When did non Catholics stop being Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LINVS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

LINVS

Guest
I saw a documentary a few years ago about a Jew in Rome in the 19th century who was baptised by his Christian maid when he was very ill. His parents didn’t approve of the baptism, but the maid did it to save his soul. The Church then took the boy from his parents in order to raise him as a Christian. The boy later grew up to become a monk and rejected any contact with his parents.
This lead me to believe that ANYONE validly baptised is a member of the one holy Catholic church. Afterall the church authorities took great responsibility in raising the Jewish boy in the faith.
So my question is when did holy mother church stop seeing ALL the baptised as her children?
 
LINVS said:
I saw a documentary a few years ago about a Jew in Rome in the 19th century who was baptised by his Christian maid when he was very ill. His parents didn’t approve of the baptism, but the maid did it to save his soul. The Church then took the boy from his parents in order to raise him as a Christian. The boy later grew up to become a monk and rejected any contact with his parents.
This lead me to believe that ANYONE validly baptised is a member of the one holy Catholic church. Afterall the church authorities took great responsibility in raising the Jewish boy in the faith.
So my question is when did holy mother church stop seeing ALL the baptised as her children?
Click to expand...
Perhaps this is a side effect of the separation of church and state in the Western world. I doubt the Catholic Church or any church would be allowed to take a child from his parents anywhere in Europe or the Americas.
 
Spiritually the Church does acknowledge that all Sacraments flow from her, so that all Christians outside the official fold who are baptized are technically Catholics in spirit.
 
WoundedIcon said:
…all Christians outside the official fold who are baptized are technically Catholics in spirit.
Click to expand...
yes, that seems to be the case from example above. There is also the saying “there is no Salvation outside of the church.” In the old days most people understood it to mean ONLY Catholics are saved. I suppose it might be highly un politically correct to all Christians owe obedience to Rome.
 
All validly baptized individuals are, in a certain limited sense, Catholic, since all baptisms by their very nature bring the individual into Christ’s Church, which is the Catholic Church, even though non-Catholic Christians do not acknowledge this. So all baptized Christians, including schismatics, are Catholic in a sacramental sense, but the non-Catholic baptized are separated. This is why we call them “separated brethren.”
 
LINVS said:
Afterall the church authorities took great responsibility in raising the Jewish boy in the faith.
Click to expand...
He was kidnapped and taken by force from his parents against his and their will. That’s not taking great responsibility for the boy. That’s kidnapp, and it’s a crime.
 
Bella92 said:
He was kidnapped and taken by force from his parents against his and their will. That’s not taking great responsibility for the boy. That’s kidnapp, and it’s a crime.
Click to expand...
Well, the Pope did rule that part of the world at the time (Papal States), and so he decided what was law.
 
Bella92 said:
He was kidnapped and taken by force from his parents against his and their will. That’s not taking great responsibility for the boy. That’s kidnapp, and it’s a crime.
Click to expand...
If the state takes a child to save his physical and mental well being, most wouldn’t be called that a crime.

If the Catholic Church takes a child to save his soul, that’s a crime.

I don’t mean to upset anyone, but this is a paradox of sorts.
 
LINVS said:
I don’t mean to upset anyone, but this is a paradox of sorts.
Click to expand...
No it’s not. Removing a child from a family because the family are abusing them is legit. Removing a child from a family because they’re Jews is racist and kidnap. Both crimes. What proof have you a Jew’s soul is in danger and needs saving? None. So what went on there was a crime.
 
You appear to be talking about the case of Edgardo Mortara, but some of the facts differ. He was actually adopted by Pope Pius IX. He was ordained in the Augustinian Order, these being not monks but mendicant friars.
 
Elizium23 said:
He was actually adopted by Pope Pius IX.
Click to expand...
His mother spent years trying to get him back, pleading with the Pope. Maybe LINVS can answer this, if a Jewish family stole your child and adopted him against your will, would you be ok with that? What if it was a Catholic Bishop who stole your son. Would that be ok with you? Am I the only one who sees what went on here as a crime, and nothing else?
 
Be careful not to judge the past by viewing it through the lens of modern thinking. Ecumenism was not so advanced and Holy Church’s perspective on the Jews was different in the 19th Century. Also, the Pope had quite a bit of temporal power as these were the days of the Papal States, the last remnant of the Holy Roman Empire.
 
Bella92 said:
His mother spent years trying to get him back, pleading with the Pope. Maybe LINVS can answer this, if a Jewish family stole your child and adopted him against your will, would you be ok with that? What if it was a Catholic Bishop who stole your son. Would that be ok with you? Am I the only one who sees what went on here as a crime, and nothing else?
Click to expand...
I can answer that…

I wouldn’t be ok if my children got taken by a Jewish family because I’m a Christian.

A Catholic Bishop would never steal my son because it’s against the law and I’ll raise him in the Catholic Faith anyway.

Bella, I didn’t mean to ruffle your feathers so.
 
LINVS said:
I can answer that…

I wouldn’t be ok if my children got taken by a Jewish family because I’m a Christian.
Click to expand...
What a pity the Pope didn’t afford this family and boy the same courtesy then and respected their faith and family.
A Catholic Bishop would never steal my son because it’s against the law and I’ll raise him in the Catholic Faith anyway.
Click to expand...
Was kidnap against the law back then? I think so. So it’s not ok for the pope to kidnap a boy. It was a crime.
Bella, I didn’t mean to ruffle your feathers so.
Click to expand...
My feathers are ruffled. I can’t believe I’m the only person here willing to condemn the action of this pope as criminal.
 
It was as much a kidnapping as it is today for Child Protective Services to remove a child from a home and place him in a foster home. This was a case of government intervention for the perceived welfare of a child - and even more importantly, the immortal soul of a child and his salvation, not just his material well-being.
 
Elizium23 said:
It was as much a kidnapping as it is today for Child Protective Services to remove a child from a home and place him in a foster home. This was a case of government intervention for the perceived welfare of a child - and even more importantly, the immortal soul of a child and his salvation, not just his material well-being.
Click to expand...
Rubbish. Considering 60% of Catholics hardly ever set food in a church and aren’t bringing their children up in the faith, will the pope be removing these children from their homes too? Are Jewish childrens souls more at risk than any other? It was a horrible crime of kidnap and nothing else.
 
Elizium23 said:
It was as much a kidnapping as it is today for Child Protective Services to remove a child from a home and place him in a foster home.
Click to expand...
Name one example of where social services removed a child from their natural parents because the child wasn’t being brought up in their faith.
 
Elizium23 said:
Also, the Pope had quite a bit of temporal power as these were the days of the Papal States, the last remnant of the Holy Roman Empire.
Click to expand...
But not enough humanity or common decency it seems, to realise kidnapping and removing by force, a perfectly happy and healthy young boy from his family, was wrong, inhumane, and a crime.
 
Bella, I suppose your anger is because you are viewing the Pope’s actions totally in a secular perspective. Or, perhaps with a view that all religions are equal. In either case, you are completely logical in your argument.
 
Bella92 said:
But not enough humanity or common decency it seems, to realise kidnapping and removing by force, a perfectly happy and healthy young boy from his family, was wrong, inhumane, and a crime.
Click to expand...
You can’t judge a bygone era by the standards of today.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top