I reject the Rcc, its pope, its marian dogmas, its claim to be the one, true church..

Mik

Well-known member
The main difference between the solemn definitions of the Immaculate Conception, The Assumption, and the Bull Una Sanctam are that there were elaborate ceremonies associated with the Marian dogmas.

The language used in the documents are virtually the same. Ineffabilis Deus says; "We declare, pronounce, and define..."

Munificentissimus Deus
says; "by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma..."

Unam Sanctam:
"..we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."

If a truth has been solemnly defined by the Pope or an Ecumenical Council, it is de fide definita. You are every bit as obliged to believe what is contained in the Papal Bull Una Sanctam as you are the dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption.

From the Bull Una Sanctam; to the Profession of Faith prescribed for the Waldensians in 1208; to Lateran Council IV; to the Council of Florence under Eugene IV; from these dogmatic documents of the Church it is clear that the necessity of belonging to the true Church of Christ (not the Vatican II Big Tent "Church of Christ") is a dogma of the Faith, of which the highest theological note, and degree of certainty applies.

To hold a proposition that contradicts a dogma incurs the theological censure of heresy against divine faith.

There's nothing wrong with observing the historical backdrop in which documents of the Church were written in. But to think that dogmas evolve or change over time is a heresy condemned in #54 of Lamentabili Sane of St. Pope Pius X.

Furthermore it is a tactic used by modernists, such as yourself, that calls into doubt every religious truth, because it renders the very idea of a religious truth impossible. It runs each dogma through the philosophical meat grinder of relativism, subjectivism, and “historicism,” and turns it into ambiguous mush, which, I'm sure, is your intention.

Unam Sanctam is universal and dogmatic in nature. It lays down principles regarding the relation of Church and state and is not directed toward any individual.

What the ironic thing is, is this, I believe, is the first time I've ever seen you reference any work or writer, and they are all Protestants.

Honestly dude, you are already 99.99% Protestant. You work so hard trying to deny or relativize Catholic doctrines why don't you just go ahead and convert to Protestantism? I suppose there is no need. You can have it both ways. You can go to your Saturday afternoon "mass" to fulfill your Sunday obligation and then play the organ in your Protestant Church on Sunday mornings. Isn't that your routine?

I'm sure your "pope" would be very proud.
Apparently, according to you, God has left your denomination without a 'vicar of Christ'. Have the 'gates of hell' prevailed against your denomination?
 

Bob Carabbio

Well-known member
Apparently, according to you, God has left your denomination without a 'vicar of Christ'. Have the 'gates of hell' prevailed against your denomination?
WE'VE GOT CHRIST HIMSELF, and the Holy Spirit indwelling All Born again Christians, as Jesus Promised, that HE SENT to us to lead us into truth.

What need have we of a (supposed) "Vicar of Christ" in a dress and a funny hat to tell us Roman LIES????

It appears that the "Gates of HELL" have prevailed against the "Roman Catholic System" that's been teaching LIES for centuries.
 

Stella1000

Well-known member
That is totally false. We too know hope, in the Bible, means confident, Joyful expectation. Not "wish."

Catholics don't like it when we misrepresent their beliefs, so kindly do not misrepresent ours.
If you look at the claim in #4 you will see that it was not me who described hope as wishing but another poster.
 

leonard03782

Well-known member
If you look at the claim in #4 you will see that it was not me who described hope as wishing but another poster.
I know I have eternal life; do you know, or do you only wish?

1John 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
you really need to stop reading the posts of others like you read the bible. It is you that equates wishing and hoping, not PeanutGallery.
 

bluedog1us

Well-known member
I will agree with that---but that doesn't solve anything for the Protestant or for the Catholic.

Which of the competing sects is the Church? The person is left to have to figure out---which of all the sects is the Church.
The problem is that some people think that the church is a specific named identity, such as Roman Catholic, or Baptist, or whatever denomination. But, the Church is every born again, by faith, sinner that has been saved by the grace of God! Those who have been baptized BY the Holy Spirit into the body (church) of Christ. 1Cor 12, Gal 3
 

Lastdaysbeliever

Well-known member
AS It's said of Germany, in some places, the only thing they have against Hitler, is that he lost.
As a young, 18 year old M.P. serving in my first permanent party duty station in Mannheim, FRG, in 1975 our M.P. station also housed a German Polizei station. The Polizei station commander was this short, stocky Deutscher who I was warned hated Americans and was a staunch Nazi. I was told to stay clear of him and I did and I always avoided looking in his eyes. Maybe the guys were just hazing me, I literally knew not much, or as a warning but regardless there were still many Deutschers alive from WWII and who served in the Wehrmacht who did harbor what you wrote but many more who were thankful for Hitler's defeat. I knew many of the latter.
 

romishpopishorganist

Well-known member
The problem is that some people think that the church is a specific named identity, such as Roman Catholic, or Baptist, or whatever denomination. But, the Church is every born again, by faith, sinner that has been saved by the grace of God! Those who have been baptized BY the Holy Spirit into the body (church) of Christ. 1Cor 12, Gal 3
Yeah--that is all well and good. This is all well and nice to say.

It still solves nothing.

For example: do real Christians believe that the Eucharist is a mere symbol (Baptist) a spiritual presence (Presbyterian) or a real presence (Lutheran?)

Do real Christians believe Double predestination (Five-point Calvinists Presbyterians) a variation of that (Moderate Presbyterians) or none of it (everyone else?)

Do real Christians baptize infants (Lutherans, Presbyterians) or not (Baptists?)

Do real Christians believe OSAS or not?

Again, you Protestants seem to want to dismiss as irrelevant or minimize these differences and serious questions. I get why you would want to do that. My point is that your musings above sound nice but solve nothing.
 

Lastdaysbeliever

Well-known member
Yeah--that is all well and good. This is all well and nice to say.

It still solves nothing.

For example: do real Christians believe that the Eucharist is a mere symbol (Baptist) a spiritual presence (Presbyterian) or a real presence (Lutheran?)

Do real Christians believe Double predestination (Five-point Calvinists Presbyterians) a variation of that (Moderate Presbyterians) or none of it (everyone else?)

Do real Christians baptize infants (Lutherans, Presbyterians) or not (Baptists?)

Do real Christians believe OSAS or not?

Again, you Protestants seem to want to dismiss as irrelevant or minimize these differences and serious questions. I get why you would want to do that. My point is that your musings above sound nice but solve nothing.
"...you protestants...". I love that you acknowledge we are not part of your religious institution.

God has promised we born again believers only need believe we are saved by Grace, through faith and not of works for our salvation. Simple. Something rc's can't understand because of their pharisiacal obsession with the rcc's "authority" and its many, many man-made dogmas, rules and tradition. So not complicated for us romish but complicated for you. Theology does play an important role in preserving the essentials of the Christian faith but it only serves the purpose of preserving the essentails of the faith found in God's breathed written Word. Revealed to us by the Holy Spirit inspired writers of the Bible.
 

Lastdaysbeliever

Well-known member
Lastdaysbeliever said:
Who is the head of the church, the body of Christ?
Arch Stanton said:
hierarchy in Christ's Church 😁
God disagrees!

Ephesians 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body.
Colossians 1:18 He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything.
Colossians 2:10 and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority;
 

romishpopishorganist

Well-known member
"...you protestants...". I love that you acknowledge we are not part of your religious institution.
Of course. Thank you! Happy to do it! I do recall a time when I ever suggested that Protestants were Catholic.
God has promised we born again believers only need believe we are saved by Grace, through faith and not of works for our salvation. Simple. Something rc's can't understand because of their pharisiacal obsession with the rcc's "authority" and its many, many man-made dogmas, rules and tradition. So not complicated for us romish but complicated for you. Theology does play an important role in preserving the essentials of the Christian faith but it only serves the purpose of preserving the essentails of the faith found in God's breathed written Word. Revealed to us by the Holy Spirit inspired writers of the Bible.
Right--so what God has actually said----and understanding it---does not matter?

How should we understand the presence of God in the Eucharist? The way the Baptists, Lutherans or Presbyterians understand it? "Who cares? Just be born again! Believe what you want--as long as you don't believe what Catholics believe!"

Are the Five Point Calvinists right about Double Predestination or not? "Who cares? Just be born again! Believe what you want--as long as you don't believe what Catholics believe!"

Should we baptize infants or not? "Who cares? Just be born again--and whatever you do, don't be Catholic! I don't think we is ought to baptize infants, but--if you want to do so--as long as you aren't Catholic, I don't care. I mean--Baptism itself is Biblical, so in the end---baptizing infants vs not baptizing them--why get in a snit over it?" Indeed! Tell that to the Baptists who were formed precisely because they thought the issue important enough to found a sect over.

Again--I can see why you would want to minimize or otherwise dismiss as irrelevant the above questions and not otherwise think critically about these issues. In your mind- as long as the person isn't Catholic, it really doesn't matter.
 

Mysterium Fidei

Well-known member
Apparently, according to you, God has left your denomination without a 'vicar of Christ'. Have the 'gates of hell' prevailed against your denomination?
Every time a pope dies the Church is left without a Vicar of Christ. It's called an interregnum and is nothing new. The Church does not cease to exist every time a pope dies.
 
Top