/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

Do not become catholic. Catholics teach a false gospel.

You're right to be questioning anglicanism, but to become catholic would be to jump out of the pan and into the fire.

Start with the basics: do you know the gospel? What does the Bible say?

>>784835

As an Anglican myself, I would say that if you've just come back, you should stay Anglican until you've really thought it over. Only the devil would insinuate that the best course is taken in haste

>>784835

Also read shit, and consider that the Catholics might not be wrong, since so far they are the only Christian denom with the right number of books in their Bible.

>>784835

>good and faithful protesters

Romans 13.

do keep in mind culpability. i'm a convert from a protester family and was only ever taught the Church was a boogeyman. there were righteous men before the Law.

>papal infallibility

what doctrines ex cathedra do you disagree with?

>priests forgive sins

Matthew 18:18. Jesus Christ has the power to forgive sins and has given that power to his disciples.

>why Catholicism?

why the west over the east? i was initially set to join the western Church, considering the east for a time. nothing the east said or did convinced me to change track.

>>784877

Are you alleging that Romans 13 is speaking of your church as an institution, not government?

Is it your position that apostates from the RCC should be killed like in Islam?

>>784880

>Are you alleging that Romans 13 is speaking of your church as an institution, not government?

just poking fun at the name protestants gave themselves.

>Is it your position that apostates from the RCC should be killed like in Islam?

Exodus 20:13.

>>784896

So you're just shitposting huh

>>784899

names are important.

>>784835

>even if one lives a life of piety and goodness in faith outside the Catholic Church, I will go to hell.

Isn't the only unforgivable sin to blaspheme the Holy Spirit?

>>785024

It's not true even by the Catechism's standards. But trads unironically think they have the real faith and that the Catechism is false. So the pool of people actually going to heaven doesn't even include the Vatican anymore and hundreds of millions of Catholics.

>>784835

You're correct to question both Catholicism and Protestantism:

http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/prot_rc_heresy.aspx

http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/inq_anglican.aspx

http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/inq_rc.aspx

>>785024

Protestants do sin against the Holy spirit

>>785025

You don't even know what the catechism is. How do you think you can pass judgement on the Catholic Church if you don't know anything about it?

>I realise that this is quite a serious issue, as most catholics I have encountered have told me that even if one lives a life of piety and goodness in faith outside the Catholic Church, I will go to hell.

You wouldn't be able to go to heaven (ie. See the Beautific Vision and have supernatural happiness) but if you were pious and had a contrite heart for you sins, out of God's mercy, you may be sent to Limbo where the fullness of Natural happiness is.

>I question the doctrine of papal infallabilty, due to the corruptible nature of man.

The Pope is not always Infallible but very rarely under certain conditions the Holy Ghost speaks through him. The last time this happened was in the 50's. Remember that the Bible is Infallible and it was written by men who had the same corruptible nature.

>I question the perceived ability of priests to forgive sins

John 20:23

[23]Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them: and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.

>I struggle to believe that anyone bar the Lord has the power to forgive sins.

This is true. Only the Lord can forgive sins but he acts through the ministry of his priests. The Priests are the Lord's ministers and forgive sins on behalf of God

>I also struggle to believe in the notion of ‘no salvation outside the one church’, as the idea of good and faithful Protestants going to hell, including my own family, seems unpalatable and unacceptable.

The Beautific Vision (heaven) is a free privilege God gives and not a right. We lost that privilege at Adam's sin but God, through his Divine mercy, died on the cross for us so although we absolutely don't deserve it, some of us may regain this privilege. Even Catholics don't deserve this privilege, God isn't obligated to give it to anyone.

But, that doesn't mean you are forced to suffer punishment in hell if you aren't Catholic. Limbo is a place of natural happiness (unlike the supernatural happiness of Heaven) without the Beautific Vision of heaven nor the punishment of hell

>I have encountered have told me that even if one lives a life of piety and goodness in faith outside the Catholic Church, I will go to hell

>I also struggle to believe in the notion of ‘no salvation outside the one church

Not necessarily. The current understanding of no salvation outside of the Church is that the Church may include all faithful Christians. However, if you ever come to know for a fact that the Catholic Church is the correct Church, and you choose not to convert, that could land you in Hell. Otherwise you may be able become Catholic in Purgatory, but Purgatory is an extremely unpleasant place that you really want to minimize your time in. In short, it may be possible for non-Catholics to be saved, but it's better to just convert.

>I question the doctrine of papal infallabilty, due to the corruptible nature of man.

If your understanding of Papal infallibility is "the Pope is always right no matter what" then you're very right to question it. However, that's not how Papal infallibility works. The Pope has the ability to give an infallible statement, but most Popes never use this power, and it can only be invoked under certain circumstances.

>I question the perceived ability of priests to forgive sins, as I struggle to believe that anyone bar the Lord has the power to forgive sins.

In a manner of speaking, you're right, the power to forgive sins can only come from God. But in Matthew 18:18, Christ shared this ability with His Apostles. Tradition tells us that the Apostles appointed successors who are called bishops, and the bishops appointed assistants who are called priests. That the Apostles were allowed to appoint successors is verified in Scripture, when they appointed Matthias to succeed Judas; as is the doctrine that they could appoint assistants, when they appointed the Seven to minister to Jeureusalem while they focused on farther lands. The authority of a priest to forgive sins has its origins in the words of Jesus Christ Himself.

>>785340

>However, if you ever come to know for a fact that the Catholic Church is the correct Church, and you choose not to convert, that could land you in Hell.

I don't know how anyone actually knows that for a fact. I've come to the conclusion that any true Christian mourns the Great Schism. And can't honestly say there is any true Church reflected on earth right now. It's the great ecclesiastical issue to end all ecclesiastical issues. Those of us on either the Orthodox or Catholic end should mourn and see what it is that is missing in each of our churches. Like a missing limb, so to speak. It should always be in our consciousness.

Sure, one can be an amputee and live a dignified life, but only a fool pretends the limb is still there or that nothing is wrong. There is always an awareness of it for any sane person.

I'm not going to tell anyone what that "limb" is exactly, but we all should be able to figure it out.

Where does this leave Protestants? I think they're the bastard children as a result of this schism. They are what the world has to be inflicted with because of the Schism…along with Islam probably. Their indifference (and sometimes hostility) to St. Mary proves it. Only a united Church can put an end to it.

>>785466

Well, that's just it. I think Orthodox need the structure too. And any Orthodox bragging about the disorganized nature of our churches is being silly.. as if that's a virtue or something. It stinks.

I won't tell Catholics what their lacking. They should be able to figure it out. But God has made it so simple that our very names have given it away.

>>785286

>Protestants do sin against the Holy spirit

Why do you believe so?

>>785523

They deny the works of the Holy Spirit just like the Pharisees did.

>>784835

The Catholic Church, with Catholic meaning "universal", attempts to unite all Christians under one unchanging doctrine so that said Christians wouldn't become divided from personal, biased views of achieving the Beatific Vision. The belief of one Catholic Christian will pretty much be aligned with the belief of another Catholic Christian whereas the beliefs of two Protestant Christians would be so wildly different it would be almost as if they were worshipping two different gods.

The key to Heaven should, ultimately, be spoken in universal code so that "all peoples, nations, and languages should serve HIM" (Daniel 7:14).

>>785731

That seems even removed from original Protestant teaching (i.e. Calvin). They at least teach Sanctification. The "Pure" in the Puritan meme. The "Piety" in the Pietest meme. No?

>>785731

You deny the fact that priests can absolve sin on behalf of the father by the power of the Holy Spirit. Just like how the Pharisees thought Jesus was healing people by the power of satan

>>785742

Then why did Christ give His authorities charge to hear confessions?

>That's the whole point of the veil of the temple tearing when Jesus died on the cross, when He said "it is finished".

It is not, we never hear of the Apostles discharged of the authority nor the mission to hear and forgive the sins of the people. If it was, then Scripture, the Apostles, or Christ Himself would have said it.

>>785742

So what you're saying is that the OT jews couldn't pray? LOL

>>785742

If that's the case, how do you explain Jesus giving his Apostles the right to bind and loose and forgive sins? "If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld.” - John 20:23

Even by Paul's standards (not one of the 12), he still held to this and recommended a man be excommunicated and "given up to Satan for the destruction of the flesh". Not an outsider, but a man in the church. And through Christ and his apostolic authority, he gave his own instruction for the whole church to turn against him. "When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh" (1 Cor 5:5).

The Church is hardly some informal belief system of random individuals left to their own freedom of conscience. This is Americanism and liberalism.

>>785744

>then why Christ give His Apostles the authority and charge to hear confessions

*

>>785749

>Jesus wouldn't give them authority higher than His own

now you're going into extra-biblical exegesis, the authority to hear confessions progresses from Christ and His authority, and we know very well that anyone who rejects His Apostles rejects Him.

>He holds the ultimate authority, and we can ask Him for forgiveness because He hears our prayers.

And Christ, in His ultimate authority, gave it to His Apostles, and gave them the sole charge to hear and forgive the sins of the people. The only other extra-apostolic forgiveness of sins comes through to us in a valid baptism.

Fast forward 500 years after the Reformation and you get Tupac singing "Only God can judge me."

That's the result of all of this. You guys made the church impotent in people's lives. Good job (not).

>>785744

>Then why did Christ give His authorities charge to hear confessions?

Read Matthew 18:15-17 and Matthew 18:19-20. It's about church discipline and the leadership having the right to make the final decision about the church's stance with regards to a person. Matthew 18:18 objectively has nothing to do with confessions.

Meanwhile, 1 John 1:9 says "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."

So the verse to go to for confessions is 1 John 1:9. Also James 5:16 says confess your faults one to another. Not the same as sins. 1 John 1:9 handles confessing sins, it is to be done to the Jesus Christ the Son.

>>785745

>So what you're saying is that the OT jews couldn't pray? LOL

I thought we were talking about confessions and forgiveness of sins. In the OT they had to offer burnt sacrifices by the levitical priest. In the NT we go through Jesus Christ the high priest after the order of Melchisedec.

Again, Matthew 18:18 has nothing to do with confessions (there is no mention of it) or with God forgiving sins. It has to do with whether the church body will forgive something or not. And like it says in Matthew 18:21-22,

Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?

Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.

>>785746

>how do you explain Jesus giving his Apostles the right to bind and loose and forgive sins?

It's church discipline exactly as we've explained about Matthew 18:18.

>he gave his own instruction for the whole church to turn against him.

He also said "them that are without God judgeth" in 1 Corinthians 5:13. Again, dealing with church discipline, not about confession or about God forgiving sins. There is no mention of that. 1 John 1:9 does mention confession however.

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

>>785752

>The only other extra-apostolic forgiveness of sins comes through to us in a valid baptism.

Now you are even denying 1 John 1:9 which I just quoted above. We absolutely have the right to confess our sins to Jesus Christ the Son and he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins.

>>785765

The Apostles and their successors ARE the Church leadership. And this Church has always maintained the sacrament of confession, even the after the Schism.

>1 John 1:9 says "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."

and to whom do we confess our sins too? this self-same Apostle was given the mission to hear and forgive sins, you cannot find me anywhere in scripture where this charge was dissolved.

>1 John 1:9 handles confessing sins, it is to be done to the Jesus Christ the Son

Jesus Christ, true man and true God, who gave the authority to hear and forgive sins to His Apostles and their successors.

You have not proved your point at all.

>Now you are even denying 1 John 1:9 which I just quoted above.

1 John 1:9 does not address the your interpretation of the sacrament of confession ever being absolved, but rather, all confession must be done through the authority of Jesus Christ.

Hello! Which He gave to His Apostles! He breathed the Holy Spirit upon them, what was that? Just for fun? They even got visited a second time after Christ was assumed into Heaven!