D
Dokimas
Guest
Well said. Thank you.
- Status
D
Dokimas
Guest
It’s like saying there’s no ‘I’ in team. Correct, Agent?
C
cooterhein
Guest
You’re quite right, it hasn’t happened on this thread. I jumped to conclusions based on your “Roman Catholic” label and assumed that you were similar to other CAF RC’s in certain ways. I think you’re doing a very nice job of doing your best to be a good Christian; what worries me, though, is that you’ll find that it conflicts with being a good Catholic. Or that you’ll completely change your idea of what it means to be a good Christian in order to avoid said conflict.
We should be united in Christ. We should be united in a common Christian faith, which requires a certain level of agreement on the nature of God (ie., the Trinity), the nature of Christ (ie., homoiousiosis), monotheism as opposed to henotheism…those kinds of things. But I also think there’s a problem when getting people united behind the man from Vatican City is of comparable importance to getting people united behind the Savior from Galilee.
Agreed. But here’s a fun question- would you go so far as to say there’s some Catholics who use the Scriptures along with Church teaching and Church Tradition in order to maintain said divide? When I see people quoting certain portions of Vatican I, it kind of seems that way sometimes.
Yes, of course. But again, I return to the juxtaposition of being perfectly united in the man from Galilee and being perfectly united in the man from Vatican City. The latter, of course, ostensibly acts as the Vicar of Christ. You get to Christ through him. A few Catholics in the real world (and most of the ones who stick around these kinds of sites long-term) believe you must get to Christ through him and through the Church that he’s the head of, even if you’re an invincibly ignorant Protestant and you don’t realize he’s facilitating that for you. (Documents that read “On the unicity and salvific centrality of the Catholic Church” have a way of getting people to say such things). After all, if you don’t believe Christians need the Vicar and it’s really possible to just go ahead and be united in Christ…well, that winds up being really good Christianity, but not such good Catholicism.
Nope. You should not take it in that way.
Unless you’re a Catholic on CAF and you spend a good deal of time in the “Traditional Catholicism” sub-forum…
Case in point- forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=203233
Notable examples: Post 1- All Christian truth originates from the Catholic Church. However, as these protestants are no longer in union with the Bishop of Rome, they now espouse all manner of heresy, such as Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide.
The Catholic Church has always taught that “Outside of the Catholic Church, there is no salvation,” except in cases of invincible ignorance. Pope Pius IX during Vatican I wrote: Quote about the ark of salvation…
Therefore, it stands to reason that Holy Mother Church must do all that she can to bring the Protestants back into communion with the one, true Church.
Post 2- The problem with “ecumenism” is that it is modernist idea but it is purposely given with no definition. If ecumenism means evangelization then why the name change? It’s non-sense and only causes confusion. Ecumenism has reared it’s ugly head time and time again to be a man-made attempt to bring about a false man-based unity.
Post 3- Ecumenism is a marketing term for conversion.
Post 4- Ecumenism is fine as long as its goal is dialog to bring the heretics back to the Church. If that’s not the goal then it is useless, and perhaps even bad and harmful.
I know I’m not the only one who’s noticed how popular this kind of statement is around here.
Post 5- True ecumenism is designed to be a tool of conversion. Through leading by example (the most powerful tool of conversion) and being tolerant of those who refuse to convert, we make our best efforts at converting others. Charity is especially important when trying to convert others.
And so forth. That thread ran for nearly two years. You can literally find hundreds of examples of CAF Catholics (a few of them ex-Protestants) talking about the necessity of converting Protestants. That’s just one thread. I can find more if you want; it’s pretty easy to do. Like right here- a recent thread from the Evangelization section. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=496347&highlight=ecumenism It’s not just in the Traditional sub-forum; it’s everywhere.
J
JeanneH
Guest
.
I hope no on here finds this post mean spirited but here goes.
I would like to start by saying that I am far from being politically correct so I hope I don’t offend. This is just MY opinion.
I was raised in the CC and Catholic schools prior to 1960.
We were taught that salvation was only in the CC. Prior Popes have taught the same thing. We were told that we should not visit Protestant churches.
Prior Popes taught infallibly that the Mass should be said in Latin because there is a chance of corrupting the Mass in the vernacular. I for one think that this is what happened to our Mass. I think Pastors are in direct violation of the Magisterium when they say the Mass in the vernacular.
I was to an interfaith meeting at a local Catholic Church and was surprised at what the Catholic priest had to say. He told a story about being a Chaplin in the service and was asked what type of christian he was. He replied that it didn’t matter. If so, why did he become a Catholic priest?
He also said that the HS was leading the movement. Why would the HS want to splinter the CC which is just was is happening if you can find salvation outside the CC.
The female Episcopalian priest said she left the CC because she wanted to be a priest. She believes she has apostolic succession even though she does not follow the Pope…
I was disheartened to read the paragraphs in the CCC about ecumenism. I agree that God can do as he pleases and there are some circumstances where some have not learned the truth.
I firmly believe in John 6:53-58. You can only receive the Real Presence in the CC.
I believe priest who are encouraging ecumenism are leading their parishioners in the wrong direction.
I think ecumenism is in error and I hope the church sees this error soon.
Jeanne
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
I am a Catholic (converted in 1985) that believes in apostolic succession with the Catholic Church centered in Rome. That’s why I use the label. I consider myself to be a ‘Bible Catholic’ to a large degree. I feel that’s where God put me, and because of that, it’s where I’ll be.
If you believe in Christ and His sacrifice for all mankind, you are where God wants you to be. Could our places change? If God wants it so.
The ‘man’ from Vatican City is a ‘man’. One I believe to be of apostolic succession as I said. He is for Christ. You are for Christ. "For there is no man that doth a miracle in my name and can soon speak ill of me. Forbid him not: for he that is not against you is for you." He is where God put him, just as I imagine your pastor/preacher is where he feels God put him.
All have sinned and come short of the glory of God. It’s not for us to judge. I like to think that, just as Christ asked the Father to forgive those who persecuted Him, mistakes are made by some Christians for they know not what they do. We all are at different spiritual levels and we all do the best we can for where we are. Should we love them any less? Not according to what Christ taught us. We all do what we think is serving Him.
I think you’re mistaken. I don’t know of anyone that believes you ‘must’ get to Christ through him. Did people believe that about Peter? No. Peter was an apostle, a teacher, a Christian leader. We believe the same about the Pope. That’s the way apostolic succession works. Have there been bad Popes? Most assuredly. I do not believe you can judge His Church based on men. Remember, all are sinners. If it’s acceptable to judge His Church because of sinful men, when do we question Christ for choosing Judas, or those that left Him and walked with Him no more (John 6:66 ironic, isn’t it)?
I’m not responding to any of the other points you’ve raised with examples from other threads. I have my beliefs and we probably would disagree on some of them. I would be glad to join any thread and give a Biblical explanation, as best as I can, on any of those subjects you wish to discuss with me. All I hope for, when entering into these ‘debates’, is that others can see my beliefs come from an interpretation of scriptures, even if you disagree with the interpretation. I also pray that I can speak of my beliefs compassionately and with charitability required of all Christians.
T
testamentum
Guest
(Luke 9:50)
My problem with Catholics quoting this verse to substantiate any claim of Christian unity with Protestantism is that how many of the non-Catholic denominations are in anyway with us whenever Evangelicals/Fundamentalists/SDA/JW
And Jesus said to him: Forbid him not: for he that is not against you is for youMy problem with Catholics quoting this verse to substantiate any claim of Christian unity with Protestantism is that how many of the non-Catholic denominations are in anyway with us whenever Evangelicals/Fundamentalists/SDA/JW
s/Baptists etc,etc, still refer to the church as the Whore of Babylon` and rage against Catholic and Apostolic teaching regarding Baptism,The real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist,etc,etc,that the Pope is the antichrist,that Catholics are idolators,that Our Lady is not a virgin nor immaculately conceived,the list is endless.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
There are imperfections on all sides. None is without sin. If Christ could ask forgivness for His persecutors, surely we can pray for those who attack our faith.
R
Radical
Guest
Hello Prodigal….thanks for the encouraging post, well done.
good point
Well, I must admit I am “against” Catholicism with respect to its claim of being the one true Church (and the corollary that Protestant Churches are religious communities and not true churches). I believe many conservative Catholics don’t understand that if I was forced to choose between 1) the Catholic Church being the one true Church and 2) Jesus’ ministry, life and resurrection being mere legend, I would easily select the second option as being the more likely. That is my conclusion after much research. As such, if a Catholic convinced me that Protestantism was wrong, I expect that I would become an agnostic and not a Catholic. I doubt that I am unique in that regard and I expect it would also be true that if a Protestant succeeded in convincing a Catholic that the Catholic Church is not the one true church, then that Catholic (ex-Catholic) might very well end up a non-Christian. It is a tricky thing. The “Catholic Church is the one true Church” belief stands in the way of full unity, but attacking the idea may not create a more ecumenical Christian…it may create an agnostic.
The “separated brethren” label officially applied to Protestants (by Catholics) has both positive and negative features. It is nice that Catholics have come around to recognizing us as their brethren. On the other hand, the “separated” bit can be emphasized to point out (yet again) the idea that Catholics view Protestants as being separated from the one true Church. I wish Catholics would look at it from that perspective and then ask themselves how they would feel if Protestants officially called Catholics their “unreformed brethren”. Would the Catholic be encouraged that the Protestants recognize him as a brother? Would the Catholic be discouraged or even offended knowing that the term “unreformed” was used to remind one that it is understood that the Catholic is still laboring under the errors of bad tradition? We have taken a step to unity, but there is a significant step yet to be taken
was a pleasure sharing
J
JeanneH
Guest
Don’t forget, that before Protestants there was one Catholic church with apostolic succession and the Protestants separated, to the point of removing books from the bible. What good reform was done by the Protestants?All other religions have splintered off from the True Catholic church. It is only here that one can recieve the Real Body and Blood of Christ. See John 6:53-58
All other religions were started by a man or maybe a women not happy in the Cathiolic Church and not by Jesus and his apostles.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
I think we’re slipping off topic?
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
I’ve given this some thought before responding, because I know we will disagree. The important thing, I think, is can we disagree charitably? I don’t subscribe to sola scriptura, maybe not quite to the degree that you explain you don’t subscribe to the ‘one true Church’ belief, that all Christian Churches are a part of.
Is it possible that you can accept my belief in the one true Church as a Catholic belief and still consider Catholics as Christians? I can accept that most Protestants espouse sola scriptura and accept that it’s mostly a Protestant belief, without it changing the fact that I believe Protestants are still Christians. That is the important factor here. Do we accept each other as Christians? That’s where our unity is; through our love and belief in Christ.
I’m not an authority, but does either belief have an impact on one’s salvation? Personally, I don’t think anyone can answer that question. It is Christ’s authority and Christ alone. He is the only one that see what’s in everyone’s heart and He is the one that will judge us all.
R
Radical
Guest
as Christians we sure should be able to pull that off
I believe that Catholics are Christians…there is no doubt in my mind. I believe that the Catholic Church is properly called a church and is ** part** of the one true Church…same as the Orthodox Church, the Lutheran Church, the Reformed Church etc.
I hope for an even greater unity and a greater level of brotherhood than what is acheived by merely recognizing that we are all Christians.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
I don’t believe we could seek unity if we were not all a ‘part’ of the one true Church. In short, we are closer to agreement than you might think, even though through a broader discussion we might find areas of disagreement, which I believe a large part to be a matter of ‘semantics’ or failures to communicate properly causing misunderstandings.
I believe a greater level of brotherhood is more easily achieved by recognizing that we are all Christians. Christians are commanded to love one another. Recognition seems to be the first step necessary, in light of many of the discussions on these forums.
- Status