The former Catholic has a question

Don't worry for even one second. I am a former Catholic and will never go back. I follow the teachings of my heavenly Father in His word. I could never go back to following all the man made rules they have. I don't believe that priests should be called father. They'll get their come-up-ins. I leave that to God. Peter may have been the first appointed leader to the new believers in Christ. Jesus said "on this rock I will build my church" Matthew 16:18. This verse is often used to say that Peter was the first pope. They don't take it to mean that Peter was a rock solid believer that would teach others and spread God's word. As far as the vatican being so rich ... hhmmm Jesus told all his followers to give up their belongings and follow him. "acting as God" - well they do believe that the Pope holds Jesus place on earth so that would make sense. The day of reckoning is coming fast. The Vatican and the church as a whole will be set straight by God in the end. I have no doubt about that. Thanks for replying. As I said I am just looking for information.

All babies are baptized as infants in the Catholic church. Sadly it is not scriptural. I studied/practiced wicca for a time too. I am now (and will forever be) a born again Christian.

"I baptize you with water for repentance..." - Matthew 3:11 And so John came, baptizing in the desert region and preaching a baptism for repentance for the forgiveness of sins. - Mark 1:4 Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." - Acts 2:38 THe act of baptism is a public declaration that you have accepted Jesus into your life. But the act itself is not what will save us from our sin. Before baptism comes repentance. Without repentance, baptism means nothing. How can a weeks-old child repent from sin and accept Jesus as Lord and Savior of his or her life?

Why Catholics Baptize Infants? Again, I'm quoting from www.knowthetruthjesus.com "'Don't Baptize Children' is also a dogma that the world heard from Anti-Catholics 1500 years after the beginning of Christianity. (they say)It was not demanded by Jesus nor practiced by his apostles in the early church. Baptism is an external sign of an internal grace that we receive by the acceptance of Jesus as our Lord and Savior. The Bible says that it was given to children, adults and old ones alike by the apostles. The children were never denied baptism. ACTS 2:38-39 says: Peter said to them, 'Repent and be baptized, EVERY ONE OF YOU, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is made TO YOU AND TO YOUR CHILDREN and to all those far off, whomever the Lord our God will call." At the time of Jesus, circumcision was the way to be consecrated to God. The Apostles replaced baptism for circumcision. In the New Testament, BAPTISM WAS DMINISTERED TO THE WHOLE FAMILY including CHILDREN and ADULTS. Baptism was never denied to children: Paul baptized the HOUSEHOLD of Stephanas (1 Cor 1:26). Acts 16:30: "Believe in Lord Jesus and your HOUSEHOLD WILL BE SAVED." Acts 18:8: "Crispus, the synagogue official, came to believe in the Lord, along with his entire HOUSEHOLD" Here the usage of "WHOLE HOUSEHOLD" was a normal usage at that time which included children and adults in a house. The use of "WATER" is an external sign of an internal grace of God. At the time of Jesus, ritual washings were practiced. When Jesus accepted this sign, he didn't intend for baptism to be a 'bath in water.' It is because of that misunderstanding that SOME SECTS prepare artificial swimming pools inside their worship centers. Jesus did not use such pools for baptism. On the day of Pentecost, 3000 men were baptized. We don't read the apostles leading them to a river or to a sea to get immersed. A sprinkling of water may be used to baptize them." God bless all of you and your families!

Thanks for replying. Hopefully I will get some good answers.

Well, whiteheather, firstly Anglicans call their clergy Vicar or Rector not father. Secondly, I think your answer highlights the problem people have with the Orthodox church and its off shoot the Catholics. You are very critical of people taking a naturalistic interpretation of this scripture because it contradicts your own interpretation, even claiming there interpretation is a misreading (Which it clearly is not) or a misunderstanding (Which it may be but which you don't show)Yet you offer no cogent argument why your own interpretation is better. This presumably is because you relying on apostolic succession and thus claiming to speak from authority, yet surely if any doctrine has been discredited it is this. Peter, from whom such authority is supposed to derive is referred to as the rock not the leader of the church and both Peter and Paul ceded authority to James the Just. all the best urban

OH no Urban whiteheather did not speak her own words. You will note the link at the end of her comment. The comment was copied straight from the article. It is not her view but rather that of the Greek Orthodox church member that wrote the article.

Interesting text. I think it presents the answer quite well from a Greek Orthodox view. I am sure it can't be too far off from what Roman Catholics believe. The whole thing about our spiritual rebirth .. please (not directed at you) some priest dripping water on my head does not equate to my spiritual rebirth. That happened when I - not a priest - asked the Lord into my heart. Water baptism is an outward sign of our acceptance of the Lord. It is useless without the belief. I love the fact that the article says that the rest of the chapter says that Jesus was blasting the pharisees and for their hipocracy. For all my years as a Catholic and continuing into the present; I have seen plenty of hipocracy in the RC church. That is a topic for a different discussion. It would be nice to see this information presented by a non-Catholic. Obviously the writer is Greek Orthodox CATHOLIC. I just love the way they always say that the bible is not to be taken literally. As I said to someone else I guess the 10 Commandments can be taken to mean whatever we want too.

I was also interested so I did some checking . I posted in my response what I found

The answers are interesting to say the least. Whiteheather I have read your second post and will reply there.

Going a bit backwards with your comments.... I have never heard ANYONE say that the apostles called each other Minister, pastor etc. I do think that they might have called each other brother but not brother Paul etc. Brother in the sense that they lived as brothers and that Jesus called them his brothers. Now let me get this straight. You can take the bible to mean what you want but I can't take the bible to mean what it says? Hhhmmm I wonder what God would think if we decided that the 10 Commandments weren't to be taken the way they were written. Are you trying to tell me that God only wants us to take the 10 Commandments at face value and not the rest of the bible? Please! A person calling themselves a father is MUCH different than insisting that someone else do so. Treating others as your children is far different as well. I pray that your eyes be opened.

Thanks wertzburg!

I agree with maildumpster on this one. I've also left a comment below if you're interested.

They think that when Jesus said Upon this rock I will build my church; that he meant Peter. Hence he would be the first pope. They can't reconcile the bible and their teachings (in most instances) because their religion WAS based on the bible and over the years has shifted to what the popes and bishops want it to be. Ever notice that most Catholics have no knowledge of the bible? They were told for years NOT to read the bible as they would not understand it. I think it was more like don't read the bible cause you'll figure out that we aren't following it. Martin Luther figured that out and said "hang on a second here" and so started the reformation.

Okay, it's all coming back to me know. Somehow I always regarded that as kind of an AA-meeting thing - Hi, my name is, and I have done, please pray with me - etc. Not crawling in a little cabinet to talk to someone you can't/aren't supposed to see, tell him what you did and have HIM forgive you and punish you. Never did see God in those details. But I guess that's because I am not Catholic. DH used to be, was an altar boy and all, but got away from that asap and for more than a few reasons - he doesn't say much and won't answer questions about any of it. MIL is still a practicing Catholic, but I am not about to ask her anything about how it works. There seems to be too many people and too much ceremony btwn God and man in Catholicism - too many layers. Seems to be quite contrary to what I was brought up reading and seeing in my own churches. Like Catholics were deliberately keeping their flocks away from God. I do know that it is only fairly recently that Mass is performed in anything but Latin, and Bible reading doesn't seem to be a high priority, at least from what I have seen. Is it true you are supposed to pray to saints and the Virgin Mary - in addition to or instead of God? Told you I was ignorant about Catholic ways!

I do believe that the Catholic church discouraged the reading of the bible because if the people were kept in ignorance the church would keep it's power. That is one of the reasons for the dark ages. This is what I get from reading some history.

The Catholic church teaches that Catholics are to pray to Mary and the saints. It isn't biblical and they don't see it as a form of worship (which it is). You are right. For years they told catholics not to read the bible cause they wouldn't understand it. My take on that is that they feared the people would see how far the church had strayed from the word of God! You don't see bibles in the pews in Catholic church but you will see them in Protestant churches. Have you ever been to a mass? If so did you notice that there isn't a teaching? The priest doesn't sit there 'disecting' the bible to help people understand it. All we can do dear sister is pray that the scales fall from their eyes. You know I went thru the trouble of ordering tracts in Italian for my parents. My mother read it and said; the truth is in there. At no time in the years that have followed has she ever said she accepted the Lord as her savior. I remember getting baptized as a believer and later asking my father if he was mad that I left the RC church. He looked at me and said "as long as you believe in Jesus I am happy". Sweeter words he could not have said to me!

Well you need not worry I started the discussion LOL!! I don't see anything wrong with asking questions about religions. It is good as surely someone will learn something! As far as ignorant - those that are ignorant are those afraid to ask the questions. It is in asking questions that you gain knowledge. I don't judge people by what they believe. I might not agree. I might point out things that are factual (as opposed to my opinion) but I do not judge them. I believe all people are accountable to one and only one and that one is not me.

I very much agree. We are not meant to judge. But we are told to correct and that is what we must do. People may refuse to accept the truth, but at least you tried. It is good to start discussions on relegions. Whenever I get in a debate I like to ask the other several questions. It gets them thinking. In the end, they're either going to hate me or change their mind about their beliefs. Even though most of the time the responses are angry, I like to think, it's not me they're rejecting, but God. And He knows how to handle rejection a lot better than me.

Honey I won't be throwing anything at you!