Salvation outside the church

[SFD]

mgrfin and catherina,

Do you disagree with the below?

Lesson 29
ON THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD

310 Q. Is it enough to belong to God’s Church in order to be saved?
A. It is not enough to belong to the Church in order to be saved, but we must also keep the Commandments of God and of the Church.

We call some commandments the Commandments of God and others the commandments of the Church. We do so only to distinguish the Commandments that God gave to Moses from those that the Church made afterwards. They are all the commandments of God, for whatever laws or commandments the Church makes, it makes them under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and by God’s authority. It would be a mortal sin to break the commandments of the Church, just as it would be to break the
Commandments of God. You must remember that the Ten Commandments always existed from the time of Adam, but they were not written till God gave them to Moses. You know that it was always a sin to worship false gods, to blaspheme, to disobey parents, to kill, etc.; for you know Cain was punished by God for the murder of his brother Abel (Gen. 5), and that took place while Adam was still alive.

Catholic Encyclopedia:

This legislation expresses not only the Maker’s positive will, but the voice of nature as well–the laws which govern our being and are written more or less clearly in every human heart. The necessity of the written law is explained by the obscuring of the unwritten in men’s souls by sin. These Divine mandates are regarded as binding on every human creature, and their violation, with sufficient reflection and consent of the will, if the matter be grave, is considered a grievous or mortal offense against God.

They have always been esteemed as the most precious rules of life and are the basis of all Christian legislation.

I have here also A Catechism of Christian Doctrine, No.3, 1941 that says the same thing as the above.

Also, I checked Spirago-Clarke, The Catechism Explained, 1921, which says the same as well.

SFD

 

[mgrfin]

mgrfin and catherina,

Do you disagree with the below?

I have here also A Catechism of Christian Doctrine, No.3, 1941 that says the same thing as the above.

Also, I checked Spirago-Clarke, The Catechism Explained, 1921, which says the same as well.

SFD

The 10 Commandments, the Decalogue, were not written in the hearts of men from the time of Adam.

It doesn’t stand up to reason.

Aristotle, the greatest pagan philosopher in ancient times, didn’t believe that such was the case.

“I am the Lord thy God.thou shalt not have strange gods before me” "? No. People in his time were idolatrers - and they were not the exception.

"Thou shalt take the name of the Lord thy God in vain…They didn’t even know what that meant.

Study up on the philosophies of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, and see for yourself. This says nothing about the deserted tribe in Africa. They believed in the 10 commandment??? Please

They did believe in the Natural Law, that was written in their hearts, and it took different forms and different depths. That however was not the Decalogue, the 10 Commandments.

What God revealed to Moses was new. It was the Covenant, and it was new.

I don’t even hesitate answering your question.
Here is my previous post to you on the matter:

Quote:SFD

There is a law of God governing human beings, which is antecedent, and far greater obligation, which was binding on the Gentiles, who had never heard of the law of Moses, and to which all men are subject, even though they recognize neither the law of the Gospel, nor the authority of the Church, nor the ruling of the State. It is called the natural law, the reflection in the rational creature of the eternal law of God, and therefore, an expression in man of the very essence of God.

The substance of the 10 Commandments, with the exception of the third commandment, is nothing more than a written expression of the natural law. If I tell a man to live according to his nature, and to live in a manner befitting of the dignity of a human being, I am merely telling him to obey the natural law, which is a reflection in his nature of the eternal law of God. In telling a man to do good and to avoid evil, I am telling him not to break the commandments of God. The two sets of ideas are mutually inclusive.

It is the natural law, which is written in the hearts of mankind, which pre-exists before Moses walked up the mountain, and obligates everyone. What is written in the hearts of man is this natural law – nothing about false worship, nothing about honoring thy father and thy mother, nothing about ‘keep holy the Sabbath day. The 10 commandments had to do with the Covenant between God and his people. The natural law the law written in the hearts of the rational man.

It is the natural law which is written in the hearts of men; not the 10 commandments, which is Old Testament Revelation.
unquote.

peace

 

[SFD]

I don’t even hesitate answering your question.

peace, charity and prayers.

Then what is your answer? Yes or No.

SFD

 

[louey]

The 10 Commandments, the Decalogue, were not written in the hearts of men from the time of Adam.

It doesn’t stand up to reason.

Aristotle, the greatest pagan philosopher in ancient times, didn’t believe that such was the case.

“I am the Lord thy God.thou shalt not have strange gods before me” "? No. People in his time were idolatrers - and they were not the exception.

"Thou shalt take the name of the Lord thy God in vain…They didn’t even know what that meant.

Study up on the philosophies of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, and see for yourself. This says nothing about the deserted tribe in Africa. They believed in the 10 commandment??? Please

They did believe in the Natural Law, that was written in their hearts, and it took different forms and different depths. That however was not the Decalogue, the 10 Commandments.

What God revealed to Moses was new. It was the Covenant, and it was new.

I don’t even hesitate answering your question.

peace, charity and prayers.

Mgrfin, I sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but you need to demand your money back from the place who gave you a “theology” degree. You got swindled. It’s never too late; one can come to the truth as long as he lives. God is so kind and merciful; in most cases He gives us a lifetime to come to the Truth. The precarious fact is, is we don’t know how long our life will be.

 

[mgrfin]

Mgrfin, I sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but you need to demand your money back from the place who gave you a “theology” degree. You got swindled. It’s never too late; one can come to the truth as long as he lives. God is so kind and merciful; in most cases He gives us a lifetime to come to the Truth. The precarious fact is, is we don’t know how long our life will be.

The issues (and the answers) involved are in Philosophy, not in Theology.

Rather than a personal attack, which I see plenty of, please do a little research into philosophy.

The God of the Old Testament was a personal God. It was monothesism.

The notion of god throughout the world was nothing like that. Why would you have personal reference to an idol if you were a pagan, and the Jews, even with the Divine Revelation, reduced at times God to an idol, a non-personal image.

Please answer intelligently, rather than attacking my credentials, of which you know nothing. Apparently, you have no credentials, whether in philosophy or in theology, or, do you?

You are in my prayers. And I think of you charitably as a fellow Christian should.

peace

 

[mgrfin]

Then what is your answer? Yes or No.

SFD

It is post #978. Read it, please, before the thread is closed.

charity and prayers for all.

peace

 

[mgrfin]

---

What I know – is from what you post. And yes—you do tend to call for the thread to be closed down — when you are in a corner (maybe the moderator will catch on to that). Trying get out of corners by calling arguments weak, inconsiquential, etc. etc. — really does not do much for you.

I never asked the Administrator to close down this thread.

Policy is, after 1000 posts, the thread close.

We are near that now.

peace

 

[SemperFidelis]

Apparently, a cricket knows more than you.

Sad for someone who claims to have a degree in theology, to have almost no knowledge of the Faith. The fact you’ve referenced Jimmy Cricket is amusing.

The Catholic people have been taught, at least in my church, about the inviolatibility of conscience.

Is there a reason you ignored my question? Just in case you’ve forgot, I’ll post it again for you:

SemperFidelis:

So, if my conscience is telling me I need to murder my friend, should I follow it?

 

[SemperFidelis]

Oh, “Chill out, Joseph” - for a moment there I thought you were talking to me.

I was.

Fortunately my name is not Joseph. And, I never supported Senator McCarthy.

Yeah, but he’d probably support what you’re doing.

 

[SFD]

It is post #978. Read it, please, before the thread is closed.

charity and prayers for all.

peace

I asked if you disagreed with the CE, two Baltimore Catechisms, Spriago-Clarke. That’s all…I didn’t ask you to give us your “take” on the subject. Here it is again:

Lesson 29
ON THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD

310 Q. Is it enough to belong to God’s Church in order to be saved?
A. It is not enough to belong to the Church in order to be saved, but we must also keep the Commandments of God and of the Church.

We call some commandments the Commandments of God and others the commandments of the Church. We do so only to distinguish the Commandments that God gave to Moses from those that the Church made afterwards. They are all the commandments of God, for whatever laws or commandments the Church makes, it makes them under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and by God’s authority. It would be a mortal sin to break the commandments of the Church, just as it would be to break the
Commandments of God. You must remember that the Ten Commandments always existed from the time of Adam, but they were not written till God gave them to Moses. You know that it was always a sin to worship false gods, to blaspheme, to disobey parents, to kill, etc.; for you know Cain was punished by God for the murder of his brother Abel (Gen. 5), and that took place while Adam was still alive.

Catholic Encyclopedia:

This legislation expresses not only the Maker’s positive will, but the voice of nature as well–the laws which govern our being and are written more or less clearly in every human heart. The necessity of the written law is explained by the obscuring of the unwritten in men’s souls by sin. These Divine mandates are regarded as binding on every human creature, and their violation, with sufficient reflection and consent of the will, if the matter be grave, is considered a grievous or mortal offense against God. They have always been esteemed as the most precious rules of life and are the basis of all Christian legislation.

I have here also A Catechism of Christian Doctrine, No.3, 1941 that says the same thing as the above.

Also, I checked Spirago-Clarke, The Catechism Explained, 1921, which says the same as well.

So, catherina and mgrfin; are these sources wrong?..YES or NO.

SFD

 

[SemperFidelis]

This so hits the nail on the head. Check out post 965.

Yes sir, a prime example. Lack of reading comprehension skills is the only reason I can think of.

 

[Just_a_Thought]

YOU DO! FORUM ADMINISTRATORS HAVE BANNED ALL SEDEVACANTIST TOPICS FROM CATHOLIC FORUMS.

Does this strike anyone as a strange course of action for people claiming to provide Catholic “Answers”? How are we to develop a “hermeneutic of continuity” if we merely ignore and silence those who claim that there is discontinuity?

I beg the administrators to open up a forum dedicated specifically to answering objections to supposed contradictions between Vatican II and Tradition.

 

[catharina]

The stated belief of those who have CHOSEN separation from the Chair of Peter is enough that there is no requirement for me to answer any of their questions and/or respond to any of their arguments. The fact that SFD has declared himslef to be sede and that maria and walkninghome and louey (and others) offer him a measure of sympathy and even a shred of credibilty is enough for me to know that I need never answer them either. Maria has my special prayers since it seems she is involved in some spiritual searching and no longer declares Popes to be heretics and public sinners as she did in the past.

 

[mgrfin]

Sad for someone who claims to have a degree in theology, to have almost no knowledge of the Faith. The fact you’ve referenced Jimmy Cricket is amusing.

Apparently, your conscience, if it were prompting you to kill a friend, was poorly informed. Where was the ‘natural law’, or the 10 commandments thingy that everyone is attacking me on - where were they?

The man was probably insane, so he was following little voices in his head, you tell me.

If his conscience was truly telling him to do it, then he could do it without subjective guilt. Objective guilt? that’s another matter.

If my conscience tells me to believe in Lutheranism, what should I do?

It’s all the same - follow your conscience.
charity to all, and prayers for all.

Check out CCC 1790: Erroneous Conscience: “A human being must always obey the certain judgement of his conscience. If he were to deliberately act against it, he would condemn himself…”

PS You seem to love my theological credentials as well - well, you get pleasure at mocking. You have anything to show us about yours? You can’t seem to understand the requirements of following your conscience, so I have to wonder where you got yours???
peace

 

[SemperFidelis]

The fact that SFD has declared himslef to be sede and that maria and walkninghome and louey (and others) offer him a measure of sympathy and even a shred of credibilty is enough for me to know that I need never answer them either.

The fact that SFD is a sedevacantist has no relevance on the fact that he has been right on almost everything he has posted on with the exception of, in my opinion, sedevacantism. The fact that he is a sede has no bearing on his arguments that are not related to sedevacantism and whether or not he is right. He, as well as others, have quoted numerous sources stating that the Decalogue is written on the hearts of man, and no one up to this point has been able to quote any source that says anything to the contrary. There has only been conjecture, on a false philosophical level, from those opposed. Nothing more.

Maria has my special prayers since it seems she is involved in some spiritual searching and no longer declares Popes to be heretics and public sinners as she did in the past.

Anybody who knows anything about the Assisi prayer meetings, or Alexander VI, can see that Popes have sinned in the past. Other than that, God Bless, catharina.

 

[SFD]

The stated belief of those who have CHOSEN separation from the Chair of Peter is enough that there is no requirement for me to answer any of their questions and/or respond to any of their arguments. The fact that SFD has declared himslef to be sede and that maria and walkninghome and louey (and others) offer him a measure of sympathy and even a shred of credibilty is enough for me to know that I need never answer them either. Maria has my special prayers since it seems she is involved in some spiritual searching and no longer declares Popes to be heretics and public sinners as she did in the past.

Why are you discussing this? It is now off-limits as far as I can tell…I thought you were all about obedience?

Why don’t you answer the question about the catechism and the natural law instead?

SFD

 

[mgrfin]

Why don’t you answer the question about the catechism and the natural law instead?

SFD

Why don’t you. We are getting tired of always answering questions for you.

It is a sign of our christian charity that we always respond, and provide prayers for you too.

peace

 

[catharina]

The fact that SFD is a sedevacantist has no relevance on the fact that he has been right on almost everything he has posted on with the exception of, in my opinion, sedevacantism. The fact that he is a sede has no bearing on his arguments that are not related to sedevacantism and whether or not he is right. He, as well as others, have quoted numerous sources stating that the Decalogue is written on the hearts of man, and no one up to this point has been able to quote any source that says anything to the contrary. There has only been conjecture, on a false philosophical level, from those opposed. Nothing more.

Anybody who knows anything about the Assisi prayer meetings, or Alexander VI, can see that Popes have sinned in the past. Other than that, God Bless, catharina.

 

[mgrfin]

I agree. SFD has been throwing rocks at us through hundreds of posts, and we are required to respond back with charity and prayers.

He is the one who is not united to the Church of Rome, or the Papacy, and for this reason we keep him in our special prayers.

peace

 

[SemperFidelis]

So for you, his belief system is fine.

No, I do not believe that his belief system is fine. But that doesn’t mean he hasn’t been right on almost everything else he has posted on, including this topic regarding the Decalogue and the Natural Law.