Pope: Other denominations not true churches

[Dulcimer]

I don’t know about anyone else but your criticism of The Pope and The Church and the Venom in which you spew it is very disturbing for a Catholic!

Since when is it “uncatholic” to question authority? Just a few other cases from church history:

1. Paul commended the Bereans for not just taking his word but checking it against their existing Scriptures (the OT).
2. Paul challenged Peter’s hypocrisy in PUBLIC, rather witheringly and humiliatingly, yet Peter does not complain, for Paul was right (“If you being a Jew live like a Gentile, how is it that you would compell the Gentiles to live like the Jews?”)!

I would be disturbed if we were not allowed to question authority…That is how cults maintain power.

–Dulcimer <><

 

[vern_humphrey]

Since when is it “uncatholic” to question authority? Just a few other cases from church history:

1. Paul commended the Bereans for not just taking his word but checking it against their existing Scriptures (the OT).
2. Paul challenged Peter’s hypocrisy in PUBLIC, rather witheringly and humiliatingly, yet Peter does not complain, for Paul was right (“If you being a Jew live like a Gentile, how is it that you would compell the Gentiles to live like the Jews?”)!

I would be disturbed if we were not allowed to question authority…That is how cults maintain power.

–Dulcimer <><

It’s one thing to read scripture, or to correct another face to face. It’s something entirely different to complain, based on biased news accounts, and refuse to even read the document in question.

 

[rpp]

Since when is it “uncatholic” to question authority? Just a few other cases from church history:

1. Paul commended the Bereans for not just taking his word but checking it against their existing Scriptures (the OT).
2. Paul challenged Peter’s hypocrisy in PUBLIC, rather witheringly and humiliatingly, yet Peter does not complain, for Paul was right (“If you being a Jew live like a Gentile, how is it that you would compell the Gentiles to live like the Jews?”)!

I would be disturbed if we were not allowed to question authority…That is how cults maintain power.

–Dulcimer <><

If you are referring to Smokke888’s posts, he was not interested in correcting. Only complaining. He repeatedly refused to actually read the documents but instead complained that ist was the Pope’s faults because news media distorted the story.

 

[rpp]

On the other hand, I think I have figureed out the reason for the timing of the release of this document. It is oto encourage the SSPX to return to full communion.

One of the loud public complaints from the SSPX has been about the false ecumenism which some have practiced which resulting in diluting Catholic teachings.

Check out this link:
cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=52350

Only one real obstacle appears to remain. And that is something only the Pope can handle. For the very first time, Archbishop Fellay actually sounded positive!

 

[steppenwolf1218]

I’d like to hear your views on this news article.

msnbc.msn.com/id/19692094

I’ve been researching this for someone in my parish office as a favor. To start, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is based upon the declarations of Vatican II. There is no real news here. Secondly, as in the original intentions of Vatican II on this matter, it’s addresses not only non Catholic christian faiths but it addresses non christians beliefs as well. Article IV of the six article 23 point letter contains the verbage which seems to have some Protestant leaders in an uproar. That Article is below:

**17. Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.58 The Churches which, while not existing in perfect communion with the Catholic Church, remain united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist, are true particular Churches.59 Therefore, the Church of Christ is present and operative also in these Churches, even though they lack full communion with the Catholic Church, since they do not accept the Catholic doctrine of the Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church.60

On the other hand, the ecclesial communities which have not preserved the valid Episcopate and the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery,61 are not Churches in the proper sense; however, those who are baptized in these communities are, by Baptism, incorporated in Christ and thus are in a certain communion, albeit imperfect, with the Church.62 Baptism in fact tends per se toward the full development of life in Christ, through the integral profession of faith, the Eucharist, and full communion in the Church.63

“The Christian faithful are therefore not permitted to imagine that the Church of Christ is nothing more than a collection — divided, yet in some way one — of Churches and ecclesial communities; nor are they free to hold that today the Church of Christ nowhere really exists, and must be considered only as a goal which all Churches and ecclesial communities must strive to reach”.64 In fact, “the elements of this already-given Church exist, joined together in their fullness in the Catholic Church and, without this fullness, in the other communities”.65 “Therefore, these separated Churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church”.66 **

From the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith: Declaration “Dominus Jesus” On The Unicity and Salvific Universality Of Jesus Christ and the Church. Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger Prefect.

 

[Nordar]

This post deserves it’s own thread. Nordar, I do not want to steal your thunder. Would you post it please? Perhaps on the Motu Proprio room.

Done!

 

[Mimi]

I was devastated at reading this age old ‘I’m better than you’. It was in all newspapers and also made one of the late night t.v. talk shows. This late night host put it this way: “God loves everyone but he loves me more, hu”. You see how that doesn’t even make sense, well that’s the reaction you get when you bring this up.

So, your core beliefs are influenced by talk show hosts?? Sheesh.

I grew up prior to Vatican II and I can tell you the atmosphere between Catholics and Protestants wasn’t that pretty! In short, what the Pope did, was to pick it up from the closet where it was being stored and rubbed it in their faces!! with a ‘I’m better than you’ attitude.

I grew up in the '60’s and most of my cousins were/are Lutheran. Sometimes (very little) we’d get taunted, but I really didn’t know why they were doing that. My mom converted (to Catholicism). No more taunting - in fact, there was No discussion at all.

This is not how you show the Love of Christ! This is not how you attain sainthood! This forces many ‘from the table’. Sure, it will win a few but it will also assure that many don’t even give it a second thought! The examples of John Paul II did much more for the Church than announcing from the throne of heaven that we are better! At this moment, I’m embarrassed being a Catholic, which I find very un-universal but more stuffed away in it’s rightious manners.

If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
There is self-righteousness, which is prideful, and then there is God-fearing Righteousness!

There’s also something to the fact that this has come forward just after elevating the use of the Latin Mass. There is obviously a connection there. Also, not long ago he was in big trouble with the Muslims because he quoted others, now he has merely quoted the truth. There seems to be a lot of George Bush in him, as he chooses to fight first then hopefully draw in the other powers later … good luck!

Groan:shrug:
I do not believe in “luck”, I believe in Providence.

Peace,
Mimi

 

[Mimi]

I’m baffled that people are baffled.

Mimi

 

[jabelltulsa]

imperfectly joined? c’mon!

What does that mean? According to the Pope, there is only one church, no more gray area!

I haven’t read much of this thread, so sorry if you have already been replied to many times. Here’s my reply:

Every Pope should have said this; in fact, many have. The timing is right, because it is an eternal truth.

Here is why the Pope, and Catholics say this: We as Catholics believe that Jesus died for our sins (just as protestants do). Through is Sacrifice on Calvary, the Gates of Heaven were opened to us all. We merely need to be baptized, and live a good life. That first action is crystal clear, but the second needs to be expanded upon. Catholics believe that we all sin from time to time (all as in all humans). John 20:23 commands the Bishops and Priests (Apostles and their descendants) to forgive or not forgive our sins.

This is important, because it shows that only the Priesthood can forgive sins (they represent God here on Earth, so the confession goes to God, actually). If a protestant receives Baptism, I believe that they are truly baptized. But what if they sin afterwards? How do they gain back their Grace? They gain it back from the Sacrament of Confession - commanded by Jesus, and carried out by the Priesthood.

The Pope HAS to communicate the authority of the Church, because the people need it to get to Heaven. This is God’s plan.

You may not believe that the Pope is the “Rock”, but you have to concede that if he thinks he is the “Rock”, then you would expect him to make this statement - he believes (as do all Catholics that know their faith) that the Catholic Church has to be clear about its primacy.

If you just drank poison, I would do whatever I could for you. Sin is the poison in this case. If you are poisoned, I would take you directly to the hospital. If you refused to go, I would tell you where the hospital is, at the very least. The Pope is just directing you to the hospital, because so many refuse to go.

I am being very general in this post, and I am only highlighting one reason why this statement is important. There are many more. I pray that you will study the history of Christianity. If you do that with an open heart, you will have no conclusion but to thank God for a brave Pope; one who will tell you the truth no matter how popular or unpopular it makes him.

This statement, by the way, has always been the teaching of the Church.

Thank You God for reaffirming this. You’re servant, Pope Benedict, has done a great thing.

 

[Robert902]

Here’s what the head of the Catholic Church Benedict (the Pope)said about salvation;

“Other Christian communities are either defective or not true churches and Catholicism provides the only true path to salvation.” He said that other Christian denominations are not true churches but merely ecclesial communities and therefore do not have the “means of salvation.”

That’s what the Pope says, but the Bible doesn’t seem to agree.

“We are saved by grace through faith, and not of works, lest any man boast.”
“I am the way, the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father except by Me.”
“There is one mediator between man and God, and that is the Christ Jesus.”

Apostolic succession according to the Catholic church gives the Pope the authority to be head of the church. They (the Catholic church) think that the apostle Peter was the first Pope. The problem with that reasoning is that the church, according to the Bible, was built on the apostles and the prophets. It was built on [all] the prophets and [all] apostles, not just one!

The head of the true church is Jesus Christ, not Peter, Benedict, Mohammed, Joseph Smith or Mary Baker Eddy! Only one mediator.

John 3:36 “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life, and he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life: but the wrath of God abideth on him.”

Placing your trust in Jesus Christ is all you need for salvation.

God Bless,
Robert

 

[christcnection1]

All the individuals responsible for affirming which books belonged in the New Testament would agree that “other denominations are not true churches.”

They believed in one holy, apostolic church… Not several, hundreds, or thousands of churches… There is just one church.

(What they failed to mention is that we believe all these other Christian groups are “imperfectly” united to the one Catholic Church.) When you phrase it in that way it doesn’t sound like demonization.

This is nothing new in Catholic teaching. It’s being spun to distort and cause disunity.

The Catholic Church also believes that any Christian can be saved. There is no contradiction with what the Pope said. Christ died for all, not just Catholics.

Well, at least all the other “churches” agree on the “essentials.”

 

[jabelltulsa]

I read this in the paper the other day. It saddened me. Does the Pope want to cause divisions between Christians? My husband, who is a Lutheran read the article and he’s angry, what am I supposed to think…that he’s going to hell? What do I tell my sister and brother in law? They are both good people but of a Protestant demonination. Do I call my sister and tell her to go back to the Catholic church or you will rot in hell? Sure, I can do that but that will only cause ill will in the family and not produce much good.

I encourage you to study your history. All protestant faiths are based in the division of Christians. Catholics don’t say that those who believe in Christ are not Christians. Many protestant sects believe that Catholics are not Christians.

Protestantism was borne out of the same thing you believe the Church is (and has always) doing here.

My friend, since the protestant reformation, so many different versions of Christianity have been borne. Protestantism is the division. The Pope (and the Popes of the past) is just restating where the truth actually is preserved. It is his and their jobs to do this.

If you were lost, I would always tell you how to get home.

If your child wandered off and became lost, wouldn’t you call out for him? The Pope (“Kephas” - Peter - Rock) is the designated human leader of the Church here on Earth. He is supposed to call his children home.

No one knows the final destination of souls except God himself. Not me, you, the Pope, no one.

I know this … only True Faith will get you to God. That plus your works.

 

[christcnection1]

Here’s what the head of the Catholic Church Benedict (the Pope)said about salvation;

“Other Christian communities are either defective or not true churches and Catholicism provides the only true path to salvation.” He said that other Christian denominations are not true churches but merely ecclesial communities and therefore do not have the “means of salvation.”

That’s what the Pope says, but the Bible doesn’t seem to agree.

“We are saved by grace through faith, and not of works, lest any man boast.”
“I am the way, the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father except by Me.”
“There is one mediator between man and God, and that is the Christ Jesus.”

Apostolic succession according to the Catholic church gives the Pope the authority to be head of the church. They (the Catholic church) think that the apostle Peter was the first Pope. The problem with that reasoning is that the church, according to the Bible, was built on the apostles and the prophets. It was built on [all] the prophets and [all] apostles, not just one!

The head of the true church is Jesus Christ, not Peter, Benedict, Mohammed, Joseph Smith or Mary Baker Eddy! Only one mediator.

John 3:36 “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life, and he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life: but the wrath of God abideth on him.”

Placing your trust in Jesus Christ is all you need for salvation.

God Bless,
Robert

We agree with all the verses of scripture you use here.

You are taking a few quotes and distorting (in part) what we truly believe.

I think you are sincere and love our Lord, but when you make a post with this kind of ignorance, you are not doing anyone here a favor.

I will reply when I have more time.

God bless,
JB

 

[brianwalden]

Here’s what the head of the Catholic Church Benedict (the Pope)said about salvation;

“Other Christian communities are either defective or not true churches and Catholicism provides the only true path to salvation.” He said that other Christian denominations are not true churches but merely ecclesial communities and therefore do not have the “means of salvation.”

This looks you quoted the main stream media’s paraphrase of what the document said. I don’t believe the document ever said that christian communities don’t have means of salvation. In fact I think it pretty much said the opposite. Would you rely on the media as an accurate source for a document issued by your church? Go read the document yourself then comment; it’s very short and easy to read.

And as a technicality, the document wasn’t written by Pope Benedict. It was written by Cardinal Levada as a document put out by the CDF, not the Pope.

That’s what the Pope says, but the Bible doesn’t seem to agree.

“We are saved by grace through faith, and not of works, lest any man boast.”
“I am the way, the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father except by Me.”
“There is one mediator between man and God, and that is the Christ Jesus.”

So noted. Where’s the contradiction between those verses and the document?

Apostolic succession according to the Catholic church gives the Pope the authority to be head of the church. They (the Catholic church) think that the apostle Peter was the first Pope. The problem with that reasoning is that the church, according to the Bible, was built on the apostles and the prophets. It was built on [all] the prophets and [all] apostles, not just one!

What’s with the and/or reasoning? The Church was built on all the prophets and the Apostles. Peter also had supremecy among them. These are not two mutually exclusive ideas. And if the Church was built on all the apostles, why do you deny Apostolic succession? It’s based on the premise that all the bishops can trace their authority back to one of the Apostles, not just Peter. Seems to me like the Catholic Church is built on the Apostles, who is yours built on?

The head of the true church is Jesus Christ, not Peter, Benedict, Mohammed, Joseph Smith or Mary Baker Eddy! Only one mediator.

Agreed. And Jesus gave Peter and his successors authority over the visible Church which He established. Why are you throwing in all those other people? They’ve got nothing to do with this.

John 3:36 “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life, and he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life: but the wrath of God abideth on him.”

Placing your trust in Jesus Christ is all you need for salvation.

Agreed, so why don’t you trust in His Church?

God Bless,
Robert

God Bless you too.

 

[HJProtestant]

You were the one who disingenuously pretended that I meant the Bible was discredited. Others, reading only your words and not my orginal post, assumed you were sincere.

After pondering it all day and rereading the posts, I agree with my first impression of your “discredited” statement. You did state that my “argument” was “discredited” but since my argument is taken directly from God’s Word, you are indeed implying that this passage in Galatians had been discredited. You call me a liar for this?! You say my comments are ingenuous?! Pardon me, but did you crawl inside my soul while I wasn’t looking?! I am reading my Bible and telling you what it says…I’m not sure how this makes me a liar…

Where does Paul say you can be saved without faith? Where does he say you can reject the teachings of the Apostles and their successors?

First, I didn’t say Paul said you can be saved without faith, the RCC does! Paul said salvation IS attained through faith. You need to slow down a bit, sir…maybe switch to decaf. Secondly, when did I reject the teachings of the Apostles and their successors!!! These are your words, not mine. You accuse me of “advancing” things not meant…!!!

Yes, you are.

Go back through the thread and read them.

I did, I found NO PROOF.

Remember, however, **you **are the one advancing the proposition that Paul meant you can reject the Apostles and their successors, discount their teaching, and still be counted as having faith. The burden of proof is on you.

So where do I start? I’ll try to keep it brief. We disagree about what is said in Matthew 16, CLEARLY. All I see is Jesus giving Peter and the apostles authority TO TEACH but it says nothing of authority OVER anyone else or the church. It does not say a word about successors or infallibility. But Paul does emphasize to the Galatians in chpt 1:8 that it is not WHO preached (including himself or angels!) but WHAT was preached.

Oh, Vern…YOU are they type of Catholic that give your church a bad name! Good thing I’m secure in my beliefs and not on the fence…because if I were teetering, I would run screaming to any church that wasn’t Catholic! Think about that when you post your pugnacious comments. You ARGUE out of anger instead of teach out of love. Is this a tactic Jesus would have used?

It is indeed, sad, that someone like you is so prevalent on this thread…you are combative instead instructive, angry instead of loving, and quite honestly not someone I want to waste my time with. I am learning nothing from you and while I came into this thread hoping to learn and understand a little more about the RCC from real people, you just seem like another angry blogger that I could find on any secular forum. I see no difference between you and some pagan off the street. As a follower of Christ (which I much prefer over Christian or Protestant), I have worked hard over the last years to see past the stereotypes that are promoted about Catholics, but you just wiped away years of hard work.

It’s really too bad. I hope I’m not the only you’ve chased out of your threads, but I doubt it.

GOOD BYE

 

[NTStudent]

Before we start this “according to the Pope” stuff, I suggest reading the Popes actual words without the ‘assistance’ of the article providing a few sentences of quote and alot of commentary. I have a feeling that MSNM just picked out a random sermon or speech, and found something that is normal, but decided to try and make it controversial by putting it in such provacative terms.

This is nothing new. Protestant denominations are not in communion with Rome, hence the name “Protestant”. Its not saying they are bad people, these individuals cannot go to heaven, or that these other denominations are all bad. Sure each Christian denomination has some truth to it. However, the Catholic Church, has the fulness of truth, and it is the one true Church established by our Lord.

I hate to be nitpicky, but Protestant doesn’t come from “protesting”. It comes from the Latin protestari, to be a witness.

 

[Milliardo]

I hate to be nitpicky, but Protestant doesn’t come from “protesting”. It comes from the Latin protestari, to be a witness.

The Diet of the Holy Roman Empire, assembled at Speyer in April, 1529, resolved that, according to a decree promulgated at the Diet of Worms (1524), communities in which the new religion was so far established that it could not without great trouble be altered should be free to maintain it, but until the meeting of thecouncil they should introduce no further innovations in religion, and should not forbid the Mass, or hinder Catholics from assisting thereat.
Against this decree, and especially against the last article, the adherents of the new Evangel — the Elector Frederick of Saxony, the Landgrave of Hesse, the Margrave Albert of Brandenburg, the Dukes of Lüneburg, the Prince of Anhalt, together with the deputies of fourteen of the free and imperial cities — entered a solemn protest as unjust and impious. The meaning of the protest was that the dissentients did not intend to tolerate Catholicism within their borders. On that account they were called Protestants.

 

[NTStudent]

Well thanks for that.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Here’s what the head of the Catholic Church Benedict (the Pope)said about salvation;

“Other Christian communities are either defective or not true churches and Catholicism provides the only true path to salvation.” He said that other Christian denominations are not true churches but merely ecclesial communities and therefore do not have the “means of salvation.”

Please give us a cite where he used these exact words.

 

[NVBurch]

Is it true the Pope said “there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church?”