Why SHOULD or Why Shouldn't everyone be Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PJM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I meet with a local clergy council. I can assure you I am not about to agree with their varied beliefs. But neither will I insult them.
 
In that case, is it is not so much, that you respect their views, but rather, that you are respectful towards them (and others).

In view of the fact that this is someone else’s thread: 👋
 
Last edited:
K, so let’s bring it around. They should be Catholic and I should try to encourage that decision, but how? I think start with respectful dialogue and sharing of views. i think questions are always best.
 
In Scripture, Matthew 28:19 , Catholics are told to go forth and baptise.
My friend {I]m the OP}

I think you misunderstand that teaching:

[18] And Jesus coming, spoke to THEM saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. [19] Going therefore, teach YOU all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [20] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded YOU: and behold I am with YOU all days, even to the consummation of the world.

Jesus here is speaking directly and exclusively to His Apostles and there successors {see Mt, 10: 5-9] HOWEVER each and everyone of is to use the gifts and talents gifted to us to Build up the Church.

God Bless you,
Patrick
 
Hi. Thank you for inviting me back into the discussion.

It is the case that I do not understand why you wrote: ‘HOWEVER’.
 
And Jesus coming, spoke to THEM saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. [19] Going therefore, teach YOU all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [20] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded YOU: and behold I am with YOU all days, even to the consummation of the world.

Jesus here is speaking directly and exclusively to His Apostles and there successors
A layperson can validly baptize. They can even do so licitly in an emergency.
 
Churches are human institutions, they do err and the Catholic church is no exception.
Not, so my friend NOT SI:grinning:
Jn 17: 17-20
[17] Sanctify THEM in truth. Thy word is truth. [18] As thou hast sent ME into the world, I also have sent THEM into the world. [19] And for THEM do I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth. [20] And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me;

Only the RCC has Jesus as our Personal warranty of teaching ALL of HIS Truths on Faith and or Morals without error; so long as they conform to the Ordinary Magisterium. Hence ONLY the RCC is able to teach of Faith and Moral matters Infallibly.

God Bless you,
Patrick
 
Hi. Thank you for inviting me back into the discussion.

It is the case that I do not understand why you wrote: ‘HOWEVER’.
Here’s why:smiley:

ALL are called to share our Faith as the NORM; but not ALL are called to Baptize as the NORM.

GBY,

PJM
 
The Church does not err. We have been told through Scripture that the Holy Spirit will never leave us - its members can err, but the Church, does not.
Almost correct:

The CHURCH cannot sin
The CHURCH cannot error when teaching on Faith and or Morals and inline with the Ordinary Magisterium

GBY

PJM
 
The reason everyone should be Catholic is because Catholicism is Truth.

The reason not everyone is Catholic is that due to as many reasons as there are people (and then some) non-Catholics have not heard the truth, have not understood the truth, been repelled by the truth. . .and often not by the actual words, but by the actions, of others who seem, though Catholic themselves, not to be living, proclaiming, or giving the Truth.

It can be very off-putting for a person who has, to the best of his/her ability (in so far as he or she believes) explored and found what he or she believes is truth, and that outside the Catholic Church, and to be told that even if ‘elements’ are there, the ‘fullness’ remains in the Catholic Church alone.

“How arrogant of you”, he/she exclaims, “Considering the many failings of your members, especially your leaders, and their evil deeds, to claim that YOUR INSTITUTION is the only ‘full truth’ around. How insulting for you to imply that I ‘don’t know anything’ about your church or Christianity --or about a faith that is non-Christian, or non-theistic–, because if I really 'knew the truth” I’d belong to your ‘group’."

And off he or she goes, simmering and stewing, convinced that ‘that place’ is the LAST place they would EVER look for REAL TRUTH.

Do I have an answer? I wish I did. Some of my dearest friends are not only non-Catholic Christians, but far better Christians than I am. I can only be saddened at the thought that, even though they are mighty in spirit now in an 'incomplete truth, how much more they would be in the fullness of truth. There are so many gifts these people–and so many others–have, and thank God that no matter ‘where’ they are, they usually use those goods in the best ways they can. . .but I still wish that we could be one, because their contributions would be so helpful ‘in the Catholic Church’. May God unite us all in His Truth, and may it be soon.
 
Yes, I just worked out why you wrote, what you wrote (with help from another poster). The reference answers your question. The Catholic Church was pronounced as having knowledge of the Truth, and commanded to go forth. Why join another religion or gathering of separated Christians, when the Church herself, has been handed the authority? The reference stands as a command for the Catholic (Universal) Church.
 
Last edited:
Churches are human institutions, they do err and the Catholic church is no exception.
Actually an “institution” doesn’t err. It is always the people who err.

The Catholic Church cannot err because Jesus is her Head, and she is ensouled by the Holy Spirit. It is the divine elements that make her infallible, not the human.
 
The baptism would be valid even in a non emergency situation.

However a layperson could never absolve someone from their sins or turn bread and wine into the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ, even in an emergency.

What is the difference? Not trying to nitpick. This is actually something I have been wondering about.
 
What is the difference? Not trying to nitpick. This is actually something I have been wondering about.
The Catechism says
1256 The ordinary ministers of Baptism are the bishop and priest and, in the Latin Church, also the deacon.57 In case of necessity, anyone, even a non-baptized person, with the required intention, can baptize58 , by using the Trinitarian baptismal formula. The intention required is to will to do what the Church does when she baptizes. The Church finds the reason for this possibility in the universal saving will of God and the necessity of Baptism for salvation. 59
It was thought to be so necessary the Church wanted to allow it to be done very broadly.

Receiving the Eucharist is not necessary for salvation.
Absolution may be necessary for salvation, but only God forgives sins and the priests are allowed the power to forgive basically acting in God’s name. Presumably God could forgive your sins himself at the point of death.
 
Last edited:
Receiving the Eucharist is not necessary for salvation.
One has to wonder…

John 6:53 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you;"

This is why the Eastern Church communes infants from the moment of baptism.
 
We do have many Roman Catholic martyr saints who were baptized and very shortly thereafter martyred, presumably in many cases before they had a chance to ever receive Holy Communion.
 
There’s something I like about the emphasis in your comment about the importance of baptism for salvation. But, Jesus gave us Himself in the Eucharist and that is a normal aspect of Catholic life.

At Mass, we don’t receive the Eucharist until we listen to the Word and we affirm it in the reception of the Eucharist.

EWTN radio apologist Dr David Anders makes the point that the Mass is of great value even if we do not receive the Eucharist, inasmuch as we offer our selves and our lives to God along with the bread and wine, at the Offertory.
 
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm

The Mass is centred around Christ, who offered Himself.

‘1350: The presentation of the offerings at the altar takes up the gesture of Melchizedek and commits the Creator’s gifts into the hands of Christ who, in his sacrifice, brings to perfection all human attempts to offer sacrifices.’

‘1370 To the offering of Christ are united not only the members still here on earth, but also those already in the glory of heaven. In communion with and commemorating the Blessed Virgin Mary and all the saints, the Church offers the Eucharistic sacrifice. In the Eucharist the Church is as it were at the foot of the cross with Mary, united with the offering and intercession of Christ.’

'1375 It is by the conversion of the bread and wine into Christ’s body and blood that Christ becomes present in this sacrament. The Church Fathers strongly affirmed the faith of the Church in the efficacy of the Word of Christ and of the action of the Holy Spirit to bring about this conversion. Thus St. John Chrysostom declares:

It is not man that causes the things offered to become the Body and Blood of Christ, but he who was crucified for us, Christ himself. The priest, in the role of Christ, pronounces these words, but their power and grace are God’s. This is my body, he says. This word transforms the things offered. And St. Ambrose says about this conversion:

Be convinced that this is not what nature has formed, but what the blessing has consecrated. The power of the blessing prevails over that of nature, because by the blessing nature itself is changed. . . . Could not Christ’s word, which can make from nothing what did not exist, change existing things into what they were not before? It is no less a feat to give things their original nature than to change their nature.’


It is essential for Catholics to go to Mass.

‘1348 All gather together. Christians come together in one place for the Eucharistic assembly. At its head is Christ himself, the principal agent of the Eucharist. He is high priest of the New Covenant; it is he himself who presides invisibly over every Eucharistic celebration. It is in representing him that the bishop or priest acting in the person of Christ the head (in persona Christi capitis) presides over the assembly, speaks after the readings, receives the offerings, and says the Eucharistic Prayer. All have their own active parts to play in the celebration, each in his own way: readers, those who bring up the offerings, those who give communion, and the whole people whose “Amen” manifests their participation.’
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top