Whoa there.......Pontiff

[ByHisGrace]

Oops cross post!

[SamSeeks]

Just as a point of curiosity, has anyone here actually read the various documents in question? Or are you responding instead to news reports and essays about the document?

If the second, are you generally in the habit of taking mainstream media reports about religious issues at full faith?

The reason I ask is that most of the comments here, and in the essay of the OP, do not comport very well with what the various documents actually said.

Sam

[RachelsDream]

SamSeeks....fact is fact.

Why do RCC members worry so much about defending the Pope, and Born Again Christians worry so much about defending God's Word? Think about it.

[Kliska]

If the second, are you generally in the habit of taking mainstream media reports about religious issues at full faith?

Here's the link for this particular document, for everyone, with references: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070629_responsa-quaestiones_en.html

The reason I ask is that most of the comments here, and in the essay of the OP, do not comport very well with what the various documents actually said.

There was a claim upthread that the pope calls/declares himself as head of the one True Church.

This statement is backed up by this, from the document: "Christ “established here on earth” only one Church and instituted it as a “visible and spiritual community”, that from its beginning and throughout the centuries has always existed and will always exist, and in which alone are found all the elements that Christ himself instituted. “This one Church of Christ, which we confess in the Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic […]. This Church, constituted and organised in this world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him”.

More: The use of this expression, which indicates the full identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church, does not change the doctrine on the Church. Rather, it comes from and brings out more clearly the fact that there are “numerous elements of sanctification and of truth” which are found outside her structure, but which “as gifts properly belonging to the Church of Christ, impel towards Catholic Unity”.

We of course believe Christ is the head of His Church, and the Holy Spirit is our guide here on earth.

“It follows that these separated churches and Communities, though we believe they suffer from defects, are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation. In fact the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation, whose value derives from that fullness of grace and of truth which has been entrusted to the Catholic Church”.

What interests me here, is an apparent contradiction. We offer salvation via Christ. We are not part of the Roman church. Yet, the RC claims the salvation brought to thousands through those outside their church, as their own. Rather, the glory goes straight to God, not the Roman church.

Question: Why do the texts of the Council and those of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of “Church” with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?

RESPONSE

According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called “Churches” in the proper sense.

So, our main probs, to the Roman church are basically two-fold. We don't have "apostolic succession" according them; therefore we don't have the Eucharist. Of course, to us, the Roman idea of apostolic succession is not biblical, neither is transubstantiation.

Those who say this has been Roman teaching for a while now are right; this is basic Roman doctrine.

[Berean Girl]

But take action as well people...

Send them to two excellent websites which are outreaches to catholics caught up in unbiblical religion and bondage:

1. Mike Gendron of Proclaiming the Gospel Ministries
www.pro-gospel.org

Mike is a former roman catholic who is now a born-again evangelist and apologist to catholics still caught up in this religion.

2. Richard Bennett of The Berean Beacon Ministries
www.bereanbeacon.org

Richard is a former roman catholic priest who is now a born-again evangelist and apologist to catholics still caught up in this religion.

3. Roger Oakland of Understand The Times
www.understandthetimes.org

Roger is a great apologist for Biblical faith vs. roman catholicism.

[Hope]

Hi Ladies, I don't intend to get caught up into a debate on this issue, mainly because I enjoy chatting with you on different "non-Catholic" threads, but I just wanted to point out that the Pope's statements or thoughts in this matter are no different from the Church's position in previous centuries. As a matter of fact, comparing Pope Benedict to St. Augustine would render Pope Benedict a "teddy bear" in comparison.

You can see from the rather strong language of this quote that those groups who cut themselves off from the Church, were deemed heretics and schismatics many MANY years ago. Autonomous churches such as we have today, would be deemed heretical at worst, and schizmatic at best by Augustine in 400 A.D.

Here is Augustine:

"Inasmuch, I repeat, as this is the case, we believe also in THE HOLY CHURCH, [intending thereby] assuredly the CATHOLIC. For both heretics and schismatics style their congregations churches. But heretics, in holding false opinions regarding God, do injury to the faith itself; while schismatics, on the other hand, in wicked separations break off from brotherly charity, although they may believe just what we believe. Wherefore neither do the heretics belong to the Church catholic, which loves God; nor do the schismatics form a part of the same ..." Augustine,On Faith and Creed,10:21(A.D. 393),in NPNF1,III:331

For more from Augustine concerning the nature and identification of the Church, go here http://www.cin.org/users/jgallegos/catholic.htm

Now Pope Benedict has not called non-Catholic churches or groups heretics, or schismatics, but as a matter of fact, views non-Catholic groups to be advantageous to leading people to Christ. I might also add the Church views trinitarian baptisms in non-Catholic churches valid baptisms.

Also, one of the writers above mentions several websites in which Catholics can go to view the testimony of their conversions to Protestantism. I could do the same thing. There are notable evangelicals who have crossed over to catholocism as well.

Blessings,

Hope

BTW, someone above made mention of the fact that Catholics must defend the Pope while protestants must defend the Bible. This thread is concerning the Pope, so naturally that is what is being defended here. I might hasten to add the Bible has lead many a protestant back home to the RCC. I have read many of their testimonies and had similar experiences in my own conversion. It could be safe to say that "the Bible made me do it."

Blessings!

[Berean Girl]

A discourse by Pastor John MacArthur:

http://www.takeheed.co.uk/ftjmrc.ram

A discourse By Pastor David Legge on cults and non-Christian religions:

http://www.takeheed.net/DavidLeggetalks.htm

Evanglizing Catholics

http://www.come.to/takeheedministries/ceciltalkrally.rm

The Papacy

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/davidmcallister/CecilAndrews.rm

[RachelsDream]

But take action as well people...

Send them to two excellent websites which are outreaches to catholics caught up in unbiblical religion and bondage:

1. Mike Gendron of Proclaiming the Gospel Ministries
www.pro-gospel.org

Mike is a former roman catholic who is now a born-again evangelist and apologist to catholics still caught up in this religion.

2. Richard Bennett of The Berean Beacon Ministries
www.bereanbeacon.org

Richard is a former roman catholic priest who is now a born-again evangelist and apologist to catholics still caught up in this religion.

3. Roger Oakland of Understand The Times
www.understandthetimes.org

Roger is a great apologist for Biblical faith vs. roman catholicism.





Great post.....I will look the above up for my family members. And you are right...they need more then prayers.....(Prayers are awesome, but they need our help before it is too late) I know time is short.....and it is time to worship the ONE true Living God rather than worship doctrines of an Institution or Man.

Thank you so much.....might use some of what I find in the letters I will send out to them regarding Salvation. Thank you again! :hug

[JoelH]

Ironically as a Bible-believing Christian, I think it is good for Benedict XVI to give this pronouncement. This shows that

1. The Catholic church is not compromising on its core doctrines and trying to join in ecumenical kumbaya;

2. I can respect and disagree with someone who holds to that organization's traditional/agreed doctrinal stance.

Mind you, it is always the orthodox Catholic belief that us Proddies "are very likely to be heading straight to hell". There is no more muddling of "liberal Catholics" (the Catholic side does not distinguish between the Catholics who listened to the Holy Spirit who led them to a whole world of inspiration and Jesus and those who preach universalism: they are both considered liberals within the Catholic church)

Good for the pope to give this pronouncement.


Joel

[Hope]

Thanks Joel, I agree with you. If we must disagree, let us do so with integrity. They say this Pope's pet peeve is "relativism," and he has written some very good things along this line. Everything has gotten relative in Christendom, and whether you are Catholic or protestant, relativism is a deceptor dressed up in terms like "political correctness" or "intolerance". You know the drill, I'm sure.

Pax Christi!

Hope