The "Correct" Faith

[nickybr38]

If you had been born Baptist, you probably be saying the same thing about the Baptist faith.

And if you had been born Baptist, you’d definitely still be saying this with Catholic crossed out at Baptist written in.

The difference between a Baptist and a Catholic is that we can actually trace our Church right back to Christ (through the Popes). They can’t. They can only go back to when the Baptist movement started.

 

[BenedictFTW]

If you had been born Baptist, you probably be saying the same thing about the Baptist faith.

And if you had been born Baptist, you’d definitely still be saying this with Catholic crossed out at Baptist written in.

Baptists are, like all Protestant denominations, late on the scene of Christianity. So, no, the Baptists have no claim to the Keys of Kingdom. They were not heard of until about two hundred years after the Reformation, which came about 1500 years after Christ. No Protestant denomination has any links back to the Apostles.

 

[nickybr38]

Baptists are, like all Protestant denominations, late on the scene of Christianity. So, no, the Baptists have no claim to the Keys of Kingdom. They were not heard of until about two hundred years after the Reformation, which came about 1500 years after Christ. No Protestant denomination has any links back to the Apostles.

Orthodox would not be considered Protestant though, right? Because they MIGHT be able to argue some lineage there.

 

[cargau]

The difference between a Baptist and a Catholic is that we can actually trace our Church right back to Christ (through the Popes). They can’t. They can only go back to when the Baptist movement started.

I, too am a Catholic and appreciate the richness and beauty of the Catholic faith. Still, a Baptist, Lutheran or Methodist may argue that their Church’s foundation was a reformation of the Apostolic Catholic Church that was necessitated by sin and abuse.

You and I can pontificate all we want about the merits of the Catholic faith but there are those who arejust as passionate about their faith. If they are sincere and passionate about the truth then I believe that we should respect their station in life.

Evangelization (not prosyltizing) is most effective by example and tender conversation when the opportunity arises.

 

[1ke]

There’s nothing in the Bible about the Mass. The exact prayers, order of the mass, which readings, when we stand, kneel, receive communion, etc. are not dictated by God. Therefore, the Church could have developed the Mass ritual to be something different entirely (think parallel universe), and it would be equally valid. This holds for any other sacrament as well. This is the ritualistic nature of religion. We have a set procedure of rites and ceremonies that we follow to proclaim our faith.

Those things are not doctrinal. So I don’t understand your point.

Catholics choosing not to attend Mass is a sin, is it not? If you die with sin on your conscience, you may not be admitted into heaven. Therefore, a Catholic missing Mass may result in them not being admitted into heaven.

It is not the ritual that makes it sinful, it is a willful sin against God’s commandments.

Protestants don’t celebrate the Mass and it is not a sin for them to not participate in a Catholic Mass, as that is not a tenet of their faith.

They are not bound by canon law. They are bound by God’s commandment. They will be accountable.

Option A), Option B), Option C)

You are completely on the wrong track. It is not an either/or proposition.

 

[nickybr38]

I, too am a Catholic and appreciate the richness and beauty of the Catholic faith. Still, a Baptist, Lutheran or Methodist may argue that their Church’s foundation was a reformation of the Apostolic Catholic Church that was necessitated by sin and abuse.

You and I can pontificate all we want about the merits of the Catholic faith but there are those who arejust as passionate about their faith. If they are sincere and passionate about the truth then I believe that we should respect their station in life.

Evangelization (not prosyltizing) is most effective by example and tender conversation when the opportunity arises.

You make some fair points. And I could make several arguments against the position you mention in your first paragraph but I don’t care to get into a long debate so I’ll leave it alone.

“You’re fine. I’m fine. We’re all fine.” is never an acceptable position to take. That I will say. Christ left one Church, not many. And it is our duty to teach truth wherever we can, even if we’re dealing with someone who is perfectly content to be Baptist or Evangelical, or whatever.

I never, EVER attack someone’s faith to their face (online I do tend to be a bit more aggressive in my approach). In conversation I do exactly what you advise. I just live according to the Church’s teaching and when they share a falsehood they believe, I share what I was taught.

PS: There is no ONE way to evangelize. Everyone is different and so different methods will work on different people.

Some people respond best to example.
Some respond best to logic.
Some respond best to evidence in history.
Some respond best to emotional pricking.
Some respond best to heated debates.

I’ve known people who are VERY bitter because they were around Christians who just ‘lead by example’ but NEVER spoke truth. I remember hearing a new Christian convert who railed against all the Christians living around him who never, ever confronted him and asked him what HE believed, and who never openly spoke about their faith.

Why was he angry? Because they never TOLD him what he was missing out on. It took YEARS before he ran into a bold Christian who talked to him about Christ.

Sometimes being quiet and just living our lives, just ISN’T ENOUGH.

 

[BenedictFTW]

Orthodox would not be considered Protestant though, right? Because they MIGHT be able to argue some lineage there.

If you mean the Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church, they were one with us until the end of the 10th century or early 11th. They and we were one. We all have the claim of the Apostolic Church, but they broke with Rome. However, they still retain the beliefs, but not the rich teachings of our Church.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

I never, EVER attack someone’s faith to their face (online I do tend to be a bit more aggressive in my approach). In conversation I do exactly what you advise. I just live according to the Church’s teaching and when they share a falsehood they believe, I share what I was taught.

This is the right tactic, as St. Peter advised.

“Always be ready to give an explanation to anyone who asks you for a reason for your hope, but do it with gentleness and reverence, keeping your conscience clear, so that, when you are maligned, those who defame your good conduct in Christ may themselves be put to shame.” (I Peter 3:15-16)

 

[nickybr38]

If you mean the Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church, they were one with us until the end of the 10th century or early 11th. They and we were one. We all have the claim of the Apostolic Church, but they broke with Rome. However, they still retain the beliefs, but not the rich teachings of our Church.

I honestly don’t know much about the Eastern Orthodox Church but they don’t submit to the authority of the Pope and aren’t exactly part of the Catholic Church either. Right? And yet they aren’t Protestant either. It’s an interesting mix.

And cute username. Benedict for the win!

 

[BenedictFTW]

There’s nothing in the Bible about the Mass. The exact prayers, order of the mass, which readings, when we stand, kneel, receive communion, etc. are not dictated by God. Therefore, the Church could have developed the Mass ritual to be something different entirely (think parallel universe), and it would be equally valid. This holds for any other sacrament as well. This is the ritualistic nature of religion. We have a set procedure of rites and ceremonies that we follow to proclaim our faith.

**These things are decided by our Church. We obey our shepherds, following what Jesus said “Do this in remembrance of Me!” Read St John’s Gospel for a hint as to why the Mass is celebrated as it is. **

Catholics choosing not to attend Mass is a sin, is it not? If you die with sin on your conscience, you may not be admitted into heaven. Therefore, a Catholic missing Mass may result in them not being admitted into heaven. Protestants don’t celebrate the Mass and it is not a sin for them to not participate in a Catholic Mass, as that is not a tenet of their faith.

To deliberately miss Mass is a mortal sin. Even one of those will result in your soul going straight to Hell. I wouldn’t even risk it!

Two people – lets say one person who was born and raised protestant, and a second who was confirmed Catholic, but then attended the same protestant services as the first throughout their adult life – reach the pearly gates.

**God decides; only He knows how often He called the Protestant to the Truth of Christ.
**
Option A) The Protestant soul, having lived a good life and following the rituals of their faith, may gain entry into heaven. However, the Catholic soul, having forsaken their rituals and followed the Protestant rituals in their place but otherwise lived a similar good life as the Protestant, may be denied entry because a Catholic knowingly missing Mass is a sin.

Yes.

Option B) The Catholic ritual was correct. Therefore, both souls are denied entry since neither of them followed the correct ritual.

Ritual? Do you mean the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - when Jesus is present, Body and Blood? Not a ritual; it is even sacrilegious to say so, I think.

Option C) The ritual isn’t important, and it’s what’s in your heart that matters. The two people are judged on their acts in the world, not which building they went to every Sunday

St Paul tells us that we need our faith and good works. We must believe that Jesus is the Son of God and Saviour of the World, that He died on the Cross for our sins and rose again on Easter Sunday. This option belittles everything you should believe in if you are, as your description says, ‘Catholic’.

There may be other options, but these three cover what I’m trying to think about. Also, “denied entry into heaven” may just mean a stint in purgatory first.

Stint in Purgatory? Really, are you serious? The souls in Purgatory suffer terribly - this is why we are asked to pray for them constantly. They are holy souls; they lived their faith and were very holy. This reality must teach us how hard we must work to get into Heaven. St Paul tells us to “Work out your salvation with fear and trembling!” If St Paul was so afraid, what must we do?

 

[BenedictFTW]

I honestly don’t know much about the Eastern Orthodox Church but they don’t submit to the authority of the Pope and aren’t exactly part of the Catholic Church either. Right? And yet they aren’t Protestant either. It’s an interesting mix.

And cute username. Benedict for the win!

Thank you. I don’t know all I might about the EO. I remember learning that there was a falling out between the Bishop of Constantinople (I think) and the Pope at the time sent a cardinal to speak to him. It was some difference on the creed, I think. Anyway, the man sent by the Pope was a passionate Italian and, being made to wait for a long time for a meeting with the bishop, he lost his temper and excommunicated the bishop. The Bishop of Constantinople, in turn, excommunicated him. But the Pope’s messenger had no right to do this, if I remember rightly, because, by the time the excommunication was handed out, the Pope had died. It is a great story. I must look up all the details. Anyway, the EO are authentic Christians, like the Catholics. As far as I know, we Catholics can actually receive in their churches, but they do not allow their congregation to receive in ours. Peace of Christ be with you

 

[ellen42]

The difference between a Baptist and a Catholic is that we can actually trace our Church right back to Christ (through the Popes). They can’t. They can only go back to when the Baptist movement started.

Baptists are, like all Protestant denominations, late on the scene of Christianity. So, no, the Baptists have no claim to the Keys of Kingdom. They were not heard of until about two hundred years after the Reformation, which came about 1500 years after Christ. No Protestant denomination has any links back to the Apostles.

You two completely missed the point of what I was saying. BenedictFTW, you said that you felt “very grateful to have been born into and brought up as a member of a practising Catholic family”. However, had you been born into and brought up as a member of a different denomination, you would probably have the same feelings towards that faith – soley because that was the faith you were born into and brought up in. I chose Baptists as my example because they tend to have a rather strict view of “being saved” – you have to be one of them or you’re wrong.

These things are decided by our Church. We obey our shepherds, following what Jesus said “Do this in remembrance of Me!” Read St John’s Gospel for a hint as to why the Mass is celebrated as it is.

Hint, sure, but the ceremony itself is not delineated in the Bible.

To deliberately miss Mass is a mortal sin. Even one of those will result in your soul going straight to Hell. I wouldn’t even risk it!

Then the Protestant, who deliberately chooses not to be Catholic and does not attend Catholic services will result in their soul going straight to Hell?

Sure, you can argue that the Protestant is not bound by Canon Law, therefore he is not in a state of mortal sin for missing mass – however that just reiterates my whole scenario.

God decides; only He knows how often He called the Protestant to the Truth of Christ.

This is a thought experiment. Of course it’s up to God to decide, but if you’re convinced that your faith is the “correct” faith, then others must be “incorrect”. Furthermore, you just declared that missing Mass will result in a mortal sin that sends your soul straight to Hell, then dismiss me with a “God decides”.

Yes.

God decides, but Option A is the correct answer. Got it.

Ritual? Do you mean the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - when Jesus is present, Body and Blood? Not a ritual; it is even sacrilegious to say so, I think.

It’s not a ritual? There are rites of the Mass. The Priest and congregation go thought the same prayers, in the same order, as defined by the Vatican and every Church should follow the same procedure. When parishes do not follow this procedure to the level people expect, you see threads on this forum about “invalid” masses. How is that not a ritual?

Are you just screwing with me at this point, because that’s just absurd.

 

[Lost_Sheep]

I’m not aware of ANY church that does not believe theirs is the “Correct Faith.”

 

[nickybr38]

You two completely missed the point of what I was saying. BenedictFTW, you said that you felt “very grateful to have been born into and brought up as a member of a practising Catholic family”. However, had you been born into and brought up as a member of a different denomination, you would probably have the same feelings towards that faith – soley because that was the faith you were born into and brought up in. I chose Baptists as my example because they tend to have a rather strict view of “being saved” – you have to be one of them or you’re wrong.

I was born in a non-denominational Christian home. I am a convert to the Catholic faith unlike Benedict. I grew up firmly believing ALL churches have bits of truth but NONE contain full truth. Now I believe that the Catholic Church is THE Christian Church that Christ Himself instituted and that it contains the fullness of Christ’s revealed truths.

People who seek truth will find it in history.

 

[cargau]

I never, EVER attack someone’s faith to their face (online I do tend to be a bit more aggressive in my approach). In conversation I do exactly what you advise. I just live according to the Church’s teaching and when they share a falsehood they believe, I share what I was taught.

This is the right tactic, as St. Peter advised.

“Always be ready to give an explanation to anyone who asks you for a reason for your hope, but do it with gentleness and reverence, keeping your conscience clear, so that, when you are maligned, those who defame your good conduct in Christ may themselves be put to shame.” (I Peter 3:15-16)

We, as God’s people are simply instruments of the Holy Spirit. We can only do so much before we give way to the tugging of one’s heart by the one who provides Sanctifying grace.

Be ready to respond to those who ask. Be gentle and respectful. And, be ready to let God be God…

 

[twoangels]

Do people here believe that there is one true, correct ritualistic faith that therefore excludes all others?

Considering the audience, I’m going to guess that most people would consider Catholicism to be the true faith, and that being a very devout Presbyterian (for instance) would be less ideal. At the end of the day, as there are aspects of protestant faith that do not align with Catholic teachings, would that mean that protestants would not be admitted into heaven because their faith may have been administered by female ministers, or they do not have proper reconciliation of sins, or receive communion?

Let’s consider it this way. You have a child who is raised in a home that teaches the value of eating a balanced diet and getting lots of exercise. Within that home, there is plenty of access to whole foods, plenty of healthy recipes and individuals who know how to cook from scratch. Some are better cooks than others, but the entire home emphasises that processed foods are bad for you and that its better to deal with a lousy cook than say eat at McDonald’s. Even with all of this, individuals within the household may not follow, understand or obey the household rules.

In another household, you have people who see the first household as a bit extreme. They emphasis the food pyramid, and offer whole foods here and there, but they also do not taboo processed foods the way the other household does. They may not have as much access to whole foods at the other household does. Not all foods may be made from scratch, but they still have phamplets explaining basic nutritional info.

Now the most extreeme household has the totality of truth about healthy diet and exercise. They have perfect optimol access to these things. But the reality may be that there are individuals who are more healthy in the second household than there are in the first. There may be individuals who are just as healthy in the second household as there are in the first. The unique thing though about the first household is that you may get people here in there who take to heart all that the first household has to offer and live exceptionally unique healthy lifestyles taking very good care of their bodies.

It’s not membership in the Church that gets you to Heaven. Its not about avoiding ritualistic rules by having your butt at Mass. It is about the fact that the Catholic Church contains the fullness of truth and has the keys needed to become great saints.

Its not a perfect analogy, but those who are given a lot are expected to be more fruitful than those who have been given less. Those who do not take advantage of what they’ve been given are judged the most harshly. As such, a Catholic who practices their faith like a devout Protestant is showing less faith than the devout Protestant. A Catholic who leaves the Catholic faith knowing it is the truth and joins a Protestant group is committing a grave sin. A Protestant who has been raised in the Protestant faith and has yet to discover the truth within the Catholic Church is not sinning.

 

[Abu]

ellen42 #1
as there are aspects of protestant faith that do not align with Catholic teachings, would that mean that protestants would not be admitted into heaven because their faith may have been administered by female ministers, or they do not have proper reconciliation of sins, or receive communion?
Since protestants aren’t bound by the Vatican decrees, are they prevented from eternal salvation because they don’t follow the proper form of the Mass?

There is much more than not having the Sacrifice of the Mass, which you want to leave out, but salvation for non-Catholics has been understood from the beginning.

Pope St Clement knew that non-Catholics could be saved from the beginning, for he wrote in about 95 A.D. to the Church in Corinth: “Those who repented for their sins, appeased God in praying and received salvation, even though they were aliens to God.” Catholic Apologetics Today, 1986, Fr William G Most, p 145]."

That pagans and other Christians were never considered to be “outside” of salvation from the start of the teaching of Christ’s Church has been firmly identified – from St Paul, to Pope St Clement, through Unam Sanctam to the Councils of Trent and Vatican II.

 

[fred_conty]

have a good read of posts on here and you will gain insight what some think… For me, all that matters is that you believe in God. But I know I am one of very few on that even in own church. etc. I am very liberal on that side of things.

But if all that matters is that we believe in God, then which God do we believe for there are so many? Each church has made its own image of the God it wants to believe in.

Bible only, once saved always saved, no hell, some hell maybe, predestination, divorce, abortion, homosexuallity, health and wealth, death sleep, 2 persons in God, Christ not God,
some books in the bible are excluded, church is important, Me and Jesus only, Baptism necessary, Baptism not necessary,etc., etc.

This may be one of the leading causes for church hopping. To look for what Jesus really did teach and only what he taught, for the truth makes a person free and at peace. If it is so easy to know what Jesus taught, then there would be a unanimous agreement.

Just a thought.