Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Radio Replies First Volume - Sunday Observance ^ | 1938 | Fathers Rumble & Carty

Posted on 11/08/2009 9:03:26 PM PST by GonzoII

Sunday Observance

1155. How do Catholics observe the Lord's Day?

They should sanctify Sunday by assisting at Mass, by prayer, and by abstaining from unnecessary servile works.

1156. I think Catholic ideas most peculiar in this matter.

That is merely because Catholic ideas do not happen to fit in with your own religious upbringing. Things we don't agree with usually seem peculiar to us. But the whole point is, are your ideas right, or are our ideas right? You have no proof whatever that your notions are right, or that Catholic ideas are wrong.

1157. Did not God command us to observe Saturday, and not Sunday at all?

No. The command as given by Moses in the Name of God to the Jews was that the Sabbath, and not Saturday, should be kept holy. The word Sabbath means rest. The law includes two elements; one essential, that one day in seven should be dedicated to God; the other ceremonial, that the particular day should be chosen. The Jews selected Saturday.

1158. God is eternally the same. Having once demanded the seventh day of the week, even He could not change it to the first day of the week.

On that argument He could not have changed from the Old Law to the New Law, nor from the Jews to the Christians. You should give up your Christian beliefs, and join the Jewish religion! Yet did not Christ say, "You have heard it said in the Law; but now I say unto you." And He deliberately abrogated certain Jewish legislation concerning marriage. He certainly admitted the possibility of some changes.

1159. God's covenant with the Jews concerned one day in seven, and He said, "My covenant I will not break." Is God a liar, or is your Church wrong?

God is not a liar, and the Catholic Church is not wrong. God Himself predicted in Isa 2:2-3, that He would establish a visible Church to which all nations would come, and that out of that Church the law would proceed to teach us His ways. In due time He sent His Son, who established the Catholic Church, and she tells us God's present law. God has not changed. If you decide to do different successive things, your decision does not change merely because the undertakings change successively. The Jews decided to observe Saturday, while Christians decided to observe Sunday. The seventh day as God's day was not changed. The Sabbath, God's rest day, was transferred from Saturday to Sunday.

1160. We Adventists observe Saturday as God commanded. Where are we wrong?

In believing the specified Jewish day to be still of obligation. You do not seem to understand that the Old Law was but figurative of the more perfect New Law, and that in the New Law Christ established the Catholic Church which clearly teaches the change of ceremonial day. If you want to keep the ceremonial day of the Jews, you may as well keep the lot, and abolish Baptism in favor of Circumcision.

1161. You Catholics got Sunday from Mithraism.

We did not. Sunday may have been the day celebrated in honor of Mithra. But this was not the reason for its selection by Christians. There is as much connection between the Christian choice of Sunday and Mithraism as there is between the fact that the Jews observed Saturday and the derivation of the word in English from Saturn. Had the Church chosen Wednesday for some reason of her own, you would alter your charge and cry in triumph, "Ah! The day sacred to Wodin."

1162. What are the reasons for the selection of Sunday rather than Saturday?

After Christ's resurrection and the establishment of the Church of the New Law, Christians kept the substance of the Old Law in this matter by still retaining one day out of seven. But the Apostles, as I have said, changed the specification of the day to Sunday. This they did for several reasons. Firstly, in order to honor the resurrection of Christ from the dead on Sunday morning. St. Paul shows that this is the bed-rock foundation of our faith when he says, "If Christ be not risen, then is our faith in vain." Secondly, the advent of the Holy Ghost gave life to the Church on Pentecost Sunday. Thirdly, the change was calculated to impress upon our minds the transition from the Old Law to the New Law. Finally, Saturday had special significance as being dedicated to the completion of God's creative work. But God's redemptive work is greater than His creative work, and as a mark of honor the first day of the week was dedicated to the superior redemptive work of God.

1163. Does Scripture in any way justify such a change as a fact?

Yes. Christ, of course, accepting the Old Law prior to fulfilling and perfecting it by His new revelation, observed Saturday. But He Himself prepared the way for the change of day. He defended His disciples when the Jews accused them of not observing the Sabbath strictly in the traditional sense. Mt 12:1-8. He rebukes a too severe an interpretation of the Sabbath law. Lk 13:10-16; Lk 14:1-5; Jn 5:9-18; Jn 7:22. He shows His authority to do as He may please with the Sabbath. Mk 2:27-28. Nowhere does He re-assert the obligation of observing the Jewish Sabbath. Never does He quote this Jewish Law. In marked contrast, the New Testament pays special honor to Sunday. Christ rose on Sunday, and appeared to His Apostles on Sunday. He chose the following Sunday to appear to them when St. Thomas was present. Fifty days later He chose Sunday for the bestowal of the Holy Spirit upon His Church. The first Christians themselves observed Sunday from the very beginning.

"On the first day of the week, when we were assembled to break bread." Acts 20:7. St. Paul rebuked the Galatians because of their tendency to revert to Jewish customs, and above all in their observance of Jewish days as if they were still binding. Gal 4:9-10. To the Corinthians he wrote, "As I have given order to the churches of Galatia, so do ye also. On the first day of the week let every one of you put apart . . . what it shall well please him" towards the collection on behalf of the Church. 1 Cor 16:1-2. In Rev 1:10, St. John tells us that he was in the spirit "on the Lord's day," i.e. on the day on which Christ rose from the dead, and which was already dedicated to Him as sacred in a special way.

1164. Geiermann, a Catholic writer, says that the Church changed the day in the 4th century at the Council of Laodicea.

You have misunderstood him. The Church then merely gave a special precept ordering the faithful to keep to the Apostolic practice of observing Sunday, But the change was not made in the 4th century for the first time. Thus St. Augustine wrote in the 4th century, "The Apostles and their contemporaries sanctioned the dedication of Sunday to the worship of God." Two centuries before Augustine, Tertullian had written, "We, as tradition has taught us, observe the day of the Lord's resurrection." St. Justin Martyr, who died in 167 A.D., wrote, "On Sunday we meet to celebrate the Lord's Supper and read the Gospels and Sacred Scripture, the first day on which God changed darkness, and made the world, and on which Christ rose from the dead." Earlier still, St. Ignatius, who died in 107 A.D., says, "If we still live according to the Jewish observances, we confess that we do not accept the grace of Christ. Those who once lived according to the Old Law have come to a new hope, no longer observing the Jewish Sabbath, but the Lord's day on which our Life rose from the dead." Thus tradition goes back to the indications given in Scripture and recorded above. Yet it is right to say that the Catholic Church changed the day in so far as the Apostles were representatives of that Church; for they, with the authority of Christ, sanctioned the change.

1165. This changing of the law proves that the Catholic Church is founded and governed by Satan.

The foundation of the Catholic Church is a matter of history, and history shows that Christ Himself founded her. You would find it quite impossible to say when, where, and how Satan founded the Catholic Church. As for Satan governing the Catholic Church, do you think Satan would be so insistent on the preservation of the doctrine of Christ? The Catholic Church says that anything impure, filthy, or wicked, is absolutely forbidden. Is that Satanic? She warns against all sin, and urges her children to be holy. It does not sound very devilish. You neither understand Scripture nor the Catholic Church to which you are so opposed.

1166. Could not a person keep Sunday holy without going to Mass?

A Catholic could not, when there is nothing to prevent his attendance at Mass. It is a mortal sin to miss Mass, and if he put himself into a state of mortal sin he vitiates all else he might attempt to do. That is, of course, unless he makes an act of perfect contrition, after which he could do some good actions; but he would not have fulfilled God's essential law.

1167. Could he not pray and read his Bible all day?

I doubt it. But if a Catholic did do that, he would be doing what God does not command, and neglecting the thing God does command.

1168. Why is it mortal sin to miss Mass on Sundays?

Christ said, "If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments." Now one of these commandments is, "Remember that thou keep holy the sabbath day." Thus God demands the sanctification of one day in seven in a special way. His very use of the word "Remember" implies a grave obligation not to forget or omit this duty. It is a mortal sin to disobey God in this matter. But how are we Christians to observe this commandment? Who is to tell us? Our Lord says, "If a man will not hear the Church, let him be as the heathen." Mt 18:17. We must, then, hear the Church. Now the Catholic Church tells us that the central factor in the religion of Christ is the Mass, and that the chief thing in the sanctification of Sunday is to be present at the offering of that Sacrifice to God. This obliges under pain of mortal sin, unless sickness or other grave difficulties prevent such assistance at Mass. Remember that men are not only individual beings. They are also social units in a collective nation. And as they are obliged to worship God in their individual capacity, so too collectively. God has always demanded public worship, and from the earliest Apostolic limes Christians met regularly for religious exercises in common.

1169. Why should Catholics be thus burdened?

Religion is a debt to God. We Catholics pay this debt regardless of our own comfort and pleasure. We do not pay earthly debts when it gives us pleasure, and refuse to pay them when it displeases us. It is a matter of honesty and justice.

1170. Why are not Catholics taught good living, instead of going to Mass and giving money?

You wrongly suppose that the Church insists upon attendance at Mass and money-giving, and that she is indifferent to truth and good living. You should ask Catholics who do attend Mass what they are taught, instead of making prejudiced guesses.

1171. Many go to Mass and are as bad as non-church-goers.

Would you have them continue in their sins and discontinue going to Mass? That is what the average non-church-goer does. It would not be so bad if he did so and kept silent about others. But it is intolerable that he should rail at those who do attempt to offer some worship to God.

1172. All the same the one who goes to Mass is no better in God's sight than the one who does not.

He may not be in other things, though even that is unlikely. But he is certainly better in God's sight in so far as he attends Mass. If the church-goer has faults, I do not justify them; but those faults will be less grave than the sin of the man who neglects the greatest of his debts — that to Almighty God.

1173. Catholics go to Mass and then are free to do what they like on Sunday.

By going to Mass Catholics have remembered to keep holy the sabbath day, which is required. For the rest, Catholics are not allowed to do as they please afterwards. They are forbidden all unnecessary servile works, and are of course forbidden, as always, any sinful conduct. But they are not forbidden lawful relaxation from ordinary pursuits.

1174. To keep a day holy means to keep it pious, godly, and sacred.

Catholics do keep the day holy. The day is consecrated to God by definite duties of religion. Innocent recreation does not desecrate it. Eating one's meals on Sunday is not in itself a pious act, yet it does not desecrate the day. To keep a day pious does not mean that every single act must be one of piety. Any act which is not sinful can be offered to God's greater honor and glory, even as David offered his dancing before the Ark of the Covenant. When the Pharisees complained to Christ that the disciples were doing what their traditions held to be unlawful, Christ replied that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.

1175. Is playing tennis keeping a day holy and as a day of rest?

Playing tennis is not sinful. It is neither holy nor wicked of itself. It is mental and bodily refreshment of one's forces. But how far will you go? If I may not play tennis, may I exercise my limbs by walking? If I may not use my legs, may I use my eyes in reading? If not that, may I use my lungs by breathing? Where are you going to stop in the use of one's faculties? Religion was not meant by God to be a strait-jacket of gloom.

1176. Our Protestant ministers forbid sport on Sunday.

If so, they do so on their own authority, not on the authority of the Scripture.

1177. Anyway, those who take up games and sport on Sunday drop their Church after a time.

That may be true of many Protestants who know that their ministers forbid such things unreasonably, and therefore give up going to church at all. It does not affect Catholics. We have easily the largest number of church-going people, even though we refuse to adopt the man-made prescriptions of Protestant ministers.

1178. After Mass, Priests even organize picnics and outings.

The Catholic Church is the only Church which can oblige her people to worship God definitely on Sunday, and many of her churches are filled three or four times on that day. There is nothing wrong with innocent recreation provided it does not interfere with one's duties to God and attendance at religious worship. Sunday is a day on which we must avoid hard bodily labor, worship God, and take lawful rest. But God never intended us to sit glum and gloomy from Saturday until Monday, as if that could offer Him the greatest possible honor and glory. Of course the Catholic Church may be guilty according to the standards of many Protestants, but she has never admitted those standards. The Catholic goes to an early Mass, slips home, has his breakfast, and then enjoys God's sunshine in innocent recreation. His greatest critic is the man who breakfasts in bed, and reads the Sunday papers until 11 a.m., religiously refusing to play the piano. If he feels like it, such a man goes along to some service at a popular church or chapel in the evening, believing himself to be one of the chosen few who have gone to church that day, forgetting the legions of Catholics who have done so while he was still in bed.

1179. I want you to reconcile such conduct with Christ's commands.

Innocent recreation on Sunday is not opposed to Christ's commands. You decide upon your own notion of what Christianity means, and calmly demand that I reconcile Catholic practice with your notions, as if your ideas were infallibly correct. That is the way with Protestantism. Protestants won't accept the authority of the Pope, believing his claims arrogant. Then each proceeds to set himself up as his own Pope. Why should I accept your tests of what Christianity should be as possessing any value? Another Protestant, with different ideas, will want me to reconcile Catholic practices with his notions. If Catholic teaching could square with every peculiar idea of each Protestant inquirer, it would have to be as changeable as the chameleon.

1180. If sport on Sunday were no harm, Christ would have said so.

Let us put it the other way round. If it were sinful, it is possible that Christ would have said so. We certainly cannot expect Him to describe all that is not sinful. Sleeping is not sinful, yet nowhere does Christ solemnly assure us that it is no sin to go to sleep. Christ omitted any explicit reference to sport on Sunday just as he omitted to refer to the wearing of shoes, sleeping at night, or the breathing of the air God gives us.

1181. What do you mean by servile work?

Work which in olden times used to be given to servants and slaves, and which is chiefly performed by bodily labor and for bodily needs. Liberal and more intellectual works are not forbidden.

1182. Would work for an hour be servile, but not for ten minutes?

The term servile refers, not to the time spent in the work, but to the nature of the work. If the work is of a servile nature in itself, it cannot be done even for ten minutes without genuine necessity. If not servile of its very nature, it would not become servile if done for ten hours.

1183. God says, "Thou shalt do no manner of work" yet you permit housework on Sundays.

God forbade the ordinary work of the Jews by which they earned their living, and the work they allotted to their slaves and servants. Christ Himself rebuked the Pharisees for their letter-of-the-law interpretation of this commandment. God's chief purpose was that all might be free for religious duties. We have to note what God intended, and fulfill the intentions of the legislator, in addition to making allowances for the vast difference between the spirit of the Old Law and that of the New. The Catholic Church forbids all unnecessary servile work on Sundays. If such work can be done during the week, it is not necessary on Sundays. Our Lord Himself said that one would be justified in laboring to release an ox from a pit on the Sabbath. A man cannot find time always on week days for all things necessary to be done, and certainly some housework is reasonably necessary on Sundays.

Encoding copyright 2009 by Frederick Manligas Nacino. Some rights reserved.
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0

TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Moral Issues; Theology; Worship
KEYWORDS: catholic; radiorepliesvolone
 Who is like unto God?........ Lk:10:18:
 And he said to them: I saw Satan like lightning falling from heaven.

Historical Context of "Radio Replies"

By markomalley

If one recalls the time frame from which Radio Replies emerged, it can explain some of the frankness and lack of tact in the nature of the responses provided.

It was during this timeframe that a considerable amount of anti-Catholic rhetoric came to the forefront, particularly in this country. Much of this developed during the Presidential campaign of Al Smith in 1928, but had its roots in the publication of Alexander Hislop's The Two Babylons, originally published in book form in 1919 and also published in pamphlet form in 1853.

While in Britain (and consequently Australia), the other fellow would surely have experienced the effects of the Popery Act, the Act of Settlement, the Disenfranchising Act, the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, and many others since the reformation (that basically boiled down to saying, "We won't kill you if you just be good, quiet little Catholics"). Even the so-called Catholic Relief Acts (1778, 1791, 1829, 1851, 1871) still had huge barriers placed in the way.

And of course, they'd both remember the American Protective Association, "Guy Fawkes Days" (which included burning the Pontiff in effigy), the positions of the Whigs and Ultra-Torries, and so on.

A strong degree of "in your face" from people in the position of authoritativeness was required back in the 1930s, as there was a large contingent of the populations of both the US and the British Empire who were not at all shy about being "in your face" toward Catholics in the first place (in other words, a particularly contentious day on Free Republic would be considered a mild day in some circles back then). Sure, in polite, educated circles, contention was avoided (thus the little ditty about it not being polite to discuss religion in public, along with sex and politics), but it would be naive to assume that we all got along, or anything resembling that, back in the day.

Having said all of the above, reading the articles from the modern mindset and without the historical context that I tried to briefly summarize above, they make challenging reading, due to their bluntness.

The reader should also keep in mind that the official teaching of the Church takes a completely different tone, best summed up in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers .... All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."324

269 UR 3 § 1.
270 Cf. CIC, can. 751.
271 Origen, Hom. in Ezech. 9,1:PG 13,732.
272 UR 3 § 1.
273 LG 8 § 2.
274 UR 3 § 2; cf. LG 15.
275 Cf. UR 3.
276 Cf. LG 8.
322 LG 15.
323 UR 3.
324 Paul VI, Discourse, December 14, 1975; cf. UR 13-18.





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.


1 posted on 11/08/2009 9:03:27 PM PST by GonzoII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fidelis; Atomic Vomit; MI; Sir_Humphrey; dsc; annalex; Citizen Soldier; bdeaner; CatQuilt; ...

Radio Replies Ping

FReep-mail me to get on or off

“The Radio Replies Ping-List”


2 posted on 11/08/2009 9:04:11 PM PST by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

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
Radio Replies Volume One: Luther
Radio Replies Volume One: Anglicanism
Radio Replies Volume One: Greek Orthodox Church
Radio Replies Volume One: Wesley

Radio Replies Volume One: Baptists
Radio Replies Volume One: Adventists
Radio Replies Volume One: Salvation Army
Radio Replies Volume One: Witnesses of Jehovah
Radio Replies Volume One: Christian Science

Radio Replies Volume One: Theosophy
Radio Replies Volume One: Spiritualism
Radio Replies Volume One: Catholic Intolerance

Chapter Eight: The Truth of Catholicism

Radio Replies Volume One: Nature of the Church
Radio Replies Volume One: The true Church
Radio Replies Volume One: Hierarchy of the Church
Radio Replies Volume One: The Pope
Radio Replies Volume One: Temporal Power

Radio Replies Volume One: Infallibility
Radio Replies Volume One: Unity
Radio Replies Volume One: Holiness
Radio Replies Volume One: Catholicity
Radio Replies Volume One: Apostolicity

Radio Replies Volume One: Indefectibility
Radio Replies Volume One: "Outside the Church no salvation"

Chapter Nine: The Catholic Church and the Bible

Radio Replies Volume One: Not opposed to the Bible
Radio Replies Volume One: The reading of the Bible
Radio Replies Volume One: Protestants and the Bible
Radio Replies Volume One: "Bible Only" a false principle
Radio Replies Volume One: The necessity of Tradition
Radio Replies Volume One: The authority of the Catholic Church

Chapter Ten: The Church and Her Dogmas

Radio Replies Volume One: Dogmatic Truth
Radio Replies Volume One: Development of Dogma
Radio Replies Volume One: Dogma and Reason
Radio Replies Volume One: Rationalism
Radio Replies Volume One: The Holy Trinity

Radio Replies Volume One: Creation
Radio Replies Volume One: Angels
Radio Replies Volume One: Devils
Radio Replies Volume One: Man
Radio Replies Volume One: Sin

Radio Replies Volume One: Christ
Radio Replies Volume One: Mary
Radio Replies Volume One: Grace and salvation
Radio Replies Volume One: The Sacraments
Radio Replies Volume One: Baptism

Radio Replies Volume One: Confirmation
Radio Replies Volume One: Confession
Radio Replies Volume One: Holy Eucharist
Radio Replies Volume One: The Sacrifice of the Mass
Radio Replies Volume One: Holy Communion

Radio Replies Volume One: Priesthood
Radio Replies Volume One: Matrimony
Radio Replies Volume One: Divorce
Radio Replies Volume One: Extreme Unction
Radio Replies Volume One: Judgment

Radio Replies Volume One: The Millenium
Radio Replies Volume One: Hell
Radio Replies Volume One: Purgatory
Radio Replies Volume One: Prayer for the Dead
Radio Replies Volume One: Indulgences

Radio Replies Volume One: Heaven
Radio Replies Volume One: The Resurrection of the Body
Radio Replies Volume One: The General Judgment/The End of the World

Chapter Eleven: The Church in Her Moral Teachings

Radio Replies Volume One: Veracity/Mental Restriction
Radio Replies Volume One: Charity
Radio Replies Volume One: Ecclesiastical Censures/Liberty
Radio Replies Volume One: Index of Prohibited Books
Radio Replies Volume One: Persecution

Radio Replies Volume One: The Inquisition
Radio Replies Volume One: Jesuits/Catholic Intolerance
Radio Replies Volume One: Protestant services
Radio Replies Volume One: Freemasonry
Radio Replies Volume One: Cremation

Radio Replies Volume One: Gambling
Radio Replies Volume One: Prohibition of Drink
Radio Replies Volume One: Sunday Observance

3 posted on 11/08/2009 9:05:48 PM PST by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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
Topics · Post Article

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