of our God;

    Hebrews 9:And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

    23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens
    should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with
    better sacrifices than these.
    24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are
    the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the
    presence of God for us:
    25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
    26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but
    now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by
    the sacrifice of himself.
    27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
    28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that
    look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

    3) The “Catholic” church did not even exist when the scripture that would be ratified by Carthage and Hippo was received and in use by the early Christians. The tyrannical authority instituted by emperor Constantine had no influence over what the early church had already received as canon and it is ironic that the very authority that massacred hundreds of million Christians who would later seek to adhere to the ratified canon that now claims to have brought the very “book” for which they spent 1270 yrs killing anyone for having.

    1 Timothy 4:1-3
    Nowthe Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall
    depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of
    devils;
    2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
    3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created
    to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the
    truth.

    I could go on…but it is better if you research the facts for the salvation of your own soul…..

  • Elissa by Grace

    Your church blog solicits money….? I suppose you do not know too… it is the single wealthiest institution of the world in all history, continuing today, or have you no shame?

    I guess I have to go on regarding the abomination of number 4 and 10…

    The unguarded absurdity of your claim that the mass is the same as calvary is either madness or such ignorance that madness should be preferred. Such a claim can only fall on the deaf ears ignorance for the rest, those in Christ, who sustain life not on bread but the very word of God…. MUST inquire why on earth then are you doing it? Was Calvary in some way inaccurately predicted by God of the prophets or do you suggest that Jesus Christ improperly filled the will of the Lord when haded the souls of men in the new covenant? As foretold by God through His prophets Jeremiah, the grounds by which you dismiss the completion of Christ’s work as recorded in scripture are wicked ways of vain imagination led astray . for Jesus Himself said “rightly did Isaiah predict of you” and your words spoken of His name: close to lips, far from hearts. o warrants a conviction that re-commit the sacrifice in an “unbloodied” manner is SICK! It defiles the accomplishments of Jesus, it diminishes the saving-power by insisting further sacrifice is required, and it denies the power of HIS will and gift as insufficient of it’s own…. in which case what makes you think a bunch of idol-worshipping humans can do what Christ Himself could not? This is the vanity about which we are warned repeatedly by Paul, instructed by Jesus to discern as to not be deceived by those claiming to speak on His behalf, and it fits the prophesy of Daniel and John about the unfaithful church!

    Hebrews 10:9…. Jesus said I come to do thy will, O God

    10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
    11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
    12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
    13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.
    14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
    15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,
    16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the
    Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I
    write them;
    17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
    18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.

    So then what the hell do you conjure up? What insanity grips you people to think a father, let alone THE FATHER, wants His SON re-murdered? Who but Satan relishes the man of Jesus Christ bloody on the cross? No where in the new or old testament does God change HIS decree that eating blood is permissible- you are a church led by Baal and vain enough to argue this is somehow a mysterious desire of God’s that thought contrary to the Word He has given Us, it is right.

    At the very conceptual level it is an offense to God, in practice it is an abomination, in scripture it is the teaching of anti-christ and in fact it is evil.

  • Elissa by Grace

    The popes would have this world believing they get the ONLY updates from God Himself and since they all defy scripture received by man, we must disobey God at the mere order of the pope’s decree- in fact, that is what the papacy demands. It is how statues and idols of various pagan gods like Jupiter got renamed no now sit in St.Peter’s as millions of Catholics, duped into ignorance and compliance, have nearly kissed the foot OFF of the former roman pagan idol. I supposed you can insist you think it is St. Peter, who never went to Rome in the first place….(he was sent to the jews in Jerusalem, Paul got the gentiles in Rome) but how do you justify, explain, or account for what is again, defiance of God’s direct orders? Do you care not that the pope has changed the second commandment by eliminating it? Where did God reverse the necessity of NOT sharing His glory with ANY other?

    Exodus 20

    Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
    4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing
    that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in
    the water under the earth.

    I implore you fellow Catholics to read the word of the Lord, our God, the CREATOR of Heaven and Earth and all that is, for HE is the Lord of Life, the spring of living waters, the bread of life eternal. He said I am the alpha and omega-
    5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord
    thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the
    children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
    6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

    So that purgatory appears not once in scripture and in no way is the concept mentioned or part of the promise of the Father in the Old Covenant nor the Son in the New testament… how do you suppose it became a certainty that the pope should only be informed and in turn be the recipient of the funds obtained?

    Hosea 4:6
    My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing
    thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.

    John 14:15
    If ye love me, keep my commandments.

    John 14:6
    Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

    So why do you offend your God? Why do you ignore the 31,000 verses NOT spoon fed to you by the pope, but follow that agent of satan as he denies the unchangeable strength of GOD and leads you contrary to His Commandments? There are 1270 years of dead Christians, martyred for calling out the sin of this blasphemy…. do you want to defy YOUR LORD and be judged for your refusal to challenge your vanity?

    do not be fooled that the peter declaration is the only isolated discussion of the corner stone there are many references to the “rock” and the churches…..
    Luke 8

    6 And some fell upon a rock; and as soon as it was sprung up, it withered away, because it lacked moisture. Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.

    12 Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh
    away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be
    saved.
    13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy;
    and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of
    temptation fall away.
    7 For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad.
    18 Take heed therefore how ye hear: for whosoever hath, to him shall be given;
    and whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he
    seemeth to have.

    John4:13

    Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again:
    14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never
    thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of
    water springing up into everlasting life.

    How can you drink of the water that the Lord Jesus gives us if you defy it by not reading it yourself?

  • J.Banjo

    Wow, this is the most arrogant piece of writing I have seen in a while.

    Firstly the Catholic church was not even made by Jesus or God- The BIBLE clearly states that “…Whoever Believes shall be saved” NOT “Who ever is in the catholic church”. So CLEARLY your church does not MATTER. God is not going to say, “You have been a good christian all your life but because you are not catholic I will not love you as much,” NO GOD LOVES EVERYONE, even sinners, so how can he not love Baptist, Protestants and other Denominations of the church?

    “[The]… Catholic Church is the one, true Church..” GIVE ME A BREAK! The mass used to be said in LATIN! This means people who could not understand Latin (Which was most) could not understand it and therefore could not be saved- thus THOUSANDS of innocent souls would have been sent to hell because of this.

    Protestants thought: God says Christians should spread the word—-> Yeah, can’t do that if they don’t understand WHAT THE FUDGE you are saying—> Lets speak in the language of the people! A 7 year old could figure that out! Not so impressive for “The One true church.” And don’t even get me started on how corrupt the Catholic church was and in some cases still is.

    I am not saying other churches are not corrupt or are perfect, but they KNOW this and do not claim to be better than others.

    The Pope is meant to be “Christ on earth”, please some one say BLASPHEMERY! Hello, NO ONE, NO MAN can be Jesus, he NEVER sinned- he was PERFECT from Birth. And even if there was one GOD would choose him NOT men.

    Then why not pray directly to Jesus? It takes no more effort to pray directly to Jesus than it does Mary and Jesus is the biblicaly stated intermediary who makes intercession on our behalf.

    Also ST PETER- do NOT get me started! God called Abraham and other OLD TESTAMENT PROPHETS his “Friends” so why, WHY? Would you then go choose one of Jesus’ disciples randomly? When JESUS NEVER created a church- it’s not in the bible and PAUL is a bigger part of the New testament. PLEASE, Please remember the disciples were people who Jesus picked off the street.

    If there had been a: Steven, Ayo, Scott or any other random person willing to go with Jesus they would be the disciples. God can go through ANYONE- so it doesn’t matter who only that God is speaking through them.

    Please read through these comment and think about it. Think REAL good.

  • hello

    Try reading from the website “voice from the desert” it speaks the truth.

  • hello

    ,nvcdgjdzbnhkfx.b thats what you wrote sounds like out loud

  • hello

    Its not fair that women aren’t allowed to become priests……………..

  • Shan

    ” Great article ! I will share ” by EASY WAYS to be a GOOD child of GOD FB Page

  • Shan

    Are you living in Earth ? We have lot of evidences … Without roaming around adults only sites…watch the miracles & evidences (Why most Saints bodies are not preserved? ….etc….[Never meant to insult you ! ]
    (Pope) JP II Witnessed the Miracle of the Host (Julia Kim part 4 of 7) http://youtu.be/cGfBb9I2bz4
    Miracles Of The Eucharist
    http://youtu.be/inG90nBYaPw
    Proof of the Supernatural & Miracles
    http://youtu.be/XcQ5SBdFKJs)

  • karen

    Hell And Purgatory Still Exist – Contrary to the belief of many Catholics, the Church still teaches that “the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin, descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, eternal fire” (CCC 1035) Furthermore, “all who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation, but after death they undergo purification, so to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.” (CCC 1030) This purification process, formally declared by the Church at the Councils of Florence and Trent, is known as Purgatory.

    Romans 8:1 (ESV)

    8 There is therefore now no condemnation for those
    who are in Christ Jesus.

    Romans 5:1 (ESV)

    5 Therefore, since we have been justified by faith,
    we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.

    Romans 10:9 (ESV)

    9 because, if you confess with your mouth that
    Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you
    will be saved.
    There is no PURGATORY, and no second chances.

  • karen
  • Karen
  • Teresa H

    I was raised Catholic, but have many family memebers that are Methodist. I have always had a hard time with the way the Catholic church seems so high and mighty. This article just proves my point. Jesus preached love and tolerance, not rules. MAN made all these rules that are “the Catholic/Universal church”. I had thought maybe you would teach me something about Catholic religion, but unfortunately your “information” has only made me want to stay away from Catholic religion more. I believe Jesus died for my sins, that he was born, died, and was raised on the third day, that he is the son of God. However I do not believe that the rules make me a better person in God’s eyes. Thank you for making my decision easier. May the Lord’s peace be upon you, and that you see his love, not man’s rules.

  • Kevin F.

    Reply to J.Banjo:
    1. Roman Catholic – Founder – Jesus Christ – in the year 33 and it has not essentially changed since that time.

    The Douay-Rheims is an accurate translation of St. Jerome’s Latin Vulgate Bible (c. 405 A.D.), which in turn is an accurate, usually word-for-word translation from the original languages.

    2. Besides, the Scripture, despite its perfection, IS NOT a SUFFICIENT REVELATION OF ALL TRUTHS of the supernatural religion. WITHOUT TRADITION we should not KNOW what SCRIPTURE IS, what books belong to it, nor the PROPER INTERPRETATION of its contents. Those that say that the Bible alone is the source of all revealed truth will search the Bible in vain for the support of their assertion.

    3. 1st COMMANDMENT:
    “I am the Lord thy God; thou shalt not have strange gods before me.”

    The 1st Commandment forbids impiety, sacrilege, heresy, apostasy, superstition, indifferentism, and simony.

    4. Does God loves unconditionally? NO!
    The truth is that God can’t stand the way we (naturally) are. The truth is that God damns to eternal Hell every adult who does not (by God’s grace) discover and traverse to its conclusion, the narrow path (St. Matthew 7:14). God damns to eternal Hell those who opt to remain as they are, unsaved sinners. Few, not many, travel the narrow path.

    5. Definitions:
    Divine Liturgy – commonly known to Western Catholics as “the Mass;” form of worship given, and required by Christ to positively fulfill the first, second and third commandments. Divine Liturgy was prayed / done in the existential Latin Rite Patriarchate until the west’s Episcopal Liturgical Revolt (1960s). It is prayed / done in Orthodox Patriarchates since Apostolic times.

    Human Liturgy – anti-Christ liturgy invented by Bishop Bugnini; a mockery of Christ’s Divine Liturgy; the Novus Ordo, which is a community celebration of PRESUMPTION imposed after Vatican II.

    Newchurch – the term presently used to describe that church body which has come to replace the Latin Rite Patriarchate. Newchurch (being a newly evolved protesting church) is characterized by its rejection of Divine Liturgy and Holy Orders ordained Priesthood (since 1969). This Newchurch has protestant, new age and “modernist” contents and characteristics.

  • Kevin F.

    Please read my reply to your comments.

  • Kevin F.

    Experts-conceived and episcopally-imposed liturgical lies:
    1) THE PEOPLE’S MASS
    We’ve been led to believe that laymen participate in Mass by being or “playing” priests; or at least, by taking over certain priest-prayers, priest-roles or priest-rituals.
    2) THE VERNACULAR MUST BE USED
    The Bishops’ Revolt has many points in common with the Protestant Revolt. Vernacularizing and people-participating are CONDEMNED.
    …The Mass instituted by Christ wasn’t a “dialogue Mass” nor did the people “concelebrate.”
    3) VERNACULARIZE, TO UNDERSTAND
    What has resulted? Nearly ALL Novus Ordo victims not only do not properly understand the Mass, they now have heretical understandings and convictions about the Mass. For example, 80% of American Novus Ordo victims under 55 have an heretical understanding of the Eucharist.
    4) THE MASS IS “A” PRAYER
    …If such were true, the ritual of such a celebration or conversation can be changed from time to time and from place to place. Thus, the idea of a semper ubique idem liturgical set of morals is rejected. Thus, a sinful and false (internal and external) ecumenism is embraced and imposed.
    Novus Ordo Condemned by Matea (Fr. Paul Trinchard)

  • Kevin F.

    How did the “Good Thief” represent the Elect?

    “Today shalt thou be with Me in Paradise.” (St. Luke 23:43)

    (the) Elect- individuals in whom God’s Saving Will (Divine Liturgy) is to be eternally experienced (as the Beatific Vision).

    “Whom He predestined He also called; and whom He called, He also justified; and whom He justified [by baptism into Divine Liturgy] He also glorifies.” (Rom. 8:30)

    “How can you escape damnation if you neglect so great salvation, Divine Liturgy?” (Heb. 2:3)

    Good Friday-Good Friday, is the only day we call good. On this day occurred Holy Sacrifice: in an unbloody way at the Last Supper and in a bloody way on the crucifix. Both Supper and Crucifixion occurred on the Calvary mountain range. The Jewish day begins at sunset. The Supper happened on the pridie (the beginning of) Good Friday. Each Mass “redoes” the unbloody Holy Sacrifice of Good Friday, the Last Supper. The Last Supper is the unbloody Sacrifice of salvation and sanctification of the Elect.

    The answer to the question is this:
    One who accepts and lives Christ’s Salvation, Divine Liturgy, is like unto the “Good Thief.” For each of the Elect, Good Friday is one’s life on earth, which, at its completion, ushers in the eternal day of ecstatic union with God. Good Friday is to be each one’s Divine Liturgy; believed, prayed and lived unto the eternal day of ecstatic union with God.

    (Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L.)

  • Kevin F.

    Truth experiment:1) Draw a square (3″ X 3″). 2) Draw two vertical and two horizontal lines so that you will have nine squares. 3) Color the four corners in black.

    Do you see a white cross on a dark background? It is there so it is true, is it not?

    Look again. This time put the white cross in the background and what do you see? Four dark squares. And that is true. There really are four dark squares.

    Both perceptions are true…there is a white cross on a dark background and there are four dark squares on a white background.

    Any Protestant can make the truth into an error. If I say there is ONLY a white cross there, that truth is no longer true. And if I say there are only four dark squares, that truth is no longer true. Both truths exist.

    I have used this example to illustrate a point. Protestants are taking the true WORD OF GOD and making a picture of dark squares, then saying,”This is truth.” What you say is true, but it’s not the only truth present. You keep saying, “It’s in the Bible, it’s in the Bible, it’s in the Bible…”

    Protestants uses a particular passage (St. Luke 4:9-12) to “prove” a point or convince others. But there is a precise danger in this. ONE MUST NEVER USE SCRIPTURE TO DECEIVE. And even if deception is not the motive, one must be very careful HOW one uses Scripture, because translations, interpretations, and language can be misleading.

    Fundamentalists will say the the Bible was here before the Church. No, Where do you think the Bible came from? Did Jesus hand the Bible over to His apostles? Yes.

    It is Protestants interpretation. That doesn’t make it Divine Revelation!
    (Father Roberts Answers Jimmy Swaggart On Our Catholic Faith)

  • Kevin F.

    Catholic – often misunderstood in religious circles to mean Universal; the root word refers to “the seat” upon which the “Head” sits (as in ex cathedra). Christ is the Head of His Church.

    Divine Liturgy is Christ on His Mercy Seat. Therefore, “Catholic” is defined as “having Divine Liturgy” from which Christ-given Divine Mercy comes to us, sinners.

    CATHOLIC: The word “Catholic” comes from “Katholikos,” as in “cathedral” – the place where the “head bishop” dwells. The Church also has the expression “the Chair of Peter.” We know that Christ ascended into Heaven and “sitteth at the right hand of the Father.” This is the only “chair” or throne that matters. (Col. 3:1). Only He is Head of His Church. As Priest and Victim, “Offerer” and “Offered,” Christ IS Divine Liturgy. He “sitteth at the right hand of the Father on the Mercy Seat” and “will come to judge the living and the dead.” He is the only One Who counts. His Word is God’s Law.
    The first time this word “Katholikos” is encountered in Orthodox Catholicism is in the letter of St. Ignatius to the Smyrneans, written about the year 110 A.D. Where Jesus is, there is the Catholic Church. THEREFORE, “where Holy Ordered Priests” make present Christ-Christus vivens “in” Divine Liturgy, there is the Catholic Church. Heretical religions such as the Donatists and today, Newchurch Novus Ordo-ites [who claim their church began with Vatican two] “de-focus on Christ both liturgically and fiducially. An alien spirit governs and informs such apostates. Briefly stated, the Satanic spirits have replaced the Holy Spirit, through Whom Christ comes among us. [Since Novus Ordo human liturgies are presided over by LAYMAN, Newchurch has "community celebrations." Newchurch NO LONGER claims to have Divine Liturgy.] (ONE HOLY CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC by Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L.)

  • Kevin F.

    “For if thou confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in thy heart that God hath raised him up from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” (Romans 10:9)

    To confess the Lord Jesus and to call upon the name of the Lord (ver. 13) is not barely the professing a belief in the person of Christ; but moreover, implies a belief of his whole doctrine and an obedience to his law; without which the calling him Lord will save no man (St. Matthew 7, 21).

    This passage must be understood like many others of this apostle, of a faith accompanied by a good-will ready to perform what faith says must be practiced; as it is required in this very place, that what we believe in the heart, we should confess with our mouth. (Rev. George Leo Haydock’s Notes from Douay-Rheims Holy Bible)

  • Kevin F.

    The doctrine of the existence of purgatory is not only reasonable, but its negation is eminently contrary to reason; it is taught in Holy Scripture, and has been taught by the Catholic Church from the very beginning.

    1. The doctrine of a middle state of purgation is taught in the Old Testament, and was firmly believed in by the Hebrews.

    2. When Our Lord came on earth, He purified the Jewish Church of all those human changes that with the years had crept into its usages and beliefs. But He never reproved anyone for belief in a middle state of purgation, or prayers for the dead.

    He said “And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this world, or in the world to come” (St. Matthew 12:32). When Our Lord said that a sin will not be forgiven in the next life, He left us to conclude that some sins will be thus forgiven. But in the next life, sins cannot be forgiven in Heaven: “There shall not enter into it anything defiled” (Apoc. 21:27). Neither can sins be forgiven in hell, for out of hell there is no redemption. they must therefore be forgiven in a middle state, Purgatory.

    The Greek story of Prometheus implies a place of purgation.

    (MY CATHOLIC FAITH BY Louis LaRavoire Morrow)

  • Kevin F.

    God was forbidding idolatry, not the making of images. In other words, the Jews were to make images of things in the heaven above. This is the fruit of your private interpretaion of Scripture. No. God does not forbid the making of images; He forbids the making of images in order to adore them.

    You have no right to accuse Catholics of praying to the Stature of Our Blessed Lady. Were you to kneel down by your bedside at night for a last prayer, could you be regarded as adoring or praying to your mattress?

  • Kevin F.

    (the) Elect – individuals in whom God’s Saving Will (Divine Liturgy) is to be eternally experienced (as the Beatific Vision).
    “Salutary Plan” refers to what God “has in mind” and “brings about;” and, to what God requires one to believe and do to be saved.

    Salvation and Sanctification – refer to the redemption of the Elect by Christ. Through Christ and His Divine Liturgy, certain sinners are saved and sanctified.

  • Kevin F.

    “If a man will not hear the Church, let him be as the heathen and the publican.” It is necessary then that those who believe in Christ should hear and obey His Church. The Church, Christ had in mind was the Catholic Church; and once a man adverts to the fact, he must join her if he wishes to save his soul.

  • Kevin F.

    Outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation, thus membership in the Church is necessary.

    -Pope Boniface VIII, Bull Unam Sanctam: Denz. 468-69 [870,875]

  • Kevin F.

    You are just quoting Scripture out of YOUR misunderstanding of what you think these verses mean. I can verse swing with you, if you would like me to.

  • Kevin F.

    What is the infallibility of a Newchurch vicar?

    *** A vicar is a person who substitutes, one who acts properly or improperly with the authority of the person for whom he is substituting.

    *** Catholics should obey the Vicar of Christ, the Pope, only if our Lord and His Church are first served or obeyed. (Vatican One Council)

    *** The pope is NOT Christ. The vicar of Christ on earth is obliged to rule as Christ and His Church demands.

    *** A pope’s infallibility is limited. A pope is infallible only when speaking ex cathedra regarding a datum of faith and morals already contained or is speaking in agreement with Apostolic Tradition, which was permanently sealed at the death of the last Apostle. (Vatican I Council)

    [During her church trials, which led to St. Joan's incineration, she put God first, before the prelates who functioned as vicars of Christ and His Church. Her slogan was: "Our Lord first served!" So should we believe in our time, similar to hers without the possibility of incineration yet!]

    (CATECHISM of DIVINE LITURGY by Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L.)

  • Kevin F.

    The four marks of the Orthodox Catholic Church take their meaning and come alive in Divine Liturgy. Divine Liturgy is the necessary “ingredient” which makes the Church one, holy, catholic, and apostolic. DIVINE LITURGY IS SALVATION.
    Without Divine Liturgy there is no Christ-given (A.D.) salvation. Without Divine Liturgy there is no Church of Salvation.

    Newchurch cannot be Christ’s Church of Salvation. It does not have Divine Liturgy which brings about and constitutes “oneness with Christ.” Consequently, Newchurch cannot produce holiness in these years of the “New and Eternal Covenant in Christ’s Blood.”

    One is led to conclude that Newchurch (being without Divine Liturgy) is not and cannot be Catholic. It is obvious that Newchurch is not the Church as “instituted by Christ and handed down” by the Apostles.

    (One Holy Catholic Apostolic by, Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L.)—Book

  • Someone in cyberspace

    In reply to Kevin F.; Perhaps one persuaded by Pope Boniface VIII, would like to respond to the deserted island test….that test identifies how a castaway on a deserted island, with a Bible, could receive Christ into their life and be saved without any input from a fellow man or a church. That is one of the wonders of the Bible …. that man may read it and be convinced of its truth without input from anyone else. Praise be to God for providing us such a wonderful resource as the Bible.

    Allow me to repeat what I offered in a comment over a year ago: “salvation comes from Christ alone (not through the church).”

  • Kevin F.

    No, you don’t understand. Protestants are not Christians.

    The Doctrine of “Sola Scriptura” Did Not Exist Prior to the 14th Century.

    This “doctrine” did not become widespread until the 16th century. So
    obviously, it’s not the teachings of Jesus Christ and His Apostles.

    This simple fact is CONVENIENTLY overlooked or IGNORED by Prots.

  • Kevin F.

    It doesn’t work that way.

  • Kevin F.

    Understanding Protestantism:

    There is no such thing as the Protestant faith.

    Protestants will say that Scripture is a sufficient guide to
    salvation, although Scripture says that it is not; it denies the
    authority of the Church established by Christ; it has no sacrifice of
    the Mass; it does not believe in confession;

    it denies Christian teaching on marriage; it rejects Purgatory,
    and very often its advocates refuse to believe in Hell. Mieantime, if
    you give me any doctrine taught by one Protestant Church, I will produce
    another Protestant Church which denies it, save perhaps the one
    doctrine that there is a God of some sort.

    Protest as much as you like against individual abuses in the Church, but no man has the right to set up a new Church.

    (RADIO REPLIES by FATHERS RUMBLE and CARTY)

  • Ann Thimesch

    I understand your anger “J. Banjo.” But you must realize that as you have your religion, we Catholics have ours. If you are to hear a Catholic completely bash another’s religion, then you must realize that they are not acting as a Catholic. It is in my personal belief that Catholicism is a beautiful religion. Why? For the simple fact that no matter where we are in the world, human as well as spiritual support will be nearby. Sure, you can question our beliefs. Who wouldn’t from time to time? But please try to understand that we believe what we believe firmly. Also (and do not take this wrongly, but do take it to heart) Catholics, as this man’s writing states, believe that any one can go to heaven if they have a clean soul. This sounds very unlike your writing above! If you truly have the grace of God in your heart, you would not speak such foul things to a person or a people that try to have the utmost respect for all peoples. The Catholic Church does everything it can to be un-corrupt, yet the church must be one, just as Jesus told Peter, and that is how it will stay. I have a deep respect for your faith in God, and God bless you for Evangelizing. If only all Catholics felt as strongly about their faith as you do. But personally, I do not think one that is not Catholic should be looking up interesting facts about Catholicism, when the only intention that they have in their heart is to insult those who might want to learn about their faith.

  • Kevin F.

    EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS:
    The official and Infallible teaching of the Catholic Church on Salvation.

    Ex Cathedra: There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one at all is saved. (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215.)

    Ex Cathedra: We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff. (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.)

    Ex Cathedra: The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church. (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.)

  • Kevin F.

    A person SINS by indifferentism WHEN he holds that one religion is as good as another or that all religions are equally true and pleasing to God, or that one is free to accept or reject any or all truths. Culpable ignorance of religion is also against this Commandment.

  • Kevin F.

    Christ saves. He saves as He wills. His will is to save through VALID HOLY ORDERED, PRIEST-SAID CANONIZED DIVINE LITURGY. Such is God’s Salutary Will.

  • Somewhere in cyberspace

    Reply to Kevin F. Perhaps you could put aside the Solas for one moment and answer the scenario I put a.k.a “deserted island test”. Could, or could not, a 21st Century castaway, alone on a deserted island, with access to a Bible, receive salvation and eternal life? To make it easier let’s assume that the castaway doesn’t know about the Solas.

  • Kevin F.

    To Gary Zimak: It’s called the Protestant Revolt, they didn’t reform anything. Martin Luther was either a Freemason, or influenced by them.

  • Kevin F.

    No test.

  • Kevin F.

    Your so-called test doesn’t replace binding doctrine.

  • Kevin F.

    You are wasting my time, with your stupid questions.

  • Kevin F.

    You are not proving anything, you are just a Anti-Catholic Bigot.

  • Kevin F.

    Read what I posted and read good Catholic Books, and leave me alone.

  • Kevin F.

    4. The Mass Is The Same Sacrifice As Calvary:
    Divine Liturgy, not the Novus Ordo “Mass”, it’s invalid.
    Apostolic Tradition and not “Living Tradition.”

  • Kevin F.
  • Kevin F.

    You are leaving out variables in your equation.

  • Kevin F.

    No, he must go to Divine Liturgy.

  • Kevin F.

    Our Data Base Defined (KEEP THE FAITH A THEOLOGICAL TRACT by MAETA)

    1. Each of us is a sinner by birth and inclination; and a sinner in deed and habit. Each is born in Original Sin–a state of having no title to enter Heaven.

    2. According to the Bible, Christ (God and man) enlightens every man (Jn 1:9). Each has a chance to be saved by the merciful God according to the conditional decrees of the old or new dispensation (covenant).

    3. Those you lived after the promulgation of the gospel (after Pentecost) must receive the Sacrament of Baptism in order to be saved (according to the Dogmatic Council of Trent).

    4. God’s omniscience and God’s providence; and, man’s free will are facts which we have difficulty resolving. However, each is free and God knows before creating each soul whether or not that soul will dwell in Heaven or Hell eternally. “They could not believe” (John 12,39; Isaias 6;10).
    Why? God foreknew this since they would NOT believe unto THEIR salvation from Hell. “Why are all not saved? Because they would not” –St. John Chrysostom.

    5. “Few are saved from Hell (as Limbo-Hell or Hell-Hell).”
    Christ says so (Mt. 7:13-14). Our Lady of Fatima CONFIRMS this fact.

    6. “OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION.” This is a thrice DOGMATIZED ECCLESIAL IMPERATIVE (Fourth Lateran Council, Unam Sanctam; Cantate Domino). THIS IS A CHRIST-GIVEN “gospel truth.”

    7. What is this “one Baptism”? It is the one Baptism which saves–the Baptism by water and the Holy Ghost, the Baptism Catholics confess in the Nicene Creed. “Unless a man be born of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter the kingdom of Heaven” (Jn. 3:5; Mt. 16:16).

    The dogmatic (fully and eternally binding) Council of Trent (in canon 2 on this sacrament) specified that the (only) matter for this sacrament was water. [This same dogmatic council DEMANDED that EVERYONE must believe that, after the promulgation of the gospel (after Pentecost) one must VOW (not desire) to receive the Sacrament of Baptism in order to be justified; and, one must receive the SACRAMENT of BAPTISM (as defined in canon 2) in order to be justified and saved (canon 5).]

    8. It is an historical imperative that a significant number (who apparently died and whose bodies had corrupted) have been raised from the dead to be baptized and then “really die.” So did St. Patrick, St. Joan of Arc and other saints.

    9. Man is the glory of God (St. Iraeneus). Each man will glorify or manifest God’s justice in Hell or God’s loving mercy in Heaven.

    10. God gives each adult a fair chance to AVOID eternal Hell (Jn. 1). It is HERETICAL to say that an adult goes to HELL ONLY if HE decides to exclude himself from Heaven. God, NOT the individual, DECIDES whether one goes to Heaven or Hell. It is correct to state that each adult person in Hell deservedly suffers eternal torments because he seriously DISOBEYED God: he died in the state of unrepented or insufficiently repented mortal sin (as judged by God and not by the individual).

    In order to keep the faith and remain a Catholic, one may not reject any of these “essentially binding” data.

  • Kevin F.

    What is love? The Schema Prayer (De 6:4) tells us that the only God-acceptable and God-given definition of “love” is to love God totally and exclusively.

    What is such love? Obedience to Christ and His Church, the Church of the faithful–not the church of the unfaithful. “If you love Me, keep My commandments”

  • Kevin F.

    Last comment:The Catholic Church alone was empowered by God TO INTERPRET THE BIBLE. No one is allowed to interpret it contrary to the teaching of the Church.

    THE PROTESTANT DENOMINATIONS WHO FAVOR PRIVATE INTERPRETATION have divided and subdivided for the same reason. NO TWO OF THEM INTERPRET THE BIBLE IN THE SAME MANNER.

    Did God intend HOLY SCRIPTURE to be OUR RULE of FAITH?
    No, God intended our rule of faith to be the LIVING VOICE of the TEACHING CHURCH.

    He who believes in Scripture as his only “guide” ends by believing in his own MISTAKEN INTERPRETATIONS of the Bible, and that means that he ends by believing in himself.

  • Kevin F.

    Now, let me ask you a question.

    Why do you reject Christ’s Bible Truth-His requirements for you to be saved from eternal Hell?

  • Kevin F.

    To Elissa by Grace :

    “Then said I: Behold, I come to do thy will, O God: he taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.” (Hebrews 10:9) DOUAY-RHEIMS HOLY BIBLE

    “Then said I: Behold, I come to do thy will, O God: he taketh away the first, that he may establish that which followeth.” (Hebrews 10:9) DOUAY-RHEIMS THE HOLY BIBLE

    That is, he taketh away what I first mentioned, the imperfect sacrifices of the Law of Moses, that to them might succeed the sacrifice of Christ. (Rev. George Leo Haydock’s Notes)

    “Thou shalt make also a propitiatory (mercy seat) of the purest gold: the length thereof shall be two cubits and a half, and the breadth a cubit and a half.” (Exodus 25:17)

    It was called the mercy-seat, because the Lord, who was supposed to sit there upon the wings of the cherubims, with the ark for his footstool, from thence shewed mercy. (Rev. George Leo Haydock’s Notes)

    THE MERCY SEAT (GOD’S WORD Modernists Refuted and Bible Verified by Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L.)

    Here, mercy was obtained through the sprinkling of blood once a year. The fulfillment of this is in Christ’s Sacrifice, the Holy Sacrifice of Mass.

    The mercy seat was a seat, a place of rest. The earthly high priests could never sit there, only Christ:

    “And every priest indeed standeth daily ministering, and often offering the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But he offering one sacrifice for sins, for ever sitteth on the right hand of God.” (Hebrews 10:11,12)

    Divine Liturgy is Christ on His Mercy Seat. Therefore, “Catholic” is defined as “having Divine Liturgy” from which Christ-given Divine Mercy comes to us, sinners. (CATECHISM of DIVINE LITURGY by Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L.)

  • Gabe

    the last is SO WRONG !!!

  • somewhere in cyberspace

    What do you mean? Are you suggesting that Catholics do worship Mary and the Saints?

  • mike plude

    All religion is man made including the Catholics church. None of the professed religions follow the ten commandments, the sabbath. Jesus did not start any religion but told the disciples to go and spread His good news,the gospel,to the rest of the world. He is our savior and no one else. Peter was not the first pope nor any one else. Jesus is the rock and Peter was a pebble told to spread Jesus teachings throughout the world. When folks read and understand His teachings then and only then we will understand what He meant.

  • mike plude

    The bible is not a Catholic book. It was compiled at the council of nicea, under the direction of constantine. Read your history.

  • john

    Haha does anyone really believe that rubbish. Mumbo jumbo I pity those deluded fools

  • Sam2001

    Barry V, if you are in a crisis, do you NOT ASK FRIENDS AND FAMILY to pray with/for you? We Catholics believe/know that our existence does not end with the death of the body, We ask that our “brothers and sisters” also pray with/for us.

    The Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, is a sticky one for many Protestants and non-Christians. From the moment at Calvary when Our Lord gave the care of his mother unto one of the apostles, John; she was also given to the human race as “our Mother”

    Many people tremble in fear of the Lord, but beg the assistance of this woman to lead them to her son, the Son of God.

  • Pre-Med Matt

    Have you ever asked a friend, parent, spouse, or sibling to pray for you? If so – which if you are any sort of an observant Christian I’m sure you have – then you are defeating your own case. Praying to Mary for her intercession to the Lord is the SAME exact thing as asking someone to pray for you, albeit much more powerful!

    In an analogy I once heard: Jesus should always be your best friend, but what’s wrong with having Mary and the saints in the two of you guys’ posse?

  • 4kidsandacat

    J Banjo, your objections are unbelievably incomplete and incorrect. There is so much more in the Bible than your single reference regarding where salvation is to be found. What of all of the mentions of the Church that Jesus says He founded or would found in the Bible? Do you think He was just talking to hear Himself talk? Or do you think that He actually founded a church? DO you think this Church still exists, or do you think that this Church died or disappeared somehow? If so, do you not think this would make Jesus a liar? Because He stated emphatically that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it, yet this would imply that Hell did prevail!

    Secondly, what in the world does the Mass being said in Latin have to do with the Church not being the true Church? The Mass may still be celebrated in Latin as clarified by Pope Benedict XVI and in fact Latin is still the language of the Church. Are you aware that even pre-Vatican II (which, BTW was improperly implemented because a number of people ignored the actual documents; it’s only now being actively corrected!), Latin prayer books were written with the vernacular translation on the opposite page? The Mass is a prayer, and no matter what language prayers are offered in, God can understand them. Whether or not the congregation understands it is irrelevant. This doesn’t send them to Hell. Have you ever asked someone who speaks a different first language aside from English to pray for you? Did they pray in that language or in English? It’s still a valid prayer even if you couldn’t understand them! Catechism books and classes were offered in the vernacular and this is where the faithful receive their instruction in the faith. How in the world did the faith spread for 1500 years before the Protestant Reformation if we are to judge by your assertion? Clearly someone was spreading the faith in the vernacular! Therefore, plenty of people had to be able to understand the faith.

    Human frailty and sin does not invalidate the teachings of Christ. So whether or not corruption exists in the Church, the teachings of the Church are still true. If you visit an inept physician who fails at curing you or easing your suffering, do you swear off the entire medical profession? No, you simply seek a more competent doctor. Same thing with priests. I would venture to say that the majority of the ordained are good holy men who are knowledgeable in the faith and do their utmost to follow the precepts of the Church. Do you believe that Peter, Paul and the rest of the disciples were completely sinless? And yet they were chosen to spread the Gospel. If you were made privy to their human failings, would this completely invalidate Christianity for you? There’s only one completely flawless person in the Bible and that’s Jesus (ok two, if you count Mary). If we were all unstained, what need would we have of Him? In fact, Jesus told us plainly that there would be wolves among the sheep (corrupt individuals, not the entire institution) who would try to lead us astray. If you are unaware of this, then you are bound to have difficulty pursuing the truth.

  • tradcatholic

    Great teaching article….the ONLY ONE I would have stressed in CAPITAL LETTERS is THERE IS NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CHURCH…..
    and although some are invincibly ignorant…..it is our CATHOLIC DUTY not only priests, to PREACH TO THEM ! Just as ST. PAUL did to CORNELIUS in Acts 1-48, EVEN THOUGH HE WAS A “GOOD and DEVOUT MAN” needed to believe the TRUE FAITH, IN ORDER TO BE SAVED….otherwise, there would have been no need for St. Paul to convert nor for JESUS CHRIST to have come into the world, to have taught the TRUE FAITH, and founded a CHURCH….THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
    There has been so much INDIFFERENTISM in the Catholic Church, since Vatican ll, accepting all FAITHS LEAD TO HEAVEN….this was NEVER THE OBJECTIVE TEACHING OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH and Must be
    REJECTED!
    Let God take care of the SUBJECTIVE TRUTH, AND WE CATHOLICS ADHERE TO THE OBJECTIVE TRUTH TAUGHT BY JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF!
    For OUR SALVATION DEPENDS ON WHAT WE DO…… AND NOT WHAT GOD CAN DO!
    -annoying Catholic, Joyce

  • albertcooper

    Thankyou for the clarity,I have always belived these things but its good to see it all reinforced

  • albertcooper

    The consecration is always valid !

  • shimon

    Necromany is sin

  • 4kidsandacat

    Your Bible interpretation disregards the way language was used at the time of Christ. Any blood relative was often referred to as brother or sister, this does not make them you actual brother. So therefore when the Bible talks about brothers or sisters of Jesus, it is not meaning actual brothers or sisters but blood relatives. By saying marriage is a gift from God and should not be prohibited from anyone, do you mean that same sex marriage is also valid? Or are these people expected to live chastely? Infallibility refers only to questions of faith and morals. Only the First Crusade was sanctioned by the Pope and it was very different from all the others. Every other Crusade was instigated by an earthly ruler and not sanctioned by the Church. 150,000,000 people? You’d better read a more reliable historical text than that. The Salem witch trials, incidentally, occurred in a PROTESTANT community that would not in any way have received instruction from the Catholic Church. Ummm. also, the Roman Catholic Church IS Christian! Consider too that the Gospels were not written until LONG after the Apostles began to spread the faith; this would mean that any reference to the Scriptures was to the OT. Also the books of the Bible were codified in the late 300′s. Meaning, all of what the Apostles taught was NOT Scripture. It was passed orally and this oral tradition is held by the Church today. Have you read the final line of John’s Gospel? “But there are many other things that Jesus did; if every one of them were written down, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written”. Recall that there is virtually nothing of Jesus’ childhood in the Bible; by your argument, Jesus didn’t have a childhood. Or, He was born, and then magically jumped to age 2 or so when the Magi visited, and then made another unbelievable leap to age 12 when He was lost in Jerusalem and found conversing with the elders, and then suddenly was 30. And Joseph just disappeared after the Nativity. You are relying on the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, and this doctrine is unbiblical.

    Where do you get that anyone with a just heart can receive communion and that it doesn’t have to be confected through a priest? Who judges whether or not the heart is pure? How would you know if you were in good enough standing to receive? Everything Jesus conferred on the apostles is done through apostolic succession, in other words passed on in an unbroken line which traces back directly to them. He gave only THEM the power to do these things and the right to confer this on those whom they chose (the entire book of Acts!). You may be eating bread in the company of your brothers and sisters, but this is not the Body and Blood with which He asks us to commemorate His death.

  • 4kidsandacat

    You’re judging with a human idea of what’s “fair”. If Jesus thought this would work He would have chosen female apostles. I’m not going to question Jesus on fairness. It’s not “fair” that unrepentant sinners will go to Hell either, but that’s what happens.

  • 4kidsandacat

    Uh…no.

    Go reread your Gospels. Jesus states a number of times that He will found a Church. Not only that, but the Apostles repeat it numerous times in the book of Acts and the Epistles. When you go back and understand what Jesus told Peter in the original Aramaic, yes, he is the first Pope. When you read your history you will find that what the Early Church fathers preached and practiced is Catholicism.

  • Vida

    Necromancy? The Saints we ask to intercede for us are very much alive in heaven.

  • Vida

    Arrogance is presuming to know more than the greatest biblical scholars, Church fathers, and the words of Jesus Christ, himself , from the past 2000 years. That, to me, stinks far more of arrogance than these facts.

  • sheila0405

    I keep forgetting about the Friday obligation. Glad this was posted! I’m a convert.

  • DGK

    For Truth consistent with Jesus’ teaching through His Church, I urge everyone to read the following excellent, factual tract (“Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth”): http://www.catholic.com/documents/pillar-of-fire-pillar-of-truth

  • Dave Flitton

    Excellent article. You are either Catholic or you are not. Gary has summed it up well….again, excellent article.

  • Justice

    you should read yours

  • Justice

    read mathew 16:18

  • Justice

    you been lied to by your protestant pastor

  • Justice

    he was definitely a heretic

  • Justice

    that is not what the church teaches, look up the catechism and find out the truth.

  • NoreenD

    If Jesus Christ did not found the Catholic Church, who did? Why did He say to Peter, “Thou art Peter and upon this rock (Peter means rock) I will build MY church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it?

  • steve the steve

    Why not do both? Even if you don’t understand the benefit of going to Jesus through Mary, there’s nothing stopping you praying to both.

  • RedRaiderMom

    And this is meant to bring ex-catholics back to the church how exactly?

  • shimon

    yes necromancy… that second sentence is a red herring fallacy

  • Maggie

    To call the Catholic Church corrupt is tantamount to calling Christ himself corrupt since the church is the Body of Christ. There have indeed been corrupt humans within the church in the past and in the present BUT the Catholic Church never was, is not now, nor ever will be corrupt.

  • IrishBoss

    You say Mary had other Children, I agree wholeheartedly for I am one of them. Jesus bequeathed us who believe to be children of Mary under the auspices of St. John at the Cross. Did Mary have other natural children? No. You say see the gospels. I ask which gospels: those gospels chosen out of many writings circulating at the time; and only those picked under the guidance of the Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church? I say your “interpretation” is flawed in this regard and maybe flawed in others as well.
    I had to chuckle at your assumptions of the numbers of people killed under the guise of the Catholic banner especially lumping in the Salem Witch trials. This mindset belies your lack of understanding of the meaning of infallibility as defined by the Catholic Church and history to boot.

  • Peter D.

    This is amazing!!!!!!!!!! Proud to be a practicing Christian-Catholic. <3

  • Brianna

    If I were to ask your intercession, is that not me also going to God? I would argue that yes, it is. I am asking you to pray *to God* for me. I am not asking you to be God. Therefore, by the very merit of asking you for prayer, for believing that your prayer will be heard, I am acknowledging God.

    When we go to Mary, the saints, or our friends, we are going to God. But we are also doing as the New Testament tells us to – to pray for each other. We are tapping into the Cloud of Witnesses.

    When Jim Caveizel says he always prays “Through Mary” that is him approaching the throne of our Lord humbly – in the same way that He came to us. We are saying that we are truly unworthy to come into the presence of His Throne (which is true! Even the Angels cover their faces in the presence of God and prostrate themselves), so we ask for the additional intercession of His Mother. We ask her to bring our prayers to the foot of the cross, to the foot of the throne, and we join our hearts with hers in prayer.

    This does not negate that we go to Our Lord for everything. We just want an army of prayer on our side, so we hit up our friends who are living gloriously in heaven right now — as both Jesus and Paul attest to quite strongly.

  • Brianna

    Seeing as “necromancy” means communing with the dead, the second is an explanation for why your accusation is false. Jesus states that “God is the God of the living, not the dead,” and silenced the Sadducees who refused to believe in the resurrection. If you believe that the saints are dead, then you have no hope of the resurrection.

  • Brianna

    “To Pray” in the old english simply means to ask. So, I could just as easily “pray” to you for your intercession. The term has fallen out of use in our common, American, tongue, but the meaning is still the same.

    The difference comes in the approach. I approach St. Therese as a big sister in my faith, someone who has walked the hard road before me, and someone who cares about my soul. So, I ask her to pray for me and with her. I pray to her asking for her prayers in the same way I ask you to also ask God to look upon his servant.

    I approach Christ as my Lord and My God, my Savior, my Redeemer, but also my Friend and my Brother. I worship and adore Him, knowing that it is through Him that I am saved, that it is Him – in union with the Father and the Spirit – who grant the graces and miracles I ask for.

  • Brianna

    Where did the Bible come from? The Bible was written and/or preserved by the Catholic Church (by 100 AD, the Christians were no longer just called Christian by Catholic Christian, by the way). The Old Testament was preserved and passed on, translated to hundreds of languages – all by monks. Catholic monks. The New Testament was written by our early bishops and popes and was later compiled by other bishops and popes.

    So, no, that man would never have had the benefit of the sacraments, but he would be saved through the works of the Church of the past as well as by the prayers of her current body which prays *daily* for the conversion of souls.

  • Sunny Donoghue

    Please find ten more facts. These are a great start, but I’m sure you can find the next ten.

  • Sunny Donoghue

    So you’re saying you have never asked someone to pray for you or a loved one in need of help.

  • Bodick Rabago

    Number – 10. Catholics Don’t Worship Mary And The Saints – Many Catholics are confused about the role of the Blessed Mother and the Saints. Should we pray to Mary and the Saints or should we go “right to the top” and pray to God? In a nutshell, the Catholic Faith teaches that we must worship God alone. Mary and the Saints are to be honored, not worshiped However, their intercession can be extremely powerful and emulating their virtues can put us on the road to Heaven.

    ==================================================================

    I strongly suggest , let’s define worship for the benefit of protestants!

    It is a part of my teachings that I worship Mary as a Saint & Holy Mother of the Son of God … but NOT as God!

    Bro.Webster(dictionary) has 2nd definition of it! To respect with great honor!

    Hyperdulia in Latin!

    I am just justifying it using the Term use by the protestants … the word Worship!

    My discussion with Eliseo Soriano of ADD makes him run wild when I used Webster Dictionary to make him that he does not know everything! He was humiliated in front his followers …

    He realized that he is not better than Bro,Webster … :)

  • Elizabeth

    Ah, but wouldn’t it be infinitely more advantageous that these things, and many more, were reinforced by our priests at every Mass, or special classes, to teach the faithful that have not a clue.

  • Elizabeth

    How so? What are you objecting to?

  • autdrew

    The Salem witch trials were conducted by PROTESTANTS, as were the majority of witch burnings. The Church declared witchcraft & magic as rubbish. The protestants went crazy on it due to their individual Bible interpretation. You seriously need a history book & an education. 150,000,000 people killed by the Church? There weren’t even that many people living in all of Europe during that time!
    As for learning history, The Crusades were launched after HUNDREDS of years of raids, murder, slave taking & invasions by the muslim hoards! They did practically nothing in hundreds of years. Since the assortment of protestant religions hadn’t been invented yet, who on earth would be fighting the muslim invaders? Catholics! After the 1000s, it was Catholic & Orthodox fighting the jihadists. Like I said, the others weren’t invented yet. Would you prefer that the Catholics not defend themselves & their people? Let them die & conquer the world?
    As for marriage, it is a sacrament given to us by God. No one is with holding marriage. Marriage has a ddefinition that it has had for millennia. Even those who believe in polygamy, it is still between men & women. tearn some real history, learn what the Church really teaches & learn something about this topic before you make yourself look like this again

  • Elizabeth

    The Novus Ordo Mass is a valid Mass. It’s unfortunate that almost all Catholics have to attend this Mass, but it is a valid Mass. However, it’s clearly a protestantized version of THE Catholic Holy Mass intended to make Protestants “comfortable” with it, thinking that might draw them in. Oops. All it has done is cause generations of Catholics to lose their faith. But it is a valid consecration and Mass, sadly.

  • Elizabeth

    Purgatory is not “second chances”.

  • Elizabeth

    Boo Hoo. It’s not fair! Good grief.

  • http://twitter.com/crucifixwearer Matthew Olson

    I made a video about this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex-WOMm4Y4w

  • Debra

    We DO believe Jesus hears our personal prayers, and we DO pray directly to Him on a regular basis. We ALSO believe that He listens to His mother, and so ask her intercession, just as you might ask for the prayers of your friends and family, the difference being Mary has her place in heaven.

  • Myles

    There is only one body in Christ. Not one here on earth and one in heaven, only one. Also Saint Paul says we should all pray for each other, so why would that exclude the Saints in heaven? 1 Corinthians 12:20-21 “But as it is, there are many parts, yet one body.” The eye cannot say to the hand, “I do not need you, “nor again the head to the feet, “I do not need you.” There are numerous verses that demonstrate this fact. Also the earliest Church Fathers understood this and wrote about asking the Saints to pray for us.

  • Myles

    @Onstergenetics Okay lets go back to the beginning like you said. Jesus is the new covenant, in the old testament the ark of the covenant carried the ten commandments. The ark could not be touch by men stained by sin. Mary being the new ark of the covenant couldnt be stained by sin either. The bible saying “Mary was a virgin until the birth of jesus doesnt mean anything. Thats like if I said my sister was a virgin until she died that stopped being a virgin once she died. The Gospels never say anywhere that Mary had any other children. Yes there are people described as Jesus brothers and sisters but that is because in those days any member of a family whether cousins, aunts or uncles, they were called brothers and sisters because they were members of the same family. Saint Paul always addressed the people he was writing to as brothers and sisters. Does that mean he was always writing to his literal brothers and sisters? Yes Jesus is the only mediator between man and God this is because he was God incarnate as man only him becoming man and being crucified could save us. This doesnt mean we shouldnt ask each other to pray for us(see Saint Paul). Peter and Mary being married also means nothing because once again Saint Paul said its recommended for full time ministers to be celibate. Next 150 million people killed in the crusades and witch trials? Thats just bad historical fact on your part. Then number is factually much less, and even if it was accurate it was people that did those horrible things it was never the teaching of the church that did those things. Read Romans 3:3-4 “will their infidelity nullify fidelity with God? No! The Catholic Church is the one true Church founded upon the Peter(Rock)Mt 16:18. John 21:15-17 “Feed my lambs, tend my sheep, feed my sheep. Peter named 195 times in new testament and always 1st to be named among apostles. Jesus also said to his apostle in Luke “whoever listens to you listens to me, whoever denies you denies me. I can go on and on to rebuke everything you can say. Last of all NOWHERE in scripture does it say that scripture alone is our authority. In fact is says just the opposite read 2 peter 3:15-16 and 2 Peter 1:20. Have a blessed day.

  • Susan

    Did Jim C. saw that? Awww, I love that guy!

  • Susan

    I meant say, did Jim C. say that. I got distracted by the thought of what a sweetheart he is.

  • Brian

    Looks like someone else had to read Anne Carrol’s horrifically inaccurate Christ the King: Lord of History. And really? Martin Luther didn’t reform anything? Tell me, when was the last time you payed your priest a couple hundred bucks to help get a friend’s soul out of Purgatory? And tell me, the Bible I should hope you have in your home somewhere, what language is it in?

  • YCA

    Transfiguration, does it make Christ a necromancer?

  • Erik

    There were Bibles in the vernacular in Germany in the 900′s. That’s another fallacy. The Lengua-Franca of the time was Latin, just as it is now, in many parts of the world, English.

  • Reg Smith

    Er Maggie, I don’t THINK that 4kidsandacat was saying that the Church is corrupt, but rather that some members are corrupt at times. That’s how I read his comment. (Did I miss something?)

  • Reg Smith

    Brian, the Holy Ghost used Martin Luther’s sin to correct the Church. God, for reasons known only to Him, allowed Luther’s pompous heresies to cause a horrible revolt where my whole family has never eaten Christ’s Body nor drunk Christ’s blood … they have no life in them.

  • Reg Smith

    Very well said Elizabeth.

  • Somewhere in cyberspace

    Kevin F. I hope that every 21st Century castaway, alone on a deserted island, with a Bible, suddenly identify their need for Divine Liturgy. I’m not enlightened as to how the castaway would come to this recognition as the Bible would not reveal Divine Liturgy to them.

    Am I a Anti-Catholic bigot or do I instead delight in the simplicity and joy of the salvation offered to a criminal beside Christ at Calvary?

  • Reg Smith

    I asked my parish priest about that a few months back and was told that we only had a ‘Friday obligation’ during Lent.
    I, too, am glad for this post.

    Pray for our priests!

  • Brian

    The only 10th Century Bible translation I know of are the Wessex Gospels, and I believe Rome condemned them in the synods of Toulouse and Tarragona.

  • Brian

    I appreciate that you can acknowledge that Luther’s work, in many ways corrected ( or, in other words, reformed) the Church. It saddens me that you would so quickly condemn your family simply for not partaking in the Eucharist. Thankfully, we know from the Word of God that it is their faith that will save them, and not their works; I pray that God will open your eyes to the truth of His Word.

  • QuoVadisAnima

    God’s Word says “Faith without works is dead”

  • QuoVadisAnima

    Because Protestants equate prayer with worship – but prayer is not necessarily worship, look it up in a dictionary. Prayer is simply talking, petitioning another in some form. That’s why in older texts you will read people saying “I pray you…” to other people.

    When did its meaning become associated with worship? After the Protestant split when their services no longer involved sacrifice – THE essence and form of worship of God found throughout Scripture.

  • albertcooper

    Totally Elizabeth,and the hear more from priests regarding sin,

  • QuoVadisAnima

    Jesus showed us the path that He wants us to follow by walking it Himself. So, for example, clearly it was His intention for Baptism to be the norm – yet He Himself told the good thief that he would be with the Lord in paradise. God establishes the rules for us to follow, however, that does not mean that He is bound by them.

    So your idea that an exception can exist therefore the rule is somehow disproved is fatally flawed. Yes, God has shown us quite clearly that we can be saved outside of the normal course of things, but that was never presented as some sort of loophole or even excuse to reject the sure course to which He directed us.

  • davepinoy

    Fundamentalists and those who does read the scripture and understand what it says according to what the author wants to convey (exegesis), will see the truth about intercession. Moses prayed for the Israelites, Abraham even interceded for Sodom and Gomorrah. All the major and minor prophets as well as the new testament writers always pray for other and in fact urge everyone to pray for another. Is Mary, the apostles, the saints, dead and not able to pray and intercede for us?….I AM THE GOD OF THE LIVING….Jesus is the God of the living and that includes those living with Him in heaven, who in fact according to apocalypse rule with him, (praying and pleading for particular situations here on earth). Confession as well is an authorization given by Christ to the Priesthood. That is why the Priest hearing a catholic’s confession has the authority, bestowed upon him by Christ, through the bishops, to forgive sin…..Sola Scriptura is definitely a product of the Devil’s deception….Its only those who arrogate unto themselves an authority solely given to the apostles, disciples, and their successors, the true meaning of scripture and the tradition they had kept. Not everything Jesus did was written…and the Tradition of the Apostles kept what is not written and passed on to their successors..Who then are we in the 20th century or from the DEFORMATION OF LUTHER, in the 16th century to anachronistically re-interpret the scripture and establish our own tradition???

  • Stefen Choo

    Hi J Banjo, thank you for your comments. It is very typical misunderstanding and misconception of the Catholic Church. Have fun doing your research! Welcome to the family soon. :)

  • Mark Chance

    IME, which admittedly is rather limited, ex-Catholics leave the Church due to active dissent with the Church’s teaching on sexuality, usually related to contraception and divorce/remarriage. They’re a little like the Henry VIII. Everything else they complain about (such as “worshiping Mary”) are afterthoughts to rationalize their dissent.

  • Mark Chance

    Find a single Church document related to doctrine or the practice of faith that says Catholics are to believe that Jesus doesn’t hear a “person’s sincere prayer”. Bet you can’t.

  • Mark Chance

    Yes, it is, and necromancy is the use of the occult to force spirits to reveal the future. The Church condemns necromancy.

  • Mark Chance

    Your knowledge (or lack thereof) doesn’t define all of reality.

  • P Ben

    My candid advice to you is to go back to that same bible you claim to be a catholic book and study it very well. Don’t read it as one of your literature book and you will be suprised of your discovery. It’s not about being a good historian but making a discovery concerning God’s stand on some of the Roman catholic TRADITIONS.

  • Grace

    You are a confuse man and you need the true light of the Holy ghost to know Jesus Christ .everything you say here has no life in it.

  • JDON

    I don’t care what your faith is, Gary. By reading # 1… I’d say you need to rethink YOUR values. I would never willingly be a part of an exclusionary regime.

  • Reg Smith

    I do not condemn my family. Only God can do that … or we can do it to ourselves.

    Actually I am rather confused and concerned by what our Lord told us. To “have no life in you”, I’m wondering, investigating and praying about the meaning of that and how it affects our eternal lives.

    But Jesus was very clear in commanding us to literally, not symbolically, eat his Body and drink his Blood. If we knowingly refuse to we will have no life in us. That’s God talking.

    Jesus also makes it clear that we will be judged by our works as well as our faith. In Matthew 25:35-46 Jesus says to those who do not feed the poor, take care of the sick, visit prisoners, etc: “You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”
    Faith without works is dead.

  • Spencer

    Can, like in #8, anyone exorcise in emergencies as well?

  • Brian

    Indeed, it does not. I merely assumed that the translations he was referring to were the Wessex Gospels, since they seem to more-or-less match the criteria he laid out. If you know the translation to which he was referring and can show that Rome didn’t condemn it, then I would say my argument was successfully refuted, otherwise simply claiming that such translations existed without providing any evidence supporting said claim does little to support his argument.

  • Brian

    Indeed, it does not. I merely assumed that the translations he was referring to were the Wessex Gospels, since they seem to more-or-less match the criteria he laid out. If you know the translation to which he was referring and can show that Rome didn’t condemn it, then I would say my argument was successfully refuted, otherwise simply claiming that such translations existed without providing any evidence supporting said claim does little to support his argument.

  • misterheche

    One should not to assume that all gender distinctions are
    discriminatory. Would you argue that God has discriminated against
    males by not allowing them to become pregnant? Or, that He has
    discriminated against females by not allowing them to impregnate? There
    is a greater purpose to these distinctions, even if we do not fully
    understand it.

    Likewise, we cannot assume upfront that an
    all-male priesthood is discriminatory. After all, the all-male
    priesthood has its roots in the selection of the twelve Apostles by
    Jesus Himself.

    If we follow the reasoning that the all-male
    priesthood is discriminatory to its logical conclusion, we would have to
    declare that Jesus discriminated against women when He selected only
    males to be his Apostles. Yet, we know that cannot be, because Jesus was
    without sin. Moreover, he bucked the conventions of his day on many
    issues, so why would He not do so in his selection of the Apostles? Once
    again, there must be a deeper point or purpose there, even if it is
    difficult for us to discern or understand.”

    There is a complex
    theology at the heart of the Catholic priesthood, rooted in the idea of
    Christ as the bridegroom and the Church as the bride. The priest
    theologically assumes the role of Christ and becomes the bridegroom in
    relation to the Church as the bride. If the priest were to be a female,
    the theology breaks down, because you end up with two brides and no
    bridegroom.

  • misterheche

    One should not to assume that all gender distinctions are
    discriminatory. Would you argue that God has discriminated against
    males by not allowing them to become pregnant? Or, that He has
    discriminated against females by not allowing them to impregnate? There
    is a greater purpose to these distinctions, even if we do not fully
    understand it.

    Likewise, we cannot assume upfront that an
    all-male priesthood is discriminatory. After all, the all-male
    priesthood has its roots in the selection of the twelve Apostles by
    Jesus Himself.

    If we follow the reasoning that the all-male
    priesthood is discriminatory to its logical conclusion, we would have to
    declare that Jesus discriminated against women when He selected only
    males to be his Apostles. Yet, we know that cannot be, because Jesus was
    without sin. Moreover, he bucked the conventions of his day on many
    issues, so why would He not do so in his selection of the Apostles? Once
    again, there must be a deeper point or purpose there, even if it is
    difficult for us to discern or understand.”

    There is a complex
    theology at the heart of the Catholic priesthood, rooted in the idea of
    Christ as the bridegroom and the Church as the bride. The priest
    theologically assumes the role of Christ and becomes the bridegroom in
    relation to the Church as the bride. If the priest were to be a female,
    the theology breaks down, because you end up with two brides and no
    bridegroom.

  • misterheche

    With
    three million people or more traveling to Rio de Janeiro to see the
    pope at World Youth Day, I am once again reminded of the beauty, wonder,
    and importance of the Catholic Church.

    If you are a Catholic
    who has been away from the Church for a while or are someone looking to
    add meaning to your life, I can only say to you, “What are you waiting
    for? Come Home!”

    A moving, two-minute video on the beauty of
    Catholicism and the contributions of the Catholic Church to Western
    Civilization can be found at the link:

    http://allhands-ondeck.blogspot.com/2012/04/catholics-come-home.html

  • misterheche

    With
    three million people or more traveling to Rio de Janeiro to see the
    pope at World Youth Day, I am once again reminded of the beauty, wonder,
    and importance of the Catholic Church.

    If you are a Catholic
    who has been away from the Church for a while or are someone looking to
    add meaning to your life, I can only say to you, “What are you waiting
    for? Come Home!”

    A moving, two-minute video on the beauty of
    Catholicism and the contributions of the Catholic Church to Western
    Civilization can be found at the link:

    http://allhands-ondeck.blogspot.com/2012/04/catholics-come-home.html

  • coco2

    I am Catholic and I pray and talk to Jesus, God the Father and the Holy Spirit many times throughout the day. I also ask Mary to pray for me, to pray for my children etc. Her only desire is to help people get closer to Jesus. People like Jim Caviezel probably had a life changing experience with God through her intercession, thus he relies on her to keep him on the right path to Jesus. But it really is God that that he worships. I can see where people get this confused with worship of Mary, but it isn’t. She is our mother and everyone’s mother wants only the best for their children. And the best is getting on that narrow road that leads to God.

  • jbrown

    there is no reason why women could not be “ordained”as a deacon and therefor could if they wanted ,recieve all the sacaments.and about invitro,wasnt the conception of Jesus a form of artificial insemination

  • Mark Chance

    The Venerable Bede translated John’s Gospel in Old English in the early to mid-8th century. King Alfred did the same thing with different parts of Scripture about two centuries later. The Lindisfarne Gospels included an Old English gloss. Near the time of the Wessex Gospels, the Pentateuch was translated into Old English. I know of no condemnations for any of these, nor have I ever read of any condemnation of the Wessex Gospels outside of websites that make false claims such as, “The Church once banned Bible reading!”.

    If the Synod of Toulouse, for example, did specifically address the Wessex Gospels, that didn’t apply to any countries outside the jurisdiction of Toulouse. It certainly wasn’t a condemnation from Rome or the Church as a whole.

  • Colin Moris

    Thank you for educating them.

  • R Joseph Owles

    Old Catholic Churches ordain women, allow birth control, and understand that divorce happens. Old Catholic Churches are also valid in Apostolic Succession, and their Sacraments are valid — The Roman Catholic Church even admits this. Learn more about the Old Catholic Church at http://kogcc.net/index.php?p=1_96_The-Kingdom-of-God-Catholic-Church

  • Kevin F.

    No, then they are “Old Catholic” by name only.

  • Kevin F.

    Where did you get your misinformation?

  • Kevin F.

    AZTEC MURDER BY ABORTION

    The culture and cult surrounding Mexico City, up to 1550 or so, was MURDER BY ABORTION. Why? MAN hoped to be enthroned BY worshipping the devil. As Jesus informed us–the devil is a murderer and a liar.

    “Religious” butchers would hold people’s legs and hands as the principle butcher-surgeon would most skillfully slash open the chest cavity to ABORT the living heart from the victim, all in a period of less than one minute. Such was the demonic cult and culture of the Americas until about four hundred years ago. Thousands were murdered daily in compliance with this cult and culture.

    Most people view this vision from the past as “disgustingly” CURRENT. Something is being extracted from what could be seen as a woman. Horrors–could it be her heart…could it be her own child in his/her initial stages of human life? What ever happened to the saying–”as safe as a baby in his mother’s womb?”

    DO I see correctly? Is this a woman having her own child MURDERED in his/her earliest life–by contraceptive pills or by surgery? Can this ME-generation be so unnaturally EVIL…so demonic…as to MURDER their own INCONVENIENT children?

    Humankind cannot bear very much reality. ONLY Mary’s Remnant (Apoc.12) see, weep and are led to pray about our peculiar apocalyptic terrors. The “rest” tend to BLOCK OUT the NEGATIVE TRUTH ABOUT OUR SOCIETY.

    Those who are numbered among Mary’s Remnant are devoted to Our Lady of Guadalupe who is the Pregnant Woman of the Apocalypse (Apoc. 12). She is THE God-given supplier of inspirations and graces to those who sincerely strive to survive and truly prosper within one of the “most murdering” nations that has ever existed and within some of the most demonic and diabolically deceived communities of men which has ever lived on the face of this planet.

    (Fr. Trinchard, S.T.L.)

  • Kevin F.

    The soul is present from the moment of conception. The Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary implies that doctrine.

    Our lady soul was created by God at the moment of her conception, and long before human activity in the sense of discernible physical movement. The unborn child is a living human being from the moment of conception.

    In abortion the doctor directly intends the killing of an innocent child as a means to the end he desires to attain. He does not merely permit the child to die. HE DEFINITELY KILLS IT. The child is not responsible for its own death, unjustifiably exposing its life to danger. (Radio Replies by Fathers Rumble and Carty)

    Pew Foundation (June 20, 2008):

    FINDING: 48% of alleged “Catholics” (Newchurchers) favor legalizing (murder by) abortion.

    [The Catholic Physicians' Guild (late sixties) showed that contraceptives ABORT, and thus KILL or MURDER any human conception.]

    FINDING: At least 84% of Newchurchers so strongly reject Jesus as Saviour (the one and only Saviour) that they reject the Orthodox Catholic Church as the only true means of salvation.

    [To be a Newchurch "Catholic,", one must reject Orthodox Catholicism, the religion which is defined by Divine Liturgy.]

    What can we conclude about Newchurch (New Age Catholics):

    1) Newchurch lie about their “strong suit”-”We love one another!”

    2) 85% REJECT THE REAL CHRIST, Who instituted and requires that we pray /

    attend /live Divine Liturgy and Sacraments to be saved from Hell.

    (Catechism of Divine Liturgy by Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L.)

  • Kevin F.

    No, you don’t understand Catholic teaching.

  • Kevin F.

    If you are talking about the “NEW MASS”, then no.

  • Kevin F.

    “CONSECRATION” PRAYERS

    CONCLUSIVELY INVALIDATE “NEW MASS”

    (“NEW MASS” CONCLUSIVELY INVALID by Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L.)

    Three Examples of Novus Ordo English Liturgy 1997:

    1) The day before he suffered he took bread.

    Cardinal Ottaviani and his Cardinal theologians condemned NOEL “New Mass” for refusing to bring the priest into “Christ-priest modality,” observing, that NOEL presented a mere narrative of a past event (thereby, invalidating their “New Mass”).

    2) He gave you thanks and praise. [no blessed]

    Because NOEL & AL deny the Christ-priest’s unique role to be the Blesser among us in a salutary mystical/sacramental way, “Blessed” is omitted by both Novus Ordo “New Mass” and today’s modern Anglican. Thus, there is no valid consecration.

    3) When supper was ended, he took the cup. Again he gave you thanks and

    praise.

    In both Novus Ordo and Anglican, the chalice of salvation is no longer considered a goodly cup; Christ’s (and the “priest’s”) hands no longer holy and

    venerable

    venerable

    . The protestantly heretical narrative tense is employed. AL is closer to thrusting the “priest” into the “supper verbal tense” than NOEL. Anglican states

    he had given

    he had given

    instead of (NOEL’s) he gave (gave clearly referring to a once and forever over with event). Here, one perceives that liturgical presiders are intended to function as narrators, not Holy Ordered Priests. NOEL nor AL “New Ordinal ‘priests’” can validly say a Canonized Latin Mass, even using the Canonized Latin Mass (CLM) Text.”

  • Kevin F.

    No.

  • Kevin F.

    When the “Abominable Desolation” is researched, in the Anchor or Jerusalem Bible, one notes that the “Abomination of Desolation” can be considered as an object: a second altar erected “upon” and “opposed to” the altar of God (1 Macc 1:57) (1 Macc 1:62). Typically, in the Old Dispensation, it referred to a false and idolatrous form of worship introduced in substitution of the true sacrifice, at a general time of apostasy of Jewry from their received faith. This object (false altar) will be in one of “the wings of the Temple” (Dan 9:27). This “wing” can be interpreted as being the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church.

    In a wide sense of the word, the Sanctuary constitutes the altar of God. Originally, the Novus Ordo “New Mass” table was placed in the Sanctuary or “upon the Altar.” Also, it “opposed the true Altar.” It stood in opposition to the true Altar, as well as “opposite” the true Altar within the Sanctuary. It “fits prophecy.” It is the “Abomination of Desolation” [the absence of God--when God is presumed to be present; is yet related to as being present, but is not].

    Characteristic of the original Abomination, there flourished “liturgically active females.” In the times of the Abominable Desolation, women are in the Sanctuary during Divine Liturgy.

    Regarding the Third Secret, Sr. Lucia of Fatima refers us to the 12th and 13th chapters of the Apocalypse. The 12th chapter reveals Our Lady birthing Christ, Sacrifice and Sacrament, as “the life-force” of Mary’s Elect Remnant. The 13th chapter reveals anti-Christ and treats of the two Beasts (NWO and Novus Ordo) of the Apocalypse, born of Satan.

    (Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L.)

  • Kevin F.

    Human Liturgy – anti-Christ liturgy invented by Bishop Bugnini; a mockery of Christ’s Divine Liturgy; the Novus Ordo, which is a community celebration of PRESUMPTION imposed after Vatican II.

  • Kevin F.

    Living Apostolic Tradition – Newchurch definition incompatible with Orthodox Catholicism, by which apostate bishops claim themselves to be living Apostles, having the unique authority to change Christ-given immutable dogma. They claim that the Deposit of Faith EVOLVES throughout history. Orthodox Catholicism teaches that the Deposit of Faith STOPPED at the death of the last Apostle, and therefore, it is unchangeable.

  • Kevin F.

    She is wrong.

  • Kevin F.

    Newchurch – the term presently used to describe that church body which has come to replace the Latin Rite Patriarchate. Newchurch (being a newly evolved protesting church) is characterized by its rejection of Divine Liturgy and Holy Orders ordained Priesthood (since 1969). This Newchurch has protestant, new age and “modernist” contents and characteristics.

    Orthodox Catholic – every faithful follower of Christ, Lord and Saviour, is Orthodox Catholic, meaning having salutarily right and necessary faith and morals, especially, liturgical morals, (as given by Christ for His A.D. Salutary Dispensation).

  • Kevin F.

    Consecration – Simply stated, “the Consecration” turns bread and wine into Christ. “The Consecration” can be done ONLY by a validly ordained and properly functioning priest. Only such a Christ-priest can salutarily metamorphosize, or transubstantiate the elements of bread and wine into Christ: Holy Sacrifice and Holy Sacrament.

  • Kevin F.

    This will be my last post here, and I will not reply to comments.

    DEMONIC LICENSE AND DEMONIC ENSLAVEMENT(NEW AGE NEW MASS by Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L.):

    Each of us is so naturally rotten and wicked that:

    1. we tend to be BLIND to evil’s presence; 2. We tend to EXCUSE our sins—(everyone does it, it’s only natural to…, I’m not a saint, etc.); 3. we tend to JUSTIFY ourselves either on our own or with the help of our MEN-experts (e.g. premarital sex cannot be a sin since…);4. we even tend to fall under the fullness of God’s curse or damnation (as related to us by God in Romans 1:18-2:4)—we encourage the evil that we do; and we, in our generation, do the Romans One Curse “one better” as we applaud or approve of serious sins which we do not directly commit; e.g. some bishops in North America do this regarding murder—abortion—(by approving legislation); just as other older people with far less serious sinning approve of legislation which allows murder by abortion); and, 5. we become vehicles for Satan’s God-allowed (initially) wonderfully, sensationally and deceptively demonic manifistations peculiar to these end-times that were it not for God’s special graces would lead “even the elect” into eternal damnation (Mt. 24:24; II Th. 2:11).

    This is the age of NAC. When we wake up, we will be able to say what the great Jerome would say today: “Catholics woke up to find themselves New Age Catholics”. They woke up to their SIN—MAN IS GOD.

    They finally heard the first Revelation of Fatima: SIN IS THE ONLY AND GREATEST PRESENT EVIL SINCE IT ALONE CAN AND DOES RESULT IN THE ONLY ETERNAL EVIL—HELL.

    When Catholics wake up—Our Lady of Fatima assures us, we will wake up—they will see that they are New Age Catholics (in gross heresy) and they will fully understand the second and third Revelations of Fatima.

    The second and third Fatima revelations disclose the following about the church and state. Sins and the effects of sins express themselves socially especially in and by “Russia” and Russia’s Errors (socialism, New Age government, etc.); and, ecclesially—in NAC.

    The Fatima-given remedy is for the greatest, best, and only ecclesial and “actual” presence of God on earth—the Catholic Church—to see its horribly grave mega sinfulness (its NAC existential identity) and to repent and to reform, or to “repair” the damage it has done to Christ’s one and only Church. This church—in its Pope and “his” bishops—must (according to God’s will as revealed at Fatima) express this new attitude by solemnly vowing a day or season of reparation followed by the proper ecclesial consecration of Russia to God’s freely chosen prime end-times sacramental: the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

  • R Joseph Owles

    I got my misinformation by being an Old Catholic Priest. I also got it by writing a book on the Old Catholic Church.

  • Kevin F.

    Martin Luther was a heretic and an apostate. He also had emotional issues.

  • Kevin F.

    NOVUS ORDO CONDEMNED

    REASONS CONDEMNED:

    1) Clearly ILLICIT

    2) Conclusively INVALID

    3) evidently DISEDIFYING

  • Kevin F.

    No, The Bible IS a Catholic book.

  • Kevin F.

    You CLAIMED to be a Catholic Priest and wrote a book. That doesn’t prove anything.

  • Kevin F.

    You are an apostate!

  • Kevin F.

    I know of Old Catholic Priests that will disagree with you.

  • R Joseph Owles

    what exactly am I supposed to be proving? I guess it doesn’t matter since it is clear that you’re just going to argue, be judgmental, and call names. Sorry, I won’t play. I expect better from anyone claiming to be a Christian of any tradition. If you’re not doing it with love, you’re not doing it for God, because God is love. Peace.

  • Kevin F.

    NO!

  • Kevin F.

    No.

  • Kevin F.

    You have no authority, not credible, and a heretic.

  • Kevin F.

    NAC EMOTIONALIZES AND PSYCHOLOGIZES OUR PERCEPTIONS (NEW AGE NEW MASS by Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L.):

    A. EMOTIONALIZE

    NAC (New Age “Catholic”) emotionalizes religion as it cater to THE FLESH—to MAN as he is or as his fleshly desires would lead him to be come.

    The average NAC sermon has a basic EMOTIONAL appeal. We want you to feel good about yourself being God. Be happy. Have a nice day. Don’t feel bad.

    This emotionalism is expressed and promulgated through: charismatic “feeling-sessions”, sensitivity sessions, RENEW,

    most forms of R.C.I.A., “feely-touchy” liturgies, and other NAC creations.

    Operationally, NAC’s morals come out of a compelling DESIRE to make as many as possible to feel good about themselves—as homosexuals (you were born that way), as drunkards (alcoholism is a disease, not a sin), as divorced and remarried [let's give them an (unwarranted) annulment], as “sexually-active” (after all, we can’t expect young people to be celibates), etc.

    B. PSYCHOLOGIZE

    Of course, emotionalizing religion also includes psychologizing it—MAN’s view is taken as GOD’s view. Why? MAN is God (in the New Age and in New Age Catholicism).

    More specifically, however, we can see how NAC depends on selected Man-worshipping and God-rejecting psychologies to do its work and “to justify” its sins.

    Today, in most of our churches, psychology has replaced or holds dominance over theology. Even in the mid-sixties at St. Louis University, at least one-third of my priestly theological training was comprised of psychology or used a psychological approach.

    …Man-affirming and God-rejecting psychology invades our religion books, sacramental preparation texts and programs, “sermonettes,” etc. In general, such MAN-psychology is employed in order to take people away from true Catholicism into NAC—to believe in MAN (and Satan) and no longer to believe in God (and His Revelation).

    …Obviously such New Age psychology is the psychology of NAC. Its diabolically male expression is becoming increasingly popular and is increasingly imposed on its VICTIMS—especially as the faithless, authority-hating and faith-hating “post-sixties” students now become the reigning experts and authorities (as bishops, priests and lay-empowered leaders) within our churches.

    DO YOU WANT PROOF? Check into the types of “retreats” that are given in YOUR diocese. LOOK at religion texts. LISTEN carefully to the sermons. ATTEND a “sacrament preparation” program or a “catechetical conference.” Etc. Only the ignorant or malicious will deny that your church is being “psychologized” into becoming demonic or into being and thriving as a New Age “Catholic” Church.

    ..Be informed. Be as wise as these serpents who dwell among us. Do not let yourself or “yours” be their NEXT victims.

  • Kevin F.

    “NEW ORDINAL” ALLEGED “PRIESTS” ARE CONCLUSIVELY INVALID (“NEW MASS CONCLUSIVELY INVALID by Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L.)

    What is the immutable (adj. never changing; always the same) and sine qua non (n. An essential condition) of Holy Ordered Priesthood? Why is a man made a priest in the Catholic Church?

    Primarily and essentially, a man receives Holy Orders to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and administer the priest-dependent sacraments. The Ordinal defines the Service and vice versa. The traditional Rite of Ordination explains this clearly. In the Church-given words of the Bishop to the Ordinand, the office of the priesthood is explained according to the traditional understanding:

    Dearly beloved son, as you are now about to be consecrated to the office of the Priesthood, endeavor to receive it worthily, and when you have received it, fulfill its duties blamelessly. The Priest is ordained to offer Sacrifice, to bless, to guide, to preach and to baptize. With great awe should one advance to so high a state…”

    The Bishops’ “New Mass” and “New Ordinal” have created an alien religion. The “New Ordinal” betrays its anti-Catholic and anti-Christ religion from the beginning of its “commissioning rite.” Here is how the Office of the Priesthood is to be explained by the Bishop according to the new 1978 rite:

    My son, you are now to advance to the order of the presbyterate. You must apply your energies to the duty of teaching in the name of Christ, the chief Teacher. Share with mankind the word of God you have received with joy. Meditate on the law of God, believe what you read, teach what you believe, and put into practice what you teach…In the memorial of the Lord’s death and resurrection, make every effort to die to sin and to walk in the new life of Christ.

    Obviously, the Bishops’ “New Rite” DOES NOT “ordain” Holy Ordered Priests. It commissions them to be catechists, collaborators, presiders or facilitators. (They should NOT be called Father!)

    —————————-

    One must recall Pope Leo XIII’s Apostolicae Curae –On the Nullity of Anglican Orders. Apostolicae Curae, when applied to “‘priests’ ordained after 1970 by the rite of that time” assures us that they ARE STILL laymen. Laymen CANNOT celebrate Mass. Period.

    If anyone saith…that those who have neither been rightly ordained, nor sent, by ecclesiastical and canonical power, but come from elsewhere, are lawful ministers of the word and of the sacraments; let him be anathema. (Council of Trent, Sess. XXIII, Can. 7, D. 967

  • Kevin F.

    The Rockefeller Foundation funded the birth control and “pro choice” (abortion) campaigns, the developments of the “pill” and other contraceptives, the promotion of the (homo) sexual revolution. All of these were intended to divorce sex from marriage and procreation and make sex the national pastime.

    Freemasonry, the church of Lucifer, is the true religion of the modern world. Our “culture” is essentially pagan, dedicated to money and sex. It is predicated on replacing God with man, hence “humanism,” the religion of man, sex and excrement.

    (Cruel Hoax Feminism & The New World Order by Henry Makow, PHD)

  • Kevin F.

    Vatican Struggles to Contain Feral Nuns

    August 12, 2012

    by Marie Henrie

    (henrymakow.com)

    ‘Catholic” nuns’ rejection of Christian teaching may be why their US numbers have dwindled from 180,000 to 60,000 since 1965.

    Having attended Catholic schools in several states, I have fond memories of dedicated teaching Sisters who in their spare time taught the girls how to embroider, read music and sing Gregorian chant.

    They incorporated proper etiquette in the classroom and even taught ballroom dancing after lunch several days a week.

    In the early nineties, a nun opened a Satanist book store on Main Street in my home town and there was no outcry from the local parish or parish school.

    When local parishes would sponsor fund raising bazaars and carnivals, the nuns had tables of books on Mother Gaia , Enneagram and even Wicca Majick.

    When I opted to home school my own family, I would get phone calls from other parents interested in doing the same. More often than not they were displeased with religion classes being replaced by ‘guided Imagery” sessions.

    I find it ironic that the very same Bishops who allowed these radical feminists to persist despite decades of complaints to the Diocesan Chanceries and even the Vatican, are now being forced to address the situation head on.

    “Not that this should come as a surprise to anyone who has followed the rise of the feminist-eco-lesbian ideology within the leadership covens of the LCWR over the last half-century,” says Randy Engel.

    Engel continues:

    “Over the last half-century, lesbian religious have forged a symbiotic relationship with their radical feminist sisters, and both have piggybacked themselves onto the liberal Left political engine. The combined covens of feminism and lesbianism have politicized religious life to such an extent that many convents and houses of female religious are only incidentally religious. Thus their “ministries” must be viewed principally through a political prism rather than a religious one.

    “Under the rubrics of “peace and justice,” the feminist/lesbian network of women religious are waging war against the unborn, “hetero-sexism,” “homophobia,” a male-only priesthood, global warming/climate change and a litany of other ‘progressive’ causes, as well as an on-going attack on Catholic faith and morals.”

  • Kevin F.

    Then they are NOT Catholic. I can’t make it clearer than that.

  • Kevin F.

    Catholic – often misunderstood in religious circles to mean Universal; the root word refers to “the seat” upon which the “Head” sits (as in ex cathedra). Christ is the Head of His Church.

    Catholic-Cathedr,=a (Greek). A seat

  • Kevin F.

    WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THE WORD “CATHOLIC?” (From:CATECHISM of DIVINE LITURGY by, Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L.):

    * “Catholic” primarily refers to “chair” as in ex cathedra — “from the chair.” The Holy Bible discloses that the chair or SEAT is the Mercy Seat, in contrast to the Seat of Justice. Christ is BOTH Saviour and Judge (Genesis 1).

    * Those who live/practice Christ’s Divine Liturgy are blessed to have access to the Mercy Seat of God and, therefore are called “Catholics.” To be “Catholic” is to pray and live Divine Liturgy. Divine Liturgy is Christ sitting on the Mercy Seat at the right hand of God interceding for the Elect (Acts 7:56, 1 John 4:10).

    * At the final judgment, this same Christ will come to separate the Hell-bound from the Heaven-bound. He will be seated on His Judgment Seat. “Now is the time of Salvation” (2 Corinthians 6:2). Now is the time to seek Christ, on His Mercy Seat, in His Divine Liturgy. The Old Testament has been fulfilled and thereby replaced by the New and Eternal Testament in Christ’s Blood.

    UP UNTIL THE “REVOLTING 1960s” WHAT DID ORDINARY PEOPLE MEAN BY THE WORD “CATHOLIC?”

    * “Catholic” referred to persons who attended Divine Liturgy. “Catholic” denotes the official worship of the Church-Divine Liturgy. Only Catholics were required to attend Mass on Sundays and Holy Days. A Catholic would be asked: “Where do you go to Mass?” Until the revolting 60s, “Catholic” always meant Mass attendance.

    [Before Newchurch replaced Orthodox Catholicism in the West, every Catholic Church had a valid Holy Ordered Priesthood (valid by virtue of being from the Apostles and hence from Christ). Each such priest's main office is to celebrate and provide Divine Liturgy. Since the revolting 60s, Catholic Churches have become Newchurches: places where the UNHOLY stands front and center in the place of the most Holy. Apoc. 13]

  • Kevin F.

    CATHOLIC: The word “Catholic” comes from “Katholikos,” as in “cathedral” – the place where the “head bishop” dwells. The Church also has the expression “the Chair of Peter.” We know that Christ ascended into Heaven and “sitteth at the right hand of the Father.” This is the only “chair” or throne that matters. (Col. 3:1). Only He is Head of His Church. As Priest and Victim, “Offerer” and “Offered,” Christ IS Divine Liturgy. He “sitteth at the right hand of the Father on the Mercy Seat” and “will come to judge the living and the dead.” He is the only One Who counts. His Word is God’s Law.

    The first time this word “Katholikos” is encountered in Orthodox Catholicism is in the letter of St. Ignatius to the Smyrneans, written about the year 110 A.D. Where Jesus is, there is the Catholic Church. THEREFORE, “where Holy Ordered Priests” make present Christ-Christus vivens “in” Divine Liturgy, there is the Catholic Church. Heretical religions such as the Donatists and today, Newchurch Novus Ordo-ites [who claim their church began with Vatican two] “de-focus on Christ both liturgically and fiducially. An alien spirit governs and informs such apostates. Briefly stated, the Satanic spirits have replaced the Holy Spirit, through Whom Christ comes among us. [Since Novus Ordo human liturgies are presided over by LAYMAN, Newchurch has "community celebrations." Newchurch NO LONGER claims to have Divine Liturgy.] (ONE HOLY CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC by Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L.)

  • Kevin F.
  • Kevin F.

    THE REAL VATICAN II STATES (NEW AGE NEW MASS by Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L.):

    “There must be NO innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and CERTAINLY requires them (Const. On Liturgy, Art. 23).”

    HAVE THE FOLLOWING INNOVATIONS— NEW, NOVEL, AND REVOLUTIONARY IMPOSITIONS—BEEN CERTAINLY AND “REALLY” FOR THE GOOD OF THE CHURCH?

    a) Effectively forbidding the Canonized Liturgy;

    b) Removing Christ from His Churches;

    c) “Sacrileging” Christ by Communion in the hand.

    d) Effectively teaching heresies within biased vernacular “perversions” of the imposed Novus Ordo;

    e) Unnecessarily endangering the VALIDITY of Masses and certain sacraments;

    f) All other new and novel post-Vatican II changes.

    The answer to the question is, NO! (KevCFal)

  • Kevin F.

    End of comments, please don’t reply, I will ignore them and put them in my spam folder.

  • Kevin F.

    The Novus Ordo Mass is an invalid mass and it’s protestant.

  • Kevin F.

    A SACRILEGE is committed when one fails to treat the sacred with proper reverence.

    1) Ordinary (venial sin or mortal sin) sacrilege is committed when one fails to show proper reverence to Christ’s Holy Gifts–the Mass and Sacraments.

    2) Gross sacrilege and rank disobedience to Christ and to His Church are committed when one deliberately uses an ILLICIT MASS or SACRAMENTAL RITUAL. Obviously the use of any Mass liturgy other than the canonized one is GROSSLY ILLICIT, and thus sacrilegious since the Church is always and everywhere the same. Once the Church clearly speaks bindingly for all times (as in Quo Primum)–so is it bound for ALL times.

    3) Gross sacrilege is committed WHEN A PRIEST CONSCIOUSLY AND DELIBERATELY SAYS OR CELEBRATES AN INVALID MASS or WHEN ONE KNOWINGLY “CONFECTS” or RECEIVES AN INVALID SACRAMENT. Because only a priest can celebrate a valid Mass, gross sacrilege is also committed when A LAYMAN DISSIMULATES CELEBRATING MASS (i.e., when he contends and pretends he celebrates mass and “confects” the Eucharist).

    4) Gross sacrilege is committed (objectively, at least) when any sacramental ritual intends, contains and expresses another religion.

    5) Gross sacrilege is committed when a validly consecrated Eucharist is treated contemptuously or blasphemed, e.g., in satanic masses or when one receives the Holy Eucharist to throw away or to desecrate in some other way.

    “Effim” means “effectively and/or implicitly. For example, we can now state that the Novus Ordo Eucharistic service EFFIM-TEACHES heresy, since about three-fourths of its attendants REJECT the BINDING Catholic definition of the Holy Eucharist. To effim-teach such heresy is sacrilegious.

    (SACRAMENTS SACRILEGED A THEOLOGICAL TRACT by MAETA)

    “Eucharist” means different things. It is thanksgiving. It is “grace doing.” It is Christ. It is the Mass ritual. (THE MYSTERY OF FAITH by Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L)

    Also, we can now safely state that baptismal sacramental preparation programs and rituals (as usually employed in the USA) effim-contain and effim-teach heresy or (at least) that which is fiducially dangerous. Such programs and rituals are rendered sacrilegious by what they effim-contain and effim-teach. (SACRAMENTS SACRILEGED A THEOLOGICAL TRACT by MAETA)

MENU