More on the RCC

[jo7241974]

It seems to me that if Moroni is on top of the highest point of temples, he is indeed over ALL the altars.

And it is pretty much idolization if he is on every temple and on the highest point of each. If it is not idolization, then what's he doing there?

Actually, he is not on top of all of our Temples. I have noticed, though, that there are crosses on top of most Reformation denominations, as well as over their alters. Hmmmmm........ If you are going to try to make something out of nothing, I am willing to return the favor. You know very well that the RCC treat their statues as icons and idols which people kneel and pray to; even to the Pope, as seen in the picture I provided. That is why they deleted the second commandment from their Catechisms. That breaking of a specific commandment is not as easy to hide as their others are.

We also are NOT supposed to even try to contact the dead. So why do members of the RCC do this by praying to dead saints, etc.? Because they are taught to do it by an Apostate Institution of Religion. Here's an interesting story which indicates how common and comfortable members of the RCC are about praying to the dead. When a friend of mine was on a mission in Mexico, he and his companion met a family who allowed them to speak to them in their home. They left some brochures with them. When they came back the next week, the husband excitedly invited my friend and his companion back into their house. There hung the brochures on the wall next to a Crucifix above several statues, rosary beads, and lit candles. The husband and wife both explaned how they had been praying to Joseph Smith all week and were very interested in learning more about the LDS Church. Whoa.......

jo

[franktalk]

Same thing -- an inanimate object.
Much more meaning to Christians than a brick, but still, an inanimate object!

I guess you got me there with your superior logic. Now if you could just convince these Catholics.

man+-+cross+prayer.jpg

and

4899167980_848b83e1a0_m.jpg

[Cow Poke]

I guess you got me there with your superior logic. Now if you could just convince these Catholics.

man+-+cross+prayer.jpg

and

4899167980_848b83e1a0_m.jpg

A) How do you know they're Catholics?
2) "Kneel at the Cross" is not worship of the CROSS, but what it represents
C) Only a total jerk would disparage the military for taking time to reverence our Lord - which is obviously what they're doing by acknowledging the Cross on which Jesus died.

(Mat 10:38 KJV) And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.
(Mat 16:24 KJV) Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
(Mark 8:34 KJV) And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
(Mark 10:21 KJV) Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
(Luke 9:23 KJV) And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.
(Luke 14:27 KJV) And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.
(1 Cor 1:17-18 KJV) For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. {18} For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
(Gal 5:11 KJV) And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? then is the offence of the cross ceased.
(Gal 6:12 KJV) As many as desire to make a fair show in the flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised; only lest they should suffer persecution for the cross of Christ.
(Gal 6:14 KJV) But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.
(Eph 2:16 KJV) And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
(Phil 2:8 KJV) And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
(Phil 3:18 KJV) (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ:
(Col 1:20 KJV) And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.
(Col 2:14 KJV) Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
(Heb 12:2 KJV) Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

[Catholicity]

A) How do you know they're Catholics?
2) "Kneel at the Cross" is not worship of the CROSS, but what it represents
C) Only a total jerk would disparage the military for taking time to reverence our Lord - which is obviously what they're doing by acknowledging the Cross on which Jesus died.

Not to mention Speaking as a Catholic we do not Worship the Cross when we kneel before it, Kiss it, or pray before it, we Worship WHO it represents and Kiss who it represents. Jesus!!!!!

[Cow Poke]

Not to mention Speaking as a Catholic we do not Worship the Cross when we kneel before it, Kiss it, or pray before it, we Worship WHO it represents and Kiss who it represents. Jesus!!!!!

Perhaps Frank should remove the statue of a pretend angel from his eye before trying to remove "The Old Rugged Cross" from ours.

going to my room...

[Thersites]

Yet the data comes directly from the RCC.....go figure.....

The "data" comes from the Church, but the interpretation comes from you. Anyone who put a modicum of effort into it could find entirely reasonable explanations for the statements you've twisted around. The fact that you are either unable or unwilling to look for such explanations says more about you than it does about Catholicism.

[One Bad Pig]

Oh, goody. Another Catholic-bashing thread started. I guess that was easier than dealing with the beating she got in the other one. Not sure I'm feeling sufficiently masochistic to tackle this one.

[Cow Poke]

Oh, goody. Another Catholic-bashing thread started. I guess that was easier than dealing with the beating she got in the other one. Not sure I'm feeling sufficiently masochistic to tackle this one.

This one will be mo betterer cause Frank is heppin her.

[Pilgrim]

so what's your point jo? Your post is way too long to bother reading.

Not sure of the point, but I'd guess the purpose is to avoid dealing with the issues or mormonism by redirecting the focus elsewhere. Sort of a giant red herring tactic.

[One Bad Pig]

This one will be mo betterer cause Frank is heppin her.

Yes, every argument is made better by a good cheerleader.

[mossrose]

We also are NOT supposed to even try to contact the dead. So why do members of the RCC do this by praying to dead saints, etc.?

Why do you baptize dead people?

[Sparko]

well another point zooms over Frank and Jo's head.

My point about Moroni is that Jo was whining about Catholics making graven images and using them in Church, when the Mormons do the same with Moroni.

And Jo's post about the blood of Christ shows that she has no clue whatsoever about salvation that comes through the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. He shed his blood for us.

again Jo shows that she is just like the Pharisees:

John 6:
52 Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”

53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.

[Hamster]

I've been pledging allegiance to the flag for 20 years. I had no idea this meant I was allying with the united states government. I assumed our society just really respected dyed cloth

[Cow Poke]

I've been pledging allegiance to the flag for 20 years. I had no idea this meant I was allying with the united states government. I assumed our society just really respected dyed cloth

Well, yeah, I never could get past the first part of the pledge, cause I couldn't figure out what legions I was pledjuh'ing.

[One Bad Pig]

In further studying the RCC, I continue to make discoveries which surprise me.

One of the issues concerns the umbrella of the main stream Christian church discussed here on Tweb. Included under this umbrella are the churches claimed by one another to be true Christian churches. The claim is made that all past differences have been laid aside, and all of the recognized denominations are now a part of the same happy family of the Body of Christ.
<snip>
How is it that so many posters on Tweb refuse to acknowledge this? Why do you continue to pretend to be a part of the same family of main stream Christianity when the Papacy of the largest church institution of the world denies that you can achieve salvation unless you join the RCC?

You are improperly conflating salvation with membership in the RCC. Those who follow Christ outside of the RCC are considered second class Christians of a sort, but their salvation is not denied.

As evidence in support of the RCC’s viewpoint of the Pope, the following quote was found here:

http://amazingdiscoveries.org/R-Pope...my_power_Jesus

I had to research all of the claims made at the site to determine their authenticity. I found both correct references and false references. I could not find anything that indicates the following is false:

Those whom the Pope of Rome doth separate, it is not a man that separates them but God. For the Pope holdeth place on earth, not simply of a man but of the true God....dissolves, not by human but rather by divine authority....I am in all and above all, so that God Himself and I, the vicar of God, hath both one consistory, and I am able to do almost all that God can do...wherefore, if those things that I do be said not to be done of man, but of God, what do you make of me but God? Again, if prelates of the Church be called of Constantine for gods, I then being above all prelates, seem by this reason to be above all gods (emphasis added).ix

ix. Decretales Domini Gregori IX Translatione Episcoporum, ("On the Transference of Bishops"), title 7, chapter 3; Corpus Juris Canonice (2nd Leipzig ed., 1881), Column 99; (Paris, 1612).

I could find nothing that indicates the above is true. It's on a bunch of anti-Catholic sites, mixed with other stuff of questionable provenance.
<snip a bunch of stuff on papal infallibility, which I won't defend>

In a letter written to the church by Pope Boniface in 1302, he said:

http://amazingdiscoveries.org/R-Pope...my_power_Jesus

Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.xii
xii. Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam (Rome: 1302).

This is absurd!!! Salvation comes from Jesus Christ!!!! Does the Vicar of Christ, i.e., the Pope, believe that he has replaced Christ? Or has he actually usurped Christ’s Power and Authority to save??? Which is it??? Remember, we cannot serve God and mammon at the same time!!!

This is not the stance of the RCC today. You are also mischaracterizing it. The pope believed that, as the vicar of Christ, anyone not subject to him was not following Christ.

According to the RCC:

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False...olic_idols.htm

"If anyone denies that in the sacrament of the most Holy Eucharist (communion wafer) are contained truly, really and substantially the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ, but says that He is in it only as a sign, or figure or force, let him be anathema." (One exhausted definition of "Anathema" = To be damned and put to death) Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent. Original text with English translation, by Rev. H.J. Schroeder, O.P., B. Herder Book Co. 1960, p.79, Canon 1.

Maybe the definition wouldn't be so exhausted if it wasn't trying to do too much. It's got nothing to do with putting people to death, and "damned" is probably a little too forceful there as well.

However, who is the Creator? Christ, or the Priest??? Consider the following:

Acts 7:48-51 (KJV)
48Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet,
49Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest?
50Hath not my hand made all these things?
51Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

In addition to showing that something a man makes, be it a wafer and/or a cup of wine, cannot be the actual body and blood of Christ because Christ dwells in Heaven, it is blasphemous to believe that a man has more power and authority than Christ Himself, by claiming that something made by man can become the body and blood of Christ just because the man “blessed” it. We take the Sacrament “in remembrance” of Christ!

That's an ... interesting misapprehension of the meaning of the Real Presence commingled with decontextualized interpretation of scripture. Nobody believes that, jo. Sorry.

One of the most shocking things I learned about the RCC as I was doing research on their beliefs brought me to tears. I actually wept when I saw this. It has to do with their many Catechisms. Now, first I will try to present how the Vatican sees Catechisms. From the Catholic Encyclopedia, I found out (emphasis added):

The word katechesis means instruction by word of mouth, especially by questioning and answering. Though it may apply to any subject-matter, it is commonly used for instruction in the elements of religion, especially preparation for initiation into Christianity.

It is worthy of note that, though texts of Scripture are not quoted, the second catechism contains a large number of questions and answers relating to the Holy Scripture, among others the following: "Is the reading of the Bible necessary to all Christians? — The reading of the Bible is not necessary to all Christians, because they are taught by the Church; still, the reading of it is very useful and recommended to all."

This seems to be pretty self-explanatory. IOW, catechisms, though they do not quote Scripture, do address questions and answers pertaining to Holy Scripture. However, studying Scripture is not “necessary” because the RCC teaches “scripture”. Now, regardless that the RCC said that reading Scripture “is very useful and recommended to all”, this is obviously not as important as learning the RCC’s dogmas!! I would ask, therefore, when and where the RCC got their power and authority to create man-made dogmas which people MUST agree to; and, when and where did they get the power and authority to have their dogmas hold a superior and supreme meaning ABOVE the Word of God???

I agree with your concern here.

Here is something else that I did not know before. Although the Catholic Bible includes the original Ten Commandments, the Catechetical “formula” of the Ten Commandments is distinctly different. Here is a version I found on a Vatican website:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_cs...sm/command.htm

A Traditional Catechetical Formula

1. I am the LORD your God:
you shall not have
strange Gods before me.

2. You shall not take
the name of the LORD your God in vain.

3. Remember to keep holy the LORD'S Day.

4. Honor your father and your mother.

5. You shall not kill. You shall not commit adultery.

6. You shall not commit adultery.

7. You shall not steal.

8. You shall not bear false witness
against your neighbor.

9. You shall not covet
your neighbor's wife.

10. You shall not covet
your neighbor's goods.

The glaring and inescapable change (which you would not even be aware of if you were to believe the RCC’s claim made earlier: The reading of the Bible is not necessary to all Christians, because they are taught by the Church;) is that they entirely deleted the second commandment. In order to still come up with “ten” commandments, they broke apart the 10th commandment into two separate commandments. Thus, the “scripture” from the Bible which IS being taught by the RCC is a blasphemous version of scripture. As we can see from the catechetical formula, the RCC is teaching a lie!!

Here is the original 2nd Commandment:

Exodus 20:4-6 (KJV)
4Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
5Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
6And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

Um, that is still in the catechism. It is considered part of the first commandment. What you found is a summary of the Ten Commandments, not the RCC's entire teaching on them.