Does God want everyone to be Catholic?

[Brendan_64]

No one’s insisting other Christians have to be Catholics to achieve salvation. The question is “does God want everyone to be Catholic?” I believe Jesus made it very clear in The gospel of John in His prayer to the Father that the answer is yes. He wanted us " all to be one" for us to " follow the teaching of the Apostles by word or letter.

The Catholic Church has admitted some of the fault for the rupture in unity too. There were mistakes on all sides. But we have to find the right balance. Vatican II focused on starting with what we have in common which is good, but it doesn’t mean that we should not desire full unity. It doesn’t mean it’s all relative, that it doesn’t matter.

I’d agree with most of this.

But does God want all Christians to be ‘Catholic’, or does God want all Christians to be ‘catholic’? Are we as Catholics, truly catholic? Do we do all we can to be catholic?

I just think we ought to be careful not to pat ourselves on the back and point a finger at our non-Catholic brothers and sisters in Christ and go, “tut, tut, you lot are guilty of schism, God is displeased with you, you need to come back to us”.

When we recite the Nicene Creed we say that we believe in one true catholic Church, catholic with a small c. Until Christians are united, none of us belong to a catholic Church (not even us Roman Catholics).

I think that God does not want everyone to be Catholic, but rather that God wants everyone to be catholic.

So how catholic are we (Catholics)?

Do we reach out to our ecumenically to our Protestant brothers and sisters in Christ? Do we meet with them in Christian fellowship? Do we pray, worship, study scripture together? Do we discuss our similarities and differences in the spirit of ecumenical charity? Do we accept each other as part of a broader Church?

Or do we close our doors, build up the fences, lecture self-righteously at them, and insist they are the ones at fault who need to join our Church?

 

[pocohombre]

The Church is more mature, although its leadership is deprived of the in person acquaintance with Jesus when He walked the earth. Still, what you are saying is like saying the Apostles were better off before Jesus ascended into heaven than they were after the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. Was Peter better off when he taught that one must become a Jew before being accepted into the Church, or after he conferred with others, including Paul, and came to the conclusion that a non-Jew could directly enter into the Church? Dispensing with the knowledge acquired over the centuries by the Church through experience and the guidance of the Holy Spirit might be a foolhardy position. I no longer wish I had been a companion of Jesus when He walked the earth as I did when I was less mature in my faith. I realize now that the All Loving God put me in the perfect place according to His Divine Will. Glory be to God!

Of course. I was not comparing to when jesus walked the earth with the apostles for obviously the baptism in spirit had not happened. I was referring to first century church ,like 65 ad or 55 ad or 90 ad. Of course some things like the gentile engrafting were “ironed” out.Still one has to explain the phenomenom of growing from simple traditions and few,from a simpler creed (apostles) to many. Just look at the prolificness of Trent. A lot like our government .The biggest legislation once was roosevelt and social security( 150 pages) or was that civil rights ,all the way to obomination of obamacare and 2000 pages! .Like i said ,it is in our nature to legislate perfection,utopia,to "judaize’.It is also in our nature to say this good,better ,more mature. If the shoe fits…

 

[meltzerboy]

And the answer is…?

I think G-d wants everyone to be as kind, loving, and charitable toward their fellow humans and other creatures as they possibly can in their daily lives.

 

[R_C]

Is that Christian to say if you don’t do Easter on my day you are excommunicated? I don’t know, but s. Paul did teach us to avoid those who caused division and to hold on to the tradition. We also know that ever since the days of the apostles we had heretical and schismatic communities that were only nominally Christian but in fact excommunicated, no, worse, under anathema. If you think that’s not Christian, deal with the Apostles and the Church Fathers, be bold with them, argue against them. Who knows, perhaps you are right and they are wrong. In the meanwhile, the Church will keep doing what the Church does, and schismatics and heretics will keep doing what they do: literally whatever pleases them most, all the while ignoring tradition and cherry-picking scripture.

If the Son of God founded a visible, perpetual Church on Earth, of which He is Head, do you think it makes any sense that He wants some to not be part of it? That He wants some to be seventh day adventist, other muslims, other atheists, others new age neopagans, etc? Nobody says that He won’t be merciful and kind towards each and everyone even if we are not members of the Church, but obviously He wants all to be a member of His Church. And sorry, but reason and history show without the least degree of doubt that at this point in history that visible Church subsists in the Catholic Church. Sure, we will find in heaven people from all ecclesiastic communities, even from other religions, and I dare say even some atheists who weren’t really so in their heart, but that is not the point, and you are totally missing the point in your attempt to defend the basic anti-catholic premise of protestantism.

Apostolic is as apostolic does . Don’t we all do the Apostles Creed ? Did the apostles hear confession ? Did they pray to dead saints or to Mary or the Rosary,or call others "father ? Is there a declaration that Peter was infallible when needed ? Did they place the eucharist in a monstrance ? Did the apostles live in palaces,or have an army, form a country/states ? Were they celibate ? Were they monastic? Did they wear normal apparel,in and out of service(Mass) ? Did they speak in the language of the people ? How many sacraments did they administer ? And yes, some of these things are a “practices” but some stem from doctrine.

Yes, the Apostles heard confessions.

Yes, the Apostles prayed to dead saints and to Mary (not the Rosary, because Mary gave it to St. Dominic in the XIII Century).

Yes, the Apostles called others “father” (it’s even in the New Testament).

Yes, there is a declaration that Peter was infallible when needed, from the mouth of Christ Himself.

No, they did not place the Eucharist in a monstrance, because they were too busy not getting slaughtered and because the concept of Eucharistic adoration was not yet present in tradition. But the teachings of the Apostles and of the Church Fathers on the Eucharist sustain Catholicism all the way.

They did not live in palaces because there weren’t any, but in the age of kings and emperors the Church had to adapt to the times. It is not the place that matters, nor the clothes one wears, but the heart.

Some were celibate, and some were monastic.

We don’t know what they wore during Mass, but tradition developed a liturgy and I hope I never see a priest wearing shorts and a sleeveless gym shirt while holding in his hands the Body of Christ.

The need of a universal language to communicate is common-sense, and it’s ridiculous to think that in a time in which you had random dialects all over the place, each community had to struggle to come up with a rendition of the liturgy that was accurate enough.

They administered exactly 7 Sacraments, the ones established by Christ, the ones that the Church still administers and always will.

But maybe I am wrong, maybe we all did it wrong, and how strange that God allowed us to go so astray for 15 centuries, and how blessed we are that a rebellious Catholic monk stood up to teach us how mistaken we are, leading to 800 million Christians to be spread within 41,000 denominations. Boy, you can definitely see the finger of God at work and the unifying force of the Holy Spirit shining forth, and in this amazing work of grace we clearly see the fulfillment of the prayer of Christ: “I want them to be one flock with one shepherd”.

 

[rogue13]

Check out John Martignoni’s new talk that has this very title, “Does God Want Everyone to Be Catholic?” He also asks that if you are Baptist, Evangelical, Lutheran, etc. if God wants everyone to be of your particular faith tradition. He gives the ramifications for answering either yes or no for Catholic or non-Catholic alike: biblechristiansociety.com/products/audio

 

[Darryl_B]

I would just like to mention a case that happened a couple of years ago now in our evangelical church. A new trainee pastor did an Absolom on the senior pastor stirred up a large section of the church against the senior pastor. The trainee pastor eventually left and took a sizable chunk of the congregation to his new church.

On communicating to various disgruntled members of the congregation that it could perhaps be considered “rebellion”, the answer I got was that the church belonged to the people not vice-versa and therefore they had the God given right to take down anyone in authority. That is the essence of the protestant churches justification for what can only be described as “rebellion”. It is an entirely unChristian attitude but is rationalized within the mind of the protestant that it is a perfectly acceptable thing to do. The church exists FOR ME.

I smell a rat. Maybe thats how all denominations formed (the one exception being the Catholic Church).

 

[pocohombre]

God always respects our free will.

Yes but do we respect others free will? Do our Church’s? Yes,today we do but yesterday? Did anyone decree against bible societies or reading in the vernacular or decree against freedom of conscience?

 

[steve_b]

I’d agree with most of this.

But does God want all Christians to be ‘Catholic’, or does God want all Christians to be ‘catholic’? Are we as Catholics, truly catholic? Do we do all we can to be catholic?

The thread says [C]atholic.
B:

I just think we ought to be careful not to pat ourselves on the back and point a finger at our non-Catholic brothers and sisters in Christ and go, “tut, tut, you lot are guilty of schism, God is displeased with you, you need to come back to us”.

We are to speak the truth in love.
B:

When we recite the Nicene Creed we say that we believe in one true catholic Church, catholic with a small c.

As I understand, small case didn’t come till the 6th or 7th century. Therefore, In 325 a.d. it would look like this “I BELIEVE IN ONE HOLY CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH”
B:

Until Christians are united, none of us belong to a catholic Church (not even us Roman Catholics).

We’ve been the Catholic Church from the beginning.

• Acts 9:31 So the church throughout all κατά kata…ὅλος holos Judea and Galilee and Sama’ria…" iow the Church is the Kataholos Church = Catholic Church The English word catholic is a transliteration of the Greek katholikos which is a compound word from kata, which means according to, and holos, which means whole. http://www.catholic.com/tracts/what-catholic-means
• St IgnatiusBp of Antioch, ~69 a.d. - ~107 a.d., ordained by apostles, disciple of St John the apostle, called the Church the Catholic Church Epistle to the Smyrnæansof which schismatics won’t be going to heaven Epistle to the Philadelphians
• St Polycarp, Bp Smyrna, disciple of St John called the Church the “Catholic Church” The Martyrdom of Polycarp
• Irenaeus ~180 a.d. wrote “Against Heresies” called the Church the “Catholic Church” Adversus haereses Bk 1 Ch 10 v 3], and also Irenaeus who was taught by Polycarp, teaches all must agree with Rome [Bk 3, Ch 3, v 2-3]Chapter 3
• Cyprian~250 a.d. Epistle 54
• The Nicene Creed, 325 a.d., it’s a matter of faith to believe in the “One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church”
• etc etc

B:

I think that God does not want everyone to be Catholic, but rather that God wants everyone to be catholic.

That is against the teaching of scripture, Tradition & the Church. 846
B:

So how catholic are we (Catholics)?

Do we reach out to our ecumenically to our Protestant brothers and sisters in Christ? Do we meet with them in Christian fellowship? Do we pray, worship, study scripture together? Do we discuss our similarities and differences in the spirit of ecumenical charity? Do we accept each other as part of a broader Church?

There is no such thing as seperate but equal. Jesus started one Church. That’s what makes the Catholic Church Holy. Not because of the membership but because who founded the Catholic Church and sustains it.

Mere mortals founded all Protestant sects. For 2000 years that kind of division from the Catholic Church has been condemned. There’s no sugar coating that.

• Paul condemned it Galatians 5:19-21
• Ignatius condemned it Epistle to the Philadelphians
• Irenaeus condemned it Bk 3 [Chapter 2 (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103302.htm) vs 2-3 & Bk 3,Chapter 3 vs 2-3
• had to stop for space

 

[pocohombre]

As I understand, small case didn’t come till the 6th or 7th century. Therefore, In 325 a.d. it would look like this “I BELIEVE IN ONE HOLY CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH”

Some say closer to 5th century ,others say had small case for some letters 1st century.regardless, based on other factors ,most translations have small case for the adjectives of"holy,catholic,apostolic" and capital for the noun “Church”

We’ve been the Catholic Church from the beginning.

Actually the first name was “christian” ,then people of the Way, then catholic. Just when the adjective became a noun is another discussion.

 

[pocohombre]

I would just like to mention a case that happened a couple of years ago now in our evangelical church. A new trainee pastor did an Absolom on the senior pastor stirred up a large section of the church against the senior pastor. The trainee pastor eventually left and took a sizable chunk of the congregation to his new church.

On communicating to various disgruntled members of the congregation that it could perhaps be considered “rebellion”, the answer I got was that the church belonged to the people not vice-versa and therefore they had the God given right to take down anyone in authority. That is the essence of the protestant churches justification for what can only be described as “rebellion”. It is an entirely unChristian attitude but is rationalized within the mind of the protestant that it is a perfectly acceptable thing to do. The church exists FOR ME.

I smell a rat. Maybe thats how all denominations formed (the one exception being the Catholic Church).

Yes let all men be called liars or rats or anything else but only God is good. One can certainly find carnal motivation for much theology,decisions in all churches.

 

[pocohombre]

pocohombre;10606379:

(No need to shout. )

OTOH, we have to be careful not to be overly liberal.

Yes, God does want all people to become Catholic. Why? Because Jesus left His promise to be with us until the end of time with His Church, founded on Peter, (Matt 16:18) not with all of us by virtue of our being Christians. Only the Catholic Church, by God’s own decision, has the whole truth. Now, if anyone says that one must be Catholic to be saved, they are clearly wrong, and I agree with you. But is there salvation through any other name but Jesus? No! Is there a better way to Jesus than through His Church? No! So, naturally God wants everyone to be Catholic, because it is the best way to come to Jesus. It has the Bread of Life in the Holy Eucharist, and those to whom it has given the power of Consecration. It has the forgiveness of sins even with imperfect sorrow through the priest. It has the whole truth in its teaching through the safeguarding and inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It teaches the proper role of Mary as Mediatrix with her Son, as Mediatrix of all graces, as the safest of all ways to Jesus and our salvation. Truth, Holy Eucharist, the Sacraments, Mary. Yes, God wants every person to be a Catholic, because God in His Love wants everyone to have his or her best opportunity for eternal salvation. Death on a cross for our salvation is God’s gift of love to the world, and the Catholic Church is God’s choice of instrumentalities s to make that salvation accessible. It is also a gift of God’s Love. We, who know this, are bound to become members of the Church. All others are excused only by their ignorance.

Yes and no .thank you for your calm demeanor.

 

[steve_b]

Some say closer to 5th century ,others say had small case for some letters 1st century.regardless, based on other factors ,most translations have small case for the adjectives of"holy,catholic,apostolic" and capital for the noun “Church”

The point was, small case was not in use in 325 a.d.
p:

Actually the first name was “christian”

technically that is in ch 11 of acts

*Acts 9:31 So the church throughout all κατά kataὅλοςholos] Judea and Galilee and Sama’ria…" iow the Church is the **Kataholos Church = Catholic Church *The English word catholic is a transliteration of the Greek katholikos which is a compound word from kata, which means according to, and holos, which means whole
P:

,then people of the Way, then catholic. Just when the adjective became a noun is another discussion.

Catholics are the 1st Christians. And the Church is the Catholic Church. THAT’s the Church Jesus “the Way” established on Peter. Catholic Church is a noun in all the writings from the 1st century. Ignatius was Bishop from ~69 a.d. to ~107 a.d.

 

[pocohombre]

pocohombre;10606379:

All the rules, were slow to evolve. And, only then due to false doctrines & heresy being claimed as from the apostles.

Poco …u cant have it both ways. We must understand that it took 400 years or so before the pure faith had to be declared in a more forceful way. Those were brutal times …desperate times require desperate measures. And then came along Islam…and the Holy Wars began. And then, along came Luther, and we brothers/sisters were fighting ourselves. Satan always finds a way to stir the pot.

But, we are the true branch, the peacemakers…led by succession of Peter. Always supported by Christ …always working for the greater glory and cause of Christ. The Church Militant…every being assaulted, always battling the Dark Side. But, not by might or force, …but by the Beatitudes, under the sign of the Cross

Understand.Is necessity the mother of invention? Were there more brutal times than the first century ? Was not every apostle martyred save the one who Jesus loved? Weren’t most of the Roman bishops killed the first 100 years ? Did that first church need to be forceful,drastic? The most drastic then was to turn one over to Satan or excommunicate for his own benefit. They kept things close to the vest, preach the Cross, more than insist on a “visible” church.I said more than,not either or… How did we get to 40,000divisions or killing heretics,or taking bibles away,or having states and armies ? What are we glorying in? We shall glory in Christ, and His universal body, in which there is no guile, with a solid rock foundation. Do we preach Christ who baptizes us into His Church,His Body? Do we preach a particular church with a particular baptism into a particular zero tolerance Christ ? Would one be wrong to say there many more scriptural evidences for the former than the latter? Yes,evidences for both, just more for the former for proper emphasis?

 

[Darryl_B]

Yes let all men be called liars or rats or anything else but only God is good. One can certainly find carnal motivation for much theology,decisions in all churches.

pocohombre, I was talking about an inherent philosophy among protestants, not the protestants themselves. It’s a philosophy I rarely see among Catholics, I suspect because they see the origin and nature of their Church somewhat differently to the way protestants perceive theirs.

 

[pocohombre]

pocohombre, I was talking about an inherent philosophy among protestants, not the protestants themselves. It’s a philosophy I rarely see among Catholics, I suspect because they see the origin and nature of their Church somewhat differently to the way protestants perceive theirs.

Thank you and that is how I understood it, the motivation,or “thinking” behind decisions or theology. Never the less one is as one does(thank you Forest Gump). If you smell a rat it is because someone is acting like a rat and perhaps is a rat. We sin because we are sinners. As you properly see the sliver in these protestants theological eye, do you see the possible 2x4 in yours? Sorry,had to give this proper rendering of the Lord’s words here. No, I am agreeing with you on a proper assessment even disdain for the situation you spoke of. My I humbly say improper motivations or theological thinking can be seen in some CC actions/decrees also.

 

[pocohombre]

The point was, small case was not in use in 325 a.d.

ok

technically that is in ch 11 of acts

Acts 9:31 So the church throughout all κατά kataὅλοςholos] Judea and Galilee and Sama’ria…" iow the Church is the **Kataholos Church = Catholic Church **The English word catholic is a transliteration of the Greek katholikos which is a compound word from kata, which means according to, and holos, which means whole

ok now you dunn it I had to get my nasb greek testament out. I do not find the same greek words of kata/holos. i have kappa alpha theta/omicron lamba eta sigma

Catholic Church is a noun in all the writings from the 1st century. Ignatius was Bishop from ~69 a.d. to ~107 a.d.

Again, they did not capitals so how do you know catholic was capital, part of the noun ? How do you know catholic was not the adjective? Is it like the creed where most translations have small c? All the writings of 1st century ? I think it is used once maybe twice.

 

[steve_b]

ok now you dunn it I had to get my nasb greek testament out. I do not find the same greek words of kata/holos. i have kappa alpha theta/omicron lamba eta sigma

Re: Acts 9:31

bibleapps.com/study/acts/9-31.htm

put your cursor on each greek word left side of page. It translates the word just putting the cursor on the word. If you Click on the word, you’ll see the lexicon for that word.

or just go straight to the lexicon directly by clicking on each highlighted word below

Ἡ μὲν οὖν ἐκκλησία καθ’ ὅλης τῆς
p:

Again, they did not capitals so how do you know catholic was capital, part of the noun ? How do you know catholic was not the adjective? Is it like the creed where most translations have small c? All the writings of 1st century ? I think it is used once maybe twice.

Since I wasn’t there, I’m old but not that old , I pulled my information from a university site.
princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Lower_case.html

 

[pocohombre]

Re: Acts 9:31

bibleapps.com/study/acts/9-31.htm

put your cursor on each greek word left side of page. It translates the word just putting the cursor on the word. If you Click on the word, you’ll see the lexicon for that word.

or just go straight to the lexicon directly by clicking on each highlighted word below

ok now i see it but seems to be a bit different for what others say constitutes basis for the word catholic.It is listed as adjective.ans Ignatius used around 107AD I think

Ἡ μὲν οὖν ἐκκλησία καθ’ ὅλης τῆς

Since I wasn’t there, I’m old but not that old , I pulled my information from a university site.
princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Lower_case.html

yes i saw same thing.That is why i said some letters had lower case 1st century.

 

[Darryl_B]

Thank you and that is how I understood it, the motivation,or “thinking” behind decisions or theology. Never the less one is as one does(thank you Forest Gump). If you smell a rat it is because someone is acting like a rat and perhaps is a rat. We sin because we are sinners. As you properly see the sliver in these protestants theological eye, do you see the possible 2x4 in yours? Sorry,had to give this proper rendering of the Lord’s words here. No, I am agreeing with you on a proper assessment even disdain for the situation you spoke of. My I humbly say improper motivations or theological thinking can be seen in some CC actions/decrees also.

Excuse me pocohombre, but I have seldom seen the 2x4 argument used in anything other than justification of ones own position. Which has made me smile much, as it would indicate you have ignored much of what I said. Protestantism is improper motivation and or theological thinking at it’s core. (Forget the focus on rats, sorry to set you off on that). I cannot see any justification for it.

 

[yogosans14]

I can’t attend a Catholic Church until I’m probably 18 so for the time being I might have to attend this Methodist church right next to me. I think Catholics say it doesn’t matter as long as their Trinitarian, but idk I could he wrong . Some believe salavation is found only in the Church.