No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church

[rinnie]

Here’s another perspective on Christ:

“Christ has been much misinterpreted by the world. Even the most elementary principles of his teachings have been desecrated, and their esoteric depths have been forgotten. They have been crucified at the hands of dogma, prejudice, and cramped understanding. Genocidal wars have been fought, people have been burned as witches and heretics, on the presumed authority of man-made doctrines of Christianity. How to salvage the immortal teachings from the hands of ignorance? We must know Jesus as an Oriental Christ, a supreme yogi who manifested full mastery of the universal science of God-union, and thus could speak and act as a savior with the voice and authority of God.” - Paramahansa Yogananda

I can agree with a little of what you said. The part about much of Christ being misinterpreted by the world. That is the People in this world. But remember Christ did not leave us orphans. He left us teachers, the bible tells us so.

But here is something to remember, and you are right there are many man made doctrines. But it never came from the CC. Here is the proof.

Now think back to Pentecost. Remember when the Apostles were actually afraid to speak, and did not know what to teach or say. Then all of a sudden just as Jesus promised the tongues of fire (remember that scripture) and then all of a sudden they started talking in all languages, etc. That is where the authroity of Christ took place.

Then think back to what Christ told them, I will be sending the ADVOCATE the HOLY SPRIIT to TEACH you ALL THINGS. Now the RCC has always had that power of the Holy Spirit from that day forward. Now if the RCC has Man Made doctrines it came from one Man. Jesus Christ. Both huMAN and divine.

Now how do we know that we can not go astray in our teaching’s. Simple go back to the bible to begin with. Remember when Jesus said go and make disciples of all nations. But he also said BE CAREFUL on WHO YOU LAY YOU HAND ON. Now think about that. Jesus said many will twist the word for their own gain not Christ’.

Now in the RCC you must have the passing of the Holy Spirit by the laying of hands. That is called Holy Orders. The Priests in the CC must obey the teachings of the Bishops and Pope. They obey the authority passed on by Christ and so must we.

That

 

[First_Thought]

Not “wrong,” merely “different.” Like the other Avatars(Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster), Jesus was a self-realized individual, one who had intimate knowledge of human potential and a direct relationship with God. Jesus was sent by the Father to teach the world about salvation and the kingdom of Heaven. Still, to this day, there are individuals convinced that Heaven and Hell are physical locations rather than states of being. I’ll leave you with another quote from Yogananda:

“How do the receptive perceive truth, whereas the unreceptive ‘seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand’? The ultimate truths of heaven and the kingdom of God, the reality that lies behind sensory perception and beyond the cogitations of the rationalizing mind, can only be grasped by intuition — awakening the intuitive knowing, the pure comprehension, of the soul.” - Paramahansa Yogananda

 

[thomasf]

I was listening to an old Catholic Answers radio show about this very topic. Alan Schreck was the guest that was speaking on the topic. From what I understand, “no slavation outside the church” was originally quoted in the 3rd century. To paraphrase what Schreck said, basically back then the catholic church was THE christian church, and the only option to find Christ. Especially while the christians were being persecuted and the church was an underground organization. You were either in the catholic church and seeking Christ, or you were pagan or jewish or some other religion. So indeed, salvation through Christ was only in the catholic church.

After the reformation and once christianity started splitting, this was not so. Suddenly there was all kinds of churches, and people of all denominations that sought Christ. None of these other churches had the fullness of the faith that the Catholic Church has, and none of them were the church that Christ founded and intended us to use on the path to salvation. But yet people were seeking Christ, and some of them had parts of the truth and a few of the sacraments and many of these people had a love for Christ and were real followers.

So the church has had to expand the understanding of what “the church” is in that statement of “no salvation outside the catholic church”. It is possible that some people who aren’t actually in the catholic church or aren’t catholic will gain salvation, their faiths have partial truth and they still seek Christ. Yet the fullness of the faith, and the best chance for salvation lies within the church that Christ founded on the Apostles.

So basically over time the understanding of that statement has had to be expanded, but it hasn’t watered down the original meaning.

I really like this explanation and it cleared up a lot of confusion for me on the subject. And once again, I believe it still boils down to God is the final judge, it’s up to Him who He saves. My hope rests within the fullness of the faith that is the Catholic Church.

 

[rinnie]

Not “wrong,” merely “different.” Like the other Avatars(Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster), Jesus was a self-realized individual, one who had intimate knowledge of human potential and a direct relationship with God. Jesus was sent by the Father to teach the world about salvation and the kingdom of Heaven. Still, to this day, there are individuals convinced that Heaven and Hell are physical locations rather than states of being. I’ll leave you with another quote from Yogananda:

“How do the receptive perceive truth, whereas the unreceptive ‘seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand’? The ultimate truths of heaven and the kingdom of God, the reality that lies behind sensory perception and beyond the cogitations of the rationalizing mind, can only be grasped by intuition — awakening the intuitive knowing, the pure comprehension, of the soul.” - Paramahansa Yogananda

Na, Not buying it when it comes to the word of God. intuition is knowing something without the conscious use of reasoning. When it comes to The Word God sent his only son to teach us the word. Now do you not agree it was done by reasoning.

Jesus did not just drop by teach a little and then take off. Then we would have the problem you describe. But Jesus said he would be sending the HOLY SPRIIT.

THe ADVOCATE to Teach and LEAD you to ALL TRUTH!! So that quote don’t work for me when it comes to the Word of Christ. But the HOLY SPRIT does

 

[rinnie]

I was listening to an old Catholic Answers radio show about this very topic. Alan Schreck was the guest that was speaking on the topic. From what I understand, “no slavation outside the church” was originally quoted in the 3rd century. To paraphrase what Schreck said, basically back then the catholic church was THE christian church, and the only option to find Christ. Especially while the christians were being persecuted and the church was an underground organization. You were either in the catholic church and seeking Christ, or you were pagan or jewish or some other religion. So indeed, salvation through Christ was only in the catholic church.

After the reformation and once christianity started splitting, this was not so. Suddenly there was all kinds of churches, and people of all denominations that sought Christ. None of these other churches had the fullness of the faith that the Catholic Church has, and none of them were the church that Christ founded and intended us to use on the path to salvation. But yet people were seeking Christ, and some of them had parts of the truth and a few of the sacraments and many of these people had a love for Christ and were real followers.

So the church has had to expand the understanding of what “the church” is in that statement of “no salvation outside the catholic church”. It is possible that some people who aren’t actually in the catholic church or aren’t catholic will gain salvation, their faiths have partial truth and they still seek Christ. Yet the fullness of the faith, and the best chance for salvation lies within the church that Christ founded on the Apostles.

So basically over time the understanding of that statement has had to be expanded, but it hasn’t watered down the original meaning.

I really like this explanation and it cleared up a lot of confusion for me on the subject. And once again, I believe it still boils down to God is the final judge, it’s up to Him who He saves. My hope rests within the fullness of the faith that is the Catholic Church.

Very Very Good Thomas. Thank-you!

 

[Brandon72]

It is the re-presentation of Christ’s sacrifice. It’s not a re-sacrifice.
Maybe if you read slower*, it would sink in . . .

Elvisman, do you not know what your church teaches??

From a Roman Catholic website:

The most serious challenge to the Catholic faith in the Eucharist was the claim that the Mass is not a real but merely a symbolic sacrifice.

To defend this basic Eucharistic mystery, the Council of Trent made a series of definitions. Originally drafted as negative anathemas, they may be reduced to the following positive affirmation of faith.

1. The Mass is a true and proper sacrifice which is offered to God. That my friend is a re-sacrifice!
2. By the words, “Do this in commemoration of me” (Luke 22:19; I Corinthians 11:24), Christ made the apostles priests. Moreover, He decreed that they and other priests should offer His Body and Blood. Say what!!! You might want to read Hebrews 10.
   [8] When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), [9] then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second. [10] **And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. **
   (Hebrews 10:8-10 ESV)
3. The Sacrifice of the Mass is not merely an offering of praise and thanksgiving, or simply a memorial of the sacrifice on the Cross. It is a propitiatory sacrifice which is offered for the living and dead, for the remission of sins and punishment due to sin, as satisfaction for sin and for other necessities.
   This is madness!! The Roman system is doing what Christ told us not to do! Why do you think He had the temple destroyed in 70AD!!?? To stop the sacrifices!!! He was sacrifice that the OT was waiting for! It is finished!!

There is no more we can sacrifice, Christ did in once and for all. You go against the word of God if you think you are going to offer a sacrifice for sins every Sunday mass. He did it on the Cross it is finished!
[27] And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.”
(Daniel 9:27 ESV) You can’t offer or sacrifice for sins anymore. Christ did that already for those who believe. Do you believe?

 

[Brandon72]

John O’Brien, a Catholic priest, has helped Roman Catholics to understand the importance of the Mass. He has written a book called The Faith of Millions, The Credentials of the Catholic Religion. It is a classic work. This is what he writes, John O’Brien, a very popular work. “When the priest announces the tremendous words of consecration…this is the Mass…he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the victim for the sins of man. It is a power exercised by the priest greater than that of saints and angels, greater than that of seraphim and cherubim. Indeed, it is a power greater even than the power of the Virgin Mary. While the Blessed Virgin was the human agency by which Christ became incarnate a single time, the priest brings Christ down from heaven and renders Him present on our altar as the eternal victim.”

How do you explain this? All the RC on this post seem to think that the mass is not a re-sacrifice, but everything I learn about your the RCC says the complete opposite. What this priest says about the mass makes me so sad to think that many are falling for this heresy. He reaches up to Heaven?? It actually makes me very angry that you would make Christ your puppet. Who are we as the created beings to think we can call Jesus Christ off of His throne, to be sacrificed over and over again!!??

HE IS OUR KING, AND WE DO HIS WILL, HE DOESN’T DO OURS!! AMEN!!

 

[elvisman]

Elvisman, do you not know what your church teaches??

From a Roman Catholic website:

The most serious challenge to the Catholic faith in the Eucharist was the claim that the Mass is not a real but merely a symbolic sacrifice.

To defend this basic Eucharistic mystery, the Council of Trent made a series of definitions. Originally drafted as negative anathemas, they may be reduced to the following positive affirmation of faith.

1. The Mass is a true and proper sacrifice which is offered to God. That my friend is a re-sacrifice!
2. By the words, “Do this in commemoration of me” (Luke 22:19; I Corinthians 11:24), Christ made the apostles priests. Moreover, He decreed that they and other priests should offer His Body and Blood. Say what!!! You might want to read Hebrews 10.
   [8] When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), [9] then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second. [10] **And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. **
   (Hebrews 10:8-10 ESV)
3. The Sacrifice of the Mass is not merely an offering of praise and thanksgiving, or simply a memorial of the sacrifice on the Cross. It is a propitiatory sacrifice which is offered for the living and dead, for the remission of sins and punishment due to sin, as satisfaction for sin and for other necessities.
   This is madness!! The Roman system is doing what Christ told us not to do! Why do you think He had the temple destroyed in 70AD!!?? To stop the sacrifices!!! He was sacrifice that the OT was waiting for! It is finished!!

There is no more we can sacrifice, Christ did in once and for all. You go against the word of God if you think you are going to offer a sacrifice for sins every Sunday mass. He did it on the Cross it is finished!
[27] And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.”
(Daniel 9:27 ESV) You can’t offer or sacrifice for sins anymore. Christ did that already for those who believe. Do you believe?

Again - your failure to understand ETERNITY is your downfall.

There is not one statement from Trent or any other council - or the Catechism - that the Mass offers a NEW sacrifice. It is the once, for all, ETERNAL sacrifice that Jesus made.

Eternity is immeasurable time. I’ve shown you 3 times - FROM THE BIBLE (Rev. 13:8) - that Jesus’ sacrifice is eternal - but you just can’t grasp this concept. Tell me what you make of Rev. 13:8. WHAT does this mean to YOU??

Pray for faith - pray for understanding.
"Trust in the LORD with all your heart and* *lean not on your own understanding" (Prov. 3:5)

 

[elvisman]

How do you explain this? All the RC on this post seem to think that the mass is not a re-sacrifice, but everything I learn about your the RCC says the complete opposite. What this priest says about the mass makes me so sad to think that many are falling for this heresy. He reaches up to Heaven?? It actually makes me very angry that you would make Christ your puppet. Who are we as the created beings to think we can call Jesus Christ off of His throne, to be sacrificed over and over again!!??

HE IS OUR KING, AND WE DO HIS WILL, HE DOESN’T DO OURS!! AMEN!!

So - because one priest uses an unfortunate series of words to describe Transubstantiation, you attribute his version of it to the Church?

**Professional anti-Catholic John MacArthur uses this very quote from O’Brien’s book to slam the Church in his epic rant of lies, “The Scandal of the Catholic Priesthood”. **
In the audio version of this diatribe, he spews out one lie after another. In the printed version (available on his website) - he cleans it up and removes much of the filth from the audio version.

Your attacks are nothing new. They’re the same tired, re-hashed rubbish that MacArthur and others have spewn for centuries . . .

I’ve said it to you before and I’ll say it again - DO YOUR HOMEWORK. You wanna know what the church teaches? Read the Catechism.
This is getting rather embarassing for you . . .

 

[O.S.Luke]

The beauty - and the necessity - of Scripture is that one line DOESN’T say it all. You have to tall ALL of the Scriptures in context. It is a common neophyte mistake to attempt to pigeonhole all of God’s word to one or 2 verses. You have taken one verse and established ALL of Christianity around it - while ignoring the rest of what Jesus said.

THAT is the tragedy of Priotestantism.

That’s a terrible generalization. Not all Protestants take scripture out of context.

Just a suggestion, Elvisman: be careful with your use of colors. Those of us who are color blind have great difficulty reading your posts when the colors switch so often. Some of your colors blend in to the screen background color (probably red).

 

[elvisman]

Not “wrong,” merely “different.” Like the other Avatars(Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster), Jesus was a self-realized individual, one who had intimate knowledge of human potential and a direct relationship with God. Jesus was sent by the Father to teach the world about salvation and the kingdom of Heaven. Still, to this day, there are individuals convinced that Heaven and Hell are physical locations rather than states of being. I’ll leave you with another quote from Yogananda:

“How do the receptive perceive truth, whereas the unreceptive ‘seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand’? The ultimate truths of heaven and the kingdom of God, the reality that lies behind sensory perception and beyond the cogitations of the rationalizing mind, can only be grasped by intuition — awakening the intuitive knowing, the pure comprehension, of the soul.” - Paramahansa Yogananda

No - it’s WRONG.
Jesus did not preach that intuition and knowledge were paramount. It was faith and love. The Church teaches us that our bodies and souls will be reunited, therefore Heaven must be a combination of the spiritual and the physical.

You are attributing things to Jesus that aren’t true. Others have tried for years to attribute other things about Jesus that are bogus.
There is NO evidence that Jesus was an adherent of Yoga philosophy.
**There is NO evidence that Jesus was an adherent of Karmic principle.
There is NO evidence that Jesus was an adherent of Buddhism.

ALL of these belief systems are incompatible with Christianity on a spiritual level.
**

 

[elvisman]

That’s a terrible generalization. Not all Protestants take scripture out of context.

Just a suggestion, Elvisman: be careful with your use of colors. Those of us who are color blind have great difficulty reading your posts when the colors switch so often. Some of your colors blend in to the screen background color (probably red).

It’s not a terrible generalization. It’s a fact.

---

**Every Protestant denomination disagrees with the Church in Scriptural matters on some level - every one. If they didn’t - they’d be Catholic.

The Church is the custodian of the Deposit of Faith (Luke 10:16, 1 Tim. 3:15, 6:20).

 

[Nicea325]

Originally Posted by Brandon72
if what is taken in the Sacrament visibly is in the truth itself eaten spiritually, drunk spiritually. For we have heard the Lord Himself saying, “It is the Spirit That quickeneth, but the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken unto you, are Spirit and Life. But there are some of you,” saith He, “that believe not.” Such were they who said, “This is a hard saying, who can hear it?” It is hard, but only to the hard; that is, it is incredible, but only to the incredulous.

The ones that believe not, are the ones who thought Jesus literally meant they need to eat his flesh!! It’s staring you right in the face! Augustine tells you it’s eaten spiritually, not fleshly. The flesh doesn’t profit a thing. It’s not the flesh of Christ we are eating or the literal blood of Christ we are drinking.

Where do you get this train of thought? One more time, St.Augustine never taught or believed the Eucharist is symbolic. St.Augustine is NOT Protestant,so stop protraying him as one. Finally, stop perverting his works because you really are looking disingenious by twsiting his works and slicing and dicing his words.

BTW: Jesus said: The Flesh profits nothing,not MY FLESH profits nothing.

Try again because at the moment you are not looking very credible with your usage of St.Augustine.

 

[KathleenGee]

I am reflecting on some materials that made me think of another context of no salvation outside the Church…many Protestants believe in Jesus and the Full Gospel…but they remind me the followers of Jesus who left Him, when he brought up the part about eating his body and blood. They thought he was turning into cannibalism.

It is ironic that Protestants can point out so many passages of the Bible, that we are ourselves believe in – but in context of the Bride of Christ – but then, how should I say this…there is not alot of thought on reflections of symbolism and metaphors regarding fundamentalist take on Scripture…but they do use symbolism in explaining Christ’s words,
‘This is my body, this is my blood…’…whoever eats of this will have eternal life.

I take that literally…we who receive the Eucharist worthily and with right have the promise of eternal life – and it will be Christ who will then either accept or reject us…

I leave it to Vatican II to explain the rest regarding non-Catholics and their salvation I have read or actually listened to former fundamentalists and how much fear and misunderstandings they had to become Catholic…so I think the Lord waits for them with open arms…through no fault of their own, because of the anti-Catholic indoctrination they have received.

My Baptist girlfriend was shocked to hear that we have Scripture readings at Mass…we have done so for 2,000 years.

But I do think there will be those who will be made accountable for spreading false doctrines and getting people to reject the sacraments.

And I also think we have to be careful in how far we go in tolerance…because then we become lukewarm. Christ said he would spit out the lukewarm…a false humanitarianism…I like humanitarians…but I do try to be faithful to my own convictions when I associate with them.

 

[Brandon72]

Again - your failure to understand ETERNITY is your downfall.

There is not one statement from Trent or any other council - or the Catechism - that the Mass offers a NEW sacrifice. It is the once, for all, ETERNAL sacrifice that Jesus made.

Eternity is immeasurable time. I’ve shown you 3 times - FROM THE BIBLE (Rev. 13:8) - that Jesus’ sacrifice is eternal - but you just can’t grasp this concept. Tell me what you make of Rev. 13:8. WHAT does this mean to YOU??

Pray for faith - pray for understanding.
"Trust in the LORD with all your heart and* *lean not on your own understanding" (Prov. 3:5)

[8] and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.

(Revelation 13:8 ESV)

Not sure what the heck this verse has to do with our discussion. This verse is about the lost souls who are not written in the book of life following the Antichrist during the great tribulation.

Now tell me what your getting at please.

 

[elvisman]

[8] and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.
(Revelation 13:8 ESV)

Not sure what the heck this verse has to do with our discussion. This verse is about the lost souls who are not written in the book of life following the Antichrist during the great tribulation.

Now tell me what your getting at please.

**It illustrates that the Lamb is slain *before *the foundations of the world. **
It proves that Christ’s sacrifice is ETERNAL - as does 1 Pet. 1:19-20.
It shows that the Catholic practice of observing this eternal sacrifice is not only proper but faithful as well as logical.

Finally - it proves that those who reject the eternal sacrifice of Jesus reject HIM.

Clear enough?

 

[Brandon72]

Again - your failure to understand ETERNITY is your downfall.

There is not one statement from Trent or any other council - or the Catechism - that the Mass offers a NEW sacrifice. It is the once, for all, ETERNAL sacrifice that Jesus made.

Eternity is immeasurable time. I’ve shown you 3 times - FROM THE BIBLE (Rev. 13:8) - that Jesus’ sacrifice is eternal - but you just can’t grasp this concept. Tell me what you make of Rev. 13:8. WHAT does this mean to YOU??

Pray for faith - pray for understanding.
"Trust in the LORD with all your heart and* *lean not on your own understanding" (Prov. 3:5)

New or old it doesn’t matter! What matters is you are offering a sacrifice when it is not needed. Have you ever read Hebrews chapter 9-11?? It explains everything you need to know about not sacrificing anymore. Jesus did it, it’s over! Stop telling me its eternal because we are not eternal down here!! We are in time, we are not in Heaven. Jesus Christ did the sacrifice once and for all. Daniel 9:27

Answer me this. Why did God have the temple destroyed in 70AD?

Jeremiah 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

If He entered in once, how can a priest keep calling Him down???

Hebrews 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Hebrews 10:12, …after he had offered** one sacrifice** for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God.

Hebrews 9:28 …Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many

See the pattern here? If Christ was offered one time, why do the priest offer him over and over again. Breaking bread and drinking the cup is supposed to be symbolic. Roman catholics take Scripture and twist the true meaning. Do this in “remembrance of me” doesn’t mean sacrifice me. He tells us to do it to remember His sacrifice.

I am done arguing with you. This is useless. Let’s agree to disagree.

God Bless

 

[Dokimas]

Not at all.
I said that YOU don’t know what it means.

Again witht the colors, Doki?
Stick to the topic.

I’ll ask you again:
Which part do you have a problem with?
Which part do you disagree with?

This is a pattern with you, Doki. Every time you’re losing the debate - you try to derail the thread.

If you had just answered the question instead of being rude, I’d have told you to follow my colors and you’ll get your answer.

Have a nice night.

 

[Dokimas]

Elvisman, do you not know what your church teaches??

From a Roman Catholic website:

The most serious challenge to the Catholic faith in the Eucharist was the claim that the Mass is not a real but merely a symbolic sacrifice.

To defend this basic Eucharistic mystery, the Council of Trent made a series of definitions. Originally drafted as negative anathemas, they may be reduced to the following positive affirmation of faith.

1. The Mass is a true and proper sacrifice which is offered to God. That my friend is a re-sacrifice!
2. By the words, “Do this in commemoration of me” (Luke 22:19; I Corinthians 11:24), Christ made the apostles priests. Moreover, He decreed that they and other priests should offer His Body and Blood. Say what!!! You might want to read Hebrews 10.
   [8] When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), [9] then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second. [10] **And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. **
   (Hebrews 10:8-10 ESV)
3. The Sacrifice of the Mass is not merely an offering of praise and thanksgiving, or simply a memorial of the sacrifice on the Cross. It is a propitiatory sacrifice which is offered for the living and dead, for the remission of sins and punishment due to sin, as satisfaction for sin and for other necessities.
   This is madness!! The Roman system is doing what Christ told us not to do! Why do you think He had the temple destroyed in 70AD!!?? To stop the sacrifices!!! He was sacrifice that the OT was waiting for! It is finished!!

There is no more we can sacrifice, Christ did in once and for all. You go against the word of God if you think you are going to offer a sacrifice for sins every Sunday mass. He did it on the Cross it is finished!
[27] And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.”
(Daniel 9:27 ESV) You can’t offer or sacrifice for sins anymore. Christ did that already for those who believe. Do you believe?

Seems obvious to me, Brandon.

 

[Patrick_Ambrose]

This is one of the most interesting topics to talk about from the stand point that I don’t think you can have a perfect, black and white answer to it. Reason being is that it’s a mute argument.

As a Catholic, I believe that the fullness of knowledge is found within the Catholic Church. Not that other Christian (or any religions outside Christianity) does NOT have truth but, rather, that the Catholic Church, being the original Church that traces it’s origins back to Christ himself, the Head of the Church.

What does this mean? We have all the “tools” and “knowledge” at our disposal to work our way to Salvation, so our excuses are limited.

Can those outside the Catholic Church find Salvation? Sure they can but it will be done with limited knowledge and, therefore, will be more difficult. Another reason why this is so is that God can do anything.

Finally, it’s not a question for us to answer but one that God will ultimately answer in the end.

For me, there’s no doubt in my mind I’m better off Catholic than not Catholic.