Keep in mind the word is bride not “brides.” There is only ONE Church, and this Church was compared to a marriage in that we are then one flesh. As it is, as well, with Christ and His Church. - one flesh.
Exactly!Keep in mind the word is bride not “brides.” There is only ONE Church, and this Church was compared to a marriage in that we are then one flesh. As it is, as well, with Christ and His Church. - one flesh.
‘He who hears YOU hears ME’… in one voice, not many; and definitely not contradictory.
Think about it, 4given.
Was Judas a member of the church? Now that’s something to ponder. He was a member of the covenant people of Israel, but he was a ‘son of perdition’ - the church is the ekklesia, those who were called out. Judas’ salvation or possibility of salvation has been debated before. He lived and died before the label “Christian” was developed.
I read the link. I do not see it making the point concerning capitalization.
I’ll have to think about gnosticism and how it relates to this - off hand I would say they were so far from Christianity that they didn’t count as heretics. I may be wrong here.
one bride or one Bride? There is only one Church, and the issue here is whether it is the Catholic church or the catholic church. I find this to be circular reasoning.Keep in mind the word is bride not “brides.” There is only ONE Church, and this Church was compared to a marriage in that we are then one flesh. As it is, as well, with Christ and His Church. - one flesh.
‘He who hears YOU hears ME’… in one voice, not many; and definitely not contradictory.
Think about it, 4given.
There is only one church. Protestants deny that it can be defined solely as the visible structure of the Catholic church. Protestant churches typically regard themselves as parts of the One Church, not the whole church, as opposed to the exclusive nature of the Catholic Church’s assertion that it, and it alone, is the Church.Exactly!
Just as in marriage a man and a woman become one flesh, the Church and Jesus are one. They must completely concur in everything taught. If one Church teaches one thing and another teaches another, who then can they both be teaching what Jesus taught?
Its simple really. Jesus was not into polygamy.
I’ve been on this thread for 2 hours straight (I think)! I’m reading too quickly and not taking the time I should on this. I need to take a break and look at this later. On a re-read it looks like you may be right. Thanks for posting. Later.Lactantius
“It is, therefore, the **Catholic Church **alone which retains true worship. This is the fountain of truth; this, the domicile of faith; this, the temple of God. Whoever does not enter there or whoever does not go out from there, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation. . . . Because, however, all the various groups of heretics are confident that they are the Christians and think that theirs is the Catholic Church, let it be known that this is the true Church, in which there is confession and penance and which takes a health-promoting care of the sins and wounds to which the weak flesh is subject” (Divine Institutes 4:30:11–13 [A.D. 307]).
Augustine
“We believe also in the holy Church, that is, the Catholic Church. For heretics violate the faith itself by a false opinion about God; schismatics, however, withdraw from fraternal love by hostile separations, although they believe the same things we do. Consequently, neither heretics nor schismatics belong to the Catholic Church; not heretics, because the Church loves God; and not schismatics, because the Church loves neighbor” (Faith and the Creed 10:21 [A.D. 393]).
“I do not hesitate to put the Catholic catechumen, burning with divine love, before a baptized heretic. Even within the Catholic Church herself we put the good catechumen ahead of the wicked baptized person . . . For Cornelius, even before his baptism, was filled up with the Holy Spirit [Acts 10:44–48], while Simon [Magus], even after his baptism, was puffed up with an unclean spirit [Acts 8:13–19]” (ibid., 4:21[28]).
“Whoever is separated from this Catholic Church, by this single sin of being separated from the unity of Christ, no matter how estimable a life he may imagine he is living, shall not have life, but the wrath of God rests upon him” (ibid., 141:5).
Fulgentius of Ruspe
“Anyone who receives the sacrament of baptism, whether in the Catholic Church or in a heretical or schismatic one, receives the whole sacrament; but salvation, which is the strength of the sacrament, he will not have, if he has had the sacrament outside the **Catholic Church **[and remains in deliberate schism]. He must therefore return to the Church, not so that he might receive again the sacrament of baptism, which no one dare repeat in any baptized person, but so that he may receive eternal life in Catholic society, for the obtaining of which no one is suited who, even with the sacrament of baptism, remains estranged from the Catholic Church” (The Rule of Faith 43 [A.D. 524]).
I am amazinly shocked that you cannot see the essence. I suggest you reread carefully, because that is not what I am seeing.
catholic.com/library/Salvation_Outside_the_Church.asp
Yes, you are right here. I suppose I should have said not that it is “required”, but that it is reasonable.
Me too as this sounds like heresy to me!
This sounds more like it.
Well, there was only one Ark, was there not? I’m really not sure of any Scriptural support for this doctrine, apart from the usual Matthew 16:18 and so on.
It doesn’t matter what Protestants deny. They don’t have the authority to claim or deny anything to begin with. Their right to even be included under the name ‘catholic’ is soley because the Catholic Church - who* does* have the authority - says they can be included (via baptism).
OK then, teaching cannot change; it is immutable! Wow that was way too easy
means yes, I am being silly… 
Claudius bishop of turin is a good example of a Catholic iconoclast, its a good read worth googling.
How is that relevant? There have been many heretical bishops in the history of the Catholic Church.