Yes or no?

  • Thread starter Thread starter joe371
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
oneGODoneCHURCH said:
I Believe that it was Pope Benedict XVI that said ( and I paraphrase here not quote) All Christians are members of the One church, by virtue of our baptism we share the same faith, although those faith communities that are not in communion with Rome are missing on the benefits of the fullness of truth.
Click to expand...
Gotta be careful with paraphrasing people like Pope Benedict or Pope Francis.
So in my words they are members of the family they just don’t show up for the get togethers.
Click to expand...
In a sense, the same could have been said of the prodigal son, no?
 
[FathersKnowBest;12215287]Gotta be careful with paraphrasing people like Pope Benedict or Pope Francis.
Click to expand...
You are correct so I have found the documentation of the position, but not the statement form Pope Benedict himself:
CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

DECLARATION
“DOMINUS IESUS”
ON THE UNICITY AND SALVIFIC UNIVERSALITY
OF JESUS CHRIST AND THE CHURCH
17. Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.58 The Churches which, while not existing in perfect communion with the Catholic Church, remain united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist, are true particular Churches.59 Therefore, the Church of Christ is present and operative also in these Churches, even though they lack full communion with the Catholic Church, since they do not accept the Catholic doctrine of the Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church.60

On the other hand, the ecclesial communities which have not preserved the valid Episcopate and the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery,61 are not Churches in the proper sense; however, those who are baptized in these communities are, by Baptism, incorporated in Christ and thus are in a certain communion, albeit imperfect, with the Church.62 Baptism in fact tends per se toward the full development of life in Christ, through the integral profession of faith, the Eucharist, and full communion in the Church.63
In a sense, the same could have been said of the prodigal son, no?
Click to expand...
True and that is the hope.
 
adrift said:
Would you substantiate this claim?
Click to expand...
Sure.

From the Council of Constance:
We have therefore come together with our venerable brothers, cardinals of the holy Roman church, and our court to this city of Constance at the appointed time. Being present here by the grace of God, we now wish, with the advice of this sacred synod, to attend to the peace, exaltation and reform of the church and to the quiet of the christian people.
*
 
House_Harkonnen said:
What if I told you that the Roman Catholic Church was calling itself “Roman” for hundreds of years before old Henry even showed up?

.
Click to expand...
House_Harkonnen said:
Sure.

From the Council of Constance:
We have therefore come together with our venerable brothers, cardinals of the holy Roman church*, and our court to this city of Constance at the appointed time. Being present here by the grace of God, we now wish, with the advice of this sacred synod, to attend to the peace, exaltation and reform of the church and to the quiet of the christian people.
Click to expand...
To Clarify the statement does not say holy Roman Catholic Church. What it is referring to is the rite. Yes the rite was referred to along time before “old Henry” showed up.
 
House_Harkonnen said:
Sure.

From the Council of Constance:
We have therefore come together with our venerable brothers, cardinals of the holy Roman church*, and our court to this city of Constance at the appointed time. Being present here by the grace of God, we now wish, with the advice of this sacred synod, to attend to the peace, exaltation and reform of the church and to the quiet of the christian people.
Click to expand...
“Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church” means that they are Cardinals of the Diocese of Rome. Not the Catholic Church. In this case “Holy Roman Church” means Diocese or Rome, or the “Church of Rome” (Just like I’m a member of the “Church of Philadelphia” or the “Philadelphian Church”).

The role of “Cardinal” only exists for the Diocese of Rome, to elect the Bishop of Rome (the Pope) and to advise the Bishop of Rome when required.

All other official duties individual are based on their have are due to the actual roles (i.e. Archbishop of an Archdiocese, Protodeacon of College of Cardinals, etc.) and/or being a Bishop (though there a couple who are pointed but not ordained Bishops).

Each Cardinal is assigned to a Church in the Diocese of Rome. Hence, each Cardinal is a clergy member of the Diocese of Rome.

For example: Cardinal Dolan (the Archbishop of New York) is the Cardinal-Priest of Nostra Signora di Guadalupe a Monte Mario. Nostra Signora di Guadalupe a Monte Mario (Church of Our Lady of Guadalupe a Monte Mario in English) is a Church is Rome.
gcatholic.org/churches/rome/067.htm

There is no such thing as “The Cardinal of New Yorker Church” or “Cardinal of the Church of New York.” That’s because there is no role for the title of Cardinal in any diocese other than Rome.

I hope this makes sense.

I hope this makes sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top