Oh come on! There is plentiful diversity in the Catholic Church--of orders, of habits, of spiritual traditions, of theological styles, of saints, of liturgical expressions, etc., etc. Diversity is one thing; fundamental disagreement about essential doctrine is something else altogether.
Trying to say that catholic diversity Bishop Barron said above is equivalent to the protestant babel of fundamental differences is a false analogy, a fallacy.
BISHOP BARON I NEED UR HELP , AM DYING AS RESULTS OF MY INTAKE OF DROGS ....AM WEAK NUT STILL CANT DO WITHOUT DRUGS...AM DYING EACH DAY .....JELP ME MY LORD
@tony Feel free to cite where you got your information supporting the claim that Catholics aren't Christian... Otherwise, I think it's you that should re-explore the Bible.
@tony I'm not sure you fully understand the bible. None of us do. But God is not a God of confusion. He would not try to confuse his children, so, you should act in Jesus's example and not try to confuse people who are correct with you Protestant Jibberish. I pray for you too! I hope you find your way back to the True Church of Christ.
@tony Catholics are Christ's True Church. They were the first and they are the only Church with Authority. Through the Apostles to Bishops, Priests, and Deacons through the centuries. The Catholic Church is the Only Church with With Christs Authority.
@tony I'm down for your Challenge. I will be pressing through a KJV Bible for the rest of this week. But I have a NAB and a Douay Rheims Bible on the way to get a full understanding. Yes, I know of Matt 16, when he properly establishes his Church. So, you go first.
Pretty hard to dislike Father Barron - he takes on the hard questions and escapes without harming himself or the questions, and yet he engages and scores.
I loved these Fr. Barron videos back in the day! I binged-watched them and they helped so much in my journey home to the Catholic Church. Fr. Barron was ordained a bishop just three months after I joined the Church, so it felt like I had a connection with him and we were accompanying each other as we entered a new stage of life. God bless💕
@@edrash1 Have you talked to a person who identifies as "Reformed" lately? There's such a diversity of opinions that repeating verbatim what one "reform" Christian said would get a dozen other "reform" Christians up in arms. They don't have much of a centralized theology...
I met you at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in NY over a decade ago. You were nice enough to talk with my sister-who could not be there-on the phone. A wonderful day for me and my sister. Prayers for you, Bishop Barron!
I am soon to marry, and as the spiritual leader of my home, I am deeply searching for our spiritual home. In my research, I have found great encouragement in the Catholic church. I believe I am now on a proper path and will soon begin the search to find a Catholic church for my family.
I know this is an older post but I hope you and your wife talked about it and agreed. I too am married and to a woman that reads her Bible everyday. I too am the spiritual leader of the home, unfortunately my wife has decided not to follow. It has created deep divisions in our relationship. It would have been helpful to know before hand.
Interesting, well-balanced presentation, Fr. Barron. I have a friend who's a Lutheran pastor. He keeps wishing his church had a magisterium. It makes him cringe to see matters of doctrine voted upon by people who have no training in theology. I think many people don't understand that the development of doctrine is not an arbitrary thing, teachings imposed by people in authority simply because they have authority. Doctrine must be consistent with Scripture, and it must make logical sense.
Oh indeed! My biggest problem with these "spring up churches" of today. No particular theological basis or backing. To me this is such a maverick way, dangerous, and leaves ample avenues for any and all wrong information to fall in to place under the rooves of these start up (upstart?) church communities where the well meaning leaders and followers remain albeit clueless and somewhat innocent, uninformed. Yet, my humble opinion is that all involved ought to feel the responsibility to be seeking the real actual Truth, rather than making up the "feel good" so called "truth" as they stumble forward with a Bible in their hand. May the mighty Holy Spirit help these folks, guide them, breathe the breath of reality on us all as we stumble toward Heaven in the murky secularity of this life!
You're very misguided, sorry for whoever taught you that, terrible thing to say, you should ashamed of yourself, you must be very young because no true, responsible adults would have such evil things to say about any religion
I became Catholic not because I "liked" it better, but for the same reason Neumann said. Writings of the Eastern Orthodox helped me a lot in this regard by the way, for they, and the Oriental Orthodox, and the Assyrian, are stronger proof than anything that the ideas of apostolic succession as just a succession of believers or presbyters is just not sustainable; we were getting it wrong for well over 1000 years before Luther figured it out? Sorry, but that doesn't work. Most of the Protestant arguments simply fall apart on this point. I pray they look at it and realize it, apostolic succession wasn't an invention of Rome. It just wasn't.
John Collins LOL I likely know more real scientists than you know actual people. Cultists like you are destroying science, BTW. www.deanesmay.com/2016/05/05/the-scientific-reality-of-the-scientism-religion/
John Collins Stephen Hawking is an idiot when it comes to philosophy and theology, but he's not a cult leader. It'd be nice if he'd give Father Geroges LeMaitre a little more credit though, given that LeMaitre's the one responsible for most of his career. No, the cult leaders are people like Richard Dawkins.
This is part of why I think most people don't trust atheists--the clear dishonesty. Atheist cults have been around for thousands of years and are still highly active today.
I have been a protestant Christian pretty much my entire adult life. I have always thought of the catholic church as a strange and basically heretical in their teachings. However, I have begun to listen to Bishop Barron and Patrick Madrid on the radio. I suddenly have started to read about the catholic faith and watched TH-cam videos about the faith. Of course, I 've done further research. I feel it is a great church. I guess the whole Mary thing ha me a bit perplexed. The whole asking saints for intercession also cause me some problems. However, I feel better about the catholic church. Don't know if I will change denomination.
Thank you Rodney. That actually makes sense. I've watched the entire 'Catholicism' series and was really impressed. Everything I had ever heard about Catholicism came from non-Catholics (I'm originally from south Alabama) so my view was very skewed. I've been watching nearly all of Fr. Barron's TH-cam videos. They all make sense to me. Thanks again for the response!
28 And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his teachings: 29 For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.
Robert. I had a partner in business once upon a time. And in the busness, we had many disagreements in our practice. But one thing we learn because we were both very good at what we did. We learned that if we strongly disagreed on something, that meant that we were both right. It's simple, we were both right and the answer is not one or the other but in fact both. What made that way of thinking work, was the fact that we seen the genius of it. If I may say that. The problem we had was that we had to figure out a way to gear the two. Not always easy, but necessary and in time was a very powerful mechanism.
My father is an Evangelical and my mother is a Catholics. Having to go back and fort between these denomination makes my head burst to find which is which is true to follow. But , somehow , my heart always never lose focus to Jesus be it wherever and whatever denominations I go to. Now , as I got older , it's pretty clear that to be able to questions much of everything about how Faiths work , I found the path of Evangelical have always been my calling to stand in the faith ( Even when I am dealing with my current sin ). Catholics still ring most to my heart still ( probably because I spend most of my childhood more with my mom than my dad ) and I only got into protestant when I finally moved out with my dad since dad's place kinda the only place that in majority , got protestant churches. One things for sure , it was a culture shock . In Catholics faith , you got a lot of statues and decorations that resembles the faith but Protestants are minimalist ( it's their way of saying that faith in Christ is the focus inside you and not the things that you have ). Protestants got instruments ranging in a complete rhythm sections and I first play the keyboard then shift my majors to electric guitar. Learn music once in classical trained literacy but now as protestant , it's pop jazz and Gospel feel ( although sometimes , we are inclined to go for the classical style ) In short , my transitions does change my culture of serving the Lord through church but It doesn't change the foundations of my own living church inside me...JESUS. My focus have always been to Him all the time. Right now , I am currently far away from home and constantly dealing with a lot of stuff ( so much that my catholic side tells me to repent and make a confessions ). But , I am grateful to God when He sent me different people fo the same faith but different denominations to carry me up when I am down by offering me to go with them at the church. I believe that God's work is always in motions and if it wasn't for Him , I would have already lost not of faith in churches of men but the church that build personally within my heart with Him. God Bless Everyone and do also say a prayers for this sinners that smokes and drink to go oftenly if best , eradicate it....
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:50 🤔 Dr. Alister McGrath's book "Christianity's Dangerous Idea" explores the issue of authority within the Protestant movement and the challenges of interpreting the Word of God. 01:20 💡 Luther's idea of the priesthood of all believers led to diverse interpretations and disagreements within Protestantism, challenging the notion of the plain sense of the Bible. 02:15 📚 McGrath suggests a gradual consensus model of authority in Protestantism, analogous to a democratic approach, which raises concerns about its effectiveness. 03:25 🛡️ While McGrath's democratic authority concept is reasonable, Bishop Barron draws inspiration from John Henry Newman's view on the necessity of a living voice to determine truth amidst divisions. 06:38 💬 The Protestant individualistic Holy Spirit interpretation does not resolve the problem of widespread disagreement, unlike the Catholic belief in the Holy Spirit's guidance in magisterial teaching. 07:20 🛡️ Newman's analogy envisions the Church's authority as a referee in the game of theological discourse, intervening when necessary, avoiding excessive interference. Made with HARPA AI
Yay Fr. Barron..you explained clearly that the church is a living church and that it needs an authority. Just like Jesus said to Peter:"Man has not reveiled this to you But my father". So has God reviled this to you Fr.....now Bishop Barron. We love you! We needed someone like you here in California. Mi Casa 🏡 Es Tu Casa🏡. We are praying for you..please pray for us.😊
I have no problem with people who are Protestant Christian. In fact my girlfriend is a Protestant Christian and her Protestant denomination is Baptist. And when I told her that my denomination is Catholic, she and I respected each other and there was mutual understanding.
Dude, you are not part of any denomination. Protestants are, because there are more than 60,000 of them. They have to set themselves apart from the other 59,999. The Catholic Church is the only one true church. It is not a denomination. It is not one among many. Just think about it.
Respectfully...the almost 2,000 year old Catholic Church is not a denomination...but the very Church our Lord Jesus Christ established in Matthew 16:18.
Chritianity has been divided unfortunately which resulted in the conflict and I think what Fr. Robert mentioned is a good starting point to really think about how we can narrow the gaps among Christian brothers and sisters. May God's grace and love be with you all !!
I became Anglican a few years ago and have found myself drawn more to the Anglo-Catholic end of the spectrum, and now feel drawn to Rome. I'm hoping someday to enter full communion with Rome, but at least for now I'm living practically as a Catholic. At a certain point I realized (as Newman did) that many of the Anglo-Catholic traditions are beautiful, but they're also kind of empty dead traditions without the living tradition of the Catholic Church. If we all follow one God, one Jesus, one faith, one Church, how can it be that we are all using wildly different interpretations of the same text? I think it's fine to debate scripture and doctrine, we should even encourage it because it promotes a greater familiarity with the Scripture and with theological concepts, but at the end of the day we need a unified voice of truth in the world to guard against heresy.
My small town in the UK has one Catholic church and at least seven Protestant ones of different denominations. How powerful it would be if we were all one.
The Pillar and Foundation of Truth is the CHURCH, not the Bible. (1 Tim 3.15) The Church wrote, assembled and canonized the Bible. No effect can be greater than it's cause. Think about it...
God Himself wrote the Bible through men. 2 Peter 1:19-21; see also 2 Timothy 3:15-17, Proverbs 30:5-6, 1 Corinthians 4:6, 2 Peter 3:15-16, 1 Peter 4:17, 1 Peter 1:22-25, James 5:10, James 1:18, 21-25, Hebrews 13:7, 11:, 4:12, 1:1-4, and I'll post others as I find them.
Does your Bible believing church teach that you must physically eat the flesh of Jesus and drink His blood to have life in you (John 6:53)? John 6:53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you
Tim Spangler Jesus Promises His Real Presence in the Eucharist John 6:4,11-14 - on the eve of the Passover, Jesus performs the miracle of multiplying the loaves. This was prophesied in the Old Testament (e.g., 2 Kings 4:43), and foreshadows the infinite heavenly bread which is Him. Matt. 14:19, 15:36; Mark 6:41, 8:6; Luke 9:16 -these passages are additional accounts of the multiplication miracles. This points to the Eucharist. Matt. 16:12 -in this verse, Jesus explains His metaphorical use of the term "bread." In John 6, He eliminates any metaphorical possibilities. John 6:4 - Jesus is in Capernaum on the eve of Passover, and the lambs are gathered to be slaughtered and eaten. Look what He says. John 6:35,41,48,51 - Jesus says four times "I AM the bread from heaven." It is He, Himself, the eternal bread from heaven. John 6:27,31,49 - there is a parallel between the manna in the desert which was physically consumed, and this "new" bread which must be consumed. John 6:51-52- then Jesus says that the bread He is referring to is His flesh. The Jews take Him literally and immediately question such a teaching. How can this man give us His flesh to eat? John 6:53 - 58 - Jesus does not correct their literal interpretation. Instead, Jesus eliminates any metaphorical interpretations by swearing an oath and being even more literal about eating His flesh. In fact, Jesus says four times we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. Catholics thus believe that Jesus makes present His body and blood in the sacrifice of the Mass. Protestants, if they are not going to become Catholic, can only argue that Jesus was somehow speaking symbolically. John 6:23-53 - however, a symbolic interpretation is not plausible. Throughout these verses, the Greek text uses the word "phago" nine times. "Phago" literally means "to eat" or "physically consume." Like the Protestants of our day, the disciples take issue with Jesus' literal usage of "eat." So Jesus does what? John 6:54, 56, 57, 58 - He uses an even more literal verb, translated as "trogo," which means to gnaw or chew or crunch. He increases the literalness and drives his message home. Jesus will literally give us His flesh and blood to eat. The word “trogo” is only used two other times in the New Testament (in Matt. 24:38 and John 13:18) and it always means to literally gnaw or chew meat. While “phago” might also have a spiritual application, "trogo" is never used metaphorically in Greek. So Protestants cannot find one verse in Scripture where "trogo" is used symbolically, and yet this must be their argument if they are going to deny the Catholic understanding of Jesus' words. Moreover, the Jews already knew Jesus was speaking literally even before Jesus used the word “trogo” when they said “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” (John 6:52). John 6:55 - to clarify further, Jesus says "For My Flesh is food indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed." This phrase can only be understood as being responsive to those who do not believe that Jesus' flesh is food indeed, and His blood is drink indeed. Further, Jesus uses the word which is translated as "sarx." "Sarx" means flesh (not "soma" which means body). See, for example, John 1:13,14; 3:6; 8:15; 17:2; Matt. 16:17; 19:5; 24:22; 26:41; Mark 10:8; 13:20; 14:38; and Luke 3:6; 24:39 which provides other examples in Scripture where "sarx" means flesh. It is always literal. John 6:55 - further, the phrases "real" food and "real" drink use the word "alethes." "Alethes" means "really" or "truly," and would only be used if there were doubts concerning the reality of Jesus' flesh and blood as being food and drink. Thus, Jesus is emphasizing the miracle of His body and blood being actual food and drink. John 6:60 - as are many anti-Catholics today, Jesus' disciples are scandalized by these words. They even ask, "Who can 'listen' to it (much less understand it)?" To the unillumined mind, it seems grotesque. John 6:61-63 - Jesus acknowledges their disgust. Jesus' use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" means the disciples need supernatural faith, not logic, to understand His words. John 3:6 - Jesus often used the comparison of "spirit versus flesh" to teach about the necessity of possessing supernatural faith versus a natural understanding. In Mark 14:38 Jesus also uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison. The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. We must go beyond the natural to understand the supernatural. In 1 Cor. 2:14,3:3; Rom 8:5; and Gal. 5:17, Paul also uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison to teach that unspiritual people are not receiving the gift of faith. They are still "in the flesh." John 6:63 - Protestants often argue that Jesus' use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" shows that Jesus was only speaking symbolically. However, Protestants must explain why there is not one place in Scripture where "spirit" means "symbolic." As we have seen, the use of "spirit" relates to supernatural faith. What words are spirit and life? The words that we must eat Jesus' flesh and drink His blood, or we have no life in us. John 6:66-67 - many disciples leave Jesus, rejecting this literal interpretation that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. At this point, these disciples really thought Jesus had lost His mind. If they were wrong about the literal interpretation, why wouldn't Jesus, the Great Teacher, have corrected them? Why didn't Jesus say, "Hey, come back here, I was only speaking symbolically!"? Because they understood correctly. Jesus Institutes the Eucharist / More Proofs of the Real Presence Matt. 26:26-28; Mark. 14:22,24; Luke 22;19-20; 1 Cor. 11:24-25 - Jesus says, this IS my body and blood. Jesus does not say, this is a symbol of my body and blood. Matt. 26:26; Mark. 14:22; Luke 22:19-20 - the Greek phrase is "Touto estin to soma mou." This phraseology means "this is actually" or "this is really" my body and blood. 1 Cor. 11:24 - the same translation is used by Paul - "touto mou estin to soma." The statement is "this is really" my body and blood. Nowhere in Scripture does God ever declare something without making it so. Matt. 26:26; Mark. 14:22; Luke 22:19 - to deny the 2,000 year-old Catholic understanding of the Eucharist, Protestants must argue that Jesus was really saying "this represents (not is) my body and blood." However, Aramaic, the language that Jesus spoke, had over 30 words for "represent," but Jesus did not use any of them. He used the Aramaic word for "estin" which means "is." Matt. 26:28; Mark. 14:24; Luke 22:20 - Jesus' use of "poured out" in reference to His blood also emphasizes the reality of its presence. Exodus 24:8 - Jesus emphasizes the reality of His actual blood being present by using Moses' statement "blood of the covenant." 1 Cor. 10:16 - Paul asks the question, "the cup of blessing and the bread of which we partake, is it not an actual participation in Christ's body and blood?" Is Paul really asking because He, the divinely inspired writer, does not understand? No, of course not. Paul's questions are obviously rhetorical. This IS the actual body and blood. Further, the Greek word "koinonia" describes an actual, not symbolic participation in the body and blood. 1 Cor. 10:18 - in this verse, Paul is saying we are what we eat. We are not partners with a symbol. We are partners of the one actual body. 1 Cor. 11:23 - Paul does not explain what he has actually received directly from Christ, except in the case when he teaches about the Eucharist. Here, Paul emphasizes the importance of the Eucharist by telling us he received directly from Jesus instructions on the Eucharist which is the source and summit of the Christian faith. 1 Cor. 11:27-29 - in these verses, Paul says that eating or drinking in an unworthy manner is the equivalent of profaning (literally, murdering) the body and blood of the Lord. If this is just a symbol, we cannot be guilty of actually profaning (murdering) it. We cannot murder a symbol. Either Paul, the divinely inspired apostle of God, is imposing an unjust penalty, or the Eucharist is the actual body and blood of Christ. 1 Cor. 11:30 - this verse alludes to the consequences of receiving the Eucharist unworthily. Receiving the actual body and blood of Jesus in mortal sin results in actual physical consequences to our bodies. 1 Cor. 11:27-30 - thus, if we partake of the Eucharist unworthily, we are guilty of literally murdering the body of Christ, and risking physical consequences to our bodies. This is overwhelming evidence for the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. These are unjust penalties if the Eucharist is just a symbol. Acts 2:42 - from the Church's inception, apostolic tradition included celebrating the Eucharist (the "breaking of the bread") to fulfill Jesus' command "do this in remembrance of me." Acts 20:28 - Paul charges the Church elders to "feed" the Church of the Lord, that is, with the flesh and blood of Christ. Matt. 6:11; Luke 11:3 - in the Our Father, we ask God to give us this day our daily bread, that is the bread of life, Jesus Christ. Matt. 12:39 - Jesus says no “sign” will be given except the “sign of the prophet Jonah.” While Protestants focus only on the “sign” of the Eucharist, this verse demonstrates that a sign can be followed by the reality (here, Jesus’ resurrection, which is intimately connected to the Eucharist). Matt. 19:6 - Jesus says a husband and wife become one flesh which is consummated in the life giving union of the marital act. This union of marital love which reflects Christ's union with the Church is physical, not just spiritual. Thus, when Paul says we are a part of Christ's body (Eph. 1:22-23; 5:23,30-31; Col. 1:18,24), he means that our union with Christ is physical, not just spiritual. But our union with Christ can only be physical if He is actually giving us something physical, that is Himself, which is His body and blood to consume (otherwise it is a mere spiritual union). Luke 14:15 - blessed is he who eats this bread in the kingdom of God, on earth and in heaven. Luke 22:19, 1 Cor. 11:24-25 - Jesus commands the apostles to "do this," that is, offer the Eucharistic sacrifice, in remembrance of Him. Luke 24:26-35 - in the Emmaus road story, Jesus gives a homily on the Scriptures and then follows it with the celebration of the Eucharist. This is the Holy Mass, and the Church has followed this order of the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist for 2,000 years. Luke 24:30-31,35 - Jesus is known only in the breaking of bread. Luke is emphasizing that we only receive the fullness of Jesus by celebrating the Eucharistic feast of His body and blood, which is only offered in its fullness by the Catholic Church. John 1:14 - literally, this verse teaches that the Word was made flesh and "pitched His tabernacle" among us. The Eucharist, which is the Incarnate Word of God under the appearance of bread, is stored in the tabernacles of Catholic churches around the world. John 21:15,17 - Jesus charges Peter to "feed" His sheep, that is, with the Word of God through preaching and the Eucharist. Acts 9:4-5; 22:8; 26:14-15 - Jesus asks Saul, “Why are you persecuting me?” when Saul was persecuting the Church. Jesus and the Church are one body (Bridegroom and Bride), and we are one with Jesus through His flesh and blood (the Eucharist). 1 Cor. 12:13 - we "drink" of one Spirit in the Eucharist by consuming the blood of Christ eternally offered to the Father. Heb. 10:25,29 - these verses allude to the reality that failing to meet together to celebrate the Eucharist is mortal sin. It is profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Heb. 12:22-23 - the Eucharistic liturgy brings about full union with angels in festal gathering, the just spirits, and God Himself, which takes place in the assembly or "ecclesia" (the Church). Heb. 12:24 - we couldn't come to Jesus' sprinkled blood if it were no longer offered by Jesus to the Father and made present for us. 2 Pet. 1:4 - we partake of His divine nature, most notably through the Eucharist - a sacred family bond where we become one. Rev. 2:7; 22:14 - we are invited to eat of the tree of life, which is the resurrected flesh of Jesus which, before, hung on the tree.
pepe bastardes I'm certainly no saint but I can't comprehend it either. When I see terms like "wafer God" and "death cookie" I feel sick. And worse that it comes from people who call themselves "Christian" and think they have some God-given authority to "save" Catholics.
and do youbelieve you are able to interpert Scripture for yourself better than the Church and the Magesterium . I beg to differ. And how do you explain that it is the Catholic Church that gave us the Books of the Bible.
John Dattoma all u need do after u have accepted Jesus as savior and asked Him to forgive ur sins and live inside ur spirit, is read & study the bible 4 ur self without the influence of any denomination or religion. The bible is truth, and every man is a liar.
Has anyone asked how did Protestanism come about? Surely anyone can see that it comes from the root word Protest! And Protest against what? Well history reveals Protestanism was to Protest against the roman 💒 departure from The Authority of Holy Bible WORD doctrines! Pure n simple!!!👏👏👏👏👏
The protest was initally against indulgences. Luther felt it was an attempt to sell salvation which... Is impossible. But i can see where were starting to fall apart as well. Our denominations have let things in that scripture clearly condemns but yet we reject things that seem to be supported by scripture which is a clear violation of Sola Scriptura... :-( im deeply puzzled... :-( sincerily a deeply concerned Presbyterian. :-(
no. I will never leave Him nor He me. every day I walk in the light and guidance of the Holy Spirit. I actually know Him and have a real experience of Him. once every week or two I gather with my fellow true believers to learn about and praise Him and his Spirit comes among us. We break bread and share wine in remembrance of Him as He commanded. this is holy communion as it should be celebrated. And we sense the results of it by His real presence among us.
25,000 plus different denominations all claiming to be guided by the Holy Spirit and understand scripture correctly, everyone else is wrong, what else do you call it? LOL
He is Right every man and woman seem to have different opinions about everything. But Ibelieve I have a small universal truth in this. It goes something like; God listens to people in great despair. And he shows them great miracle of comfort.
truth, beauty, goodness all in catholic faith. No where else offers that. You have to wear "catholic glasses" to see it. I love the peace and humility in Catholics. I don't believe Protestants have fullness of truth as many books were left out by ex-Augustinian monk matin Luther. Second you need traditions to understand many things in bible that only Catholics can answer correctly. For example, you wouldn't understand exactly if you read my love letter written to my spouse 20yrs ago unless you know both families.
Where in the Bible does it say this? It doesn't. Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book? It doesn't.
"[T]he most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday....People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become 7th Day Adventists, and keep Saturday holy." Bishop Barron, you said that there needs to be a living voice. Well, there is! Hebrews 4:12 says: "Indeed, the word of God is living and effective.." Hebrews 4:7 “Today, if you will hear His voice..."
@DannyGirl The Catholic Encyclopedia says different, it says the church made the change (under the title "commandments"). (My guess is the new CCC changed what was the historic position of the Catholic Church, which previously freely admitted to making the change in the law.) Isaiah 66:23 says we will keep the sabbath in Heaven. There's no such thing as a "jewish sabbath" - it is the sabbath of the Lord. He calls it "my holy day." Sunday is pagan, it comes from sun worship. Many things in the Catholic church have their origins in pagan worship; such as Christmas and Easter and Halloween.
@DannyGirl "But you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.” James Cardinal Gibbons (Archbishop of Baltimore), The Faith of our Fathers(1917 edition)pg.72-73 (16th edition)pg.111 (88th edition) pg. 89. Originally published 1876. "The Church, on the other hand, after changing the day of rest from the Jewish Sabbath, or seventh day of the week, to the first, made the Third Commandment refer to Sunday as the day to be kept holy as the Lord's Day." - The Catholic Encyclopedia "Commandments of God" What day is God's holy day? Isaiah 58:13a - If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day... What day is the Lord's day? Matthew 12:8 - For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day. Does God ever change? Malachi 3:6a - For I am the Lord, I change not What day will be celebrated in Heaven as the Lord's day? Isaiah 66:23 - And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord.
@DannyGirl Why would we keep the sabbath in Heaven, if Jesus abolished it? I showed you the historical context, even the (former) Archbishop of Baltimore said the church made the change, and it's not in the Bible.
@DannyGirl No scripture says to keep Sunday holy. Look at all the first day of the week scriptures - none is the Lord's day or sabbath day. I don't feel like writing a rebuttal for each of them, but it's easy to refute. The Catholic Church has historically taught that it is the power who changed the sabbath - even from the archbishop and catholic encyclopedia which I quoted you. Was the Archbishop wrong?
@DannyGirl Moses didn't make the 10 commandments, GOD did. The fourth commandment says that the sabbath is given to man (same word as Adam) because God created the Heavens and Earth in 6 days and rested on the 7th.
Does your Bible believing church teach that the Church itself (rather than the Bible) is the pillar and bulwark (foundation) of Truth (1 Timothy 3:15)? 1 Timothy 3:15 But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.
John Reynolds I would argue that this verse was written long before anything resembling the Catholic Church and it's hierarchy had developed. The Church in those days resembled much more the diversity of today than the uniformity of the pre-schism catholic church. In the days of Paul you already have jewish christians and greek christians.
hisredrighthand The First Letter from St. Paul to St. Timothy was written approximately in A.D. 55... Below is the very first written account that has survived the centuries with the formal name of “The Church”: "See that ye all follow the bishop,even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church." Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrneans, 8:2(c. A.D. 110). We see from this short text that by the end of the first century the following has already been well established, there are Bishops, Priests, Deacons, and especially the term “Eucharist” and the formal name of the Church. Ignatius uses this formal name of the Church our Lord Jesus Christ established as if it is already widely known. Sure sounds like the Catholic Church of today….don’t you think?
hisredrighthand “The Church” is Hierarchical Matt. 16:18; 18:18 - Jesus uses the word "ecclesia" only twice in the New Testament Scriptures, which demonstrates that Jesus intended a visible, unified, hierarchical, and authoritative Church. Acts 20:17,28 - Paul refers to both the elders or priests ("presbyteroi") and the bishops ("episkopoi") of the Church. Both are ordained leaders within the hierarchical structure of the Church. 1 Cor. 12:28 - God Himself appoints the various positions of authority within the Church. As a loving Father, God gives His children the freedom and authority to act with charity and justice to bring about His work of salvation. Eph. 4:11 - the Church is hierarchical and includes apostles, prophets, pastors, and teachers, all charged to build up the Church. The Church is not an invisible entity with an invisible foundation. Phil. 1:1 - Paul addresses the bishops and deacons of the Church. They can all trace their unbroken lineage back to the apostles. 1 Tim. 3:1; Titus 1:7 - Christ's Church has bishops ("episkopoi") who are direct successors of the apostles. The bishops can trace the authority conferred upon them back to the apostles. 1 Tim. 5:17; Titus 1:5; James 5:14 - Christ's Church also has elders or priests ("presbyteroi") who serve the bishops. 1 Tim. 3:8 - Christ's Church also has deacons ("diakonoi"). Thus, Jesus Christ's Church has a hierarchy of authority - bishops, priests and deacons, who can all trace their lineage back to Peter and the apostles. Exodus 28:1 and 19:6 - shows the three offices of the Old Testament priesthood: (1). high priest - Aaron (Ex. 28:1) (2). Ministerial priests - Aaron’s sons (Ex. 19:6; 28:1) (3) Universal priests - Israel (Ex. 19:6). The New Testament priesthood also has three offices: (1) High Priest - Jesus Christ (Heb. 3:1) (2) Ministerial priests - the ordained bishops and priests (Rom. 15:16; 1 Tim. 3:1,8; 5:17; Titus 1:7) (3) Universal priests - all the baptized (1 Pet. 2:5,9; Rev. 1:6)
John Reynolds Where is the mandate to WORSHIP the Eucharist? Scripture? Nope. The Creeds? Nope. Your reference? Nope. It isn't a minor thing. You MUST know that if the Eucharist is NOT supposed to be worshiped, then this is idolatry of the worst kind, right?
Only God and Jesus have authority. all we do is to be for their will and glory. Our salvation is in grace through blood Jesus, nothing else and through no organization nor person.
pat mark So you put him at a open shame at every mass do you? You kill Jesus over and over? Hebrews 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Is the writer of Hebrews a liar or is the Catholic church ? Once for all.
Tommy. Your understanding is completely simplistic and childish, that is why you need a teaching authority who understands these mysteries. The Church understands all of these things and can explain them biblically and with intelligence and reason as well. You cannot. You accuse because you have no understanding. Those outside of the Church are puffed up with their own pride and will accept no teaching or authority and that's why they are so confused. But stop casting stones if you are ignorant. You people don't understand because you refuse to learn.
Prancer1231 Typical Catholic person. Cant answer any of my questions resort to insults. If you gave the world the bible as YOU Catholics say, How is it YOU have no understanding of it? I can I am saved,can you? I am a child of God, Can you say this? You insult Jesus by telling him he didn't do a very good job on forgiving sins thus saying one has to go to purgatory BEFORE going to Heaven. If you were a mature adult ,why not refute me with your bible? Reason why you don't is simple. You are either not mature enough or you lack what the word of God says. So which is it? Try this seeing Paul says to DO THIS! 2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
The Catholic Church IS THE CHURCH...it is where all Christians belong....that being said..The Prostestant churches ( most).. share one key belief with the Catholic Church..Hell is a real place and people go there....how strange that some people dont agree with this teaching as 1) Jesus himself told us so..2) Our blessed Mother told us many go there because they have no one to pray for them 3) The Saints have told us it is real and people DO go their.....yes very strange that some believe hell just might be empty🤔🤔🤔
justthinken1 they’ve corrected that and this link also provides where that information originally came from. Clearly there are thousands of protestant denominations. Even if it’s not the erroneous 33,000. The church corrected itself. The church is made of humans who are indeed fallible. m.ncregister.com/blog/scottericalt/we-need-to-stop-saying-that-there-are-33000-protestant-denominations
justthinken1 The fact that exactly 33,000 protestant denominations does not change The authority of the first traditional Christian church: the Catholic Church. There’s tradition, authority, reason, and BIBLE. I don’t know why people say Catholics are not taught to read their Bible. That’s absolutely not true. We do have Catholic Bible studies you know and the families are biblical-based
justthinken1 Just a simple observation. Being rude calling names and generally acting unChristlike is not very convincing to anyone. I wasn’t rude to you and have no idea why some people feel that being that rude online is OK. Shrug. To each his own ... work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
I wish all the Churches could be one but it now seems impossible. So many interpretations of the bible when it is so simple to understand. The Catholic Church shot itself in the foot when it added doctrines which are not found in the bible such as infant baptism, Acts 8:35-38 praying to saints and Mary, 1 Tim. 2:5, selling indulgences, Rom. 6:1, bowing and worshipping statues, 1 John 5:21, forbidding to marry of certain groups such as nuns and priests which in turn led to sexual perversion among some of them, 1 Tim. 4:1-3, giving one man power to give his word the same weight as scripture. 2 Thess. 2:3-4 If they had just stayed true to the beliefs of the first century church, there would have been no break up. Jude 3
Tommy. Jude 3 pretty much tells us there was a complete doctrine which needed no additions or subtractions which is pretty much what happened over the centuries. I'm glad we have the bible or new testament to read for ourselves. The first century Christian Church recorded in the new testament wouldn't have recognized the Roman Catholic or Orthodox Catholic Church of today. Jude 3 "Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was ONCE delivered to the saints." There was no need for pagan practices which were later adopted by the apostate Church of Rome since they already had the complete doctrine of Christ which needed no additions or subtractions. Thanks Tommy.
horseman528 The bible says that whole families were baptized together. Infant baptism was practiced in the earliest days of the church, read the church fathers. Baptism brings you into the family of God, like the Jews circumcized their infants when they were 8 days old. When you can make an adult decision you are confirmed. Paul says it is better to remain single because if you marry you have to focus on your spouse. The clergy stays single because it gives them more time to focus on God. There is far more sexual perversion in the non-Catholic, non-celibate world. There are more protestant clergy accused of child abuse according to insurance statistics. If celibacy leads to perversion then why are all forms of sexual perversion more rampant outside of the Catholic church?
Prancer1231 Whole families were baptized in the cases of Lydia and the Philippian jailer according to Acts 16:15 and Acts 16:33, but it nowhere mentions infants. Salvation is a decision that one must make for themselves. I can't decide for anyone to be baptized; they must decide for themselves when they come to an age of reason and accountability. Without faith first being applied to baptism, it is nothing more than an empty ceremony of getting wet. There is no forgiveness of sins without faith. Only after one believes and confesses that Jesus Christ is the Son of God can that baptism wash away their sins according to Acts 8:35-38 and 22:16. Ephesians 2:8 "For by grace are ye saved through FAITH..." It is impossible for an infant to have faith since it has no knowledge of those things. As far as bishops being celibate, the Holy Spirit speaking through Paul in 1 Timothy 3:1 stated that a bishop MUST be blameless, THE HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE...This requirement of a bishop being the husband of one wife is repeated in Titus 1:6. Any person who has matured and is healthy has a sex drive. God gave us marriage to satisfy that sex drive. When there is no outlet for that sex drive, people will find other ways to satisfy it which will be sinful whether it be through pornography, fornication, or pedophila. The forbidding to marry was one characteristic of the apostate church according to 1 Timothy 4:1-3. Most Catholics appear to be good people and sincere, but people can be sincerely wrong.
horseman528 The early church fathers write about infant baptism. Yes, you need to make an informed decision when you are of an age to do that. That is why Catholics are confirmed at around the age of 14. Jewish infants don't make the decision to be circumcized. It brings them into the family of God, it sets them apart. Baptism is similar. We are born with original sin. How can an infant repent of original sin?
The problem with a referee is that his word is final..Theres the answer, once its accepted the questioning stops.......I trust no man and i test the spirits. Protestants do rely on the spirit as the final source, sometimes he makes us wait for answers, but we continue to study and pray and learn and grow.....quick easy answers is man's way, not God's......As long as we have questions and concerns we will bury ourselves in the bible, always seeking for more......if we had no questions or concerns or desire to know more the Holy Bible would be sitting on the shelf collecting dust.....mines beside my bed, worn and comfortable and filled with gum wrappers to bookmark my favorite pages.......deception in religion is so rampant, i may be a tad bit paranoid, but the paranoia keeps me alert and diligent...:)
But whose reading of the Bible? There are tens of thousands of Protestant churches, each one representing a distinctive interpretation of the Bible. And the referee I'm talking about is one that has received the sanction of the Holy Spirit.
i read alone, and in a study group and always pray for guidance beforehand...even when i attend church (Baptist) i have open book in hand....i do not trust anyone's interpretation 100%. , its not that i question their expertise in the scriptures. ...I question purposeful deception in a corrupt world full of corrupt men........if i find myself in hell it will be because of my own evil doings, not because i followed someone else there. ....i was once very trusting. 15 years later i still pray for deliverance from the cult of the SDA's...........getting back to the church that I was raised in has helped, but has left me guarded and paranoid Reply Fr. Robert Barron
Bibleindepth there is no true Christianity without the Eucharist, which is the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine.
Thank you, thank you, thank you, Bishop Barron! I just finished listening to Patrick Madrid and James White 1993 debate on sola scriptura, and, though Mr. Madrid did a great job in showing the falseness of sola scriptura's claims, it left me very discouraged. Your clarity and wisdom in this video lifted my spirits. I am so grateful for your ministry.
It's best to go to God in prayer for His opinion instead of listening to human debates. Ask God whether His word is the only source of true Christian teaching and if so, why, or does He approve of human arguments because His testament does not really testify to His teachings being inerrant, but is rather a book of guidelines to be accepted or rejected, modified and corrected by RC theologians. The Holy Spirit is the voice, clear voice and living voice leading those who want to obey God and do His will.
My interpretation of scriptures is of God. Yours is of what men taught you.I asked and prayed to God for understanding.God freely gives wisdom to all who ask.
a few years back and it ultimately led me to Christian mystics and monks. I quickly realized they are all Catholic, which led me to look into Catholicism for myself. I bought "Catholicism" and a few other of Fr. Barron's videos. Like a breath of fresh air. I can see my way back to God now. I'm taking it slow bc I don't want it to be an emotional response to really well made videos but one I can defend intellectually and feel grounded in.
Question: "What are the differences between Catholics and Protestants?" Answer: There are several important differences between Catholics and Protestants. While there have been many attempts in recent years to find common ground between the two groups, the fact is that the differences remain, and they are just as important today as they were at the beginning of the Protestant Reformation. The following is brief summary of some of the more important differences: One of the first major differences between Catholicism and Protestantism is the issue of the sufficiency and authority of Scripture. Protestants believe that the Bible alone is the source of God’s special revelation to mankind and teaches us all that is necessary for our salvation from sin. Protestants view the Bible as the standard by which all Christian behavior must be measured. This belief is commonly referred to as “sola scriptura” and is one of the “five solas” (sola is Latin for “alone”) that came out of the Protestant Reformation as summaries of some of the differences between Catholics and Protestants. While there are many verses in the Bible that establish its authority and its sufficiency for all matters of faith and practice, one of the clearest is 2 Timothy 3:16, where we see that “all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” Catholics reject the doctrine of sola scriptura and do not believe that the Bible alone is sufficient. They believe that both the Bible and sacred Roman Catholic tradition are equally binding upon the Christian. Many Roman Catholics doctrines, such as purgatory, praying to the saints, worship or veneration of Mary, etc., have little or no basis in Scripture but are based solely on Roman Catholic traditions. Essentially, the Roman Catholic Church’s denial of sola scriptura and its insistence that both the Bible and tradition are equal in authority undermine the sufficiency, authority, and completeness of the Bible. The view of Scripture is at the root of many, if not all, of the differences between Catholics and Protestants. Another disagreement between Catholicism and Protestantism is over the office and authority of the Pope. According to Catholicism the Pope is the “Vicar of Christ” (a vicar is a substitute) and represents Jesus as the head of the Church. As such, the Pope has the ability to speak ex cathedra (with authority on matters of faith and practice), making his teachings infallible and binding upon all Christians. On the other hand, Protestants believe that no human being is infallible and that Christ alone is the Head of the Church. Catholics rely on apostolic succession as a way of trying to establish the Pope’s authority. Protestants believe that the church’s authority comes not from apostolic succession but from the Word of God. Spiritual power and authority do not rest in the hands of a mere man but in the very Word of God. While Catholicism teaches that only the Catholic Church can properly interpret the Bible, Protestants believe that the Bible teaches God sent the Holy Spirit to indwell all born-again believers, enabling all believers to understand the message of the Bible. Protestants point to passages such as John 14:16-17: “I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.” (See also John 14:26 and 1 John 2:27.) A third major difference between Catholicism and Protestantism is how one is saved. Another of the five solas of the Reformation is sola fide (“faith alone”), which affirms the biblical doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone because of Christ alone (Ephesians 2:8-10). However, Catholics teach that the Christian must rely on faith plus “meritorious works” in order to be saved. Essential to the Roman Catholic doctrine of salvation are the Seven Sacraments, which are baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, penance, anointing of the sick, holy orders, and matrimony. Protestants believe that, on the basis of faith in Christ alone, believers are justified by God, as all their sins are paid for by Christ on the cross and His righteousness is imputed to them. Catholics, on the other hand, believe that Christ’s righteousness is imparted to the believer by “grace through faith,” but in itself is not sufficient to justify the believer. The believer must supplement the righteousness of Christ imparted to him with meritorious works. Catholics and Protestants also disagree on what it means to be justified before God. To the Catholic, justification involves being made righteous and holy. He believes that faith in Christ is only the beginning of salvation and that the individual must build upon that with good works because God’s grace of eternal salvation must be merited. This view of justification contradicts the clear teaching of Scripture in passages such as Romans 4:1-12, Titus 3:3-7, and many others. Protestants distinguish between the one-time act of justification (when we are declared righteous by God based on our faith in Christ’s atonement on the cross) and the process of sanctification (the development of righteousness that continues throughout our lives on earth). While Protestants recognize that works are important, they believe they are the result or fruit of salvation but never the means to it. Catholics blend justification and sanctification together into one ongoing process, which leads to confusion about how one is saved. A fourth major difference between Catholics and Protestants has to do with what happens after death. Both believe that unbelievers will spend eternity in hell, but there are significant differences about what happens to believers. From their church traditions and their reliance on non-canonical books, the Catholics have developed the doctrine of purgatory. Purgatory, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia, is a “place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God’s grace, are not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions.” On the other hand, Protestants believe that because we are justified by faith in Christ alone and that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us-when we die, we will go straight to heaven to be in the presence of the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:6-10 and Philippians 1:23). One disturbing aspect about the Catholic doctrine of purgatory is the belief that man can and must pay for his own sins. This results in a low view of the sufficiency and efficiency of Christ’s atonement on the cross. Simply put, the Roman Catholic view of salvation implies that Christ’s atonement on the cross was insufficient payment for the sins of those who believe in Him and that even a believer must pay for his own sins, either through acts of penance or time in purgatory. Yet the Bible teaches that it is Christ’s death alone that can satisfy or propitiate God’s wrath against sinners (Romans 3:25; Hebrews 2:17; 1 John 2:2; 1 John 4:10). Our works of righteousness cannot add to what Christ has already accomplished. The differences between Catholicism and evangelical Protestants are important and significant. Paul wrote Galatians to combat the Judaizers (Jews who said that Gentile Christians had to obey the Old Testament Law to be saved). Like the Judaizers, Catholics make human works necessary for one to be justified by God, and they end up with a completely different gospel. It is our prayer that God will open the eyes of those who are putting their faith in the teachings of the Catholic Church. It is our hope that everyone will understand that his “works of righteousness” cannot justify him or sanctify him (Isaiah 64:6). We pray that all will instead put their faith solely in the fact that we are “justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood-to be received by faith” (Romans 3:24-25). God saves us, “not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life” (Titus 3:5-7).
I’ve heard a lot of people recommend Scott Hahn. The lamb’s supper is supposed to be a great book. I am currently reading Hahn’s signs of life. It explains the biblically 40 of the Church’s teachings.
2 Timothy 3:16-17: No matter how traditionalists twist it, it still says that scripture alone is all-sufficient to equip us for EVERY good work. not most not partially but every EVERY got it? EVERY. Luke 10:26: "What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?" Jesus expected even his enemies to correctly interpret the Bible by simply reading and studying it.
WORK OUT YOUR SALAVATION IN FEAR AND TREMBLING Mat 12:33-37 Matt. 24:13; 25:31-46 Rom. 11:22 2 Pet 2:20-21 Col 1:21-23 Phil 2:12 Heb 10:26-29. If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left... only a fearful expectation of judgment.."
You keep saying there is rampant disagreement which I agree with and also disagree with. If you really look into the differences between denominations you find a overwhelming unity on the essentials of scriptures. All true Christian churches believe in Christs deity, the trinity, Jesus’ death, burial, and bodily resurrection, His ascension to the right hand of the Father, His intercession for His people, and salvation through faith in Christ. I don’t like that there are all these denominations, but I also know Gods word is ultimate authority and His people will hear His voice. God bless
"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with Divine words." -Gregory of Nyssa
Fr. Barron, what is your view then on the Episcopal Church and their ideas for interpretation of scripture and using not only tradition but also reason? I'm not theologian but if I am understanding correctly, St. Thomas Aquinas was a big advocate for using reason when interpreting scripture. Thanks Fr. Barron.
Siento que pierdo al no contar con los subtitulos español de los comentariod del padre Barron sabrá él de esta necesidad del pueblo hispano? Creo que no, mandos medios ayuda por favor.
So true. What a wonderful evangelist Fr Robert is. I certainly don't begrudge protestant's holding a different view, but it would be wonderful if quite a few of them could see the beauty and reason of having our living voice and guidance in the Holy Father, Pope Francis. His gentle guidance is a beautiful thing to behold. Come and take up the beauty and truth of my faith and yours.
Luther was a professional Catholic Bible scholar. And he actually read the early Fathers.... Ambrose (340?-396), “How can we use those things which we do not find in the Holy Scriptures?” (Ambr. Offic., 1:23). Athanasius (300?-375), “The Holy Scriptures, given by inspiration of God, are of themselves sufficient toward the discovery of truth. (Orat. adv. Gent., ad cap.) The Catholic Christians will neither speak nor endure to hear anything in religion that is a stranger to Scripture; it being an evil heart of immodesty to speak those things which are not written,” (Athanasius, Exhort. ad Monachas). “Vainly then do they run about with the pretext that they have demanded Councils for the faith’s sake; for divine Scripture is sufficient above all things; but if a Council be needed on the point, there are the proceedings of the Fathers, for the Nicene Bishops did not neglect this matter, but stated the doctrine so exactly, that persons reading their words honestly, cannot but be reminded by them of the religion towards Christ announced in divine Scripture.” (Athanasius, De Synodis, 6). We ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures...Let us then speak nothing concerning the Holy Ghost but what is written; and if anything be not written, let us not busy ourselves about it. The Holy Ghost Himself spoke the Scriptures; He has also spoken concerning Himself as much as He pleased, or as much as we could receive. Be those things therefore spoken, which He has said; for whatsoever He has not said, we dare not say. (Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 4.17ff) What then is our reply? We do not think that it is right to make their prevailing custom the law and rule of sound doctrine. For if custom is to avail for proof of soundness, we too, surely, may advance our prevailing custom; and if they reject this, we are surely not bound to follow theirs. Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words. (Gregory of Nyssa, Dogmatic Treatises, Book 12. On the Trinity, To Eustathius.) Let us not therefore carry about the notions of the many, but examine into the facts. For how is it not absurd that in respect to money, indeed, we do not trust to others, but refer this to figures and calculation; but in calculating upon facts we are lightly drawn aside by the notions of others; and that too, though we possess an exact balance, and square and rule for all things, the declaration of the divine laws? Wherefore I exhort and entreat you all, disregard what this man and that man thinks about these things, and inquire from the Scriptures all these things; and having learnt what are the true riches, let us pursue after them that we may obtain also the eternal good things; which may we all obtain, through the grace and love towards men of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom, to the Father and the Holy Spirit, be glory, might, and honor, now and ever, and world without end. Amen.” (John Chrysostom, Homily on 2 Corinthians, 13.4) For the reasonings of any men whatsoever, even though they be [true Christians], and of high reputation, are not to be treated by us in the same way as the canonical Scriptures are treated. We are at liberty, without doing any violence to the respect which these men deserve, to condemn and reject anything in their writings, if perchance we shall find that they have entertained opinions differing from that which others or we ourselves have, by the divine help, discovered to be the truth. I deal thus with the writings of others, and I wish my intelligent readers to deal thus with mine. (St Augustine, Letters, 148.15)
exactly! and then in heaven I may surely boast that I am there because I played my cards right, I did this, I did that, I went to this, I read that and said this and that is why I am here. this is the works based salvation of the RC church. what will a true Christian say in heaven? I am here in spite of all that I did. I am here because of his grace, because of his unfailing love, his provision, nothing I did earned this paradise and so I owe him everything.
As a Catholic I will also say that I am there only because of His Grace. You are mistaken about us thinking that the works are the basis of our salvation. They are our duty. Grace and love spur us on to love others and to serve them as we would serve Jesus. Read all of James for more.
@@lyndavonkanel8603 Council of Trent. CANON 9: “If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema. CANON 12: “If any one shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy pardoning sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is that confidence alone by which we are justified…let him be accursed.” Canon 24: “If anyone saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema.” Canon 30: “If any one saith, that, after the grace of Justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted, and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened (to him); let him be anathema.” I can go on. Roman church is not the same as biblical cristian church. what you called grace and faith are not what i call faith and grace
My pleasure, and are you familiar with RCIA? The Catholic Church offers it to people who would like to learn more about Catholicism; it's a 9-month series of meetings/discussions led by priests and nuns where all the major points are explained. Then at the Easter Vigil you can choose whether or not to become a Catholic.
.....If someone [today] does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?" (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; first edition [A.D. 251]). Cyprian of Carthage (Part 3)
Bishop Barron makes some good points. I am a Protestant of no particular denomination. God gave prophets and teachers to interpret the Bible, and Christians should read the Bible and listen to God. No pope, cardinal or preacher gets it right everytime. There must be some authority in the church, but every person is responsible for hearing and doing the word of God.
I believe in the power of Christ' blood so much that I will go Mass today and have my soul sprinkled and purified with His precious blood and I will offer up His body and Blood for you my friend.
Roman Catholicism: The One True Church? By Steve Meehan For years, growing up as a Roman Catholic, we were taught that we were members of the one true Church. It was impressed upon us regularly by the parish priest during Mass, while giving his homily; by the nuns all throughout my Catholic parochial school years of 2nd through 7th grade; during our preparation to receive for the first time the sacraments of Penance, Communion and Confirmation; and while attending CCD classes all the way through high school (the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine is an association established at Rome in 1562 for the purpose of giving religious education, normally designed for children). It was an established fact that we understood and we never questioned the validity of it. And to be honest, it was a matter of pride, that we were privileged enough to be a member of the correct Church, while all others had belonged to something else that didn't quite measure up to the status of the Roman Catholic Church. After all, how could it be possible that Roman Catholicism is not the One True Church? Look at what Rome has to offer: it has the priests, the nuns; the bishops; the cardinals; and of course, the Pope. They have the Sacraments; the statues; the holy water; the incense; the Stations of the Cross; the Eucharist - in which Christ physically manifests Himself into the wafer after the consecration by the priest during the Mass; the Marian apparitions - which appear mainly to Roman Catholics; and they have the Vatican - where the Vicar of Christ (Christ's representative on Earth) governs the faithful and makes infallible proclamations and doctrine. How can this not be The One True Church? No other organization on the face of the Earth comes close to offering to its flock what Rome provides for its faithful. But, of course, to be true, one must adhere to what has been established as truth and not teach or practice what is contrary to the truth. We read in Scripture a few passages that declare what is truth and what is not. Jesus proclaimed in John 14:6: "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes to the Father, but by me." He also professed in John 8:31-32: "Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, 'If you continue in my word, then are you my disciples indeed. And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free'." It is clear then, by just these two verses, that Jesus Christ has described Himself as Truth, and that those who adhere to His Word and practice what He taught, will be living and worshipping truthfully, and that only His truth will set us free; not in anything else that detracts or subtracts from His truth. In fact, the verse is worded in a way ("you shall know the truth") that suggests that it is imperative to know His Word, to know His Truth, by studying the scriptures, in order to avoid any false doctrine being taught by some other source that may later try to establish itself as the bearer of truth but is actually offering a false truth. Jesus also proclaimed that it is only possible to worship Him correctly in spirit and in truth: "But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeks such to worship him. God is a Spirit, and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth" John 4:23, 24 So for a person or an organization to call themselves true, they must teach his Word correctly and abide by His Word. Unless one is doing that, the above verse says, that they are not true worshippers. Another purveyor of Truth is the Holy Spirit. Jesus promised His disciples, that when He would depart from them and return to Heaven, that He would send in His stead the Comforter, the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit's role in the world - and who indwells those who have accepted Christ's free gift of salvation - is to point us to Jesus Christ and not to anything or anyone else as the sole means of salvation. "Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it sees him not, neither knows him: but you know him; for he dwells within you, and shall be in you." John 14:17 It takes the indwelling of the Holy Spirit into the believer to be able to discern what is written in God's Word and to be able to understand and to apply His truth in our Christian walk. Without His assistance, it is too easy to be lead astray and to accept false doctrine. The Holy Spirit, after all, inspired the Jewish scribes and later the Apostles, to write the books of the Holy Bible and it takes His discernment in our lives for us to properly comprehend the Word and understand it correctly. It also stands to reason, that if one is not aware of what is contained in the Scriptures, then they can easily accept doctrines of men that may be inspired by another source. Growing up as a Roman Catholic, I was completely ignorant of what was contained in the Bible - regarding Jesus, salvation and His gospel of grace. Like most Catholics, the Holy Bible was in the home, but just collected dust and was never read. We accepted all that was taught us by the priests, the nuns, the lay teachers in the CCD classes, and in their catechism. Whatever they told us had to be correct, as they assured us that they were the One True Church. Why would they ever steer us wrong? This was the mindset of my siblings, my parents, grandparents, and going back generations of all past family members who trusted in and were raised in the Roman Catholic system. We were ignorant of anything else but their plan of salvation. The Roman Catholic Church tells their members that only they, through their Magisterium - the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, as exercised by the bishops or the pope - can properly interpret scripture for their faithful. So, while they say they encourage the reading of the Holy Writ, it is only by their guidance and authority can one fully understand what the verses are meant to convey. They are not open to private interpretation, and must be filtered through their teachings to understand their version of the truth. It wasn't until my early 20s, that the Lord led me to start reading His Word. At that point of my life, I wasn't even a marginal Catholic. I stopped going to Mass, stopped going to the normally required weekly confessions to a priest, and had pretty much given up on their version of the faith. I got tired of the repetitiveness of the Mass: the rote prayers; genuflecting before the figure on the cross; the lighting of votive candles before a statue - usually of Mary; dipping my hand in the "Holy Water" and making the 'sign of the cross'; receiving the Eucharist wafer and giving my assent when the priest said "the Body of Christ" that I was consuming the physical body of Jesus; and the whole bit. It was all very ritualistic, legalistic, lacking any real passion and completely devoid of the presence of Christ. But in reading the Word, I began to see that what God has revealed to us through the scriptures doesn't completely mirror the teachings of Rome; in fact, most of it doesn't. You would think that the One True Church would certainly follow what Christ and the Apostles taught. Why would they teach something different? If they are in fact the One True Church, wouldn't they follow and teach all that scripture reveals to us and they wouldn't deviate from the Truth? Have they got the ultimate authority to change God's Word or trump His commandments? For instance, Exodus 20:4 - the second commandment - forbids us from worshipping graven images, and yet Rome has deleted this commandment and subdivided the last one, which tells us not to covet our neighbor's belongings. How can they delete a commandment? Christ said "If you love me, you will keep my commandments" - not delete them (John 14:15). Is it that important for Rome to disregard a commandment, so that the parishioners can dress up, light candles before, and parade behind statues or graven images, as the Bible calls them? Was the prohibition of worshipping before a graven image only meant for the Jews, but Christians are free to do so? Over and over throughout the Word, we are told that God detests that kind of activity. Rome calls the pope the Vicar of Christ (Christ's representative on Earth) but that title is more befitting the Holy Spirit: He is the Comforter that Christ promised; He is the one who indwells each believer; and He is the one who seals us, points us to Jesus Christ, and gives us discernment in reading the Word. Rome calls the pope the Holy Father, but Jesus used this term only once in scripture referring to God the Father as the Holy Father : "And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through your own name those whom thou has given me, that they may be one, as we are." John 17:14 Neither Jesus, nor the Apostles would ever use that term in addressing a man; only God the Father is the Holy Father. In fact, Christ even told His followers not to refer to any man as our father (spiritual father): "And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven" - Matthew 23:9 If Christ told us not to do it, why does Rome give that title to their priests? Is this something that a One True Church should be doing - flaunting God's Word? Are they exempt from this restriction and can override Christ's teachings? It doesn't add up. If we are truly Christians, we should be following Christ's examples and His admonitions. If they are truly the One True Church, shouldn't they be abiding by His Word instead of disregarding it? There are countless other examples of where the teachings of Rome fly in direct contrast to the teachings of Jesus and His disciples. Perhaps the biggest is the question of our salvation. Repeatedly in the gospels and in the other books of the New Testament are verses telling us that Christ's Gospel is a gospel of grace and is freely given - to all those who would accept it. It is not by works and it cannot be earned. Grace is God's unmerited favor; it is impossible to work for it, neither can one ever be good enough to attain it: "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God Not of works, lest any man should boast" - Ephesians 2:8, 9 "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost" - Titus 3:5 "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" - Romans 6:23 "Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shall be saved..." - Acts 16:31, 32 Why would Rome insist that we have to work along with God's grace (what they refer to as "cooperating grace") in order to be saved? The very expression of cooperating grace or cooperating with grace is a contradiction in terms. If Grace is unmerited favor and is freely given by God, how can one then co-operate or work alongside with it to receive it? Co-operating with grace would nullify grace; it wouldn't be freely received. Their works for attaining salvation include: going to weekly Mass; partaking of the sacraments; paying a penalty or Penance for one's sins (which denies the sufficiency of Christ's death on the cross to cover all sins); and then finally spending time in a fictitious place called Purgatory, to purge away any leftover sins that Christ's blood couldn't cover, or not enough Penance was performed. Purgatory is just another means of denying the sufficiency Christ's atonement for our sins; it is the ultimate declaration that his agonizing crucifixion on a wooden cross - the plan of salvation that was established before the foundation of the world was laid - was not enough to pay the cost of all of our sins. In other words, when Christ uttered those final words "It is finished" - signifying that He had satisfied the wrath of God against us for the sins we have committed and that all our sins were "paid in full", Rome declares that no it is not finished and the paying of penances and time spent in Purgatory is required. It is a rejection of what Christ accomplished. Their gospel is a complete distortion of the gospel of grace, and is in fact another gospel - as the Apostle Paul warned against: "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel. Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." Galatians 1:6-9 Why would Rome teach another gospel? They are leading their followers astray and the gospel they teach can't possibly save anyone. A gospel of works nullifies God's free gift of grace: "And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work" Romans 11:6 "Who has saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began" - 2 Timothy 1:9 It should be clear that a true church would never teach a false gospel. Along with the aforementioned false teachings - and there are many others - Rome has taken upon itself to invent new teachings over the centuries that neither Jesus nor the Apostles ever taught. Here is a brief list of some of their "infallible" doctrines that they have implemented: * Prayers for the Dead and the Sign of the Cross - 300ad * Veneration of Angels and Dead Saints - 375ad * The Mass, as a daily celebration adopted - 394ad * The worship of Mary, and the use of the term "Mother of God" - 431ad * Priests begin to dress differently from the laity - 500ad * Extreme Unction or Last Rites as a sacrament - 526ad * Doctrine of Purgatory established (denies Christ's sufficiency) - 593ad * Latin language used in prayer and worship in churches (not all Catholics understood Latin, rendering the words meaningless) - 600ad * Prayers directed to Mary (even though Jesus taught to pray to the Father) - 600ad * Title of Pope bestowed upon the Bishop of Rome - 610ad * Kissing of the Pope's feet - 709ad * Temporal power of the Popes - 750ad * Worship of the Cross, Images and Relics (idolatry) - 788ad * Holy Water instituted - 850ad * Veneration of St. Joseph begins - 890ad * Baptism of Bells - 965ad * Canonization of Dead Saints (ALL Christians are saints!) - 995ad * Fasting on Fridays and during Lent - 998ad * The Mass is an ongoing sacrifice of Jesus and attendance mandatory - 1079ad * Celibacy of Priesthood - 1079ad * Praying the Rosary introduced (vain repetitions, Christ warns against) - 1090ad * Inquisition of Heretics (Bible believing Christians who didn't bend the knee to Rome) - 1184ad * Selling of Indulgences to lessen time spent in Purgatory (denies Christ's atonement) - 1190ad * Transubstantiation priest can transform a wafer into Jesus Christ - 1215ad * Confession of sin to a priest - 1215ad * Adoration of the wafer (blasphemy, idolatry) - 1220ad * Bible forbidden to be read or owned by laymen (Bibles deny Rome's teachings) - 1229ad * Scapular of Mary worn frees a person from Purgatory (nonsense) - 1287ad * Cup of Blood of Christ forbidden to be touched by laymen - 1414ad * Doctrine of Purgatory proclaimed to be Dogma of the Faith - 1439ad * Doctrine of 7 Sacraments affirmed (works that must be done along with grace) - 1439ad * Ava Maria instituted (Prayer/hymn to Mary) - 1508ad * Tradition of Rome equal with Scripture (free license for popes in declarations) - 1545ad * Apocryphal Books added to Rome's Bible - 1546ad * Immaculate Conception of Mary (they declare she was born without sin Romans 3:23) - 1834ad * Papal Infallibility (pope can declare anything and their faithful must believe) - 1870ad * Modern Science "Modernism" condemned by pope - 1907ad * Condemnation of public schools (Rome couldn't teach kids their doctrines) - 1930ad * "Mother of God" title to Mary reaffirmed - 1931ad * Assumption of the Virgin Mary (Mary bodily arose to Heaven - not in Bible) - 1950ad Along with these doctrines that Rome has established over the years for their faithful to adhere to and further one's bondage to their system, they have also leveled condemnations or "anathemas" on all bible believing Christians who would not submit to the papacy or their system. Here is a sampling of 100 or so anathemas that the papacy has declared over the years: - If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification...let him be anathema. - If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema. - If anyone says that he will for certain, with an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift of perseverance even to the end, unless he shall have learned this by special revelation, let him be anathema. [1 John 5:13 tells us that we can be assured of our salvation. Either John, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is lying to us, or Rome is] - If anyone says that the Catholic doctrine of justification as set forth by the holy council in the present decree, derogates in some respect from the glory of God or the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ, and does not rather illustrate the truth of our faith and no less the glory of God and of Jesus Christ, let him be anathema. [The Bible declares that Rome's doctrine is in error] - If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law were not all instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ, or that there are more or less than seven, or that any one of these seven is not truly and intrinsically a sacrament, let him be anathema. [The sacraments are works and nullify grace] - If anyone...denies that wonderful and singular change of the whole substance of the bread into the body and the whole substance of the wine into the blood - which change the Catholic Church most aptly calls transubstantiation, let him be anathema. [Worshipping a wafer is both idolatrous and blasphemous] Whether they realize it or not, they have not only bestowed these condemnations on all Bible believing Christians, but on Christ and His Apostles as well - including Peter, who they claim was the first pope. They would never teach the things that Rome claims nor would they have any part in their false religious system . Is Roman Catholicism, as they contend, the One True Church? Not hardly, if they teach doctrines of men, instead of the Word of God: "Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?" - Matthew 15:3 "Thus have you made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition." - Matthew 15:6 "But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." - Matthew 15:9 "And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition" - Mark 7:9 Dear Roman Catholic, there is no way that the Church of Rome can be The One True Church. They offer a false gospel and there is no truth in it. The true Church of Christ is the body of all believers who have put their complete faith and trust in the finished work of Christ on the cross - it is not just a particular denomination or any other man made religious system. Works are not a part of His salvation; neither is paying a penance for your own sins, or going to a purging place called Purgatory, or any of the other means of attaining salvation that Rome concocts. As a matter of fact, after a lifetime of being active in their system: being baptized as an infant; attending mandatory weekly mass (and should you miss one Sunday purposely, they claim you have committed a "mortal sin" and would go to hell if not confessed to a priest); confessed your sins to a priest and paid a penalty or Penance for those sins; receive Jesus Christ physically (instead of spiritually as the Bible attests) through their Eucharistic service; performing the other sacraments; and then ultimately, after death, spend an undetermined amount of time suffering in Purgatory to purge away any remaining sins that Christ couldn't cover because His plan of redemption obviously came up short, one can still never claim that they have any assurance of salvation. According to Rome, one commits the "sin of Presumption" if they believe they can claim to know for sure that they have secured salvation through Christ; an anathema will be directed your way if you claim that you know that you are saved. Even though the Apostle John - the one whom Christ entrusted with the care of His earthly mother to after Jesus' death on the cross - assured us regarding salvation: "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." - 1 John 5:13 All of the so-called works that the Catholic must do to try to attain salvation, only furthers one's commitment to their religion to try to appease God and ends up increasing their bondage to this false system. Their "Holy Mother Church" can only save us; the priests are needed for absolving our sins; their Mass has to be attended; the sacraments are needed; and on and on it goes. Even the erroneous doctrine of Purgatory is presented with the caveat that one's time can be lessened there by buying Mass cards, donating money to the Church, etc. It is all about their system and not Christ. The Roman Catholic Church is not the One True Church. Their system offers really no hope. It is a counterfeit Christianity and they present a corrupted version of the truth. On the surface, they appeal to the flesh in all their displays of piety, ritualism, relics, images, incense, candles, acts of contrition, shrines usually dedicated to Mary mainly, as well as other dead saints, and for the most part, Christ is left out in all of their regalia - unless, of course, He is depicted as a baby or still hanging on the cross. All of that is a substitute for real thing but is attractive to those who have no clue as to what God's Word says about sin, atonement, salvation or a gospel of grace. They don't waste an opportunity to diminish what Christ has performed for us on the cross, or who Christ really is. Instead of rightly pointing to the Creator for salvation, they point to the created - the priests; the popes; the statues; the wafer; Mary, or their version of Mary; the dead saints; the "Holy Mother Church" as they refer to the Catholic Church; and anything else other than Jesus Christ. They really do teach another gospel and have another Jesus - who is received via transubstantiation, but was powerless to cover all of our sins; and another Mary (the Mary of the Bible doesn't reflect any of the attributes that Rome has ascribed to her: she wasn't sinless; didn't remain a virgin after the birth of Christ; she had other children; is not a co-redeemer or co-mediator; doesn't hear or answer prayer; etc.) They emphatically are not the true church, despite their proclamations otherwise. One day, we will all stand before Christ at His judgment. If you die as a Roman Catholic, Rome will not be there to defend you. If they can't even be entrusted with the safeguarding of its members children (speaking of the decades, may be centuries long molestation and raping of children by their clergy, and the cover-up and relocation of these criminals to other parishes by their bishops, cardinals and popes), how can you possibly trust them with your eternal security and salvation? The bottom line is: you can't....and you must not. Accept the One who WILL be there in front of you at His judgment. Don't be beguiled by the enemy and accept a false substitute plan of salvation. Accept His free gift of salvation, believe in Him and His Word, and His Truth will indeed set you free! "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." - Colossians 2:8 "There is a way which seems right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death" - Proverbs 14:12
I'm more of a traditionalist Catholic, not Sedevacantist or anything though. I only go to Latin mass because I simply prefer it but despite all my opinions I still have great respect for Bishop Barron, I don't see eye to eye with him on everything but I'm still proud to say that he's a Bishop in my Church, more accurately our Church
Can you please answer my question if you understand. Preventing people, who want to partake of the Eucharist? Does that have eternal consequences for the person who is prevented? Thanks.
1 Cor 4:6 Paul warned: "in building the church, do not exceed scripture!" Luke 1:1-4 Luke begins by mentioning uninspired gospels by Christians, then the oral tradition of the apostles and concludes that scripture alone will allow Theophilus to know for certain what the truth is. Matthew 4:1-11. Three times Jesus was tempted by the Devil and each time Jesus replied exactly the same three dangerous words that defeated the Devil: "IT IS WRITTEN"
Oh come on! There is plentiful diversity in the Catholic Church--of orders, of habits, of spiritual traditions, of theological styles, of saints, of liturgical expressions, etc., etc. Diversity is one thing; fundamental disagreement about essential doctrine is something else altogether.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
So beautifully put. ❤️
So true!!
Trying to say that catholic diversity Bishop Barron said above is equivalent to the protestant babel of fundamental differences is a false analogy, a fallacy.
BISHOP BARON I NEED UR HELP , AM DYING AS RESULTS OF MY INTAKE OF DROGS ....AM WEAK NUT STILL CANT DO WITHOUT DRUGS...AM DYING EACH DAY .....JELP ME MY LORD
This video started my investigation that led me to the Catholic Church.
tony why? Are Catholics not Christians?
@tony Feel free to cite where you got your information supporting the claim that Catholics aren't Christian... Otherwise, I think it's you that should re-explore the Bible.
@tony I'm not sure you fully understand the bible. None of us do. But God is not a God of confusion. He would not try to confuse his children, so, you should act in Jesus's example and not try to confuse people who are correct with you Protestant Jibberish. I pray for you too! I hope you find your way back to the True Church of Christ.
@tony Catholics are Christ's True Church. They were the first and they are the only Church with Authority. Through the Apostles to Bishops, Priests, and Deacons through the centuries. The Catholic Church is the Only Church with With Christs Authority.
@tony I'm down for your Challenge. I will be pressing through a KJV Bible for the rest of this week. But I have a NAB and a Douay Rheims Bible on the way to get a full understanding. Yes, I know of Matt 16, when he properly establishes his Church. So, you go first.
im back home to the Catholic Church 2017!! thank you Jesus
I am proud to be Catholic and love Father Barron's commentary.
Keep the faith brother, God bless
I am not a Catholic and I love Father Barron's commentary.
Michael Abrahams then its only time...
Pride is from the devil
Pretty hard to dislike Father Barron - he takes on the hard questions and escapes without harming himself or the questions, and yet he engages and scores.
I loved these Fr. Barron videos back in the day! I binged-watched them and they helped so much in my journey home to the Catholic Church. Fr. Barron was ordained a bishop just three months after I joined the Church, so it felt like I had a connection with him and we were accompanying each other as we entered a new stage of life. God bless💕
Same!
I truly struggled with this. Scott Hahn's journey from protestant to Catholic is a great source for those struggling with this issue
Hahn strawmans the Reformed position heavily, specifically on the sacraments.
@@edrash1 Have you talked to a person who identifies as "Reformed" lately? There's such a diversity of opinions that repeating verbatim what one "reform" Christian said would get a dozen other "reform" Christians up in arms. They don't have much of a centralized theology...
Very insightful and pastorally engaging and theologically captivating. Fr Robert is a God's gift to the world.
Rodney gave a good response. Prayers in your quest to discover God's will for you.
I met you at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in NY over a decade ago. You were nice enough to talk with my sister-who could not be there-on the phone. A wonderful day for me and my sister. Prayers for you, Bishop Barron!
I am soon to marry, and as the spiritual leader of my home, I am deeply searching for our spiritual home. In my research, I have found great encouragement in the Catholic church. I believe I am now on a proper path and will soon begin the search to find a Catholic church for my family.
I also suggest that you become a Catholic which will enable you to receive communion.
You absolutely should come over to the one and true Church established by Christ.
I know this is an older post but I hope you and your wife talked about it and agreed. I too am married and to a woman that reads her Bible everyday. I too am the spiritual leader of the home, unfortunately my wife has decided not to follow. It has created deep divisions in our relationship. It would have been helpful to know before hand.
Barron is a super intellectual who explains in daily words. Wise guy.
This is the most important explanation of authority, protestants (and Catholics) need to hear. God bless, everyone 🙏🏻
This guy is a gem amongst pebbles.
Peter Travere he is a jewel in a sea of broken glass
Interesting, well-balanced presentation, Fr. Barron. I have a friend who's a Lutheran pastor. He keeps wishing his church had a magisterium. It makes him cringe to see matters of doctrine voted upon by people who have no training in theology.
I think many people don't understand that the development of doctrine is not an arbitrary thing, teachings imposed by people in authority simply because they have authority. Doctrine must be consistent with Scripture, and it must make logical sense.
Joe Offer you really laid it out well!! Thank you Joe
Oh indeed! My biggest problem with these "spring up churches" of today. No particular theological basis or backing. To me this is such a maverick way, dangerous, and leaves ample avenues for any and all wrong information to fall in to place under the rooves of these start up (upstart?) church communities where the well meaning leaders and followers remain albeit clueless and somewhat innocent, uninformed. Yet, my humble opinion is that all involved ought to feel the responsibility to be seeking the real actual Truth, rather than making up the "feel good" so called "truth" as they stumble forward with a Bible in their hand. May the mighty Holy Spirit help these folks, guide them, breathe the breath of reality on us all as we stumble toward Heaven in the murky secularity of this life!
The Catholic Chuch is Christ's mystical body
Watch your mouth
You're very misguided, sorry for whoever taught you that, terrible thing to say, you should ashamed of yourself, you must be very young because no true, responsible adults would have such evil things to say about any religion
Someday you'll grow up be patient
+Noah G ignorance is astounding...
+rosegarden23 quoting some passages and ignoring others doesn't serve your point very well.
Much appreciated. So true. Pray for Holy Catholic Church. Thank you Fr Barron.
I became Catholic not because I "liked" it better, but for the same reason Neumann said.
Writings of the Eastern Orthodox helped me a lot in this regard by the way, for they, and the Oriental Orthodox, and the Assyrian, are stronger proof than anything that the ideas of apostolic succession as just a succession of believers or presbyters is just not sustainable; we were getting it wrong for well over 1000 years before Luther figured it out? Sorry, but that doesn't work. Most of the Protestant arguments simply fall apart on this point. I pray they look at it and realize it, apostolic succession wasn't an invention of Rome. It just wasn't.
John Collins
Yeah that's why people increasingly look at atheists like they're just shallow uneducated people.
John Collins LOL another atheist with pretensions to "science." Doubtful you even understand science, son.
John Collins LOL I likely know more real scientists than you know actual people. Cultists like you are destroying science, BTW. www.deanesmay.com/2016/05/05/the-scientific-reality-of-the-scientism-religion/
John Collins Stephen Hawking is an idiot when it comes to philosophy and theology, but he's not a cult leader. It'd be nice if he'd give Father Geroges LeMaitre a little more credit though, given that LeMaitre's the one responsible for most of his career. No, the cult leaders are people like Richard Dawkins.
This is part of why I think most people don't trust atheists--the clear dishonesty. Atheist cults have been around for thousands of years and are still highly active today.
I have been a protestant Christian pretty much my entire adult life. I have always thought of the catholic church as a strange and basically heretical in their teachings. However, I have begun to listen to Bishop Barron and Patrick Madrid on the radio.
I suddenly have started to read about the catholic faith and watched TH-cam videos about the faith. Of course, I 've done further research. I feel it is a great church. I guess the whole Mary thing ha me a bit perplexed. The whole asking saints for intercession also cause me some problems. However, I feel better about the catholic church. Don't know if I will change denomination.
did you?
Thank you Rodney. That actually makes sense. I've watched the entire 'Catholicism' series and was really impressed. Everything I had ever heard about Catholicism came from non-Catholics (I'm originally from south Alabama) so my view was very skewed. I've been watching nearly all of Fr. Barron's TH-cam videos. They all make sense to me. Thanks again for the response!
Research Newnan on line.
Love your word best Teacher Prophet, ever I sit in awe . 🙏💯💯🕊️🕊️🕊️🙌🏻🔥🔥
28 And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his teachings:
29 For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.
In a way the living voice could be the Eucharist also. It is truly God living as a voice for truth.
Oh my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell. Lead all souls to Heaven, especially those most in need of Thy mercy. amen
Robert. I had a partner in business once upon a time. And in the busness, we had many disagreements in our practice. But one thing we learn because we were both very good at what we did. We learned that if we strongly disagreed on something, that meant that we were both right. It's simple, we were both right and the answer is not one or the other but in fact both. What made that way of thinking work, was the fact that we seen the genius of it. If I may say that. The problem we had was that we had to figure out a way to gear the two. Not always easy, but necessary and in time was a very powerful mechanism.
That was an excellent analogy with the umpire.
“A living voice…an umpire “
Also guidance of the Holy Spirit 🙏🏾❤️🩹
Amen
My father is an Evangelical and my mother is a Catholics. Having to go back and fort between these denomination makes my head burst to find which is which is true to follow. But , somehow , my heart always never lose focus to Jesus be it wherever and whatever denominations I go to.
Now , as I got older , it's pretty clear that to be able to questions much of everything about how Faiths work , I found the path of Evangelical have always been my calling to stand in the faith ( Even when I am dealing with my current sin ). Catholics still ring most to my heart still ( probably because I spend most of my childhood more with my mom than my dad ) and I only got into protestant when I finally moved out with my dad since dad's place kinda the only place that in majority , got protestant churches.
One things for sure , it was a culture shock . In Catholics faith , you got a lot of statues and decorations that resembles the faith but Protestants are minimalist ( it's their way of saying that faith in Christ is the focus inside you and not the things that you have ). Protestants got instruments ranging in a complete rhythm sections and I first play the keyboard then shift my majors to electric guitar. Learn music once in classical trained literacy but now as protestant , it's pop jazz and Gospel feel ( although sometimes , we are inclined to go for the classical style )
In short , my transitions does change my culture of serving the Lord through church but It doesn't change the foundations of my own living church inside me...JESUS. My focus have always been to Him all the time.
Right now , I am currently far away from home and constantly dealing with a lot of stuff ( so much that my catholic side tells me to repent and make a confessions ). But , I am grateful to God when He sent me different people fo the same faith but different denominations to carry me up when I am down by offering me to go with them at the church.
I believe that God's work is always in motions and if it wasn't for Him , I would have already lost not of faith in churches of men but the church that build personally within my heart with Him.
God Bless Everyone and do also say a prayers for this sinners that smokes and drink to go oftenly if best , eradicate it....
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:50 🤔 Dr. Alister McGrath's book "Christianity's Dangerous Idea" explores the issue of authority within the Protestant movement and the challenges of interpreting the Word of God.
01:20 💡 Luther's idea of the priesthood of all believers led to diverse interpretations and disagreements within Protestantism, challenging the notion of the plain sense of the Bible.
02:15 📚 McGrath suggests a gradual consensus model of authority in Protestantism, analogous to a democratic approach, which raises concerns about its effectiveness.
03:25 🛡️ While McGrath's democratic authority concept is reasonable, Bishop Barron draws inspiration from John Henry Newman's view on the necessity of a living voice to determine truth amidst divisions.
06:38 💬 The Protestant individualistic Holy Spirit interpretation does not resolve the problem of widespread disagreement, unlike the Catholic belief in the Holy Spirit's guidance in magisterial teaching.
07:20 🛡️ Newman's analogy envisions the Church's authority as a referee in the game of theological discourse, intervening when necessary, avoiding excessive interference.
Made with HARPA AI
Yay Fr. Barron..you explained clearly that the church is a living church and that it needs an authority.
Just like Jesus said to Peter:"Man has not reveiled this to you But my father". So has God reviled this to you Fr.....now Bishop Barron. We love you! We needed someone like you here in California.
Mi Casa 🏡
Es Tu Casa🏡.
We are praying for you..please pray for us.😊
I have no problem with people who are Protestant Christian. In fact my girlfriend is a Protestant Christian and her Protestant denomination is Baptist. And when I told her that my denomination is Catholic, she and I respected each other and there was mutual understanding.
please lead her out of the false Baptist denomination, her soul depends on this.
Dude, you are not part of any denomination. Protestants are, because there are more than 60,000 of them. They have to set themselves apart from the other 59,999. The Catholic Church is the only one true church. It is not a denomination. It is not one among many. Just think about it.
until you marry and the kids come along. then watch how understanding you both are.
Faro Catolico
Protestant denominations are not 60,000. Why are you lying?
Respectfully...the almost 2,000 year old Catholic Church is not a denomination...but the very Church our Lord Jesus Christ established in Matthew 16:18.
"You are my Luther, and on my Luther I shall build my Church, 1500 years from now"
Lol.
HAHAHAHAHAHAH
Chritianity has been divided unfortunately which resulted in the conflict and I think what Fr. Robert mentioned is a good starting point to really think about how we can narrow the gaps among Christian brothers and sisters. May God's grace and love be with you all !!
We are told we are accountable of all our deeds and words. This is just a fact.
I became Anglican a few years ago and have found myself drawn more to the Anglo-Catholic end of the spectrum, and now feel drawn to Rome. I'm hoping someday to enter full communion with Rome, but at least for now I'm living practically as a Catholic. At a certain point I realized (as Newman did) that many of the Anglo-Catholic traditions are beautiful, but they're also kind of empty dead traditions without the living tradition of the Catholic Church. If we all follow one God, one Jesus, one faith, one Church, how can it be that we are all using wildly different interpretations of the same text? I think it's fine to debate scripture and doctrine, we should even encourage it because it promotes a greater familiarity with the Scripture and with theological concepts, but at the end of the day we need a unified voice of truth in the world to guard against heresy.
My small town in the UK has one Catholic church and at least seven Protestant ones of different denominations. How powerful it would be if we were all one.
Most of those Protestant church buildings aren't used today, I imagine.
God bless you Bishop Barron
Let us pray for all people to go to believe in Jesus and go to Mass on sunday.
Let us pray to you
The Pillar and Foundation of Truth is the CHURCH, not the Bible. (1 Tim 3.15)
The Church wrote, assembled and canonized the Bible.
No effect can be greater than it's cause.
Think about it...
God Himself wrote the Bible through men. 2 Peter 1:19-21; see also 2 Timothy 3:15-17, Proverbs 30:5-6, 1 Corinthians 4:6, 2 Peter 3:15-16, 1 Peter 4:17, 1 Peter 1:22-25, James 5:10, James 1:18, 21-25, Hebrews 13:7, 11:, 4:12, 1:1-4, and I'll post others as I find them.
Does your Bible believing church teach that you must physically eat the flesh of Jesus and drink His blood to have life in you (John 6:53)?
John 6:53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you
John Reynolds The "bible believers" only believe the parts of the bible that they like.
John Reynolds When Jesus said "I am the bread of life", did he turn into bread? "The vine"? "The Gate"? "The Lamb"?
Tim Spangler
Jesus Promises His Real Presence in the Eucharist
John 6:4,11-14 - on the eve of the Passover, Jesus
performs the miracle of multiplying the loaves. This was prophesied in the Old
Testament (e.g., 2 Kings 4:43), and foreshadows the infinite heavenly bread
which is Him.
Matt. 14:19, 15:36; Mark 6:41, 8:6; Luke 9:16 -these
passages are additional accounts of the multiplication miracles. This points to
the Eucharist.
Matt. 16:12 -in this verse, Jesus explains His
metaphorical use of the term "bread." In John 6, He eliminates
any metaphorical possibilities.
John 6:4 - Jesus is in Capernaum on the eve of Passover,
and the lambs are gathered to be slaughtered and eaten. Look what He says.
John 6:35,41,48,51 - Jesus says four times "I AM the
bread from heaven." It is He, Himself, the eternal bread from heaven.
John 6:27,31,49 - there is a parallel between the manna
in the desert which was physically consumed, and this "new" bread
which must be consumed.
John 6:51-52- then Jesus says that the bread He is
referring to is His flesh. The Jews take Him literally and immediately question
such a teaching. How can this man give us His flesh to eat?
John 6:53 - 58 - Jesus does not correct their literal
interpretation. Instead, Jesus eliminates any metaphorical interpretations by
swearing an oath and being even more literal about eating His flesh. In fact,
Jesus says four times we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. Catholics thus
believe that Jesus makes present His body and blood in the sacrifice of the
Mass. Protestants, if they are not going to become Catholic, can only argue
that Jesus was somehow speaking symbolically.
John 6:23-53 - however, a symbolic interpretation is not
plausible. Throughout these verses, the Greek text uses the word
"phago" nine times. "Phago" literally means "to
eat" or "physically consume." Like the Protestants of our day,
the disciples take issue with Jesus' literal usage of "eat." So Jesus
does what?
John 6:54, 56, 57, 58 - He uses an even more literal
verb, translated as "trogo," which means to gnaw or chew or crunch.
He increases the literalness and drives his message home. Jesus will literally
give us His flesh and blood to eat. The word “trogo” is only used two other
times in the New Testament (in Matt. 24:38 and John 13:18) and it always means
to literally gnaw or chew meat. While “phago” might also have a spiritual
application, "trogo" is never used metaphorically in Greek. So
Protestants cannot find one verse in Scripture where "trogo" is used
symbolically, and yet this must be their argument if they are going to deny the
Catholic understanding of Jesus' words. Moreover, the Jews already knew Jesus
was speaking literally even before Jesus used the word “trogo” when they said
“How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” (John 6:52).
John 6:55 - to clarify further, Jesus says "For My
Flesh is food indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed." This phrase can only
be understood as being responsive to those who do not believe that Jesus' flesh
is food indeed, and His blood is drink indeed. Further, Jesus uses the word which
is translated as "sarx." "Sarx" means flesh (not
"soma" which means body). See, for example, John 1:13,14; 3:6; 8:15;
17:2; Matt. 16:17; 19:5; 24:22; 26:41; Mark 10:8; 13:20; 14:38; and Luke 3:6;
24:39 which provides other examples in Scripture where "sarx" means flesh.
It is always literal.
John 6:55 - further, the phrases "real" food
and "real" drink use the word "alethes."
"Alethes" means "really" or "truly," and would
only be used if there were doubts concerning the reality of Jesus' flesh and
blood as being food and drink. Thus, Jesus is emphasizing the miracle of His
body and blood being actual food and drink.
John 6:60 - as are many anti-Catholics today, Jesus'
disciples are scandalized by these words. They even ask, "Who can 'listen'
to it (much less understand it)?" To the unillumined mind, it seems
grotesque.
John 6:61-63 - Jesus acknowledges their disgust. Jesus'
use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" means the disciples need
supernatural faith, not logic, to understand His words.
John 3:6 - Jesus often used the comparison of
"spirit versus flesh" to teach about the necessity of possessing
supernatural faith versus a natural understanding. In Mark 14:38 Jesus also
uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison. The spirit is willing but the
flesh is weak. We must go beyond the natural to understand the supernatural. In
1 Cor. 2:14,3:3; Rom 8:5; and Gal. 5:17, Paul also uses the
"spirit/flesh" comparison to teach that unspiritual people are not
receiving the gift of faith. They are still "in the flesh."
John 6:63 - Protestants often argue that Jesus' use of
the phrase "the spirit gives life" shows that Jesus was only speaking
symbolically. However, Protestants must explain why there is not one place in
Scripture where "spirit" means "symbolic." As we have seen,
the use of "spirit" relates to supernatural faith. What words are
spirit and life? The words that we must eat Jesus' flesh and drink His blood,
or we have no life in us.
John 6:66-67 - many disciples leave Jesus, rejecting this
literal interpretation that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. At this
point, these disciples really thought Jesus had lost His mind. If they were
wrong about the literal interpretation, why wouldn't Jesus, the Great Teacher,
have corrected them? Why didn't Jesus say, "Hey, come back here, I was
only speaking symbolically!"? Because they understood correctly.
Jesus Institutes the Eucharist / More Proofs of the Real
Presence
Matt. 26:26-28; Mark. 14:22,24; Luke 22;19-20; 1 Cor.
11:24-25 - Jesus says, this IS my body and blood. Jesus does not say, this is a
symbol of my body and blood.
Matt. 26:26; Mark. 14:22; Luke 22:19-20 - the Greek
phrase is "Touto estin to soma mou." This phraseology means
"this is actually" or "this is really" my body and blood.
1 Cor. 11:24 - the same translation is used by Paul -
"touto mou estin to soma." The statement is "this is
really" my body and blood. Nowhere in Scripture does God ever declare
something without making it so.
Matt. 26:26; Mark. 14:22; Luke 22:19 - to deny the 2,000
year-old Catholic understanding of the Eucharist, Protestants must argue that
Jesus was really saying "this represents (not is) my body and blood."
However, Aramaic, the language that Jesus spoke, had over 30 words for
"represent," but Jesus did not use any of them. He used the Aramaic
word for "estin" which means "is."
Matt. 26:28; Mark. 14:24; Luke 22:20 - Jesus' use of
"poured out" in reference to His blood also emphasizes the reality of
its presence.
Exodus 24:8 - Jesus emphasizes the reality of His actual
blood being present by using Moses' statement "blood of the
covenant."
1 Cor. 10:16 - Paul asks the question, "the cup of
blessing and the bread of which we partake, is it not an actual participation
in Christ's body and blood?" Is Paul really asking because He, the
divinely inspired writer, does not understand? No, of course not. Paul's
questions are obviously rhetorical. This IS the actual body and blood. Further,
the Greek word "koinonia" describes an actual, not symbolic
participation in the body and blood.
1 Cor. 10:18 - in this verse, Paul is saying we are what
we eat. We are not partners with a symbol. We are partners of the one actual
body.
1 Cor. 11:23 - Paul does not explain what he has actually
received directly from Christ, except in the case when he teaches about the
Eucharist. Here, Paul emphasizes the importance of the Eucharist by telling us
he received directly from Jesus instructions on the Eucharist which is the
source and summit of the Christian faith.
1 Cor. 11:27-29 - in these verses, Paul says that eating
or drinking in an unworthy manner is the equivalent of profaning (literally,
murdering) the body and blood of the Lord. If this is just a symbol, we cannot
be guilty of actually profaning (murdering) it. We cannot murder a symbol.
Either Paul, the divinely inspired apostle of God, is imposing an unjust
penalty, or the Eucharist is the actual body and blood of Christ.
1 Cor. 11:30 - this verse alludes to the consequences of
receiving the Eucharist unworthily. Receiving the actual body and blood of
Jesus in mortal sin results in actual physical consequences to our bodies.
1 Cor. 11:27-30 - thus, if we partake of the Eucharist
unworthily, we are guilty of literally murdering the body of Christ, and
risking physical consequences to our bodies. This is overwhelming evidence for
the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. These are unjust penalties if the
Eucharist is just a symbol.
Acts 2:42 - from the Church's inception, apostolic
tradition included celebrating the Eucharist (the "breaking of the
bread") to fulfill Jesus' command "do this in remembrance of
me."
Acts 20:28 - Paul charges the Church elders to
"feed" the Church of the Lord, that is, with the flesh and blood of
Christ.
Matt. 6:11; Luke 11:3 - in the Our Father, we ask God to
give us this day our daily bread, that is the bread of life, Jesus Christ.
Matt. 12:39 - Jesus says no “sign” will be given except
the “sign of the prophet Jonah.” While Protestants focus only on the “sign” of
the Eucharist, this verse demonstrates that a sign can be followed by the
reality (here, Jesus’ resurrection, which is intimately connected to the
Eucharist).
Matt. 19:6 - Jesus says a husband and wife become one
flesh which is consummated in the life giving union of the marital act. This
union of marital love which reflects Christ's union with the Church is
physical, not just spiritual. Thus, when Paul says we are a part of Christ's
body (Eph. 1:22-23; 5:23,30-31; Col. 1:18,24), he means that our union with
Christ is physical, not just spiritual. But our union with Christ can only be
physical if He is actually giving us something physical, that is Himself, which
is His body and blood to consume (otherwise it is a mere spiritual union).
Luke 14:15 - blessed is he who eats this bread in the
kingdom of God, on earth and in heaven.
Luke 22:19, 1 Cor. 11:24-25 - Jesus commands the apostles
to "do this," that is, offer the Eucharistic sacrifice, in
remembrance of Him.
Luke 24:26-35 - in the Emmaus road story, Jesus gives a
homily on the Scriptures and then follows it with the celebration of the
Eucharist. This is the Holy Mass, and the Church has followed this order of the
Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist for 2,000 years.
Luke 24:30-31,35 - Jesus is known only in the breaking of
bread. Luke is emphasizing that we only receive the fullness of Jesus by celebrating
the Eucharistic feast of His body and blood, which is only offered in its
fullness by the Catholic Church.
John 1:14 - literally, this verse teaches that the Word
was made flesh and "pitched His tabernacle" among us. The Eucharist,
which is the Incarnate Word of God under the appearance of bread, is stored in
the tabernacles of Catholic churches around the world.
John 21:15,17 - Jesus charges Peter to "feed"
His sheep, that is, with the Word of God through preaching and the Eucharist.
Acts 9:4-5; 22:8; 26:14-15 - Jesus asks Saul, “Why are
you persecuting me?” when Saul was persecuting the Church. Jesus and the Church
are one body (Bridegroom and Bride), and we are one with Jesus through His
flesh and blood (the Eucharist).
1 Cor. 12:13 - we "drink" of one Spirit in the
Eucharist by consuming the blood of Christ eternally offered to the Father.
Heb. 10:25,29 - these verses allude to the reality that
failing to meet together to celebrate the Eucharist is mortal sin. It is
profaning the body and blood of the Lord.
Heb. 12:22-23 - the Eucharistic liturgy brings about full
union with angels in festal gathering, the just spirits, and God Himself, which
takes place in the assembly or "ecclesia" (the Church).
Heb. 12:24 - we couldn't come to Jesus' sprinkled blood
if it were no longer offered by Jesus to the Father and made present for us.
2 Pet. 1:4 - we partake of His divine nature, most
notably through the Eucharist - a sacred family bond where we become one.
Rev. 2:7; 22:14 - we are invited to eat of the tree of
life, which is the resurrected flesh of Jesus which, before, hung on the tree.
John Reynolds You are what you eat.
pepe bastardes I'm certainly no saint but I can't comprehend it either. When I see terms like "wafer God" and "death cookie" I feel sick. And worse that it comes from people who call themselves "Christian" and think they have some God-given authority to "save" Catholics.
We are searching as to why we ALL cannot be under one roof. God Bless David. Kasine speaks highly of you.
The Holy Spirit is the living voice today and until the end of the age.
The Word of God vs.The Word of Man =The Word of God wins Always!!
And how do you determine what is what? By verifiable evidence. Of which there isn't any.
and do youbelieve you are able to interpert Scripture for yourself better than the Church and the Magesterium . I beg to differ. And how do you explain that it is the Catholic Church that gave us the Books of the Bible.
John Dattoma all u need do after u have accepted Jesus as savior and asked Him to forgive ur sins and live inside ur spirit, is read & study the bible 4 ur self without the influence of any denomination or religion. The bible is truth, and every man is a liar.
Ewald where does it say that in the Bible?
Joejoe The dogface boy. Says what? Please refresh
Has anyone asked how did Protestanism come about? Surely anyone can see that it comes from the root word Protest! And Protest against what? Well history reveals Protestanism was to Protest against the roman 💒 departure from The Authority of Holy Bible WORD doctrines! Pure n simple!!!👏👏👏👏👏
Wil liam I wish things were that simple. If it were, the church would be united already.
People like you keep me away from being a catholic. For sure.
Bless Pascal that’s a shame you keep yourself from something due to someone.
The protest was initally against indulgences. Luther felt it was an attempt to sell salvation which... Is impossible. But i can see where were starting to fall apart as well. Our denominations have let things in that scripture clearly condemns but yet we reject things that seem to be supported by scripture which is a clear violation of Sola Scriptura... :-( im deeply puzzled... :-( sincerily a deeply concerned Presbyterian. :-(
no. I will never leave Him nor He me. every day I walk in the light and guidance of the Holy Spirit. I actually know Him and have a real experience of Him.
once every week or two I gather with my fellow true believers to learn about and praise Him and his Spirit comes among us. We break bread and share wine in remembrance of Him as He commanded.
this is holy communion as it should be celebrated. And we sense the results of it by His real presence among us.
Newman was amazing. The oak tree and the acorn don’t look the same
But in essence they are
Without Papal infallibility all you are left with is personal infallibility.
WhyCatholic That is a lie. Typical RCC propaganda. I've never met a Bible believing Christian clam infalliblity...other than the Bible.
25,000 plus different denominations all claiming to be guided by the Holy Spirit and understand scripture correctly, everyone else is wrong, what else do you call it?
LOL
WhyCatholic Don't engage this person, he is an anti-Catholic troll.
WhyCatholic Please do show who proclaims infalliblity. I will join you in rebuking them. Or maybe your accusation has no foundation.
Tim Spangler are you infallible?
From Father to Bishop to... Pope?
Cardinal Timothy Dolan..
He is Right every man and woman seem to have different opinions about everything. But Ibelieve I have a small universal truth in this. It goes something like; God listens to people in great despair. And he shows them great miracle of comfort.
Here come the angry Protestants... *epic battle music plays in the background*
Just kidding!
th-cam.com/video/RdxdnVqn08E/w-d-xo.html
truth, beauty, goodness all in catholic faith. No where else offers that. You have to wear "catholic glasses" to see it.
I love the peace and humility in Catholics.
I don't believe Protestants have fullness of truth as many books were left out by ex-Augustinian monk matin Luther.
Second you need traditions to understand many things in bible that only Catholics can answer correctly.
For example, you wouldn't understand exactly if you read my love letter written to my spouse 20yrs ago unless you know both families.
Where in the Bible does it say this? It doesn't. Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book? It doesn't.
"[T]he most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday....People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become 7th Day Adventists, and keep Saturday holy."
Bishop Barron, you said that there needs to be a living voice. Well, there is! Hebrews 4:12 says: "Indeed, the word of God is living and effective.." Hebrews 4:7 “Today, if you will hear His voice..."
@DannyGirl The Catholic Encyclopedia says different, it says the church made the change (under the title "commandments"). (My guess is the new CCC changed what was the historic position of the Catholic Church, which previously freely admitted to making the change in the law.) Isaiah 66:23 says we will keep the sabbath in Heaven. There's no such thing as a "jewish sabbath" - it is the sabbath of the Lord. He calls it "my holy day." Sunday is pagan, it comes from sun worship. Many things in the Catholic church have their origins in pagan worship; such as Christmas and Easter and Halloween.
@DannyGirl "But you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.” James Cardinal Gibbons (Archbishop of Baltimore), The Faith of our Fathers(1917 edition)pg.72-73 (16th edition)pg.111 (88th edition) pg. 89. Originally published 1876.
"The Church, on the other hand, after changing the day of rest from the Jewish Sabbath, or seventh day of the week, to the first, made the Third Commandment refer to Sunday as the day to be kept holy as the Lord's Day." - The Catholic Encyclopedia "Commandments of God"
What day is God's holy day? Isaiah 58:13a - If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day...
What day is the Lord's day? Matthew 12:8 - For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
Does God ever change? Malachi 3:6a - For I am the Lord, I change not
What day will be celebrated in Heaven as the Lord's day? Isaiah 66:23 - And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord.
@DannyGirl Why would we keep the sabbath in Heaven, if Jesus abolished it?
I showed you the historical context, even the (former) Archbishop of Baltimore said the church made the change, and it's not in the Bible.
@DannyGirl No scripture says to keep Sunday holy. Look at all the first day of the week scriptures - none is the Lord's day or sabbath day. I don't feel like writing a rebuttal for each of them, but it's easy to refute. The Catholic Church has historically taught that it is the power who changed the sabbath - even from the archbishop and catholic encyclopedia which I quoted you. Was the Archbishop wrong?
@DannyGirl Moses didn't make the 10 commandments, GOD did. The fourth commandment says that the sabbath is given to man (same word as Adam) because God created the Heavens and Earth in 6 days and rested on the 7th.
Does your Bible believing church teach that the Church itself (rather than the Bible) is the pillar and bulwark (foundation) of Truth (1 Timothy 3:15)?
1 Timothy 3:15 But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.
John Reynolds I would argue that this verse was written long before anything resembling the Catholic Church and it's hierarchy had developed. The Church in those days resembled much more the diversity of today than the uniformity of the pre-schism catholic church. In the days of Paul you already have jewish christians and greek christians.
hisredrighthand The First Letter from St. Paul to St. Timothy was written approximately in A.D. 55...
Below is the very first written account that has survived the centuries with the formal name of “The Church”:
"See that ye all follow the bishop,even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church." Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrneans, 8:2(c. A.D. 110).
We see from this short text that by the end of the first century the following has already been well established, there are Bishops, Priests, Deacons, and especially the term “Eucharist” and the formal name of the Church. Ignatius uses this formal name of the Church our Lord Jesus Christ established as if it is already widely known.
Sure sounds like the Catholic Church of today….don’t you think?
hisredrighthand “The Church” is Hierarchical
Matt. 16:18; 18:18 - Jesus uses the word
"ecclesia" only twice in the New Testament Scriptures, which
demonstrates that Jesus intended a visible, unified, hierarchical, and
authoritative Church.
Acts 20:17,28 - Paul refers to both the elders or priests
("presbyteroi") and the bishops ("episkopoi") of the
Church. Both are ordained leaders within the hierarchical structure of the
Church.
1 Cor. 12:28 - God Himself appoints the various positions
of authority within the Church. As a loving Father, God gives His children the
freedom and authority to act with charity and justice to bring about His work
of salvation.
Eph. 4:11 - the Church is hierarchical and includes
apostles, prophets, pastors, and teachers, all charged to build up the Church.
The Church is not an invisible entity with an invisible foundation.
Phil. 1:1 - Paul addresses the bishops and deacons of the
Church. They can all trace their unbroken lineage back to the apostles.
1 Tim. 3:1; Titus 1:7 - Christ's Church has bishops
("episkopoi") who are direct successors of the apostles. The bishops
can trace the authority conferred upon them back to the apostles.
1 Tim. 5:17; Titus 1:5; James 5:14 - Christ's Church also
has elders or priests ("presbyteroi") who serve the bishops.
1 Tim. 3:8 - Christ's Church also has deacons
("diakonoi"). Thus, Jesus Christ's Church has a hierarchy of
authority - bishops, priests and deacons, who can all trace their lineage back
to Peter and the apostles.
Exodus 28:1 and 19:6 - shows the three offices of the Old
Testament priesthood:
(1). high priest - Aaron (Ex. 28:1)
(2). Ministerial priests - Aaron’s sons (Ex. 19:6; 28:1)
(3) Universal priests - Israel (Ex. 19:6).
The New Testament priesthood also has three
offices:
(1) High Priest - Jesus Christ (Heb. 3:1)
(2) Ministerial priests - the ordained bishops and
priests (Rom. 15:16; 1 Tim. 3:1,8; 5:17; Titus 1:7)
(3) Universal priests - all the baptized (1 Pet. 2:5,9;
Rev. 1:6)
John Reynolds Where is the mandate to WORSHIP the Eucharist? Scripture? Nope. The Creeds? Nope. Your reference? Nope. It isn't a minor thing. You MUST know that if the Eucharist is NOT supposed to be worshiped, then this is idolatry of the worst kind, right?
John Reynolds Did you forget "Pope"? Not a single mention of that position's description like the other positions' descriptions? Why?
Only God and Jesus have authority. all we do is to be for their will and glory. Our salvation is in grace through blood Jesus, nothing else and through no organization nor person.
our souls are sprinkled and purified with the precious blood of Jesus Christ at every Mass.
pat mark So you put him at a open shame at every mass do you? You kill Jesus over and over? Hebrews 10:10
By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Is the writer of Hebrews a liar or is the Catholic church ? Once for all.
You are doing nothing more than making assertions. Without verification by demonstrable evidence, they remain only assertions.
Tommy. Your understanding is completely simplistic and childish, that is why you need a teaching authority who understands these mysteries. The Church understands all of these things and can explain them biblically and with intelligence and reason as well. You cannot. You accuse because you have no understanding. Those outside of the Church are puffed up with their own pride and will accept no teaching or authority and that's why they are so confused. But stop casting stones if you are ignorant. You people don't understand because you refuse to learn.
Prancer1231 Typical Catholic person. Cant answer any of my questions resort to insults. If you gave the world the bible as YOU Catholics say, How is it YOU have no understanding of it?
I can I am saved,can you? I am a child of God, Can you say this? You insult Jesus by telling him he didn't do a very good job on forgiving sins thus saying one has to go to purgatory BEFORE going to Heaven. If you were a mature adult ,why not refute me with your bible? Reason why you don't is simple. You are either not mature enough or you lack what the word of God says. So which is it? Try this seeing Paul says to DO THIS!
2 Timothy 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
The Catholic Church IS THE CHURCH...it is where all Christians belong....that being said..The Prostestant churches ( most).. share one key belief with the Catholic Church..Hell is a real place and people go there....how strange that some people dont agree with this teaching as 1) Jesus himself told us so..2) Our blessed Mother told us many go there because they have no one to pray for them 3) The Saints have told us it is real and people DO go their.....yes very strange that some believe hell just might be empty🤔🤔🤔
"The Catholic Church IS THE CHURCH...it is where all Christians belong"
Show me this in scripture
So worth returning to these older videos. Thank you Bishop Barron for your clear articulation of this crucial issue.
“A gradual consensus.” 30,000 Protestant Churches
justthinken1 they’ve corrected that and this link also provides where that information originally came from.
Clearly there are thousands of protestant denominations. Even if it’s not the erroneous 33,000. The church corrected itself. The church is made of humans who are indeed fallible.
m.ncregister.com/blog/scottericalt/we-need-to-stop-saying-that-there-are-33000-protestant-denominations
justthinken1 The fact that exactly 33,000 protestant denominations does not change The authority of the first traditional Christian church: the Catholic Church. There’s tradition, authority, reason, and BIBLE. I don’t know why people say Catholics are not taught to read their Bible. That’s absolutely not true. We do have Catholic Bible studies you know and the families are biblical-based
Mary Rigney if u count every mom and pop church I’m sure it’s way higher than 33K
justthinken1 please do tell me how many Protestant denominations there are ? I dare u
justthinken1 Just a simple observation. Being rude calling names and generally acting unChristlike is not very convincing to anyone. I wasn’t rude to you and have no idea why some people feel that being that rude online is OK. Shrug. To each his own ... work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
Who put the Bible together? Someone must have had an authority to put it together? It didn't fall out of the sky from God.
It was assembled under the influence of the Holy Spirit.
The Catholic church put the bible together.....Google it
@@AFreckledAngel And those in the Church were working with the help of the Holy Spirit.
I wish all the Churches could be one but it now seems impossible. So many interpretations of the bible when it is so simple to understand. The Catholic Church shot itself in the foot when it added doctrines which are not found in the bible such as infant baptism, Acts 8:35-38 praying to saints and Mary, 1 Tim. 2:5, selling indulgences, Rom. 6:1, bowing and worshipping statues, 1 John 5:21, forbidding to marry of certain groups such as nuns and priests which in turn led to sexual perversion among some of them, 1 Tim. 4:1-3, giving one man power to give his word the same weight as scripture. 2 Thess. 2:3-4 If they had just stayed true to the beliefs of the first century church, there would have been no break up. Jude 3
horseman528 I agree with you Horseman.
Tommy. Jude 3 pretty much tells us there was a complete doctrine which needed no additions or subtractions which is pretty much what happened over the centuries. I'm glad we have the bible or new testament to read for ourselves. The first century Christian Church recorded in the new testament wouldn't have recognized the Roman Catholic or Orthodox Catholic Church of today. Jude 3 "Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was ONCE delivered to the saints." There was no need for pagan practices which were later adopted by the apostate Church of Rome since they already had the complete doctrine of Christ which needed no additions or subtractions. Thanks Tommy.
horseman528 The bible says that whole families were baptized together. Infant baptism was practiced in the earliest days of the church, read the church fathers. Baptism brings you into the family of God, like the Jews circumcized their infants when they were 8 days old. When you can make an adult decision you are confirmed. Paul says it is better to remain single because if you marry you have to focus on your spouse. The clergy stays single because it gives them more time to focus on God. There is far more sexual perversion in the non-Catholic, non-celibate world. There are more protestant clergy accused of child abuse according to insurance statistics. If celibacy leads to perversion then why are all forms of sexual perversion more rampant outside of the Catholic church?
Prancer1231 Whole families were baptized in the cases of Lydia and the Philippian jailer according to Acts 16:15 and Acts 16:33, but it nowhere mentions infants. Salvation is a decision that one must make for themselves. I can't decide for anyone to be baptized; they must decide for themselves when they come to an age of reason and accountability. Without faith first being applied to baptism, it is nothing more than an empty ceremony of getting wet. There is no forgiveness of sins without faith. Only after one believes and confesses that Jesus Christ is the Son of God can that baptism wash away their sins according to Acts 8:35-38 and 22:16. Ephesians 2:8 "For by grace are ye saved through FAITH..." It is impossible for an infant to have faith since it has no knowledge of those things. As far as bishops being celibate, the Holy Spirit speaking through Paul in 1 Timothy 3:1 stated that a bishop MUST be blameless, THE HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE...This requirement of a bishop being the husband of one wife is repeated in Titus 1:6. Any person who has matured and is healthy has a sex drive. God gave us marriage to satisfy that sex drive. When there is no outlet for that sex drive, people will find other ways to satisfy it which will be sinful whether it be through pornography, fornication, or pedophila. The forbidding to marry was one characteristic of the apostate church according to 1 Timothy 4:1-3. Most Catholics appear to be good people and sincere, but people can be sincerely wrong.
horseman528 The early church fathers write about infant baptism. Yes, you need to make an informed decision when you are of an age to do that. That is why Catholics are confirmed at around the age of 14. Jewish infants don't make the decision to be circumcized. It brings them into the family of God, it sets them apart. Baptism is similar. We are born with original sin. How can an infant repent of original sin?
Your four full lines of response demonstrates how well it works with you.
When I say 'Jesus' Satan trembles, when I say 'Luther' the Heavens cry.
Great referee analogy - papal refs are at an advantage, since they have some help from above. God doesn't miss any calls.
The problem with a referee is that his word is final..Theres the answer, once its accepted the questioning stops.......I trust no man and i test the spirits. Protestants do rely on the spirit as the final source, sometimes he makes us wait for answers, but we continue to study and pray and learn and grow.....quick easy answers is man's way, not God's......As long as we have questions and concerns we will bury ourselves in the bible, always seeking for more......if we had no questions or concerns or desire to know more the Holy Bible would be sitting on the shelf collecting dust.....mines beside my bed, worn and comfortable and filled with gum wrappers to bookmark my favorite pages.......deception in religion is so rampant, i may be a tad bit paranoid, but the paranoia keeps me alert and diligent...:)
But whose reading of the Bible? There are tens of thousands of Protestant churches, each one representing a distinctive interpretation of the Bible. And the referee I'm talking about is one that has received the sanction of the Holy Spirit.
i read alone, and in a study group and always pray for guidance beforehand...even when i attend church (Baptist) i have open book in hand....i do not trust anyone's interpretation 100%. , its not that i question their expertise in the scriptures. ...I question purposeful deception in a corrupt world full of corrupt men........if i find myself in hell it will be because of my own evil doings, not because i followed someone else there. ....i was once very trusting. 15 years later i still pray for deliverance from the cult of the SDA's...........getting back to the church that I was raised in has helped, but has left me guarded and paranoid
Reply
Fr. Robert Barron
Sally Brown how ironic, that Baptist theology actually de-emphasizes baptism.
Fr. Robert Barron does not over-concentration on religion tend to insanity?
Bibleindepth there is no true Christianity without the Eucharist, which is the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine.
I love all of you on here, liking you all is the hard part.
Thank you, thank you, thank you, Bishop Barron! I just finished listening to Patrick Madrid and James White 1993 debate on sola scriptura, and, though Mr. Madrid did a great job in showing the falseness of sola scriptura's claims, it left me very discouraged. Your clarity and wisdom in this video lifted my spirits. I am so grateful for your ministry.
It's best to go to God in prayer for His opinion instead of listening to human debates. Ask God whether His word is the only source of true Christian teaching and if so, why, or does He approve of human arguments because His testament does not really testify to His teachings being inerrant, but is rather a book of guidelines to be accepted or rejected, modified and corrected by RC theologians. The Holy Spirit is the voice, clear voice and living voice leading those who want to obey God and do His will.
excellent explaination. as a new orthodox christian, I am finding your explainations very enlightening. thanks.
My interpretation of scriptures is of God. Yours is of what men taught you.I asked and prayed to God for understanding.God freely gives wisdom to all who ask.
a few years back and it ultimately led me to Christian mystics and monks. I quickly realized they are all Catholic, which led me to look into Catholicism for myself. I bought "Catholicism" and a few other of Fr. Barron's videos. Like a breath of fresh air. I can see my way back to God now. I'm taking it slow bc I don't want it to be an emotional response to really well made videos but one I can defend intellectually and feel grounded in.
Question: "What are the differences between Catholics and Protestants?"
Answer: There are several important differences between Catholics and Protestants. While there have been many attempts in recent years to find common ground between the two groups, the fact is that the differences remain, and they are just as important today as they were at the beginning of the Protestant Reformation. The following is brief summary of some of the more important differences:
One of the first major differences between Catholicism and Protestantism is the issue of the sufficiency and authority of Scripture. Protestants believe that the Bible alone is the source of God’s special revelation to mankind and teaches us all that is necessary for our salvation from sin. Protestants view the Bible as the standard by which all Christian behavior must be measured. This belief is commonly referred to as “sola scriptura” and is one of the “five solas” (sola is Latin for “alone”) that came out of the Protestant Reformation as summaries of some of the differences between Catholics and Protestants.
While there are many verses in the Bible that establish its authority and its sufficiency for all matters of faith and practice, one of the clearest is 2 Timothy 3:16, where we see that “all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” Catholics reject the doctrine of sola scriptura and do not believe that the Bible alone is sufficient. They believe that both the Bible and sacred Roman Catholic tradition are equally binding upon the Christian. Many Roman Catholics doctrines, such as purgatory, praying to the saints, worship or veneration of Mary, etc., have little or no basis in Scripture but are based solely on Roman Catholic traditions. Essentially, the Roman Catholic Church’s denial of sola scriptura and its insistence that both the Bible and tradition are equal in authority undermine the sufficiency, authority, and completeness of the Bible. The view of Scripture is at the root of many, if not all, of the differences between Catholics and Protestants.
Another disagreement between Catholicism and Protestantism is over the office and authority of the Pope. According to Catholicism the Pope is the “Vicar of Christ” (a vicar is a substitute) and represents Jesus as the head of the Church. As such, the Pope has the ability to speak ex cathedra (with authority on matters of faith and practice), making his teachings infallible and binding upon all Christians. On the other hand, Protestants believe that no human being is infallible and that Christ alone is the Head of the Church. Catholics rely on apostolic succession as a way of trying to establish the Pope’s authority. Protestants believe that the church’s authority comes not from apostolic succession but from the Word of God. Spiritual power and authority do not rest in the hands of a mere man but in the very Word of God. While Catholicism teaches that only the Catholic Church can properly interpret the Bible, Protestants believe that the Bible teaches God sent the Holy Spirit to indwell all born-again believers, enabling all believers to understand the message of the Bible.
Protestants point to passages such as John 14:16-17: “I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.” (See also John 14:26 and 1 John 2:27.)
A third major difference between Catholicism and Protestantism is how one is saved. Another of the five solas of the Reformation is sola fide (“faith alone”), which affirms the biblical doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone because of Christ alone (Ephesians 2:8-10). However, Catholics teach that the Christian must rely on faith plus “meritorious works” in order to be saved. Essential to the Roman Catholic doctrine of salvation are the Seven Sacraments, which are baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, penance, anointing of the sick, holy orders, and matrimony. Protestants believe that, on the basis of faith in Christ alone, believers are justified by God, as all their sins are paid for by Christ on the cross and His righteousness is imputed to them. Catholics, on the other hand, believe that Christ’s righteousness is imparted to the believer by “grace through faith,” but in itself is not sufficient to justify the believer. The believer must supplement the righteousness of Christ imparted to him with meritorious works.
Catholics and Protestants also disagree on what it means to be justified before God. To the Catholic, justification involves being made righteous and holy. He believes that faith in Christ is only the beginning of salvation and that the individual must build upon that with good works because God’s grace of eternal salvation must be merited. This view of justification contradicts the clear teaching of Scripture in passages such as Romans 4:1-12, Titus 3:3-7, and many others. Protestants distinguish between the one-time act of justification (when we are declared righteous by God based on our faith in Christ’s atonement on the cross) and the process of sanctification (the development of righteousness that continues throughout our lives on earth). While Protestants recognize that works are important, they believe they are the result or fruit of salvation but never the means to it. Catholics blend justification and sanctification together into one ongoing process, which leads to confusion about how one is saved.
A fourth major difference between Catholics and Protestants has to do with what happens after death. Both believe that unbelievers will spend eternity in hell, but there are significant differences about what happens to believers. From their church traditions and their reliance on non-canonical books, the Catholics have developed the doctrine of purgatory. Purgatory, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia, is a “place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God’s grace, are not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions.” On the other hand, Protestants believe that because we are justified by faith in Christ alone and that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us-when we die, we will go straight to heaven to be in the presence of the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:6-10 and Philippians 1:23).
One disturbing aspect about the Catholic doctrine of purgatory is the belief that man can and must pay for his own sins. This results in a low view of the sufficiency and efficiency of Christ’s atonement on the cross. Simply put, the Roman Catholic view of salvation implies that Christ’s atonement on the cross was insufficient payment for the sins of those who believe in Him and that even a believer must pay for his own sins, either through acts of penance or time in purgatory. Yet the Bible teaches that it is Christ’s death alone that can satisfy or propitiate God’s wrath against sinners (Romans 3:25; Hebrews 2:17; 1 John 2:2; 1 John 4:10). Our works of righteousness cannot add to what Christ has already accomplished.
The differences between Catholicism and evangelical Protestants are important and significant. Paul wrote Galatians to combat the Judaizers (Jews who said that Gentile Christians had to obey the Old Testament Law to be saved). Like the Judaizers, Catholics make human works necessary for one to be justified by God, and they end up with a completely different gospel.
It is our prayer that God will open the eyes of those who are putting their faith in the teachings of the Catholic Church. It is our hope that everyone will understand that his “works of righteousness” cannot justify him or sanctify him (Isaiah 64:6). We pray that all will instead put their faith solely in the fact that we are “justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood-to be received by faith” (Romans 3:24-25). God saves us, “not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life” (Titus 3:5-7).
I’ve heard a lot of people recommend Scott Hahn. The lamb’s supper is supposed to be a great book.
I am currently reading Hahn’s signs of life. It explains the biblically 40 of the Church’s teachings.
2 Timothy 3:16-17: No matter how traditionalists twist it, it still says that scripture alone is all-sufficient to equip us for EVERY good work. not most not partially but every EVERY got it? EVERY.
Luke 10:26: "What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?" Jesus expected even his enemies to correctly interpret the Bible by simply reading and studying it.
WORK OUT YOUR SALAVATION IN FEAR AND TREMBLING
Mat 12:33-37
Matt. 24:13; 25:31-46
Rom. 11:22
2 Pet 2:20-21
Col 1:21-23
Phil 2:12
Heb 10:26-29. If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left... only a fearful expectation of judgment.."
Scripture distinguishes sins that cannot be forgiven either before or after death from sins which can be forgiven after death (Matthew 12:31)
You keep saying there is rampant disagreement which I agree with and also disagree with. If you really look into the differences between denominations you find a overwhelming unity on the essentials of scriptures. All true Christian churches believe in Christs deity, the trinity, Jesus’ death, burial, and bodily resurrection, His ascension to the right hand of the Father, His intercession for His people, and salvation through faith in Christ. I don’t like that there are all these denominations, but I also know Gods word is ultimate authority and His people will hear His voice. God bless
"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with Divine words." -Gregory of Nyssa
Fr. Barron, what is your view then on the Episcopal Church and their ideas for interpretation of scripture and using not only tradition but also reason? I'm not theologian but if I am understanding correctly, St. Thomas Aquinas was a big advocate for using reason when interpreting scripture.
Thanks Fr. Barron.
Siento que pierdo al no contar con los subtitulos español de los comentariod del padre Barron sabrá él de esta necesidad del pueblo hispano? Creo que no, mandos medios ayuda por favor.
So true. What a wonderful evangelist Fr Robert is. I certainly don't begrudge protestant's holding a different view, but it would be wonderful if quite a few of them could see the beauty and reason of having our living voice and guidance in the Holy Father, Pope Francis. His gentle guidance is a beautiful thing to behold. Come and take up the beauty and truth of my faith and yours.
Luther was a professional Catholic Bible scholar. And he actually read the early Fathers....
Ambrose (340?-396), “How can we use those things which we do not find in the Holy Scriptures?” (Ambr. Offic., 1:23).
Athanasius (300?-375),
“The Holy Scriptures, given by inspiration of God, are of themselves sufficient toward the discovery of truth. (Orat. adv. Gent., ad cap.) The Catholic Christians will neither speak nor endure to hear anything in religion that is a stranger to Scripture; it being an evil heart of immodesty to speak those things which are not written,” (Athanasius, Exhort. ad Monachas).
“Vainly then do they run about with the pretext that they have demanded Councils for the faith’s sake; for divine Scripture is sufficient above all things; but if a Council be needed on the point, there are the proceedings of the Fathers, for the Nicene Bishops did not neglect this matter, but stated the doctrine so exactly, that persons reading their words honestly, cannot but be reminded by them of the religion towards Christ announced in divine Scripture.” (Athanasius, De Synodis, 6).
We ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures...Let us then speak nothing concerning the Holy Ghost but what is written; and if anything be not written, let us not busy ourselves about it. The Holy Ghost Himself spoke the Scriptures; He has also spoken concerning Himself as much as He pleased, or as much as we could receive. Be those things therefore spoken, which He has said; for whatsoever He has not said, we dare not say. (Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 4.17ff)
What then is our reply? We do not think that it is right to make their prevailing custom the law and rule of sound doctrine. For if custom is to avail for proof of soundness, we too, surely, may advance our prevailing custom; and if they reject this, we are surely not bound to follow theirs. Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words. (Gregory of Nyssa, Dogmatic Treatises, Book 12. On the Trinity, To Eustathius.)
Let us not therefore carry about the notions of the many, but examine into the facts. For how is it not absurd that in respect to money, indeed, we do not trust to others, but refer this to figures and calculation; but in calculating upon facts we are lightly drawn aside by the notions of others; and that too, though we possess an exact balance, and square and rule for all things, the declaration of the divine laws? Wherefore I exhort and entreat you all, disregard what this man and that man thinks about these things, and inquire from the Scriptures all these things; and having learnt what are the true riches, let us pursue after them that we may obtain also the eternal good things; which may we all obtain, through the grace and love towards men of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom, to the Father and the Holy Spirit, be glory, might, and honor, now and ever, and world without end. Amen.” (John Chrysostom, Homily on 2 Corinthians, 13.4)
For the reasonings of any men whatsoever, even though they be [true Christians], and of high reputation, are not to be treated by us in the same way as the canonical Scriptures are treated. We are at liberty, without doing any violence to the respect which these men deserve, to condemn and reject anything in their writings, if perchance we shall find that they have entertained opinions differing from that which others or we ourselves have, by the divine help, discovered to be the truth. I deal thus with the writings of others, and I wish my intelligent readers to deal thus with mine. (St Augustine, Letters, 148.15)
exactly! and then in heaven I may surely boast that I am there because I played my cards right, I did this, I did that, I went to this, I read that and said this and that is why I am here. this is the works based salvation of the RC church.
what will a true Christian say in heaven? I am here in spite of all that I did. I am here because of his grace, because of his unfailing love, his provision, nothing I did earned this paradise and so I owe him everything.
As a Catholic I will also say that I am there only because of His Grace. You are mistaken about us thinking that the works are the basis of our salvation. They are our duty. Grace and love spur us on to love others and to serve them as we would serve Jesus. Read all of James for more.
@@lyndavonkanel8603 Council of Trent.
CANON 9: “If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema. CANON 12: “If any one shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy pardoning sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is that confidence alone by which we are justified…let him be accursed.” Canon 24: “If anyone saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema.” Canon 30: “If any one saith, that, after the grace of Justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted, and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened (to him); let him be anathema.” I can go on. Roman church is not the same as biblical cristian church. what you called grace and faith are not what i call faith and grace
Wow. Thank you for guiding us, the faithful, in this confused world.
The word of God is living and active; sharper than a two edged sword
My pleasure, and are you familiar with RCIA? The Catholic Church offers it to people who would like to learn more about Catholicism; it's a 9-month series of meetings/discussions led by priests and nuns where all the major points are explained. Then at the Easter Vigil you can choose whether or not to become a Catholic.
.....If someone [today] does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?" (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; first edition [A.D. 251]). Cyprian of Carthage (Part 3)
Really appreciate this video.
Bishop Barron makes some good points. I am a Protestant of no particular denomination. God gave prophets and teachers to interpret the Bible, and Christians should read the Bible and listen to God. No pope, cardinal or preacher gets it right everytime. There must be some authority in the church, but every person is responsible for hearing and doing the word of God.
Keep on preaching Brother!
Thank you bishop Barron! You are another Fulton sheen!
The living voice is Jesus Christ! He is the authority and the word is the truth!
I believe in the power of Christ' blood so much that I will go Mass today and have my soul sprinkled and purified with His precious blood and I will offer up His body and Blood for you my friend.
Roman Catholicism: The One True Church?
By Steve Meehan
For years, growing up as a Roman Catholic, we were taught that we were members of the one true Church. It was impressed upon us regularly by the parish priest during Mass, while giving his homily; by the nuns all throughout my Catholic parochial school years of 2nd through 7th grade; during our preparation to receive for the first time the sacraments of Penance, Communion and Confirmation; and while attending CCD classes all the way through high school (the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine is an association established at Rome in 1562 for the purpose of giving religious education, normally designed for children). It was an established fact that we understood and we never questioned the validity of it. And to be honest, it was a matter of pride, that we were privileged enough to be a member of the correct Church, while all others had belonged to something else that didn't quite measure up to the status of the Roman Catholic Church.
After all, how could it be possible that Roman Catholicism is not the One True Church? Look at what Rome has to offer: it has the priests, the nuns; the bishops; the cardinals; and of course, the Pope. They have the Sacraments; the statues; the holy water; the incense; the Stations of the Cross; the Eucharist - in which Christ physically manifests Himself into the wafer after the consecration by the priest during the Mass; the Marian apparitions - which appear mainly to Roman Catholics; and they have the Vatican - where the Vicar of Christ (Christ's representative on Earth) governs the faithful and makes infallible proclamations and doctrine. How can this not be The One True Church? No other organization on the face of the Earth comes close to offering to its flock what Rome provides for its faithful.
But, of course, to be true, one must adhere to what has been established as truth and not teach or practice what is contrary to the truth. We read in Scripture a few passages that declare what is truth and what is not. Jesus proclaimed in John 14:6:
"I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes to the Father, but by me."
He also professed in John 8:31-32:
"Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, 'If you continue in my word, then are you my disciples indeed. And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free'."
It is clear then, by just these two verses, that Jesus Christ has described Himself as Truth, and that those who adhere to His Word and practice what He taught, will be living and worshipping truthfully, and that only His truth will set us free; not in anything else that detracts or subtracts from His truth. In fact, the verse is worded in a way ("you shall know the truth") that suggests that it is imperative to know His Word, to know His Truth, by studying the scriptures, in order to avoid any false doctrine being taught by some other source that may later try to establish itself as the bearer of truth but is actually offering a false truth.
Jesus also proclaimed that it is only possible to worship Him correctly in spirit and in truth:
"But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeks such to worship him. God is a Spirit, and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth" John 4:23, 24
So for a person or an organization to call themselves true, they must teach his Word correctly and abide by His Word. Unless one is doing that, the above verse says, that they are not true worshippers.
Another purveyor of Truth is the Holy Spirit. Jesus promised His disciples, that when He would depart from them and return to Heaven, that He would send in His stead the Comforter, the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit's role in the world - and who indwells those who have accepted Christ's free gift of salvation - is to point us to Jesus Christ and not to anything or anyone else as the sole means of salvation.
"Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it sees him not, neither knows him: but you know him; for he dwells within you, and shall be in you." John 14:17
It takes the indwelling of the Holy Spirit into the believer to be able to discern what is written in God's Word and to be able to understand and to apply His truth in our Christian walk. Without His assistance, it is too easy to be lead astray and to accept false doctrine. The Holy Spirit, after all, inspired the Jewish scribes and later the Apostles, to write the books of the Holy Bible and it takes His discernment in our lives for us to properly comprehend the Word and understand it correctly.
It also stands to reason, that if one is not aware of what is contained in the Scriptures, then they can easily accept doctrines of men that may be inspired by another source. Growing up as a Roman Catholic, I was completely ignorant of what was contained in the Bible - regarding Jesus, salvation and His gospel of grace. Like most Catholics, the Holy Bible was in the home, but just collected dust and was never read. We accepted all that was taught us by the priests, the nuns, the lay teachers in the CCD classes, and in their catechism. Whatever they told us had to be correct, as they assured us that they were the One True Church. Why would they ever steer us wrong? This was the mindset of my siblings, my parents, grandparents, and going back generations of all past family members who trusted in and were raised in the Roman Catholic system. We were ignorant of anything else but their plan of salvation.
The Roman Catholic Church tells their members that only they, through their Magisterium - the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, as exercised by the bishops or the pope - can properly interpret scripture for their faithful. So, while they say they encourage the reading of the Holy Writ, it is only by their guidance and authority can one fully understand what the verses are meant to convey. They are not open to private interpretation, and must be filtered through their teachings to understand their version of the truth.
It wasn't until my early 20s, that the Lord led me to start reading His Word. At that point of my life, I wasn't even a marginal Catholic. I stopped going to Mass, stopped going to the normally required weekly confessions to a priest, and had pretty much given up on their version of the faith. I got tired of the repetitiveness of the Mass: the rote prayers; genuflecting before the figure on the cross; the lighting of votive candles before a statue - usually of Mary; dipping my hand in the "Holy Water" and making the 'sign of the cross'; receiving the Eucharist wafer and giving my assent when the priest said "the Body of Christ" that I was consuming the physical body of Jesus; and the whole bit. It was all very ritualistic, legalistic, lacking any real passion and completely devoid of the presence of Christ.
But in reading the Word, I began to see that what God has revealed to us through the scriptures doesn't completely mirror the teachings of Rome; in fact, most of it doesn't. You would think that the One True Church would certainly follow what Christ and the Apostles taught. Why would they teach something different? If they are in fact the One True Church, wouldn't they follow and teach all that scripture reveals to us and they wouldn't deviate from the Truth? Have they got the ultimate authority to change God's Word or trump His commandments?
For instance, Exodus 20:4 - the second commandment - forbids us from worshipping graven images, and yet Rome has deleted this commandment and subdivided the last one, which tells us not to covet our neighbor's belongings. How can they delete a commandment? Christ said "If you love me, you will keep my commandments" - not delete them (John 14:15). Is it that important for Rome to disregard a commandment, so that the parishioners can dress up, light candles before, and parade behind statues or graven images, as the Bible calls them? Was the prohibition of worshipping before a graven image only meant for the Jews, but Christians are free to do so? Over and over throughout the Word, we are told that God detests that kind of activity.
Rome calls the pope the Vicar of Christ (Christ's representative on Earth) but that title is more befitting the Holy Spirit: He is the Comforter that Christ promised; He is the one who indwells each believer; and He is the one who seals us, points us to Jesus Christ, and gives us discernment in reading the Word.
Rome calls the pope the Holy Father, but Jesus used this term only once in scripture referring to God the Father as the Holy Father
:
"And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through your own name those whom thou has given me, that they may be one, as we are." John 17:14
Neither Jesus, nor the Apostles would ever use that term in addressing a man; only God the Father is the Holy Father. In fact, Christ even told His followers not to refer to any man as our father (spiritual father):
"And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven" - Matthew 23:9
If Christ told us not to do it, why does Rome give that title to their priests? Is this something that a One True Church should be doing - flaunting God's Word? Are they exempt from this restriction and can override Christ's teachings? It doesn't add up. If we are truly Christians, we should be following Christ's examples and His admonitions. If they are truly the One True Church, shouldn't they be abiding by His Word instead of disregarding it?
There are countless other examples of where the teachings of Rome fly in direct contrast to the teachings of Jesus and His disciples. Perhaps the biggest is the question of our salvation. Repeatedly in the gospels and in the other books of the New Testament are verses telling us that Christ's Gospel is a gospel of grace and is freely given - to all those who would accept it. It is not by works and it cannot be earned. Grace is God's unmerited favor; it is impossible to work for it, neither can one ever be good enough to attain it:
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God Not of works, lest any man should boast" - Ephesians 2:8, 9
"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost" - Titus 3:5
"For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" - Romans 6:23
"Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shall be saved..." - Acts 16:31, 32
Why would Rome insist that we have to work along with God's grace (what they refer to as "cooperating grace") in order to be saved? The very expression of cooperating grace or cooperating with grace is a contradiction in terms. If Grace is unmerited favor and is freely given by God, how can one then co-operate or work alongside with it to receive it? Co-operating with grace would nullify grace; it wouldn't be freely received.
Their works for attaining salvation include: going to weekly Mass; partaking of the sacraments; paying a penalty or Penance for one's sins (which denies the sufficiency of Christ's death on the cross to cover all sins); and then finally spending time in a fictitious place called Purgatory, to purge away any leftover sins that Christ's blood couldn't cover, or not enough Penance was performed.
Purgatory is just another means of denying the sufficiency Christ's atonement for our sins; it is the ultimate declaration that his agonizing crucifixion on a wooden cross - the plan of salvation that was established before the foundation of the world was laid - was not enough to pay the cost of all of our sins. In other words, when Christ uttered those final words "It is finished" - signifying that He had satisfied the wrath of God against us for the sins we have committed and that all our sins were "paid in full", Rome declares that no it is not finished and the paying of penances and time spent in Purgatory is required. It is a rejection of what Christ accomplished.
Their gospel is a complete distortion of the gospel of grace, and is in fact another gospel - as the Apostle Paul warned against:
"I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel. Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." Galatians 1:6-9
Why would Rome teach another gospel? They are leading their followers astray and the gospel they teach can't possibly save anyone. A gospel of works nullifies God's free gift of grace:
"And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work" Romans 11:6
"Who has saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began" - 2 Timothy 1:9
It should be clear that a true church would never teach a false gospel. Along with the aforementioned false teachings - and there are many others - Rome has taken upon itself to invent new teachings over the centuries that neither Jesus nor the Apostles ever taught.
Here is a brief list of some of their "infallible" doctrines that they have implemented:
* Prayers for the Dead and the Sign of the Cross - 300ad
* Veneration of Angels and Dead Saints - 375ad
* The Mass, as a daily celebration adopted - 394ad
* The worship of Mary, and the use of the term "Mother of God" - 431ad
* Priests begin to dress differently from the laity - 500ad
* Extreme Unction or Last Rites as a sacrament - 526ad
* Doctrine of Purgatory established (denies Christ's sufficiency) - 593ad
* Latin language used in prayer and worship in churches (not all Catholics understood Latin, rendering the words meaningless) - 600ad
* Prayers directed to Mary (even though Jesus taught to pray to the Father) - 600ad
* Title of Pope bestowed upon the Bishop of Rome - 610ad
* Kissing of the Pope's feet - 709ad
* Temporal power of the Popes - 750ad
* Worship of the Cross, Images and Relics (idolatry) - 788ad
* Holy Water instituted - 850ad
* Veneration of St. Joseph begins - 890ad
* Baptism of Bells - 965ad
* Canonization of Dead Saints (ALL Christians are saints!) - 995ad
* Fasting on Fridays and during Lent - 998ad
* The Mass is an ongoing sacrifice of Jesus and attendance mandatory - 1079ad
* Celibacy of Priesthood - 1079ad
* Praying the Rosary introduced (vain repetitions, Christ warns against) - 1090ad
* Inquisition of Heretics (Bible believing Christians who didn't bend the knee to Rome) - 1184ad
* Selling of Indulgences to lessen time spent in Purgatory (denies Christ's atonement) - 1190ad
* Transubstantiation priest can transform a wafer into Jesus Christ - 1215ad
* Confession of sin to a priest - 1215ad
* Adoration of the wafer (blasphemy, idolatry) - 1220ad
* Bible forbidden to be read or owned by laymen (Bibles deny Rome's teachings) - 1229ad
* Scapular of Mary worn frees a person from Purgatory (nonsense) - 1287ad
* Cup of Blood of Christ forbidden to be touched by laymen - 1414ad
* Doctrine of Purgatory proclaimed to be Dogma of the Faith - 1439ad
* Doctrine of 7 Sacraments affirmed (works that must be done along with grace) - 1439ad
* Ava Maria instituted (Prayer/hymn to Mary) - 1508ad
* Tradition of Rome equal with Scripture (free license for popes in declarations) - 1545ad
* Apocryphal Books added to Rome's Bible - 1546ad
* Immaculate Conception of Mary (they declare she was born without sin Romans 3:23) - 1834ad
* Papal Infallibility (pope can declare anything and their faithful must believe) - 1870ad
* Modern Science "Modernism" condemned by pope - 1907ad
* Condemnation of public schools (Rome couldn't teach kids their doctrines) - 1930ad
* "Mother of God" title to Mary reaffirmed - 1931ad
* Assumption of the Virgin Mary (Mary bodily arose to Heaven - not in Bible) - 1950ad
Along with these doctrines that Rome has established over the years for their faithful to adhere to and further one's bondage to their system, they have also leveled condemnations or "anathemas" on all bible believing Christians who would not submit to the papacy or their system.
Here is a sampling of 100 or so anathemas that the papacy has declared over the years:
- If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification...let him be anathema.
- If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema.
- If anyone says that he will for certain, with an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift of perseverance even to the end, unless he shall have learned this by special revelation, let him be anathema. [1 John 5:13 tells us that we can be assured of our salvation. Either John, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is lying to us, or Rome is]
- If anyone says that the Catholic doctrine of justification as set forth by the holy council in the present decree, derogates in some respect from the glory of God or the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ, and does not rather illustrate the truth of our faith and no less the glory of God and of Jesus Christ, let him be anathema. [The Bible declares that Rome's doctrine is in error]
- If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law were not all instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ, or that there are more or less than seven, or that any one of these seven is not truly and intrinsically a sacrament, let him be anathema. [The sacraments are works and nullify grace]
- If anyone...denies that wonderful and singular change of the whole substance of the bread into the body and the whole substance of the wine into the blood - which change the Catholic Church most aptly calls transubstantiation, let him be anathema. [Worshipping a wafer is both idolatrous and blasphemous]
Whether they realize it or not, they have not only bestowed these condemnations on all Bible believing Christians, but on Christ and His Apostles as well - including Peter, who they claim was the first pope. They would never teach the things that Rome claims nor would they have any part in their false religious system
.
Is Roman Catholicism, as they contend, the One True Church? Not hardly, if they teach doctrines of men, instead of the Word of God:
"Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?" - Matthew 15:3
"Thus have you made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition." - Matthew 15:6
"But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." - Matthew 15:9
"And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition" - Mark 7:9
Dear Roman Catholic, there is no way that the Church of Rome can be The One True Church. They offer a false gospel and there is no truth in it. The true Church of Christ is the body of all believers who have put their complete faith and trust in the finished work of Christ on the cross - it is not just a particular denomination or any other man made religious system. Works are not a part of His salvation; neither is paying a penance for your own sins, or going to a purging place called Purgatory, or any of the other means of attaining salvation that Rome concocts.
As a matter of fact, after a lifetime of being active in their system: being baptized as an infant; attending mandatory weekly mass (and should you miss one Sunday purposely, they claim you have committed a "mortal sin" and would go to hell if not confessed to a priest); confessed your sins to a priest and paid a penalty or Penance for those sins; receive Jesus Christ physically (instead of spiritually as the Bible attests) through their Eucharistic service; performing the other sacraments; and then ultimately, after death, spend an undetermined amount of time suffering in Purgatory to purge away any remaining sins that Christ couldn't cover because His plan of redemption obviously came up short, one can still never claim that they have any assurance of salvation.
According to Rome, one commits the "sin of Presumption" if they believe they can claim to know for sure that they have secured salvation through Christ; an anathema will be directed your way if you claim that you know that you are saved. Even though the Apostle John - the one whom Christ entrusted with the care of His earthly mother to after Jesus' death on the cross - assured us regarding salvation:
"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." - 1 John 5:13
All of the so-called works that the Catholic must do to try to attain salvation, only furthers one's commitment to their religion to try to appease God and ends up increasing their bondage to this false system. Their "Holy Mother Church" can only save us; the priests are needed for absolving our sins; their Mass has to be attended; the sacraments are needed; and on and on it goes. Even the erroneous doctrine of Purgatory is presented with the caveat that one's time can be lessened there by buying Mass cards, donating money to the Church, etc. It is all about their system and not Christ.
The Roman Catholic Church is not the One True Church. Their system offers really no hope. It is a counterfeit Christianity and they present a corrupted version of the truth. On the surface, they appeal to the flesh in all their displays of piety, ritualism, relics, images, incense, candles, acts of contrition, shrines usually dedicated to Mary mainly, as well as other dead saints, and for the most part, Christ is left out in all of their regalia - unless, of course, He is depicted as a baby or still hanging on the cross. All of that is a substitute for real thing but is attractive to those who have no clue as to what God's Word says about sin, atonement, salvation or a gospel of grace.
They don't waste an opportunity to diminish what Christ has performed for us on the cross, or who Christ really is. Instead of rightly pointing to the Creator for salvation, they point to the created - the priests; the popes; the statues; the wafer; Mary, or their version of Mary; the dead saints; the "Holy Mother Church" as they refer to the Catholic Church; and anything else other than Jesus Christ.
They really do teach another gospel and have another Jesus - who is received via transubstantiation, but was powerless to cover all of our sins; and another Mary (the Mary of the Bible doesn't reflect any of the attributes that Rome has ascribed to her: she wasn't sinless; didn't remain a virgin after the birth of Christ; she had other children; is not a co-redeemer or co-mediator; doesn't hear or answer prayer; etc.)
They emphatically are not the true church, despite their proclamations otherwise. One day, we will all stand before Christ at His judgment. If you die as a Roman Catholic, Rome will not be there to defend you. If they can't even be entrusted with the safeguarding of its members children (speaking of the decades, may be centuries long molestation and raping of children by their clergy, and the cover-up and relocation of these criminals to other parishes by their bishops, cardinals and popes), how can you possibly trust them with your eternal security and salvation? The bottom line is: you can't....and you must not.
Accept the One who WILL be there in front of you at His judgment. Don't be beguiled by the enemy and accept a false substitute plan of salvation. Accept His free gift of salvation, believe in Him and His Word, and His Truth will indeed set you free!
"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." - Colossians 2:8
"There is a way which seems right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death" - Proverbs 14:12
Stephen Meehan Oh it's you again. Why are you on every Catholic site on TH-cam posting your propaganda?
Stephen Meehan what is your church' s teaching on contraception?
3:18 Actually, Blessed Newman started life as an atheist then as an evangelical fundamentalist then as an Anglican and then as a Catholic.
You should really do something about that sound trac you use Robert, I hummed it on the way to work today! Oh I need prayer!
I'm more of a traditionalist Catholic, not Sedevacantist or anything though. I only go to Latin mass because I simply prefer it but despite all my opinions I still have great respect for Bishop Barron, I don't see eye to eye with him on everything but I'm still proud to say that he's a Bishop in my Church, more accurately our Church
What a great analogy...I look forward to using it...
Amen
Can you please answer my question if you understand. Preventing people, who want to partake of the Eucharist? Does that have eternal consequences for the person who is prevented? Thanks.
Such an enlightening topic.
WOW JJ! you learn a new word at school today? I am impressed.Great work you did.I applaud you at the highest.
1 Cor 4:6 Paul warned: "in building the church, do not exceed scripture!"
Luke 1:1-4 Luke begins by mentioning uninspired gospels by Christians, then the oral tradition of the apostles and concludes that scripture alone will allow Theophilus to know for certain what the truth is.
Matthew 4:1-11. Three times Jesus was tempted by the Devil and each time Jesus replied exactly the same three dangerous words that defeated the Devil: "IT IS WRITTEN"