Catholics are Christian

[matt1]

Catholics to this day are nearly one fifth of the world's population.

That one single denomination outnumbers all 30,000 protestant denominations combined

For two thousand years Pagans, Muslims, som Jews, Communists, and as we in some cases even Protestants, the media, Modernists, atheists, other Heresies, and even Catholic themselves (including and especially the Hierarchy) have tried to Destroy the Church
Many of our Popes were martyred and there were times where the Catholic Church was persecuted in every country in the world at the same time.

Any other institution would have been defeated long ago, however, Christ did promise that the gates of Hell would not prevail against his Church.
Catholicism is not only a colossal success, it is a miracle, and it is also a colossal enigma.
The most hated institution in the world.

When the Pope Condemend Contraception he didnt do so to win the popular vote.  many Catholics, including rebellious priests, despise this teaching.
A large percentage of Catholics do not agree with it or obey it.
However, the Pope has the keys of St. Peter, and the Holy spirit guides him when he speaks ex-cathedra, and so he spoke the truth knowing that people would make fun of him, hate him, and that many would leave the Church over it.
He did it any way. 

Same thing with Women priests,  Same thing with abortion, divorce and plenty other issues. 

We can count on the Catholic Church to speak the truth regardless of how many worldy people or even Catholics will object and throw a fit.
As you can see, we cant always count on this from the non-Catholic denominatons who changed thier stance on contraception, women priests (pastors), some on abortion, some on homosexuality.

It can be proven that the Church dates back to the time of Christ. 
There is more proof of that than there is proof that Alexander the Great existed.
It can be proved that the Apostles had Successors.
Anticatholics say, "where does Scripture say the Apostles had Successors?"
Well, there wouldnt be much talk of that because only one Apostle died in the Scripture.
That Apostle had a successor, Matthias

If you want to read History or even the world book encyclopedia (non Catholic sources) you will find it not even a matter to refute that the Apostles ordained successors


There are Protestant Pastors who decided, "I want my services to look more like the services that the 1st and 2nd century Christians had
They do the research from what the early Christians wrote about their services, and try it out.  Then they get complains, "reverend this looks too much like a Catholic Mass".

I know one of these people who tried that out, he is now a Catholic Deacon.

Protestants claim to be Solo Scriptura, but they reject our Lord's and St. Paul's clear teaching that it is the Body and blood of Christ

They say, it cant be Christ, it looks and tastes like bread and wine.
Well, the Bible just looks and feels like a book.  With Faith you believe it is the word of God, as I do.

We dont see God or touch him, at least most of us dont.
We have faith.  When you're in an empty room you look around, it just looks, feels, sounds, and smells like a vacant room. 
However you know God is there.

The Eucharist doesnt need to look or taste like something different than bread or wine for us to have Faith that God has made himself present body blood soul and divinity

in the Consecrated Host.
In fact those who have faith in what Jesus said, believe this.

Those who reject what Jesus said follow their own logic instead of the word of God as these people did:  John 6:52-54, 67

52 Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

[AVZ]

The most hated institution in the world.

Please continue to swallow in self pity.

Also, protestants reject what they cant find in the Bible.  

And why shouldn't they? The alternative is to come up with fantasies and fabricate religious precepts around it.
Something I am sure would be rejectable as well?

If the Bible was easy to interpret, we would not have 30,000 denominations.

The Bible fortunately is easy to interpret. The onus is upto you to prove that if Reformation would not have happened the total number of people accepting Christ would have been larger than the total number of people consolidated in the Catholic Church and the 30,000 denominations together.

There was far more unity in Christendom before the reformation.

In fact there was far more unity when it was only Jesus Christ and the 12 disciples.
Good point to reject the existence of the Catholic Church.

[matt1]

Early Christians listened to the teaching of the Apostles
Not the Bible (they didnt have one)
Meaning they didnt listen to the Apostles and say, let me open to John 6 and see if that is Biblical
To say that everything out of the Bible is fantasy is to say everything that Christ and the Apostles did and taught that is not in Scripture is a fantasy and a fabrication
not a good idea
especially when it says not all that Jesus said or did is written down
There were many accounts on the life of Jesus
Some Catholic Christians decided which of those accounts would be in the Bible
There are thousands of other contemporary accounts and the Bishops that put togeather the Canon did not say those are all false
they just determined these must definately be included in the Canon as the word of God
They didnt say every other writting on Christ and the Apostles is false fabrication or fairy tales
Get your facts straight and come back when you have something reasonable, rational, and accurate to say

[AVZ]

Early Christians listened to the teaching of the Apostles
Not the Bible (they didnt have one)
Meaning they didnt listen to the Apostles and say, let me open to John 6 and see if that is Biblical

You are incorrect.
Almost immediately in church history the early chirstians received written accounts from the apostles.
If you read the letters from Paul, you will see that on various occasions Paul urges the churches to compare the spoken word of the various apostles against the letters witten by them, to measure, compare and learn the truth in the gospels preached.

If you think the early Christians were the illiterate underbelly of society depending on tradition alone, you are quite wrong.
Many of them were well educated and well positioned people who wouldn't take a man's word for it and required more than just an apostle telling them something.
Hence the survival of the apostolic letters, copied many times over, finally resulting in what you now call the Bible.

[matt1]

Those letters from Paul were not the Bible
My point remains
at that time they were listening to Paul and the Apostles verbally and yes, some of them, not all of them, could read his letters
Those letters were written to churches that had been established
Paul showed up to many different areas that were not evangelized and they accepted the preaching and works of the Apostles
For the Majority of people could not read at that time
Nor were his epistles made available to everyone
There was no printing press

[AVZ]

Those letters from Paul were not the Bible
My point remains
at that time they were listening to Paul and the Apostles verbally and yes, some of them, not all of them, could read his letters
Those letters were written to churches that had been established
Paul showed up to many different areas that were not evangelized and they accepted the preaching and works of the Apostles
For the Majority of people could not read at that time

You are confirming my point. Early Christians accepted the preaching and works of the Apostles.
As I said "...take a man's word for it and required more than just an apostle telling them something"

You are forcing the concept of the present Bible on the early Chirstians.
As far as the early Christians were concerned, their access to the various letters served the same purpose as your present day Bible.

Furthermore, would you say that in countries today where illiterate people unable to read the Bible, but it is read to them by for example priests, we can claim that these people do not have a Bible?

Finally, what makes you assume your present day Bible is complete? Would it be possible that in the future, other yet unknown manuscripts could be found that could potentially be additions to the Bible as you know it?
Would that then be a reason for people in the future to claim that you had no Bible?

[Lively Stone]

Early Christians listened to the teaching of the Apostles
Not the Bible (they didnt have one)
Meaning they didnt listen to the Apostles and say, let me open to John 6 and see if that is Biblical

You are incorrect.
Almost immediately in church history the early chirstians received written accounts from the apostles.
If you read the letters from Paul, you will see that on various occasions Paul urges the churches to compare the spoken word of the various apostles against the letters witten by them, to measure, compare and learn the truth in the gospels preached.

If you think the early Christians were the illiterate underbelly of society depending on tradition alone, you are quite wrong.
Many of them were well educated and well positioned people who wouldn't take a man's word for it and required more than just an apostle telling them something.
Hence the survival of the apostolic letters, copied many times over, finally resulting in what you now call the Bible.

Correct! 

[matt1]

If the letters were known to be Scripture
Amazing!  which ones?
There were hundreds if not thousands of letters and Documents from and about the Apostles and leaders of the Church at that time
a tiny few of them made it to the Canon
there were more than twenty Gospels, only four made it
You mean to tell me the people at that time knew which ones were what we presently call the word of God and which were not?
Cmon! you're smarter than that.

Also, if new Scriptures come out, the Church has no right to add them to the Bible, the Canon is Closed.
Something Martin Luther decided he could add to and tear out.
What a great guy you have as the inventor of the SoloScriptura and faith alone Doctrine, and the founder of the Reformation.

[chosenone]

With reference to the title of the post "catholics are not Christian", I dont believe that at all, but what I do believe is that the RC church is full of unbiblical teaching and practises, many of which are verging on heretical. I also pray that many will see this and come out of the RC church(as many have done). I can never understand how you cant see all of this, it clear as day. Maybe you just dont want to see it?

[AVZ]

With reference to the title of the post "catholics are not Christian", I dont believe that at all, but what I do believe is that the RC church is full of unbiblical teaching and practises, many of which are verging on heretical. I also pray that many will see this and come out of the RC church(as many have done). I can never understand how you cant see all of this, it clear as day. Maybe you just dont want to see it?

Actually in many countries Catholics do not classify themselves as "Christian"

[Lively Stone]

With reference to the title of the post "catholics are not Christian", I dont believe that at all, but what I do believe is that the RC church is full of unbiblical teaching and practises, many of which are verging on heretical. I also pray that many will see this and come out of the RC church(as many have done). I can never understand how you cant see all of this, it clear as day. Maybe you just dont want to see it?

Yes, I don't go so far as to label Cathoilics non-Christian, but many of their beliefs are, and I have to wonder what that cancels out in the eyes of the Father. Every great believer I know who was Catholic at one time---that is a lot of people---have said that they never really met Jesus Christ in all their years of being in the Catholic religion, and that once they met Him, He directed them out.

[LightHammer]

With reference to the title of the post "catholics are not Christian", I dont believe that at all, but what I do believe is that the RC church is full of unbiblical teaching and practises, many of which are verging on heretical. I also pray that many will see this and come out of the RC church(as many have done). I can never understand how you cant see all of this, it clear as day. Maybe you just dont want to see it?

Actually in many countries Catholics do not classify themselves as "Christian"

Name one country.

[AVZ]

With reference to the title of the post "catholics are not Christian", I dont believe that at all, but what I do believe is that the RC church is full of unbiblical teaching and practises, many of which are verging on heretical. I also pray that many will see this and come out of the RC church(as many have done). I can never understand how you cant see all of this, it clear as day. Maybe you just dont want to see it?

Actually in many countries Catholics do not classify themselves as "Christian"

Name one country.

Philippines

[LightHammer]

With reference to the title of the post "catholics are not Christian", I dont believe that at all, but what I do believe is that the RC church is full of unbiblical teaching and practises, many of which are verging on heretical. I also pray that many will see this and come out of the RC church(as many have done). I can never understand how you cant see all of this, it clear as day. Maybe you just dont want to see it?

Actually in many countries Catholics do not classify themselves as "Christian"

Name one country.

Philippines

SECURING OUR MORAL HERITAGE: TOWARDS A MORAL SOCIETY
A Statement from the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Phillippines.

To plan our families is, indeed, a Christian value and responsibility. This is why we support the couple's desire for the planning and proper spacing of their children through natural family planning programs in our dioceses. A contraceptive-oriented population control program is not the moral way.

Here's another from the Catholic bishops in the Phillipines.

Homily on Trinity Sunday June 1, 2012. Exegetical Reflection on the Gospel of Matthew 28:16-20
Monsignor Lope Robredillo 

The classical formulation of the doctrine was framed in the language of Greek philosophy which, unfortunately, is beyond the understanding of most of us. The consequence is that the doctrine emerged as something foreign to the daily life of Christians, appearing as it does as a mathematical problem to be solved. Of course, the dogmatic formula is a necessary, given the culture and world view of the time; but this does not prevent us from going back to the biblical understanding to see it relevance to our practical life as Christians.

Care to try another country?

[AVZ]

With reference to the title of the post "catholics are not Christian", I dont believe that at all, but what I do believe is that the RC church is full of unbiblical teaching and practises, many of which are verging on heretical. I also pray that many will see this and come out of the RC church(as many have done). I can never understand how you cant see all of this, it clear as day. Maybe you just dont want to see it?

Actually in many countries Catholics do not classify themselves as "Christian"

Name one country.

Philippines

To plan our families is, indeed, a Christian value and responsibility. This is why we support the couple's desire for the planning and proper spacing of their children through natural family planning programs in our dioceses. A contraceptive-oriented population control program is not the moral way.

SECURING OUR MORAL HERITAGE: TOWARDS A MORAL SOCIETY
A Statement from the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Phillippines.

The classical formulation of the doctrine was framed in the language of Greek philosophy which, unfortunately, is beyond the understanding of most of us. The consequence is that the doctrine emerged as something foreign to the daily life of Christians, appearing as it does as a mathematical problem to be solved. Of course, the dogmatic formula is a necessary, given the culture and world view of the time; but this does not prevent us from going back to the biblical understanding to see it relevance to our practical life as Christians.

Homily on Trinity Sunday June 1, 2012. Exegetical Reflection on the Gospel of Matthew 28:16-20
Monsignor Lope Robredillo

Care to try another country?

Yep, Indonesia

[AVZ]

Let me elaborate.

In particular when I travel trough Asia-Pacific, many times I have to fill in church visitor forms, country entry cards and other (semi)official documentation.
Almost without exception when these documents ask for religion, the following options are available:

a. Catholic
b. Christian
c. Muslim
d. Hinduism
e. Other.........

So, if you are a Catholic...which option do you check?

[LightHammer]

Let me elaborate.

In particular when I travel trough Asia-Pacific, many times I have to fill in church visitor forms, country entry cards and other (semi)official documentation.
Almost without exception when these documents ask for religion, the following options are available:

a. Catholic
b. Christian
c. Muslim
d. Hinduism
e. Other.........

So, if you are a Catholic...which option do you check?

I can't read Indonesian which is what the Conference of Indonesian Bishops use on their website. I decided to use the Western Australia Indonesian Catholic Community but when I went to post my reply verifying that they identify themselves as Christian I saw that you have posted this.

The standards of government entry cards are irrelevant to the intial claim you made. All Catholics identify themselves as Christians. All of them. A man in my parish of predominant African Americans is from the phillippines and he does not hesitate to define his Christian identity so that one was relatively simple to debunk.

Whetehr or not the goverments you work make the distinction is truly irrelevant to me. You tried to claim that Catholics in others countires do noy identify themselves as Christian and that is false. Just because they are forced by way of some stupid entry form to get specific about being Catholic does not mean that they view the Catholic Church as something apart from Christianity.

On the contrary if they are proud and faithful Catholics they know that Catholic Christianity is the only true Christianity with all others Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian Church of the East, Armenian and Protestant all being off shoots that can't compare.

[AVZ]

Let me elaborate.

In particular when I travel trough Asia-Pacific, many times I have to fill in church visitor forms, country entry cards and other (semi)official documentation.
Almost without exception when these documents ask for religion, the following options are available:

a. Catholic
b. Christian
c. Muslim
d. Hinduism
e. Other.........

So, if you are a Catholic...which option do you check?

I can't read Indonesian which is what the Conference of Indonesian Bishops use on their website. I decided to use the Western Australia Indonesian Catholic Community but when I went to post my reply verifying that they identify themselves as Christian I saw that you have posted this.

The standards of government entry cards are irrelevant to the intial claim you made. All Catholics identify themselves as Christians. All of them. A man in my parish of predominant African Americans is from the phillippines and he does not hesitate to define his Christian identity so that one was relatively simple to debunk.

Whetehr or not the goverments you work make the distinction is truly irrelevant to me. You tried to claim that Catholics in others countires do noy identify themselves as Christian and that is false. Just because they are forced by way of some stupid entry form to get specific about being Catholic does not mean that they view the Catholic Church as something apart from Christianity.

On the contrary if they are proud and faithful Catholics they know that Catholic Christianity is the only true Christianity with all others Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian Church of the East, Armenian and Protestant all being off shoots that can't compare.

If you read my post correctly you see that I included church visitor forms.
Remind me to scan you a few samples during my upcoming trip.

Alternatively you can also ask and confirm with your Philippino colleague that the general indicator for Catholics = Catholics and Protestants = Christian in Asia-Pacific.

[LightHammer]

Let me elaborate.

In particular when I travel trough Asia-Pacific, many times I have to fill in church visitor forms, country entry cards and other (semi)official documentation.
Almost without exception when these documents ask for religion, the following options are available:

a. Catholic
b. Christian
c. Muslim
d. Hinduism
e. Other.........

So, if you are a Catholic...which option do you check?

I can't read Indonesian which is what the Conference of Indonesian Bishops use on their website. I decided to use the Western Australia Indonesian Catholic Community but when I went to post my reply verifying that they identify themselves as Christian I saw that you have posted this.

The standards of government entry cards are irrelevant to the intial claim you made. All Catholics identify themselves as Christians. All of them. A man in my parish of predominant African Americans is from the phillippines and he does not hesitate to define his Christian identity so that one was relatively simple to debunk.

Whetehr or not the goverments you work make the distinction is truly irrelevant to me. You tried to claim that Catholics in others countires do noy identify themselves as Christian and that is false. Just because they are forced by way of some stupid entry form to get specific about being Catholic does not mean that they view the Catholic Church as something apart from Christianity.

On the contrary if they are proud and faithful Catholics they know that Catholic Christianity is the only true Christianity with all others Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian Church of the East, Armenian and Protestant all being off shoots that can't compare.

If you read my post correctly you see that I included church visitor forms.
Remind me to scan you a few samples during my upcoming trip.

Alternatively you can also ask and confirm with your Philippino colleague that the general indicator for Catholics = Catholics and Protestants = Christian in Asia-Pacific.

That sounds like a distinction made by Protestants whereas your claim seemed to suggest that Catholics do not identify themselves as Christians which I believe I have adequately proven is not the case.

[AVZ]

Let me elaborate.

In particular when I travel trough Asia-Pacific, many times I have to fill in church visitor forms, country entry cards and other (semi)official documentation.
Almost without exception when these documents ask for religion, the following options are available:

a. Catholic
b. Christian
c. Muslim
d. Hinduism
e. Other.........

So, if you are a Catholic...which option do you check?

I can't read Indonesian which is what the Conference of Indonesian Bishops use on their website. I decided to use the Western Australia Indonesian Catholic Community but when I went to post my reply verifying that they identify themselves as Christian I saw that you have posted this.

The standards of government entry cards are irrelevant to the intial claim you made. All Catholics identify themselves as Christians. All of them. A man in my parish of predominant African Americans is from the phillippines and he does not hesitate to define his Christian identity so that one was relatively simple to debunk.

Whetehr or not the goverments you work make the distinction is truly irrelevant to me. You tried to claim that Catholics in others countires do noy identify themselves as Christian and that is false. Just because they are forced by way of some stupid entry form to get specific about being Catholic does not mean that they view the Catholic Church as something apart from Christianity.

On the contrary if they are proud and faithful Catholics they know that Catholic Christianity is the only true Christianity with all others Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian Church of the East, Armenian and Protestant all being off shoots that can't compare.

If you read my post correctly you see that I included church visitor forms.
Remind me to scan you a few samples during my upcoming trip.

Alternatively you can also ask and confirm with your Philippino colleague that the general indicator for Catholics = Catholics and Protestants = Christian in Asia-Pacific.

That sounds like a distinction made by Protestants whereas your claim seemed to suggest that Catholics do not identify themselves as Christians which I believe I have adequately proven is not the case.

This includes Catholic Church visitor forms. Yes, FYI I do attend catholic services.

[LightHammer]

Let me elaborate.

In particular when I travel trough Asia-Pacific, many times I have to fill in church visitor forms, country entry cards and other (semi)official documentation.
Almost without exception when these documents ask for religion, the following options are available:

a. Catholic
b. Christian
c. Muslim
d. Hinduism
e. Other.........

So, if you are a Catholic...which option do you check?

I can't read Indonesian which is what the Conference of Indonesian Bishops use on their website. I decided to use the Western Australia Indonesian Catholic Community but when I went to post my reply verifying that they identify themselves as Christian I saw that you have posted this.

The standards of government entry cards are irrelevant to the intial claim you made. All Catholics identify themselves as Christians. All of them. A man in my parish of predominant African Americans is from the phillippines and he does not hesitate to define his Christian identity so that one was relatively simple to debunk.

Whetehr or not the goverments you work make the distinction is truly irrelevant to me. You tried to claim that Catholics in others countires do noy identify themselves as Christian and that is false. Just because they are forced by way of some stupid entry form to get specific about being Catholic does not mean that they view the Catholic Church as something apart from Christianity.

On the contrary if they are proud and faithful Catholics they know that Catholic Christianity is the only true Christianity with all others Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian Church of the East, Armenian and Protestant all being off shoots that can't compare.

If you read my post correctly you see that I included church visitor forms.
Remind me to scan you a few samples during my upcoming trip.

Alternatively you can also ask and confirm with your Philippino colleague that the general indicator for Catholics = Catholics and Protestants = Christian in Asia-Pacific.

That sounds like a distinction made by Protestants whereas your claim seemed to suggest that Catholics do not identify themselves as Christians which I believe I have adequately proven is not the case.

This includes Catholic Church visitor forms. Yes, FYI I do attend catholic services.

Feel free to scan and upload a copy of that. In any event I think I provided enough to dispel the idea that Catholics in other countries think of themselves as not being Christian.

[matt1]

Ive never heard of such an amusing claim

[DaveW]

Alternatively you can also ask and confirm with your Philippino colleague that the general indicator for Catholics = Catholics and Protestants = Christian in Asia-Pacific.

And what do they do with Messianic Jews?

[DaveW]

On the contrary if they are proud and faithful Catholics they know that Catholic Christianity is the only true Christianity with all others Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian Church of the East, Armenian and Protestant all being off shoots that can't compare.

Are you kidding me LH?  History proves the Catholics (alegience to Rome) broke from the Orthodox and not the other way around.

I can make just as good a case for Orthodoxy breaking off from Messianic Judaism and MJ being the true original New Covenant faith.

[matt1]

The Bishop of Rome as been the head of the Church since earlier than the reign of Pope linus 67 AD
The Church Fathers spoke of the leadership that the Bishop of Rome had over the early flock
The Orthodox Churches accept the early councils
They split from Rome and broke a tradition that had been practiced hitherto
Therefore, they split, but they are Catholic in almost every sense of the word if you look at their Doctrines and belief about the seven Sacraments
They also have Apostolic Succession and believe in Scripture and Church Tradition

[mclees8]

 Mati states   There was far more unity in Christendom before the reformation.


Mike > before the reformation the only unity the people knew was salvation was adherence to the religous authority. They knew litttle about personal faith and salvation through Jesus.

[DaveW]

The Bishop of Rome as been the head of the Church since earlier than the reign of Pope linus 67 AD
The Church Fathers spoke of the leadership that the Bishop of Rome had over the early flock

Some did - mostly to the west.  The eastern believers did not see Rome as supreme.

The Orthodox Churches accept the early councils

Of course they do as they were the ones who called them.

They split from Rome and broke a tradition that had been practiced hitherto

More to the point, the western churches with one patriarch broke off of the eastern churches with several patriarchs.

[HRoberson]

There was far more unity in Christendom before the reformation.

Well, there was that small disturbance in 1056, and then there were those councils before that. And well, the Reformation didn't just appear on the scene out of whole cloth.

No, I'm not even sure the whole Papal doctrinal supremacy thing was really accepted all that much.

Then we have Marcion and his followers, Pelagius, Origen, and well, a host of others. And then all that enlisting of police and military folk to oust priests and bishops over and over again. Yeah, I'm thinking....

Not quite as united as we sometimes like to assert.

[HRoberson]

The Bishop of Rome as been the head of the Church since earlier than the reign of Pope linus 67 AD

Depends on what you mean by "head." There is quite a bit of evidence that the idea was simply ceremonial and advisory; not juridical.

The Church Fathers spoke of the leadership that the Bishop of Rome had over the early flock.

Yes; again, depending on what you mean by that term. There was that joint anathema nastiness which, if your assertion is true, would not; could not have happened.

The Orthodox Churches accept the early councils.

More so than Rome, in fact.

They split from Rome and broke a tradition that had been practiced hitherto.

This depends on which side you're on. The EO will say that the Roman bishop's assumption of juridical authority was not Tradition, and that the calling of a Western council to modify a creed agreed to in an actual ecumenical council was not over nice of Rome.

Therefore, they split, but they are Catholic in almost every sense of the word if you look at their Doctrines and belief about the seven Sacraments.

Actually, they claim to be the real church. Rome is a sideshow that reaps what she deserves. Protestantism is considered by the EO to be a particularly Roman problem. It develops naturally from the Roman bishop assuming he's in charge. Imagine that! That's what all those Protestants do!

They also have Apostolic Succession and believe in Scripture and Church Tradition.

There are a number of denominations that claim AS, for what it's worth.

[kensington]

I have to note, that in the OP it is stated that Catholics world wide out number all other denoms put together.

But, then goes on to note that they are filled with priests and those who dispise the word.

That being said.... probably then... more Catholics are just sinners with a lable than all of the other denoms where people are truely walking with the Lord.

Conclusion... there may be more Catholics on the roll than other denoms. But, there other denoms have more on the roll who are actually saved.

That may just be me... based on what I witness of all religious people. 

Of the Catholics I know ...  there are those who are living in fornication, drunkeness, having abortions, homosexuality, liars, thieves.  That is not error in dogma eithre... that is those openly living in sin.

For the other denoms, I see them either walking out their faith, or walking away. Not living on the fence and doing both. Not living openly gay and going to church on Sunday where it's said to be a sin. (Thus I don't mean churches that embrace homosexuality).

So, roll call for roll call, I'd say the "other denoms" have it on how many of their numbers are actually walking with the Lord. I've even started to think that the few Catholics I see here who appear to be faithful to the Lord... may be the only ones I have actually met who do. 

[matt1]

"Catholics despise the word of God"

The Catholic Church put together the Christian Bible.
The Catholic Church was the first Church to Call the Bible the "Word of God".
We have greater revrence for Scripture than any other book.  At any given hour of the day, thousands of masses are said throughout the world.

If you went to daily mass you would hear the entire Bible from Genesis to revelation read out loud over and over again.  
After each reading we say "the word of the Lord, thanks be to God"  "The Gospel of the Lord, praise to you Lord Jesus Christ"
We dont say "the word of the Lord" when reading any other Document including the Catechism or Papal encyclicals
We have greater reverence for the Bible than any other writting
If you say Catholics despise the word, than that means we despise Papal encyclicals and the writtings of the Saints even more, because the Church has greatest reverence for the word of God,
over all other books/writtings
We read Scripture throughout the Mass.  We dont read the Catechism or the life of the Saints.
Maybe occasionally during the Homily a priest might do that, but it is rare, and not in the Liturgy.

If A priest despises the word he must really hate the mass
The majority of the Liturgy in any given mass is direct quotes from the Bible
Sorry, People who make a comment like "the Catholic Church despises the Word" have no clue what they talk about.

Yes there are Catholics who despise the word just like there are a great deal of Catholics who despise the Church and push for contraception, abortion, gay marriage, Socialism, and there are many Catholics who reject the Eucharist and the teachings on the rest of the Sacraments.

It is a mystery why they dont just join another denomination
Oh I know, they want to Change the Church, they want it to compromise and become liberal and immoral, so they remain Catholic to destroy the Church from within

They know they can do more damage to the Church if they remain inside
Communists have actually gotten thousands of atheists to go through seminary and become priests and Bishops to destroy the faith from within.
The answer to why there is so much Scandal in the Church is simple, the Devil hates the Church.
Jesus spoke of the many wicked shepards who would get control of the flock
We should expect all kinds of problems because the Devil prowls like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour.

[matt1]

Well you say there are a number of Churches that Claim Apostolic succession
they can claim it all they want
in the 1 2 3 4 5th... centuries there were no seventh day adventists, Baptists, assembly of God's, presbytyrians, Lutherans, Episcopalians, Trinitarians....etc

Them trying to prove apostolic sucession is like me trying to Historically prove that Napolean existed before Alexander the great

No evidence, just a claim
Catholicism has thousands of documented writtings from early Christians and Bishops about what the Church believed
They had the Sacraments of the Catholic Church.
Our Episcopal ordination can trace itself back to the first century as well as the Papacy

The world book encyclopedia states that the Papacy and the Church date back to the time of Christ
There is a list of every pope after peter that existed and the years he was in office
The WB encyclopedia is not a Catholic book

They just know historical facts and aren't ashamed to state them

[AVZ]

The world book encyclopedia states that the Papacy and the Church date back to the time of Christ

Can you please advise page or section of WBE where this is listed?
Even better if you could post that part of the WBE here.

[Lively Stone]

IMHO, Catholicism is not even a denomination. It really is an entire religion unto itself.

[Lively Stone]

"Catholics despise the word of God"

The Catholic Church put together the Christian Bible.
The Catholic Church was the first Church to Call the Bible the "Word of God".
We have greater revrence for Scripture than any other book.  At any given hour of the day, thousands of masses are said throughout the world.

Yet, it is clear that most Catholics lack a basic understanding of the Bible, and when shown how their traditions and many matters of faith defy the word of God, they rationalize and ignore the correction in favour of extra-biblical thinking and teaching. How strange is that?

If you went to daily mass you would hear the entire Bible from Genesis to revelation read out loud over and over again.  

You can listen to the word in your car, but you meed to read it yourself and study it and have it taught by Spirit-led teachers.

After each reading we say "the word of the Lord, thanks be to God"  "The Gospel of the Lord, praise to you Lord Jesus Christ"

Vain repetitions are meaningless for most.

We have greater reverence for the Bible than any other writting

I have not witnessed that.

If you say Catholics despise the word, than that means we despise Papal encyclicals and the writtings of the Saints even more, because the Church has greatest reverence for the word of God,
over all other books/writtings

Again, I have not witnessed that.

The answer to why there is so much Scandal in the Church is simple, the Devil hates the Church.

Actually, this is what is going on:

Numbers 32:23b
...then take note, you have sinned against the Lord; and be sure your sin will find you out.