Why Pray To Virgin Mary?

2,540 thoughts on “Why Pray To Virgin Mary?”

1. I would like to ask Alan what Church he is a member of? Does he believe that it is the Church established by Jesus upon Peter?

2. @Liam (1312)

   Jesus did say, and I quote from this Roman Catholic Bible, “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18). He did not say He would build His church on Peter.

   The Greek word for Peter is petros, meaning “a little stone.” The word for rock is petra. What Jesus said was, “I will build my church on the Rock.” He Himself was the Rock. He never said He would build His church on Peter, “a little stone.” That would be too faulty a foundation.

   In I Peter 2:5-8, Peter himself speaks of believers as stones and of Jesus as a rock. So in Ephesians 2:19-21, Jesus is the corner stone, the foundation. The church, therefore, is built, not on Peter or his successors, but on Jesus Christ Himself—the Rock.

   For my supreme authority I quote the great Apostle Paul. In I Cor. 3:11, in this wonderful Roman Catholic Bible, he says this: “For other foundation no one can lay, but that which has been laid, which is Christ Jesus.” Paul says Jesus Christ is the foundation, the Rock. It is on that Rock the church is built. See Also 1 Corinthians 10:4.

   According to Ephesians 2:20 in the Catholic Bible, the Church was “Built upon the foundation of the Apostles and the prophets with Christ himself as the chief Corner Stone”. That makes it clear that the Church was built, not on Peter, but that its foundation was laid by all the Apostles and prophets and that, not Peter, but JesuJesus did say, and I quote from this Roman Catholic Bible, “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18). He did not say He would build His church on Peter. The keys and the power to bind that He gave Peter in Matt. 16:19 represent the authority He gave all believers in Matt. 18:18-19.

   The Keys and the power to bind He gave Peter in Matthew 16:19 was the authority He gave all believers in Matthew 18:18-19. In any case they were Kingdom, not Church Keys, and the Kingdom is now in abeyance.

3. Hi Alan,
   I believe that you are a sincere seeker after Christ but in picking and choosing from The Bible you are in error in places.That is why Jesus ensured Peter that all matters in faith and morals expressed by His Church is in accord with God’s will and protected by the Holy Ghost.

4. It is not my intention to hurt anyone through my belief that the coming into being of other so called churches resulted from the continuing onslaught of Lucifer against the Church of Christ. Which sincere believers in those other churches and cults would not accept but the Word of God states truthfully that one church and one church only was established and that Church’s existence was assured in-spite of heresy fed by satan in order to destroy it . A guarantee reinforced by Jesus when he assured St. Peter – the first human father of the Church- that the gates of hell would not prevail against it.

   A continuing offensive, today, which involves aside from the abortionistic, atheistic, agnostic, secular, and media elements, etc., of satan’s milieu our Priests and Religious have fallen victim to the onslaught of the father of lies as he tries to destroy the Priesthood. Lucifer knows that if he can destroy the Priesthood the Church will not last long. But it is doomed to failure because of the original guarantees of its founder, Jesus.

   Thus the sins of some clergy and religious today implies that satan is using them as a method of attempting a destruction of the Church. As in the past he used the claims of ‘heresy’ and the concept of ‘reform’ in his struggle against the Body of Christ. Also in the history of the Catholic or Universal Church satan in the past, as now, has used the sinful behaviour of even Popes to attempt to destroy it. But the source of all evil is banging against the grace of the Holy Spirit, and what he does is doomed to failure.

   On this matter my final reference to modern clerical betrayal we must not forget that two of Christ’s chosen apostles betrayed Our Saviour, that is, Judas and Peter. Yes, in-spite of his love for them and their witness of his statements and acts confirming who he claimed to be Judas sold him for thirty pieces of silver to his enemies and Peter who was the first leader of his Church (in modern terms-1st Pope) denied him three times. Thus if it can happen at that level satan can manipulate from top to bottom the Church’s membership
   if we stop following Jesus. For Juan in his writings emphasises that the way to life eternal is narrow and to traverse it we must deny ourselves by imitating Christ including his experience of the cross. Any lapse in this is dangerous as our Christian history confirms.

5. Liam Comain (#1314)

   I believe that you are a sincere seeker after Christ but in picking and choosing from The Bible you are in error in places.That is why Jesus ensured Peter that all matters in faith and morals expressed by His Church is in accord with God’s will and protected by the Holy Ghost.

   You mean to say that the Bible is full of errors? That God is a liar? Peter was never the first pope. This are concocted lies of the Roman catholic church and it can be proven from scripture. The Bible is the Word of God – and it is sufficient for the Christian in all matters of faith, practice and doctrine.

   What many people like your self think that the Roman Catholic church is the true church established by Christ. It must be noted that the Roman Catholic church is a schism that came into existence when the Catholic Church split with the Eastern Orthodox church clandestinely inspired by satan to usurp that which was already established much before it came into existence.

   if we stop following Jesus. For Juan in his writings emphasises that the way to life eternal is narrow and to traverse it we must deny ourselves by imitating Christ including his experience of the cross. Any lapse in this is dangerous as our Christian history confirms.

   This is not christian teaching but roman catholic paganism. The scripture does not teach that we have to imitate Christ sufferings on the cross. Rather we must believe by faith that to obtain eternal life we must sincerely believe in our heart that he obtained the redemption for us from sin on the cross by his shed blood and to reconcile us back to God. That is biblical salvation. We are saved by God’s Grace thru faith (Ephesians 2:8-9).

   So why don’t you educate readers of this post how to get to heaven? What i see is the deception in your false theories that satan uses to take away our focus from the true biblical Jesus (the object of our faith) to the roman catholic Jesus (which is another false jesus) who is projected as mama Mary’s boy who is always obedient to his mother’s commands. Please study roman catholic church doctrine and you will see the Babylonian doctrines it clings to.

   You should make sure your efforts is to edify people find salvation for their souls to go to heaven instead of publishing deceptive stuff to guide people away from the truth.

   Gob Bless you and pray that he puts truth in you. Come to the saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus christ – the true Christ found in the scriptures, who has given us victory over sin, death and hell.

6. ROMAN CATHOLICISM v/s JUDAISM – a comparison between the two religions.

   From a Roman Catholic perspective, the concept of saving faith is far removed from the biblical teaching of commitment to and simple trust in Christ alone for salvation. The Roman Catholic Church has distorted the gospel of grace. It has fallen into the same Galatian error of legalism (a sacerdotal/sacramental/works salvation) addressed by Paul in his letter to the Galatian Churches. In that letter Paul dealt with the heresy of the Judaizers, who attempted to add the Jewish ceremonial law to faith in Christ as a basis for salvation. Temple worship and the ceremonial law included circumcision, an altar, daily sacrifices, a laver of water, priests, a high priest, special priestly and high priestly vestments and robes, candles, incense and shewbread. In the routine religious life of the average Jew there were feast days, prayers, fasts, adherence to the tradition of the elders and certain dietary restrictions. All of these things were included in the Judaizers’ teaching on salvation. So it was Jesus plus the Jewish system. How does this relate to Roman Catholicism? The doctrines of salvation embraced by Rome are, in principle, identical to the Judaizers. The Roman Church teaches that salvation is achieved by believing that Jesus is the Son of God who died for sin, by being baptized, by being a part of the Roman Catholic Church, by striving to keep the Ten Commandments and partaking of the sacramental system (which involves ongoing sacrifices, altars, priests, a high priest, along with the exercises of prayers, fasts, almsgiving, penances and until recently adherence to certain dietary regulations). The following lists demonstrate the parallels between Roman Catholicism and the Judaizers:

   Judaizers

   1. Belief in Jesus as Messiah and Son of God

   2. Circumcision

   3. Become a Jew

   4. Sacrificial System

   5. Priests

   6. High Priests

   7. Altars

   8. Feast Days

   9. Laver of Water

   10. Dietary Regulations

   11. Candles

   12. Incense

   13. Shew Bread

   14. Keep the Ten Commandments

   15. Tradition of the Elders

   Roman Catholicism

   1. Belief in Jesus as Messiah and Son of God

   2. Baptism

   3. Become a Roman Catholic

   4. Sacrificial System

   5. Priests

   6. High Priests

   7. Altars

   8. Feast Days

   9. Font of Holy Water

   10. Dietary Regulations (Until recently)

   11. Candles

   12. Incense

   13. The Eucharist Wafer

   14. Keep the Ten Commandments

   15. Tradition of the Church Fathers

   The parallels are obvious. The Roman Catholic teaching on salvation is essentially the same as that preached by the Judaizers. Paul warned the Galatian believers that if they embraced this false gospel they would actually desert Christ (Gal. 1:6). Those evangelicals who would promote spiritual cohabitation with the Church of Rome need to heed to the warning of Paul. He saw no basis for unity with the Judaizers even though they professed faith in Christ. Likewise, there is no basis for unity with the Church of Rome today

7. Alan,
   Not The Bible but your personal interpretation of it which I am convinced satan welcomes!
   Satan is the master of divide and conquer.
   Look at the many non Catholic cults existing today because egotistical priests like Luther left the Church Jesus formed upon Peter-the rock!Of course you contend that Christ’s Church does not exist or that it disappeared via schism.
   Also read above and you will see the list of Popes(Church Fathers) since the inaguration of Peter.Popes that even Martin Luther acknowledged when still a member of the one and only Church because Jesus directly formed it and after thousands of years it still remains His Body.
   Alan, have you never heard about taking up ones cross and following our Saviour? If not start reading The Authentic Bible of the Church of Christ.

8. Liam O Comain (#1318)

   I see your interpretation in which satan rejoices – man added traditions that contradict the Bible. I am saying that the roman catholic church has lost all morals because of its false Babylonian doctrines it embraces other than the Apostolic doctrines. The church that Christ established has its structures clearly defined in the NEW TESTAMENT – which is a church that strictly abides in the apostolic doctrines. You like many others inter-changeably hide under either the Catholic or Roman Catholic disguise.

   BTW you should note that before Christ church came, the Bible clearly states that Christ came to “save that which was lost” – Matthew 18:11 as His primary purpose. Christ Church is clearly defined in the NEW TESTAMENT.

   Look at the many non Catholic cults existing today because egotistical priests like Luther left the Church.

   I can prove from the Catechism of the Roman catholic Church that it is the roman catholic church that is a cult. A cult man-made religion always teaches their adherents that they are Gods. See para #460 – RCC Catechism teaches that Christ came to earth that we might become Gods. This is in contradiction of Christ’s purpose stated in Matthew 18:11. I believe God’s Word as truth as Jesus said in John 17:17 – sanctify them to thy truth, thy Word is truth. The RCC teaching is a false one and I will trash it. The claims to Apostolic succession from Peter as the first pope to the present is a pretty concocted package and is not true.

   The Roman Catholic Church does not have any authentic Bible but relies in its pagan traditions and that is why the RC church popes authorized murders of bible believing Christians during the dark ages of the inquisition and crusades. Certainly a true church of Christ would never authorize murder of bible believing Christians for their faith in the Bible alone. Did Christ authorize such dastardly acts of violence? This Christ came to establish violence? Please get you facts straight as you have been spoon-fed with lies galore. The RCC even burnt bibles. The Only authentic Bible fo God is the KING JAMES BIBLE – its is the preserved word of God for the english speaking world.

   Also i’d appreciate when you place forth your arguments, do place them with evidence and not something that emanates from the figment of your imagination. Please provide evidence from the scriptures to support your claims otherwise its plain futile. See my post at #1317 for a comparison between RC vs Judaism.

   Also read above and you will see the list of Popes(Church Fathers) since the inaguration of Peter.Popes that even Martin Luther acknowledged when still a member of the one and only Church because Jesus directly formed it and after thousands of years it still remains His Body.

   Who made this list? How can you prove that Peter was the first pope? and the rest of the popes who allegedly claim apostolic succession on the primacy of Peter? What is that Apostolic succession all about? Appreciate truthful answers from you.

   Just because Luther acknowledged the list of Popes – how can it be taken as truth? Just because I acknowledge some lady beauty – does it make her beautiful?

   You say the RCC is one and the only Church. The Eastern Orthodox Church also stake that claim that they are the one true church. So who is right?

   I see that by your name you must be Irish. Well why don’t you engage with a face to face debate with your fellow compatriot Ian Richard Kyle Paisley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Paisley). It would be interesting debate.

   UN UNITED NATIONS must END the VATICAN as a “COUNTRY” because it is ONLY ONE BUILDING for male homosexual GAYS (population half a USA High School). Women and children are forbidden…The Pope, Nuncios, Cardinals do not need DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY to RE-INCARNATE JESUS in the EUCHARIST = MAGIC + SORCERY.

9. Alan,
   Are we permitted as St.Paul says,”to fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ for His body which is the Church”(Col.i.24.)? And is it not sweet to suffer whatever is sent by God,who is the true and only good?Bearing in mind that our Creator always renders suffering conducuve to our greatest good.

10. Alan,
    The ‘Jewish’ Old Testament is the ‘Christian’Old Testament
    (again satan’s tactic of divide and conquer).No one should attempt to divide The Bible-the Word of God!!!
    The Old Testament is the ‘root’ and the New Testament is the ‘fruit’.The Old promised the Messiah and the New confirmed our Saviour’s arrival and what he done to overcome satanic intrigue.The latter included a Church(and please stop playing with words) which was founded on Peter for the 1st Popes name means ‘rock’.Rather strange that Our Saviour would refer to himself as a ‘rock’.After all He is the Creator of all that is which includes ‘rocks’.

    Alan,
    Why are there so many hundreds of so called ‘reformation’ cults whose only point of unity or association is their hatred of God’s Church and as implied their lack of ‘unity’?This is contrary to The Bible for Jesus referred to”my church”.

    Listen,Alan, “Come follow me…”.

11. Alan,
    Like the so called ‘reformed’cults since the time of Luther the Orthodox’s broke away from Christ’s Church.(Although much earlier).
    The difference between yourself and myself, that is as a Christian, is that I belong to the true fold of Jesus and accepts His word that he formed one Church.
    In conclusion, what of the following is the one Church formed by Jesus on Peter(BEARING IN MIND THE TERMS”MY CHURCH”):the lutheran,the anglican,the presbyterian,the latter day saints OR WHATEVER YOU ARE A MEMBER OF OR FOUNDER OF.

12. Alan,
    The reverend fellow Irishman whom you referred to above broke from the Irish Presbyterian church and formed his own – Wellthe Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster.Keeping alive the tradition so to speak !
    The reverend and yourself are strong adherents of Luicifer’s strategy against Jesus.Placing strong emphasis on the New Testament but then denying the statements of Jesus.
    The reverend on a tv interview sometime past stated that he did not believe Jesus when he stated “This is my body,this is my blood” in relation to the Eucharist or the Living Bread.
    In fact in his reply he referred to the concept of ‘canabolism’.Well you know as well what word he really meant.

13. Liam (#1320,1321,1322)

    Are we permitted as St.Paul says,”to fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ for His body which is the Church”(Col.i.24.)? And is it not sweet to suffer whatever is sent by God,who is the true and only good?Bearing in mind that our Creator always renders suffering conducuve to our greatest good.

    You mean to say that the RCC who taught “self-flagellation” in the Phillipines (see ) and it is what the Bible teaches atually teaches that christians must adhere to?

    Please provide proof that on the Apostolic succession on Peter’s primacy. Also what is the Difference between Catholic and Roman Catholic are they one and the same?

    The ‘Jewish’ Old Testament is the ‘Christian’Old Testament

    You should know these below. Apparently the Roman Catholic church still lives in the shadow of the Old covenants.

    The New Covenant otherwise known as the covenant of consummation fulfilled all previous covenants, abolishing their temporal nature, and “completing the cycle of the covenantal revelation.” This covenant “was to be like all Old Testament covenants before it, in that it too would be centered” “not under the law but the under grace” of God (Rmn. 6:14) which was freely provided in the New covenant. This covenant was irrevocable being solely established by God’s promise of “I will” (Jer. 31:33-34). The New covenant was not unconditional, rather it required every individual to personally receive what God had offered.

    “Although Israel had failed in fulfilling its covenantal responsibilities, the Lord God of Israel would not fail in His purpose to establish a great people and a great nation to glorify his own name. The Lord’s intention to redeem a people to Himself from among the fallen of humanity would not be thwarted.” Every believer was therefore, allowed to take part in that covenant relationship with God, through Christ via the New Covenant.

    Prophets such as Isaiah, Ezekiel and Hosea prophesied the realization of the New covenant, however, Jeremiah was the only one who gave the clearest and fullest prophecy concerning the “making of a New Covenant with the House of Israel and with the House of Judah” (Jer. 31:31 see also Heb. 8:6-13;10:16;). The promise being that God would place within His people a new heart and mind upon which the laws of God would be written instead of tablets of stone (Jer 31:31). In order for humanity to be restored to God, repentance is required, coupled with, faith that Christ was the New covenant, and obedience to Jesus’ commandments. The greatest promise of the New covenant was the fullness of eternal life brought by faith and an “internal transformation of the heart”

    This covenant varied from its predecessors in that it did not require either circumcision of the flesh, or its laws written on stone. All of these temporal elements were fulfilled and abolished by Christ, leaving only an internal seal on the heart and spirit (Rmn. 2:24-29; Col. 2:11-12;2Cor 3;Heb 8-10). An “everlasting inheritance” (Abrahamic Covenant), an “everlasting priesthood” (Mosaic covenant), and an “everlasting throne and kingdom” (Davidic covenant) were all made only possible in and through Christ, the Redeemer.

    Even though the Old covenant completed its purpose, “the substance of the two covenants [the Old covenants and the New covenant] in terms of their redemptive intention is identical”. “The New covenant can be understood in no other way than as a bringing to fruition of that which was anticipated under the old covenant.”

    I see that you are too much obsessed by cults when the RC church is the biggest cult of all – THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS. Instead of presenting your false theories, try to save your soul.

    Prove to me the Assumption of Mary did take place. Why do Roman Catholics pray to Virgin Mary? Is it officially taught by the RCC?

    Listen,Alan, “Come follow me…”
    I will follow only my Jesus Christ as my only sufficient saviour who redeemed me. I do not follow anybody else. You are satan’s agent. Do come out of that deceptiveness. You have been systematically indoctrinated with lies and you want to drag other good people on this blog to eternal damnation. Now … You are asking me to follow you .. are you a pedophile?

    All followers of Christ are called Christians (Acts 11:26). You will not find the word Catholic. Christ, Christianity, Christians relate to each other. Catholicism came into existence much later. Any church that claims to be the true church established by Christ should be obedient to Jesus commandments. The RC Church fails miserably.

14. Alan,
    The word ‘catholic’ means ‘universal’.Yes, it took time for the Church of Christ to be named Catholic for after it was formed by Jesus it could not be called ‘universal’until it spread throughout the world.That is the reason behind its centuries old title for it became ‘universal’.And in due course it based itself in Rome led by Our Lord’s Apostles.The latter is why it is referred to at times as the ‘Roman Catholic Church’.Of course satanic influenced persons will refer to the Rome based title to attack or degrade it.

    May I add that I did not request that you come and follow ‘me’for I am only a Christian.That is a Biblical statement of Jesus.Surely for a person who gives the impression that he knows it all why did you reach such a conclusion?Perhaps you are so influenced by Lucifer that you took the opportunity to imply that I was a pedophile and impress others by the contents of your anti-Christian mentality.

    And as one can see you are good at twisting what I express sincerely in the name of the Truth- who is God.

    Alan,at the ultimate moment of ‘truth’,that is, death you will see that the truth emanates from the Church of Christ now based at The Vatican.I pray that by that time you will carry the beads of the Mother of the one and only God who fathered the Catholic Church.

15. Alan,
    Listen to and take the advice of St.Paul-“If any man among you seem to be wise in this world,let him become ignorant that he may be wise”(1 Cor.3:18-19).
    I still do not know what so called church you belong to or have you established your own cult.Inspite of my questioning.
    Wise up-destroy the influence of satan-and follow Jesus in the one and only Christian Church which Our Saviour established.The only source of the Holy Bible.

16. Liam Comain (#1325)

    I see no point in continuing debating with you. You are unable to provide answers to the questions I have raised. You do not even know what the Catechism teaches. You are only relying on what musically sounds nice to your ears.

    2 Timothy 4:3 – For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

    Is there a difference between Catholic and Roman Catholic?
    Yes. Many are not aware that there is a difference between Catholicism and Roman Catholicism. According to Webster Encyclopedic dictionary the word Catholic means universal or general. In the beginning of the church there were no denominations but only one general church and was called Catholic not Roman Catholic.

    Then how did Roman Catholicism begin?
    The early church which was called Christian or Catholic was persecuted by the Roman Emperors. Christians were crucified, burnt alive and given to wild beasts to be eaten alive. Then there was a sudden change as Constantine the Roman emperor (A.D 313) granted liberty to all Christians as before Christians were persecuted and killed but now Constantine gave religious freedom to the people. He exempted Christian ministers from taxes and encourage to build churches. He moved his capitol to Byzantium and he called Constantinople, “New Rome.” Of the Empire.

    Therefore the Roman Catholic church is not Christian and is not the church Jesus established because it has deviated considerably from the apostolic doctrines.

    Alan,at the ultimate moment of ‘truth’,that is, death you will see that the truth emanates from the Church of Christ now based at The Vatican.

    This is NOT true. Waiting for the truth after death will be too late. You need to repent right now while you’re still alive and accept God’s gift of salvation thru’ Jesus and NOT thru the Pagan Roman Catholic Mary.

17. @Liam Comain,
    Are you a christian or Catholic?

18. Alan,
    You appear to be all astray in your thinking-what madness-what hate!!!What would Jesus think about the vile and evil attack by you upon His Mother in the last sentence above?So full of hatred and anger!!!
    Alan,
    No matter what lies expressed by you the truth will be out.For even the so called reformist groupings by their participation in the movement for Christian unity with the Church of Christ at the Vatican are seeing the truth as expressed by myself.The truth which is drawing thousands of converts as I write to the Catholic Church of Christ.
    At Calvary today I will offer up my Mass for your conversion.God bless!!!!!!!

19. Liam Comain (#1329)

    At Calvary today I will offer up my Mass for your conversion.God bless!!!!!!!

    Just another of those pagan rituals Lol! :=)

20. Hello Jibson,

    It is good you are back, i hope you have something beautiful to share with us now. This will be more interesting and discussion will be more lively when you are around.

    Ave Maria!

21. Hello to Christine Marie and others

    I have posted a few days about the doctrine of the New Birth (Born Again) .. but it seems our beloved Admin/owner of this site has not yet approved it or something is amiss. Appreciate the investigation, Admin :) and thanks a million God blessings on you.

22. Thanks Christine Marie.

23. @ those anti-catholics here,
    You ppl keep condemning our faith practices all along and now you condemn the Holy Mass itself… I seriously doubt you are a Christian basically, you are surly a weed in the field. Face the wrath of GOD very shortly…

    The Eucharistic Celebration is the most… i have no words of human origin to describe it. You ll only realize when you experience the Divine presence in the Eucharist. I am a witness of this experience.

    So i can tell to your face, you dare to say one word about Jesus in the Eucharist, you ll face the wrath!

24. At the Last Supper on the night he was betrayed,Our Saviour instituted the Eucharistic sacrifice of his Body and Blood.He done this to perpetuate the sacrifice of the cross throughout the ages until he came again and also to entrust to his beloved Spouse,the Church,a memorial of his death and resurrection in which he Himself under the appearance of bread and wine is received during Mass and consumed.Thus our minds are full of grace,and a pledge of future glory is given to us.Reflect upon it-as his apostles received him thousands of years ago so do all true believers and members of the Catholic (that is members of the universal)Church that is Christian.

    May I add that the ceremony is referred to by a few titles.As above ‘Mass'(Missa)because at its end those in attendance are sent forth so that they might fulfil God’s will in their daily lives.In ‘mission’ so to speak.

    The command of Jesus at the Last Supper to repeat his actions and words until he comes again is the heart of The Mass- our Eucharistic Banquet.Of course the satanic influenced individuals as usual will refer to it as a pagan ritual but those who read The Bible will see its foundation based upon the words of Our Loving Messiah.

25. George (#1334):

    No body is anti-catholic. But we are pained at “roman catholic teaching” that contradicts the scriptures. The roman catholic church teachings itself anti-catholic. We are truth seekers who seek the truth. Please edify us if we are wrong. Please tell us the official teachings of the Catholic church concerning “should we pray to virgin mary?

    The Eucharistic Celebration is the most… i have no words of human origin to describe it. You ll only realize when you experience the Divine presence in the Eucharist. I am a witness of this experience.

    Please share with us the claim that you say you have been a witness to the Eucharist experience. What sort of experience did you feel?

    According to Acts 1:9 – Jesus Ascended into Heaven and is seated at the right had of the Father. Prior to His ascension bodily into heaven, He gave the promise of the Comforter which is the Holy Ghost will be with us till Christ returns back for the second time. So I do not see how Christ the omnipotent God willfully comes into the Eucharist and the command of the priest. To me, it is a clear indication that priests probably have been bestowed with special magical occult powers to pull Christ from heaven into the Eucharist wafer. The Eucharist turning into the flesh – the Doctrine of Trans-substantiation – it contradicts what St.Paul says in 2 Corinthians 5:16.

26. Alan-1317.
    The Bible is the Word of God ,that is,the Truth.But that word in whatever language used can be manipulated to serve the stand of those like yourself who put their own biased opinion before God.You also ignore the path of ‘sacred tradition’upon which the Bible is based.For the witnesses statements of Mary and others were in their minds especially memories before the apostles wrote one word of the New Testament.Yes ‘holy tradition’ occurs before the written word in the new and the old testaments.
    The latter is one of the reasons Jesus assured his church that in matters of faith and morals the Holy Spirit would ensure that it would at all times express the Truth!

27. Listen to Jesus!
    “I am the living bread that came down down from heaven;if anyone eats of this bread,he will live for ever;…he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life and …abides in me,and I in him”(Jn 6:51,54,56).
    As stated above a founder of a so called church once said that he could not accept this statement of Jesus.Implying that it reminded him of canobilism.
    But remember God is almighty and he created us,and redeemed us,because of his love for us.He can do anything that he wills.But think about it: after the great gifts of creation and salvation he through Jesus gave himself to us as our food while we continue our earthly journey.
    Of course Alan and others refers to this act of love as purely pagan.Continue,please, to pray for them.

28. Hi Sir Alan,

    I was taking note of your discussion with Sir Liam,your both doing good.

    Ave Maria!

29. 1 Corinthians 11:26
    Whenever you eat this bread, then, and drink this cup, you are proclaiming the Lord’s death until he comes.

    The Holy Communion reminds us of the death of Jesus on the cross and his second coming.

    Here the Bible does not mention that they considered the bread as a sacrifice, as a thing to worship or it was locked in a box. The Bible does not reveal that they appointed a special priest to perform this.

    Jesus proclaimed the following verse as he knew very well that we were likely to forget him in future and as we all have the tendency of forgetting. This is the only verse which spoke about the presence of this act

    Luke 22:19
    Then he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, ‘This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.

30. The Catechism says “Christ…commanded that his bloody sacrifice on the Cross should be daily renewed by an unbloody sacrifice of his body and blood in the Mass under the simple elements of bread and wine.
    Jesus never made such a command. If you’ll check the references in Matthew 26 and I Corinthians 11, you’ll see for yourself that the Lord’s Supper is a MEMORIAL and a SHOWING of Christ’s death until He comes again. It is not a sacrifice.

31. Liam Ó Comáin (#1338)

    Bible interpretation can be either figurative/symbolic or literal. It just depends on the context of the surrounding verses. Those verses of John 6:51,54,56 are not to be taken literal as we need to look elsewhere in the whole bible also. Roman Catholics just simply rely on a few verses to stake the claim that their teachings are supported in the Bible. We also need to take other bible verses also into consideration. For instance Luke 22:19, 1 Corinthians 11:24-25 St.Paul teaches us that the we have to come in “remembrance” when we come to eat at the Lords table. The bread and wine to be consumed is therefore used as symbolic to remember the body and blood of the Lord Jesus Christ and his sacrificial death on the cross. Hence John 6:51,54,56 is only in remembrance and not literal. The Roman Catholic church interpretation is wrong.

32. Alan,
    who told you that Bible verses are interpreted on the bases of the surrounding verses, now i understand how you guys foolishly misinterpret God’s word.
    Bible should be interpreted in light of the original text(i.e. the text in which the verse was written). and if you are really able to read the original text or get help from some one who can read them, you ll understand that Jesus meant to literally consume Him (i.e. His Body and Blood). Read the Bible with the Help of the Holy Spirit and with the original text. and then put your interpretations here… don’t put your base less interpretation techniques tat you learnt from satan here and mislead people…

33. Jibson/Alan,
    What the Catholic Church teaches is what Jesus taught for The Church formed upon Peter-the rock-
    is the Mystical Body of Christ.And when He established it as I have stated many times, for it is the Word of God from The Bible, Jesus assured His Church that in all matters of ‘Faith and Morals’ what it taught would be the Truth!In fact the Holy Spirit assures this guarantee.

    Yes,Alan, your first and second sentences I accept(1342).That is why Jesus guaranteed that the Holy Spirit would ensure that what the Catholic Church teaches is always the Truth.For Jesus knew that people like yourself would come along and state ” Those verses of John 6:51,54,56 are not to be taken literal”.

    Jibson,”He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood…”-that is not symbolic but a person who denies this truth is saying that God is not Almighty and is talking gibberish.

    Also, Jesus, stated that sins forgiven would be forgiven and those retained would be retained.I suppose it would be both your opinion that this statement should not be taken literally.

34. George (#1343)

    Bible should be interpreted in light of the original text(i.e. the text in which the verse was written). and if you are really able to read the original text.

    This is another devils guidance that we need to go back to the original text or manuscript as it is technically called. For your knowledge and edification, the original manuscripts are not available but “copies” of the original text or manuscript. However only the KJV (English translation) is correct translation because the KJV’s manuscript come from Antioch which are completely reliable. If we have to go back to the original text then why do we need translations in the vernacular? And do you know the language of the original text or manuscripts? Even Liam has accepted my interpretation of John 6:51,54,56 in light of Luke 22:19, 1 Corinthians 11:24-25 where St.Paul teaches us that the we have to come in “remembrance” when we come to eat at the Lords table?

    BTW you have not shared the experience you claimed to have felt in the Eucharist. What was it exactly? REMEMBER: Human feelings and sensations are deceptive but the Word of God is “truth”

    You have started this post topic titled: “SHOULD WE PRAY TO VIRGIN MARY? – but you haven’t yourself provided any answer to it in light of the official teachings of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC).

35. Liam (#1344)

    Yes,Alan, your first and second sentences I accept..For Jesus knew that people like yourself would come along and state ” Those verses of John 6:51,54,56 are not to be taken literal”.

    If for example .. Jesus had to mention in the Bible: IT IS RAINING CATS AND DOGS” – How would you interpret the statement? Figurative or symbolic or literal?

36. Liam (#1344)

    Also, Jesus, stated that sins forgiven would be forgiven and those retained would be retained.I suppose it would be both your opinion that this statement should not be taken literally.

    Who ONLY has the power to forgive sins? See 1 John 1:9

37. Alan,
    First things first, My experience with My Lord in the Eucharist is something very awesome tat the knowledge i have in languages isn’t sufficient to explain them. when life is really heard to move on, when i feel i can’t face another day, when all hopes leave me, a mere few minutes spent infront of my Eucharistic Lord, i get the strength to move on, any major decisions tat i take in my life will be always in His presence, and none of them have ever failed, but at times when i try to take decisions on my own it fails so miserably. i have understood His presence… what about you????

    now to the interpretation,
    What makes you think KJV is THE REAL BIBLE…. Just because it came from Antioch…???? dude this is where satan is playing really heavy in your life. your argument is baseless…
    who told that we don’t have the real manuscripts…??? What about the Dead sea scrolls???? what are they, old grandma stories???
    don’t try to post just for the sake of argument. We Catholics here aren’t fools to just listen to what ever you say.

    And about the topic of this post… i don’t know how long have you been on this site… but both Liam & i have been here for quite a long time, just go some 600 comments above to see my comments about the topic, they are both based on the CCC and the BIBLE.

38. Alan,
    It is precisely personal interpretation that has been used by satan to attempt to destroy Christ’s Church since it was established.You can see this in the fact that all the so called protestant churches or cults arose from some founder’s personal interpretation of holy scripture.Ignoring the statement of Jesus that in matters of faith and morals the Catholic Church would at all times be guided by the Holy Spirit.

39. Alan,
    The Catholic’s Church’s founder Jesus as God forgives sins but as the Bible confirms he empowered Catholic Priests with the authority to do so.

40. Alan,please do not put any limit to the power of God.If he wanted to rain cats and dogs there would be no problem,(please reflect).
    Are you a member of a grouping or did you set up your own cult.What’s the name? What is your difference with other so called reform bodies and why are there not one so called reformed church.Oh! I see self interpretation!A reality well founded upon ones rip roaring ego.

41. @Liam ó Comáin (#1351):

    The Catholic’s Church’s founder Jesus as God forgives sins but as the Bible confirms he empowered Catholic Priests with the authority to do so.

    PLEASE PROVIDE SCRIPTURE PROOF TO BACKUP YOU CLAIMS!!!

    ———————

    @George (#1348):
    First things first, My experience with My Lord in the Eucharist is something very awesome tat the knowledge i have in languages isn’t sufficient to explain them.

    THAT IS YOU PERSONAL INTERPRETATION AND EXPERIENCE AND NOT CHRISTIAN NOR IS IT SUPPORTED OR APPROVED IN SCRIPTURE – GOD’s HOLY WORD!!

    As for me … I worship God in spirit and in truth John 4:24, 14:17, 16:13 because as a born-again Christian I am sanctified by the truths of God’s word (John 17:17). The scripture are the only infallible rule of faith and all sufficient.

    who told that we don’t have the real manuscripts…???

    I only said that the originals are not traceable but are avaiable are copies of the original. Yes the dead sea scrolls prove also that God preserved His infallible Word much before the Roman Catholic Church came on the scene. Most Roman Catholics like yourself think that it is the Roman Catholic Church who gave us the Bible?

    And about the topic of this post… i don’t know how long have you been on this site… but both Liam & i have been here for quite a long time, just go some 600 comments above to see my comments about the topic, they are both based on the CCC and the BIBLE.

    Please point to the correct post number (#???) so the will I comment on it.

42. What is meant by the term Catholic?

    Something should be said concerning the meaning of the term “catholic,” which the Roman Church tries to appropriate exclusively to itself. Dr. J. G. Vos, editor of Blue Banner Faith and Life, gives this definition: “THE CATHOLIC CHURCH: The universal church of God, as distinguished from a particular branch, congregation or denomination of that church.” “The Church of Rome,” he continues, “has wrongly appropriated to itself the term ‘Catholic’; it is self-contradictory to call a body ‘Roman’ (which is particular) and at the same time ‘Catholic’ (which means universal).”

    A Catholic Dictionary gives this definition: “Catholic. The word is derived from the Greek, and simply means universal.”

    Dr. John H. Gerstner, Professor of Church History in Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, in a booklet, The Gospel According to Rome, says:
    “Strictly speaking ‘Roman Catholic’ is a contradiction of terms. Catholic means universal; Roman means particular. it is the Protestant and not the Romanist who believes in the catholic church. Protestants believe the church is universal or catholic; Rome cannot discover it beyond her own communion. Our formula is: ‘Ubi Spiritus ibi ecclesia’—’Where the Spirit is there is the church.’ Her motto is: ‘Ubi ecclesia ibi Spiritus’—’Where the (Roman) church is there is the Spirit.’

    “It is because of the proper historic use of the word ‘catholic’ that Protestants do not hesitate to recite it in the Apostles’ Creed. We cling to the word because we cherish the concept. Rome has no monopoly on it; indeed, as we have suggested, it is a question whether she has any right to it” (p. 14).

    All those who believe in Christ as Savior, regardless of what denomination they belong to, are in fact members of the Christian catholic church. Evangelical Protestants are the truest “catholics,” for they base their faith on the New Testament as did the early Christians. The Roman Church has added many doctrines and practices that are not found in the New Testament, and anyone who accepts those becomes, to that extent, a Roman catholic, and by the same token ceases to be a Christian catholic. Since the word “catholic” means “universal,” the true Christian catholic church must include all true believers, all who belong to the mystical or spiritual body of Christ (“the church, which is his body”—Ephesians 1:22-23). But there have been, and are, millions of Christians who have never had any connection with the Roman church. The Roman Church, is, after all, a local church, with headquarters in Rome, Italy and is limited to those who acknowledge the authority of the pope. Even in her most extravagant claims the Roman Church claims only about one in eight of the population of the world, and in the professedly Christian world she has cut herself off from and broken communion with perhaps more than half of Christendom, so that there are probably more professed Christians who reject her authority than acknowledge it. And geographically she fails utterly to prove her claim to universality. Even in the nominally Roman Catholic countries such as Italy, France, Spain, and Latin America, Rome today probably does not have effective control of more than fifteen percent of the people. In any event the Roman Church clearly is not universal, but is only one among numerous others and is outnumbered by the effective membership of the various Protestant and Eastern Orthodox churches.

    Bishop J. C. Ryle, of Liverpool (England), has well said:
    “There are many ‘churches,’ but in the New Testament only one true church is recognized. This true church is composed of all believers in the Lord Jesus. It is made up of God’s elect—of all converted men and women—of all true Christians. It is a church of which all the members are born again of the Holy Spirit. They all possess repentance toward God, faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ, and holiness of life and conversation. They all draw their religion from one single book—the Bible.

    “It is the church whose existence does not depend on forms, ceremonies, cathedrals, churches, vestments, organs, or any act or favor whatever from the hand of man. It has often lived on and continued when all these things have been taken from it. This is the universal church of the Apostles’ Creed, and of the Nicene Creed. This is the only church which is truly universal. Its members are found in every part of the world where the Gospel is received and believed.”

    And Rev. Stephen L. Testa, a former Roman Catholic, and founder of The Scripture Truth Society, has said:
    “The Lord Jesus Christ founded His church (Matthew 16:18), which was evangelical Christian. He was to be the Head, the Holy Spirit the Guide, and the Bible the only rule
    of faith and practice. It was made up of His followers who were born again and pledged to continue His work of redemption in the world. It was catholic in that it was designed for all the people of the earth. The church remained pure and faithful Gospel for to the about 300 years, which was the golden age of martyrs and saints, who were persecuted by pagan Rome. After the so-called conversion of emperor Constantine (A.D. 310) Christianity was declared the state religion, and multitudes of pagans were admitted to the church by baptism alone, without conversion. They brought with them their pagan rites, ceremonies and practices which they gradually introduced into the church with Christian names, all of which corrupted the primitive faith, and the church became Romanized and paganized. What makes a church truly catholic is its adherence to the Gospel of Christ and the Apostles’ Creed. The Roman Church has added popery and so many other pagan doctrines and practices that many people think it no longer either Christian or catholic.

    “The Reformation of the 16th century was a protest against those pagan doctrines, a wholesale withdrawal from the official church and a return to the primitive catholic Christianity of the New Testament. The Roman Church today can become again a truly catholic church by renouncing popery and those dogmas and practices which are contrary to the Word of God and holding fast to its primitive foundation, on which basis the reunion of all Christian churches could be realized. The name ‘catholic,’ when applied to the Roman Church exclusively, is a misnomer, for it befits better those Protestant churches which hold fast to the Bible and the Apostles’ Creed without any additions whatever. ‘For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto them, God shall add unto him the plagues which are written in this book: and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the tree of life, and out of the holy city, which are written in this book’ (Revelation 22:18-19).

    “The true church of Christ is invisible, made up of truly converted people who are to be found in all the visible churches and whose names are written in heaven, and the visible churches exist to train saints for the kingdom of Christ”.

43. Alan,
    A lot of historical rubbish you are reading.I dont require these evangelicals or ex-Catholics-for my source of truth is the Bible!!!!!!!

    Recall that some of the above refers to different churches or denominations and the Bible confirms that Jesus formed ONE CHURCH-“my church”.

    If you plant seeds it takes time to germinate and grow.Thus it took years for the Church of Christ to grow and in time as it spread throughout the globe it was then appropriate to refer to it as ‘Catholic’; for the latter term means ‘Universal’and the former was not applied to God’s Church until later ages.THEN as it became universal it required a world wide centre and base by which it could serve God and His children so it settled in the Italian city of Rome.A choice based upon the political realities of the time. Thus, in due course because of its base it was also referred to as ‘Roman’.That is a brief outline of the growth of Christ’s Church.A Church which does not deny the virgin birth nor the resurrection as do some so called reformists ministers have done.

44. Alan,1352,
    When the risen Jesus gave to his apostles the Holy Spirit it was then that he bestowed on then the divine power to forgive sin:’Receive the Holy Spirit.If you forgive the sins of any,they are forgiven;if you retain the sins of any,they are retained.'(Jn 20:22-23.)

45. Liam Ó Comain (#1354)

    A lot of historical rubbish you are reading.I dont require these evangelicals or ex-Catholics-for my source of truth is the Bible!!!!!!!

    ARE YOU SURE YOUR SOURCE OF TRUTH IS THE BIBLE AND NOT THOSE PAGAN TRADITIONS YOU HAVE BEN SPOON FED BY POPISH PERSONS?? TILL DATE YOU ARE JUST GIVING SPECULATIONS BUT NO SOUND PROOF. YOU ARE SIMPLY WASTING YOUR TIME. NO BODY IS GOING TO ACCEPT YOUR MUMBO JUMBO.

    THEN as it became universal it required a world wide centre and base by which it could serve God and His children so it settled in the Italian city of Rome.

    WHY IT HAD TO BE IN ROME ONLY AND NOT.. SAY JERUSALEM or THE PLACE JESUS ASCENDED INTO HEAVEN? HOW IT LANDED IN ROME? SURELY THIS IS SINISTER!!

    The problem with you is that you cannot stomach the fact that “Catholic” and “Roman Catholic” are not one and the same.

46. What does the term Church actually mean in the NEW TESTAMENT?

    In the Bible the word “church” never means a denomination. The Bible has nothing to say about denominations. Whether a local church chooses to remain strictly independent, or to enter into a working agreement with one or more other local churches, and if so on what terms, is not discussed in Scripture, but is left entirely to the choice of the church itself. And we find that in actual practice churches range all the way from those that remain entirely unrelated to any other, to the other extreme of those that subject themselves to some hierarchy of denominational overlords who own the property and send the minister. Surely the local church should own the building and grounds that it has
    developed and paid for. Such ownership serves as a shield against undue denominational pressure being brought to bear upon it. And, as it has the right to decide whether or not it will join a denomination, so it should have the right to withdraw from the denomination if it so chooses.

    Usually the word “church,” as used in the New Testament, means a local congregation of Christians, such as “the church of God at Corinth,” “the church in Jerusalem,” “the churches of Galatia,” “the church in thy house.” At other times it may refer to the church at large, as when we are told that “Christ loved the church, and gave himself up for it” (Ephesians 5:25). Or again it may refer to the whole body of Christ in all ages, as when we read of “the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven” (Hebrews 12:23). When our Lord prayed for unity, “that they may all be one” (John 17:21), it was primarily a spiritual unity, a oneness of heart and faith, of love and
    obedience, of true believers, and only secondarily a unity of ecclesiastical organization, that He had in mind, as is made clear by the fact that He illustrated that unity by the relationship which exists between Himself and the Father—“even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee.” Unity of faith must be achieved before there can be unity of organization. The ideal, of course, would be for the church to be one in both faith and organization. But it clearly is not yet ready for that. Much work remains to be done in teaching God’s Word before that can be accomplished. As Christians become more closely united in doctrine they work together more harmoniously and want to be united
    more closely in organization. But unity of doctrine must always remain primary, for that relates to the very purpose for which the church was founded. The alleged tragedy of disunity of organization is more than offset by the real tragedy of disunity of doctrine that results when conservative and modernistic churches are combined in one organization.

    It is just here that the Romanists, who claim to be the only true church, err in attempting to bring all churches, even to force all churches, into one external and mechanical organization. The oneness for which Christ prayed was not external and visible, but spiritual and invisible. There can be and actually is real spiritual unity among Christians apart from organizational unity. The church is not a mechanism, but a living organism, whose head is Christ; and any unity that is mechanical and forced is bound to hinder the very thing that it is designed to promote. When we hear the pope and occasionally other church leaders talk about uniting all churches into one super organization, the words they employ and their method of approach make it clear that what they have in mind is not a spiritual unity of believers but an ecclesiastical and mechanical unity of believers and unbelievers, designed primarily for what they think would be greater efficiency of operation. And, after all, perhaps the diversity of churches, with a healthy spirit of rivalry within proper limits, is one of God’s ways of keeping the stream of Christianity from becoming stagnant. History is quite clear in showing that where there has been enforced uniformity the church has stagnated, whether in Italy, Spain, France, or Latin America. The confinement of religious life to a dead level of uniformity does not solve our problems.

47. Liam (# 1354):

    Be aware that the first century church was Christian and the followers of Christ were first called Christians at Antioch (Acts 11:26). The term Catholic appeared much afterwards. Besides the “roots” of the Church are originally Christian – so is Jesus Christ, Christ, Christians, Christainity, Biblical Christianity. The Roman Church is a apostate branch not part of the mainstream Christian church because of its anti-biblical teachings. As a Christian I submit to the original Biblical Chrsitianity. I do not submit to the apostate Roman pope. Because of the persecution, many early churches went underground to continue felllowship in individual houses see 1 Corinthians 16:19.

    Ever since New Testament times there have been people who accepted the basic principles now set forth in Protestantism. That is, they took the Bible as their authoritative standard of belief and practice. They were not called Protestants. Neither were they called Roman Catholics. They were simply called Christians. During the first three centuries they continued to base their faith solely on the Bible. They often faced persecution, sometimes from the Jews, sometimes from the pagans of the Roman empire. But early in the fourth century the emperor Constantine, who was the ruler in the West, began to favor Christianity, and then in the year 324, after he had become ruler of all of
    the empire, made Christianity the official religion. The result was that thousands of people who still were pagans pressed into the church in order to gain the special advantages and favors that went with such membership. They came in far greater numbers than could be instructed or assimilated. Having been used to the more elaborate pagan rituals, they were not satisfied with the simple Christian worship but began to introduce their heathen beliefs and practices. Gradually, through the neglect of the Bible and the ignorance of the people, more and more heathen ideas were introduced until the church became more heathen than Christian. Many of the heathen temples were taken
    over by the church and re-dedicated as Christian churches. I am witness to this because some of the Roman Churches in the area I live were non-Chriistian temples that were forcibly taken over.

    Thus in time there was found in the church a sacrificing and gorgeously appareled priesthood, an elaborate ritual, images, holy water, incense, monks and nuns, the doctrine of purgatory, and in general a belief that salvation was to be achieved by works rather than by grace. The church in Rome, and in general the churches throughout the empire, ceased to be the apostolic Christian church, and became for the most part a religious monstrosity.

48. Liam (#1355):

    Alan,1352,
    When the risen Jesus gave to his apostles the Holy Spirit it was then that he bestowed on then the divine power to forgive sin:’Receive the Holy Spirit.If you forgive the sins of any,they are forgiven;if you retain the sins of any,they are retained.’(Jn 20:22-23)

    Hello.. John 20:22-23 my friend was spoken to the “Disciples”, not just the Apostles, as the text clearly shows . See John 20:20. The word “Apostle” was not used, and some of the disciples were women.

    every believer (or disciple) is a priest Revelation 1:6, as as such has the power (authority) to say, “Your sins a re forgiven you in the name of Jesus Christ, if you receive Him as your Savior. By the same token, every believe (or disciple) has the power (authority) to say “Your sins are retained (not forgiven) if you do not receive Jesus Christ as your Savior.

    It was the chief Apostle who made this clear when he stated to Cornelius in Acts 10:43 – “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins”. The Apostles never heard confessions.

    See also Mark 2:7 and Luke 5:21. No man can forgive, but Jesus did forgive, because He is God. No priests or ministers can forgive sin because they are men. We can go direct to God through our mediator, Jesus Christ, and be forgiven. Rebels cannot forgive rebels; it is the King who forgives. Sinners cannot forgive sinners; it is God who forgives. There is no where to be found in scripture powers to forgive sins were conferred exclusively to Roman Catholic priests. Besides the priesthood sacrificial system was abolished in the New Testament covenant as Christ became the High priest and sacrificial lamb once for all for the sins of the whole world. The sacrifice of Calvary is over. See Hebrews 10:10-23.

49. Alan,
    Think,you are repeating some of what I have said and confirming that Christ’s Church is the one and only Catholic One.From Peter right up to the present Pope tradition confirms the latter- see the list of Church Fathers or popes in another truthful contribution(910)above.Even protestant historians acknowledge this but they imply that the leadership of the Church of Christ went astray and thus the need for reform of the Church(one Church only) overseen by past Popes.Thus the Catholic Church’s roots were planted by Jesus through St.Peter.And those churches who arose from the so called reform (and there are thousands)in no way could a rational or sincere believer in Christ justify their existence.In fact their arrival,I assume, made satan jump for joy.I can imagine ‘the father of lies’ saying to unfortunate inhabitants of hell ‘Which one now is the real Body of Christ’?

50. Please don’t get bogged down in the fruit of Tradition, that is the Bible, for both are equal.

    You state that the apostles never heard confession-where you there at the time?

    You are overlooking the place of holy tradition which Jesus assured Peter that as the church developed whatever decisions it made and implemented it would be guided by the Holy Spirit and its decisions would be in accord with the Divine Will.