C
CWBetts
Guest
Not usually. Language is a gift. It should be used to the best of our ability to convey the complex truths laid out in Scripture and tradition. And mean-spirited sarcasm is never a virtue.
IMO... It's better to be Protestant, but tell me why it's better to be Catholic
- Status
P
paul_c
Guest
This thread is getting ugly. There is no reason to hate.
Church teaching is clear. I posted the applicable part of the catechism a few pages back. Jesus founded the Catholic church on the rock of St. Peter to administer the grace giving sacraments and teach the way to salvation.
To be saved we must be baptized in the name of the father, the son, and the holy spirit. This makes us members of the Catholic Church, it gives us sufficient grace to be saved and through baptism, all prior sins are forgiven. After Baptism we are called to follow Christ and to stay in the state of grace by avoiding sin and loving God and neighbor. If we stay in the state of Grace until Death, we will go to heaven. If we fall from grace through sin, we can be reconciled sacramentally through confession to a priest. To fortify us with Grace and help us journey toward holiness, we must recieve Jesus through the eucharist. As Jesus says in John 6, if you do not eat his body and drink his blood, you have no life within you.
Now the biggest problem for non-Catholic Christians is that the have separated themselves from the life giving sacraments. Instead of the real presence, they have a memorial meal, which simply does not impart grace. And they can not be absolved from their sins. Can they still live lives of love, sure, but without God’s grace this is very difficult and there is no room for error without reconciliation.
Now as for non-Christians, they have even more difficulty since they haven’t even been baptized. Now, the Catholic Church teaches that if they have never been exposed to Christ but follow his teachings of love nonetheless (which is in everyone’s heart through the natural law), they can be saved. Of course, if they have been exposed to Christ and reject him, just as if a non-Catholic Christian has been exposed to Christ’s body, the Catholic Church and rejects it, then they will be held liable.
That said, the Catholic Church welcomes all to enter and be saved… That is where unity makes sense. Unity does not make sense if it requires you to compromise the truth. and your own salvation.
Church teaching is clear. I posted the applicable part of the catechism a few pages back. Jesus founded the Catholic church on the rock of St. Peter to administer the grace giving sacraments and teach the way to salvation.
To be saved we must be baptized in the name of the father, the son, and the holy spirit. This makes us members of the Catholic Church, it gives us sufficient grace to be saved and through baptism, all prior sins are forgiven. After Baptism we are called to follow Christ and to stay in the state of grace by avoiding sin and loving God and neighbor. If we stay in the state of Grace until Death, we will go to heaven. If we fall from grace through sin, we can be reconciled sacramentally through confession to a priest. To fortify us with Grace and help us journey toward holiness, we must recieve Jesus through the eucharist. As Jesus says in John 6, if you do not eat his body and drink his blood, you have no life within you.
Now the biggest problem for non-Catholic Christians is that the have separated themselves from the life giving sacraments. Instead of the real presence, they have a memorial meal, which simply does not impart grace. And they can not be absolved from their sins. Can they still live lives of love, sure, but without God’s grace this is very difficult and there is no room for error without reconciliation.
Now as for non-Christians, they have even more difficulty since they haven’t even been baptized. Now, the Catholic Church teaches that if they have never been exposed to Christ but follow his teachings of love nonetheless (which is in everyone’s heart through the natural law), they can be saved. Of course, if they have been exposed to Christ and reject him, just as if a non-Catholic Christian has been exposed to Christ’s body, the Catholic Church and rejects it, then they will be held liable.
That said, the Catholic Church welcomes all to enter and be saved… That is where unity makes sense. Unity does not make sense if it requires you to compromise the truth. and your own salvation.
O
One_in_Christ_1
Guest
I don’t think there is hate on this thread, just strong convictions. Because we have strong convictions to our particular theological traditions does not make them to be true. All I am asking is Christian unity between Christians from different traditions, in-spite of our important theological distinctives. Do I expect you to embrace the doctrine of imputation and a forensic justification? Of course not, even though I believe it to be the truth. Now you can claim that salvation is through the Catholic Church… which I am not asking you to change. But I don’t have to believe it and still have Christian unity with you. There is only one body of Christ in which Christ is the head. Our Triune God is the God of all of Christendom in spite of our theological errors. We should become brown bag happy face Christians if we can understand this tension of personal conviction, truth and a command for Christian unity.
T
tweetymom
Guest
C
CWBetts
Guest
T
tweetymom
Guest
T
tweetymom
Guest
And you and him and others do not give sarcastic remarks? I am a woman of few words, I do not need a half of page to describe my feelings. Just because I do not agree with some of the thing you and others post doesn’t mean I am being sarcastic. Maybe some of you should go back and read some of yours and others remarks. We should all be one in Christ no matter our religion. God Bless you in your journey with our Savior.
K
kepha1
Guest
The clearest line of separation between Fundamentalism and historic Christianity, when it comes to devotion to Mary, is the differing perspectives on the dictum “to Jesus through Mary.” Historic Christianity has never seen Mary in isolation from Jesus and has viewed Marian doctrine and devotion as the safest, surest and swiftest path to a true and lasting commitment to Christ. Fundamentalists claim that they “do not need Mary” to go to Jesus and that they prefer to go directly to Jesus.
This response is a misunderstanding of the traditional teaching. All Christians can and should pray directly to Jesus. But no one actually “goes” to Jesus “alone”. We all carry with us some mediating group or individual when we go to Jesus. Fundamentalists approach him with a Calvinist picture of a god who has predestined the majority of mankind to damnation or with a Dispensationalist picture of a god who operates through various covenants and dispensations established with Israel and the church. Faith movement Charismatics have their own health-and-wealth conception of god. Nobody goes to Jesus “alone”. We go with various pictures of God and salvation. If we go to Jesus through Mary we go with the right picture, the historic picture, the God-given picture.
When we talk about going “to Jesus through Mary” we are not suggesting that Mary’s function is to “introduce” us to Jesus. We are talking about growing deeper in our life in Jesus with and through Mary’s assistance. With Mary as our model, teacher and guide we become the kind of Christian God wants us to be. With and through Mary we become more and more like Jesus. Thus “through Mary” does not mean that she functions as a door-opening “go-between”. In actuality, it means that she is acting as our Mother trying to make us more like her divine Son. We are simply doing what Jesus commanded in John 19 and what the book of Revelation teaches when it says that those who “keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ” are “her seed.” (Revelation 12:17).
**
To go to Jesus through Mary is to have a maternal companion at your side given to you by Jesus to help you follow His commandments and stay faithful to Him. We may ask why we need this companion when Jesus can do this for us just as well. This is like asking why God has given us guardian angels when we could go directly to God for all our needs. The question is: how does God want things to work? Does He want us to work with our guardian angels, does He want our angels to protect us? If the answer is yes, as Scripture tells us, our conceptions of what is or is not “appropriate” are irrelevant. Similarly if God ordains Mary to be our Mother and guide - as Scripture and the historic Faith affirm - then that is what is best for us.
In practice the Fundamentalist does not go to Jesus “alone”. He is nurtured by his minister, his Bible teacher, his church and other such “support groups” in forming his understanding of Jesus and then “goes” to Jesus on the basis of the training and guidance he gets from these groups, often with the groups or individuals actually praying with him and guiding him. To go to Jesus through Mary is simply to embrace another “support” or “fellowship” group in our journey - one whose role in this regard has been biblically mandated. True, we cannot see Mary. But we cannot see our guardian angels either - and we are perfectly justified in seeking their help.
To put it another way, a father who helps his son learn to pray, corrects his misconceptions about God, teaches him the Bible, and directs him in leading a Christian life is not “supplanting” Jesus or acting as an obstacle between his son and Jesus. He is helping his son establish a full and lasting commitment to his Savior. Of course the son could try to “go” to Jesus alone - but how much easier and how much safer it is to have the guidance of someone who is an experienced Christian and who loves him with a father’s tenderness. This is all that is involved in going to Jesus through Mary. “Do whatever he tells you” is her constant encouragement.
“To Jesus through Mary”: according to the historic Faith this is the path to salvation ordained by the Trinity. “To Jesus through Calvinism, Dispensationalism, the Faith Movement, etc.”: this is the path to salvation taught by Fundamentalism. The historic Faith is authoritative simply because it originates from the apostolic community. It is also more true to our experience. No one came to Jesus alone. Apostles, missionaries, preachers, theologians, writers, parents, and the Church brought us to Jesus. God could have chosen to act directly but he did not. He chose to act through human beings. These human beings were pathways to Him not obstacles.
So it is with Mary.
mariology.com/content/view/9/28/
D
Dancelittleewok
Guest
You, sir, are begging the question again. Tell me why it is closer to the truth than the Catholic version, compare and contrast.IMO… I believe my version of justification is closer to the truth than yours.
O
One_in_Christ_1
Guest
It’s hard to believe that Muslims have never heard a single word about Jesus Christ, especially in the world of Internet and instant communication. The Quran speaks of a different Jesus Christ, which is from the Spirit of the Anti-Christ. So, how can God save Muslims who believe in a false Jesus Christ and who clearly reject the deity of Christ? It’s the same with the non-Christian Jew who rejects Jesus as their Messiah. Now, that false ecumenicism and unity to teach that Jews and Muslims have hope apart from faith in the historic Christ revealed in the Bible. Sometimes it seems the Catholic Faith has drifted from the very essential of Christianity with false unity. Of course, that’s just my opinion. BTW, did the Pope really kiss the Quran in public?
S
spn82756
Guest
.
O
One_in_Christ_1
Guest
I’m okay with this view as long as some Catholics go through Mary to Jesus. It appears this conversation started because the person elevated Mary in Genesis 3 without even mentioning Jesus. If you leave Jesus outside the picture, then it is no longer a Christian Faith. It’s not that I agree with your post above as being accurate for the various Protestants circles, but they are not enough to fight over. If we have two groups who are in error, one who forgets Mary, and the other forgets Jesus… then who has a more heretical outlook in regards to Christianity?
O
One_in_Christ_1
Guest
Ouch… what would be the purpose of this? I’ve read portions of the Quran in which it clearly denies the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus the Christ. Therefore, Islam attacks the very heart of the Christian Faith… Christ and Him crucified for forgiveness and reconciliation with God. The only hope for any non-Christian is repentance and faith in the Christian Christ and Christian gospel. God provided a single way to Himself, and that is the historic position of the church.
V
Vile_Servant
Guest
O
One_in_Christ_1
Guest
God is a Holy God in which sinners cannot approach Him because sinners are tainted with sin (rebels against God)? How can Christians approach Him, or approach the throne of grace as being a sinner-saint since no Christian achieves sinlessness in this life? We can only approach God being clothed with the righteousness of Christ since our personal righteousness has yet to be perfected in this life. If Christians are not imputed (credited) with the righteousness of Christ upon conversion, how are we able to approach a perfectly holy God as a sinner-saint? I’m all ears to hear the Catholic answer to this dilemma.
K
kepha1
Guest
This pic, printed with no or misleading context, is a favorite of anti-Catholics on both extreme ends of the spectrum, from frothing-at-the-mouth funnymentalistis to rad-trad “more-Catholic-than-the-pope” heretics.
When the pope kissed the Quran, he did it as a diplomatic gesture to the giver, not as an affirmation of agreement with its contents. He had three choices:
- Hand it back and rebuff the gift, offending the giver;
- throw it on the floor, spit on it and yell Heresy!, after which all chaos most likely would’ve broken out;
- accept it with a polite kiss and bow to the giver, then hand it off to an assistant to put somewhere later (possibly even the circular file), thereby maintaining some sort of rapport of mutual respect for the persons involved, not the religion.
The late John Paul II traveled extensively and tried to reach out to divergent groups caught in error. He respected the Moslem people without respecting their religion’s errors. Insofar in its very limited amount of what it has in common with Christianity, Islam does contain a few elements of truth, since the Christian faith is fully true. Perhaps the pope shouldn’t have kissed the Quran; however, even if he did, it should be recalled that he also kissed the ground of the places he visited, even communist countries. Nobody would accuse him of agreeing with those governments, only that he was showing diplomatic courtesy. Europeans should know that a kiss is more common as a polite gesture than it is here in N. America, where it is treated as a more intimate gesture. People projected their own meaning into John Paul II’s gesture rather than believe that he might have just been showing courtesy to the giver, not agreement with the contents of the gift.
Here are the messages that JP2 delivered at the World Day of Peace from 1979 to 2005
None of it bears any resemblance to the lies of traditionalist radicals or our “separated brethren” who have blown this incident way out of proportion.
D
Dancelittleewok
Guest
I find this position unique, especially since some Protestants, such as the hyper-Calvinists (in comparison that follow Joseph Arminius’ teaching) do not believe that God died to save all; He only saved believers. The rest are the unsaved reprobates whom weren’t saved to begin with and without God’s grace regenerating their hearts. They are incapable of repentance and slaves to sin. How do you think that this matches up with the heart of the Gospel?
O
One_in_Christ_1
Guest
Can you explain this with your own words? I’m not ready to read links.
O
One_in_Christ_1
Guest
I unable to follow your line of thinking. Do you believe that Muslims can enter Heaven apart from faith in the Christian Christ or the Christian gospel?
D
Dancelittleewok
Guest
Before I answer the dilemma, I have a follow up question: How is this better than the Catholic version? Please share your views about the Catholic justification version.
- Status