Author Topic: What would it take for you to become Roman Catholic ?  (Read 1047 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Adamski

  • 1Tim315
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
  • Manna: 2
  • Gender: Male
  • James 2:24
What would it take for you to become Roman Catholic ?
« on: Wed Mar 25, 2015 - 17:14:16 »
There is little that separtes the Lutheran church from the roman catholic.  If you follow what Luther taught

Luther taught
- similar Eucharistic beliefs
- confession to clergy was encouraged
-Mary ever virgin
-rosary and intercession of saints

Even in his famous 95 thesis he claimed the pope was the head of the church on earth three times

If you are a Lutheran and truly following Luther what is keeping you from Union with Rome?

Offline Winnie

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 157
  • Manna: 6
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: What would it take for you to become Roman Catholic ?
« Reply #1 on: Sat Jun 04, 2016 - 18:57:30 »
That is interesting information.  I think I 'got saved' in a Lutheran Church we went to in junior high school.  Went to three other churches since then.  The Lord has me in the Salvation Army now. 
I am curious to read on the things Luther said!

Offline Diego

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Manna: 0
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: What would it take for you to become Roman Catholic ?
« Reply #2 on: Mon Aug 08, 2016 - 15:47:46 »
That fact that I was raised Roman Catholic. I went to a Roman Catholic college. Studied to be a Priest and Monk. Darn near became one. Thank you, no.

Why would I be a Romanist? Grace Alone, Faith Alone, Scripture Alone, thank you. And yes, I know what Luther taught. We ARE Catholic, in the only true way one can be. I would advise you to read the Book of Concord. Then you can see if that question that you asked even applies any further (you will find that it does not).

Even assuming the Pope is the head of the Church, the so-called Infallibility garbage of 1870 becomes a problem. And Transubstantiation is an issue. I don't really have an issue with it being ONE possible explanation of Eucharistic change. I have a problem with it being a forced belief. I have a problem with being forced to believe it as dogma. I have a problem with indulgences. I have a problem with Purgatory. I have a problem with defining Saints, and praying to them.

I have a problem with earned Salvation. I have a problem with Semi-Palagianism, which the Catholic Church is very close to being, if it isn't actually. I have a problem with being forced to believe in the Immaculate Conception, defined "ex cathedra" in 1854. I have a problem with being forced to believe in the Assumption, defined "ex cathedra" in 1950. Of course the very concept of "ex cathedra" was already mentioned as a problem. All of things are frankly, unbiblical.

Shall I go on?