Alright - - I will try and give an informed Catholic response to Mr Hamilton's comments:

[NOTE: LEFT margin]: (Mr Hamilton's comments begin at the FAR LEFT of margin)

- - - - [NOTE: DASHES]: (My reply comments begin with dashes (- - - - -)

The fact that all religions becoming one is the anti-christ

- - - - I believe I used the words, "all the Faiths will become one" (This is to indicate not only the Christian Religions, but also, to include the faiths, Budhism, Judaism, Hinduism, Muslim,) [of the World,] will become ONE.

- - - - Try to recall that Christ, Himself, acknoweldged that He has "'other' sheep that do not belong to this fold; These also I must lead, and they will hear my voice, and there will be one flock." (JN 10:16)

- - - - And, recall that Christ prayed "that they may be ONE, as We, [Father] are ONE."

- - - - So i don't understand the "anti-christ" comment you make, when it seems obvious that Christ is at work, accomplishing these things, and that it is He who is bringing them about, by HIS own Will.

- - - - You certainly would not advocate Christ's Will was that of the Anti-christ, would you?

- - - - And, WHOSE WILL are you advocating, by stating that all the faiths becoming one is of the Anti-christ. Who shall withstand the Power of God to do these things; to bring all the faiths into belief in, and follow Him?

- - - - In the Prayer Christ taught us, we have these beautiful words: "Thy Kingdom Come, THY WILL be done."

...

It takes little effort to see the truth about the Catholic church. The "church" that Jesus refers to is the body of Christ. We all who take Jesus as Lord and Savior are the body of Christ. It is the Catholic church that started its own version of the Bible to counter educate people after Martin Luther started mass producing it in German., It is a well know fact that the Catholic church prevented people from learning to read years ago, so that they could control what the people knew. This is seen in other religions as well such as the Muslim religion.

- - - - When you state, "It takes little effort to see the truth about the Catholic church," and then follow it with other statements that are UNFOUNDED, it sets up a very dangerous pattern for your readers to sort through and discern. This is precisely what the Catholic Church has been dealing with for centuries.

- - - - HERESIES are so dangerous to the people of God because, often, people who are sincerely trying to learn the truth can read something that may SOUND GOOD, and may be POSED in a manner that SEEMS honest and forthcoming, (with lines and expressions, as you use): "It takes little effort to see the truth about the Catholic church," but are often only HALF-TRUTHS masquerading as WHOLE truths, for UNFOUNDED conclusions. These unfounded conclusions, then, must later be unraveled and proven false (by the Church,) who is the TRUE guardian of the Word of God which comes to us from the Apostles, whom Christ commissioned.

- - - - One of the very first HERESIES which the Church had to deal with, origininated with the Alexandrian priest, Arius (c. 250 - c. 336): He maintained that the Son of God was created by the Father and was therefore neither co-eternal with the Father, nor consubstantial; that Christ was only human, but NOT divine.

- - - - Volumes of books HAVE been written by theologians who are educated with the history of the teachings of Christ, as passed down from the Apostles and their successors. They dispel misperceptions like yours for anyone who is willing to "listen" to BOTH sides, rather than jump-ship, like EX-Catholics who become distracted with half-truths without fully discerning the Catholic response. Had they listened to BOTH views, they would be still safe within the Church's harbour. Call it what you like, "rough-weather," "high-waves," but for those faithful to the Magisterium of the Church, these misperceptions are one-by-one, cast off, and again, the faithful are able to navigate safely thru these storms.

- - - - So let us attempt to uncover some of these misperceptions one-by-one:

- - - - My reply-comments will illustrate not only the true teaching and view of the Catholic Church, but more importantly, the IMPORTANCE of RELYING on the teaching authority of the Church, before people decide to "jump ship," like the EX-Catholics you state are so "adept" with the Catholic Faith

- - - - So we continue with Mr Hamilton's comment that: "It takes little effort to see the truth about the Catholic church," followed by: the "church" that Jesus refers to is the body of Christ. (Catholics would agree, that the Followers of Christ, or the People of God who follow Christ, are indeed the Church of Christ. )

- - - - However, the followers of Christ must OFTEN discern whether OUTSIDE information they see, receive, are exposed to, or are confronted with, is the TRUTH. They must be CAUTIOUS and AWARE of what the many so-called "teachers" out-there are advocating.

- - - - Are they a broken-away "teacher?" This would be the FIRST red-flag to be cautious of, as a warning. See, HALF-the-truth, is: The Church DOES comprise of the THE PEOPLE OF GOD, who are following Christ.

- - - - The INFORMED Catholic would, however, QUESTION the parts in this article put forth by SJC and Mr Hamilton, who may advocate abandoning the Catholic Church, for the "HALF-TRUTHS" that on the FACE-OF IT, only SEEM to make sense:

- - - - Here are the comments put forth by SJC:

"If your church says that in order to have eternal life...

- you need to give money to the church...

- all are saved ( universalism/catholic)

- must belong or be a member of a church group, and attend weekly church

- ask Jesus into your heart

- you can lose your salvation

- confess your sins to a priest or church staff

Run, don't walk to the nearest exit. Never go back!

Forget all your secular theories, religious views and trust Christ and the Bible alone!

Enter the straight gate...Matthew 7:13-14

All have sinned...Romans 3:23

All false religions make you the savior. Muslims teach Jesus is not the savior. The Jewish religion teaches Jesus is not the savior. They will go to hell!

Do you put all your trust in Christ or man-made religions and self"

==

- - - - Those shown above, are THIRTEEN (13) comments, some of which are even quotations from Scripture:

- - - - Recall, though, that even Satan quoted and used Scripture, (while trying to tempt Our Lord in the desert). So, we know, quoting Scriptural passages, without reading the intent of the author, looking at its context, and following those who are the Guardian of these passages, can be very misleading. Other comments put forth, are LOADED with caveats to an informed Catholic:

...

"If your church says that in order to have eternal life...

- you need to give money to the church...

- - - - Catholics have the most generous Charitable organizations in the world. Not because we "have to," but because we care for and love the less fortunate, and believe in practicing the virtues of Faith, Hope, and Charity, as the People of God. Catholics take-to-heart the Parables Christ illustrated in regards to Charity and Mercy.. Recall, the Parable of the Good Samaritan; The forgiving Master; The poor Widow, to name a few.

- - - - Not only the Successors of the Apostles are buildinig the Church, but we are all SENT to build up the Kingdom of God, and we Rejoice in Christ's mission, as do many of the 30,000 other churches. Christ will join them to Himself in His own good time, and in the meantime, we are all called to be Witnesses to His Love..

- - - - We are building the Church He founded; the first followers being the Apostles and the Successors with whom they Laid-hands on, and ordained through the Sacraments taught to them by the Apostles. These Successors continue to this day, documented by the Church's history of 266 Popes. St Peter, being the first, the first 32 popes having given their lives with the ultimate Sacrifice, as that of Christ, by a Martyr's Death.

- all are saved ( universalism/catholic)

- - - - Never heard any Catholic Teaching state this one, nor do we know who will be, or who will NOT be saved. Judgment is reserved to Our Lord's discretion.

- must belong or be a member of a church group, and attend weekly church

- - - - Catholics do NOT teach that Christ does not redeem those outside of the Catholic faith.

- ask Jesus into your heart

- - - - We hear this phrase often in many other Christian circles, but i don't recall any Catholic teaching making this a required practice.

- you can lose your salvation

- - - - The informed Catholic knows they have free-will, and that they must "work out their salvation with fear and trembling." (Phil 2:12) If they sin, (rejecting God) and die without having been forgiven for that wrong, they DO BELIEVE they risk "losing" their salvation.

- confess your sins to a priest or church staff

Run, don't walk to the nearest exit. Never go back!

- - - - It was Christ who stated, "Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven; Whose sins you shall retain, they are retained." For SJC to tell people to run and never go back, the informed Catholic would reply, "Sorry, but he does not have authority to interpret that passage officially," and "We will rely on the Teaching Auithority of the Magisterium of the Church for such matters."

Forget all your secular theories, religious views and trust Christ and the Bible alone!

- - - - trust Christ and the Bible ALONE? Where is THAT in the Bible? (clue: It isn't!)

Enter the straight gate...Matthew 7:13-14

All have sinned...Romans 3:23

- - - - Really? Did CHRIST sin? (i don't believe that he actually thinks that Christ sinned, but for the informed Catholic, there is a caution of isolating a single passage like this, and generalizing it for EVERYONE. Even tho the Scriptural passage does state ALL have sinned, we probably DO agree that Christ did not sin,) which may help us realize that the Scriptural Writer's INTENT, AND CONTEXT of what that author MEANT is not only important, but ESSENTIAL for a true understanding of the passage. See, although the passage doesn't qualify the EXCEPTION for Christ, the informed Catholic is able to relate not only the other passages which DO qualify this passage's intent, but also they respect the TEACHING of the Magisterium of the Church, which existed even before the Bible came to be compiled and written; Note: Christ commanded His Apostles to: "Go and Teach..." (NOT, Give ALL a BIBLE to read, figure-out, and interpret separately, from that of Christ's authorized Teachers). This is a stumbling block for the Fundamentalist who relies on the Bible alone, (Sola Scriptura). In this case, that of erroneously interpreting the isolated passage literally, without understanding its context, they rob themselves of the OTHER HALF OF THE TRUTH. Thus, are we able to understand, not only the value of, but the authenticity of the Catholic Teaching that: Neither did Christ's Mother sin, something that was always believed by the Church, even before it was proclaimed as a Dogma of the Faith. It doesn't say it in THIS passage, but it is elsewhere. Furthermore, many teachings of the Church are not so EXPLICIT, but the informed Catholics know how to follow not only the EXPLICIT, but the IMPLICIT, because they are LISTENING to the GUARDIANS Christ authorized, who teach us how to interpret these passages: AS THEY HAVE BEEN HANDED DOWN FROM THE DAYS BEFORE IT WAS EVEN WRITTEN, AND COMPILED INTO THE BOOKS OF THE BIBLE. The extreme error of 30,000 OTHER teaching groups in OPPOSITION, makes it all the more evident, and ALARMING. The problem with SJC's comment here is that he failed to qualify his "half-truth" with the exception(s).

All false religions make you the savior. Muslims teach Jesus is not the savior. The Jewish religion teaches Jesus is not the savior. They will go to hell!

- - - - (Really, who has set any of US up, as their Judge?)

Do you put all your trust in Christ or man-made religions and self"

- - - - (what IS a man-made religion? Is he referring to his previous reference of Catholicism, or is he purposefully being vague? Isn't that dangerous for others who may be seeking TRUTH? Which TRUTH does he mean? And, which MAN does he refer to for the MAN-made Church for which he refers? Which of the early Successors of Christ, who decided the official canon of books of the Bible in circa 382, made the "man-made" Church from which his bible came from? Or rather, does he use a different canon of books in his Bible edition, as in circa 1500?

- - - - It would appear to me, that SJC and Mr Hamilton rely on books and sources , as noted in this website, from previous posts, under the searchable title: "Pencil Neck Schiff ignores Citizen's Arrest on him," in order to attack what the informed Catholic would believe is the Church's Teaching Authority. This teaching authority, as it relates to the Command of Christ, is: Go therefore, and make disciples of every nation, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, teaching them to carry out all I have commanded you, and know that I am with YOU until the end of the age.

- - - - and to Peter: Thou art Peter, and upon this rock, I will build my Church. I give to you the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. Whatever you hold bound on earth, will be held bound in Heaven, and whatever you hold loosed on earth, will be held loosed in Heaven; and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against IT.

- - - - And to the Apostles, He who hears you, hears Me.

- - - - However, Mr Hamilton then branches off in his paragraph to a new topic, that the Catholic church started its own Bible to counter educate people AFTER Martin Luther started producing it in German, and that the Catholic church prevented people from learning to read years ago so they could control what the people knew.

- - - -Sorry, but these comments are unfounded. The Catholic Church decided on the official books of the Bible WAY before Martin Luther, and the Reformation. These comments are in error, and his comments, (as SJC,also above,) use half-truths that neither dismantle, NOR negate the Promises of Christ to PROTECT His Church from Teaching Error in His Name, (by His command for the Church to Teach, and carry out His commands). It appears Mr Hamilton uses quotes from Jesuits who were involved in their own schemes, as an attempt to attack the Teaching Authority of the Church.

- - - - It is truly sad when anyone in authority, whether they be Jesuits, Popes, Bishops, Priests, Nuns, Lay Ministers, Sunday School Teachers, misuse their position for their own selfish concerns or benefits, and they, like us, will all face Our Lord, sooner or later, and God being the Just God of Truth and Righteousness will deal with us all accordingly. No-one will escape that!

- - - - We, for our part, are called to do our own part; to pray for the Holy Spirit, and discern the truth with sincerity of heart and understanding.

- - - -This leads us to the question of authority to Teach, and how we can rely on this Teaching: Can the Catholic Church validly claim this authority as being from Christ? Can it PROVE it. The Informed Catholic's answer to that is a resounding Yes. Their proof is found in history; the writings of the early Church; the carrying-out of these commands as documented and preserved by this Teaching Church, and the documentable and historical succession of the Popes and Ministers within this Church. And Catholics need no reliance upon those teachers who oppose or question this authority, for Christ's Promises can be trusted.

- - - - IF the Church COULD NOT do these things, then Catholic's WOULD RUN, as SJC advised above, to SOMEONE who COULD! The fact is, however, NO-ONE else can or does make this claim. That alone, should close the matter from further debate, however, today, we have the very effects the Early Church sought to protect against, by heresies, and various groups who misused their power on such a large scale, that now, so much misinformation has led to individuals who have infiltrated the Church with their own schemes and evil intents, that the TRUE Catholic must be very cautious. Recall Christ's words, I know my My Sheep, and they know my voice. These Catholics welcome a sincere conversation, to bring to our table of investigation, a due-dilligence of honesty and integrity, to LEARN this history, and to SHARE it, that we may be able to protect others who would be easily misled by people who have been brain-washed by WOLVES in SHEEPS clothing. Christ will do His part in protecting the innocent, and will lead the sincere-of heart, for as Christ stated:

- - - - "And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for God’s people in accordance with the will of God."

- - - - Consider the great commission of Christ to the Apostles, right before His Ascension into Heaven: Go therefore, and make disciples of every nation, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, teaching them to carry out all I have commanded you, and know that I am with YOU until the end of the age.

- - - - Look closely: Who is YOU, in that phrase? If He states, "I am with YOU until the end of the age," and we can realize that the Apostles, one by one, passed on, (died,) then they had to know that this passage of, "I am with YOU until the end of the age," must be Christ's promise to His Teaching Church, not only for THEM, in THEIR NOW, but for them also in the TOMORROWS of the Church, "TO THE END OF THE AGE." Why else would the Apostles , under the guidance of the Holy Spirit's direction, make Disciples for these CONTINUING AGES, (through the Laying On Of Hands,) other than to CARRY-OUT CHRIST'S COMMAND, knowing that Christ promised to be with them, even as one-by-one, each of them died, after having already FIRST, taught and ordained other Successors who ALSO would continue this Instruction from Christ? (Recall also, directly from the Command of Christ: "I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear it now;" "Wait here until you are clothed from on High;" and, "the Holy Spirit will lead you to all Truth;"

- - - - Nine days later, we have PENTECOST, the birth of the Church, when the tongues of fire rested upon each of them in this most beautiful of Annointings). These NEW successors were ordained to CONTINUE this Commission of Christ; to receive the Holy Spirit, and they were in UNION with this FIRST, ORIGINAL, and continually TEACHING Church.

- - - - Not only that, we can all RELY on this phrase of Christ, as His promise to BE WITH and PROTECT this [first, and continually] Teaching Church, which He commissioned for the Faithful.

- - - - If we cannot believe in this, then who CAN we believe? What pastor teaching otherwise? Which of the 30,000 other sects calling themselves Christian and Bible teaching, gives us any reliable authority with which to put our faith in, (lest we have, rather, 7 billion people of our world in total chaos, believing whatever each interprets, to his own peril or luck of the "feel-good-about-it" moment's emotions, or will)? Particularly when not one of them can claim as their own, from Christ's commands, as having RECORDED His words.

- - - - So, some will say, i have the bible alone, as my authority. Really? What is the effective date for the bible they use? What of the EARLIER group who wrote it, and had the Apostles as their own Teachers? What of their Traditions; the practices-in-action which accompanied their transcribed words, continued to the present day?

- - - - Recall, that Christ never gave the Apostles a set of books and said, "here, go and teach this, and pass it out for the masses of people to hack it out, and interpret it like you want, and like Joanie likes, and let's not forget about Robert, and Louie, and 30,000 other self-proclaimed Christian groups following their own agenda, and neglecting the parts he, she, and they don't think is that important.

- - - - No, He told the Apostles to go and Teach them to carry out all He commanded, and in the early Church, before the New Testament was even compiled, we have the early fathers of the Church, taught by the Apostles themselves, teaching, studying, clarifying, declaring, and passing on, to the body of believers, for the faithful, the Church's stance on matters of faith and morals. This was particularly evident whenever there was doubt or question, what the CHURCH's view was to be inferred. We have these many writings to date.

- - - - Recall, from the first Council at Jerusalem, in the matter of the Gentiles becoming Christian. Many were uncertain about whether they would have to undergo the ritual practice of circumcision. Later in Acts 15, 2, we read the phrase, "We and the Holy Spirit have decided ..." No, this would not be required in order to become one with Christ's Church.

- - - - Later, St Jerome was commissioned by Pope Damassus to translate the bible into Latin, in approximately 382 AD. At this time, the Catholic Church had been using the word Catholic to refer to UNIVERSAL, (NOT a religious denomination, to distinguish one protesting group from another,) with the first 32 Popes, succeeded from Peter, who were by the way, Martyred for their faith; hardly a group of heretics with their "own" agenda. It was in 382, that the Church officially declared the Canon of Sacred Scripture, that Catholic's still refer to, until today.

- - - - The following excellent excerpt, from CatholicBridge.com, sheds important light, regarding Mr Hamilton's comments about the "Catholic Church having prevented people from learning to read years ago...," as this type of propaganda is so often used by people attempting to smear the Catholic Church with half-truths. Half-the-truth is often far worse that ANY truth. Making such a claim begs for much more understanding.

- - - - Here is the excerpt:

- - - - "Did the Catholic Church forbid Bible reading?

- - - - "To explore this question we need to look at three separate issues:

(1) The history

(2) The situation earlier in this century

(3) What's it like today?

- - - - "(1) History - Why didn't people in the Middle Ages read the Bible?

- - - - "Bible wasn't available - no printing presses" - - The Bible was on scrolls and parchments during the early centuries of Christianity. No one had a "Bible". In the Middle Ages, each Bible was written by hand. Most people were, at best, only functionally literate. That is partially why they used stained glass windows and art to tell the Bible story. The printing press was not invented until 1436 by Johann Gutenberg. Note: The Gutenberg Bible, like every Bible before it, contained the Deuterocanonical books - or "apocrapha" in Evangelical circles.

- - - - "So prior to 1436, the idea of everybody having a Bible was out of the question, even if they could read. It's hard to imagine a world without photocopiers, printing presses, email and websites.

- - - - "The printing press - - "After the invention of the printing press, prior to Luther's Bible being published in German, there had been over 20 versions of the whole Bible translated into the various German dialects (High and Low) by Catholics. Similarly, there were several vernacular versions of the Bible published in other languages both before and after the Reformation. The Church did condemn certain vernacular translations because of what it felt were bad translations and anti-Catholic notes (vernacular means native to a region or country).

- - - - "The Catholic Douay-Rheims version of the whole Bible in English was translated from the Latin Vulgate. It was completed in 1610, one year before the King James Version was published. The New Testament had been published in 1582 and was one of the sources used by the KJV translators.

- - - - "The Latin Vulgate was always available to anyone who wanted to read it without restriction. Some Evangelicals have said that it would only have been usable by people who read Latin. But in the 16th Century there were no public schools and literacy was not that common, especially among the peasants. Those people who could read had been well educated and could read Latin. We got an email that said:

- - - - "The Church still had its readings and services in the dead language of Latin ...The Church fought to keep the Bible in Latin even though it could not be understood by most people of the time.

- - - - "Latin was far from a dead language. It was the language of theology and science (the language of all educated peoples throughout Europe and beyond) well into the 17th and 18th Centuries. For example, when Isaac Newton published his works on physics, he published them in Latin so that all of Europe could read them. The same was true of all other scientific and scholarly advances.

- - - - "The reason that the Protestant reformers used vernacular languages was because (a) most educated people did not take the reformers seriously and (b) they used the masses to get power for their movement. The pamphlets published by Luther and Calvin were filled with all manner of crude and dirty language (lots of references to "sh*tting," "p*ssing," and "farting"), and this was done to capture the imagination of the common man and to create popular uprising against the social establishment.

- - - - "The Bible could very much be understood by people with the intelligence and ability to understand its theological content -- most of whom spoke Latin. Most common people of the time, however, could understand neither the language nor the content ...and most common people are still clueless about the content of the Bible today ...which is why Protestants provide "ministers" to interpret it for them.

- - - - "The Jewish Bible was in Hebrew until the 19th Century. The Greek versions of the Jewish Bible made in ancient times were used by Christians so the Jews avoided them. Any Jew who wanted to read the Bible was expected to make the effort to learn Hebrew.

- - - - "Did the Catholics burn Bibles? - - "We must be careful not to project modern, American sensibilities (in regard to freedom and justice) into the context of medieval history. In the Middle Ages and before 1776, there was simply no such thing as separation of Church and State, not in Catholic countries OR in Protestant countries. Protestants burned Catholics for praying in Latin or hearing the Catholic Mass in England, Geneva, and Scandinavia. At this time in history, heresy was also a secular crime; and the powers of a particular country treated it as such. Despite the "spin" that some Evangelicals put on the Catholic position, the Catholic Church was NEVER opposed to people reading the Bible. What it opposed was people reading interpretations the Bible APART from the teaching authority of the Church, which would lead to the kinds of problems we have today with 30,000 denominations interpreting Scripture differently. The Bible itself warns against this. (2 Peter 1:20). With the invention of printing, there was a communications explosion, and one suddenly saw lots of people making very poor and heretical translations of the Bible and popularizing them throughout Christendom. The Church tried to stop this. There ARE situations where some of these poor translations of the Bible were burned.

- - - - "The COMMON people of the middle ages had no intellectual defense with which they could make a reasonable judgment about the Truth. They were almost as vulnerable to the heresies that were sweeping through their communities as a person standing in front of a gun. Except a lot more than their lives was at stake, their ETERNAL LIVES were in jeopardy. Today, if someone went out into the street and started shooting people, we wouldn't say, "let him go ahead and do it, people can protect themselves...it's their own fault if they are shot to death." The Church was very worried that people who were influenced by these heresies were going to spend eternity in hell. No one was punished for simply believing a heresy. The crime was TEACHING it, and LEADING OTHERS ASTRAY. The Church felt it was their job to protect the souls of the innocent. In hindsight, we see that we would have done better by not using force.

...

Jesus Himself said in John 14:6

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

But there was more that He said as well. To know scripture is very important. So many people only read those parts of the Bible they are directed to read instead of reading all of it. To avoid following links to evidence under the guise of calling them rabbit holes is to act as one who knows what he believes rather than believes what he knows. The former is someone who fears to look at information that may contradict his beliefs.

- - - - As to AVOIDING the rabbit holes, as Mr Hamilton describes, I do not avoid them for fear of the evidence they will lead to, but rather that, having read many of them, I saw they DID NOT lead to ANY SUBSTANTIVE VALUE, or PRECLUSION of the truthfulness of the Church's teachings. I refer particularly to Tupper Saussy's chapter on the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary. This chapter, was "evidence" in, and of itself, for the informed Catholic, as nothing but RUBBISH. The posture of his writing this chapter was that ofone so mis-informed, and lacking any foundation from which to make such claims.

- - - - So, while I can appreciate your comment about "knowing what I believe," VS "believing what I know," I can assure Mr Hamilton, as a well-informed Catholic, as also for any well-informed Catholic, KNOWING what we believe," AND "BELIEVING what we know," regarding the faith passed on to us by the Catholic Church as being TRUTHFUL, and WORTHY OF BELIEF AND FAITH, are VICE-VERSA, the SAME for us. And for many Catholics who may not YET have found the need to be so well-studied, they are still far in front of EVERY crowd who counters true Catholic Teaching, so long as they are sincerely following the tenants of the Catholic faith. They are, so-to-speak, in the safe-harbour of Christ's promises. The false teachings, as are being put forth by people teaching heresies and spreading errors on the outside-waves of some 30,000 differing "Christian denominations," each, putting their own spin on what THEY interpret, resulting in nothing but chaos by the majority who become so distracted with half-truths. Their "leaders" reveal a different spirituality, so often with a rationalized version of Christ's Teaching Church; they "look the other way," so as not to subject themselves to the Teachings Christ gave the Church authority to Teach in His Name, and they are lucky if they ever properly understand the words: "He who hears you, Hears Me."

- - - - Rather, they hear a version often put forth by WOLVES in Sheeps clothing. The motives of these leaders quickly become APPARENT, however, when they are confronted with the SIMPLE evidence of the WRITINGS of the EARLY CHURCH FATHERS; the Apostles of Christ, and their very own Successors, whom these Apostles themselves , FORMED, taught, and gave their lives up, to guard and protect the truths they taught.

- - - - SO, Catholics, be on guard !!! Those teaching their own version, apart from the Church, do so at their own peril, and cause others who are unaware of it, to have a much greater challenge before them.

...

But the scary thing that you point out is all religions coming under one religion. That is done under the anti-christ. It is a sign of end times. But just so you can clarify some things for others to help them comprehend the Catholic religion, answer a few questions for me. And by the way, there are several ex-Catholics who grew up in the Catholic church that go to the church I attend who are very well adept at the Catholic religion.

- - - - Well, as to the "all religions becoming one religion," and being "done under the anti-christ," again, I refer you to re-read, if necessary, what i wrote above, (regarding Christ's prayer for unity.) Here, now, we will follow with some understanding to your "one-liner" questions next. BUT first.. about your fellow church attendees who you state are Ex-Catholics, and how adept they are "in the Catholic religion," i'm curious, what do you suppose makes them ADEPT? Have they had some mystical revelation Christ has not shared with the rest of His Church? Has He conferred a new authority on your fellow attendees that we Catholics missed from the early Church and those who recorded their messages for us, as Catholic followers of Christ?

- - - - I realize our dialogue here may only be between us, but as a Catholic, i am concerned for these you referred to. Will you consider giving them a copy of this response, and ask them this: BEFORE they LEFT the Church: Did they ever study the early Church fathers for clarification on their objections to Catholic Teaching?

- - - - I would say, "There is absolutely NO WAY !!"

- - - - Do you know why? Because they would have found one of the most UNIFYING, and CRITICAL piece of information that would have kept them SOLIDLY, without ANY equivocation, or even CONSIDERING leaving the Church. I will not "give" it to you, but will save it for your own follow-through and personal moment of appreciation. I hope it will serve as your hope in the one, undeniable Truth you will not compromise. For now, let me just refer you to Christ's reply to the Apostles, when they asked Him: "why do you speak to the people in parables?"

- - - - Recall His answer to this: "The mystery of the Kingdom of God has been granted to you. But to those outside, everything comes in parables, so that they may look and see, but not perceive, and hear and listen, but not understand, in order that they may NOT be converted and be FORGIVEN."

- - - - Isn't that a most strange answer? Christ, who calls ALL to conversion, reserves the UNDERSTANDING of His beautiful explanations and parables, because of WHAT POSSIBLE REASON, do you and your fellow EX-Catholic people suppose? Perhaps Christ wants only the sincere-of-heart to have this gift of understanding the Mystery of the Kingdom of God. When Christ said that, He must have been dealing with a very stiff-necked people who were not sincere, holding on to their own stubbornness, and following their own ways and desires.

...

1. Do you call priests "father"?

- - - - Yes. Here is probably the most comprehensive explanation i could find for you. (If you are sincerely interested in the "Catholic" answer, vs looking for a way to criticize or dismiss Catholicism, check this one out from Catholic.com):

- - - - "Call No Man “Father”?

- - - - "Many Protestants claim that when Catholics address priests as “father,” they are engaging in an unbiblical practice that Jesus forbade: “Call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven” (Matt. 23:9).

- - - - "How should Catholics respond?

- - - - "The Answer

- - - - "To understand why the charge does not work, one must first understand the use of the word “father” in reference to our earthly fathers. No one would deny a little girl the opportunity to tell someone that she loves her father. Common sense tells us that Jesus wasn’t forbidding this type of use of the word “father.”

- - - - "In fact, to forbid it would rob the address “Father” of its meaning when applied to God, for there would no longer be any earthly counterpart for the analogy of divine Fatherhood. The concept of God’s role as Father would be meaningless if we obliterated the concept of earthly fatherhood.

- - - - "But in the Bible the concept of fatherhood is not restricted to just our earthly fathers and God. It is used to refer to people other than biological or legal fathers, and is used as a sign of respect to those with whom we have a special relationship.

- - - - "For example, Joseph tells his brothers of a special fatherly relationship God had given him with the king of Egypt: “So it was not you who sent me here, but God; and he has made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house and ruler over all the land of Egypt” (Gen. 45:8).

- - - - "Job indicates he played a fatherly role with the less fortunate: “I was a father to the poor, and I searched out the cause of him whom I did not know” (Job 29:16). And God himself declares that he will give a fatherly role to Eliakim, the steward of the house of David: “In that day I will call my servant Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah . . . and I will clothe him with [a] robe, and will bind [a] girdle on him, and will commit . . . authority to his hand; and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah” (Isa. 22:20–21).

- - - - "This type of fatherhood applies not only to those who are wise counselors (like Joseph) or benefactors (like Job) or both (like Eliakim); it also applies to those who have a fatherly spiritual relationship with one. For example, Elisha cries, “My father, my father!” to Elijah as the latter is carried up to heaven in a whirlwind (2 Kgs. 2:12). Later, Elisha himself is called a father by the king of Israel (2 Kgs. 6:21).

- - - - "A Change with the New Testament?

- - - - "Some Protestants argue that this usage changed with the New Testament—that while it may have been permissible to call certain men “father” in the Old Testament, since the time of Christ, it’s no longer allowed. This argument fails for several reasons.

- - - - "First, as we’ve seen, the imperative “call no man father” does not apply to one’s biological father. It also doesn’t exclude calling one’s ancestors “father,” as is shown in Acts 7:2, where Stephen refers to “our father Abraham,” or in Romans 9:10, where Paul speaks of “our father Isaac.”

- - - - "Second, there are numerous examples in the New Testament of the term “father” being used as a form of address and reference, even for men who are not biologically related to the speaker. There are, in fact, so many uses of “father” in the New Testament, that the objection to Catholics calling priests “father” must be wrong, as we shall see.

- - - - "Third, a careful examination of the context of Matthew 23 shows that Jesus didn’t intend for his words here to be understood literally. The whole passage reads, “But you are not to be called ‘rabbi,’ for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called ‘masters,’ for you have one master, the Christ” (Matt. 23:8–10).

- - - - "The first problem is that although Jesus seems to prohibit the use of the term “teacher,” in Matthew 28:19–20, Christ himself appointed certain men to be teachers in his Church: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations . . . teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” Paul speaks of his commission as a teacher: “For this I was appointed a preacher and apostle . . . a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth” (1 Tim. 2:7); “For this gospel I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher” (2 Tim. 1:11). He also reminds us that the Church has an office of teacher: “God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers” (1 Cor. 12:28); and “his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers” (Eph. 4:11). There is no doubt that Paul was not violating Christ’s teaching in Matthew 23 by referring so often to others as “teachers.”

- - - - "Fundamentalists themselves slip up on this point by calling all sorts of people “doctor”; for example, professors and scientists who have Ph.D. degrees (i.e., doctorates). What they fail to realize is that “doctor” is simply the Latin word for “teacher.” Even “Mister” and “Mistress” (“Mrs.”) are forms of the word “master,” also mentioned by Jesus. So if his words in Matthew 23 were meant to be taken literally, Fundamentalists would be just as guilty for using the word “teacher” and “doctor” and “mister” as Catholics for saying “father.” But clearly, that would be a misunderstanding of Christ’s words.

- - - - "So What Did Jesus Mean?

- - - - "Jesus criticized Jewish leaders who love “the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues, and salutations in the market places, and being called ‘rabbi’ by men” (Matt. 23:6–7). He was using hyperbole (exaggeration) to show the scribes and Pharisees how sinful and proud they were for not looking humbly to God as the source of all authority and fatherhood and teaching, and instead setting themselves up as the ultimate authorities, father figures, and teachers.

- - - - "Christ used hyperbole often, for example when he declared, “If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell” (Matt. 5:29, cf. 18:9; Mark 9:47). Christ certainly did not intend this to be applied literally, for otherwise all Christians would be blind amputees! (cf. 1 John 1:8; 1 Tim. 1:15).

- - - - "Jesus is not forbidding us to call men “fathers” who actually are such—either literally or spiritually. He is warning people against inaccurately attributing fatherhood—or a particular kind or degree of fatherhood—to those who do not have it.

- - - - "As the apostolic example shows, some individuals genuinely do have a spiritual fatherhood, meaning that they can be referred to as spiritual fathers. What must not be done is to confuse their form of spiritual paternity with that of God. Ultimately, God is our supreme protector, provider, and instructor. Correspondingly, it is wrong to view any individual other than God as having these roles.

- - - - "Throughout the world, some people have been tempted to look upon religious leaders who are mere mortals as if they were an individual’s supreme source of spiritual instruction, nourishment, and protection. The tendency to turn mere men into “gurus” is worldwide.

- - - - "This was also a temptation in the Jewish world of Jesus’ day, when famous rabbinical leaders, especially those who founded important schools, such as Hillel and Shammai, were highly exalted by their disciples. It is this elevation of an individual man—the formation of a “cult of personality” around him—of which Jesus is speaking when he warns against attributing to someone an undue role as master, father, or teacher.

- - - - "He is not forbidding the perfunctory use of honorifics nor forbidding us to recognize that the person does have a role as a spiritual father and teacher. The example of his own apostles shows us that.

- - - - "The Apostles Show the Way

- - - - "The New Testament is filled with examples of and references to spiritual father-son and father-child relationships. It is worth quoting some of them here.

- - - - "Paul regularly referred to Timothy as his child: “Therefore I sent to you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ” (1 Cor. 4:17); “To Timothy, my true child in the faith: grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord” (1 Tim. 1:2); “To Timothy, my beloved child: Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord” (2 Tim. 1:2).

- - - - "He also referred to Timothy as his son: “This charge I commit to you, Timothy, my son, in accordance with the prophetic utterances which pointed to you, that inspired by them you may wage the good warfare” (1 Tim 1:18); “You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 2:1); “But Timothy’s worth you know, how as a son with a father he has served with me in the gospel” (Phil. 2:22).

- - - - "Paul also referred to other of his converts in this way: “To Titus, my true child in a common faith: grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior” (Titus 1:4); “I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I have become in my imprisonment” (Philem. 10). None of these men were Paul’s literal sons. Rather, Paul is emphasizing his spiritual fatherhood with them.

- - - - "Spiritual Fatherhood

- - - - "Perhaps the most pointed New Testament reference to the theology of the spiritual fatherhood of priests is Paul’s statement, “I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (1 Cor. 4:14–15).

- - - - "Peter followed the same custom, referring to Mark as his son: “She who is at Babylon, who is likewise chosen, sends you greetings; and so does my son Mark” (1 Pet. 5:13). The apostles sometimes referred to entire churches under their care as their children. Paul writes, “Here for the third time I am ready to come to you. And I will not be a burden, for I seek not what is yours but you; for children ought not to lay up for their parents, but parents for their children” (2 Cor. 12:14); and, “My little children, with whom I am again in travail until Christ be formed in you!” (Gal. 4:19).

- - - - "John said, “My little children, I am writing this to you so that you may not sin; but if any one does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 John 2:1); “No greater joy can I have than this, to hear that my children follow the truth” (3 John 4). In fact, John also addresses men in his congregations as “fathers” (1 John 2:13–14).

- - - - "By referring to these people as their spiritual sons and spiritual children, Peter, Paul, and John imply their own roles as spiritual fathers. Since the Bible frequently speaks of this spiritual fatherhood, we Catholics acknowledge it and follow the custom of the apostles by calling priests “father.” Failure to acknowledge this is a failure to recognize and honor a great gift God has bestowed on the Church: the spiritual fatherhood of the priesthood.

...

2. Do you hail Mary?

- - - - (please see below, for 2, 3, and 4).

...

3. Do you refer to Mary as the "mother of God"?

4. Do you refer to Mary as "the queen of heaven"?

- - - - Regarding Mary, the BVM (Blessed Virgin Mary), you will never get a true Catholic to separate themselves from Her or Her Son. Nor can you separate the Two, for they go together, and are INSEPARABLE; Neither is to be praised above or below the other.

- - - - Do Catholics worship Mary, No. Catholic Theology teaches that Worship is reserved to God alone.

- - - - Do Catholics Hail Mary, No, we Honor Her, JUST AS GOD HONORED HER, with the same words God sent the angel to proclaim:

- - - - "Hail Mary, Full of Grace, the Lord is with Thee," several translations appear, another being, and meaning the same thing according to Catholic Teaching: "Ave Maria...," and, "Rejoice, oh highly favored Daughter..." The passage is from Luke's gospel. Luke uses the Greek, Perfect Passive Participle, "Kecharitomene," indicating from the beginning, and always enduring, [Greek] gracia plena [Latin] (full-of-grace).

- - - - and continuing with the prayer of Elizabeth, (when Mary visited Elizabeth,) right after this Annunciation from Gabriel, the ArchAngel of the Lord: Elizabeth, filled with the Holy Spirit, cried aloud, "Blessed Art Thou Among Women, and Blessed is the Fruit of Thy Womb"

- - - - This prayer is sung and prayed continually by the Church, both Honoring Her as the Mother of God, for Jesus IS Lord, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity; and the second part of this Prayer, is Intercessory, asking Her to pray for us, both Now, and at the hour of our death. This prayer, referred to as the Hail Mary, does not worship Her, and NO Catholic-informed Catholic will tell you they worship Her, but rather, that they Honor Her, as Christ Honors Her infinitely, and eternally, and, that Worship is reserved for God alone.

- - - - The Church teaches the faithful four (4) tenants of the Blessed Virgin Mary:

- - - - 1. That She is Immaculately Conceived; that from the first instant of Her having been Conceived within the womb of Her Mother, Saint Anne, She is preserved from any stain of Sin, and that She was never for an instant under the power, control, or friendship of Satan.

- - - - This is confirmed from the very beginning when sin was first committed by Adam and Eve, where God said to the Serpent, "Because you have done this, I will put ENMITY between you and the Woman; between your seed and Hers; you shall strike at Her Heel, and She shall crush your head. (Gen 3:15)

- - - - 2. That She is Ever-Virgin; BEFORE, DURING, and AFTER the birth of Her Son, Jesus. This has always been believed and taught from the earliest days of the Church.

- - - - 3. That She is the Mother of God

- - - - 4. That She is taken both Body and Soul into heaven.

- - - - and yes, Catholics acknowledge, and believe, informedly, (not informally, but being INFORMED by the Church Christ commissioned to TEACH, and carry out ALL HE COMMANDED,) that She is the Queen of Heaven and Earth.

- - - - This is not to be compared with the secular notion of a country, such as the Queen of England, but to be understood in light of the role of Christ's reign as King of Heaven. Numerous references prefigure the reign of a King, and Kingdom to come, in the Old Testament, with the King deferring to the Mother, who was the Queen, and the King obeyed Her, and Honored Her, just as Christ does ALWAYS.

...

5. Is there an obelisk in the courtyard of the Vatican?

- - - - I have heard there is.

...

6. Is there a sun god emblem surrounding the obelisk in the courtyard of the Vatican?

- - - - I have heard there is.

...

7. Is there a statue of the Baphomet in the Vatican?

- - - - I have heard there is.

- - - - For these questions, 5, 6, and 7, and other statues you may refer to, in no way, shape, or form, is any teaching by the Catholic Church advocating worship or devotion to such images of Satan or Evil, and you will not find any such official teaching. At best, the presence of such figures could only be reminders that Satan and evil are real, and that we must, as Catholic Christians recognize this presence, and know that what the Gospel proclaims, and the writings of St Paul tells, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, can separate us from God's Love.

...

One way that you can tell if a religion is a false religion is its church will have its own version of the Bible. It will claim that others are wrong and probably do not have the original version that the group of teachers had in the beginning. But is it important to note that the statues of Rome were not replaced when the Catholic church was formed. They merely changed the names.

- - - - Well, you don't state it, but if one uses this charge to a Catholic, they would ask: how can they say "OUR own version of the Bible"? The Bible, we as Catholics have today, is the Word of God recorded from the Sacred Tradition of the Early Church Fathers, (the first 400 years, the many writings were was still being studied, before being compiled, to determine which books would be recognized as Canonical. Being that these writings were from the Church's own early Fathers, also makes this Teaching Church, the the Guardian of that Word, and they define the intent of these writings, along with the many other early writings which were used in their deliberations for its formation, by these Leaders in Communion with the Church.

- - - - As to the statues, I presume you refer to those celebrating Pagan feasts and origins. Catholics also understand that many feast days, for example, Christmas, was once celebrated as a pagan feast. Catholic understanding is not that we adopted a pagan holiday to practice paganism, but that the pagans were converted to Christ, and the day of celebrating these feasts honored the truth, (and in this example, Christmas, they are honoring the day Christ was born). These are not obstacles for informed Catholics. Here is another interesting excerpt from Catholic.com regarding Pagan origins:

- - - - "Yes, there are sects which hold such a position, but none of them can present a convincing case for criticizing the calendar or the feast days we have.

- - - - "To call our calendar pagan is incorrect. Its framework, with its months, weeks, and days, is more accurately termed secular. It existed among the Romans and was reformed under Julius Caesar. The Julian calendar was reformed under Pope Gregory XIII in 1582 and renamed the Gregorian calendar. The world uses it today.

- - - - "The Church instituted feasts commemorating Christian persons and events and placed the feasts in the framework which the Romans had previously constructed. This framework should not be considered any more pagan than the roads, bridges, and ships built by the Romans and used by the apostles and the Church. If any sect thinks reverting to the Jewish calendar is somehow better and not pagan, it doesn’t know the facts. The Jewish calendar is derived from the Babylonian calendar, and you can’t get more “pagan” than that.

...

Jesus Himself said and it is recorded in John 16:4

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

That means we do not have to go through a priest. As a matter of fact, God made all of us kings and priests.

- - - - I'm sorry, but the passage you use here in no way implies any negation of the role of a Catholic Priest ordained by the Church, in the Sacrament of Holy Orders, in Communion with the Bishops. Nor in the Sacrament's ministry to teach us in His Name, nor in forgiving sins through the Sacrament of Reconciliation (often called Confession, as in, Confessing one's sins to a priest,) and this includes the power to retain sin, as in, to deny forgiveness, through his ordained ministry. [Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven; Whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.] These are solid tenants of an apostolic and Catholic faith. Passed on to us from yesterday, and the day before that, to the day before that, week by week, month by month, year by year, century by century; passed on for us all, CATHOLIC, UNIVERSALLY open wide to the sincere of heart. As fresh today as yesterday, to the day the Apostles passed on these teachings to the early Church. It is today available to all those attentive to seek God with a sincere heart.

- - - - Nor do informed Catholics believe that priests are the Mediator between God and man, with the priest being "accessed" or "used" in order to come to the Father (INSTEAD OF Christ being that means). That is simply not the Catholic view. Perhaps you can better understand it this way: Can YOU be an INTERCESSOR and bring another to conversion to God? Not only YES, but we are ALL called to this mission, to intercede, and pray for one another.. Recall the words, "If you see your brother sin, first admonish him privately.."

- - - - Thus also, thru the Sacrament of the Laying on of Hands, (Holy Orders) described in the Acts of the Apostles in Scripture, the Priest's ministry is exercised and administered, in the Person of Christ, the Sacraments of Christ, as He commanded. Recall them: You must be born again by Water AND the Spirit; Baptize them in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; Do this in Memory of Me; Whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven, Whose sins you retain, they are retained. Teach them to carry out all I have commanded you.

- - - - Do you suppose the Catholic view is that priests, or bishops, are without Sin? Of course not; Christ never promised that they would be free of sin.

- - - - Even one of the Apostles of Christ, used his own free will to betray Him, and this was the first scandal of the Church. Catholics are very aware of the need to discern what is of the Holy Spirit, and today, particularly, when we see so much evil surrounding us. That in no way, is an obstacle for Christ to fulfill His promise, that the gates of hell shall not prevail against His Church.

...

Revelation 1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

Revelation 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

So we as Christians know that we have been given power and authority.

Luke 10:19 Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you.

John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

Mark 16:17, 18 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

I have personally experienced 4 of the 5 signs that Jesus stated in Mark 16: 17, 18. I may have experienced drinking something deadly and not died, I just am not aware of it. I have gotten results from laying hands on the sick. I have cast out devils. I just started speaking in tongues ten days ago. The first night was not much. But the second night, a little after 1 am on Wednesday morning I took off praying in tongues and went on for almost three hours.

But Jesus said something else that is extremely important in Matthew 23:9. You can see it in context by following the link.

And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

What is it you call a priest? I believe you call them father, do you not? We do not tell you these things because we do not like you. We tell these things, because just the opposite, we love you. But it should be noted that the Catholic church does not tell most people even within the church what really happens at the upper levels of the church any more that the Freemasons or Illuminati does. As a matter of fact, many Freemasons and Illuminati are Catholics. Some of the are Jesuits. The truth about what happens at the upper echelons of the Vatican has been reveal by ex-Jesuits and Nuns. We didn't just make this stuff up. It has been revealed by those who have been in those upper echelons of the church.

- - - - We have addressed these matters comprehensively, above.

---

I love to talk scripture and actually teach a Sunday school. As a matter of fact, it was one of the ex-Catholics in Sunday school who pointed out the scripture about calling no man on earth father. I knew it before then, but he also learned this and like so many other ex-Catholics, have learned things that they know to be wrong in the Catholic church. I for one have never been to a Catholic church, although my fiancee is Catholic. I do not hold that against her and she doesn't hold against me the fact that I am not. One thing I know about my fiancee is she is extremely intelligent she will learn the truth when she is ready. But it should be noted that I do not believe that most Catholics are going to hell, just because the upper echelons of the church worship Ba'al. On the contrary, God knows your heart and He will consider that in all things. However, God is not who will judge us when we leave this world. For that duty has been passed on to Jesus, because He is who paid the price.

- - - - We would agree that God knows the heart, and that He will judge, and we must all give an account for our actions. But, to state the upper echelons worship Ba'al is vague, at best. Any POSSIBLE truth of the reports you cite, that past nuns and priests came forth to expose such occurrences, will have their own judgment day, like all of us. The Church's ministry, from the command to Teach, AND the promise of Christ's protection from error on this Teaching, on faith and morals, will not be destroyed by man, (sinner OR saint)!

- - - - I WOULD add, before you try correcting your fiancee, maybe she is already following the truth, and possibly, you may be the one who has yet to realize the truth of what SHE already follows and believes to be true.

- - - - Study the early fathers of the Church that you may see the true passing on of what the Apostles taught, and how this message was carried out. There is no substitute for knowing these facts. You cannot rely on books like Tupper Saussy's numerous claims as a validation that the Church Teaches corruption because of some individuals who sinned gravely. Christ's promises to protect His Church deserves much greater faith, and i would add, Respect, than a dismissal, and quick exit out the back door. Those who leave the Church risk being in grave danger. Those who do harm within the Church, AND outside of it, to undermine these teachings are in serious error, and do great harm to the people of God. Christ never prayed for separation but for unity. To spread errors of what I think should be, and what you think should be, and Louise, and Joan, and Tom, and 30,000 other differing beliefs, is clearly not what Christ intended, and you probably know that. We must use our God-given mind to read between the lines of the Bible Translation which is not passed down from those separated from the FIRST and continuing Teaching Church Christ gave us to rely on, for we will find there is no "second-best" or substitute. There is no SECOND Church of Christ!

...

John 5:22, 23 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:

23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

I am a very devout Christian. I walk with Jesus every day. I talk with Father every day, because He is the only real Dad I have ever had. Mine abandoned me when I was but 3 years old along with my mom. The only one I have been able to count on being there for me Is God the Father, who's name is I AM.

- - - - But He tells us to Listen to His Son, and recall, He has said, He who hears you, Hears Me. He obviously knew we would need the Church as Teacher, for the AGES. Otherwise, it makes no sense that He stated, Go and Teach them to carry out all I commanded you, and know that I am with you unto the end of the age.

...

Exodus 3:13-14

13 And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?

14 And God said unto Moses, I Am That I Am: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I Am hath sent me unto you.

We can talk scripture if you want. But rather than tell us not stop saying things bad about the Catholic church, how about you provide what you know to compare with what we know. Get the scripture right out of the Bible rather than a Bible that only the Catholic church has under the guise of it being the only correct one.

- - - - Mr Hamilton, your foundation crumbles where you state: "Get the scripture right out of the Bible rather than a Bible that only the Catholic church has under the guise of it being the only correct one;" and

- - - - This is refuted above, in our reply to your charge, that the Church burned bibles. Have you ever heard the phrase, "it loses something in the translation?" Why would any Catholic go to an "after-market edition," when they already trace their roots, for the edition they use, to the original? Furthermore, the guardians of this edition, house all the historical footnotes to that original edition? With all due respect, your conclusion is illogical

- - - - And, the guardian of that Original is the Catholic Church. Not the separated followers' edition, or the changed-message edition, etc. The history of the early Church proves this. This value cannot be circumvented or ignored.

...

You should approach the one religion thing with extreme caution, because that will be lead by the anti-christ. Think about it. The Catholic church is talking about merging with Islam, and religion that is very much a satanic church. I will post more about this as time allows.

- - - - No sir, the Catholic Church will not bend the Teachings of Christ to any Satanic worship. The only way the Islamic faith will merge with Catholicism will be to Teach and share with them, the messages of Christ that has BEEN the same, (provable by the early writers and sucessors of the Church), and is the same today, and will be tomorrow, so they can sincerely accept the Truth, as it is STILL BEING TAUGHT now for over 2000 years by the Catholic Faith.

- - - - If one thinks otherwise without this kind of discernment, it is very easy to be misled. And I mean that with all respect. We must question these things with a lot more insight and maturity.

- - - - I've shared these views the best I know how. If i've missed something, let me know, but otherwise if you still cling to your beliefs without any value from above then I will leave you to your own sources, but with one final thought: Given the above insights shared, do you actually think Christ would leave His Church without a safe harbour for His people to find the truth, as in, on their own, and to the extent that we see over 30,000 different sects teaching anything BUT unity. I would question THAT proposition. We must always ask the Holy Spirit, Whom Our Lord taught us to ask for, and He will not fail us in that, for we have His own original Teaching Church still present in this, OUR AGE.

- - - - frisbee101