I am not a Catholic, but...
Catholic theologians have been studying the Bible for nearly 2000 years, and for that same period of time they have had to confront the problem that all Christians face: "How do I respond to questions not specifically addressed by scripture, and how do I distinguish between instructions intended for the time and instructions which remain valid today?"
The formal establishment of their church, including the Papacy, is their way of addressing the problem systematically, so that individual believers are not left to personal interpretations, often poorly informed, or to the vagaries of contemporary religious opinion. All Christians, including Catholics, look three places for truth: to the Bible, to the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and to the teaching of their Church.
Over the centuries, the Catholic Church has erred. Some of the abuses led to the Protestant Reformation, followed–within the Catholic Church–by a Counter Reformation that addressed and corrected the worst of the problems cited by Luther.
If you don't mind an 800-year-old reference, Thomas Aquinas addresses scores of theological questions in his "Summa Theological," and his dense prose is studded with references, both to scripture, and to the authorities of the time, who had themselves studied scripture.
If you are troubled by the particular status of Mary and the Catholic Saints, I suggest reading John Henry Newman's "Apologia pro Vita Sua," which is quite readable, despite a Latin title, and describes his own struggle, as an Anglican priest, with the same issue.
In common with other denominations, the Catholic church publishes simplistic tracts that skirt difficulties while emphasizing specific isolated points. These are best avoided.
Don't start with the assumption that Catholics are ignorant or superstitious. You would be mistaken.
2007-10-13 04:11:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by anobium625 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
I could tell you about the eucharist.
What you do, is go to John 6, completely ignore the fact that Jesus ditched the 5000 that he fed because they wanted to force him into being a king - erase that from memory.
Then forget that the Bible tells you that they tried to follow his disciples across the Sea to Capernaum. (Be sure not to think about how Jesus ditched them in Tiberias)
Who then found Jesus in Capernaum and began to ask him to show them how to make bread and fish so that they could feed themselves. Also try NOT to remember that they weren't interested in the Gospel message at all, but only wanted to be able to feed themselves in the way Jesus did in Tiberias.
So try not to feel how rude and imposing they were being along with the fact that they really weren't interested in what Jesus had to say concerning the Father. ( Don't remember ANY of that!)
So then after you ignore the whole reason why Jesus started talking there in Capernaum to those people about eating his flesh and drinking his blood ; which is so that they would walk away in disgust (don't remember that) , because they had no prior background in the teaching Jesus gave his disciples later about communion ( don't consider or remember that either!) , which they eventually did walk away, then you can get the Roman Catholic reason why they think that they have to literally eat his flesh and literally drink his blood. Ignore all of the circumstances that led to Jesus giving the speech that he gave in Capernaum. And also try to ignore the fact that Jesus told them right there that no one can come to him except the Father drew them in, which He didn't - they were not chosen by God, but only wanted to do and see the miracles. And then force Jesus into being the king.
After that, I think you'll have it.
2007-10-13 04:12:15
·
answer #2
·
answered by Christian Sinner 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Ok, let's start at Mary. The Bible teaches that Mary was a godly young virgin of Israel who God chose to bear his Son. This was the desire of all Jewish women, that they should be the one to bear the Messiah.
However, Mary was not sinless, otherwise she would not have 'rejoiced in God my saviour' (Luke 1:47). Neither did she have perfect knowledge. When she tried to divert Jesus from his ministry, he overruled her (Matt. 12:46-50).
By the way, neither was she 'ever virgin'. Jesus, according to scripture, had brothers and sisters according to the flesh (and not just in the spirit, as the priests will tell you) - see Matt. 12:46;13:55-56.
The doctrine of her being assumed into heaven does not appear in any of the canonical works of Scripture, but in one apocryphal book, which the Catholic church accepts but was put in the apocrypha because it was never accepted in the original canon.
Regarding prayers to Mary, since she is a dead person, this is necromancy, which is forbidden in scripture.
Regarding apparitions of Mary, I personally do not believe them and if you will read the demands of 'Our Lady of Medjugorje' you will see that these do not at all tie up with scripture and are out of line with the humble and meek picture of Mary which the Bible gives, who became one amongst our Lord's early believers (Acts) and is thereafter never mentioned in scripture.
I don't know what novenas are, so will pass on.
The eucharist, as you term it is called by Catholics the Mass and the central teaching is of transubstantiation - ie. that the 'host' wafer and wine change identity at the words of the priest and become the actual body and blood of the Lord Jesus. Protestants do not believe this, but they believe that the bread and wine represent only the body and blood in a spiritual sense.
The mass is the central act of Catholicism. Now, ask yourself and think about this logically and with the help of scriptures. When Jesus said 'This is my body' , he spoke in aramaic and what he actually said is 'this ... my body'. He could have meant 'this represents my body' but, even if he did say 'this is my body' there was his body standing before his disciples in the very person of Jesus. Now, Jesus limited himself as God to the body of a man and couldn't therefore be in the same place at the same time.
Not only that, where is Jesus now? Doesn't the word say that he is seated at the right hand of God? And when will he get up, in his glorified body? Is it not when he is sent by Father back to the air for his Church. In the meantime, he sits at God's right hand. He cannot be in the mass, because he is actually in heaven.
Also, if Jesus is actually present in the bread and wine, then we must adore these things, but if he is not, then this is idolatry. You are worshipping a wafer!
The mass claims to be an ongoing sacrifice, in which Jesus is crucified again, every time it happens. But the Bible says that he suffered for sin ONCE FOR ALL (ie. his job done - Heb. 9:26; I Pet. 3:18). If Christ must suffer crucifixion every time the mass happens, then his job is never done and, therefore your salvation is never complete.
Regarding the assertion that the Pope is descended from a long line, unbroken since Peter, the first - this is just a complete fabrication! Jesus Christ said 'thou art Peter (ie. Petros = the rock) and on this rock I will build my church'. But Christ did not build his church on Peter (who was not the first pope, either), but on what Peter had just said (Matt. 16:17-18), which was the 'bedrock' of the gospel, the confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God.
This has all been twisted for political ends, but, ask yourself, if the pope really has come down to us from Peter, how come he doesn't act like Peter? Peter was a holy man, but this 'unbroken line' of popes has been anything but holy. Jesus said that you can tell a tree by its fruit.
Neither is it true that the Roman Catholic church was the original church of the Apostles. Look at what the Early Church was like in Acts and in the Letters. Look at what it believed. It was nothing like the Catholic church. That church came later, when the original apostles had died out, the Church Fathers emerged, some of whom were distinctly heretical and the church was recognized by the Roman state and thereafter received power, so that it became quite fashionable to be 'christian'. Then followed compromise and the truth of the true gospel was marginalised as more and more heresies were brought in based on pagan babylonish practices and beliefs.
2007-10-13 05:17:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by homechrch 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
Much of what the Catholic Church teaches is based on tradition as opposed to the bible. As I Lutheran, I would probably get into trouble by listing a bunch of things that the Catholic Church teaches that are not biblical, so I will leave it alone.
The bottom line is that we all believe Jesus Christ to be the Son of God, that He lived a perfect life for us, and that He died as a sacrifice for our sins, and that He rose again, and we are baptized into His family. The rest is irrelevant.
2007-10-13 03:54:30
·
answer #4
·
answered by Kitten S 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
http://www.ourcatholicfaith.org/index.html
http://www.fisheaters.com/
Here these 2 websites give in depth information about jesus Christ's TRUE Church, the Holy Roman Catholic Church..God Bless
2007-10-13 07:45:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by tebone0315 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
there are many things that the catholic church teaches that are not in or are contradictory to what the bible teaches.
Praying to Mary = not in bible
praying to saints = not in bible(in fact anyone who is a christian is a saint according to the bible
calling preists "father" = contradicts Jesus' teaching
forbidding priests to marry = contradicts what Paul taught in New testament
Popes words being equal to scripture = not in bible
concept of a pope = not in bible and contradicts the bible
Peter being the first pope = never mentioned in bible
Peter was married by the way.....and why can't modern day priests and popes be married?
I grew up catholic and am thankful that someone showed me the bible and that God gave me the ability to see through the lies of the catholic church.
2007-10-13 03:54:36
·
answer #6
·
answered by songndance1999 4
·
4⤊
2⤋
on the different, there is multiple suggestion on the sources of the Bible (that's plural, not singular, as a results of fact the Bible became written by potential of multiple authors). yet once you opt to talk approximately killers... Muhammad brutally killed far extra human beings himself than Jesus ever did, so... infrequently the form of guy or woman to be installation as an occasion.
2016-10-22 06:21:11
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Buy a copy of the New American Bible. It not only contains ALL the books of the Old and New Testaments, but will have annotations, footnotes, dictionary of terms; in short a whole course of "why the Church teaches this - see (name of book w/chapter and verse)".
2007-10-13 03:56:14
·
answer #8
·
answered by Granny Annie 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
You won't find such "Bible information" anywhere because it does not exist.
2007-10-13 09:54:37
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
How can you not find it. They invented the bible.
Love and blessings Don
2007-10-13 03:55:02
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋