SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : General Topics : Are all Catholics going to hell?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next Page )
PosterThread
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Mike and Keith
Thanks for the update on the Catholic anemthemas. I've not studied Catholicism for many years now, and what I wrote were off facts lurking in the corners of my mind!

Do you know how they cope with the concept of the Church. Do they still mean by that title the Roman Catholic insititution? What do they do with Augustine's concepts that there is no salvation without baptism and that baptism secures entrance into the Church? What will they have done with Papal Bulls against Lutheransim?

BTW I think the reformers generally distinguished between the Pope as the current holder of that position and the Pope as the continuing head of a system. In that sense they branded the Papacy as anti-Christ, rather than a particular holder of the office.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/1/2 9:10Profile
crsschk
Member



Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 9192
Santa Clara, CA

 Re:

adonaisarmy:

Quote:
But if you call yourself something do you not reprensent what it is you call yourself. So If you call yourself a catholic, you represent all that catholicism is do you not?


Depends, if you know what the establishment holds to as opposed to what is being feed to the congregation.

Have very little recall of what was learned in those years of going to church Sunday after Sunday. Catechism classes. By that I mean by means of doctrine. But I did learn from just general exposure good morals at home, discipline, how much my mom hated lying and stealing and the sting of a spanking, outmoded concepts in our day.

I learned much more from my fathers conduct than the words he uttered and more so later as I grew up and reflect back. Patience. My dad sacrificed much for us, worked hard all his life and never asked for anything in return. We held to much of the Church traditions of lent and advent prior to Christmas, which was always very special in our home (previously mentioned in another thread).
[Mention here that this is still not 'doctrine'.]

Something that has stayed with me even in recent times was how my Dad never forced us to go along with some of the other 'special days' for lack of a better word. Can't recall what they were for, but mid week services and the odd days my father always attended alone. That left an impression on me, not for whatever they were about, but that he felt they were important enough to him while not begrudgingly or forcing us to attend. Looking back I wish I had gone with him for no other reason than he's my Dad.

Only point these things out because for many and sadly what is followed and what is adhered to is not always known. It's rather easy to get caught up in things whether it be Word of Faith teaching or the absurdity of say transubstantiation unaware.
And usually it's the voices against that can bring a shocking revelation as it was in my case.
As was mentioned prior, it often does depend on how you go about it.

So, yes indeed I believe doctrine is of utmost importance and in no way would defend anything that contradicts God's word. But I also think that the finger needs to be pointed in the right direction. The 'teachers', 'priests', 'prophets',
whatever title they like to go by, those who are leading the sheep astray and usually they are the ones that get most of our venom around here, for what they teach.

To reiterate something alongside these earlier comments. After living a prodigal lifestyle for many years and tired of running from the Hound of Heaven... When God by His grace arrested my attention and I cried out in repentance in the disgusting pit I had made of my life... When I was relating back to my mom how all the incredible leadings brought me back to the Lord, certain people over the years who had witnessed to me, Christians that convicted me even without words, all the strange and various ways the Lord used to draw me to Himself... The one thing that to this day still humbles me to no end was my mom's response;

"You know, don't forget, you have a mother who has been praying for you."

She could care less if I came back to the "Catholic" church, just that I came back to God.


_________________
Mike Balog

 2005/1/2 11:16Profile
Agent001
Member



Joined: 2003/9/30
Posts: 386
Toronto, Ontario, Canada

 Re:

Roman Catholicism is difficult to evaluate because:

1. Its official position on many doctrines were substantially re-worked at Vatican II Council. In many ways, its traditional doctrinal formulations had been [i]moderated.[/i]

2. Many members of the Roman Catholic Church do not adhere to its professed teachings. There are the traditional ones who reject Vatican II. There are charismatic Catholics and evangelical Catholics. There are also those apart from professing to be Catholic, knows nothing about God and faith; they are mere church-goers.

I am not so much concerned about the [i][b]label[/b][/i]. What matters is whether a person has a personal relationship with Christ.

On another note, I observe that in Canada, some of the Roman Catholic Churches simply use the abbreviated sign [b][i]RC[/i][/b], e.g. St. Jerome RC Church. I wonder if there is some theological justification or ecumenical motivation behind this.


_________________
Sam

 2005/1/4 11:00Profile
couch
Member



Joined: 2003/10/29
Posts: 62
College Station, TX

 Re: Are all Catholics going to hell?

Just a side note for this discussion...

An excellent sermon on Catholocism is:

We Must Tell Catholics the Truth by Mike Gendron

It is the most precise, easy-to understand but thoroughly informational and practical explanation of how the Bible differs from Catholic doctrine.

Although I wouldn't agree with Mike on all points of doctrine, he has a true heart for the Lord and, being a former catholic priest, has an incredible heart and mind to reach Catholics with the true gospel of Christ.

http://www.myfaith.com/Proclaiming-T-G-M-AUDIOS.htm


_________________
Ryan Couch

 2005/1/4 12:44Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Hi Sam
Does the Roman Catholic church still hold to the Athanasian Creed? with its opening lines...
[b]WHOEVER wishes to be saved must, above all, keep the Catholic faith.
For unless a person keeps this faith whole and entire, he will undoubtedly be lost forever.

[/b]And its closing clauses…[b]
This is the catholic faith. Everyone must believe it, firmly and steadfastly; otherwise He cannot be saved. Amen.
[/b]
It is a glorious statement of the mystery of the Godhead, but does the Catholic church still claim that we must believe every clause in order to be saved?

BTW this page of creeds is a fascinating read!


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/1/4 13:21Profile
KeithLaMothe
Member



Joined: 2004/3/28
Posts: 354


 Re:

Re: the Athanasian Creed; the word "catholic" simply meant "universal" (as in the Apostle's Creed) before it meant "Roman Catholic", and I suspect that RCs who want to be inclusive interpret it the first way and RCs who want to be exclusive interpret it the second.

Or was the word "Catholic" already set in its meaning by that time? 4th century, right?

There's a pamphlet called "Scriptural Truth for Roman Catholics" ( http://la.znet.com/~bart/s_truths.htm ) that, among other things, lists of some of the developments of RC doctrine, I thought some of you might find it interesting, and perhaps some would know whether it is accurate:

1. 2nd c. Presbyters first called priests by Lucian
2. 3rd c.Sacerdotal mass instituted by Cyprian
3. A.D. 300 Prayers for the dead
4. A.D. 300 Making the sign of the cross
5. A.D. 320 Wax candles
6. A.D. 375 Veneration of angels, dead saints, and images
7. A.D. 394 Mass became a daily ritual
8. A.D. 431 Beginning of exaltation of Mary, term "Mother of God" first applied to her by Council of Ephesus
9. A.D. 500 Priests began to wear special clothing
10. A.D. 526 Extreme Unction (Rite of Healing)
11. A.D. 593 The doctrine of Purgatory by Gregory I
12. A.D. 600 Latin used in worship
13. A.D. 600 Prayers offered to Mary, dead saints and angels
14. A.D. 610 First man to be proclaimed Pope (Boniface III)
15. A.D. 709 Kissing the Pope's feet
16. A.D. 750 Temporal power of Popes, conferred by Pepon, King of the Franks
17. A.D. 786 Veneration of cross, images, relics authorized
18. A.D. 850 holy water, mixed with pinch of salt, chrism, and blessed by a priest
19. A.D. 890 Veneration of St. Joseph
20. A.D. 927 College of Cardinals begun
21. A.D. 965 Baptism of bells instituted by Pope John XIII
22. A.D. 995 Canonization of dead saints by Pope John XV
23. A.D. 998 Fasting on Fridays and Lent
24. 11th c. The Mass developed gradually as a sacrifice, attendance made obligatory
25. A.D. 1079 Celibacy of priests declared
26. A.D. 1090 Rosary adopted (pagan) by Peter the Hermit
27. A.D. 1184 The Inquisition instituted by Council of Verona
28. A.D. 1190 Sale of indulgences
29. 12th c. Seven Sacraments, defined by Peter Lombard
30. A.D. 1215 Transubstantiation, defined by Innocent III
31. A.D. 1215 Auricular confession (Rite of reconciliation) of sins to a priest instead of God, instituted by Innocent III
32. A.D. 1220 Adoration of the wafer (called the Host), decreed by Pope Honorius III
33. A.D. 1251 Scapular invented by Simon Stock of England
34. A.D. 1414 The cup forbidden to the laity at communion by Council of Constance
35. A.D. 1439 Purgatory proclaimed as a dogma by the Council of Florence in
36. A.D. 1545 Tradition declared of equal authority with the Bible by the Council of Trent
37. A.D. 1546 Apocryphal books are added to the Bible by the Council of Trent
38. A.D. 1560 Creed of Pope Pius IV imposed as the official creed in place of the original Apostolic Creed
39. A.D. 1854 Immaculate Conception of Mary (not virgin birth) proclaimed by Pope Pius IX
40. A.D. 1864 Syllabus of Errors proclaimed by Pope Pius IX and ratified by the Vatican Council; condemned freedom of religion, conscience, speech, press and scientific discoveries which are disapproved by the Roman Church; asserted the Pope's temporal authority over all civil rulers
41. A.D. 1870 Infallibility of the Pope in matters of faith and morals proclaimed by the Vatican Council
42. A.D. 1950 Assumption of Mary proclaimed by Pius XII
43. A.D. 1965 Mary proclaimed the "Mother of the Church" by Pope Paul VI

 2005/1/4 17:17Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Hi Keith

Quote:
Re: the Athanasian Creed; the word "catholic" simply meant "universal" (as in the Apostle's Creed) before it meant "Roman Catholic", and I suspect that RCs who want to be inclusive interpret it the first way and RCs who want to be exclusive interpret it the second.

I'm not sure that this is true. If you read the article I hyperlinked in the last post you will see that the Athanasian Creed may be several hundred years younger than it is claimed, and was apparently unknown in the Eastern Church for some centuries.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/1/5 3:37Profile
KeithLaMothe
Member



Joined: 2004/3/28
Posts: 354


 Re:

I had not checked the link, but I just did. Interesting that it's in doubt whether Athanasius was even alive when it was written.

Any ideas on the history of the term "catholic" during the possible eras in which the creed could have been written?

If it did definately mean "Roman Catholic", I suppose the damnatory clauses could be interpreted as condemning only those who deny anything affirmed in that particular creed.

As for the content of the creed, I was a bit surprised at some of the wording, considering that some Reformed churches subscribe to it. The words, if spoken today, would be considered more than a little sketchy on "Justification by Faith" (I'm thinking the second to last passage in the creed), but I do see how it fits just fine with that and that the author(s) simply had other doctrinal concerns to worry about at the time.

 2005/1/5 4:56Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

'catholic' is a legitimate adjective and still used in the kind of sentence that says 'his taste in music is catholic'. It simple means 'universal' hence the name of the leading RC newspaper.

Evangelical anglicans were very conscious that they were part of the 'universal' or 'catholic' church, although occasionally their proofs were peculiar; apostolic succession, by the unbroken chain of laying on of hands from Peter through to the present day, is part of this.

Modern catholic ecumenic comments often refer to 'justification by faith in baptism'!! My reading of the last Vatican councils indicate that as they hold to baptismal regeneration this is really the entry point of Christians into the 'catholic church'. Consequently all who have received trinitarian baptism are part of the 'catholic church'.

Quote:
[i]Keith writes:[/i] If it did definately mean "Roman Catholic", I suppose the damnatory clauses could be interpreted as condemning only those who deny anything affirmed in that particular creed.

The phrase 'catholic church' is definitely in earlier creeds (the Apostles’([i]I believe in the Holy Spirit, [u]the holy catholic church[/u],[/i]) and Nicene ([i]We believe in [u]one holy catholic and apostolic Church[/u].[/i]), but the Roman Catholic church has taken the high ground of saying the 'Roman' Catholic church is the true inheritor of the 'catholic' church and has taken over that role and title. (a little like Judah taking over the promises to Israel) Even in their conciliatory ecumenical mode they refer to the ‘other churches’ as separated. They always start from the assumption that reunification means ‘coming home to Rome’.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/1/5 5:21Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

I don't know if anyone has mentioned Evangelicals & Catholics Together: This group are seeking to mend the bridges, if they can be mended. But even in their attempts they acknowledge fundamental problems in understanding.

[i]Among points of difference in doctrine, worship, practice, and piety that are frequently thought to divide us are these:

The church as an integral part of the Gospel or the church as a communal consequence of the Gospel.
The church as visible communion or invisible fellowship of true believers.
The sole authority of Scripture (sola scriptura) or Scripture as authoritatively interpreted in the church.
The "soul freedom" of the individual Christian or the Magisterium (teaching authority) of the community.
The church as local congregation or universal communion.
Ministry ordered in apostolic succession or the priesthood of all believers.
Sacraments and ordinances as symbols of grace or means of grace.
The Lord's Supper as eucharistic sacrifice or memorial meal.
Remembrance of Mary and the saints or devotion to Mary and the saints.
Baptism as sacrament of regeneration or testimony to regeneration.
This account of differences is by no means complete. Nor is the disparity between positions always so sharp as to warrant the "or" in the above formulations. Moreover, among those recognized as Evangelical Protestants there are significant differences between, for example, Baptists, Pentecostals, and Calvinists on these questions.[/i]

Many are acutely uncomfortable at this move which includes Chuck Colson, Bill Bright, and Jim Packer.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/1/5 5:49Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy