Scripture AND Church: Foundational Change?

[CatherineofA]

Genesis315:

Well, are you thinking you are not in error because of pride? Only God can judge that.

The Church still teaches this. The pastoral thinking today says it is best to let the Holy Spirit guide Protestants home rather than to try and force convert them.

As of yet, I do not feel I am in error because I have yet to receive conclusive verfication that the Catholic Church has the claims to starting with Christ as they say. As of yet, I have not found the historical documentation or support to verify that. Studying ancient history is not an overnight art. There are many historians out there and not all support the Catholic view. How else could Protestant seminary graduates have a course background in early church history and languages? How could secular well known scholars and published authors on early church history not be Catholic and be Orthodox or Protestant?
I am very spiritually fullfilled as a Southern Baptist and do not feel spiritually lacking. The only thing that would take me to Catholicism would be some revealing historical information about its role as the church of Christ that I am not currently aware of or have yet to find. Outside of the historical connection, I fail to see how church and Christ have shared importance. I also fail to see how the church doctrine outside of what Christ preached or is in scriptures is necessary or true. However, I am researching.

 

[Genesis315]

Hey, if you’re searching with an open heart, then you’re already following the grace and on your way to salvation

As Church Militant said, why not have the fullness of Christianity? As was pointed out in Dominus Iesus, if you’re responding to the grace, you’re in good shape:thumbsup:

 

[CatherineofA]

Genesis315:

Hey, if you’re searching with an open heart, then you’re already following the grace and on your way to salvation

As Church Militant said, why not have the fullness of Christianity? As was pointed out in Dominus Iesus, if you’re responding to the grace, you’re in good shape:thumbsup:

You made the statement that I am on the way to salvation. How can I be on the way, if the church recognizes Protestants as Christians? I have the fullness of Christianity now. I do not feel spiritually lacking. I don’t feel that spirtual pull for something else. All I feel is a need to verify historical information to determine if the Catholic Church has documented history on their side to prove their claim that they are the church of Christ and that his connection to them is the one intended. That is the only thing that would pull me into the Catholic faith. Without that conclusive information, I can have nothing more than an interest in its actions in its early years, middle ages, and beyond.

 

[Genesis315]

CatherineofA:

I have the fullness of Christianity now.

Well, not according to the Church. You have a slightly defective form of Christianity. I don’t mean to offend, but a Baptist would say the same about us. Each group believes the other is in error on some points. If we didn’t think we had the fullness of Christianity we wouldn’t be Catholic.

You made the statement that I am on the way to salvation.

Us catholic don’t say we’re “saved” like other groups. Salvation is a lifelong process.

I do not feel spiritually lacking. I don’t feel that spirtual pull for something else. All I feel is a need to verify historical information to determine if the Catholic Church has documented history on their side to prove their claim that they are the church of Christ and that his connection to them is the one intended. That is the only thing that would pull me into the Catholic faith. Without that conclusive information, I can have nothing more than an interest in its actions in its early years, middle ages, and beyond.

Your desire to research and verify might be the spiritual pull you think is missing.

 

[MariaG]

posted by CatherineofA

However, change is change. If the church stated that you have to be a member of the Catholic Church to be saved and then later stated you do not have to be a member, that is a change in a basic core belief in the supremacy of the faith.

Not to belabor this point since I know you see it as a dog and pony show, but the Catholic Church has not changed the teaching that you must be a member of the Church to be saved. The church still teaches this. What has changed is the definition of who belongs to the Catholic Church. You could be considered a member of the Catholic Church. It changed due to circumstances of history make it possible for one to be a Christian without ever knowing the teachings of the Catholic Chruch. In the past, one could only be christian if one was Catholic.

As for looking into history, it does take time. I pray that God will lead you to all truth.

God Bless,
Maria

 

[Genesis315]

MariaG:

Not to belabor this point since I know you see it as a dog and pony show, but the Catholic Church has not changed the teaching that you must be a member of the Church to be saved. The church still teaches this. What has changed is the definition of who belongs to the Catholic Church. You could be considered a member of the Catholic Church. It changed due to circumstances of history make it possible for one to be a Christian without ever knowing the teachings of the Catholic Chruch. In the past, one could only be christian if one was Catholic.

Right, anyone who is baptized is technically a member of the Catholic Church. This includes the baptism by desire folks as well, not just the traditional water baptized folks. These people are just not in full communion with the Church (but technically neither are nominal Catholics who reject various teaching of the Church).

 

[Church_Militant]

CatherineofA:

You made the statement that I am on the way to salvation. How can I be on the way, if the church recognizes Protestants as Christians? I have the fullness of Christianity now. I do not feel spiritually lacking. I don’t feel that spirtual pull for something else. All I feel is a need to verify historical information to determine if the Catholic Church has documented history on their side to prove their claim that they are the church of Christ and that his connection to them is the one intended. That is the only thing that would pull me into the Catholic faith. Without that conclusive information, I can have nothing more than an interest in its actions in its early years, middle ages, and beyond.

CA,
You cannot have the fullness of Christianity without the Eucharist, and if you wonder…you don’t know what you’re missing. It’s all about obedience. The idea isn’t to find a church where we are conmfortable, but to be in the church that Jesus Himself founded…not some splinter group that will deprive you of all God has to offer you.

My advice: Stop trying to split hairs and get around the fact that the Catholic Church is the one church that has Jesus at it’s root. Come home…the party is waiting for you.
Pax vobiscum,

 

[banjo]

CatherineofA:

Thank you very much for your post. I have finally received a comment that can possibly be verified or linked to historical precedence! This is what I was looking for with my question! Please do not go away and answer another question for me. Based on what you posted, why has the church been mentioned during the Reformation era as seeing the reformers as heretics and the like? Based on what you stated about the early centuries, why did they not view the reformers differently?

I’m sorry, I left immediately after posting. As for seeing the reformers as heretics I think we need to define heretic. Here is one definition. “If a person, after receiving baptism and retaining the Christian name,
pertinaciously denies any of the truths which are to be believed with divine and Catholic faith, or if he doubts the same, he is a heretic.”
(The Catholic Catechism John A. Hardon, S.J.) I can’t speak to all of the reformers, but Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli were all Catholics and the reformation movement was considered by some an attempt to disolve the Catholic Church. However, I think your real quest and question here is revealed in your post #21 on this thread. You stated, in part, “All I feel is a need to verify historical information to determine if the Catholic Church has documented history on their side to prove their claim etc…” That’s a tall order and I think ultimately it’s only going to be resolved by you in faith through research. I have, at this time, only two points of (name removed by moderator)ut. First, if the Church of the first three centuries became corrupt, as some say, even in spite of Christ’s claim that the powers of death wold not prevail against it, where is the historically verifiable evidence of this and where was the “true” church for a dozen centuries? That would be a puzzler for me. Second, much of my reading is of Protestant converts to Catholicism. David Currie, Harry Crocker, Stephen Ray, Mark Shea, Dave Armstrong, Scott Hahn…who seem to have a particular thing in common. They all researched the early Fathers seeking answers to questions they didn’t or couldn’t find elsewhere. If I find anything I think will help give you a more complete answer I’ll pass it along. However, I’ll tell you up front I’m not a scholar, an intellectual, or an expert on Church history. But I am a believer!