Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Radio Replies Volume One: Protestantism Erroneous
icatholicism.net ^ | 1938 | Fathers Rumble & Carty

Posted on 05/21/2009 9:02:04 PM PDT by GonzoII

Protestantism Erroneous

244. Do you say that the Protestant faith is false?

There is no such thing as the Protestant faith. There are hundreds of varieties of Protestantism, each variety containing some true things mixed up with its own particular errors.   As religious systems I say that all Protestant sects are wrong.


245.    How does Protestantism in general disobey Christ?

In general it says 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. But I could go on almost forever. Meantime, 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.


246.    Would you call Protestants heathens?


Christ said, "If a man will not hear the Church, let him be as the heathen." Matt. XVIII, 17. He referred, of course, to a deliberate and willful refusal of a known obligation. If a man knows that the Catholic Church is the true Church, yet refuses to obey it, he will certainly be as the heathen before God. But Protestants who are ignorant of the truth of the Catholic claims, and who believe in Christ, trying to serve Him as best they can, would not be regarded as heathens. An exception is made in their case because of their lack of knowledge and because of their good dispositions.


247.    Protestantism is not a protest against Christ, but against the Roman Church.


Christ promised that His Church would not fail. The Protestant Reformers said that it did fail. Instead of protesting merely against the bad lives of some Catholics, and even of some Priests, they went too far, and protested against the Church as such, asserting that Christ had failed to keep His promise concerning it. This was a protest against Christ, who had promised to be with His Church till the end of the world. Protest as much as you like against individual abuses in the Church, but no man has the right to set up a new Church.


248.    But a re-formed Church is not a new Church.

Protestantism was not a true reformation of the Church. The identity of the Church is indissolubly linked with a continuous identity of doctrine, worship, and discipline. The so-called Reformation involved the abolition of essential doctrines, worship, and discipline, substituting completely different and humanly invented alternatives.


249.    The Protestant Churches have as much right to say they have the truth as the Churches of the Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians, etc., in early times.

You are supposing that the Protestant Churches have the same doctrine, worship, and discipline as those early Churches. But this is an unwarranted supposition. Those early branch foundations of the one true Church had the true doctrine, and were in communion with St. Peter, Bishop of Rome, who addressed his first Epistle to the Galatians and several other Churches. Protestant Churches do not hold the same doctrine as those early Churches, nor do they acknowledge the same obedience. Also, in all the countries where Protestant Churches exist, there exists also the Catholic Church which corresponds exactly with the Churches of the Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians, etc.


250.    According to you, Christ was a Catholic. All followers of Christ, therefore, belong to the Catholic Church.


Christ, as the Founder of the Catholic Church, was of course a Catholic. But your conclusion does not follow. Many profess to believe in Christ, but do not accept the whole of His teaching. They are mistaken. Certainly the Anglican does not believe in the correct doctrines of Christ if the Baptist does. The Catholic Church alone teaches the complete doctrine of Christ, and the only way to become a Catholic is to submit to her teaching authority and disciplinary directions.


251.    Since Christ forbade divisions in the Church, you must admit that every Christian Church is a branch of the true Church. The Protestant Churches are but offshoots from the Roman Catholic Church.


The Protestant sects constitute a breakaway from the Catholic Church. That is their condemnation, for there could never have been a valid reason for leaving the Church established and guaranteed by Christ. In any case, branches of the Church must be living branches still retaining their union with the parent tree. The Catholic Church as established in England, or in America, or in Australia, fits in with the idea of living branches. But at best, the Protestant sects are branches sawn off, and without the true life of the tree. Protestant Churches are divisions from the Church, not co-ordinated parts within the Church, and making up one complete body.

252.    You have no right to deny our claims.   Christ meant Protestantism to be, or it would not exist,

On the same reasoning you would argue that because sin exists Christ meant it to be! Christ predicted that heresies would arise, but distinctly forbade men to abandon the Church and originate them.


253.    God sends all for our good, and it is our fault if we do not make good use of Protestantism.


Not everything is sent by God. He permits some things which the perverse will of men causes, and He permitted the evil of heresy. However, He never permits any evil without drawing some good from it. There are many good Protestants despite the sin of those who began Protestantism. And it is undeniable that Protestantism occasioned the reform of many abuses among the members of the Catholic Church.


254.    What right has the Catholic Church to arrogate to herself powers given by Christ, rather than any other body of believers?


None whatever. No body of believers has any right to arrogate to itself any powers at all in this matter, just as no ordinary citizen has the right to enter a court and declare himself to be judge. Yet a lawfully appointed judge has the right to act in virtue of his commission. The Catholic Church takes nothing upon herself, but she does endeavor to fulfill the commission given her by Christ. Historically she alone can possibly inherit the jurisdiction given by Christ to the Apostles, and handed down through tiie ages. All other churches exist because men arrogated to themselves the right to coin new doctrines and set up churches of their own.
 

255.    We have the Creeds, Saints' Days, Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy Communion.   These things guarantee that we are true Christians.


Some Protestants have those things, at least theoretically. Others have some of them. Others have none of them. But in any case they would not prove Protestants to be true Christians. At most they prove that some Protestants are attempting to do some Christian things. But a true Christian accepts the complete teaching of Christ, and does all that He commands. And all is accepted on the authority of Christ, not on the authority of one's own human judgment. A self-made religion built upon a personally approved selection from the teaching of Christ does not give us the Christian religion.


256.    Anyway, there are Protestants as good as Catholics, and the Protestant Church is as good as the Catholic Church.

The idea that there are Protestants as good as Catholics has no bearing on the question. There are very good and sincere Mahometans, but that does not make Mahometanism true. And again, there is not a Protestant Church, there are dozens of different brands of Protestantism. Tell me which brand of Protestantism is as good as the Catholic Church, and I shall tell you when it started and who started it. Christ certainly did not begin it.


257.    Protestants at least are allowed to think for themselves.

And when they do they end in chaos, or with no religion at all! However, the chief characteristic of the majority of Protestants is absence of thinking on matters of religion.

258.    If Protestantism continues because Protestants do not think, is not the same true of Catholicism?

No. There is no really rational foundation for Protestantism, and if Protestants did reflect soundly upon the subject they would discover this. But there is a rational foundation for Catholicism. All Catholics at least know that their Church would not be so vast and united, not to speak of its mere existence, after centuries of misrepresentation, hatred, and attack, were it not for the protection of God. And if they give deeper thought to the matter they find many other solid reasons for their conviction. Impartial study leads a man out of Protestantism. It never leads a man out of Catholicism.


259.    Just the opposite is true. Catholics remain Catholics because they have never developed any reasoning powers on the subject of religion.


You show complete ignorance of Catholic theological works, written by the cleverest men of the centuries. St. Thomas Aquinas had the Catholic Faith very deeply, yet wrote probably the greatest masterpiece of religious thinking the world has ever seen.


260.    You are most ungrateful, for your own change from Protestantism to Catholicism was due to the very freedom of thinking given you by Protestantism.


You are in a quandary. Catholics remain Catholics because they do not think, yet thinking led me to become a Catholic! However, Catholics are free to think as much as they like about religion, and the more the better. The Catholic Church merely keeps them from thinking wrongly. Protestants are free to think whatever they like, apparently, with no safeguard against error at all.
 

261.   If all that you say is true, why is the British Empire Protestant?

Because the ancestors of its present members rejected and left the Catholic Church, setting up Churches of their own. But must the religion of the British Empire be the true religion? Is that the infallible test? If Anglicanism is true because it is British, we may as well add, "and because it is not French, or Spanish, or Italian, or German, or Austrian, etc." In other words, because it is not the religion for all nations established by Christ.


262.    But surely the majority of the millions of Protestants would realise their mistake, if indeed they are mistaken. They would on any other important subject.

It is not certain that men would realize their mistakes on other subjects. In political and national affairs men differ hopelessly, and absurd political policies seem ever to find followers. Yet, even granted that men would realize their mistakes in other matters, they would not therefore realize the falsity of Protestantism. In the first place, religion is very different from other matters. It is not here a question of a merely intellectual admission. The acceptance of Catholicism is a complex matter demanding adherence of mind, heart, and will, under the influence of God's grace. The absence of one or other necessary condition can mean a dimming of one's powers of comprehension. And until a man sees the truth of Catholicism, he is liable to rest more or less content with the religion he has. Again, Protestant prejudice is a real, if unrealized, force in those educated under the influence of Protestantism, a force blinding people to the defects of Protestantism, and to the merits of Catholicism. I remember a man who went through many forms of Protestantism, ending in Agnosticism, and who replied to my question as to whether he had ever studied Catholicism, "No. But Catholicism can't be right!" Protestantism had ceased to grip him positively, yet still left the negative poison in his system, "Rome must be wrong—I would not even consider it." Finally, and especially with Englishmen, the Protestant religion has been so blended with nationalism that it has become a matter of sentiment and patriotism. Its adherents go far more by feeling and emotion than by reason and true faith. Indeed it has been said strongly, yet not without a degree of truth, that when an Englishman enters his Church, he leaves his brains on the doormat. In other words, the average Protestant gives little real thought to his religious position at all.


263.    That Protestantism commends itself more to men is evident from the fact that it is not attacked as is Catholicism.

The world is not afraid of Protestantism, which has always been ready to water down Christian obligations to suit it. But instinctively the world hates and fears the Catholic Church, which will make no compromise, but insists upon the fullness of Christian doctrine, comfortable or uncomfortable. She insists upon the intellectual obedience of faith; disciplinary submission of the will; the impossibility of divorce and re-marriage; the iniquity of birth-control by evil means; the inadequacy of a merely secular education. Her repetition of Christ's axiom, "Deny thyself; take up thy cross; and follow Me," interferes too much with the comfort of men. If Christianity demanded merely the admission of a few religious doctrines, men would not object to it. But since it imposes moral obligations difficult for human nature, I am not surprised that men refuse it in its original and austere form when they are offered a less exacting substitute with the assurance that it is just as good.


264.    Are not the Protestant Churches at least working for reunion?


Not for reunion with the Catholic Church. Meantime, if they were to unite among themselves, the union would not last a generation.   As long as men refuse to submit to the Catholic Church, they will insist upon the right to think for themselves and build up systems accordingly. If Protestantism grants the right of private judgment, it may secure the cry, "Good. I think Catholicism wrong." But it must be prepared to hear the words, "And I think Protestantism wrong also." Already-established Protestantism can say nothing, and the man sets up for himself. So it will go on. The Catholic Church alone can preserve true unity. Every year finds Protestantism splitting up into still further sects, and in the end it will fall, as must every house divided against itself.

Copyright © 2005-2006 iCatholicism.net. All Rights Reserved.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Theology
KEYWORDS: radiorepliesvolone

Rev. Dr. Leslie Rumble, M.S.C.

"I was brought up as a Protestant, probably with more inherited prejudices than most non-Catholics of these days.  My parents were Anglican and taught me the Angelican faith. My 'broad-minded' protestant teachers taught me to dislike the Catholic Church intensely. I later tried Protestantism in various other forms, and it is some thirty years since, in God's providence, I became a Catholic. As for the 'open, free, sincere worship' of a Protestant Church, I tasted it, but for me it proved in the end to be not only open, but empty; it was altogether too free from God's prescriptions."

Eventually, Leslie became a priest of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart.

In 1928, Fr. Rumble began a one-hour 'Question Box' program on 2SM Sydney, N.S.W. radio on Sunday evenings that was heard all over Australia and New Zealand. For five years he answered questions on every subject imaginable that had been written to him from all over that part of the globe. His first show began with a classic introduction:

"Good evening, listeners all. For some time I have been promising to give a session dealing with questions of religion and morality, in which the listeners themselves should decide what is of interest to them. Such a session will commence next Sunday evening, and I invite you to send in any questions you wish on these subjects . . . So now I invite you, non-Catholics above all, to send in any questions you wish on religion, or morality, or the Catholic Church, and I shall explain exactly the Catholic position, and give the reasons for it. In fact I almost demand those questions. Many hard things have been said, and are still being said, about the Catholic Church, though no criminal, has been so abused, that she has a right to be heard. I do not ask that you give your name and address. A nom de plume will do. Call yourself Voltaire, Confucius, X.Y.Z., what you like, so long as you give indication enough to recognize your answer."

"By the summer of 1937, the first edition of Radio Replies was already in print in Australia, financed by Rt. Rev. Monsignor James Meany, P.P. - the director of Station 2SM of whom I am greatly indebted."

"I have often been mistaken, as most men at times. And it is precisely to make sure that I will not be mistaken in the supremely important matter of religion that I cling to a Church which cannot be mistaken, but must be right where I might be wrong. God knew that so many sincere men would make mistakes that He deliberately established an infallible Church to preserve them from error where it was most important that they should not go wrong."

Rev. Charles Mortimer Carty

I broadcast my radio program, the Catholic Radio Hour,  from St. Paul, Minnesota.

I was also carrying on as a Catholic Campaigner for Christ, the Apostolate to the man in the street through the medium of my trailer and loud-speaking system. In the distribution of pamphlets and books on the Catholic Faith, Radio Replies proved the most talked of book carried in my trailer display of Catholic literature. As many of us street preachers have learned, it is not so much what you say over the microphone in answer to questions from open air listeners, but what you get into their hands to read. The questions Fr. Rumble had to answer on the other side of the planet are same the questions I had to answer before friendly and hostile audiences throughout my summer campaign."

I realized that this priest in Australia was doing exactly the same work I was doing here in St. Paul. Because of the success of his book, plus the delay in getting copies from Sydney and the prohibitive cost of the book on this side of the universe, I got in contact with him to publish a cheap American edition.  

It doesn't take long for the imagination to start thinking about how much we could actually do. We began the Radio Replies Press Society Publishing Company, finished the American edition of what was to be the first volume of Radio Replies, recieved the necessary imprimatur, and Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen agreed to write a preface. About a year after the publication of the first edition in Australia, we had the American edition out and in people's hands.

The book turned into a phenomena. Letters began pouring into my office from every corner of the United States; Protestant Publishing Houses are requesting copies for distribution to Protestant Seminaries; a few Catholic Seminaries have adopted it as an official textbook - and I had still never met Dr. Rumble in person.

To keep a long story short, we finally got a chance to meet, published volumes two and three of Radio Replies, printed a set of ten booklets on subjects people most often asked about, and a few other pamphlets on subjects of interest to us.

Fr. Carty died on May 22, 1964 in Connecticut.

"Firstly, since God is the Author of all truth, nothing that is definitely true can every really contradict anything else that is definitely true. Secondly, the Catholic Church is definitely true. It therefore follows that no objection or difficulty, whether drawn from history, Scripture, science, or philosophy, can provide a valid argument against the truth of the Catholic religion."



Biographies compiled from the introductions to Radio Replies, volumes 1, 2 and 3.

Source: www.catholicauthors.com

1 posted on 05/21/2009 9:02:04 PM PDT by GonzoII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fidelis; MHGinTN; Atomic Vomit; MI; Salvation; mel
 Radio Replies

Radio Replies Ping

FReep-mail me to get on or off

“The Radio Replies Ping-List”

ON / OFF


2 posted on 05/21/2009 9:04:29 PM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

The Radio Replies Series: Volume One

Chapter One: God

Radio Replies Volume One: God’s Existence Known by Reason
Radio Replies Volume One: Nature of God
Radio Replies Volume One: Providence of God and Problem of Evil

Chapter Two: Man

Radio Replies Volume One: Nature of Man & Existence and Nature of the Soul
Radio Replies Volume One: Immortality of the Soul
Radio Replies Volume One: Destiny of the Soul & Freewill of Man

Chapter Three: Religion

Radio Replies Volume One: Nature of Religion & Necessity of Religion

Chapter Four: The Religion of the Bible

Radio Replies Volume One: Natural Religion & Revealed Religion
Radio Replies Volume One: Mysteries of Religion
Radio Replies Volume One: Miracles
Radio Replies Volume One: Value of the Gospels
Radio Replies Volume One: Inspiration of the Gospels
Radio Replies Volume One: Old Testament Difficulties [Part 1]
Radio Replies Volume One: Old Testament Difficulties [Part 2]
Radio Replies Volume One: Old Testament Difficulties [Part 3]
Radio Replies Volume One: New Testament Difficulties

Chapter Five: The Christian Faith

Radio Replies Volume One: The Religion of the Jews
Radio Replies Volume One: Truth of Christianity
Radio Replies Volume One: Nature and Necessity of Faith

Chapter Six: A Definite Christian Faith

Radio Replies Volume One: Conflicting Churches
Radio Replies Volume One: Are All One Church?
Radio Replies Volume One: Is One Religion As Good As Another?
Radio Replies Volume One: The Fallacy of Indifference

Chapter Seven: The Failure of Protestantism

Radio Replies Volume One: Protestantism Erroneous

3 posted on 05/21/2009 9:05:51 PM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Ping


4 posted on 05/21/2009 9:10:52 PM PDT by Jack Black
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
Christ, as the Founder of the Catholic Church, was of course a Catholic.

Now you did it. There's gonna be fisticuffs over that remark!

5 posted on 05/21/2009 9:15:29 PM PDT by Alex Murphy (Presbyterians often forget that John Knox had been a Sunday bowler.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
245. How does Protestantism in general disobey Christ?

In general it says 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. But I could go on almost forever. Meantime, 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.


In general it says that Scripture is a sufficient guide to salvation, although Scripture says that it is not;
<>br> Scripture reference? Proof?

it denies the authority of the Church established by Christ;

Once again, proof? Scripture reference?

it rejects Purgatory

And again, where, anywhere in the Bible, is there proof of the existence of Purgatory?

it denies Christian teaching on marriage;

Huh? Once again, proof?

But I could go on almost forever.

So far a bunch of assertions that I do not believe can be backed-up with empirical, biblical, or even anecdotal evidence.

Can somebody please provide the evidence that is lacking here?
6 posted on 05/21/2009 9:19:44 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
247. Protestantism is not a protest against Christ, but against the Roman Church. Christ promised that His Church would not fail. The Protestant Reformers said that it did fail. Instead of protesting merely against the bad lives of some Catholics, and even of some Priests, they went too far, and protested against the Church as such, asserting that Christ had failed to keep His promise concerning it. This was a protest against Christ, who had promised to be with His Church till the end of the world. Protest as much as you like against individual abuses in the Church, but no man has the right to set up a new Church.

Catholics incorrectly assume that when Christ spoke of his Church, he meant the physical organization of the church at that time.

Christ, was instead referring to those born-again in the Spirit. This has always been Christ's and his Heavenly Father's church.
7 posted on 05/21/2009 9:24:51 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

Where is mass described in the scriptures?


8 posted on 05/21/2009 9:30:45 PM PDT by SWAMPSNIPER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

The authors display an amazing lack of understanding of the Protestant movement. And they create a number of straw men that are easy to burn down...too bad they don’t correspond to reality!


9 posted on 05/21/2009 9:35:55 PM PDT by LiteKeeper (When do the impeachment proceedings begin?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
246. Would you call Protestants heathens? Christ said, "If a man will not hear the Church, let him be as the heathen." Matt. XVIII, 17. He referred, of course, to a deliberate and willful refusal of a known obligation. If a man knows that the Catholic Church is the true Church, yet refuses to obey it, he will certainly be as the heathen before God. But Protestants who are ignorant of the truth of the Catholic claims, and who believe in Christ, trying to serve Him as best they can, would not be regarded as heathens. An exception is made in their case because of their lack of knowledge and because of their good dispositions.

If a man knows that the Catholic Church is the true Church, yet refuses to obey it, he will certainly be as the heathen before God.

And that is the core of the problem. There is no proof from he bible that the Catholic Church is the infallible ever-present, ever-existing Church of God. It is an organization managed, maintained, and served by men.

Jesus came to break the bonds of the Old Testament; to give men a direct access to God through his sacrifice; not to re-implement the Old Testament through the use of a Pope, Priests, etc. He did away with the priestly system by his death on the Cross and his subsequent victory over death when he rose from the dead. There was no longer the necessity for an intercessor, Christ is that intercessor. Futhermore, he promised to send his Holy Spirit to teach us everything we needed to know.

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.


10 posted on 05/21/2009 9:37:15 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

The answer to Question 245 is correct. We deny all of those things...because they are not Scriptural!


11 posted on 05/21/2009 9:38:07 PM PDT by LiteKeeper (When do the impeachment proceedings begin?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
"Now you did it."

You must be talking about this guy!

James White loves to argue... White and his friends descend on Salt Lake City during the Mormon Church’s biannual General Conference...telling Mormons why they are going to hell.

12 posted on 05/21/2009 9:46:12 PM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
248. But a re-formed Church is not a new Church.

Protestantism was not a true reformation of the Church. The identity of the Church is indissolubly linked with a continuous identity of doctrine, worship, and discipline. The so-called Reformation involved the abolition of essential doctrines, worship, and discipline, substituting completely different and humanly invented alternatives.


The argument that the Catholic Church as with Protestantism surrounds the traditions of Men. Protestants, by and large, except the Bible as the Word of God whose sole purpose is to save the souls of men.

Is the Catholic Church's purpose any different?

Does the Catholic Church accept the Bible as the Word of God as well?

Then my question to Catholics would be why the need to besmirch Protestants?

Jesus, when his disciples came and told him about others who were preaching in his Name, but were not apart of the apostles basically told the disciples to leave them be.

Do we not seek the same goal the salvation of men by the same method, repentence and faith in Jesus Christ and his sacrifice?
13 posted on 05/21/2009 9:59:19 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Well, let’s go back to the source of “protestantism”: Martin Luther’s 95 Theses


Out of love for the truth and the desire to bring it to light, the following propositions will be discussed at Wittenberg, under the presidency of the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and of Sacred Theology, and Lecturer in Ordinary on the same at that place. Wherefore he requests that those who are unable to be present and debate orally with us, may do so by letter.

In the Name our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Poenitentiam agite, willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance.

2. This word cannot be understood to mean sacramental penance, i.e., confession and satisfaction, which is administered by the priests.

3. Yet it means not inward repentance only; nay, there is no inward repentance which does not outwardly work divers mortifications of the flesh.

4. The penalty [of sin], therefore, continues so long as hatred of self continues; for this is the true inward repentance, and continues until our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

5. The pope does not intend to remit, and cannot remit any penalties other than those which he has imposed either by his own authority or by that of the Canons.

6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring that it has been remitted by God and by assenting to God’s remission; though, to be sure, he may grant remission in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in such cases were despised, the guilt would remain entirely unforgiven.

7. God remits guilt to no one whom He does not, at the same time, humble in all things and bring into subjection to His vicar, the priest.

8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to them, nothing should be imposed on the dying.

9. Therefore the Holy Spirit in the pope is kind to us, because in his decrees he always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.

10. Ignorant and wicked are the doings of those priests who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penances for purgatory.

11. This changing of the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory is quite evidently one of the tares that were sown while the bishops slept.

12. In former times the canonical penalties were imposed not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties; they are already dead to canonical rules, and have a right to be released from them.

14. The imperfect health [of soul], that is to say, the imperfect love, of the dying brings with it, of necessity, great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater is the fear.

15. This fear and horror is sufficient of itself alone (to say nothing of other things) to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.

16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ as do despair, almost-despair, and the assurance of safety.

17. With souls in purgatory it seems necessary that horror should grow less and love increase.

18. It seems unproved, either by reason or Scripture, that they are outside the state of merit, that is to say, of increasing love.

19. Again, it seems unproved that they, or at least that all of them, are certain or assured of their own blessedness, though we may be quite certain of it.

20. Therefore by “full remission of all penalties” the pope means not actually “of all,” but only of those imposed by himself.

21. Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error, who say that by the pope’s indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved;

22. Whereas he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to the canons, they would have had to pay in this life.

23. If it is at all possible to grant to any one the remission of all penalties whatsoever, it is certain that this remission can be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to the very fewest.

24. It must needs be, therefore, that the greater part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and highsounding promise of release from penalty.

25. The power which the pope has, in a general way, over purgatory, is just like the power which any bishop or curate has, in a special way, within his own diocese or parish.

26. The pope does well when he grants remission to souls [in purgatory], not by the power of the keys (which he does not possess), but by way of intercession.

27. They preach man who say that so soon as the penny jingles into the money-box, the soul flies out [of purgatory].

28. It is certain that when the penny jingles into the money-box, gain and avarice can be increased, but the result of the intercession of the Church is in the power of God alone.

29. Who knows whether all the souls in purgatory wish to be bought out of it, as in the legend of Sts. Severinus and Paschal.

30. No one is sure that his own contrition is sincere; much less that he has attained full remission.

31. Rare as is the man that is truly penitent, so rare is also the man who truly buys indulgences, i.e., such men are most rare.

32. They will be condemned eternally, together with their teachers, who believe themselves sure of their salvation because they have letters of pardon.

33. Men must be on their guard against those who say that the pope’s pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to Him;

34. For these “graces of pardon” concern only the penalties of sacramental satisfaction, and these are appointed by man.

35. They preach no Christian doctrine who teach that contrition is not necessary in those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessionalia.

36. Every truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without letters of pardon.

37. Every true Christian, whether living or dead, has part in all the blessings of Christ and the Church; and this is granted him by God, even without letters of pardon.

38. Nevertheless, the remission and participation [in the blessings of the Church] which are granted by the pope are in no way to be despised, for they are, as I have said, the declaration of divine remission.

39. It is most difficult, even for the very keenest theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the abundance of pardons and [the need of] true contrition.

40. True contrition seeks and loves penalties, but liberal pardons only relax penalties and cause them to be hated, or at least, furnish an occasion [for hating them].

41. Apostolic pardons are to be preached with caution, lest the people may falsely think them preferable to other good works of love.

42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend the buying of pardons to be compared in any way to works of mercy.

43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better work than buying pardons;

44. Because love grows by works of love, and man becomes better; but by pardons man does not grow better, only more free from penalty.

45. 45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a man in need, and passes him by, and gives [his money] for pardons, purchases not the indulgences of the pope, but the indignation of God.

46. Christians are to be taught that unless they have more than they need, they are bound to keep back what is necessary for their own families, and by no means to squander it on pardons.

47. Christians are to be taught that the buying of pardons is a matter of free will, and not of commandment.

48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting pardons, needs, and therefore desires, their devout prayer for him more than the money they bring.

49. Christians are to be taught that the pope’s pardons are useful, if they do not put their trust in them; but altogether harmful, if through them they lose their fear of God.

50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the pardon-preachers, he would rather that St. Peter’s church should go to ashes, than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh and bones of his sheep.

51. Christians are to be taught that it would be the pope’s wish, as it is his duty, to give of his own money to very many of those from whom certain hawkers of pardons cajole money, even though the church of St. Peter might have to be sold.

52. The assurance of salvation by letters of pardon is vain, even though the commissary, nay, even though the pope himself, were to stake his soul upon it.

53. They are enemies of Christ and of the pope, who bid the Word of God be altogether silent in some Churches, in order that pardons may be preached in others.

54. Injury is done the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or a longer time is spent on pardons than on this Word.

55. It must be the intention of the pope that if pardons, which are a very small thing, are celebrated with one bell, with single processions and ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

56. The “treasures of the Church,” out of which the pope. grants indulgences, are not sufficiently named or known among the people of Christ.

57. That they are not temporal treasures is certainly evident, for many of the vendors do not pour out such treasures so easily, but only gather them.

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the Saints, for even without the pope, these always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outward man.

59. St. Lawrence said that the treasures of the Church were the Church’s poor, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.

60. Without rashness we say that the keys of the Church, given by Christ’s merit, are that treasure;

61. For it is clear that for the remission of penalties and of reserved cases, the power of the pope is of itself sufficient.

62. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last.

64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

65. Therefore the treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they formerly were wont to fish for men of riches.

66. The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish for the riches of men.

67. The indulgences which the preachers cry as the “greatest graces” are known to be truly such, in so far as they promote gain.

68. Yet they are in truth the very smallest graces compared with the grace of God and the piety of the Cross.

69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of apostolic pardons, with all reverence.

70. But still more are they bound to strain all their eyes and attend with all their ears, lest these men preach their own dreams instead of the commission of the pope.

71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed!

72. But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!

73. The pope justly thunders against those who, by any art, contrive the injury of the traffic in pardons.

74. But much more does he intend to thunder against those who use the pretext of pardons to contrive the injury of holy love and truth.

75. To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of God — this is madness.

76. We say, on the contrary, that the papal pardons are not able to remove the very least of venial sins, so far as its guilt is concerned.

77. It is said that even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could not bestow greater graces; this is blasphemy against St. Peter and against the pope.

78. We say, on the contrary, that even the present pope, and any pope at all, has greater graces at his disposal; to wit, the Gospel, powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written in I. Corinthians xii.

79. To say that the cross, emblazoned with the papal arms, which is set up [by the preachers of indulgences], is of equal worth with the Cross of Christ, is blasphemy.

80. The bishops, curates and theologians who allow such talk to be spread among the people, will have an account to render.

81. This unbridled preaching of pardons makes it no easy matter, even for learned men, to rescue the reverence due to the pope from slander, or even from the shrewd questionings of the laity.

82. To wit: — “Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial.”

83. Again: — “Why are mortuary and anniversary masses for the dead continued, and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded on their behalf, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?”

84. Again: — “What is this new piety of God and the pope, that for money they allow a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God, and do not rather, because of that pious and beloved soul’s own need, free it for pure love’s sake?”

85. Again: — “Why are the penitential canons long since in actual fact and through disuse abrogated and dead, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences, as though they were still alive and in force?”

86. Again: — “Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?”

87. Again: — “What is it that the pope remits, and what participation does he grant to those who, by perfect contrition, have a right to full remission and participation?”

88. Again: — “What greater blessing could come to the Church than if the pope were to do a hundred times a day what he now does once, and bestow on every believer these remissions and participations?”

89. “Since the pope, by his pardons, seeks the salvation of souls rather than money, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons granted heretofore, since these have equal efficacy?”

90. To repress these arguments and scruples of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the Church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christians unhappy.

91. If, therefore, pardons were preached according to the spirit and mind of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved; nay, they would not exist.

92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Peace, peace,” and there is no peace!

93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Cross, cross,” and there is no cross!

94. Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hell;

95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven rather through many tribulations, than through the assurance of peace.


14 posted on 05/21/2009 10:02:16 PM PDT by ctdonath2 (John Galt was exiled.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
"In general it says that Scripture is a sufficient guide to salvation, although Scripture says that it is not; <>br> Scripture reference? Proof?"

1Tm:3:15: "But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth., "

it denies the authority of the Church established by Christ;

"Once again, proof? Scripture reference?"

The proof is found in Protestant beliefs which are common knowledge. Also the Church established by Christ was founded in the first century the churches of Protestantism have their origin in the 16th.

Mt:16:18:"And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." -Jesus Christ, 1st cent. A.D.

it rejects Purgatory

"And again, where, anywhere in the Bible, is there proof of the existence of Purgatory?"

Mt:12:32:"And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him neither in this world, nor in the world to come."

2 Macc 12:46: "It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins. " it denies Christian teaching on marriage;

"Huh? Once again, proof?"

Once again common knowledge amongst Protestants that one can marry twice, Christ an St. Paul teach otherwise:

Scripture

Gen. 2:20-24 - we see that, from the beginning, husband and wife are joined together by God and become one body. A body cannot be dismembered and still live.

Mal. 2:16 - God says "I hate divorce." These are strong words from our Lord. Divorce and remarriage violates the sacred marital covenant between a husband and a wife that has been ordained by God.

Matt. 19:6 - Jesus makes it clear that it is God who joins the husband and wife together, according to His will. What God joins together cannot be dissolved because God's will is perfect and eternal.

Matt. 19:9; Mark 10:11-12; Luke 16:18 - Jesus says that whoever divorces and remarries another commits adultery. This is an offense against the natural law.

Rom. 7:2-3 - again, Paul reiterates Jesus' teaching that sacramental marriage followed by a divorce and remarriage is adultery. He who commits adultery destroys himself. (Prov. 6:23). Many Protestant denominations have rejected this teaching of Jesus and His Church.

1 Cor. 7:10-11 - once again, Paul gives Christ's teaching that married couples cannot divorce and remarry. This violates God's divine plan for the husband and wife.

Matt. 5:31-32 - the Lord permits divorce only for "porneia." This Greek word generally means unlawful sexual intercourse due to either blood relations (also called incest) or nonsacramental unions. The Lord does not permit divorce for "moicheia" (adultery). It is also important to note that in these cases, a marriage never existed in the first place, so the Lord is not actually permitting divorce, but a dissolution of the unlawful union.

Eph. 5:22-32 - Paul says that the sacramental union of husband and wife is the image of Christ and the Church. Just as Christ the Bridegroom and His Bride the Church are inseparable, so are a husband and wife also inseparable. A civil divorce cannot dissolve a sacramental marriage (between two baptized people).

1 Cor. 7:12-15 - these verses set forth what the Church calls the "Pauline privilege" - two unbaptized people marry, and afterwards one of the people is baptized. If the unbaptized person decides to leave the marriage, the Christian is free to remarry (because the first marriage was not sacramental, and a union between a baptized and an unbaptized person can jeopardize the baptized person's faith).

Ezra 10:1-14 - these verses support what the Church calls the "Petrine privilege" - a baptized person marries an unbaptized person. To save the baptized person’s faith from being jeopardized, the Pope may dissolve such a marriage pursuant to his binding and loosing authority.

Rev. 19:9 - the marital union of man and woman reflect Christ's union with the Church at the heavenly marriage supper. Just as Christ and the Church have become one flesh through the Eucharist and the union brings forth spiritual life for God's children, a man and a woman become one flesh and their union brings forth physical life for the Church. This union is indissoluble.

Source:


Copyright 2001 - 2007 © by John Salza. All Rights Reserved.
johnsalza@scripturecatholic.com


15 posted on 05/21/2009 10:42:04 PM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER
"Where is mass described in the scriptures?"

Malachi 1:11; Mt 26:26; Acts 2:42,46; 1 Cor 10:16, 18; 11:23, 27-30.

16 posted on 05/21/2009 10:51:24 PM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
"Then my question to Catholics would be why the need to besmirch Protestants?"

Nothing is personal, we are discussing truths.

17 posted on 05/21/2009 10:54:01 PM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

when jesus said that no-one gets to God except through him did he also mean you can pray to every mortal man and woman that a Pope has decided to saintify?

I didn’t know we were allowed to attack religions like this, I guess it could be fun.

Wouldn’t it be nice if the Holy Book were only written in a language noone speaks and we have to trust the almighty High Preists to tell us whats in it.

Maybe the Pope should damn Gutenberg to hell for the printing press.

Bring back the star chambers and stop this education of the masses crap while we are at it.


18 posted on 05/21/2009 11:17:53 PM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
I didn’t know we were allowed to attack religions like this, I guess it could be fun.

2 Tim 4:2-3 Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine. For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears.

The bride and Christ are one, they are not separated or divorced and neither is Christ a polygamist nor did Christ take another bride.

When Saul was hunting down Christ's church, the Catholic Church, Jesus asked: Saul, Saul, Why do you persecute me?

St. Ignatius of Antioch, a student of John, in 107 AD, wrote, "Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church"

Anyone interested in the fullness of truth can easily pull up the Catholic catechism online to find out what the Church teaches. As Christians on a pilgrimage we all seek the face of God. Christ died for his Church and wanted each and every one of us to partake of the gifts he entrusted her with.

19 posted on 05/22/2009 12:13:11 AM PDT by HeavensGate27
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
You gotta love Salza - concise, accurate and to the point. I enjoyed The Biblical Basis for the Eucharist.
20 posted on 05/22/2009 12:19:06 AM PDT by HeavensGate27
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: HeavensGate27
"You gotta love Salza - concise, accurate and to the point. I enjoyed The Biblical Basis for the Eucharist."

He sure makes things easy.

21 posted on 05/22/2009 1:55:10 AM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
1Tm:3:15: "But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth., "

Once again, the Church of God is not an organization of men, regulated, organized, and managed by men. The Church of God are those whose hearts and lives have been redeemed by the Blood of Christ.
22 posted on 05/22/2009 6:49:34 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
Nothing is personal, we are discussing truths.

I think most rational reasoning men and women would disagree with you on that.

The scripture support for the positions stated by the author are weak or non-existant or taken out of context.

Furthermore, the reliance on the traditions of men as the edicts of God without any clear scriptural support are the main contention of Protestants.

The deification of Mary

The praying to Mary as if she had any power with Jesus above any other redemeed sinner

The deification of Saints and prayers to the them when Jesus should be the sole receiver of our prayers and the sole receiver of our faith.

Purgatory, for which there is no clear, in context support for.

The ability to pray somebody out of purgatory for which ther is no scripture support.

The lack of power and victory over sin in Catholic Teaching and the need to come regularly and confess your sins to a Priest when Christ died once and for all for your sins, not only to forgive you but to change your very heart and give you power over the sin in your life.

It is as if the Catholic church backslid into the Old Testament ceremonial continual sacrificial law which Christ came to deliver not only the Jews, but all of Mankind from.

It would seem that when Paul confronted Peter and the other apostles for dissassembling with the Jews after Jesus had gone back to Heaven that instead of heading Paul's advice, some of those people decided that the practices and traditions of men were more important than the freedom from Sin that came from relying solely on the Blood of Christ. It would appear that these same group of people became the Catholic Church.

Christ came to free men from unnecessary and non-production reliance on the traditions of fallible men.

The Catholic Church has retained all of the form of Godliness, without the Power. The Catholic Church has retained a reliance on all of the traditions of the church without the SOLE reliance on a Christ who died for them on Calvary. As a result, much like the Jews and the heathens (as Paul explained in his books) God has removed his blessing from the Catholic Church and given it to whomsoever will obey his word and rely solely on the merits of Christ's sacrifice on Calvary for their salvation.
23 posted on 05/22/2009 7:10:17 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Here we go again. More Christians using the whole armor of God to attack each other.


24 posted on 05/22/2009 7:23:52 AM PDT by Terabitten (Vets wrote a blank check, payable to the Constitution, for an amount up to and including their life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

I’m not sure where the true church, founded by Christ and the desciples exists today. One thing is clear to me, it is not located in the vatican.


25 posted on 05/22/2009 4:06:31 PM PDT by nightwalker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII; informavoracious; larose; RJR_fan; Prospero; Conservative Vermont Vet; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.

Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment

Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

26 posted on 05/22/2009 4:07:44 PM PDT by narses (http://www.theobamadisaster.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Thank you for the ping. It is about time to take my name off of your ping list. Thank you ...


27 posted on 05/22/2009 4:14:23 PM PDT by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Very good catechisis, thanks for posting.


28 posted on 05/22/2009 4:22:25 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

I have complied.


29 posted on 05/22/2009 9:23:01 PM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: nightwalker
"I’m not sure where the true church, founded by Christ and the desciples exists today. One thing is clear to me, it is not located in the vatican."


What is the History of Your Church?

Church Year Established Founder Where Established
 
Catholic 33 Jesus Christ Jerusalem
 
Orthodox 1054 Schismatic Catholic
Bishops
Constantinople
 
Lutheran 1517 Martin Luther Germany
 
Anabaptist 1521 Nicholas Storch &
Thomas Munzer
Germany
 
Anglican 1534 Henry VIII England
 
Mennonites 1536 Menno Simons Switzerland
 
Calvinist 1555 John Calvin Switzerland
 
Presbyterian 1560 John Knox Scotland
 
Congregational 1582 Robert Brown Holland
 
Baptist 1609 John Smyth Amsterdam
 
Dutch Reformed 1628 Michaelis Jones New York
 
Congregationalist 1648 Pilgrims and Puritans Massachusetts
 
Quakers 1649 George Fox England
 
Amish 1693 Jacob Amman France
 
Freemasons 1717 Masons from four lodges London
 
Methodist 1739 John & Charles
Wesley
England
 
Unitarian 1774 Theophilus Lindey London
 
Methodist Episcopal 1784 60 Preachers Baltimore, MD
 
Episcopalian 1789 Samuel Seabury American Colonies
 
United Brethren 1800 Philip Otterbein &
Martin Boehn
Maryland
 
Disciples of Christ 1827 Thomas & Alexander
Campbell
Kentucky
 
Mormon 1830 Joseph Smith New York
 
Methodist Protestant 1830 Methodist United States
 
Church of Christ 1836 Warren Stone &
Alexander Campbell
Kentucky
 
Seventh Day Adventist 1844 Ellen White Washington, NH
 
Christadelphian (Brethren
of Christ
1844 John Thomas Richmond, VA
 
Salvation Army 1865 William Booth London
 
Holiness 1867 Methodist United States
 
Jehovah's Witnesses 1874 Charles Taze Russell Pennsylvania
 
Christian Science 1879 Mary Baker Eddy Boston
 
Church of God in Christ 1895 Various churches of God Arkansas
 
Church of Nazarene c. 1850-1900 Various religious bodies Pilot Point, TX
 
Pentecstal 1901 Charles F. Parkham Topeka, KS
 
Aglipayan 1902 Gregorio Aglipay Philippines
 
Assemblies of God 1914 Pentecostalism Hot Springs, AZ
 
Iglesia ni Christo 1914 Felix Manalo Philippines
 
Four-square Gospel 1917 Aimee Semple
McPherson
Los Angeles, CA
 
United Church of Christ 1961 Reformed and
Congregationalist
Philadelphia, PA
 
Calvary Chapel 1965 Chuck Smith Costa Mesa, CA
 
United Methodist 1968 Methodist and United
Brethren
Dallas, TX
 
Born-again c. 1970s Various religious bodies United States
 
Harvest Christian 1972 Greg Laurie Riverside, CA
 
Saddleback 1982 Rick Warren California
 
Non-denominational c. 1990s various United States

Top

 


Copyright 2001 - 2004 © by John Salza. All Rights Reserved.
johnsalza@scripturecatholic.com

30 posted on 05/23/2009 2:07:35 AM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: annalex

My pleasure.


31 posted on 05/23/2009 2:13:26 AM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER
Where is mass described in the scriptures?

SEE HERE FOR SCRIPTURAL REFERENCES TO THE MASS

Also, the entire Book of Revelations is a description of the Heavenly Liturgy which is mirrored by the Catholic Mass, which has the same liturgical structure. See Scott Hahn's The Lamb's Supper.
32 posted on 07/18/2009 10:44:34 AM PDT by bdeaner (The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? (1 Cor. 10:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson