We need to stop worrying about who is “right.”

[Atrocitous]

@ChristopherA, The Roman Catholic Church will never change in regards to infighting among Christians and especially those Christians outside of the RCC, One could point to Mark 9: 40. Really doesn’t matter or point to, Luke9/ 49-56. Still doesn’t matter. Or how about Luke again, with Christ on the Cross, " Father Forgive them " .

Has to make one wonder why Jesus is so willing to accept anyone who believes in Him an Forgive anyone who believes in Him, but the Roman Catholic Church and other Christian religions have created very strict systems that have no room for anything but their way.

 

[julietteamdg]

The Church didn’t create these systens, Our Lord did himself. He said it himself, those who reject His Church reject Him.

 

[farronwolf]

So has Church teaching changed any during its 2000 year history? Has canon or the catechism had any changes?

Which is or were true over that 2000 year period. If any changes were made how can the before and after both be true.

 

[stpurl]

Please since you raise the issue, show me where the Church ever made a 180 change in dogma or doctrine. Discipline, as I’m sure you know, is by nature something which is adapted for particular needs and can be changed by a change in needs or else remain ‘for the most’ and change ‘for the few’. Example of change in discipline for particular needs is that of celibate clergy at this juncture from married AND unmarried men to the current ‘unmarried only’. And even there for example if a married Anglican priest were to convert and to become a Catholic priest, he could remain married. And Eastern Catholics who in communion with Rome can have married or unmarried clergy.

An example of discipline which remains in effect for all is Friday abstinence, but many areas have received an indult which relieves meat abstinence on non-Lent Fridays.

With regard to dogma or doctrine, even the supposed ‘change’ with regard to the death penalty has not truly changed. In order for it to have done a 180, it would have had to be the case that the settled teaching in the Magesterium, as set forth by the Pope and all the bishops in concert, would be that the death penalty was to be carried out in all cases of certain capital crimes, and never to be mitigated with life in prison or otherwise.

But that was never the case. The death penalty was an option for ‘Caesar’ and the legal authorities as long as it was understood that such a penalty was LEGALLY a moral necessity. In a world where a mass murderer for example could ‘break prison’ easily and wreak havoc on a large innocent population, the death penalty would be morally justified for the protection of the innocent.

In a world where a mass murderer not only can be far more stringently contained such that innocents need no longer fear his escape the death penalty then becomes less preferable as an option to protect all —even the guilty—from harm.

So the recent change in the catechism does not say the Church was ‘wrong’ before and now ‘right’ by saying that the death penalty is no longer a moral option.

Similarly, the words even of St. Paul regarding slaves do not mean the Church ever believed in a person owning another ‘body and soul’ was morally right. So the longstanding position of the Church (which came about even before the start of the heinous practice that led to African slaves through the 19th century) AGAINST chattel slavery is likewise not a change but a continuation and deepening understanding as not the Church, but the SECULAR SOCIETY, made its changes.

 

[julietteamdg]

Matters of doctrine and dogma cannot change, but they can develop, usually in response to heresies or modern technology. And by DEVELOP I mean it can be explicitly declared.

When it comes to Church customs, practices, traditions, etc. these can and do change, as people change. It’s impossible in this world for nothing to change.

 

[stpurl]

And of course, you apparently have ignored or forgotten the specific points that I was careful to make: The salient points regarding who Christ is (some Christians just think He was a great teacher, some do not recognize His Mother correctly, and by erring there, incorrectly know and understand Jesus Himself and His nature; some do not recognize His true Presence in the Catholic (and Orthodox) church as Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity.

Some think that ‘loving one’s neighbor’ means not simply tolerating (acknowledging that evil exists but realizing that rectifying the evil has its own consequences that can cause harm)moral wrongs such as abortion, divorce, ‘gay marriage’ and the like, but actively and publicly proclaiming these things as good and loving (gay marriage), ‘giving people happiness’ (divorce), and ‘not punishing unwanted children or taking away a woman’s right over her body (abortion).

In one of the earliest Christian texts (the Didache, credited to the apostles themselves), abortion was roundly condemned.

Jesus Himself, in His own words, told not just the Jews but all humanity that divorce was not to be permitted except where a marriage had existed legally but not sacramentally; for example, a second marriage after a divorce was a legal ‘OK’ for Jews but Jesus said that was not right and that second marriage could be dissolved by divorce (again, a ‘legal’ proceeding) since it was morally wrong from the start. The same for a marriage where one of the parties was forced and did not give free consent, or where one or both parties lied by omission or commission regarding something which, had the other person known of it, that other person would NOT have married that lying spouse. In those cases again the marriage was legal, any children would be legitimate, the innocent spouse would have gone into the marriage in good faith, but the marriage would be invalid and divorce would be the proper legal step once the wrong was known.

So again, no doctrinal ‘changes’ here.

 

[farronwolf]

Please since you raise the issue, show me where the Church ever made a 180 change in dogma or doctrine.

Who, other than you said anything about a 180 degree change? You seem to want to take my question, and fit it to what you want to answer.

The original post by the OP was that we focus on bringing people to God and not focus so much about who is right on a particular segment of our beliefs vs. other Christians.

Seems as much of the sentiment is that if people don’t believe exactly what the Church believes then the devil has them already and there is no hope, short of believing exactly what the Church teaches.

 

[stpurl]

Wait, you’re the one who seems to be making the assumptions here.

“Seems” is the operative word. You apparently think that I and others are out there bludgeoning people who don’t believe exactly what the Church believes. You are the one making the strawman leap into claiming that this equates into ‘the devil has them already and there is no hope’ blah blah.

I call baloney.

And I still challenge you to tell me, amidst a cloud of Christian believers who run the gamut as I have unceasingly pointed out of beliefs core to their Christian faith that are 180 degrees (Look, either the Eucharist is the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus, or it’s a symbol; the difference between those two things is literally the difference between God and an idol!), and completely different ideas of what even ‘love’ is, how can you possibly come up with anything but a kind of watery, “this means whatever you want it to mean’ drivel as a ‘belief statement’?

That does NOT mean that I’m out there screaming at Protestants “You’re all wrong” or that there isn’t plenty of ‘common material’ out there. My best friend is Protestant, we’ve attended each other’s churches, prayed together, praised together; she is one of the best Christians I know and I thank God for her friendship. I don’t go around telling her where she gets off, she doesn’t tell me the Rosary is ‘vain repetition’ etc.

But we have been friends for 50 something years and there have been a lot of changes in 50 years in society.

Both of us are bedrock pro-life. We are against gay marriage but not against gays, since both of us have gay family members. We both love the Bible and we love Jesus and we love our families. We have some differences.

Now here’s the thing. I think this is the kind of view the OP was envisioning but it’s not something that is easily done, especially in today’s society.

Unless you have people who are already committed Christians, it just won’t work out.

And too many people today are ‘cultural Christians’. And of those, the majority are secular humanist Christians with all that goes with it—gay marriage, etc.

50 years ago Catholics and Protestants were a lot closer doctrinally. No female clergy. No gay marriage. Contraception and divorce had only BARELY started to be accepted in some Protestant denominations starting in 1930. 1930!! Then came WW2, and the 50s, and for most white people and a fair number of non-whites in the US the society was homogenized and it was Mom and apple pie, no sex before marriage, etc.
There’s been a sea change and the Protestant AND Catholic communities reflect entirely too much of this chaos today.

 

[farronwolf]

I don’t think so. We should worry about who is right.

Gotta disagree, it DOES matter who’s right because that distinction is what could save a soul from damnation.

What we believe actually does matter. Heresy matters.

So it really does matter which Christian group is RIGHT, doesn’t it?

They are being misled by that ‘angel’ Lucifer who is perfectly happy to allow people to waft along on a truncated idea that “God is love’ and therefore love means saying yes to all earthly things because ‘nice’ and ‘tolerant’, and that saying Truth, like Jesus is the Way (which somehow people will take as implying that Jews and Buddhists and agnostics can’t find a way to heaven that isn’t Jesus but is good enough because golly gee, they’re NICE people and wasn’t Jesus nice, therefore if we’re nice we’re just like Him and yay we’re in?)

I am not just imagining that there is some intolerance to others beliefs.

Do you feel your lifelong friend’s soul is in jeopardy because they don’t believe what is “right”?

Do you believe that your friend can bring people to Christ and possibly save them from hell?

Heck there is plenty of intolerance on this forum when folks continually post:

You can’t be a Catholic if you vote for a democrat.
You aren’t a good Catholic if you receive communion in your hand.
Every thread seems to devolve in to the abortion debate.

These are just a few of the things that come up repeatedly and indicate that if folks are that critical of other Catholics, they aren’t able to try to bring others to christianity with the help of other non Catholic christians.

 

[c4csp]

There is objective truth and anything contrary to it is false. Jesus established a church, not churches, and it is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic. That truth matters. Why? Because it is the way Christ is going to distribute sanctifying grace through the sacraments. His church is salvific. One must be in a state of grace to make it to heaven. How are folks outside the Catholic Church having their mortal sins forgiven? It matters. Jesus said, whoever eats my body and drinks my blood has eternal life. This isn’t wonder bread and grape juice. It matters. It matters because Jesus said so.

We should treat others outside Christ’s Church with love and respect but we should never compromise on speaking the truth. As Catholics, we have the fulness of truth and there is no other church that is equal.

Being a good Christian doesn’t mean compromising your faith or rejecting/water down 2,000 year old teaching. Doing that is gravely sinful.

 

[stpurl]

Let’s turn this around a bit, shall we?

Annie Agnostic believes that gay marriage is wonderful because “love”. She talks with Ellen Episcopal. Ellen tells her that as a Christian, their faith reaffirms that gay marriage is loving and that Jesus blesses these people. Ellen tells Annie to come to her open communion church where Annie sees people who talk about Jesus the ‘good teacher’, whose Bible study preaches the gospel of ‘sharing the loaves and fishes’, who sit comfortably in their pews and celebrate being an ‘Easter people of joy’.

Annie comes out of the group completely affirmed. The Jesus she encountered here is one she can completely accept; a ‘good teacher’ about whom distorted legends grew up, whose good example is no more and no less that of George Floyd, and about Whom nothing need be done but what Annie is already doing; being an activist for ‘good causes’, living a ‘good life’, keeping her mind ‘open’.

Has Annie any actual knowledge of Jesus Himself or His gospel? Not hardly.

Now let Annie meet Charlie Catholic. Charlie does not ‘bludgeon’ her. Charlie openly prays the rosary when he takes his morning walks. He quotes phrases from the Bible when they have work meetings and people are asked to give their favorite ‘inspirational phrases’. Charlie treats everyone with respect. Charlie gives money and food to beggars in the street. Charlie is always there with a smile and.a helping hand. And when Annie asks, Charlie is ready to tell her about the wonderful friend he has in Jesus, that even, and especially, in the bad times, he trusts. He confides how hard it can be. It may take months or years, but Charlie’s actually living the gospel, even if Charlie has to ‘bow out’ of marching in the Pride parade and when he is perfectly respectful and in fact was found by coworkers volunteering in an AIDS shelter, showing that he ‘walks the walk and talks the talk’ about being committed to Christ, is going to be the ‘seed’ that germinates in Annie’s mind. Charlie does NOT validate everything Annie believes, but he treats her with the same kindness and integrity he does for everybody else.

Don’t you think that Charlie’s approach is more likely to lead a person to Christ, even if he never spouts a word of “strictly Catholic doctrine’ unless asked, and when asked, does so with joy and affirmation, than Ellen’s would?

 

[farronwolf]

So are you contending that only Catholic christians are going to heaven?

Just to clear things up.

 

[fredystairs]

Apparently, what Christians believe is all over the place:

“If you look at some of the dominant elements in the American mind and heart today, as illuminated by the Inventory, we find that most people say that the objective of life is feeling good about yourself; that all faiths are of equal value; that entry into God’s eternal presence is determined by one’s personal means of choice; and that there are no absolutes to guide or grow us morally,”

https://www.arizonachristian.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/AWVI-2020-Release-08-Perceptions-of-Sin-and-Salvation.pdf

All of these cannot be right.

Pax

 

[c4csp]

So are you contending that only Catholic christians are going to heaven?

Just to clear things up.

Am I? I didn’t say it, Jesus did. You may want to clear up your confusion with Him.

There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. That is Catholic dogma that needs to be accepted by all Catholics. St. Thomas Aquinas said if you reject one dogma, you reject them all. Again, not my words. I am just following the teaching of the church.

The question is, do folks understand the teaching, no salvation outside Catholic Church? Catholics cannot reject it, so it is wise to understand it. It means that the Catholic Church, through sacraments are the means Christ intended to save. Therefore if that is true, then eating wonder bread and drinking grape juice in Baptist church is not going to get it done. So Protestentism, buddhism, Hinduism, Islam will not save you. Now, Jesus can save anyone He wants but the ordinary means is through the Catholic Church, His church.

If one adheres to natural law and is invincibly ignorant of Christ’s Church then we believe they can be saved. Also, if one has baptismal desire, they can be saved. God will provide sufficient means before death for one to save themselves.

The problem is that if one knows of christ’s Church and rejects it, they will not be saved. That is Catholic doctrine and I accept it fully. We must all accept it.

 

[farronwolf]

That is a wonderful story but a bit skewed. Telling of a short encounter with Ellen vs months or years of contact with Charlie.

Maybe annie went to Ellen’s sunday school a time or tw or ten and became curious about scripture and what Jesus taught.

 

[farronwolf]

The original post wasn’t about whether Catholics should not worry about what is “right” it was about bringing people to God and away from the devil.

Yes, Catholics have a duty to follow Church teaching, but non Catholics don’t necessarily if they don’t understand the teachings.

I find it odd, that so many people want to take a thread topic and change what the original intent of the post is to fit what they want to say. But hey, we can hope for the future.

 

[fredystairs]

Just to add to what @c4csp said about there being no salvation outside of the Catholic Church attached is an article from Catholic Answers:

Is There Really "No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church?" | Catholic Answers Magazine

An excerpt from the article:

1. There is no salvation apart from Christ and his One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Again, this is an infallible teaching and not up for debate among Catholics.
2. Those who are “invincibly” ignorant concerning the truth of #1 above will not be culpable for this lack of knowledge before God.
3. Those in the category of #2 have the real possibility of salvation even if they never come to an explicit knowledge of Christ and/or his Church

There are further references to the CCC within the article.

Pax

 

[c4csp]

Yes, Catholics have a duty to follow Church teaching, but non Catholics don’t necessarily if they don’t understand the teachings.

There is a fine line about not understanding Catholic teaching and rejecting Catholic teaching. I can understand one not understanding it, but the one who doesn’t understand it would not be the one preaching and blaspheming Christ’s Church and leading many souls from HIs holy Church.

We hope for God’s mercy but we should take seriously the salvation of souls, and that is in His Church. God does not will the plurality of religion. I find it hard to be ignorant of that when all the “Christian” religions believe various things. Some are ok with homosexuality, abortion, contraception, etc. Some are perfectly ok with grave evil. We as Catholics can safely say, God does not will that. Therefore anything contrary to Catholicism, which is Christ’s Church, is heretical.

 

[farronwolf]

Here we go again. Is what you are repeating what the OP was asking about?

I find it odd, that so many people want to take a thread topic and change what the original intent of the post is to fit what they want to say. But hey, we can hope for the future.

 

[c4csp]

Here we go again. Is what you are repeating what the OP was asking about?

farronwolf:

I find it odd, that so many people want to take a thread topic and change what the original intent of the post is to fit what they want to say. But hey, we can hope for the future.

I addressed the OP in my responses completely. However, there is a contradiction in the OP post.

Lets stop talking about what type of Christianity is “right” and start preaching the gospel we are all believers of Jesus but don’t you think we should stop worrying about who is right and start saving people from the devil. We are all believers of Jesus Romans 12:18 Let’s start worrying about bringing people to God more and how we may do that.

It matters where salvation is, which is in the Catholic Church, or you will not be saving anyone from the Devil. Do you not see the contradiction in the OP’s statement? It matters big time who is right and where is salvation. How are you going to save them from the Devil when they have mortal sins and no priest for them to get absolution? Mortal sins send folks to hell.

I addressed the OP spot on. You missed it.