Difference between christian and catholic

I feel really stupid asking this, because I actually went to a Catholic school. I just didn't get taught much religion. I don't understand the basic difference between Christian and Catholic. Anyone care to explain?

Catholics are just one type of Christian, just as Baptists, Presbyterians, Orthodox, Methodists, Anglican, Lutheran, Brethren, etc

This was discussed two months ago:

http://www.funadvice.com/q/...

non-catholics are allowed to use condems...

The main difference between Catholics and all those other denominations, is that most of them got started up during or after the Protestant Reformation. Prior to that, there was the Catholic Church and a few renegade sects (like the Gnostics). But pretty much everyone in Western Europe was Catholic until Martin Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and others got involved.

Today, Catholics continue to believe in things like the authority of the Pope, intercession of the saints, sanctity of the virgin Mary, necessity of baptism and the catechisms, and confession to priests. Very few Protestant denominations accept these doctrines, preferring personal interpretation of the Bible and salvation through faith alone rather than good works, which many Catholics believe are integral to salvation.

Another major difference is the Bible; most Protestant translations do not include the Apocrypha, while the Catholic Bible does.

The term Christian applies to all those believers who affirm the existence of the Trinity, the full divinity and full humanity of Christ Jesus, and the Sacrament of Baptism.

The term 'Catholic Church' uses the term 'catholic' which is the Latin word for universal. The earliest Christians used the term 'Catholic Church' in writing around the end of the 1st century (see letters of St. Ignatius of Antioch). It is meant to denote the communion of all believers: the 'one body' of Christ.

In the early centuries that followed, the Church adopted creeds in which all believers professed liturgically 'I believe in... The Holy Catholic Church' (baptism) and 'We believe in One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church' (Eucharistic Liturgy).

Most Christian ecclesial communities still profess a belief in the creeds. The institutional Church still lays claim to all four marks of the Church: oneness, holiness, catholicity and apostolicity.

While other Christian ecclesial communities also claim all four pillars, oneness and apostolicity seem to be questionable. Ever since the Reformation, Protestant groups have been splintering and spilliting off from each other over every piece of doctrine.

Along the same lines, the institutional Catholic Church has the historical ability to claim apostolicity in the form of 'apostolic succession.' The apostles (Jesus' closest followers) appointed succesors for themeselves to fulfill their mission of 'preaching the gospel to all nations' (Mt. 28:20; see Acts 1).

The successor to the office of St. Peter is the person we call the 'pope'. As the successor to St. Peter, he has the same guarantee that Christ gave to Peter: 'Amen I say to you Simon you are rock [peter] and upon this rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. Behold, I will give you the keys to the kingdom; whatever you bind of earth will be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.' (Mt. 16:17-19)

The pope and the bishops in union with him make up the 'magesterium,' which is the 'sacred teaching office of the Church'. It was under magisterial authority that the Church compiled the Sacred Scriptures during the first millenium. They also have the responsibilty of interpreting the Scriptures. There there was no authority in place to interperate the bible, then anyone could start a new Church based on their own interpretation of any 5 bible verses (which is exactly what happened after the Reformation)

In Short, the Catholicism is the 'original Church' that Christ founded on St. Peter. The other Christian communities broke off from that Church throughout the centuries.

If you have any questions, feel free to funmail me.

At its core, any set of believers that profess Jesus as Lord can be called Christian in the broadest sense of the term. Where Catholicism differs is in the specific beliefs that it espouses in contrast to other Christians.

Contrary to some of what has been said here, the Baptist faith is not a Protestant faith, but a descendant of the Anabaptists which were contemporaries.

In regards to the whole order of succession, there is no Biblical proof that Peter ever went to Rome, no established a church there. Since most of the Biblical text state that Jesus will come to reign on this Earth from Jerusalem, one wonders why Catholicism chose Rome.

Furthermore, there is all sorts of things that the Catholic church has done to hinder the cause of Christ-- everything from burning believers at the steak, to the inquisitions, to the selling of indulgences, state control, denying the priesthood of the believer, requiring chastity for priests, etc.

Basically it all goes back to a belief in the Bible + tradition, which can be changed at any time by fallible human beings.

The simplest explanation I can give is I've noticed that Cathloic people have all these man made rules that people have to follow,, with christians is soley based apon you and your relationship with God nothing else

confusedx0gurl - lol. good one.
can't quit giggling. christian rules are real, catholic rules are man made.
you are much funnier than I thought.
lol.

they are all man made.

aarthur01: Does someone have to believe in the trinity to be a Christian? The dogma of the trinity was basically voted into existance by the Nicean council in 325 CE. The Bible does not seem helpful to resolve this point. One can find passages that support the dogma of trinity and other passages that go against it.

Jehova Witnesses and Mormons don't believe in the trinity but are widely considered to be Christian. Some churches change the concept of trinity so much that it is quite different from that in the Nicean Creed.

Catholics believe in Jesus being the son of god, god, and the virgin Mary the only major diffrence is that we also worship the Virgin Mary

In response to filletofspam:

According to Christifideles Laici (a Post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation from John Paul 2) in order to claim the name Christian, one must believe in Christ Jesus, the Trinity, and be Baptized.

Based on that understanding, you are absolutely right that Catholic Church does not recognize members of either the LDS or Jehovah's witnesses as Christian. In fact, if we have converts from those groups who have been baptized, they need to be re-baptized because of the serious differences in theology.

(However, Vatican 2 recognized that it is possible for people of other faiths, including those named, to gain salvation, based on the merits of Christ Jesus, and depending on their state of knowledge and disposition at the time of death, see Lumen Gentium13-17).

As far as the doctrine of the Trinity is concerned, it is true that the Nicene Creed was not finished until of the Council of Constantinople in 381, however the doctrine of the trinity has been there since the beginning.

Christ's last command to his Apostles was go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19). Faithful to this command, the early Church always Baptized using this Trinitarian formula, and continues to confess that a baptism using any other formula is invalid.

In the Book Introduction to Christianity, Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) cites the early Christian practices recorded in the didache within the first 100 years after the resurrection, which reflect the use of the Trinitarian formula for baptism.

Based on the rite of Baptism the, Church adopted the Apostle's Creed as a confession in the belief in the Trinity. That creed was in full working order by the time of the council of Nicea in AD 325, and it was that creed that was exanded to make the modern day Nicene Creed.

In response to vv dhs 001:
We do not worship Mary. The Second Vatican council was outspoken about this point in the document Sacrosanctum Conciliorum (I think that it is the last paragraph, but I am not entirely sure).

We honor Mary as the Mother of God (Theotokos see Lk. 1:43; Gal 4:4). We believe that she, like all those who have died, has the power to pray for us in heaven, and their prayers are effective (see Mt. 22:32; Heb. 11:39-12:1; James 5:16-18).

We love Mary, we honor her, we ask her for prayers, but it is incorrect to say that we worship her.

If you look at the Church governing system set forth in the new testament No earthly headquarters Elders ( More than one in each congregation.) And elected leaders and Deacons as elected servents of their congragation, Each Congragation being self Governing. and the catholic governing system modeled after the roman empire. And many of your prodestant movements have an earthly headquarters no elders only Deacons.
Some have Instruments and a few don't.

I've never heard a jehovah witness claim to be a christian. . . .

I don't remember reading anywhere in the New Testament that the leaders were elected.

I know that Jesus chose his Apostles and sent them out. I know that Peter and the other Apostle's relied on a sign from the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:15-26). I know that God's gifts to Timothy was given through Paul's laying on of hands (2 Tim 1:6). According to St. Clement of Rome, the Apostle's chose succesors for themselves, to fulfill their mission.

aarthur001: what you are basically saying is that the Catholic church doesn't consider anyone Christian who denies the doctrine of trinity. While the Roman Catholic Church is the largest Christian church it can no more dictate what it means to be Christian than anyone else.

Even in your passage:

go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit

Note that 3 entities with 3 different purposes are listed. Father, son, holy spirit. I see no indication that the three are in fact one but that all three are important. Note that in John 14:28 that Jesus says that God is greater than himself. If they were all the same than how could any be greater?

In response to filletofspam:

You are correct in the implications of my statement. The Catholic Church doesn't consider anyone Christian who denies the doctrine of the Trinity.

However, you were incorrect in the statement that the passage I quoted has no indication that the 3 persons are in fact one entitiy. Reading it again, you may notice that the passage says to baptize in the NAME (rather than the names) of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Based on this passage, the Church has come to confess that God is in fact one God, whose name is: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

There are also other Scriptural passages that support the doctrine of the Trinity as the Church understands it. The one that I quoted is the most explicit example recorded from Christ himself that concisely uses the terminology Father, Son and, Holy Spirit.

In answer to your point about Jesus' statment that the Father is greater than I:
You are correct, that Jesus did in fact make that statement. In order to understand how that stament fits into the Catholic concept of the Trinity, we must review the Catholic concept of the Trinity.

God is all powerful; he knows runs and sustains the universe with more ease than I snap my finger. He infinitely knows himself and infinitely loves himself, and that knowledge and that love is so full, so rich and so complete that it is itself another person: God the Son, eternally begotten of the Father. It is as if God the Father is looking at himself in a mirror. There is nothing in the Son that was not in the Father, and there is nothing in the Father that the Son does not posses. Furthermore, the love that the Father pours out to the Son and the Son pours out to the Father is all-encompassing, and consists of everything that is in both the Father and the Son. That love is also so complete and so real that it constitutes another distinct person: God the Holy Spirit. The 3 of them together are one in subsance/being/essence. At the same time, they are truly distinct, because of their relationships to each other. Each is fully God, but each is distinct, and God in himself is all 3. This is called, the mystery of the hypostatic union.

Based on this understanding, is it correct to say that Jesus (fully God and fully man) can say, the Father is greater than I. The answer to that question is yes. Allow me to explain.

The Father is great, because he himself is the source of all goodness. Insofar as the Son comes from the Father, and the Father is the source of the Son, the Father is greater. One might say that the Father is like the quarter-back; he's the one calling the shots, because he is the source of the Son's intellect and will.

So the greatness of the Father exists in the primacy of his command.

At the same time however, because the Son is eternally begotten, and heir to everything that belongs to the Father, he has complete and total access to the Father's greatness, insofar as he does the Father's will in both perfect obedience (because he is distict) and also perfect freedom (because he is consubstantial with Father).

Furthermore, one can make the argument that the Son is subordinate to the Father because of his human nature. We believe that he is fully God and fully man. St. Athanasius argued along this line of thinking in the 4th century:

He is perfect God; and He is perfect man, with a rational soul and human flesh. He is equal to the Father in His divinity but he is inferior to the Father in His humanity. Although He is God and man, He is not two but one Christ.And He is one, not because His divinity was changed into flesh, but because His humanity was assumed into God. He is one, not at all because of a mingling of substances, but because He is one person.

I know that this may seem confusing. This is how the Church has understood the Trinity for centuries, and it took me several years to realize just how much sense this explanation really makes.

In response to the statement that the Catholic Church does not have the authority to decide what the term Christian means:

According to the Scriptures, Christ gave St. Peter the keys to the kingdom, and he gave the authority to bind and loose in heaven and on earth (Mt. 16:17-19). He later extended that authority to the rest of the Apostles.

According to St. Clement of Rome, the Apostles passed on their authority to their successors, and instructed them to do the same through the ages. The modern day magesterium (the pope and bishops in union with him) received their authority from the Apostles, passed down through the ages in a line of unbroken succession. Insofar they have the authority that Christ gave to Peter (on whom Christ built his Church), they have the authority to determine who is a member of that Church.

In response to minthegap:

Contrary to some of what has been said here, the Baptist faith is not a Protestant faith, but a descendant of the Anabaptists which were contemporaries.

The term Protestant refers to any eccesial community that traces its roots back to the Protestant reformers (including Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli). The Anabaptists you mention trace their origins to Zwingli if I understand correctly. When you say contemporaries, do you mean contemporary to the reformers, or are you refering to the so-called trail of blood?

In regards to the whole order of succession, there is no Biblical proof that Peter ever went to Rome, no established a church there. Since most of the Biblical text state that Jesus will come to reign on this Earth from Jerusalem, one wonders why Catholicism chose Rome.

First, St. Peter's location has little or no bearing on the order of succession.

Second, you are correct in saying that there is no unequivocal biblical proof that St. Peter when to Rome. However, there is extra-biblical historical references to establish that fact. Furthermore, there are biblical passages that allude to the fact that St. Peter went to Rome and died on a cross. (See Jn. 21:18-19; 1 Pet 5:13 Peter references the Church in Babylon) For a full list of references see http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm, or the Book Pope Fiction by Patrick Madrid.

Furthermore, there is all sorts of things that the Catholic church has done to hinder the cause of Christ-- everything from burning believers at the steak, to the inquisitions, to the selling of indulgences, state control, denying the priesthood of the believer, requiring chastity for priests, etc.

Burning non-believers: It is true that some Church officials have executed non-believers, however, it must be noted that they were not defining doctrine when they did it. In fact, the Catholic Church officially condemns capital punishment except in cases where it is absolutely necessary for the public safety (see Pope John Paul 2's encyclical Evangelium Vitae 55-57).

The selling of indulgences: Again, it is true that some members of the clergy did sell false indulgences. However, it must be noted again, that they were not defining doctrine. Again, the Church condemned the selling of false indulgences in an capacity. This time, she did it at the council of Trent.

State control: recall that in the ancient world, there was no such thing as separation of Church and State. When the Roman Empire declined and fell, there was no legitimate legislating authority. In some communities, the Church was the only thing that had anything resembling a legal structure. The truth is that having the Church and the State fused into entity was a disaster, which is why the Code of Canon Law forbids consecrated religious from serving in elected office. Also, the Second Vatican council has declared that people have the right to decide what to believe, and cannot be forced to contradict their conscience, “within obvious limits.” (I believe that this point also answers the point about the inquisition)

Denying the Priesthood of the believer: The Church has never denies the common priesthood of all believers. She has affirmed ever since the time of St. Peter that we are “a holy priesthood” (2 Pet. 2:5). Furthermore the “Catechism of the Catholic Church” (CCC) proclaims the following:

“Christ, high priest and unique mediator, has made of the Church ‘a kingdom, priests for his God and Father.’ [referencing 2 Pt. 2:5, 9] The whole community of believers is, as such, priestly. The faithful exercise their baptismal priesthood through their participation, each according to his own vocation, in Christ’s mission as priest, prophet and king. Through the sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation the faithful are ‘consecrated to be… a holy priesthood’ [referencing Lumen Gentium 1]” (CCC 1546)

It goes on to say, “The ministerial or hierarchical priesthood of bishops and priests, and the common priesthood of all the faithful participate, ‘each in its own proper way, in the priesthood of Christ.’ While being ‘ordered one to another,’ they differ essentially” (CCC 1547; internal quote from Lumen Gentium 2).

Requiring chastity for priests: The Church requires chastity for everyone. (She defines chastity as “the moral virtue which… provides for the proper integration of sexuality… leading to the inner unity of the bodily and Spiritual being. Chastity is called one of the fruits of the Holy Spirit.”)

Everyone is called to be chaste, because it means living your sexuality proper to your in life. If you are married, then having sexual relations with your spouse is chaste. If you are not married, then having sexual relations with anyone is unchaste.

I think that in your criticism you were referring to the current requirement that priests remain celibate (which is different than being chaste).

Currently, the Latin Rite Catholic Church does not ordinarily ordain married men. However, she does recognize the Theological validity of ordaining married clergy. There are currently rites in the Catholic Church other than the Latin rite, which DO ordain married men (Ex. Byzantine rite). Furthermore, The Latin rite does ordain married men in extraordinary circumstances (Ex. A married Lutheran ‘priest’ converts to Catholicism; the Latin rite would ordain him if he is called to the priesthood.)

That being said, (ordinary) celibacy in the ordained priesthood is a long-standing discipline of the Church, and there are several scriptural reference that speak favorably of the practice (see 1 Cor. 9).

I am curious what the etc. If you would indulge us, I would like to know if there are any further questions about the Church’s teachings that we might be able to clear up.

God Bless, and Take care.

EVERY WHERE that the educated man / woman BEHOLDS ~They see the OBVIOUS apparent CHANGE .. in the PUBLIC attitudes IN the colonies packs mobs of pagan Catholics across this disgusting planet.

This is The complete CHANGE .. towards the NON Catholic.

MOST Catholics don’t know what the Catholic church Really HISTORICALY Teaches. /\ ~~~OR Catholics continue TO PLAY along in the incurably servile slavish FOUNDATIONAL - PILLAR of all Romes, Roman~tic games. { THE Game of catholicism …which is.~~{ worship of IGGY~NORANCE }

The catholic church Teaches the following, in documentation historical creed

The catholic church Teaches THAT A HERETIC IS ANYONE Who DOES NOT BELIEVE Every Article of CATHOLIC Faith

That A HERETIC is Anyone WHO IS NOT A MEMBER of the CATHOLIC Church

That HERETICS CANNOT GAIN ETERNAL LIFE Unless They GIVE UP Their FAITH BE United With the CATHOLIC Church

The catholic church Teaches HERETICs Are NOT CHRISTIANS DO NOT Worship the True GOD or Jesus Christ

HERETICS Are to Be CONDEMNED PUNISHED, Even Just ON SUSPECION Alone, Are DENIED ANY DEFENSE

ALL LAWS Statues of ANY COUNTRY Which Prevent the CONDEMNATION EXECUTION of Heretics ARE Null Void

The Catholic Church Declares ALL HERETICS Anathema HERETICS Are to BE BURNED

The catholic church Teaches

“HE IS A HERETIC who does NOT believe what the Roman Hierarchy teaches.” American Textbook of Popery, p 164 (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).

HERESY consists in a STUBBORN DENIAL of truths which have been DEFINED proposed by the CHURCH as divinely revealed DOCTRINES.

Any baptized PERSON who...obstinately DENIES or DOUBTS any of the truths PROPOSED for belief by divine CATHOLIC FAITH, is a HERETIC. Canon 1324-1325 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law.
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/3543/heretic.htm

“He is a HERETIC who dEVIATES from any article of FAITH.” The American Textbook of Popery, p 143, (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).

Whoever 'obstinately' DENIES these (Catholic) truths, the DOCTRINAL commentary of Pope John Paul II says, falls under the censure of HERESY. Our Sunday Visitor, Analysis, July 19, 1998.

A HERETIC is Anyone Who IS NOT a Member of the CATHOLIC Church

Whosoever will DEPART { From the CATHOLIC Church } must NEEDS be FOUND with HERETICS. St. Cyprian, The Epistles of Cyprian, Epistle LXXIII, #11.
http://www.ewtn.com/library/PATRISTC/ANF5_8.TXT

So the Christian is A CATHOLIC as long as he LIVES IN THE BODY: cut off from it he becomes A HERETIC-the life of the spirit FOLLOWS not the amputated MEMBER. St. Augustine, Sermon cclxvii., # 4 (Quoted by Pope Leo XIII in Satis Cognitum (On the Unity of the

Church), Encyclical promulgated on June 29, 1896, #5.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_29061896_satis-cognitum_en.html

Heretics bring SENTENCE upon themselves since they by THEIR OWN CHOICE withdraw from the CHURCH, a withdrawal which, since they are aware of it, constitutes DAMNATION.

St. Jerome: Commentary on Titus 3:10–11.
http://www.catholic.com/library/Salvation_Outside_the_Church.asp

MISGUIDED PEOPLE attempt TO PERSUADE themselves others THAT MEN ARE NOT SAVED ONLY IN THE CATHOLIC RELIGION, but that even heretics may attain eternal life.

Pope Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio (On Mixed Marriages), Encyclical promulgated on May 27, 1832, #2.

Heretics CANNOT Gain ETERNAL LIFE Unless They GIVE UP THEIR FAITH BE United With the CATHOLIC Church

All OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, Jews or heretics CANNOT SHARE IN ETERNAL life will GO INTO THE EVERLASTING FIRE which was prepared for the devil his angels, UNLESS THEY ARE JOINED TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

Pope Eugenius I've, in Bull of Union with the Copts, Council of Florence, Session 11, on February 4, 1442.

Heretics DO NOT Worship the TRUE GOD or Jesus Christ

Heretics (those who are NOT MEMBERS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH or who DO NOT HOLD TO CATHOLIC DOCTRINE) worship a GOD WHO IS A LIAR, a CHRIST WHO IS A LIAR.

St. Augustine, (quoted in Patrologiae Cursus Completus: Series Graca, by Fr. J. P. Migne, Paris: 1866, 42:207).

A MANIFEST HERETIC is NOT a CHRISTIAN

St. Cyprian, St. Athanasius, St. Augustine, St. Jerome, others. St. Robert Bellarmine, On the Church Militant.

Heretics Are to Be CONDEMNED PUNISHED, Even Just ON SUSPECION ALONE, Are DENIED Any DEFENSE

“ALL SECTS OF HERETICS ARE CONDEMNED various PUNISHMENTS are appointed for them their ACCOMPLICES.”

Pope Alexander I've, The American Textbook of Popery, p 135 (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).

“For the SUSPICION ALONE OF HERESY, purgation is DEMANDED.”

The American Textbook of Popery, p 156 (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).

“All defence is denied to heretics.” The American Textbook of Popery, p 153 (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).

ALL HERETICS, are assuredly to BE PUNISHED with suitable penalties OVER ABOVE the PENALTIES imposed At the council of Ferrara*, ALL HERETICS, together TO receive their DESERVED PINISHMENT with Korah, Dathan ...… note ~~~{ THESE GUYS were swallowed alive up in a pit died }

Pope Eugenius I've, in Decree of the Council of Florence Against the Synod at Basel, Council of Florence, Session 7, on September 4, 1439.

(* The Penalties of expelling HERETICS who have not left the city within the said thirty days ARE TO BE EJECTED OUT OF THE CITY... DENIED them all COMMERCE all articles NEEDED FOR HUMAN USE..

..If there are SOME WHO IGNORE these ORDERS of ours, DARING perhaps TO CONVEY ………, since it is written that THE RIGHTEOUS PLUNDERED THE UNGODLY, such persons may be DESPOILED without penalty by any of the faithful tHEIR GOODS SHALL BE CEDED TO THE FIRST TAKERS.

Pope Eugenius I've, in Ecclesiastical Penalties Against Members of the Basel Synod, Council of Ferrara, Session 31, February 15, 1438.

...schismatics, blasphemers as HERETICS, to BE PUNISHED as TRAITORS, to have incurred the aforesaid censures PENALTIES, others TO BE INFLICTED, according as it shall seem good justice shall persuade...

Pope Eugenius I've, in Monition of the Council of Florence Against the Antipope Felix V, Session 9, on March 23, 1440.

Heretics bring SENTENCE upon themselves since they by their own choice WITHDRAW from the CHURCH, a withdrawal which, since they are aware of it, constitutes DAMNATION.

St. Jerome: Commentary on Titus 3:10–11.

A GENUINE CATHOLIC who CONTINUES steadfast in the catholic FAITH, who beleives - ONLY THOSE THINGS - which THE CATHOLIC CHURCH holds UNIVERSALLY

It is therefore an INDISPENSABLE OBLIGATION for ALL CATHOLICS to adhere to the faith of the Fathers, to preserve it, to die for it , on the other hand, to DETEST the profane Men, [ any NON CATHOLIC ] to dread them, TO HARASS THEM, to ATTACK THEM.

St. Vincent of Lerins, Commonitoria, PL 50:637, (quoted in The Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 6: The Book of Sentimental Excuses, Chapter 4: The Dogmas of Faith Admit No Alteration Whatsoever).

All Laws Statues of Any Country Which Prevent the Condemnation Execution of Heretics Are Null Void

“Statutes THAT IMPEDE the EXECUTION of THE DUTIES which appertain to the office of INQUISITORS are NULL VOID.”

Pope Urban I've, The American Textbook of Popery, p. 106 (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).

The Catholic Church Declares All Heretics Anathema

“Cardinal (Of Lorraine). Anathema to all heretics.
“Answer Anathema, anathema. The Council of Trent, Acclamations of the Father at the Close of the Council, Edited translated by J. Waterworth (London: Dolman, 1848).

Heretics Are to Be Burned

She ( THE Catholic Church) DOES NOT CONTENT HERSELF with persuasion, ARGUMENTS of an INTELLECTUAL MORAL order appear to her INSUFFICIENT, SHE has recourse to FORCE, to CORPORAL PUNISHMENT, to TORTURE.

The Rector of the Catholic Institute of Paris, H.M.A. Baudrillart, quoted in The Catholic Church, The Renassance, Protestantism, p 182-183.

[Martin] Luther, never burned a heretic.'..This is the ignorance or impudence of Luther.

Luther is convicted of impudence falsehood,--for that heretics were often burned by the [Catholic Church may be proved from many examples.

Jesuit Robert Bellarmine, in Disputationes de Controversiis, Tom. II, Lib. III, cap. XXII, 1628 edition.

There are many unquestionable cases of Protestants punished as heretics in NEARLY ALL THE LANDS WHERE ROMAN CATHOLICS HAVE HAD POWER, right down to THE FRENCH REVOLUTION [of 1798].

Catholic author G.G. Coulton, in The Death-Penalty for Heresy, Medieval Studies, No. 18, pp. 62, 1924 edition.

“A HERETIC MERITS the pains of FIRE...By THE GOSPEL, the canons, CIVIL LAW, CUSTOM, heretics MUST BE BURNED.”

The American Textbook of Popery, p 164 (quoting from the “”).

HERE ON THE OTHER SIDE of HELL we find another BEAST ON THE...

SCATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SECOND EDITION # 841... The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the creator...,.IN THE FIRST PLACE amongst whom ARE '''THE MUSLIMS;...

...MUSLIMS; profess to hold the faith of abraham, and together WITH US [CATHOLICS]...THEY ADORE the ONE, merciful GOD,

..thats why the pope can kiss and stroke BOW DOWN TO the unholy quran

Popes claim in catholic catechism 2 and ed 841 that''

muslims;...these profess to hold the faith of abraham, and together with us [catholics]...they adore the one, merciful god, mankind's judge on the last day

MAY 1985 SATANS POPE John Paul II repeats ROMES DECLARATION TO AUDIENCE OF THOUSANDS

THE POPE said: “CATHOLICS Muslims, WE have MANY THINGS IN COMMON as BELIEVERS and as human beings...WE BELIEVE IN THE SAME GOD

http://www.letusreason.org/RC25.htm http://focusonjerusalem.com/tiesthatbind.html
,,,THE CATHOLIC GOD IS THE MUSLIM GOD

THATS WHY YOUR POPE CAN KISS STROKE AND BOW TO THE UNHOLY QURAN

http://images.google.com/images?q=photos%20%20of%20pope%20kissing%20quranhl=enlr=sa=Ntab=wi

The catholic sect….Damns….and condemns…the BIBLE BELEIVER / non catholic Christ ian…… as LOST. Headed for hell…

The catholic sect….Damns….and condemns…the BIBLE BELEIVER / non catholic Christ ian…… ~~~as DESERVING of whatever punishment the POPES can manipulate their frenzied mobs of Catholics to perform…~~~at whatever point or bowel of history at any given time…possible.

The catholic sect….Damns….and condemns…the BIBLE BELEIVER / non catholic Christ ian…… as serving ANOTHER EVIL JESUS….

Rome SAYS

Heretics / NOT MEMBERS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ….. DO NOT HOLD TO CATHOLIC DOCTRINE) worship a GOD WHO IS A LIAR, CHRIST WHO IS A LIAR.

BUT Muslims ISLAM //OOH they ALL SERVE OUR GOD…..and we Kiss and BOW down to their QURAN
* service ALLAH

THIS IS ROMES …ATTACK ON THE BIBLE AND ITS believers,,, [ CHRISTS CHURCH ‘ ]]] contradiction,,,IS,,manifested