What official infallible declaration of any Pope on morals would you as a non-Catholic Christian object to and why?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kd5glx
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Anna_Scott said:
rinnie,

When you name those 10 things, please exclude beliefs proclaimed in the Nicene Creed, since most Christians agree with this creed. I realize there are some differences in the Orthodox Church regarding the “Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father [and the Son]”. Link: oca.org/OCchapter.asp?SID=2&ID=10

Link: creeds.net/ancient/nicene.htm
Nicene Creed in English Liturgical Language which we recite every Sunday in the Anglican Church:
**
We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, light from light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father [and the Son.]
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.**

I am not asking for these 10 things to be difficult. I really want to know.

You did say this is quite simple to learn. So, I’m assuming you, as a Catholic, have learned the infallible teachings, and the non-Ex Cathedra teachings to which you must submit religious mind and will…

It is my understanding that Pope Pius IX’s 1854 definition of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary, and Pope Pius XII’s 1950 definition of the dogma of the Assumption of Mary are Ex Cathedra teachings.

Again, I am asking for ten (10) non-Ex Cathedra teachings to which Catholics must submit religious mind and will.

Peace,
Anna
Click to expand...
Okay let me think!
  1. No Salvation outside of the CC.
  2. There are only 7 Sacraments.
  3. No birth control.
  4. The Father Son and Holy Spirit are all equal.
    4.Sola Scriptura
  5. Purgatory
  6. Eucharist. That Chirst is the True living Bread.
  7. necessity of Baptsim.
  8. Malice of taking human life. (abortion)
  9. Human Nature is composed of 2 human parts Body and Soul
  10. One Baptism you can only be baptised once.
I believe these are ten off the top of my head. If I am wrong anyone can correct me.
 
google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CB4QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newadvent.org%2Fcathen%2F07790a.htm&ei=CEb3TY77BcHg0QHaioXYCw&usg=AFQjCNHUNWoagNaZamIp2t-mCsxjL6QlFg

Andrew, Humanae Vitae, Quantum Praedecessores and Unam Sanctam. Are encyclicals which for example Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul speaks on marrage, pro-creation etc.

Here’s the encyclical, btw this is nothing new in light of histroy

google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vatican.va%2Fholy_father%2Fpaul_vi%2Fencyclicals%2Fdocuments%2Fhf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html&ei=CEn3TbWlGJSr0AH26qHRCw&usg=AFQjCNGswj52pRfly_lD36OxGw-L_Fyh1Q

Here’s a link relating it to history and explaining and expanding on it.

google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCkQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ewtn.com%2Flibrary%2FTheology%2FAUTHUMVT.HTM&ei=H1T3TevrBOSu0AHbyvSXCw&usg=AFQjCNGYZwsLOFKB-uxc5szxypoRGjWh1A

This encyclical is considered Prophetic.

And to understand each and every encyclical requires deep researc as stated above. One whould require exactly this type of re-search. Should one hear to calling to take on the responsibility “God Bless Them”. The Pope has taken 4-years to complete Part I+II of Jesus of Nazareth, and its still assumed a Part III is yet to came.

The Pope is the Compass for Mankind for Morals in as he who speaks from Peters Chair.

Heres a history of th encyclicals which date to Paul and the New Testament Not all are infallible. I’ve heard many Cathilc debates that " Humanae Vitae" is not and infallible enyclical.

Gary
 
Andrew, you seem to have a concern about this Bull also so here it is…?

Unam Sanctam…Bull of Pope Boniface VIII promulgated November 18, 1302

Urged by faith, we are obliged to believe and to maintain that the Church is one, holy, catholic, and also apostolic. We believe in her firmly and we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins, as the Spouse in the Canticles [Sgs 6:8] proclaims: ‘One is my dove, my perfect one. She is the only one, the chosen of her who bore her,’ and she represents one sole mystical body whose Head is Christ and the head of Christ is God [1 Cor 11:3]. In her then is one Lord, one faith, one baptism [Eph 4:5]. There had been at the time of the deluge only one ark of Noah, prefiguring the one Church, which ark, having been finished to a single cubit, had only one pilot and guide, i.e., Noah, and we read that, outside of this ark, all that subsisted on the earth was destroyed.

We venerate this Church as one, the Lord having said by the mouth of the prophet: ‘Deliver, O God, my soul from the sword and my only one from the hand of the dog.’ [Ps 21:20] He has prayed for his soul, that is for himself, heart and body; and this body, that is to say, the Church, He has called one because of the unity of the Spouse, of the faith, of the sacraments, and of the charity of the Church. This is the tunic of the Lord, the seamless tunic, which was not rent but which was cast by lot [Jn 19:23- 24]. Therefore, of the one and only Church there is one body and one head, not two heads like a monster; that is, Christ and the Vicar of Christ, Peter and the successor of Peter, since the Lord speaking to Peter Himself said: ‘Feed my sheep’ [Jn 21:17], meaning, my sheep in general, not these, nor those in particular, whence we understand that He entrusted all to him [Peter]. Therefore, if the Greeks or others should say that they are not confided to Peter and to his successors, they must confess not being the sheep of Christ, since Our Lord says in John ‘there is one sheepfold and one shepherd.’ We are informed by the texts of the gospels that in this Church and in its power are two swords; namely, the spiritual and the temporal. For when the Apostles say: ‘Behold, here are two swords’ [Lk 22:38] that is to say, in the Church, since the Apostles were speaking, the Lord did not reply that there were too many, but sufficient. Certainly the one who denies that the temporal sword is in the power of Peter has not listened well to the word of the Lord commanding: ‘Put up thy sword into thy scabbard’ [Mt 26:52]. Both, therefore, are in the power of the Church, that is to say, the spiritual and the material sword, but the former is to be administered for the Church but the latter by the Church; the former in the hands of the priest; the latter by the hands of kings and soldiers, but at the will and sufferance of the priest.

However, one sword ought to be subordinated to the other and temporal authority, subjected to spiritual power. For since the Apostle said: ‘There is no power except from God and the things that are, are ordained of God’ [Rom 13:1-2], but they would not be ordained if one sword were not subordinated to the other and if the inferior one, as it were, were not led upwards by the other.

For, according to the Blessed Dionysius, it is a law of the divinity that the lowest things reach the highest place by intermediaries. Then, according to the order of the universe, all things are not led back to order equally and immediately, but the lowest by the intermediary, and the inferior by the superior. Hence we must recognize the more clearly that spiritual power surpasses in dignity and in nobility any temporal power whatever, as spiritual things surpass the temporal. This we see very clearly also by the payment, benediction, and consecration of the tithes, but the acceptance of power itself and by the government even of things. For with truth as our witness, it belongs to spiritual power to establish the terrestrial power and to pass judgement if it has not been good. Thus is accomplished the prophecy of Jeremias concerning the Church and the ecclesiastical power: ‘Behold to-day I have placed you over nations, and over kingdoms’ and the rest. Therefore, if the terrestrial power err, it will be judged by the spiritual power; but if a minor spiritual power err, it will be judged by a superior spiritual power; but if the highest power of all err, it can be judged only by God, and not by man, according to the testimony of the Apostle: ‘The spiritual man judgeth of all things and he himself is judged by no man’ [1 Cor 2:15]. This authority, however, (though it has been given to man and is exercised by man), is not human but rather divine, granted to Peter by a divine word and reaffirmed to him (Peter) and his successors by the One Whom Peter confessed, the Lord saying to Peter himself, ‘Whatsoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound also in Heaven’ etc., [Mt 16:19]. Therefore whoever resists this power thus ordained by God, resists the ordinance of God [Rom 13:2], unless he invent like Manicheus two beginnings, which is false and judged by us heretical, since according to the testimony of Moses, it is not in the beginnings but in the beginning that God created heaven and earth [Gen 1:1]. Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.

You get the impression their some hidden agenda here, all of this can be read… And we can discuss any one you would like. But there is no list nor I do foresee one coming. So where do we go from here?

God Bless Gary
 
As far as submission to the Church which Jesus Christ in Scripture built his church upon?

Yes submission is required. While you may or may not agree with everything. It is Peter who Jesus Christ built the Church upon gave the Keys to and the authority to bind and lose. Its prophecy in Isaiah which came to light the Acts with Peter, in Matthew, and is again confirmed in Revelations etc.

Benedict XVI sits in Peter chair today as the Vicar of Christ. No-one else in the physical world can claim this authority.

The only inability I see is to comprehend Scripture in context on this subject. Which of course we can debate as we have done so already.

Sorry about typos, I’m moving quickly here.

God Bless, Gary
 
rinnie said:
Okay let me think!
  1. No Salvation outside of the CC.
  2. There are only 7 Sacraments.
  3. No birth control.
  4. The Father Son and Holy Spirit are all equal.
    4.Sola Scriptura
  5. Purgatory
  6. Eucharist. That Chirst is the True living Bread.
  7. necessity of Baptsim.
  8. Malice of taking human life. (abortion)
  9. Human Nature is composed of 2 human parts Body and Soul
  10. One Baptism you can only be baptised once.
I believe these are ten off the top of my head. If I am wrong anyone can correct me.
Click to expand...
Yes this is were we are coming from. Its an in-depth study in each instance. The encyclicals are Biblical with Paul for example, and 21 total in then NT I believe.

God Bless, Gary
 
mardukm said:
. . .The question is meant to determine if there is not a log in the eye with regards to your opinion. If you believe your own bishop has no authority for you to follow, then your complaint would have some relevance. If you believe that you owe your own bishop religious submission, then your concerns are a log in the eye and have no real merit. . . .
Click to expand...
mardukm,
I addressed this in Post #117:
Anna_Scott said:
. . . .The problem for me is that “submission of religious mind and will.”** I can give that submission to Christ-to the Holy Trinity; but not to a person on earth. **

I haven’t found sufficient evidence that the Catholic Church should hold such power. Obviously the Orthodox haven’t either. It’s an interesting situation–the Catholic Church declared itself to be the sole authority, the Chair of Peter. It’s a “because I said so” situation; and I just can’t find historical support for that claim–again, neither can the Orthodox. . . .
Click to expand...
 
Anna_Scott said:
Vicar of Christ
Click to expand...
Do you think through scripture it is Peter who Jesus Christ built the Church upon gave the Keys to and the authority to bind and lose. Its prophecy in Isaiah which came to light the Acts with Peter, in Matthew and John, and is again confirmed in Revelations etc.

Whats your take on this?

God Bless, Gary
 
GaryTaylor said:
google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CB4QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newadvent.org%2Fcathen%2F07790a.htm&ei=CEb3TY77BcHg0QHaioXYCw&usg=AFQjCNHUNWoagNaZamIp2t-mCsxjL6QlFg

Andrew, Humanae Vitae, Quantum Praedecessores and Unam Sanctam. Are encyclicals which for example Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul speaks on marrage, pro-creation etc.

Here’s the encyclical, btw this is nothing new in light of histroy

google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vatican.va%2Fholy_father%2Fpaul_vi%2Fencyclicals%2Fdocuments%2Fhf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html&ei=CEn3TbWlGJSr0AH26qHRCw&usg=AFQjCNGswj52pRfly_lD36OxGw-L_Fyh1Q

Here’s a link relating it to history and explaining and expanding on it.

google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCkQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ewtn.com%2Flibrary%2FTheology%2FAUTHUMVT.HTM&ei=H1T3TevrBOSu0AHbyvSXCw&usg=AFQjCNGYZwsLOFKB-uxc5szxypoRGjWh1A

This encyclical is considered Prophetic.

And to understand each and every encyclical requires deep researc as stated above. One whould require exactly this type of re-search. Should one hear to calling to take on the responsibility “God Bless Them”. The Pope has taken 4-years to complete Part I+II of Jesus of Nazareth, and its still assumed a Part III is yet to came.

The Pope is the Compass for Mankind for Morals in as he who speaks from Peters Chair.

Heres a history of th encyclicals which date to Paul and the New Testament Not all are infallible. I’ve heard many Cathilc debates that " Humanae Vitae" is not and infallible enyclical.

Gary
Click to expand...
Exactly. Those encyclicals are not infallibly declared from your supreme pontiff and can be dismissed by a Catholic and he can still be in good standing. Of course many people have varying opinions on them and it is clear in a simple comparison betwee. Those documents and others from your church that the position on many things is/was in a state of flux. Quite a quandary indeed.

In Christ,
Andrew
 
GaryTaylor said:
Do you think through scripture it is Peter who Jesus Christ built the Church upon gave the Keys to and the authority to bind and lose. Its prophecy in Isaiah which came to light the Acts with Peter, in Matthew and John, and is again confirmed in Revelations etc.

Whats your take on this?

God Bless, Gary
Click to expand...
Gary,
At this point, I lean towards the Eastern Orthodox view, as expressed in The Primacy of Peter, Chapter 2, Peter’s Primacy In The New Testament And The Early Tradition, Veselin Kesich, page 57:

"For Karl Rahner, the post-resurrection experiences of Christ’s disciples are "strictly sui generis, and they belong to the very origin of the Church. No one can succeed to the unique status promised to the twelve (Lk 22:30). The apostles cannot hand over their places in a kingdom appointed to them, nor can Peter transfer his role as the rock of the first Church in Christ.

Only the church as a whole succeeds to these apostolic privileges. The apostles’ successor is the apostolic church, which possesses the fullness of apostolic tradition and with which Christ identifies himself. (Acts 9:4). Every bishop in the apostolic church who occupies the place which Peter occupied at the eucharistic gathering, and who performs the pastoral duties which Peter performed, is the successor to the apostle.

But no bishop can succeed to Peter’s unique place as a member of the twelve, as the first witness of the resurrection, and as the first head of the first assembly in Christ. Both the New Testament and the early history of the church are in full agreement on this point."

Peace,
Anna

P.S. Gotta get ready for an appointment. Will be back later to answer your other posts. 🙂
 
Anna_Scott said:
mardukm,
I addressed this in Post #117:
Click to expand...
Anna here is something you have to remember. You need to think about this for a moment.

Okay Jesus was a human being granted he was HUMAN and DIVINE but he was both.

Now Jesus taught us as a human on this earth. He was every bit as human as us. He even showed he could feel as a human by his suffering. There was no holding back on that.

Now with that said remember when the Pharasies said they would not listen to Jesus and then they turned around and said FATHER ABRAHAM said this, and FA said that.

Remember what Jesus said? He said you will listen to Father Abr. but not to the SON OF GOD.

Now with that said are you seeing what I am saying.

God worked through ABRAMAN, NOAH, MOSES. etc. Then he came as JESUS and worked as MAN fully HUMAN and Divine.

Now how can you believe ST Peter, Father Abraham but then deny the Pope?

Do you see what I am saying. If you believe that Jesus is indeed who he said he is. GOD and I believe you do, then how can you deny the authority he gave to MAN on earth.

Show me where St Peter was any more or less human then the Pope. Jesus told Peter to pass down to all ages. St Peter passed down that Power and Jesus promised us until the end of age.

Jesus said he was sending the Advocate the Holy Spirit to lead the CC. Now the Pope is and always has been charge of the CC. Do you see what I am saying.

Think of it simple. Just simple. If St Peter can be traced to the RCC how could the RCC not be the true Church?
 
Both the papacy and the episcopate share the title, ‘Vicar of Christ’, but the preferred use is Servant of God. Also this title means the papacy in communion with the bishops in th world, the universal church.

It is Christ’s authority in the Church. I think people are focusing on the humanity of the administrators rather than consecrated to Christ and representing Him…it does not mean they are perfect like Him, but express His will in faith and morals, all this the presence of the Holy Spirit. Without the presence of the Holy Spirit at work, the do not connect. We know when the Pope is speaking in Christ through the Holy Spirit and when he is giving his opinion.

Not all encyclicals are equal in weight. Your local bishop explains the perspective of papal encylclicals.
 
KathleenGee said:
Both the papacy and the episcopate share the title, ‘Vicar of Christ’, but the preferred use is Servant of God. Also this title means the papacy in communion with the bishops in th world, the universal church.

It is Christ’s authority in the Church. I think people are focusing on the humanity of the administrators rather than consecrated to Christ and representing Him…it does not mean they are perfect like Him, but express His will in faith and morals, all this the presence of the Holy Spirit. Without the presence of the Holy Spirit at work, the do not connect. We know when the Pope is speaking in Christ through the Holy Spirit and when he is giving his opinion.

Not all encyclicals are equal in weight. Your local bishop explains the perspective of papal encylclicals.
Click to expand...
Exactly and look at it this way. To say that the Pope can SAY that he is speaking in the name of Jesus Christ and he is not, would mean the Pope can actually overpower God.

And we know that is impossible. Jesus promsied us when he speaks in MY NAME it will be with MY VOICE. You either believe those words or you don’t.🤷
 
Anna_Scott said:
Gary,
At this point, I lean towards the Eastern Orthodox view
Click to expand...
The 451 Council acknowledges The Bishop of Rome as First and Constantinople as Second. Do you realize the Orthodox church acknowledges this? Just as they acknowledge the Bishop of Rome the “proto” at 325 Nicaea. When Constantine moved his seat to Constantinope, Cerularius decided that Constantinople should therefore be second to Rome. But the Pope decided against that because Alexandria had always been the second patriarchate. Constantinople only became the second Patriarchate after the council of Chalcedon and only after the diminishment of Alexandria Constantinople was built in 313. So we have 300 years of Apostolic Succession already intact.

I understand what you are saying and how todays EO feels, but we have the early Ecumenical Councils I mentioned where the EO+CC are in agreement.

We can no make mistake about the fact that EO is valid and these are apostles of Christ but at the moment they have no claim to the Chair of Peter. You would have to belong the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church for that to be a Truth. Which no doubt is possible.

Nonetheless the Apostolic Succession remained intact from death of Peter till today.

Jesus Christ didn’t chose all the apostles in Scripture upon his known death, he chose Peter. Peter in Acts started the church at Pentecost…

Matthew-Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God.

Matthew-And Jesus answering said to him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona, for flesh and blood has not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in the heavens.

" In context this relates to Paul… For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms."

Matthew-And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. “Peter is the Rock”

"In context John-And he brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas” (which, when translated, is Peter) Rock.

Matthew-And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of the heavens; and whatsoever thou mayest bind upon the earth shall be bound in the heavens; and whatsoever thou mayest loose on the earth shall be loosed in the heavens.

"In context Isaiah-“I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.”

The tradition of the Apostles has been made manifest throughout the world, and can be found in every Church by those who wish to know the truth." – Irenaeus, writing about A.D. 189, on how the unity of the Church was based on the Apostolic Tradition everywhere handed down.

We have fundemental problem in History. The Bishop of Rome is acknowledged in History until the 7th Ecumenical Council by both Protestants {higher level} and the EO?

How does logic conclude that did not continue when in light of the fact of History we know it did? Granted the Schism and reformation are tragic. But the position of Rome and Peter’s Chair and Apostolic Succession is intact for all Christians till the 7th Ecumenical Council. It never stopped Benedict sits in that position today. I know many would like to explain and rationalize this away yet Bible X 7 Ecumenical Councils is very strong case.

Rome is the prime See, then it stands to reason that his primacy extended over all the Church. Which it did in history and in truth still does.

Catholic symbolism represents religious significance. Matthew 16:19:

And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

The Keys represent the dual authority with which to open heaven to repentant sinners and to lock heaven to the unrepentant - the ability to grant or withhold salvation. This power is believed to be bestowed upon every pope who leads the Roman Catholic Church

Its all good I fail to see how in context of Scripture and History this can be explained logically as anything but Rome and the Chair of Peter.

God Bless, Gary
 
rinnie and KathleenGee I’m sorry I crossed your posts. I’m daydreaming, talking and typing all at the ame time.

I’m daydreaming about World Peace and a United Church!🙂

God Bless, Gary
 
Dear sister Anna,
Anna_Scott said:
mardukm,
I addressed this in Post #117:
Click to expand...
Thank you for your response. So it is established that you do not accept the authority of your bishop, but accept only the authority of Jesus Christ. Your religion status “Anglican Catholic” threw me off. I assumed you were High Church Anglican, but I guess you are Low Church Anglican, of the more Protestant variety.

So your problem with the teaching on obedience is much more fundamental than just “It’s hard for me to accept the authority of the Pope.” You have a problem with human authority in general.

Let me know if I interpreted you correctly, and we can proceed from there. If I have misinterpreted you, please explain your position a little more so we can have a better understanding of where you are coming from.

Blessings,
Marduk
 
FabiusMaximus said:
You know I can understand the reasoning behind papal infallibility, but I don’t understand the purpose in dogmatizing it. It created much tension within and outside the Roman Catholic Church.

All in all, I find that Catholics dogmatize things too much. What’s the purpose of making the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption, and Papal Infallibility all dogmatized, unalterable doctrines? Does a person really need to believe such things to be a ‘good’ Catholic? To be saved?

Even Purgatory. I know some Orthodox believe in a similar concept, and others in a much more extreme ‘version,’ but nothing dogmatized.
Click to expand...
Yes,I agree with a former poster.there are very good reason for something being dogmatic.Just like scripture passage which have led things to considered dogmatic these things are fundamental truths that can’t be denied.There absolutly necessary for Catholics to believe in helping to gain salvation.If one denies the Virgin Birth one will necessarily deny other beliefs which are essential.The two can’t be separated.this goes for the Assumption.Im not sure why its necessary because I can’t recall the reasons but there is a sound reason.
 
GaryTaylor said:
. . . .

Unam Sanctam…Bull of Pope Boniface VIII promulgated November 18, 1302

Urged by faith, we are obliged to believe and to maintain that the Church is one, holy, catholic, and also apostolic. We believe in her firmly and we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins. . . .
Click to expand...
Gary,
Thank you for posting Unam Sanctam.

For me, the main issue of concern in Unam Sanctam is as follows: “We declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” That would exclude even the Eastern Orthodox from salvation, would it not?

Other Popes made similar declarations.

Pope John XXIII:
“And you, venerable brothers, will not fail, in your teaching, to recall to the flocks entrusted to you these grand and salutary truths; we cannot render to God the devotion that is due Him and that is pleasing to Him nor is it possible to be united to Him except through Jesus Christ; and it is not possible to be united to Jesus Christ except in the Church and through the Church, His Mystical Body, and, finally, it is not possible to belong to the Church except through the bishops, successors of the Apostles, united to the Supreme Pastor, the successor of Peter.” (Pope John XXIII, Address on the creation of three new dioceses on Taiwan, L’Osseratore Romano, June 29, 1961).

“The Saviour Himself is the door of the sheepfold: ‘I am the door of the sheep.’ Into this fold of Jesus Christ, no man may enter unless he be led by the Sovereign Pontiff; and only if they be united to him can men be saved, for the Roman Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ and His personal representative on earth.” (Pope John XXIII in his homily to the Bishops and faithful assisting at his coronation on November 4, 1958).

Pope Pius XII:
“O Mary Mother of Mercy and Refuge of Sinners! We beseech thee to look with pitying eyes on poor heretics and schismatics. Do thou, who art the Seat of Wisdom, enlighten the minds wretchedly enfolded in the darkness of ignorance and sin, that they may clearly recognize the Holy, Catholic, Roman Church to be the only true Church of Jesus Christ, outside of which neither sanctity nor salvation can be found. Call them to the unity of the one fold, granting them the grace to believe every truth of our holy faith and to submit themselves to the Supreme Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Jesus Christ on earth, that, thus being united with us by the sweet chains of charity, there may soon be but one fold under one and the same Shepherd; and may we all thus, O Glorious Virgin, exultantly sing forever: ‘Rejoice, O Virgin Mary! Thou alone hast destroyed all heresies in the whole world!’ Amen.” (Pope Pius XII, The Raccolta, Benzinger Brothers, Boston, 1957, No. 626).

Leo XIII:
“This is our last lesson to you: receive it, engrave it in your minds, all of you: by God’s commandment salvation is to be found nowhere but in the Church; the strong and effective instrument of salvation is none other than the Roman Pontificate.” (Pope Leo XIII, Allocution for the 25th anniversary of his election, February 20, 1903; Papal Teachings: The Church, Benedictine Monks of Solesmes, St. Paul Editions, Boston, 1962, par. 653).

Pope Innocent III:
“There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215.)

Pope Eugene IV:
“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.)

Pope Pius XI:
“Furthermore, in this one Church of Christ no man can be or remain who does not accept, recognize and obey the authority and supremacy of Peter and his legitimate successors.” (Pope Pius XI, Encyclical, Mortalium animos, January 6, 1928, The Papal Encyclicals, Claudia Carlen, I.H.M., McGrath Publishing Co., 1981, pp. 317, 318).
rinnie said:
Okay let me think!
  1. No Salvation outside of the CC. . . . .
Click to expand...
Gary and rinnie,

Is this an infallible teaching of the Catholic Church that “neither salvation nor the remission of sins” exists outside the Catholic Church–and it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff–no exceptions?

Peace,
Anna
 
mardukm said:
The questions are not for you. They’re for me or anyone else who wants to have a little more knowledge of your premises so we can answer your question better. If you don’t want to engage in the dialogue, that’s OK, too.

The question is meant to determine if there is not a log in the eye with regards to your opinion. If you believe your own bishop has no authority for you to follow, then your complaint would have some relevance. If you believe that you owe your own bishop religious submission, then your concerns are a log in the eye and have no real merit.

If you can tell us why such a list would be necessary for someone to live their faith, then we can proceed with the discussion from there. if you cannot give a reason, then why should anyone bother to answer your question?

Again, it’s all about the log in the eye.

Blessings,
Marduk
Click to expand...
mardukm said:
Dear sister Anna,

Thank you for your response. So it is established that you do not accept the authority of your bishop, but accept only the authority of Jesus Christ. Your religion status “Anglican Catholic” threw me off. I assumed you were High Church Anglican, but I guess you are Low Church Anglican, of the more Protestant variety.

So your problem with the teaching on obedience is much more fundamental than just “It’s hard for me to accept the authority of the Pope.” You have a problem with human authority in general.

Let me know if I interpreted you correctly, and we can proceed from there. If I have misinterpreted you, please explain your position a little more so we can have a better understanding of where you are coming from.

Blessings,
Marduk
Click to expand...
mardukm,

The question of this Thread: **What official infallible declaration of any Pope on morals would you as a non-Catholic Christian object to and why?
**

It’s difficult to answer the question of the OP, if I don’t know what falls under “infallible declarations” of the Popes.

So, it would be helpful if you would spend some time identifying the infallible teachings of the Catholic Church, instead of making speculations and assumptions about my motives, beliefs, and whether or not I have a “log in my eye.”

Peace,
Anna
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top