If Protestants are going to quote the Catechism of the Catholic Church, can they find Protestant beliefs?

This protestant has an honest reason. He sees the heresy and contradiction in the CCC. He quotes Paragraph 868, to him it is a truth.

Paragraph 819, the Protestant knows, is something he knows Novus Ordo catholics are not supposed to believe but there it is, in all its Apostolic glory. He knows that they don't hold it to be true, and it is against their new doctrine of Vatican II, but there it is.

The Protestant remembers when Catholics respected Pope Pius XII. And all the popes before him. It isn't his thinking, but he knows that no one would call those people uncatholic. What about today? Do they even know about popes before Vatican II?

The Protestant knows the CCC where contradicts itself. It states the opposite in Par. 868, which IS their new doctrine, one of false ecumenism and religious liberty, he, the Protestant, holds to be true, and THIS is against the Doctrine of Christ in Par. 819. The Protestant knows which doctrine can be found in any Manual of Apologetics, the kind of book these CCC people will never dare pick up and read. He has studied Patristics, and he knows. Christ's Doctrine puts an anathema on the false ecumenism and religious liberty.

It is to the Protestant's credit that he can point to the real doctrine, which for him is heresy, but for the True Church it is not. This Protestant knows the Doctrine of the Catholic Church and he is obviously smarter than the Novus Ordo who are reading the words in Paragraph 819 and don't understand them.

Protestants claim that popes can become heretics. Catholic Doctrine agrees. It is the Novus Ordo of Vatican II who deny it. No one ever claimed that a pope cannot become a heretic. In fact, the Canons of the Church provide the punishment for such a pope should he happen to commit heresy. It is that he is removed from office, and the chair is vacant. Sede Vacante, chair empty. This has now happened five times since 1958. There have been no legitimate popes since Pope Pius XII, a sainted pope. Is there anything in the bible that can tell us how many more of these imposters we have to endure before they are all kicked out? Protestants, you probably have the insight to know. Can you tell them?

Protestants! Help these Novus Ordo to return to Catholicism. As it is, they don't even make it as Protestants. They are Roman Protestants, with a mixture of any doctrine.

No Salvation Outside the Church. This is a de fide dogma, established by the previous popes of the past to which the Novus Ordo heretical church no longer obeys. Paragraph 819 is a perfect example of the heresy of the pope who wrote the encyclical on "Ecumenism" and "Religious Liberty," both heresies against the True Church. Many Catholics are still alive, raising their children to be True Catholics, in an era when there is no present Vicar of Christ.

Catholics belong to that Catholic Church of Pope Pius XII. Do any of you dare to not call them Catholic? The Church in hiding is found in private chapels around the world, not SSPX or any other such anagrams, but by individual valid priests who would not have anything to do with the heresy of Vatican II and the heretical church it spawned.

If anyone wants to know the REAL Catechism of the Church, the one that the Protestant KNOWS says what it is supposed to say, and is what Catholics believe, it is the Catechism of Trent, or of the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, the Baltimore Catechism. Vatican II will have nothing to do with THESE catechisms.

2009-02-24T13:58:09Z

The devil will get the faithful in “gates” on earth. They will fail. The Church can & will disappear on earth in the Latter Days & Christ shall not barely be able to find it. SS.Thomas, Augustine, Ireneus, Ignatius & Christ offered the Sacrifice "pro multis." It cannot be offered with any other words! David states that the "Evening Sacrifice, Body and Blood) shall fail." St. John says that the "evening sacrifice shall end." This is loss twice:1. valid Ordination Rite altered by Montini in 1967 invalidated it; 2. the substitution of "for all, pro omnibus," in 1967 cannot be found in scripture or in Patristic writings, not in Trent, nor in the Summa. Scripture says "Pro multis-for many." All Early Fathers are in agreement to all that "boring doctrine." One little word, the difference between heaven & hell. Heresy is had in one word, one drop of poison, not a truckload! You deny changes? It is not heresy to observe that a pope who does so has defected. Christ's Word stays same

2009-02-24T14:08:07Z

To those who say they were "duly" elected as popes. Elections themselves do not prove validity of the candidates qualities. These are two different venues. While the election followed the "rules,” the candidate was unqualified. His open heresies were printed in the Bulgarian newspapers, he supported what he said, never recanted, was proud to align himself with Communists and atheists, calling them "christians" and "brothers" and openly blessed their beliefs as equal to Christ's teaching. Go and read.

To those who are bored with Catholicism. It is a glorious Faith, and its demise has been a hundred years coming, not of a mere recent 50 years. Pope Pius IX warned us at Vatican Council. Pope Pius X spoke of the coming "remodernizing" of doctrine. They condemned it. We are not surprised at the demise, only that it is in our day. There will not be "two" Latter Days. There will not be "two" evening sacrifices to "fail." It will only happen once.

2009-02-24T14:08:46Z

To those who do not read well. A plural of any word does not mean "all." It seems you understand a universal term when you want to. Why can't you understand that "for many" cannot mean "for all?"

To those who quote Titus. Get a Douay Rheims. Then use a Haydock to understand your text. It would be quite a feat to call someone uncatholic who holds with the full Dogma of the Catholic Church, every Council,
every de fide encyclical, and who has lived and believed as a Catholic for ?? years! Try and do it with some dogmatic proof. Find me a doctrine that I do not believe! Then get a Baltimore or Douay or Trent catechism
and begin your knowledge. Isaiah: "My people are lost for want of knowledge."

To those who whine about doctrine and doctrine. The Baltimore Catechism is a mere whisp of a book, understood clearly by third graders. Buck up. You can do it.

2009-02-24T14:09:58Z

To the person who was able to perceive that in order to be Catholic, one is forced to the position due to the evidence, that the chair is empty. This may be shocking to you, because you have BEEN TOLD such a thing is shocking. Who told that to you? It is not shocking in the Enchiridion Symbolorum or in the Canon Law of 1917. Is it shocking? Why should it be? Even scripture shows that Christ said to Peter "get thee behind Me."
These words were the removal of Peter from the papacy because Peter spoke heresy, "This, shall not happen to thee!" Crucifixion, however, was a belief, a de fide belief, which Peter denied. In the next moment Peter
repented his heresy. We know he did, for he became the first head bishop of the Church. A heretic can be reformed. There is a cure for the sin of heresy. It is to repent the heresy. Are you all listening? Out there in Steubenville? And EWTN?

Anonymous2009-02-24T07:41:09Z

Favorite Answer

My wife and I belong to Pius X. We do not subscribe to the Novus Ordo.
We used the Catechism of Trent. The Mass has been changed in that the words of Consecration have been changed from: Hoc est enim corpus meum. This is my Body. At the Consecration of the Blood: This is the challis of my blood, which is shed for many Pro Multis. To: Which is shed for all men Pro Omnibus. Forgive my Latin, I have not used it in years.

Ed H2009-02-23T21:26:28Z

You forgot the gates of hell will not overcome the church and it includes after Pius XII. So why not relieve youself of the burden and let Peter be the leader? It is too much wieght. Seriously, you throw out a little and you loose the whole thing. The church will not make sense otherwise. Trent does not contradict anything in Vatican II. But you burden youself if you must be the scholar to unravel every little detail that only in appearance is contradictory. Come back.

skepsis2009-02-23T20:39:27Z

This sounds like the whining of a loser. Vatican II was convened by a duly elected, sitting pope, and its decisions are binding on the Roman Catholic Church. Dissenters who refuse to recognize those decisons excommunicate themselves. Asking Protestants to condemn Catholics who acknowledge Catholic teaching that says Protestantism can have " many elements of sanctification and of truth" is a bit counterintuitive. I don't see anyone buying into your rant.

john w2009-02-23T20:23:00Z

Is there a valid question here, or merely a rant againt the Novos Ordo Conciliar Church?

Anonymous2009-02-23T20:25:06Z

How will the non-Christian ever learn anything about Jesus Christ and the power of God for salvation when you pile doctrine upon doctrine, dispute upon dispute until there is nothing but confusion and the unchurched world turns it's back on the mess we've made?

Show more answers (3)