Is everyone who is baptized technically catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Harry123
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Pope Saint John Paul II, *Ut Unum Sint*13. The same Document carefully draws out the doctrinal implications of this situation. Speaking of the members of these Communities, it declares: "All those justified by faith through Baptism are incorporated into Christ. They therefore have a right to be honoured by the title of Christian, and are properly regarded as brothers and sisters in the Lord by the sons and daughters of the Catholic Church".

With reference to the many positive elements present in the other Churches and Ecclesial Communities, the Decree adds: "All of these, which come from Christ and lead back to him, belong by right to the one Church of Christ. The separated brethren also carry out many of the sacred actions of the Christian religion. Undoubtedly, in many ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community, these actions can truly engender a life of grace, and can be rightly described as capable of providing access to the community of salvation".

These are extremely important texts for ecumenism. It is not that beyond the boundaries of the Catholic community there is an ecclesial vacuum. Many elements of great value (eximia), which in the Catholic Church are part of the fullness of the means of salvation and of the gifts of grace which make up the Church, are also found in the other Christian Communities.They are anything but dead. They are alive. And IN Christ. It is these actions THEMSELVES that provide access to “the community of salvation” which is the theological term employed here for Heaven.

Of course, what he is writing would assuredly include Jon and the Lutherans.
Re: the prodigal son story.

Are the 2 sons brothers to each other? Yes
Are they both sons of the Father? Yes
Did one remain faithful? Yes
Did one NOT remain faithful? Yes
Is the prodigal son still son of the Father? Yes
Are the 2 sons still brothers to each other? yes

Yet what did the Father say of the one son while that son was away?

This son of mine was Lost, he was DEAD.

That condition didn’t change until that son turned around and came home. Obviously “dead” has a spiritual meaning not a physical meaning in that story.

Looking at this in the sense I presented in my last post

visibly one , means
  • No contradictory differences
  • full communion in faith
  • full communion in sacraments
  • full communion in ministry
With the Catholic Church.

Can those points be said of ANY Protestant regardless of stripe? No.

Re: “They are alive. And IN Christ.” how then does that work when the answers to those previous points are all NO ?
 
Re: the prodigal son story.
The Parable of the Prodigal son is NOT about Protestants.

Are there Protestants who are “dead” spiritually. Yes one could say that.

Are there Protestant who are in “life”? Yes one can say that.
 
The Parable of the Prodigal son is NOT about Protestants.
That’s like saying anything in scripture was written for those people then in that day but can’t be applied to anything happening today.
 
That’s like saying anything in scripture was written for those people then in that day but can’t be applied to anything happening today.
No. it is not.

It is rather saying exactly what I said.
 
Are there Protestants who are “dead” spiritually. Yes one could say that.

(are there Catholics who are dead? - yes that too can be said to be the case)

Are there Protestant who are in “life”? Yes one can say that.

Are all Protestant’s “dead”? No I would not say so.

Are all Protestants “in life”? No again I would not say so.

But *yes *one can be a Protestant - and be “in life” (not dead).
 
Are there Protestants who are “dead” spiritually. Yes one could say that.

(are there Catholics who are dead? - yes that too can be said to be the case)

Are there Protestant who are in “life”? Yes one can say that.

Are all Protestant’s “dead”? No I would not say so.

Are all Protestants “in life”? No again I would not say so.

But *yes *one can be a Protestant - and be “in life” (not dead).
IOW, when you show a person what is wrong and where they are wrong, then the example I used fits.

knowledge is key
 
steve b,

I was a part of that conversation re- those many prodigal sons. Quite literally…, speaking a prayer for the dead is one thing when the community acknowledges after the wake at the funeral that the person is dead.

But I think the Prodigal Son Jesus gives us acknowledges his guilt and he articulates to himself a practical plan for return to his father after constructively abandoning his family.
If he was spiritually dead we can’t judge, and his father seems also not to judge – making reference to death in the sense that his lost son couldn’t enjoy life on the father’s estate.

I don’t think that the father’s move to compassion automatically indicates judgment of his son. His son must have appeared beaten by life, but does not Jesus vindicate the Father through his Father’s constant call to not judge by appearances?

The prodigal son is very vague in his confession, wouldn’t you say?

Perhaps the Father demands no further penance because the ring, the robe, and the sandals plus some of the fattened calf once promised are all he remains entitled to of his Father’s material estate. From here on in, he survives on the Father’s love alone.
 
Re: the prodigal son story.

Are the 2 sons brothers to each other? Yes
Are they both sons of the Father? Yes
Did one remain faithful? Yes
Did one NOT remain faithful? Yes
Is the prodigal son still son of the Father? Yes
Are the 2 sons still brothers to each other? yes

Yet what did the Father say of the one son while that son was away?

This son of mine was Lost, he was DEAD.

That condition didn’t change until that son turned around and came home. Obviously “dead” has a spiritual meaning not a physical meaning in that story.

Looking at this in the sense I presented in my last post

visibly one , means
  • No contradictory differences
  • full communion in faith
  • full communion in sacraments
  • full communion in ministry
With the Catholic Church.

Can those points be said of ANY Protestant regardless of stripe? No.

Re: “They are alive. And IN Christ.” how then does that work when the answers to those previous points are all NO ?
Let us be perfectly clear. You express a mindset that is completely alien to the Holy See of today. What you write is also offensive and far from actual reality…the reality that we all belong to Christ and that we are one in Him, even if there is impaired communion between, for example, Roman Catholics and the communities that emerge from the Reformation. This was well articulated by Pope Saint John Paul II in Ut Unum Sint.

I have thanked God “for what he has already accomplished in the other Churches and Ecclesial Communities and through them”, as well as through the Catholic Church. Today I see with satisfaction that the already vast network of ecumenical cooperation is constantly growing. Thanks also to the influence of the World Council of Churches, much is being accomplished in this field.

So as Catholics, with the Pope, we give hearty thanks to God for what He is doing in and through people who are not in full communion with Rome. We acknowledge and confess moreover that we see the works of God and the activity of the Holy Spirit in these other Churches and Ecclesial Communities.

Far from the tragic language and imagery of the past, today we use the language of the Pope to describe these non-Catholics, whom we embrace in love and we acknowledge them as “other Christians”, “others who have received Baptism”, and “Christians of other Communities” as Pope Saint John Paul said of them in Ut Unum Sint where he wrote that is the Spirit who fosters “deep communion” and does so “in spite of historical and canonical divisions” – because the Spirit is not impeded.

There is NOTHING of the sense between these Christians not in full communion with Rome and us that is in any way akin to the relationship between the prodigal son and his brother.

Far from being like the Prodigal Son who left his father, these disciples of the Lord Jesus who have not full communion with the Church of Rome are in reality and in fact doing the works of the Heavenly Father – and far better than some who have the name of Catholic – they are alive in the Spirit and bearing witness to Christ even unto the shedding of their blood.

Echoing the thanks of Pope Saint John Paul, every person on this thread should have profound praise and gratitude for the World Council of Churches, which was working on ecumenism when Rome, under popes of another era who were tragically of another mind than where the Holy Spirit has led us today.

As a priest, what a joy it is to me as we prepare to commemorate for one full year, as Roman Catholics jointly with Lutherans and others, the Reformation – and to do this with and under the Successor of Peter and Catholic Bishops in dioceses around the world
 
do you have a reference to this new use of “Catholic” meaning a Lutheran?
There are Lutherans who aren’t thrilled at that idea
It is hardly a “new use” of the word of the Catholic. It is one that has a significant history for Lutherans, particularly on the continent.

Your question demonstrates a reason why The Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism from the Holy See states that is important for a Roman Catholic to have first studied the Christian confession to which the Roman Catholic is addressing him or herself so that the Roman Catholic understands their dialogue partner from the partner’s perspective.

Had you complied with that norm, you would know the meaning of “Evangelical Catholic” with regard to both Lutheranism and, actually for that matter, constituent elements of the Anglican Communion, which also use the term. Are you not aware of the usage within the Anglican Communion either?

If you’re completely unacquainted with even the concept, I would suggest beginning your theological investigation with Johann Gerhard – but since the Directory states that Catholics are to learn from their dialogue partners, you should ask one of the Lutherans to enlighten you and inform you about this area.
They’re starting to ordain women priests. Just thinking out loud, I suspect that will cool the dialogue.
Who do you think that you are you talking about? The Polish National Catholic Church assuredly does not ordain women. In fact, their stance on this issue had profound ramifications in terms of their relations with those with whom they were in communion. You are very ill informed, if you think that The Polish National Catholic Church of all the Churches is ordaining women. I suggest you familiarise yourself with the PNCC better and – also read the statements from your diocese’s ecumenical office and, most especially, your national conference of bishops, to wit:

*We welcome our fellow Christians to this celebration of the Eucharist as our brothers and sisters. We pray that our common baptism and the action of the Holy Spirit in this Eucharist will draw us closer to one another and begin to dispel the sad divisions which separate us. We pray that these will lessen and finally disappear, in keeping with Christ’s prayer for us “that they may all be one” (Jn 17:21).

Because Catholics believe that the celebration of the Eucharist is a sign of the reality of the oneness of faith, life, and worship, members of those churches with whom we are not yet fully united are ordinarily not admitted to Holy Communion. Eucharistic sharing in exceptional circumstances by other Christians requires permission according to the directives of the diocesan bishop and the provisions of canon law (canon 844 §4). Members of the Orthodox Churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Polish National Catholic Church are urged to respect the discipline of their own Churches. According to Roman Catholic discipline, the Code of Canon Law does not object to the reception of Communion by Christians of these Churches (canon 844 §3)…*
In other words, a member of the Polish National Catholic Church may freely use the provision of canon 844 §3 to seek the sacraments of Eucharist, Penance and Anointing from the Sick from any Roman Catholic priest in spite of the state of impaired communion between their Church and the Churches in communion with Rome. Not only are their Orders valid but the substantial agreement in sacramental theology permits invoking canon 844 §3.

This dialogue between the Roman Catholics and the Polish National Catholic Church, which the Americans are taking the lead with, continues apace much to the contrary of what you seem to think.
 
Let us be perfectly clear. You express a mindset that is completely alien to the Holy See of today. What you write is also offensive and far from actual reality…the reality that we all belong to Christ and that we are one in Him, even if there is impaired communion between, for example, Roman Catholics and the communities that emerge from the Reformation. This was well articulated by Pope Saint John Paul II in Ut Unum Sint.
When I wrote

visibly one , means
  • No contradictory differences
  • full communion in faith
  • full communion in sacraments
  • full communion in ministry
With the Catholic Church.

Do you know where that came from? It came from Benedict XVI in 2012. I merely put his words into bullet points. I even gave the link

“We must not, however, forget that the goal of ecumenism is the ** visible unity **among divided Christians. This unity is not a work that we human beings can simply achieve. We must strive with all our might, but we must also recognize that, ultimately, this unity is a gift of God, it can only come from the Father through the Son, because the Church is his Church. In this perspective the importance of praying the Lord for visible unity appears but it also becomes clear that this goal important for the New Evangelization.
Walking together towards this goal is a positive reality on condition, however, that the Churches and Ecclesial Communities do not stop along the way, accepting the contradictory differences as something normal or as the best that can be obtained. Instead it is in full communion in faith, in the sacraments and in the ministry, that will become concretely evident the present and active power of God in the world. Through the visible unity of Jesus’ disciples, humanly inexplicable, God’s action that overcomes the world’s tendency to disintegration.”

catholicculture.org/cult…m?recnum=10104
 
It is hardly a “new use” of the word of the Catholic. It is one that has a significant history for Lutherans, particularly on the continent.

Your question demonstrates a reason why The Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism from the Holy See states that is important for a Roman Catholic to have first studied the Christian confession to which the Roman Catholic is addressing him or herself so that the Roman Catholic understands their dialogue partner from the partner’s perspective.

Had you complied with that norm, you would know the meaning of “Evangelical Catholic” with regard to both Lutheranism and, actually for that matter, constituent elements of the Anglican Communion, which also use the term. Are you not aware of the usage within the Anglican Communion either?

If you’re completely unacquainted with even the concept, I would suggest beginning your theological investigation with Johann Gerhard – but since the Directory states that Catholics are to learn from their dialogue partners, you should ask one of the Lutherans to enlighten you and inform you about this area.

Who do you think that you are you talking about? The Polish National Catholic Church assuredly does not ordain women. In fact, their stance on this issue had profound ramifications in terms of their relations with those with whom they were in communion. You are very ill informed, if you think that The Polish National Catholic Church of all the Churches is ordaining women. I suggest you familiarise yourself with the PNCC better and – also read the statements from your diocese’s ecumenical office and, most especially, your national conference of bishops, to wit:

*We welcome our fellow Christians to this celebration of the Eucharist as our brothers and sisters. We pray that our common baptism and the action of the Holy Spirit in this Eucharist will draw us closer to one another and begin to dispel the sad divisions which separate us. We pray that these will lessen and finally disappear, in keeping with Christ’s prayer for us “that they may all be one” (Jn 17:21).

Because Catholics believe that the celebration of the Eucharist is a sign of the reality of the oneness of faith, life, and worship, members of those churches with whom we are not yet fully united are ordinarily not admitted to Holy Communion. Eucharistic sharing in exceptional circumstances by other Christians requires permission according to the directives of the diocesan bishop and the provisions of canon law (canon 844 §4). Members of the Orthodox Churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Polish National Catholic Church* are urged to respect the discipline of their own Churches. According to Roman Catholic discipline, the Code of Canon Law does not object to the reception of Communion by Christians of these Churches (canon 844 §3)
In other words, a member of the Polish National Catholic Church may freely use the provision of canon 844 §3 to seek the sacraments of Eucharist, Penance and Anointing from the Sick from any Roman Catholic priest in spite of the state of impaired communion between their Church and the Churches in communion with Rome. Not only are their Orders valid but the substantial agreement in sacramental theology permits invoking canon 844 §3.

This dialogue between the Roman Catholics and the Polish National Catholic Church, which the Americans are taking the lead with, continues apace much to the contrary of what you seem to think.
This article, while in no way comprehensive, is a decent brief on the term Evangelical Catholic.liquisearch.com/evangelical_catholic/lutheran_evangelical_catholicity
 
It is hardly a “new use” of the word of the Catholic. It is one that has a significant history for Lutherans, particularly on the continent.

Your question demonstrates a reason why The Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism from the Holy See states that is important for a Roman Catholic to have first studied the Christian confession to which the Roman Catholic is addressing him or herself so that the Roman Catholic understands their dialogue partner from the partner’s perspective.

Had you complied with that norm, you would know the meaning of “Evangelical Catholic” with regard to both Lutheranism and, actually for that matter, constituent elements of the Anglican Communion, which also use the term. Are you not aware of the usage within the Anglican Communion either?

If you’re completely unacquainted with even the concept, I would suggest beginning your theological investigation with Johann Gerhard – but since the Directory states that Catholics are to learn from their dialogue partners, you should ask one of the Lutherans to enlighten you and inform you about this area.
you left out an important link I gave showing the other side’s position.

reuters.com/article/us-re…90L0HQ20130122

Are THOSE Lutherans qualified spokesmen for what they believe?
D:
Who do you think that you are you talking about? The Polish National Catholic Church assuredly does not ordain women.
I was thinking old Catholics

ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/zlitur395.htm

my apologies
D:
I suggest you familiarise yourself with the PNCC better and – also read the statements from your diocese’s ecumenical office and, most especially, your national conference of bishops, to wit:

*We welcome our fellow Christians to this celebration of the Eucharist as our brothers and sisters. We pray that our common baptism and the action of the Holy Spirit in this Eucharist will draw us closer to one another and begin to dispel the sad divisions which separate us. We pray that these will lessen and finally disappear, in keeping with Christ’s prayer for us “that they may all be one” (Jn 17:21).

Because Catholics believe that the celebration of the Eucharist is a sign of the reality of the oneness of faith, life, and worship, members of those churches with whom we are not yet fully united are ordinarily not admitted to Holy Communion.*
Where have I said anything to the contrary
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top