Recusant Catholic here. After reading the Bible, I've felt a desire to return to the Church, but I'm not sure which one...

Recusant Catholic here. After reading the Bible, I've felt a desire to return to the Church, but I'm not sure which one. On what in scripture is the Catholic Church's authority based? What about the sacraments? It's all a bit dizzying. I'd like to hear everyone's arguments, both Catholic and Protestant. See me as someone to proselytize.

Amen, I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the netherworld will not prevail against it.

"The Negrus Feetus is the most holy sacrament of the Roman Catholic Church. It can be performed by gently caressing, kissing, licking the foot or sucking the toes (in a non-sensual manner!). Gently biting is also valid and is considered good practice.

Yes, Peter might have been Bishop of Rome, but how does that give him authority? Please explain more than that.

Dies Mann hier ist ein Stormfag. Raus, Stormfag.

The Catholic Church is not based on Scripture. It is prior to scripture because it was instituted by Christ himself, with Peter the first pope. The scriptures were written later, as it was decided by the already existing Catholic Church which ones would be in the Bible.

Sola Scriptura is a Protestant doctrine. And the most funny thing about it, is that it is not even found in the Bible. Rather 1 Timothy 3:15 says "The Church is the pillar and foundation of truth."

It's dieser Mann you stupid cunt.

t. pope Cuckus III

>Recusant Catholic
So a LARPer?

Catholicism is a joke. It's a secular NGO. It's no different from joining the Boy Scouts, Greenpeace or the Red Cross. If you're looking for something spiritual, then you might wanna try Eastern Orthodoxy.

>Peter might have been Bishop of Rome
He both was and wasn't. In the Apostolic Age, churches were all run by a college of presbyter-bishops (Titus 1:5-7, Philippians 1:1,), and Peter was just one of these at Rome (1 Peter 5:1). Hence, since Peter was not the sole bishop in Rome, he could not have been pope.

>Catholic and Protestant
Orthodoxy is the one you're looking for, and it's looking for you.

That's heresy, user

Go Protestant, it lets you interpret the bible however you wish.

t. triggered snowflake polfags

Your first paragraph is going to need a bit more evidence to back your claims to convince me of anything. As for the second paragraph, I don't know much about Sola Scriptura, but that verse you quoted which refers to "The Church"—how do we know if he is referring to Rome or just Christendom in general? Was the Roman Church even the sole authority at this time? Churches in places such as Alexandria were autonomous, were they not?

Why is Eastern Orthodoxy that much greater? Neither of you have offered anything. The only reason why I haven't considered them is because I would feel very awkward as an American in one of their ethnic churches. I notice that they're usually Syrian, Greek, Ukrainian, etc.

Very interesting. Is this where the Puritans and other dissenting Christians based their doctrine on the necessity of autonomous churches?

That's more or less how I live my life in practice already, however, there are times when I miss the sense of belonging somewhere I had going to a Catholic school. After all, that's the point of it, belonging to a Church.

>Yes, Peter might have been Bishop of Rome, but how does that give him authority? Please explain more than that.

Jesus isn't talking about Peter as head of the church in Rome, he's talking about Peter as the head of the Church, period. Peter is the rock (Cephas) to whom Christ refers. Combine that with the doctrine of Apostolic Succession, and it's not difficult to arrive at the conclusion that Peter's direct successors are the heads of the Church.

Jesus' right hand founded the Catholic Church and was the first pope

what else can you want?

There is no salvation outside the church, remember that lad

sacraments are literally just ritualized continuations of the actions Christ and the Apostkes performed

>turning bread into Body of Christ
>baptizing people
>blessing marriages
>healing sick
>ordaining successors to Apostles
>forgiving sins
>welcoming new members into the Church

Also, why did you come to Veeky Forums if you want serious advice? Go to the online Catholic Encyclopedia or something if you want good info

Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
You tell me OP, does it sound like the rock is Peter, or Peter's confession that Jesus is the Christ?

You forgot the most important sacrament!

Finish the verse. Jesus gives Peter the keys to Heaven and says whatever he binds on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatever he looses on earth shall be loosed in Heaven.

Binding and loosing was a jewish term used to signify giving a final, authoritative say on a matter of doctrine. Jesus gave this to Peter.

You are omitting the part that matters to this discussion:

Matthew 16:13-20

13 Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” 14 And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” 15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock[b] I will build my church, and the gates of hell[c] shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed[d] in heaven.” 20 Then he strictly charged the disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ.

He gave the authority to bind and loose, and promised the keys of Heaven.

I also find myself drawn to Christianity. I have a great admiration for Catholicism aesthetically as I do love the high church, but having a hard time square the logical circles with Christianity in general and catholicism especially.

Just can't buy into the anti gay shit (not triggered, just don't agree with it), hell, and the idea that everytime I cum into a sock its a mini-holocaust

Okay, so essentially both the Catholic and Orthodox church claim to be the 'true church' because they are directly based on the testimony of the apostles. This claim surfaced in the 2nd Century to distinguish the early Church from competing sects of Christianity, because they had saints saying: "I knew St. Paul or St. James and they wanted us to follow this doctrine".

Essentially the sacraments and Church doctrine are sacred because Jesus said so, and we know that Jesus said so because he told an apostle, who told some 2nd Century saint, who told a 3rd Century bishop, who wrote it down as official church doctrine. So both the Catholics and Orthodox are practicing the faith as the apostles did.

The specific authority of the Catholic Church is based on the fact that Christ told St. Peter, you will be my rock and the head of my church on Earth. Peter then became the bishop of Rome, granting the same title to his successor. This means that the power to lead Christ's church is still invested in the bishop of Rome, who should be obeyed by all other priests.

Obviously, the Catholic Church has had a rocky time throughout the centuries, but I would say that we are still the church most founded in historical precedent. The Protestants interpret the Bible themselves so there are a million different varieties, from straight up crazy to basic Catholics without the Pope. I would say that prior to the 1800s, the Orthodox church was pretty close to the Catholic church, but almost all Orthodox churches are now national franchises and have changed their doctrine to suit political goals more than spiritual goals in the past 200 years.

Do it! Come back into the fold of the Church!

>After reading the Bible, I've felt a desire to return to the Church
Literally why?