Numerous corrupt popes...

Explain to me how the Catholic Church is the Church of Christ again?

This is for genuine discussion though I don't mean to come off as attacking I just want to know given the fact that the Roman Catholic Church has had such a corrupt history and at times has acted like the Islam of Christianity, Sometimes it really does seem the Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon, how do you reconcile this with your faith?

Watch the mods delete this one.

Attached: 68429.jpg (700x394, 192.31K)

Other urls found in this thread:

Humans are fallible. The Church remains.

As St. Jerome says, barely one in a hundred priests behaved in a manor befitting the infinite dignity of their office. Were the Israelites or are the protestants any better?

Wouldn't you expect the Church to be holy though? Yes we're all sinners, but as Christians we ought to be transformed by Christ, we should be substantially different from the world as it was in times past (that includes the evils of Israel) since we were chosen out of the world. We shall be known by our fruits, and a false prophet cannot bear good fruit.

You know Muslims often say the same thing about their religion "Oh well humans are fallible. Islam remains." It sounds like a cop out. Once again, good fruit and bad fruit. The Catholic Church repeatedly time and time again gives off more bad fruit than good.

And the thing is, these aren't simple sins, these are major sins. Killings, sex abuse, persecutions. Time and time again too. And many times it's the upper level clergy encouraging or even participating in these things or at the very least not speaking up against them. At times it seems as if the whole Catholic Church is responsible.

Protestants and Orthodox have also done some pretty bad things, but not on the scale of the Catholic Church.

Mostly because they're not on the scale of the Catholic Church. Like wow, a Church that's 10x bigger has 10 x more scandals. You got us, breh.

Attached: giphy.gif (245x187, 716.3K)

Humans aren't infallible, none of these have gotten any praise from the Church either.

That was by no means a command from the Church itself.
Besides, they were just Jews :^)

Literally nothing wrong with this, and any protestant would've done the same seeing as how America was burning witches like nothing.

Implying that KJV-onlyists wouldn't burn anybody translating the bible himself.

They were not really forced to convert by violence, they could eitehr leave or convert.
Again, where is the problem here?

You mean the protestants right, or are you being retarded on purpose?

Pff yeah I know right? We could've been living on Mars right now if not for le ebil church…

Yes, and? :^) Also implying that protestants didn't do the same

So men are fallible, aight we get that.
By the way, how are those female gay priests going for you guys?

As if a protty would even care about orthodox, only to shit on catholics right.
Anyway it was more about ethnicity than religion, and Serbs did the same with others.
But hey the narrative right?

Funny how nothing of this has been approved by the Church and only done by fallible men.

Now we just writing fanfic but hey narrative.

No it doesn't. Gross exaggerations don't help your argument. The Catholic Church has done far more good for Europe than bad.


wtf i love the Southern Baptist Church now, time to go to my mega church to listen to Joel Osteen talk about his new private lear jet

Great argument, reminds me of my 3 year old cousin.

Chosen with the guidance of the Holy Spirit yes, but you can choose to ignore guidance.

It's funny though because whenever the prots did something stupid or were overtaken with corruption you'll point to it as proof that they're of Satan, but whenever you guys did anything shitty or are overtaken with corruption you'll just go

Attached: 1480332844180.jpg (420x614, 88.19K)

The issue is the nature of Catholicism compared to Protestantism.
Where the Catholic church is one giant organization that kind of has to take responsibility for any bad things committed in the past and all misdeeds of the clergy committed in any given country, as a Protestant you only worry about your small specific church and don't feel associated with anything outside of that.

Protestant churches are either completely independent or part of smaller (typically only national) conferences. On top of that, if your local church starts doing something you dislike (female priests, acceptance of homos…) or is associated with some kind of scandal, you can simply just leave and go find a new church next door. From that moment on, you feel like your denomination has absolutely nothing at all to do with what happened at that other church. If something happens at a certain church that is part of a national conferences, it can simply just be kicked out.
I also feel like a lot of Protestants don't take responsibility for some of the things their churches did throughout history.

The Catholic church though is very different. You can't just leave if you dislike the direction the church is going, at best you can find a traditional Latin mass but you are still part of that same body. If a scandal happens in a Catholic parish somewhere in Africa, they are still a part of the same church as a believer in the US.

I would say that the one somewhat legitimate complain you have, are the popes themselves. The idea that the successor to the Apostle Peter could be somebody you couldn't even call a Christian in good faith, throws serious shade at the entire organization. It's not just like they were "fallible men" but legitimately up there with some of the most evil kings.
And even if Catholics don't like to hear it, ultimately these men decide on the Catholic church's future. Once you accept John Henry Newman's idea of dogma as an acorn growing over time, why would it not be possible for that dogma to develop in a direction you dislike? Look at the current pope's comments on hell or Amoris laetitia, and you have to start wondering if you really want to commit yourself to where the Catholic church is going. These fallible men that are in charge of the church seem to be leading it into an awfully fallible direction.

Jesus didn't say "They're hypocrites so don't listen to them, go and create a new church", he said "observe whatever they tell you but do not copy their works". When Priests fail to live up to the faith that is on them, the Pope sits on the seat of St Peter so he must be listened to, but that doesn't mean you need to follow him off the edge of a cliff.

The gates of hell will not prevail against it and there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church. There is no point leaving unless you want to be damned, because no other Church can offer salvation.

Huh, so you admit you're basically the Pharisees now. Great, the first step towards a solution is acknowledging that you've become the people Jesus was firmly opposed to.

Jesus always acknowledge the authority of the Priestly caste even when they didn't practice the faith properly. He never said "If you don't like what they're saying just schism and make a new church". The only people Jesus would be opposed to would be the ones who think they can just leave the body of Christ and make their own denomination with beer and hookers whenever they decide that certain doctrine is inconvenient, namely Protestants

Not really I'm just saying that protestants did some massacres too.
OP was stating things that are also common in protestant churches but for narrative's sake only uses them to shit on the catholic Church.

Even as an Ortho
Half of what is listed here is retarded and made up

Despite the many Othos and Catholics on this board, I as a Catholic think you Orthos are alright, I would call you guys distant brothers.

But Christianity literally formed in direct opposition to the Pharisees and Sadducees, Jesus did start his own Church.

They didn't genocide indians so much as enslave them, but that was mostly just because they were Spanish

Jesus reformed Judaism to what God intended it to be. The Pharisees and Sadducees excommunicated themselves by their unwillingness to accept Jesus teachings. "Judaism" would later be reconstructed 500 years later by pulling the concept of the "oral torah" of their asses

The Spanish just screwed them into a new race. All killing was due to conflict, which I will admit, the Spanish kinda started. Still though, the natives were barbaric and the Spanish did them a favor by showing them Christ.

Yeah bro I agree, the Spanish turned them 100% Christian, that's why they all worship Santa Muerte today

The pope relaxing prohibitions on slavery helped

winnie the pooh off, Santa Muerte is a fringe movement and you know it.

Nowhere in Scripture does Christ promise that the reprobate will not be in His Church, however, He does affirm they will be separated from the elect on Judgement.

We have God's assurance His mercy (and thus, His authority) will always be with His Son, no matter how the seed of His Son falters.

Psalm 88: 27-35

You cant deny that Latin America is far better off regarding the faith than Protestant Europe, US

Not even a catholic, but nice meme
Lots of scientific pioneers were catholics including the father of modern genetics Gregor Mendel

Attached: Dark ages meme.png (640x5040, 923.05K)

Who could possibly be behind the fall of the Roman Empire

Attached: THE ETERNAL GERMAN.jpg (853x480, 88.13K)

Nice list of black legends, lack of context and even some discredited 17th century protestant propaganda.
I especially like the part about scientific advancement, fedora tier. Why don't you read what the Galielo trial was about?
Why don't you read who the cathars were?
Why don't you study who were the men of the first Crusade?

Why don't you actually study history instead of being a drone and mentioning things you know only surface level?

The Christ himself.

and this is the non-brainlet version

Attached: 1386090863857.png (1386x4653, 2.32M)

These. Are you me? These would have been my responses if you didn't beat me to them.

Non sequitur, the institution will only be so good as its members. Also some of the bad things you suggested in the OP is nonsense. Cathars and pagan Indians in the Americas are both incompatible forces, one of outright heresy, and the other of crude, civilization destroying animism.

Not a Catholic btw, just don't care about the liberal sob story version of history.


If you can find me one example of a KJV onlyist burning someone alive I’ll pray a rosary. No protestant has ever killed someone for translating the Bible

Attached: image.jpg (4032x3024, 2.02M)



The oral torah was a thing back in Jesus' day. Those are the traditions of the elders, which Jesus and his disciples are repeatedly breaking, unlike the actual laws of the written torah, which the scribes and pharisees would be teaching, when they sat in the seat of Moses (reading the scriptures to the people as commanded in deuteronomy 31:11)

The oral torah was written down as the mishnah in the two centuries after the destruction of the temple, but the traditions in it had been piling on and been taught by the rabbis at least for the 500 or so years since the return from the captivity in Babylon.
In that sense, the pharisees and sadducees would have excommunicated themselves by placing their own authority above the written word of God (making it void by their traditions; see Mark 7:13)

And yet, Dogma has never been corrupted. The substance of the Church has never changed as it is unchangable. Whether you want to admit that or not doesn't matter. Furthermore does the Grace flowing from the Sacraments not depend on the sin of the celebrant.

This thread is just meh.

Oh the Church itself did it and condoned it? Source pls.
Nothing wrong
Nothing wrong
Nothing wrong
Genocide? lel, it was done by the protestant US army
Nothing wrong
That is an issue.
Meme, muh 62 gazzilion serbs
That is an issue
Outright lie.


umm no sweety. Catholics are about 1 billion, protties 700 million and orthodox about 300 million.

Way more than that

How do you treat a deadly virus? Do you let it spread and let God judge the dead? Do you let a person who spreads heresy spread it around and send 10 people to hell or do you put him down before he can spread it?
Seriously, consider that question, would you choose to kill on person or let dozens of people go to hell?
And it's a moot point anyway, the protestant did the same amount of killing.

Can you show me where the Bible says to kill heretics? It just says to mark them.


And before you mention Matthew 13:30
When you can pluck op the cockle without damaging the wheat, there is no reason not to do it.

Which inerpretation of the Bible? Interpretation number 24125 of the reformed southeastern anabaptist true church of Christ?

Epic meme fellow le sir

Attached: IMG_3020.JPG (540x960, 43.18K)

Those things are not that bad, rest is horrendous of course.

Not really, but no one really cares about protestant sects in other regions unless it's something Jim Jones-tier, whilst news about the Catholic Church spread like wildfire.

Sooo… way does it say to execute them?

Really representing the love of Christ there, eh buddy?

Buddy, I’m hispanic and I absolutely have no care what the Spanish did to the natives. They might have done bad stuff, but in the end it was so they can see the light of Christ. The rest goes for what the other user says. As much as it’s better to peacefully convert someone, sometimes people don’t change. And we can’t just let them harm other Christians while they practice their barbaric beliefs.

Surely if the the Americas hadn't been conquered Christians around the globe would be being attacked by radical Nahuaist terrorists right now.

I never implied that, and if they never came the natives would never be Christian. Tell me user, are you really Christian? Or are you here to hate on Catholics?

Which one? South America is full on Native americans, and the colonists took indian wives etc. The only ones who were genocided (by protestants) live nowadays in reserves in North America.

Also 'forced' conversion, as if 500 Spaniards could bring down an Empire without the native population greatly supporting them.

Regardless of if or not, I don't think such methods would have been sanctioned by Jesus considering all that stuff he said about loving, casting the first stone, and dying by the sword.

My honest analysis of it is western Christendom turned really shitty around the time of colonialism through all the bitterness that was sown during the religious wars and natives got the short end of the stick by having received less tolerance for their native culture compared to peoples who were converted in previous ages who may have been able to integrate their culture into the religion more, not denying that Europeans did not see their share of brutality at the hands of Christian institutions or that some pre-Columbian traditions haven't survived either.

I have heard that Catholicism is a mixture of Babylonian paganism that was evident in Rome and Christianity.

Have you ever met a Catholic, been into a Catholic church, studied Christian history, read the Bible or read the Wikipedia entry on either Catholicism or Christianity?

The Atheist Commie?

Its basically people who want to make a political party out of Christianity. So, that's the kind of thing that results.

just putting this out here to kill this myth


We were brothers until 1054, broski.

wtf i'm a unitarian now

I sense anger in your tone, brother.

I'm also Orthodox. You're not our brothers in Christ, but servants of the devil, and heterodox. You do not have the Son, since you make Him out to be one with the Father, and offer Him as an unleavened sacrifice like the Jews's satanic meals. As such, you do not have the Father either.

Attached: unnamed(2).jpg (900x900, 65.98K)

Unis have the highest kill count

Attached: 72145DE4-BCD1-4393-B875-CA21A426A37F.jpeg (300x425, 57.5K)


You deny the Trinity, by adhering to the heresy of modalism, and making the Son cause of the Spirit like the Father is. Either the Son has the same hypostatic properties as the Father and so is the Father, either the spiration of the Spirit is an essential property and the Spirit spirates Himself too.

Using the same verses as the Sabellians do to support the same heresy, wonderful. Your blasphemes will judge you at the eschaton.

He should be banned for rule 3, not 2

You are offended that we believe the Son is equal with God and accuse us of Modalism for it, just like Arius
The Father and the Son are distinguished by the filiation of the Son, which does not apply to the Father, who instead begets.
The Father is not alone because He is love, but when love is alone it is narcissistic, so by nature in eternity past He begot the Son. But love is obsessive when it has but one other object, so by nature in eternity past they spirated the Spirit. Thus, the Spirit generates no one, because love is complete in God. It is not spiration which is essential, but the trinity that is an essential property. It wasn't what you seem to believe, that the Father is above and beyond the Son and the Holy Spirit, and at some point chose to create them, but all three exist by nature. The trinity as an essential attribute proves the double procession of the Spirit because the only difference between generation and spiration is that the former is immediate, the latter mediate. If the Spirit does not proceed from the Father and the Son, He would not be the Spirit, because there would be no difference between Him and the Son.

the first Eucharist was unleavened. Matthew 26:26 describes a passover meal.

christian server

discord gg/Xw4V7Jb


Nah they just killed Catholics for not translating the bible.

That aside these threads are rather pointless the energy you are expending is energy you could be using to pray to our lord and savior. In that way we are all sinner because we put arguing semantics and old grudges over our Lord God.

Relax, bro, it was just a prank. Just like Christianity you like so much.

James C. Russell-The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity_ A Sociohistorical Approach to Religious Transformation-Oxford University Press, USA (1994).pdf

Attached: a2e4bb7b4ac11464009d2822b514c9a1665051b093a1894226da48bfb76dab2b.gif (314x500 322.51 KB, 34.97K)

Of course I cannot find an example.
By the time this denomination existed lynching was long gone.
I'll still bet 100 ETH that given the power Steven Anderson-tier people will ban the production of other translations and put sanctions on doing it.

So…what about the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches?
We share about the same values yet no contact with the Germanic tribes was every made except for some raids and mercenary activities.
I also struggle to remember any values we didn't have pre-10th century that the Germanics did and suddenly got integrated.

One of the things that gave me a good push towards Catholicism was the nastiness of this meme. Thank you for reminding me.

Attached: earliest known depiction of Mary, 2nd century.jpg (592x696, 97.82K)

Attached: 1432783647234.gif (500x302, 483.86K)