Vatican Reasserts It Is the Only Church of Christ

[linuxdoctor]

Since Christ founded the universal Church in the first century, it has always had to contend with and defend itself against its enemies from within and without. Early Christians were persecuted by every authority around from Jewish to Greek to Roman. Then there were the internal enemies, those who decided that they knew better than those whom Christ left in charge of His Church and their successors. I'm speaking of the heretics.

Heretics are even mentioned in the New Testament and St. Paul's attention was constantly drawn to the problems with the Church at Corinth, writing at least three letters to them correcting their errors, two of which are in the Bible.

The Universal Church that Christ founded, that is to say, the Catholic Church has always had heretics. In the fourth and fifth centuries, the Aryan heresy, which denied the divinity of Christ, threatened to supplant the true Christian Faith. Fortunately, a few faithful Popes and Saints saved Christianity and the names of St. Augustine, Pope St. Damasus and St. Athansius stand out as giants in the defence of the true Faith.

During the sixteenth century, Martin Luther and his sycophants attempted to rewrite the BIble through faulty translation in an attempt to redefine Christianity in their own image. This rewritten religion was called Protestantism and it created untold havoc and terror to Europe as the Protestants rose armies against the Church of Christ in the name of the daemonic religion.

In the nineteenth century, a heresy called Modernism arose which was described by Blessed Pope Pius IX as "the synthesis of all errors," a heresy that continues and plagues us to this day. The heresy of Modernism, by its very nature, is constantly changing and so it is difficult to pin down exactly what Modernism is. This fact is something that the Modernists themselves use to their advantage.

In the twentieth century, in the aftermath of the second session of the Second Vatican Council, the modernists managed to take control of how the documents of the Second Vatican Council were interpreted and as a result attempt to alter the teachings of the Church. In fact, these modernists contended that the Church had in fact changed some of its teachings. Two such teachings were the rephrasing of the ancient dictums, "outside the Church there is no salvation," and "the Church of Christ on earth is the Catholic Church." It is this last point that the Vatican recently issued a document about.

On 29 June 2007, and released this past Wednesday, the Pope approved a document from the Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith entitled, "RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH." After first dealing with the mistaken belief that the Church has changed its doctrine, answering in the negative, it then answers the question, "What is the meaning of the affirmation that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church?" This has been a troubling and contentious issue in the Church since it was first stated by the Second Vatican Council in "Lumen Genitum." Modernists, Protestants and other heretics held that the Church was surrendering its claim to be the exclusive Church of Christ. This document corrects that misperception.

[LP-Harvey]

[SE13]

There must be something slightly different in America, but here in The United Kingdom, Protestants are known as such because they protest against The Catholic Church. To give a brief history, most of England and Scotland was predominantly Catholic, as was The Monarchy. Divorce was not allowed by The Catholic Church, so King Henry VIII created a new religion based on Catholicism, but to allow divorce so as to continue finding new wives with which he could provide a son as heir to The British Throne. Royal followers converted to the new religion (The Church Of England) as most of England did, however those who did not remain Catholic, and rebel against the further invasions of The English (Under The British banner) which included Northern Ireland, hense all the troubles there in the past. Glasgow and Edinburgh in Scotland are Cities divided by religion, as was Belfast in Northern Ireland. The reasons for all of that are probably best left for another thread, however that is my take on Protestants and Catholics. Being English through and through, I do not fully understand the ins and outs of the religious divide, as these "barriers" mean nothing for the vast majority of The English population. Perhaps one of our Scottish or Irish members could take the reins from here on.....
_________________
It feels so empty without a signature, so here is some mindless gabble to occupy the space

[Xtreme]

The Church founded upon Peter must be the True Church of Christ, simply because Christ guaranteed that the Church built upon Peter - the "Rock" of Christ's Church on earth - would not fail, even against all power of hell.

If one is to be Christian, then one must recognize that the True Church is the one founded upon Peter by Christ and thus the one that carries the Sacred tradition of Peter and the Apostles through the millennia.

This is why Protestants (and I say this with intending as little offense as possible) must perform absurd acrobatics to try to validate their beliefs. The face of the matter is that the broke away from the True Church and turned away from the Tradition protected by the Holy Spirit and chose instead to pick their own personal interpretations of scripture and theology.

It seems that the thousands - perhaps millions - of Protestant sects indicate the fundamental flaws of their sophomoric rebellion against Christ's Church.

[SE13]

Herein lies the problems surrounding almost everything religious and to do with war.

At the end of the day, whatever version of the book you read, you all worship the same "God", so why is one version of events better than another? Forgive me if I am wrong, but one of the writings of The Bible depicted how God wished to create harmony. That said, if you truly believe, then you would follow his every word.

The mere fact that people squabble about religion goes to prove the flaws in both the writings, and humanity itself.

[Xtreme]

[SE13]

[Xtreme]

[LP-Harvey]

The Catholic Church prescribes to the New Testament, correct?

Doesn't Paul's letters refer to several different churches, with different bases and methodologies... but the same ideological beliefs?

Isn't this the basis for denomination?

I sense hypocrisy.

[Xtreme]

No... those letters are simply referring to his contemporary equivalent of our contemporary Parishes and such. Different locations and situations, not different denominations. Paul was writing to them all and still they were one Church, though many physical churches (upper vs. lower case "C/c" is the distinction in modern use).

Also, Paul was frequently correcting improper practices in the different locations. If he simply said "you guys do it wrong, but I don't care because I'm not over there" then maybe I would buy into your suggestion a bit, but that's not at all what he says at any point.

Paul seems to be a the typical scripture-toting Protestant's favorite writer to cherry pick verses from. Realize that there is a vast context to everything in scripture. I could say, "The Koran says 'You shall...be...cast into the... pit of flame...if you... have... red clothing'" but I would be instantly slapped on the wrists by the nearest human being. But if I cherry pick various verses from the Bible and string them together, that's perfectly alright to the run-of-the-mill Protestant. Hmm.

Anyway, the fact of the matter is that Christ, in scripture, states that the Church that He founds upon Peter will not fall even against all power of hell.

If a Christian is to believe the Bible, then He must decide which Church this is. Protestant Churches broke away (hence "PROTESTant") from the Catholic Church. That's a fairly dead giveaway as to their lack Apostolic succession, in my opinion.

The only claim I can see that you might make would be with the Eastern Orthodox Church, but doing so eliminates the possibility, again, of any Protestant Church being Christ's True, eternal Church.

[SE13]

[linuxdoctor]

[voltare]

[b][font=georgia]Well, glad to I haven't missed anything new.

Certainly, the pope (elected by his fellow cardinals) is welcome to claim whatever he wishes. The authority doesn't derive from anyone, directly, save by what people who obey him wish to ascribe. Many still believe that the Japanese emperor is the direct descendant of God, too.

Tell me LD, do you believe that when the various Popes declared any who venture on a Crusade for the 'holy lands' were guaranteed a one way ticket to heaven, regardless of the atrocities they committed on the way? Or were they just 'kidding.'

Stephan
_________________
[img:3378ced9c2]http://www.vv3b.com/img/forumbanner.png[/img:3378ced9c2]

[Xtreme]

[voltare]

Xtreme,

I agree. I make the point, because it illustrates how the word of the Pope (and the Church he represents) is not necessarily proof of anything.

Stephan
_________________
[img:3378ced9c2]http://www.vv3b.com/img/forumbanner.png[/img:3378ced9c2]