Leaders representing the Roman Catholic Church and some American Protestant denominations have signed an agreement in Texas to recognize each other's baptisms.
After about six years of dialogue, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Reformed Church in America, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), the Christian Reformed Church in North America, and the United Church of Christ signed a document recognizing each other's liturgical rites of baptism.
The five denominations signed the "Common Agreement on Mutual Recognition of Baptism," affirming the baptism agreement on Tuesday evening at a prayer service held at St. Mary's Cathedral in Austin....
"...both Catholics and non-Catholics wondering where the Roman Catholic Church really stands. This book leaves no doubt about the truthful answer. Author Richard Bennett spent forty-eight years in Catholicism and twenty-two as a priest..."
You picked a good article, in "Roman Catholic Tradition," so it's good that you provided the link at the end of your statement. It is well worth reading. Just some more reasons why Christian and Catholics -- never together!, faith by act.
"Roman Catholicism describes TRADITION as a ‚Äúliving transmission‚ÄĚ through which ‚Äú‚Ä¶ the Church, in her doctrine, life and worship, perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes‚ÄĚ. It is the living faith produced by ‚Äúrealities and words that are being passed on.‚ÄĚ This, explains Catholic scholars, is accomplished in a variety of ways: The way in which the faith is transmitted can take almost any form in the Church: the sign of the cross that a mother traces on the forehead of her child; teaching the basic prayers of Christianity, especially the ‚ÄúOur Father,‚ÄĚ in the home and in religious instruction; living, praying, and singing in the local congregation, into which the young person grows; Christian example in everyday life and Christian action even to the point of martyrdom; the witness given by Christian music (especially hymns and chorales), by architecture and the plastic arts (especially representations of the cross, which is considered a privileged Christian symbol); and, not least, by the liturgy of the Church." [The Church‚Äôs Confession of Faith]" Roman Catholic Tradition
Thanks for the link, Are some RCs Christian. I agree fully with what this fellow said; without nuance. I have always preferred to say that no one can understand Catholicism and remain in that cult and I take it a step further by saying no one can understand Catholicism and not reject it fully, either from the inside or the outside and still call themselves Christian. That is what these fellows are doing on this thread. I also agree with this fellow about a possible transition period, but I would say that possibility should not and would not diminish my criticism of anyone supporting the RCC. That is what many of our ecumenicalists say they are doing out of some misplaced love.
SteveR wrote: RCC has error... been home to generations of God's People
Steve. You worked out which century you're in yet?
The true Christian is by grace the witness of the Word of God. Christian is Greek for Christ-follower, not mortal follower or church follower. The Christian then has the perception to identify false witness such as the J.W's.
By the same token the Christian can perceive the UNBiblical nature of the RCC. Their christ is not the Bible Christ. Their church is not the Bible Church. Their office of pope is antichrist. Their worship of dead bodies and other relics is rediculous religious fallacy. Their doctrine on baptism is unBiblical. Their 'Traditions' are unBiblical. Their doctrine of justification is unBiblical. Their doctrine of salvation is unBiblical.
The RC mass is unBiblical blasphemous and a misconstrued and apostate fraud.
Their maryolatry is not only unBiblical nonsense and idolatry it is embarrassing that any Christian would ever consider it. Which is why the Christian knows it is ludicrous practice. The co-mediatrix idea is so far from Bible doctrine that it is obviously pagan.
The RCC is so far from Biblical truth that it has become a peddler of fiction.
SteveR wrote: but is home... to generations of God's People
Well please give some links to those who you claim are justified by faith alone and presently still at home in the RC 'church' and explain how they still hold to the blasphemous mass etc.?
Do you believe that regeneration is the sole work of the HS? Would the same HOLY SPIRIT OF TRUTH leave a new born babe in the midst of such antichristian blasphemy?
Read the tract posted previously and please comment on that.
I am acquainted with few converted former RC's and they do not hold your view as it is incompatible with Holy Scripture and the gospel.
"If you, with a good knowledge of Romanism, can maintain that there are Romanists who are true Christians, I fear for your own soul; you clearly do not know Christ or his Gospel. I exhort you to "search the scriptures" (Jn.5:39); for the "Gospel" you have embraced is not the Gospel of Christ. And to those Roman Catholics who claim to be "born again," "saved," etc., even though you remain in the Roman Catholic institution, I say this: you have been deceived. You are still dead in trespasses and sins (Eph.2:1). Repent! Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ! And come out of Babylon!"
haveyenotheard wrote: Are Some RC's Christians? Scroll down to ...THE ROMAN CATHOLIC INSTITUTION Are Some Roman Catholics Christians? (8 pgs) Today you can not be a RC and a Christian-read the above carefully.
Great site! What a resource! Thanks!
It's good to see some remnant stability. ________
Steve, just caught your last. If there were any of God's people within the RCC at any point in its infamous history, then I would not call them Roman Catholics.
John UK wrote: Why then did Trent put his published text on the Forbidden Books list for Roman Catholics? p.s. Erasmus did not write the Received Text. Tell me Steve, what Greek text do you think the AV 1611 translators used?
This thread has gone full circle, once again my position(as stated early in this thread) is the RCC has error(some time periods worse than others) but is and has been home to generations of God's People
Today you can not be a RC and a Christian-read the above carefully.
The Catholic Counter-Reformation movement often condemned Erasmus as having "laid the egg that hatched the Reformation. (So was Erasmus such a friend of Rome?) In his Treatise on Preparation For Death he made clear his position, that faith in the atonement of Christ, and not in the sacraments and rituals of the church, are the only guarantee of eternal life( Romish but not all the way?) All of his works were placed on the Index of Prohibited Books by Paul IV, and some of his works continued to be banned or viewed with caution in the later Index of Pius IV.
SteveR wrote: He not only published it, edited many parts, translated other parts from Jeromes(from the antichrist church) Latin Vulgate, he then dedicated it to your antichrist.
Why then did Trent put his published text on the Forbidden Books list for Roman Catholics?
p.s. Erasmus did not write the Received Text.
Tell me Steve, what Greek text do you think the AV 1611 translators used?
John for JESUS wrote: 1. God is sovereign, He is not a dictator. 2. Even James taught works, though we are not saved by works. 3. One is saved by faith alone through Christ alone. 4. God is not the one to respond to us but rather we respond to God. 5. I have never defendeded Catholic doctrine..
John UK wrote: Ah....you mean that Bible which the RCC tried soooo hard to prevent being translated into English, even putting out contracts on those who attempted it. But the Monks' Monopoly was broken, and God's word was made available to all. Liberation has made such a difference. Yes indeed, read that Bible! It is good advice to every generation!
Do you recall Desiderius Erasmus, a Roman Catholic, published the Received Text? Will you stop using it now?
Galmor wrote: You have been proclaiming the Arminian heresy on this site for over two years now. Thus God loses His sovereignty over His creature. Your recent posts defending the idolatrous, blasphemous and repudiated Roman Catholic religious fallacy, suggests your endorsement for the papal antichrist and his unBiblical religion. This demonstrates the subtle nature of your deviation from Scripture and confirms Matt 7:21-23 and 2Peter 2:1-2.
Arminianism was labeled heresy at The Synod of Dort where they were excluded by Calvinist. I believe they are wrong on a couple points but they believe Jesus saves. God is sovereign, He is not a dictator. Even James taught works, though we are not saved by works. One is saved by faith alone through Christ alone. God is not the one to respond to us but rather we respond to God. I have never defendeded Catholic doctrine, instead I have said I do not believe in things such as purgatory, praying to saints, etc.
If by that you mean I believe it is possible that the Catholic Church (or any church) can step into apostasy after being run according to scripture, then yes. I wasn't sure about the statement in the article that the seven churches are church ages so I'm not sure how accurate it is overall. Can you please tell me (someone who doesn't know alot about it) why you think the Catholic Church is apostate and has it always been?