That's right skippy. If it ain't the Catholic collection plate you are droppin ca$h into.....then you have just bought yourself a one way ticket to eternal damnation.
Read on and get thee to a confessional booth PRONTO!!
This Pope is turning out to be the most entertaining Pope is quite some time. Not as amusing as Pope Paul III (1534–1549) mind you......but pretty damn entertaining nonetheless.
Pope: Other Christians not true churches
By NICOLE WINFIELD, Associated Press Writer
Pope Benedict XVI has reasserted the universal primacy of the Roman Catholic Church, approving a document released Tuesday that says Orthodox churches were defective and that other Christian denominations were not true churches.Benedict approved a document from his old offices at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that restates church teaching on relations with other Christians. It was the second time in a week the pope has corrected what he says are erroneous interpretations of the Second Vatican Council, the 1962-65 meetings that modernized the church.
On Saturday, Benedict revisited another key aspect of Vatican II by reviving the old Latin Mass. Traditional Catholics cheered the move, but more liberal ones called it a step back from Vatican II.
Benedict, who attended Vatican II as a young theologian, has long complained about what he considers the erroneous interpretation of the council by liberals, saying it was not a break from the past but rather a renewal of church tradition.
In the latest document — formulated as five questions and answers — the Vatican seeks to set the record straight on Vatican II's ecumenical intent, saying some contemporary theological interpretation had been "erroneous or ambiguous" and had prompted confusion and doubt.
It restates key sections of a 2000 document the pope wrote when he was prefect of the congregation, "Dominus Iesus," which set off a firestorm of criticism among Protestant and other Christian denominations because it said they were not true churches but merely ecclesial communities and therefore did not have the "means of salvation."
In the new document and an accompanying commentary, which were released as the pope vacations here in Italy's Dolomite mountains, the Vatican repeated that position.
"Christ 'established here on earth' only one church," the document said. The other communities "cannot be called 'churches' in the proper sense" because they do not have apostolic succession — the ability to trace their bishops back to Christ's original apostles.
The Rev. Sara MacVane of the Anglican Centre in Rome, said there was nothing new in the document.
"I don't know what motivated it at this time," she said. "But it's important always to point out that there's the official position and there's the huge amount of friendship and fellowship and worshipping together that goes on at all levels, certainly between Anglican and Catholics and all the other groups and Catholics."
The document said Orthodox churches were indeed "churches" because they have apostolic succession and that they enjoyed "many elements of sanctification and of truth." But it said they lack something because they do not recognize the primacy of the pope — a defect, or a "wound" that harmed them, it said.
"This is obviously not compatible with the doctrine of primacy which, according to the Catholic faith, is an 'internal constitutive principle' of the very existence of a particular church," the commentary said.
Despite the harsh tone of the document, it stresses that Benedict remains committed to ecumenical dialogue.
"However, if such dialogue is to be truly constructive, it must involve not just the mutual openness of the participants but also fidelity to the identity of the Catholic faith," the commentary said.
The document, signed by the congregation prefect, U.S. Cardinal William Levada, was approved by Benedict on June 29, the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul — a major ecumenical feast day.
There was no indication about why the pope felt it necessary to release the document, particularly since his 2000 document summed up the same principles. Some analysts suggested it could be a question of internal church politics, or that it could simply be an indication of Benedict using his office as pope to again stress key doctrinal issues from his time at the congregation
14 comments:
use HTML code for bold, not message board code, you rube.
Stop looking like a damn amateur.
The pope is not saying anything new, the defense of his faith and to ensure it's correctness according to him is his calling. Contrary to popular belief, the pope cant make changes to Church doctrine, he just helps define it.
Yes, and to define every other Christian Church as being not a "real church" is just the continuing insanity of religion.
He and the Catholic Church have no more of a lock on who the real god is than any random tribe in Africa does. It's all based on Faith and Faith alone.
It just simply strikes me as more decisive rhetoric from another in a long line of organized religions claiming to be "the only way" to the mythical pearly gates.
This is what the Church has always taught and believed to be True.
From the document:
Christ 'established here on earth' only one Church and instituted it as a 'visible and spiritual community', that from its beginning and throughout the centuries has always existed and will always exist, and in which alone are found all the elements that Christ himself instituted. 'This one Church of Christ, which we confess in the Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic. ... This Church, constituted and organized in this world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him'.
It is possible, according to Catholic doctrine, to affirm correctly that the Church of Christ is present and operative in the churches and ecclesial Communities not yet fully in communion with the Catholic Church, on account of the elements of sanctification and truth that are present in them. Nevertheless, the word 'subsists' can only be attributed to the Catholic Church alone precisely because it refers to the mark of unity that we profess in the symbols of the faith (I believe... in the 'one' Church); and this 'one' Church subsists in the Catholic Church.
Dale,
That is not what the Church teaches.
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338
And yet the artical states....
"It restates key sections of a 2000 document the pope wrote when he was prefect of the congregation, "Dominus Iesus," which set off a firestorm of criticism among Protestant and other Christian denominations because it said they were not true churches but merely ecclesial communities and therefore did not have the "means of salvation.""
The New Testament Bible does NOT teach that a Jew, Muslim, Sikh, or any other non-follower of Jesus Christ will be granted access to Heaven.
It's a club with rules, and no matter how many men reinterpret those rules over the years, it still holds firm to the central belief that Jesus Christ is the only one true savior and path to heaven.
You're right, the Church does believe that Jesus Christ is the only way to salvation.
And as the Catechism states:848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338
With respect to the Bible, it's important to understand that as Catholics, we submit to the teachings of the Church. For Catholics, the Church is the sole interpreter of the Bible.
Furthermore, there is biblical evidence to support this teaching of the Church:
Romans 2
2:14 For when the Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature those things which are of the law, such persons, not having the law, are a law unto themselves.
2:15 For they reveal the work of the law written in their hearts, while their conscience renders testimony about them, and their thoughts within themselves also accuse or even defend them,
{2:16} unto the day when God shall judge the hidden things of men, through Jesus Christ, according to my Gospel.
Dale writes:
"Blind allegiance to any governing body, whether it be social, political, or religious is never a good way to go."
I agree, but you assume that my allegiance is blind. A false assumption (In my humble opinion).
Dale writes:
"Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Scientologists, all have bought themselves a one way ticket to eternal torture.....simply by being BORN."
I've already demonstrated that the Church does not teach nor believe that to be true. So I'm not sure why you've decided to bring this up again.
It’s neither honest nor conducive to good debate to ascribe beliefs to a group of people that you know to be untrue.
Oh, but I do believe it to be true. Your belief that it may not be true, or that the Catholic Church has some exempt clause to the contrary doesn't enter into it.
I firmly believe that the Christian religion teaches that those who deny Christ are going to hell.
“But whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.” Matt 10:33.
As for your blind allegiance, I was only going by the quote you posted : "With respect to the Bible, it's important to understand that as Catholics, we submit to the teachings of the Church. For Catholics, the Church is the sole interpreter of the Bible."
Which bring us back to the original story.....The Pope putting forth the idea that Christians NOT attending a Catholic Church, are not really on the path to salvation.
Of which I still submit is a ridiculous idea. At least THEY are attending churchs that actually teach (in one way or another) the supposed word of Christ. Why the decisive tone? Why the rhetoric? Isn't it enough that they are following the same mythology (more or less) as yourself?
Dale writes:
"Oh, but I do believe it to be true. Your belief that it may not be true, or that the Catholic Church has some exempt clause to the contrary doesn't enter into it."
So let me get this straight, you presume to know what the Catholic Church "really" teaches even if the Church pronounces the exact opposite?
Catechism of the Catholic Church:
847: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337
Be honest here Dale. It's obvious that your assumptions about the Catholic Church were wrong and that your initial post was inaccurate.
Dale writes: "That's right skippy. If it ain't the Catholic collection plate you are droppin ca$h into.....then you have just bought yourself a one way ticket to eternal damnation."
That's just not true; as demonstrated above.
I presume to know what the Bible really teaches, even if the church nitpicks loopholes to reconcile itself with the fact that millions of men, women, and children in the world are damned to eternal torture by the nature of their upbringing.
And the quote in the story ("It restates key sections of a 2000 document the pope wrote when he was prefect of the congregation, "Dominus Iesus," which set off a firestorm of criticism among Protestant and other Christian denominations because it said they were not true churches but merely ecclesial communities and therefore did not have the "means of salvation."") , and your quote (Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.) contradict each other.
But contradictions, the bible, and supposed church doctrine go hand in hand.
I choose not to believe that by the nature of one's birthplace, upbringing, and belief they will be damned for eternity, as clearly taught in the bible and every other man-made scripture.
Dale writes: "I presume to know what the Bible really teaches"
Well, that's a very bold statement to make. What kind of biblical exegisis training do you have?
Furthermore, you claimed that the Catholic Church taught that you must be Catholic to attain salvation. I've provided evidence to the contrary.
Lastly, can you explain how Dominus Iesus contradicts CCC 847: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.
As a matter of fact, Dominus Iesus supports what the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches.
From Dominus Iesus:
Furthermore, the salvific action of Jesus Christ, with and through his Spirit, extends beyond the visible boundaries of the Church to all humanity. Speaking of the paschal mystery, in which Christ even now associates the believer to himself in a living manner in the Spirit and gives him the hope of resurrection, the Council states: “All this holds true not only for Christians but also for all men of good will in whose hearts grace is active invisibly. For since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery”.37
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html
I have enough biblical (and Catholic) training to know and be certain that a denial of Jesus Christ as the true lord and savior will earn you a one way ticket to Hell.
Spice the idea up with all the teachings and Catechisms you see fit, that fact still holds firm.
Do you really believe that the Pope thinks that Muslims are going to Heaven? Do you really cling to the belief that Jews who deny Jesus as God's son will be saved?
Catholic footnotes to the bible do not change the basic hard facts.
Those who do NOT believe (and there are MILLIONS and MILLIONS who don't, and for good reason) that Jesus Christ (who's own historical existence is questionable at best) was the son of god are in direct conflict with Christian doctrine.
Preachers do not spend every Sunday extolling the idea that you don't really "have" to believe to get in. They preach what they do for a reason. Because they BELIEVE it.
Post a Comment