B
Br.Rich_SFO
Guest
People had misunderstandings of Chrurch teachings. It’s called the human element in the Church which is far from perfect.
- Status
J
Jared_Silvey
Guest
Any religion that holds one or more doctrines that are held by the Catholic Church has some truth in it. To deny that Reformed Baptists have any truth is to deny the inerrancy of Scripture, the deity of Christ, and His bodily resurrection. But it is the Catholic Church alone which possesses the fullness of truth.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Preciselyh **which **“false understandings” were produced by Vatical II?
And even though ecuminical councils have the Kharisma of infallibility, Vatican II, being pastoral in its intent, did not exercise that Kharisma
What millions of souls “could have been sacrificed?”
M
mcliffor
Guest
M
marci
Guest
I see what your saying here, but for the catholic it is not enough to believe in the scriptures and believe in Christ as the Messiah. One needs (as a catholic) the sacraments for salvation. Again, the teaching of the church used to be that non-catholic christians could be saved if they were baptized and lived a life of good works and were free from mortal sin. (This is when dealing with protestant sects and not pagan tribes in Africa for example).
This is no longer the case, there is no mention of the need for baptized persons to be free from mortal sin. I, as a catholic, cannot be in mortal sin when I die and enter into heaven. Therefore, I frequent the sacrament of Confession, lest I find myself to be in a state of mortal sin.
When you deny that truth for one group of christians, you make it less of a necessity for another. That is why it is my belief that while the church trying to be more open to protestants and non-christians after VII, unitentionally caused the effect of watering down the necessity (in the minds of many catholics) for the sacraments. For example, the relatively few number of catholics that frequent Confession. The trend to wait to baptize infants, the higher divorce rates, the ignorance of many modern day catholics about the necessity to be free from mortal sin before recieving the Eurcharist.
In my opinion, what was intended to bring about unity between faiths in the hopes that protestants would “come home” to the true church, did very little to persuade protestants to enter the fold and very much to convince catholics that it wasn’t really necessary anyway. It created a sort of religious relativism where the “your ok I’m ok” thinking reigns supreme, and consequently the “truth” changes to fit the individual so as not to offend.
I have a hard time believing that God is not equal in His Justice. I know that it may not seem fair in worldly terms, but why would God require more from one group of people than another when He grants salvation. Obviously, there are those who in the inermost jungles, have never heard the name of Jesus, and I think that that is when God’s mercy comes in becuase it is not their fault that a missionary hasn’t found them yet. But, their are many others who are learned individuals who find fault with certain doctrines of the church, and even after study still refuse to enter into union with her.
If you say that they are still saved because they have an inconvincable ignorance, then what about all of those catholics out their who refuse to accept church teaching on birth control or divorce and remarraige. What if they even after being instrcted in church teaching and understanding in these matters, still cannot bring themselves to accept these teachings? Are they still saved, like the protestant? Or, are they damned because they are catholic?
See how leaving things so open can be a cause for confussion and misunderstandings? Frankly, I have a hard time understanding it, and I think I have a better understanding of my faith than alot of catholics.
V
Verbum
Guest
Hi Marci,
there is no mention of the need for baptized persons to be free from mortal sin
Where do you get that? The doctrine of the Church is that anyone who does their best to follow the dictates of their conscience can be saved. No one is in the state of mortal sin who follows the dictate of their conscience. If they dont’ follow the dictates of their consciente in serious matters, they cannot be saved.
Verbum
there is no mention of the need for baptized persons to be free from mortal sin
Where do you get that? The doctrine of the Church is that anyone who does their best to follow the dictates of their conscience can be saved. No one is in the state of mortal sin who follows the dictate of their conscience. If they dont’ follow the dictates of their consciente in serious matters, they cannot be saved.
Verbum
M
marci
Guest
The Baltimore Catechism. Has church teaching changed about the need for a catholic to be free from mortal sin in order to enter heaven?
I think you are heading into realativism territory. I do not decide what constitutes a mortal sin, the church does. I may think that using BC is fine and dandy. I can rationalize it all day long as I follow the dictate of my conscience, but the church says no sir.
I think that it is alot easier for someone to commit mortal sin than alot of people believe. Didn’t Our Lady say at Fatima that “souls were falling into hell like leaves from the trees”?
Isn’t that why heaven is at the end of the narrow path, while wide and well traveled is the path to hell?
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Not quite true – there are abortion doctors who “follow the dictates of their conscience.” Aztec priests, ripping out a sacrificial victim’s heart were “following the dictates of their conscience.”
The Church’s position is that one who is Invnicibly Ignorant, and who lives a Christ-like life may be saved. Persons who are not invincibly ignorant must have their consciences informed by the Church.
And mortal sin, by definition, does condemn one to Hell – unless it is confessed and forgiven,
- Status