K
KathleenGee
Guest
Genesis, you bring forward good points from the Council, but the fullness of understanding the Church is defined in our catechism…so much to it.
Is the Roman Catholic Church and the body of Christ one and the same?
- Status
R
Rohzek
Guest
I believe it was St. Augustine who said, “How many sheep there are without, how many wolves within.” He was speaking of the visible church. In short, we know where the Church is, but we do not know where it is not.
F
frangiuliano115
Guest
I agree with everything!I think it is just that either/or thinking that you have. The Catholic faith is most generally “both”.
Jesus only founded One Church. All who are members of HIm are members of His One Body.
He also founded a visible and heirarchical Church which has been called Catholic since the first century. They are one and the same.
The two are not separated. When we are joined to HIm in baptism, we are made members of His One Body, the Church.
This is not possible. Although a person may be saved who is not visibly Catholic, in some mysterious way we don’t understand, Jesus has grafted them into Himself, and thus, into His One Body. For the record, I agree with you that it is not our place to judge that. Only He knows those who are His. He was specific that we are not to separate the wheat from the chaff, but leave it to the angels.
As to the state of anyone’s soul, none of us can know. As such, we need to support all those who seek His face, and seek the Truth.
Fran
F
frangiuliano115
Guest
F
frangiuliano115
Guest
I have confidence of the Spirit of God within you, Fran!
But this is the work of God’s angels, not of us.
Yes, but let us not characterize it as “becoming more protestant”, because that is disrespectful to all the saints and martyrs who gave their lives for the Holy Bride of Christ. Let us think of it instead as developing more fervency for our faith, letting it permeate all aspects of our lives, and allowing the HS to set us on fire for His Word, and His mission in the world. We must become, as the Holy Father has said truly “evangelical”.
**
It that case perhaps I can surmount our semantics problem.
I think you are meaning here to say that not everyone who appears to be a member of the Visible Catholic institution is a true believer? If so , then I certainly agree. I just do not call them “in the Church”, because to me that means they are in Christ, and a member of the Body. There are many who are “nominal” Catholics, baptized but not practicing. There are some that may even be official members of the local parish yet do not know Christ (he will say to them “I never knew you”).
These I call the sacramentalized yet unevangelized.
Perhaps just the part that pertains to the thread topic?
No, I don’t understand why you need to create two “churches”, or separate one from the other.
But I am in agreement that there are people that appear to be part of the visible institution that are not “in Christ”. I think this is why Jesus talked about the wheat and the tares growing together until the end of the age.**
I learned the word “sacramentalized” here at CAF. It’s a good word to know. Yes, many are sacramentalized but have no rapport with Jesus/God.
Also, just to clarify re the church becoming more protestant if catholics become more fervent: In protestant churches you’ll find that a really high percentage of people there really want to be there, as is not the case for catholicsim - many go out of habit or obligaton. Some in protestant churches also don’t want to be there, however, like teenagers or spouses - but most do. I’m saying that we will most likely become like this in the future since more and more acceptance of secularization is going on.
Oh. Re the priest. Let’s see, the Reader’s Digest Version:
There is the church - down in Rome. The institution. The magesterium.
There is the Church - the Body of Christ - the bride of Christ.
Why do I separate and why this discussion with the priest? I have a friend who insists that if you’re baptized you’re a member of the Body. I keep telling her, But what if I kill one person every week, I’m still a member? And she replies yes. So I spoke to the priest about this to make sure I was right and he said I was. You have to ACCEPT your baptism in order to be a member of the Body. And Church, the invisible Church.
Short enough for ya?
Fran
F
frangiuliano115
Guest
I’m good with all you say. I’m trying to understand why threre should be any misunderstanding if we seem to agree… I have to think of this a bit:
For reasons it is difficult for me to understand, you seem to believe that the Church no longer teaches EENS, which is not true.
The major change that has occurred since Vatican 2 is that the Church recognizes that there are members of His One Body that are not identifiable as visible Catholics belonging to the local parish. It is our understanding of the nature of the Church that has changed, not EENS.
I think the teaching on EENS has changed. I think the church fathers meant “outisde the church” meaning catholic meaning universal. Maybe the teaching hasn’t change but how we understand it. So I agree with your last pp, but it seems confusing when reading the two of them together - it might be me… I mean, if you tell a Baptist he’s not saved, it wouldn’t be correct. He is not a member of our Catholic church, but he is a member of the Church - see? Do we agree that he would be a member of the invisible Church?
Fran
F
friardchips
Guest
The Gospel of Love that St. Paul so fervently preached is important in understanding the Lord’s presence among us and the above reality is one reason why. One saint, I can’t remember who (said for different reasons), said that we can look at strangers walking past them and imagine them in a habit or a nun’s veil - one might be surprised at how people naturally suit such spiritual attire. I think your above comment is basically the same as saying we are can all inherit The Kingdom as we are all children of the Creator.
P
PJM
Guest
frangiuliano115;1 said:
Hi Fran,
I were trifocals and am a two finger typist. SORRY about confusing you.
Whenever I speak of the “Church” I am every-time referencing “Thee Catholic Church Universal”
I disagree that “His body is one” if you mean to include in that definition “all Christian faiths”
Because there is But One True God “God is every good thing perfected”; It is impossible for God’s “Body being one” AND simultaneously holding differing and often even contradictory faith beliefs in the same defined issues. Other faiths COMPETE, not conform with Christ Teachings and desire.
If I say so and so is heading hell bound; it is always conditional on them NOT repenting and converting, as at present they are not going about salvation God’s way; actually not following what Christ would choose to have them do. And YES, it does make a difference to God.
Briefly: The Will of the father is that we know that He desires just one church and it’s one set of true faith beliefs; then accept them unconditionally; and then live them fully; and then share them when God presents the opportunity [such as now]; and be ready and able to defend them when necessary.
Acts 20: 28-30 “Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. I know that, after my departure, ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock. And of your own selves shall arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.”
Mt. 28: 16-20 “Now the eleven remaining apostles] disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. And when they saw him they worshiped him; but some doubted. [Pre-Pentecost] And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. [and I now pass it on to YOU** Jn.17:18 & 20:21] [YOU] Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded[that is commanded & taught] YOU; and lo, I am with YOU always, to the close of the age.”
P
PJM
Guest
Fran PART 2 OF 2
Acts 5: 2 “And we are witnesses of these things and the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to all that obey him.”
Mt 13: 11-14 “Who answered and said to them: Because to YOU it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven: but to them it is not given. For he that hath, to him shall be given, and he shall abound: but he that hath not, from him shall be taken away that also which he hath. Therefore do I speak to THEM in parables: because seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.”
And then, these for you to please look up as space is limited here:
**Mt. 11:15, 10:27, 10:14
Jn 10: 27, 21: 15-17 are but a few.**
2nd. Peter 1: 16-21 “You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy [teaching] of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”
2nd. Peter 3: 14-17 “Therefore, beloved, since you wait for these, be zealous to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. And count the forbearance of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, beware lest you be carried away with the error of lawless men and lose your own stability
“Conditionally” with God should be understood as doing all He ask, because he ask, exactly as he ask. Which precisely why he created only One true Church; so that all could know if they hear and obey it; they can assured of doing God’s Will.”
God choose to establish a new “Church”. Pagans would have their temples; Jews their Synagogues; BUT his new “chosen people” whom HE called “My Church” singular; Mt 16:18 would be the “The Way; the Truth & the Life” that all souls ought to be seeking.
We my friend need to understand the Lord’s Prayer: “THY will be done! On earth [just] as it IS done in heaven. Amen!
unless you consider withholding God’s own singular truth as a “personal option” charity; which is exactly what you’re advocating here. The fatal errors of Protestantism can be briefly summed up as:
Missing all of the essential “You” in the bible and it’s intended exclusively.The Church existed at least more than 1,000 years before Wycliffe, Luther, Calvin, Smith ect. Surely God did not wait for them to make known His Truth! Which are as they must be: singular per defined issue. And the idea that God embraces those who knowingly or not; contradict what He God ordained is a moral impossibility; and neither biblical nor logical.
God Bless you my friend,
Patrick
In which case you missed it. :shrug:Each and every YOU references directly and exclusively the Catholic Church. Every bible passage I have shared HERE, is telling all of us exactly that; as does the narrow gate and other passages as well.
Acts 5: 2 “And we are witnesses of these things and the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to all that obey him.”
Mt 13: 11-14 “Who answered and said to them: Because to YOU it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven: but to them it is not given. For he that hath, to him shall be given, and he shall abound: but he that hath not, from him shall be taken away that also which he hath. Therefore do I speak to THEM in parables: because seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.”
And then, these for you to please look up as space is limited here:
**Mt. 11:15, 10:27, 10:14
Jn 10: 27, 21: 15-17 are but a few.**
“To Believe” MEANS to actually; factually, to know, understand and accept ALL that Christ teaches. And this then excludes in great part the 16th -20th Century man-engineered to be easier, less complex and certailnly less demanding innovative beliefs that flowed through the breach of Luther’s apostasy.
2nd. Peter 1: 16-21 “You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy [teaching] of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”
2nd. Peter 3: 14-17 “Therefore, beloved, since you wait for these, be zealous to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. And count the forbearance of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, beware lest you be carried away with the error of lawless men and lose your own stability
No my friend, I’m not judging; I’m Teaching. Exposing God’s always singular truth per defied issue.
“Conditionally” with God should be understood as doing all He ask, because he ask, exactly as he ask. Which precisely why he created only One true Church; so that all could know if they hear and obey it; they can assured of doing God’s Will.”
“From your lips to God’s ears.” Were you’re supposition true The Incarnation, His Church and the bible would all be frivolous and unnecessary. Or maybe God could have written the Bible by Himself and just somehow dropped it upon us. Silly yes! But that’s what in effect your understanding seems to ME to be.
God choose to establish a new “Church”. Pagans would have their temples; Jews their Synagogues; BUT his new “chosen people” whom HE called “My Church” singular; Mt 16:18 would be the “The Way; the Truth & the Life” that all souls ought to be seeking.
We my friend need to understand the Lord’s Prayer: “THY will be done! On earth [just] as it IS done in heaven. Amen!
No Fran what you advocate is not charity;
unless you consider withholding God’s own singular truth as a “personal option” charity; which is exactly what you’re advocating here. The fatal errors of Protestantism can be briefly summed up as:Missing all of the essential “You”
God Bless you my friend,
Patrick
R
Rohzek
Guest
I don’t think Fran is necessarily trying to include “all Christian faiths” here. He is merely reiterating the truth that the two holy fathers, Augustine and Tychonius, both asserted. That we know where the Body of Christ/Church is, but we do not know where it is not. Therefore, it is plausible that one might know God in Anglicanism, Lutheranism, etc. despite the sin of heresy. This therefore makes them partakers of grace, however impaired, and thence part of the Body of Christ, although not part of the visible institution established by Christ which holds all perfect truth (which is the Catholic Church according to you two).
F
frangiuliano115
Guest
Fran PART 2 OF 2
In which case you missed it. :shrug:Each and every YOU references directly and exclusively the Catholic Church. Every bible passage I have shared HERE, is telling all of us exactly that; as does the narrow gate and other passages as well.
Acts 5: 2 “And we are witnesses of these things and the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to all that obey him.”
Mt 13: 11-14 “Who answered and said to them: Because to YOU it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven: but to them it is not given. For he that hath, to him shall be given, and he shall abound: but he that hath not, from him shall be taken away that also which he hath. Therefore do I speak to THEM in parables: because seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.”
////////////////////////////////
“From your lips to God’s ears.” Were you’re supposition true The Incarnation, His Church and the bible would all be frivolous and unnecessary. Or maybe God could have written the Bible by Himself and just somehow dropped it upon us. Silly yes! But that’s what in effect your understanding seems to ME to be.
God choose to establish a new “Church”. Pagans would have their temples; Jews their Synagogues; BUT his new “chosen people” whom HE called “My Church” singular; Mt 16:18 would be the “The Way; the Truth & the Life” that all souls ought to be seeking.
We my friend need to understand the Lord’s Prayer: “THY will be done! On earth [just] as it IS done in heaven. Amen!
No Fran what you advocate is not charity;
Missing all of the essential “You”in the bible and it’s intended exclusively.The Church existed at least more than 1,000 years before Wycliffe, Luther, Calvin, Smith ect. Surely God did not wait for them to make known His Truth! Which are as they must be: singular per defined issue. And the idea that God embraces those who knowingly or not; contradict what He God ordained is a moral impossibility; and neither biblical nor logical.
God Bless you my friend,
Patrick
Good evening Patrick,
There is a fundamental difference between us and we will never agree. The first thing I learned in fundamental theology is that the bible speaks to us individually. So that when it says YOU, it’s speaking to ME, it does not mean a church.
In His Body I do intend to include all who believe in Him. Precisely because He has only one Body. Are you trying to tell me that only Catholics are going to heaven? So Jesus instituted a church, the catholic church. I guess He couldn’t figure out that one day it would split. We say that the Holy Spirit works in the church, we think he’ll be working in the church for this decision as to whether or not let remarrieds receive communion. Great. So where was the Holy Spirit when the catholic church split in the e1500’s? Why did He allow it to split? Seems like a big mistake to me. And I think God doesn’t make mistakes.
Do I mean by this that God wanted a split? Who can know. I certainly cannot know God’s mind, as it seems that you do. I do know that the split was for a reason and the church has been reforming ever since. You must admit that the church is different today than it was back in 1500, 1700, 1800 and even pre VAT II. So how do we account for that?
You say that some are not going about salvation in God’s way. Well, what way would that be do you suppose? Is it not because they are basing their faith in Christ - the one who went to the cross and died for us all? What other way is there??
ONE
F
frangiuliano115
Guest
TWO
It sounds like you’re on a mission. What you’re really doing is making christians reading along that are not catholic think we’re living in the dark ages.
God loves everyone PJM. He desires to save everyone. All we have to do is believe in the Son to get to the Father. You quote scripture like I’ve never seen. I know the bible, you could just talk to me.
Mathew 8:22 Follow me and let the dead buy the dead.
Who are the dead? Maybe the ones who don’t want to follow Jesus?
He spoke to the rich man. When the R.M. asked Jesus what He must do to be saved, the answer was not / join my church. but to sell everything and follow Jesus.
Also, check out>
Mathew 19:25
Romans 8:38
Romans 10:9
Philippians 3:4
Hebrews 7:25
The list goes on. The bible speaks to us in a personal way. We are to read it as if Jesus were speaking to us. All lthat scripture you quote is for unsaved people. We’re a saved people PJM. All who are trusting in Jesus are a saved people.
Leaving aside Lumen Gentium, Vatican II, Pope Benedict, Pope Francis / do you really believe that Lutherans and Baptists have no chance of getting into heaven?
I’m posting what the catholic church believes regarding non-catholics. This is after Vatican Council II in 1965.
Much has changed in our church, but many refuse to believe it. Or they’re using incorrect language which leaves one wondering.
The fate of non-Catholics, as expressed at Vatican II:
bullet The “Dogmatic Constitution on the Church - Lumen Gentium” (1964) is one of many documents to come out of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council (often referred to as “Vatican II”). The Council was held in Rome between 1962 and 1965. Lumen Gentium" contains in its Chapter 1 an essay on “The Mystery of the church.” Sections 14 to 16 describe the potential for salvation of:
bullet Followers of the Catholic Church,
bullet Members of other Christian denominations, and
bullet Believers of non-Christian religions. 5
The language is difficult to follow for a lay person. However, an “Assessment of this Council” was written “as an AID to study by Catholic Students of the Second Vatican Council. They contain material, some written in a journalistic style, for the American reader.” In the section “The Constitution of the Church” the assessment reads:
“The Catholic Church professes that it is the one, holy catholic and apostolic Church of Christ; this it does not and could not deny. But in its Constitution the Church now solemnly acknowledges that the Holy Ghost is truly active in the churches and communities separated from itself. To these other Christian Churches the Catholic Church is bound in many ways: through reverence for God’s word in the Scriptures; through the fact of baptism; through other sacraments which they recognize.”
As I’ve said before, we should leave God’s job to God, and that includes knowing who has attained salvation. Which brings up an interesting point. Some of our brethren tell me they can’t even be sure THEY’RE saved, but you are apparently able to tell me if even those outside the church are saved!
Fran
It sounds like you’re on a mission. What you’re really doing is making christians reading along that are not catholic think we’re living in the dark ages.
God loves everyone PJM. He desires to save everyone. All we have to do is believe in the Son to get to the Father. You quote scripture like I’ve never seen. I know the bible, you could just talk to me.
Mathew 8:22 Follow me and let the dead buy the dead.
Who are the dead? Maybe the ones who don’t want to follow Jesus?
He spoke to the rich man. When the R.M. asked Jesus what He must do to be saved, the answer was not / join my church. but to sell everything and follow Jesus.
Also, check out>
Mathew 19:25
Romans 8:38
Romans 10:9
Philippians 3:4
Hebrews 7:25
The list goes on. The bible speaks to us in a personal way. We are to read it as if Jesus were speaking to us. All lthat scripture you quote is for unsaved people. We’re a saved people PJM. All who are trusting in Jesus are a saved people.
Leaving aside Lumen Gentium, Vatican II, Pope Benedict, Pope Francis / do you really believe that Lutherans and Baptists have no chance of getting into heaven?
I’m posting what the catholic church believes regarding non-catholics. This is after Vatican Council II in 1965.
Much has changed in our church, but many refuse to believe it. Or they’re using incorrect language which leaves one wondering.
The fate of non-Catholics, as expressed at Vatican II:
bullet The “Dogmatic Constitution on the Church - Lumen Gentium” (1964) is one of many documents to come out of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council (often referred to as “Vatican II”). The Council was held in Rome between 1962 and 1965. Lumen Gentium" contains in its Chapter 1 an essay on “The Mystery of the church.” Sections 14 to 16 describe the potential for salvation of:
bullet Followers of the Catholic Church,
bullet Members of other Christian denominations, and
bullet Believers of non-Christian religions. 5
The language is difficult to follow for a lay person. However, an “Assessment of this Council” was written “as an AID to study by Catholic Students of the Second Vatican Council. They contain material, some written in a journalistic style, for the American reader.” In the section “The Constitution of the Church” the assessment reads:
“The Catholic Church professes that it is the one, holy catholic and apostolic Church of Christ; this it does not and could not deny. But in its Constitution the Church now solemnly acknowledges that the Holy Ghost is truly active in the churches and communities separated from itself. To these other Christian Churches the Catholic Church is bound in many ways: through reverence for God’s word in the Scriptures; through the fact of baptism; through other sacraments which they recognize.”
As I’ve said before, we should leave God’s job to God, and that includes knowing who has attained salvation. Which brings up an interesting point. Some of our brethren tell me they can’t even be sure THEY’RE saved, but you are apparently able to tell me if even those outside the church are saved!
Fran
F
frangiuliano115
Guest
Hi Rohzek,
I’m rather dismayed at the fact that we’re still quoting Augustine when there has been a change after Vat II.
Could you please read it and then if you’d care to post and tell me where our different understanding is? (the red in post no. 138) PJM also is stating pre Vat Ii doctrine.
I’m not sure what you mean by “all christian faiths” but then you go on to say that Lutherans, Anglicans, etc. could know God.
Don’t you think any person could know God, no matter what the religion?
Fran
P
PJM
Guest
OK, I accept that as expressed here. BUT, I’m not sure that is Frans meaning, having read quite a number of Fran’s post:shrug:
C
clem456
Guest
Just as an aside:
Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists, etc…
are not guilty of the sin of heresy.
The founders might be called heretics, and guilty of the sin of heresy (I am not knowledgeable in who has been decreed what) but the modern day followers are not guilty of “heresy”.
You can call the particular beliefs “heretical”, but…
I believe “heretic” is a legal term, and not a general term that is equated simply with “separated” or “non-conforming believer person”.
A
adrift
Guest
Your friend is right. Either you are misquoting your priest, he misunderstood you are he doesn’t baptize babies.…
Why do I separate and why this discussion with the priest? I have a friend who insists that if you’re baptized you’re a member of the Body. I keep telling her, But what if I kill one person every week, I’m still a member? And she replies yes. So I spoke to the priest about this to make sure I was right and he said I was. You have to ACCEPT your baptism in order to be a member of the Body. And Church, the invisible Church.
Short enough for ya?
Fran
I suggest you read the CCC and show it your priest as well especially 1267-1271
F
frangiuliano115
Guest
You’re replying to>Your friend is right. Either you are misquoting your priest, he misunderstood you are he doesn’t baptize babies.
I suggest you read the CCC and show it your priest as well especially 1267-1271
Originally Posted by frangiuliano115 View Post
…
Why do I separate and why this discussion with the priest? I have a friend who insists that if you’re baptized you’re a member of the Body. I keep telling her, But what if I kill one person every week, I’m still a member? And she replies yes. So I spoke to the priest about this to make sure I was right and he said I was. You have to ACCEPT your baptism in order to be a member of the Body. And Church, the invisible Church.
Adrift,
I respectfully suggest that YOU don’t understand, not this priest.
I happen to love CCC no. 1271. You can reread it too.
It says that baptism is the foundation of communion among all Christians, including those who are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church. Great sentence even for those who believe that there is no salvation outside the church / but why believe the CCC?
For men WHO BELIEVE IN CHRIST and have been properly baptized… are put in communion with the catholic church.
Does someone who murders a person a week (who was my example) believe in Christ?
Does the fact that he’s baptized make any difference? Is he going to heaven anyway?
… baptism constitutes the sacramental bond existing amoung all who through it are reborn.
Is our murderer reborn? Which means died to Christ and reborn in Christ.
Go on to 1272>
…The person baptized is configured to Christ.
Is our murderer configured to Christ?
pp no. 1274
The faithful christian who has kept the seal till the very end, remaining faithful to the demands of his baptism…
Come on Adrift. Think it over. Is the murderer part of the Body of Christ??
Fran
A
adrift
Guest
Does a murder undo a baptism? In fact is there anything that can undo a baptism? You assume that if you are a member of the Church that you are saved…far from it.
.’
I respectfully suggest that you haven’t a clue about the Church of Jesus or what baptism is.
R
Rohzek
Guest
I really don’t see a difference between the red stuff you wrote and what Augustine and Tychonius wrote so long ago. Perhaps you would take it further than they in terms of extending it to non-Christians, but I don’t find that to be a stretch. It still abides by the same principle.
As for others, I seriously urge that people read Tychonius’ Book of Rules, especially on the bipartite body of Christ. It would resolve this debate over whether or not a murderer undoes baptism, or is a member of the Body of Christ, etc.
A cheap English translation can be found by William S. Babcock from 1989. Or if you can read Latin, just read the version found in the Patrologia Latina.
- Status