Posted on 07/29/2013 5:33:38 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
Thank you both for the kind words.
One sentence. Quoted from the catechism or the bible, from which it is derived
The church does not state that one must be catholic to be saved
Take it up with a clergyman
One quote a direct statement
Otherwise it’s all a lot of nonsense
Correct. What it "does" say is that "outside the Church (the Body of Christ)" there is no salvation.
I think the hypothetical case offered explains it well....a "not a Catholic" person dies. Said individual has done his or her best to "be a good person" during life. At death, Christ reveals THE TRUTH, and basically says "are you with me or against me".
Answer = yes......from that point, the soul "is" inside the Church, and thus saved, though probably will require a stint in Purgatory. Answer = no...go to Hell, go straight to hell, do not pass "GO".
Remember..."the Church" has three parts...the "Church on earth" (you and me), the "Church suffering" (souls saved but requiring purification in Purgatory), and the "Church Triumphant" (purified souls in Heaven).
The argument is not what is the interpretation of the Church position, but unless i admit that the Church is judgmental, ignorant and deserving of scorn the conversation will be open
My side of the argument is the request to have a direct quote stating the assertion that unless one is a Catholic (while alive, obviously), one cannot be saved
I guess i appreciate your attempt to assist, but ido not read theological arguments from a source whose credentials are not bona fide
Your argument will not win over those who are now invested in this debate, as you could see
They cannotproduce the sentence and i am not wasting effort trying to convice them
Yhe job is for they, who made the assertion, to simply produce the evidence
They cannot. So i am done with the debate
They’ll come up like the black knight its only a flesh wound but tgey will not win
But they will not read interpreted catholic interpretation
They spend much of tgeir lives arguing falsehoods catholics are not going to come out ahead in that activity
I never said it did. I was saying though, that the Church claims and has always claimed that outside the Church (the Body of Christ), there is no salvation.
It's only because you refuse to read what I posted that you still don't see that the infallible claim Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus does not necessarily mean one "must be Catholic while alive on Earth" to be saved.
But if you want to continue to resist a Catholic teaching (taught by Councils and Popes) just because it sounds like something it's not, to you, then I can't help you. Sheesh, I never thought I'd get such resistance to this from a fellow Catholic.
The last word is yours if you desperately need it.
Those who are interpreting "there is no salvation outside the Church" as "you gotta be Catholic to be saved" are also wrong (in the sense of having an incorrect view of the Church's position).
The "and currently identify as homosexuals" part is what needs careful defining. If you mean, "is currently disturbed by a strong cujrrent of homosexual appetite," the answer would be "no." That sort of person isn't fit for a pastoral role.
If you mean "currently identifies with the LGBT subculture or social movement or political advocacy groups," the answer would be "no." That person --- even if they are heterosexual!! --- is advocating things outside of Dvine and Natural Law. I would include "straight" academics or political figures who advocate for gay marriage and the like.
If you mean "currently still finds his spontaneous attractions tend toward men, but he does not cooperate with these attractions in thought, word or deed" --- well then, that's different. That's virtuous. That person can be fairly described as "conforming himself to Christ" --- and that's what the priesthood, indeed the Christian life, is all about.
It does not say one has to live life as a Catholic to have salvation. And that is the argument you are interfering with
It does not say it
In two days no one can come up with it and they can not
The original accusers are gone. Out of the argument
It’s over
The argument you intruded on stated that the church asserts that one must be a catholic in order to achieve salvation
The challenge is to prove it in one sentence, quoted from the bible, catechism or tradition
In two days no one could
Dream on if you think i’m going down some other rabbit hole. That’s not going to happen
LOL, well Jesus did face a hostile media of sorts. Remember the Pharisee’s asking Jesus if they should pay their taxes? They weren’t looking to publish a paper per se, but they were looking to trap him with a dishonest question. Jesus’ changed the narrative, and made it about doing right by God vs. his opinion. The Pope could probably follow this model, and say something to the effect of “we love all sinners, including me and you, regardless of the particular sin.... just like God does”
And also to you :)
And he will get better at it. The position he is in has few equals in media attention and scrutiny. If he’s just honest and well intentioned, that will come through.
This Christian thing isn’t complicated. Love God, understand that he saves you, its not your goodness or works, and Love your neighbor even when unlovable...because God loved you when you were. Its HARD to do, and we struggle with it, but its not complex. That is one of the reasons I like this Pope. I think he gets that its about pointing people to Jesus. I dont have a problem with the pomp and ceremony in a lot of Catholic things, its nice and reverent and I like those kind of things, but ultimately it needs to be for the sake of pointing to Christ.
Too bad I don't have room to put in the name of the person quoted: the all-purpose Thomas Jefferson.
Are you really so obtuse that you are unable to recognize when someone is basically agreeing with you? But the Church does say something which can be mis-interpreted as saying that. It is a simple case of the truth, recognizing the specific statement that the Church DOES make about salvation, and admitting that the Church does indeed make that statement.
The irony is I don’t think anyone actually reads newspapers anymore...heh heh heh. Take that NY Times!
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Nor do you.
The argument was for people to, when they mis interpret the Church teaching, to prove that what they are so positive about exists in Church teaching.
In this case they could not.
The argument is over.
I won the argument.
Life goes on.
Yup. Your imitation of it was well done and bong-worthy, D2 ;-)
That 'evasive babble' and circle-jerk is what we're fed and expected to swallow whole from these NWO Media Stooges. And as soon as someone begins to tell it like it is (Judge Napolitano, Beck), they're jettisoned. Of all of them, MSNBC is vy far the worst, but Bill "falafel " O'Reilly's Horsesh*t Zone especially tees me off.
Why thank you...
It's what happens on a minute by minute basis. Such as FOX, CNN, the local news BS and right here....All as a matter of routine.
You can always tell you're hitting the target by how pissed off, and evasive the bull cheeters get.
Your assertion that the Church does NOT say that one must be a practicing member of the RCC to obtain salvation is correct.
But that is not the whole story, and the whole truth requires acknowledging what the Church DOES say, and what that statement means.
Your "argument", by failing to tell the WHOLE truth is as misleading as those mistaken parties who are claiming that the RCC claims that one must be a practicing Catholic to be saved.
You "won" nothing, but proved yourself, at bottom, to be one who fails to tell the whole truth, but only that part of it that "fits your story".
I’m not looking for sple language.
One sentence
That’s it
It will be either from the catechism or rhe bible
One sentence
It’s not there
Give up
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.