Is Jesus Christ and the Roman Catholic Church the only way to salvation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy_B
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Of course you don’t know! You have not read the letters that Ignatius of Antioch wrote to John, the Apostle…yes, Ignatius IS in the Bible. You haven’t read anything between Jesus’ resurrection and the first 300 years thereafter. Try it. But, be careful…when you do, you will know the truth and then you really will have to convert to Catholicism.

The “Catholic” term was begun before John the Apostle died, by the way.

What you know about this fits in a thimble.

Kathie
Well your attitude certainly isn’t going to help win over anyone considering conversion that’s for sure. Christians outside the Catholic Church are still God’s children, whether considered separated or not. Even Pope Benedict XVI teaches love and unity amongst believers referencing the CCC 830, not rudeness and snide remarks.
 
Jesus exists anywhere believers gather.
Believers, yes. Catholics are believers. What do Protestants believe? (Anything they want.) Can you believe anything you want, and be saved? No, you have to believe what Jesus, by means of the Catholic Church, teaches.
Salvation is entirely dependent on Jesus.
We get to Jesus through His Church.
 
Well your attitude certainly isn’t going to help win over anyone considering conversion that’s for sure. Christians outside the Catholic Church are still God’s children, whether considered separated or not. Even Pope Benedict XVI teaches love and unity amongst believers referencing the CCC 830, not rudeness and snide remarks.
What do you mean, EVEN Pope Benedict? You might not like someone’s tone, but you didn’t address their points.

Your tone could use a lot of work also.
 
“Is Jesus Christ and the Roman Catholic Church the only way to salvation?”

No.

John 10:16

“And other sheep I have, that are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd.”

The RCC isn’t nesssary to salvation; Jesus is, however.

In response to the question (is there salvation outside the Church) Catholics have, in ages past, responded unequivocally in the negative. The Second Vatican Council and more recent ecumenical endeavors have, of course, asserted that non-Catholics may too end up in Heaven.
 
“Is Jesus Christ and the Roman Catholic Church the only way to salvation?”

No.

John 10:16

“And other sheep I have, that are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd.”
He was referring to the Gentiles. “One fold and one shepherd” is the Catholic Church and the Pope.
The Second Vatican Council and more recent ecumenical endeavors have, of course, asserted that non-Catholics may too end up in Heaven.
If they are completely without post-baptismal sin, and if they did not ever consciously reject the Catholic Church.
 
Thanks for showing us that the RCC isn’t needed for one’s salvation.
The Church is not “Roman”, but even persons that are saved outside the visible Catholic Church are somehow joined to her, since there is only one Body of Christ, and all saved persons are members of that Body.
 
The Church is not “Roman”, but even persons that are saved outside the visible Catholic Church are somehow joined to her, since there is only one Body of Christ, and all saved persons are members of that Body.
Good point.

They would have to be baptized, and of course, baptism incorporates them into the Church in an invisible manner.

If they never commit any sin, and never consciously reject the Church, then they remain in the state of grace given to them by their baptism - that is, by being invisible members of the Church.
 
CBS, know that not all here are the same in their stance, many of us have understanding and tolerance towards the denominations outside of the Catholic faith, I consider myself one of them. I also don’t like how you are being treated here, they don’t realize, your conversion is in it’s infancy, there is much to learn about the Catholic faith and I think we all are learning more and more about it each day, which is one of the reasons for the existance of this forum.

They also don’t realize, your stance is actually correct from your perspective, that you would feel that you are betraying your bretheren for taking the harsh position some of the Catholics are taking here, so know this, I know where you are coming from having spent a great deal of time with protestants as well.

In the end though, it was I that was condemed for my faith even though I earnestly tried my best to get them to change their stance on Catholics, so there is another side of this coin and clearly, both sides are taking a negative stance, which should never be the case.

I read an early post about someone wanting to re-integrate the protestants into the Catholic faith, now that seems quite constructive to me, what about the rest of you?
 
I read an early post about someone wanting to re-integrate the protestants into the Catholic faith, now that seems quite constructive to me, what about the rest of you?
It depends upon what is meant by that. Obviously, they could not return to the Church while still rejecting its teachings.
 
I read an early post about someone wanting to re-integrate the protestants into the Catholic faith, now that seems quite constructive to me, what about the rest of you?
Jesus desires that we all be One. He created One Church, One Baptism, One Body, and He is the One Head and Lord of all. The One, however, though Catholic, is not necessarily Roman. I think it is hard for Westerners, who have never heard or had experience of non Roman Catholics, to grasp how much prejudice actually exists toward those who are not Roman. Some Latins would probably not even identify the Divine Liturgy, and assume that the participants were heretics of some kind!
 
What if they kept the teachings, yet changed the ceremony, in the end, that ultimately is what would happen. I don’t know about you, but I’m tired of the same tired ceremony, I want to break it up a bit so people actually are more involved, more interested, and are not just doing it all through route. This makes it so that there will be less benchwarmers and more people actively involved and interested during mass.

This is my observation from what I’m seeing happen dynamic wise with protestant denominations. They all tend to lean towards one direction over the other. One church will have extensive bible study right after service in a more informal setting, they even meet at each others homes for this as well, this is not a bad thing for them to bring to the table, others are leaning more along group fellowship, where you are actively involved with the congregation. I can recall when it was included within mass for us to shake hands and say to one another, peace be with you, this was mandated because people were not talking to each other, it was a forceful way of doing it and entirely ineffective, yet clearly shows there is something lacking in this department, and again, this is something some denominations can bring to the table. Others, we’ll take the southern baptists for example, go ballistic in song and worship, they have a real fire going on during service, we simply don’t put out enough energy as Catholics while we sing to the Lord, and yet again, another element that we would benifet from.

The list goes on and on, reintegration would not only make the Catholic church much, much stronger as an all inclusive unifying force, it would ultimately enhance our faith to much larger degrees, regardless of what denomination you began from.
 
What if they kept the teachings, yet changed the ceremony, in the end, that ultimately is what would happen. I don’t know about you, but I’m tired of the same tired ceremony, I want to break it up a bit so people actually are more involved, more interested, and are not just doing it all through route. This makes it so that there will be less benchwarmers and more people actively involved and interested during mass.
If people understood what was going on at Mass, they’d be excited and interested even without changing things around.
This is my observation from what I’m seeing happen dynamic wise with protestant denominations. They all tend to lean towards one direction over the other. One church will have extensive bible study right after service in a more informal setting, they even meet at each others homes for this as well, this is not a bad thing for them to bring to the table, others are leaning more along group fellowship, where you are actively involved with the congregation.
Catholics do these things too - just not at Mass. The Mass is a specific thing that was designed by Jesus - we can’t just come along and change it around to suit ourselves.
I can recall when it was included within mass for us to shake hands and say to one another, peace be with you,
This is part of the Mass. It is called the Sign of Peace, and it is there because Jesus put it there, to remind us of His command, “Leave thy gift at the altar until thou hast made peace with thy brother.”
this was mandated because people were not talking to each other, it was a forceful way of doing it and entirely ineffective,
NO, it was never a man-made addition to the Mass, and it was not “put there” for fellowship - the purpose of the Sign of Peace is not fellowship; it is to remind us that we must be at peace with everyone we know (as symbolized by the people around us with whom we share the sign of peace) before we can partake of Holy Communion.

A priest can choose whether or not to use the Sign of the Peace at his Mass; if he thinks it is being abused, he can remove it.

The words to the Sign of the Peace are: V1 “Peace be with you,” V2 “And also with you.”

Not V1 “Hi, how are you?” V2 “Fine, how about you?”

Not “Merry Christmas.” Not “Happy Easter.” Not, “Hey, are you going for lunch with us today?” Not,“Hey long time no see, where’ve you been?” Etc.
 
CBS, know that not all here are the same in their stance, many of us have understanding and tolerance towards the denominations outside of the Catholic faith, I consider myself one of them. I also don’t like how you are being treated here, they don’t realize, your conversion is in it’s infancy, there is much to learn about the Catholic faith and I think we all are learning more and more about it each day, which is one of the reasons for the existance of this forum.

They also don’t realize, your stance is actually correct from your perspective, that you would feel that you are betraying your bretheren for taking the harsh position some of the Catholics are taking here, so know this, I know where you are coming from having spent a great deal of time with protestants as well.

In the end though, it was I that was condemed for my faith even though I earnestly tried my best to get them to change their stance on Catholics, so there is another side of this coin and clearly, both sides are taking a negative stance, which should never be the case.

I read an early post about someone wanting to re-integrate the protestants into the Catholic faith, now that seems quite constructive to me, what about the rest of you?
Thank you for your understanding and KIND response. 🙂

There seem to be massive extremists on this forum that have zero interests in explaining anything or evangelizing the Catholic faith to others. Quite honestly, the past few responses make me sick.

Not everyone is posting questions in this forum as an anti-Catholic with a hidden malicious agenda behind their questioning. If the best people have is simply to state “you don’t know” or “believe it because the church says so or stay out of our church” then that is sad. Not to mention belittle you, and question your sincerity about conversion, it’s no wonder the attendance levels are where they are at today. :rolleyes:

I won’t let them bother me. I will continue my inquiry and discernment and forget their ugliness. The Masses I have attended so far have been excellent and the people have been extremely nice, warm, and welcoming.

Thank you for your response again.
 
This is part of the Mass. It is called the Sign of Peace, and it is there because Jesus put it there, to remind us of His command, “Leave thy gift at the altar until thou hast made peace with thy brother.”

NO, it was never a man-made addition to the Mass, and it was not “put there” for fellowship - the purpose of the Sign of Peace is not fellowship; it is to remind us that we must be at peace with everyone we know (as symbolized by the people around us with whom we share the sign of peace) before we can partake of Holy Communion.

A priest can choose whether or not to use the Sign of the Peace at his Mass; if he thinks it is being abused, he can remove it.

.
It wasn’t in the Tridentine Liturgy prior to Vatican II. *Of course *it was an addition in the novus Ordo.
 
  • Catholics do these things too - just not at Mass. The Mass is a specific thing that was designed by Jesus - we can’t just come along and change it around to suit ourselves.
Jesus did not detail and write down the exact ceremony in all of it’s detail and repition as we see it today manifest, he was never that specific. The Catholic church evolved these afterwards, this proves they can and will further evolve it in the future.

Furthermore, I’m clearly not seeing the same interest in mass/service I do with the protestant denominations, this indicates a luke warm approach and we should avoid that type of mentality. Sure there are some that find it interesting, but most are thinking route, reciting what they need to without putting in any thought in the manner what so ever. Reintegration is going to require a less rigid approach, and the statement of “suited” was not my intention at all, the context of enriching was.

The sign of Peace when I was growing up was never incorporated in any mass I’ve ever attended and I attended quite a few different parishes. It was only put in place as a popular thing during my early teens, so someone higher up in the chain of command decided to emphasise it’s use. So, I shake hands like a good catholic, following orders just as everybody else. Yet afterwards, I try to talk to these same people and I get the cold shoulder, did they honestly mean “peace be with you” clearly not at all, for they would have changed their stance afterwards. You can call it what you want, but it’s meant to introduce yourself to your fellow bretheren and get a working dialog going.

Fellowship and socializing are two different things, you have them confused, when we fellowship, we discuss our faith, yet when you got to mass, everybody is talking about anything but that, they are simply socializing among themselves, and in most cases, only within their own inner circle.

An element I enjoyed with the Baptists was the longer sermon’s, those gave me something of great interest to look forward to, that it wasn’t a 10 minute break from ceremony, and this is one of the elements they lean towards which again, can and should be incorporated within mass.

Overall, the Church has “suited” things to accomodate the masses, because people do not want to think, they want to get in, do their duty, and get out, this is why I stress the importance of looking at this element, there are many creative ways to accomplish the exact same tasks, to teach the same elements and to make people pay attention for they have to stay on their toes during the process and actually participate and know what they are saying and doing.
 
Thank you for your understanding and KIND response. 🙂

There seem to be massive extremists on this forum that have zero interests in explaining anything or evangelizing the Catholic faith to others. Quite honestly, the past few responses make me sick.

Not everyone is posting questions in this forum as an anti-Catholic with a hidden malicious agenda behind their questioning. If the best people have is simply to state “you don’t know” or “believe it because the church says so or stay out of our church” then that is sad. Not to mention belittle you, and question your sincerity about conversion, it’s no wonder the attendance levels are where they are at today. :rolleyes:

I won’t let them bother me. I will continue my inquiry and discernment and forget their ugliness. The Masses I have attended so far have been excellent and the people have been extremely nice, warm, and welcoming.

Thank you for your response again.
Your welcome brother, I just wish Father Franklevic was alive today, I’d point him towards this board, he’d be a big player at evangalizing others towards the Catholic faith, what he taught in his sermon’s I hold dear to my heart to this day.

Good that you are not letting radical, rigid approaches get to you, it’s not right in my book, and as you are saying, counterproductive towards evanalizing others into the faith.
 
It wasn’t in the Tridentine Liturgy prior to Vatican II. *Of course *it was an addition in the novus Ordo.
It was omitted from the Tridentine Mass- it was part of what the Apostles passed down to us, with an option that it could be omitted. The Council of Trent chose to omit it, probably because of the confusion of people thinking it was a “Hi, how ya doin’” thing.

Which is the same reason that a lot of priests today omit it, too.
 
It was omitted from the Tridentine Mass- it was part of what the Apostles passed down to us, with an option that it could be omitted. The Council of Trent chose to omit it, probably because of the confusion of people thinking it was a “Hi, how ya doin’” thing.

Which is the same reason that a lot of priests today omit it, too.
Since 1969, I have yet to attend Mass anywhere in this country (U.S.) where the Sign of Peace was ever omitted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top