How can Protestants be forgiven for sins? (Please, any adivce appreciated)

[Reuben_J]

yes. I don’t voluntarily ignore anyone. It doesn’t mean I am obligated to read or respond to everything.

I have used the ignored list and forgot for whatever reasons and why. Much later I noticed that I couldn’t read the posters’ posts because they are in my ignored list. And I thought, why did I put them in my ignored list because now I wanted to read their posts but couldn’t.

It is rather tricky. I think I you did a wise thing - you don’t have to put them in your ignore list - just don’t read their posts if you don’t want to, and don’t have to respond to them, for whatever reason.

That way if you change your mind, you can always read their posts again.

 

[ajcstr]

How does the contemporary Church handle schmismatics? Do the anathemas of Trent still apply to modern schismatics?

I frankly do not understand what you are asking. We do not regard Christians who are not Catholic as “schismatics”.

During the great schism the Western Church anathematized the Eastern Church and vice versa. These anathemas were subsequently lifted (though I don’t know how this was formally done).

Can Vatican II be viewed as a lifting of the anathemas declared at the Council of Trent as they relate to Protestant beliefs regarding justification/salvation?

 

[Wannano]

I have used the ignored list and forgot for whatever reasons and why. Much later I noticed that I couldn’t read the posters’ posts because they are in my ignored list. And I thought, why did I put them in my ignored list because now I wanted to read their posts but couldn’t.

It is rather tricky. I think I you did a wise thing - you don’t have to put them in your ignore list - just don’t read their posts if you don’t want to, and don’t have to respond to them, for whatever reason.

That way if you change your mind, you can always read their posts again.

Not only that, sometimes posters come back with an apology or admission of changed thinking. If they are on Ignore you don’t see anything positive they may contribute either. My own weakness is to respond to quickly to those who are agitators.

 

[Wannano]

You have been here for some time now, Wannano. The posters to whom you refer merit one thing only…to be **ignored/

They are, in fact, being faithless to the authentic** Magisterium, which is living. And they show themselves to be the sort of Catholic whom Pope Francis warns about

I have been here for awhile, maybe too long! I think I may confuse the issues because I am unfamiliar with all the correct terminology.

We embrace the clergy and the faithful of the non-Catholic Churches and Communities for what they are: members of the one Body of Christ who are our brothers and sisters

 

[ajcstr]

From the Catholic Church’s point of view, what would have to happen to make the communion perfect?

Give a read to this (nice section on the anathemas also)… Let me know what you think.

douglasbeaumont.com/2014/03/12/what-is-full-communion-with-the-catholic-church/

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Great post, Father. If I might piggyback on your first paragraph,

then I would add that I have a number of friends who have told me they are reluctant to use the “Ignore List” feature. To them I say “So then do you ‘Subscribe’ to every single Youtuber?”

The ignore feature is absolutely wonderful. Frankly, it would be even better if it could simply exclude entirely those posts from the thread that have been deemed useless and without any interest whatsoever.

 

[Peter_J]

yes. I don’t voluntarily ignore anyone. It doesn’t mean I am obligated to read or respond to everything.

Honestly, even though I have encouraged various people to try CAF’s ignore list feature (in many cases it’s friends of mine who are feeling extremely depressed over stuff they’ve read on the web), I have to admit that sometimes I wish it would help me more than it does, and hence I don’t actually use it as much as some people might think I do.

One thing that I occasionally observe to myself is “I like [fill in name of Protestant poster] and yet I only actually read a small fraction of his/her posts, because most of his/her posts are responses to ‘stuff’ that I have no interest in and prefer to keep my distance from.”

 

[tgGodsway]

I hear you. Theology is complicated and not everything pertains to each person individually. I have a question.

Why do Roman Catholics use the word “protestant” as much as they do? Most of my affiliation come from this point of view, yet the word is almost non-existent in my circle.

Neither is there any fixation on what Catholics do nor don’t do. It is almost as if the “protestants” have soooo moved on from the original disagreement with Catholics. I brought up this point with young people recently and most of them have never heard the word protestant. Nor do they know the history of protesters against Roman Catholic authority. It is a shame in one sense (because church history is not being taught) and maybe a blessing in another sense because we are all part of the same spiritual body of Christ.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I hear you. Theology is complicated and not everything pertains to each person individually. I have a question.

Why do Roman Catholics use the word “protestant” as much as they do? Most of my affiliation come from this point of view, yet the word is almost non-existent in my circle.

Neither is there any fixation on what Catholics do nor don’t do. It is almost as if the “protestants” have soooo moved on from the original disagreement with Catholics. I brought up this point with young people recently and most of them have never heard the word protestant. Nor do they know the history of protesters against Roman Catholic authority. It is a shame in one sense (because church history is not being taught) and maybe a blessing in another sense because we are all part of the same spiritual body of Christ.

Actually, as Catholics we do not use that term that much. It is no longer really that meaningful or descriptive and so Rome does not use it.

I find it is used on this forum more than in any other environment I have been in. Which is not very astonishing when you consider that a number of those Catholics who contribute here speak as if they are themselves from some past era that has been left behind. Happily.

 

[steve_b]

I hear you. Theology is complicated and not everything pertains to each person individually. I have a question.

Why do Roman Catholics use the word “protestant” as much as they do? Most of my affiliation come from this point of view, yet the word is almost non-existent in my circle.

Neither is there any fixation on what Catholics do nor don’t do. It is almost as if the “protestants” have soooo moved on from the original disagreement with Catholics.

Do they still hold to the original tenets of Protestantism?

tgGodsway:

I brought up this point with young people recently and most of them have never heard the word protestant. Nor do they know the history of protesters against Roman Catholic authority.

Do you educate them on where to get the information they need to know?

tgGodsway:

It is a shame in one sense (because church history is not being taught)

Agreed.

But Today it’s also almost impossible to excuse an individual of ignorance today, (of the innocent variety) especially given the phenomenal ease of accessing information. People have at their finger tips, amazingly powerful computers in their hands. Ask them any question on any subject, and they have an answer in seconds.

That’s why the CCC says
**1791 **This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man “takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin.” In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits."

BTW,

By 2020, it’s estimated that 7 billion smart phones will be in circulation.

tgGodsway:

and maybe a blessing in another sense because we are all part of the same spiritual body of Christ.

One could also say, So were all of these, catholic.com/tract/the-great-heresies since all of them are/were baptized.

Yet they are all heresies.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

From the Catholic Church’s point of view, what would have to happen to make the communion perfect?

That would be a situation in which there is a harmony with regard to the faith, ecclesiastical governance and the sharing of sacraments.

Again, Pope Benedict said, relative to a future in which we are reunited, *"unity does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return: that is, to deny and to reject one’s own faith history. Absolutely not!

It does not mean uniformity in all expressions of theology and spirituality, in liturgical forms and in discipline."*

Thanks, again my terminology confusing the issue. How do you term Catholics that are faithless to the Majesterium?

That depends upon the nature of what from the Magisterium is not being followed, who makes that determination, and what are the consequences of that determination.

Thank you for your response.

You’re welcome

PS: please refer to post 128 above. How do you interpret the words of the last paragraph “wipe out every kind of separateness?” That sounds 16th century.

That person’s posts are skipped over in my view of the thread as they and their posts are ignored. I have found them to be a waste of my time to read…or, perhaps better said, not worth reading.

 

[Peter_J]

One thing that I occasionally observe to myself is “I like [fill in name of Protestant poster] and yet I only actually read a small fraction of his/her posts, because most of his/her posts are responses to ‘stuff’ that I have no interest in and prefer to keep my distance from.”

I hear you. Theology is complicated and not everything pertains to each person individually.

I should clarify: when I say that I “prefer to keep my distance from” (among other thing) Protestant-bashing posts, it’s not because they don’t pertain to me personally.

Consider: when I’m on CARM, I keep my distance from Catholic-bashing posts, even though they do pertain to me since I’m Catholic.

 

[spedteacherita]

And I just had occasion to post something from Pope Benedict XVI attesting to the very fact that we hold in common the Church’s ancient creeds.

I find this to be one of the great issues to beware of: the Catholics who post here are not the following

1. Clergy…with exceptions for a few of us who are ordained.
2. Theologians…which are even more rare.
3. Ecclesiologists…which are even more sorely lacking
4. Ecumenists…and that part is tragic most of all since the Council Fathers decreed that every Catholic was to take up and enact in their own lives the ecumenical imperative that they articulated at Vatican II.

I think you have to discern that the utter failure in quality of the threads is because the Catholic contributors are so lacking in their ability to fulfill or even articulate what Vatican II and the Post-Conciliar Church teaches and herself holds.

Thanks for sharing.

God bless!

Rita

 

[Wannano]

Give a read to this (nice section on the anathemas also)… Let me know what you think.

douglasbeaumont.com/2014/03/12/what-is-full-communion-with-the-catholic-church/

It is interesting. What I got most from it is that Catholics who like to say Proestants are doomed because “there is no salvation outside the Church” do not realize that partial communion with Rome places one inside the Church not outside. I think I am correctly understanding that is the viewpoint of the RCC.

 

[tgGodsway]

I hear these words, “Church fathers” quite often on this site. But I would think that the truest Church fathers are those who were actually eye-witnesses to the resurrection and the apostolic faith. The fathers quoted often here on this site were actually people who lived centuries after the facts and were definitely not eye-witnesses at all. Why such trust in people who were not present to the founding of Christianity?

 

[rcwitness]

It is interesting. What I got most from it is that Catholics who like to say Proestants are doomed because “there is no salvation outside the Church” do not realize that partial communion with Rome places one inside the Church not outside. I think I am correctly understanding that is the viewpoint of the RCC.

oooh! I like the way that is put! Very true!

 

[ajcstr]

It is interesting. What I got most from it is that Catholics who like to say Proestants are doomed because “there is no salvation outside the Church” do not realize that partial communion with Rome places one inside the Church not outside. I think I am correctly understanding that is the viewpoint of the RCC.

That plus at the time the phrase “no salvation outside the Church” was coined, to be outside the Church meant to be a non-christian.

 

[ajcstr]

I hear these words, “Church fathers” quite often on this site. But I would think that the truest Church fathers are those who were actually eye-witnesses to the resurrection and the apostolic faith. The fathers quoted often here on this site were actually people who lived centuries after the facts and were definitely not eye-witnesses at all. Why such trust in people who were not present to the founding of Christianity?

Mark (Peter’s secretary), Luke (Paul’s companion) and Paul probably did not witness the resurrection and the reformers certainly did not.

The Church Fathers are the men that were trained by the apostles or by the apostles disciples. They provide a history of the beliefs of the Church (especially prior to the Council of Nicaea were it is alleged by many that Constantine “hijacked” the faith).

 

[LutheranScholar]

That plus at the time the phrase “no salvation outside the Church” was coined, to be outside the Church meant to be a non-christian.

Well, now, that makes more sense!

 

[steve_b]

PS: please refer to post 128 above. How do you interpret the words of the last paragraph “wipe out every kind of separateness?” That sounds 16th century.

#128 was a quote from Vat II Lumen Gentium. Nov 1964