Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation??
Ask Father Murray Watson ^ | Father Murray

Posted on 01/02/2002 1:15:38 PM PST by Theresa

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 401-412 next last
To: SoothingDave
Why would Christ die for that? Pagan idol worshippers "follow their conscience." What poppycock.

What happens to pagan idol worshippers who do follow their conscience?

51 posted on 01/02/2002 4:09:49 PM PST by Jeff Gordon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GrandMoM
AMEN!
52 posted on 01/02/2002 4:10:34 PM PST by texson66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: AlGone2001
There is a big difference between loving your neighbor, and believing his lies.

I agree with you. That is why I referenced the versus immediately following it. I understand that Christ does not call it "The golden rule". I was only providing the reference to what "the world" typically refers to as the "golden rule" in the Bible. Perhaps I should just have placed a "bump" there but I wanted to include the warnings in the scripture that followed that verse. People tend to select only what they want to hear.

53 posted on 01/02/2002 4:10:35 PM PST by Down South P.E.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: rface
...salvation is found through Christ, NOT by deeds.

Bummer. It is sad to think of Ghandi burning in hell.

54 posted on 01/02/2002 4:15:31 PM PST by Jeff Gordon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gordon
If you like to gamble, place your bet. But weigh the consequences on what you know(and maybe study a little more on the subject) before you place it.
55 posted on 01/02/2002 4:15:33 PM PST by Down South P.E.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
Don't believe it. Those who stay outside of the Catholic Church due to an INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE of the Church's necessity to salvation MAY be saved.

I was wondering how long it'd take. 12 posts. Yup. Think that's a new record.

Gotta love the absolute arrogance of some Catholics. Methinks this is God's sense of humor at work.

56 posted on 01/02/2002 4:16:42 PM PST by usconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Theresa
From reading this article the author would have us believe that Roman Catholic dogma doesn't teach that one must be Roman Catholic to be saved. What does their actual dogma say? Read carefully these documents from past until present (Vatican II):

Pope Boniface VIII (1302 A.D.):
So, when the Greeks and others say that they were not committed to the care of Peter and his successors, they must confess that they are not of Christ’s sheep, even as the Lord says in John, ‘There is one fold and one shepherd’... Furthermore, that every human creature is subject to the Roman pontiff,—this we declare, say, define, and pronounce to be altogether necessary to salvation (From the Bull Unam Sanctam).

The Council of Florence:
The sacrosanct Roman Church...firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart ‘into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels’ (Matt. 25:41), unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, and almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church (44Henry Denzinger, The Sources of Catholic Dogma (London: Herder, 1954), p. 230, #714).

Pope Innocent III (1198-1216 A.D.):
By the heart we believe and by the mouth we confess the one Church, not of heretics but the Holy Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic (Church) outside which we believe that no one is saved (From the letter Eius exemplo. Found in Denzinger, p. 166, #423).

Pope Clement VI (1342-1352 A.D.):
No man of the wayfarers outside the faith of this Church, and outside the obedience of the Pope of Rome, can finally be saved (From the letter Super quibusdum. Found in Denzinger, p. 204, #570b).

Pius IX (1846-1878 A.D.):
For, it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood; but, on the other hand, it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, are not stained by any guilt in this matter in the eyes of God...But the Catholic dogma that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church is well- known; and also that those who are obstinate toward the authority and definitions of the same Church, and who persistently separate themselves from the unity of the Church, and from the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, to whom ‘the guardianship of the vine has been entrusted by the Savior,’ cannot obtain eternal salvation (From the Allocution, Singulari quadem. Found in Denzinger, pp. 416, 425; #1647, 1677).

The Council of Trent
Seventh Session: Decree Concerning the Sacraments
For the completion of the salutary doctrine on Justification...it hath seemed suitable to treat of the most holy Sacraments of the Church, through which all true justice either begins, or being begun is increased, or being lost is repaired. After this Catholic doctrine on justification, which whosoever does not faithfully and firmly accept cannot be justified.

Canon I: If anyone saith, that the sacraments of the New Law were not all instituted by Jesus Christ, our Lord; or that they are more, or less, than seven, namely, Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Order and Matrimony; or that any of these seven is not truly and properly a sacrament: let him be anathema.

Canon IV: If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification; - though all (the sacraments) are not necessary for every individual: let him be anathema.

Canon VIII: If any one saith, that by the said sacraments of the New Law grace is not conferred through the act performed, but that faith alone in the divine promise suffices for the obtaining of grace: let him be anathema (The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, in Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1919 ed.), pp. 118-121).

Vatican I:
Further, all those things are to be believed with divine and Catholic faith which are contained in the Word of God, written or handed down, and which the Church, either by a solemn judgment, or by her ordinary and universal magisterium, proposes for belief as having been divinely revealed. And since, without faith, it is impossible to please God, and to attain to the fellowship of his children, therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will any one obtain eternal life unless he shall have persevered in faith unto the end...The first condition of salvation is to keep the rule of the true faith.
If any one, therefore, shall say that blessed Peter the Apostle was not appointed the Prince of all the Apostles and the visible Head of the whole Church militant; or that the same directly and immediately received from the same our Lord Jesus Christ a primacy of honor only, and not of true and proper jurisdiction: let him be anathema.

If, then, any should deny that it is by institution of Christ the Lord, or by divine right, that blessed Peter should have a perpetual line of successors in the Primacy over the universal Church, or that the Roman Pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy: let him be anathema.

We teach and define that it is a dogma divinely revealed: that the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra, that is, when in discharge of the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith and morals to be held by the universal Church, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, is possessed of that infallibility with which the divine redeemer willed that his Church should be endowed for defining doctrine regarding faith or morals; and that therefore such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church.But if any one—which may God avert—presume to contradict this our definition: let him be anathema.
This is the teaching of Catholic truth, from which no one can deviate without loss of faith and salvation (Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom (New York: Harper, 1877), Dogmatic Decrees of the Vatican Council, On Faith, Chapter III; Chp. 4, pp. 266-71).

Vatican II:
This sacred Synod turns its attention first to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon sacred Scripture and tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. For Christ, made present to us in His body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique Way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk 16:16; Jn. 3:5) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by God through Jesus Christ, would refuse to enter her or to remain in her could not be saved.

The mission of the Church concerns the salvation of men, which is to be achieved by belief in Christ and by His grace. Hence the apostolate of the Church and of all her members is primarily designed to manifest Christ’s message by words and deeds and to communicate His grace to the world. This work is done mainly through the ministry of the Word and of the sacraments, which are entrusted in a special way to the clergy (The Documents of Vatican II (Chicago: Follett, 1966), Walter M. Abbott, S.J., General Editor.

So I ask, do we believe what they say (or write) or what they teach and hold as true?

57 posted on 01/02/2002 4:32:57 PM PST by Iowegian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bookwurm
Can you explain why Paul wrote Romans 2:14-16? Is that not for the ones who have not heard the Gospel? Does not Paul say "for when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, on the day when according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus."
58 posted on 01/02/2002 4:34:11 PM PST by constitutiongirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Pablo64
"Those Roman Catholics are wrong. I don't think it is true, however. My mother and father are both very devout RC's and I know that they don't believe that devout Muslims are saved. Muslims do not believe in salvation through Jesus Christ (who by His death paid the penalty for our sins that we could never pay) so to believe that they are saved by being devout Muslims is wrong doctrine."

I guess this is an area where "devout RC's" aren't always in agreement! I imagine most of us would accept Mother Teresa as a devout Roman Catholic. Here's what she says about the conversion experience:

"What we are all trying to do by our work, by serving the people, is to come closer to God. If in coming face to face with God we accept Him in our lives, then we are converting. We become a better Hindu, a better Muslim, a better Catholic, a better whatever we are, and then by being better we come closer and closer to Him. If we accept Him fully in our lives, then that is conversion. What approach would I use? For me, naturally, it would be a Catholic one, for you it may be Hindu, for someone else, Buddhist, according to one's conscience. What God is in your mind you must accept." [Desmond Doig, "Mother Teresa: Her People and Her Work."]

59 posted on 01/02/2002 5:39:20 PM PST by ikurrina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Pablo64
"Those Roman Catholics are wrong. I don't think it is true, however. My mother and father are both very devout RC's and I know that they don't believe that devout Muslims are saved. Muslims do not believe in salvation through Jesus Christ (who by His death paid the penalty for our sins that we could never pay) so to believe that they are saved by being devout Muslims is wrong doctrine."

I guess this is an area where "devout RC's" aren't always in agreement! I imagine most of us would accept Mother Teresa as a devout Roman Catholic. Here's what she says about the conversion experience:

"What we are all trying to do by our work, by serving the people, is to come closer to God. If in coming face to face with God we accept Him in our lives, then we are converting. We become a better Hindu, a better Muslim, a better Catholic, a better whatever we are, and then by being better we come closer and closer to Him. If we accept Him fully in our lives, then that is conversion. What approach would I use? For me, naturally, it would be a Catholic one, for you it may be Hindu, for someone else, Buddhist, according to one's conscience. What God is in your mind you must accept." [Desmond Doig, "Mother Teresa: Her People and Her Work."]

60 posted on 01/02/2002 5:40:22 PM PST by ikurrina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Rum Tum Tugger
which will lead people to God if they attempt to follow their conscience faithfully.

That bit can't be right. Some consciences are twisted. Maybe Hitler thought sincerely he was doing right as he saw the right.

61 posted on 01/02/2002 5:50:34 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ikurrina
Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

I've read the quote from Mother Theresa (who's work I respect very much...I have a cousin who was adopted from one of the orphanages that Mother Theresa helped run), but the problem that opens for me is that it is more of the "all roads lead to God" theology that I can not accept.

Aside from being a doctrine heavily promoted by New Age philosophy, it flies in the face of simple logic. If it was not necessary for Jesus to die for our sins, then why would He have put Himself through all that. I mean, why step down from His rightful place of glory, humble Himself by becoming a man (as scripture teaches us) and then allow Himself to suffer and be put to a cruel death by the very ones He created? If "all roads lead to heaven" then God didn't need to do any of that....we could all just find our own way, or at least some way that didn't involve Jesus going to the cross for us.

Jesus said "I am the way [not just one way], the truth [not a version of truth] and the light [not one among many]".

This does not in any way discount the wonderful works of charity and kindness that Mother Theresa and thousands like her over the ages have done in God's name. The Bible tells us that if we have true faith we will also have good works (the one is a natural outpouring of the other), but it is also very clear that salvation is by faith alone.

Peace.

62 posted on 01/02/2002 6:34:37 PM PST by Pablo64
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents ; Theresa
The institutional and earthly manifestation of the Church is only valid to the extent that it is true to the Spirit of Christ and the mystical/spiritual/invisible dimension of the "Mystical Body." Hence, a lot of institutional Christianity (of all denominations) is false and a form of pride or pharisaic charlatanism. Unfortunately, AmChurch offers a good deal of this infidelity.
63 posted on 01/02/2002 6:43:00 PM PST by HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Theresa
To engage in this discussion, one must acknowledge the necessity of "salvation".

The concept of an "original" sin having been committed must also be acknowledged to participate in the discussion.

If neither is acknowledged, comments by churches and antiquity translations are meaningless.

What has one to say if they do not accept the original guilt trip?

64 posted on 01/02/2002 6:46:50 PM PST by leadhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
Father Murray, whoever he might be, should examine the document of the Church from last year Dominus Iesus is he needs help defining the Church. Suffice it to say that the Church in this phrase is none other than the Catholic one, the only one.

So, Dave are you saying here that you have to be a member of the Catholic (captiol C) Church to gain salvation?

Becky

65 posted on 01/02/2002 6:53:04 PM PST by PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rface
The author is so right - the "church" is not a denomination, but a condition of the heart. For those who have received Jesus as Savior and Lord, they have become a member of "the church".

The Mormons also make a statement, "we are the one true church". Which is a bunch of poppy-cock.

The true "church" consists of true believers; be they Methodists, Catholics, Presbyterians, Lutherans, and even us Fundamentalists, etc.

66 posted on 01/02/2002 7:05:50 PM PST by Sueann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kitkat; Theresa; rface; k2blader; SoothingDave; AAABEST; bookwurm
HERE
67 posted on 01/02/2002 7:06:20 PM PST by Matchett-PI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DallasDeb
Roman Catholics believe devout Muslims are saved.

---

Not necessarily. RCs believe that it's possible for devout Muslims to be saved by Christ. But it hinges on many caveats -- it presupposes the fact that such a devout Muslim never heard the Gospel, never was exposed to Christianity. A Muslim is accountable for informing his conscience to the best of his ability, and if he were exposed to the truth of the Gospel and did not further investigate, then he would be culpable for his own ignorance in that case. However, there would be mitigating circumstances -- was he briefly exposed? had he been brainwashed into thinking Christianity was evil? etc. These types of things could be considered extenuating circumstances.

However, the point is, it's no simple "Follow your conscience, and you're in." That attitude belies a presumption of God's mercy, and is a grave sin in itself. I think the better way of phrasing it is that "Salvation is possible outside formal membership within Christianity."

68 posted on 01/02/2002 7:31:09 PM PST by Proud2BAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gordon
What happens to pagan idol worshippers who do follow their conscience?

That depends on whether they have participated in the proper formation of an informed conscience to the best of their abilities (i.e. - if they were part of a child sacrificing cult, and they had a nagging sense that something was wrong with throwing children to the pits of flames and spikes, that they took the necessary steps, no matter how dangerous, to figure out if this was right).

69 posted on 01/02/2002 7:39:18 PM PST by Proud2BAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Theresa
You should not be so smug. What if you had been born a Hindu? What if all your ancestors for centuries were Hindu and you loved them and respected them. What if the ties that bound you to them and to your land and culture were intertwined with Hinduism? Are you so smug as to think that just hearing the gospel once or twice could overcome all that conditioning?

It is not "smug" to believe that God can overcome any obstacles to belief in Jesus Christ, including Hinduism, Islam, or any other false religions.

The arm of the Lord is never too short to save those He has chosen as His own...

-penny

70 posted on 01/02/2002 7:50:46 PM PST by Penny1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Proud2BAmerican
Are you saying that if they honestly and totally believed that child sacrifices were holy in the eyes of their god, they would be saved?

This, of course, is very hypothetical. A sane man anywhere in today's world would have to have a sense of wrongness about child sacrifices.

71 posted on 01/02/2002 10:09:34 PM PST by Jeff Gordon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Iowegian
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by God through Jesus Christ, would refuse to enter her or to remain in her could not be saved.

There is a lot of wiggle room in this statement created by the word knowing. Certainly if one was never exposed to the RC teachings, one could not know. If were exposed (as might be the case for a Muslim) they may still not know in the sense that they do not believe.

Does this Vatican II fuzzy statement supercede the previous black and white statements?

72 posted on 01/02/2002 10:26:10 PM PST by Jeff Gordon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Theresa
A lot of Christians from different denominations -- Catholic, Prostestant, Orthodox -- believe that outside their church, you're probably not really 'saved'. This exclusivity seems to be human nature. I'm sure God can handle it.
73 posted on 01/02/2002 10:47:06 PM PST by WaterDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gordon
Are you saying that if they honestly and totally believed that child sacrifices were holy in the eyes of their god, they would be saved?

This, of course, is very hypothetical. A sane man anywhere in today's world would have to have a sense of wrongness about child sacrifices.

At this point in the hypothetical, I fear we would be forced to make too great an assumption. You either assume that the person has *no* moral qualms within his consciousness whatsoever about sacrificing children, or assume that he *does* have some sort or presence of internal convulsion, either great or small, that suggests the act is wrong. I think that someone of the Judeo-Christian fold would tend toward assuming that in all humanity there is the law of God imprinted upon the soul that, at the least, would send off at least some sort of internal moral incongruity in sacrificing a child, at some level in the individual.

However, that said, I would just back up to the general statement that the Catholic position regards a person's willingness to not only follow their conscience, but also suitably inform that conscience to the best of their abilities. This becomes a subjective matter that is left up to God to determine (that is, how culpable a person is with regard to their own participation in the formation of conscience). Discussing this relative to a child-sacrificing pagan seems to be a moot point since we'd be trying to do it in a vacuum. All a Catholic could say with regard to that individual's salvation would be that it would be possible for God to save the person.

74 posted on 01/02/2002 10:48:49 PM PST by Proud2BAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
bump
75 posted on 01/02/2002 10:53:37 PM PST by homeschool mama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Iowegian;PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
For, it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation (Pius IX (1846-1878 A.D.)

When the voice of the Pope speaks on matters of morality, salvation and Church Doctrine the truth of those pronouncements is infallible; unarguable and absolute.

It is actually the voice of God speaking through the Pope.

When Becky asks SoothingDave "are you saying here that you have to be a member of the Catholic (captiol C) Church to gain salvation?" his answer must be a resounding "YES!"

Iowegian has presented an unimpeachable set of historical Papal pronouncements that makes this basic article of Catholic faith abundantly clear.

There is no interpretive argument possible here on such a fundamental point of Catholic Doctrine.

76 posted on 01/02/2002 11:09:41 PM PST by henbane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
Bravo!
77 posted on 01/02/2002 11:13:58 PM PST by Humidston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Proud2BAmerican
You all have made me curious about this subject. I did a web search. I found a site which claims to give the answer to this question. The summation says

Salvation is a matter of how we respond to the truth we are given in life. Only for those who have encountered the fullness of truth in Christ is a formal proclamation of belief in Christ necessary.

The web site is located at http://www.cc.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/a/salvation.html

78 posted on 01/02/2002 11:36:21 PM PST by Jeff Gordon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Iowegian
Canon IV: If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification; - though all (the sacraments) are not necessary for every individual: let him be anathema.

Amazing! I bookmarked this bad boy.

79 posted on 01/03/2002 2:23:05 AM PST by AlGone2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Iowegian
If any one saith, that by the said sacraments of the New Law grace is not conferred through the act performed

Grace is an act? I'm sure that we've been told that grace and works were not the same. Grace is a gift. Since when did we earn a gift?

The Greek word for gift is charis. It is also used for grace. I go to work for a paycheck, not a gift.

I am saved through grace, and not by my own actions.

80 posted on 01/03/2002 2:27:33 AM PST by AlGone2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: AlGone2001
Grace is an act?

According to Rome it is.

81 posted on 01/03/2002 2:31:32 AM PST by Iowegian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Iowegian
Your post in 57 made its way to my desktop. That is information that I'd never seen. I am in total shock. I've noticed that there aren't many defending these writings.
82 posted on 01/03/2002 2:37:17 AM PST by AlGone2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
FYI
83 posted on 01/03/2002 2:43:41 AM PST by Iowegian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlGone2001
I am in total shock. I've noticed that there aren't many defending these writings.

Yes they are rather startlingly frank words which don't jive at all with what the average RC says they believe about all those who don't follow their ways to the letter, including their version of the sacraments and being subject to the Pope. But SD will be on here soon giving you his usual spin on "development of doctrine".

84 posted on 01/03/2002 2:50:07 AM PST by Iowegian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Theresa
"Why would Christ die for that? Pagan idol worshippers "follow their conscience." What poppycock. "

You should not be so smug. What if you had been born a Hindu? What if all your ancestors for centuries were Hindu and you loved them and respected them. What if the ties that bound you to them and to your land and culture were intertwined with Hinduism? Are you so smug as to think that just hearing the gospel once or twice could overcome all that conditioning?

Please see my post #12 and meditate on the words I have capitalized and bolded. "Invincible Ignorance" means something, and you have just given a good example of such. "May" also means something, it is not an assurance. God will ultimately be the judge of everyone's culpability (i.e. guilt) of how they responded to His Gospel. Those with a cultural conditioning or bias against Christ or against the Catholic Church may be excused.

SD

85 posted on 01/03/2002 5:14:40 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: k2blader
Hm, just for clarification, are you saying that the Catholic church is the "only Church" ?

There is only one Church, the Catholic one. All other Chrstians have at some point deviated from Her.

That I, as a Baptist, am not part of the "only Church" and thus am not saved ?

This I did not say. All Christians, by virtue of their Baptism, are joined together to the one Church. Your culpability for remaining outside of the Church's official boundaries and teachings is for God to determine.

SD

86 posted on 01/03/2002 5:18:27 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
So, Dave are you saying here that you have to be a member of the Catholic (captiol C) Church to gain salvation?

Becky, you know darn well that I believe all Christians are "attached" to this one Church and that I have great faith in God's mercy for those who can not see the necessity of the Church.

SD

87 posted on 01/03/2002 5:20:30 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gordon
Are you saying that if they honestly and totally believed that child sacrifices were holy in the eyes of their god, they would be saved?

One would think not, that this act would offend the Law God wrote on our hearts. But it is not ours to judge.

This, of course, is very hypothetical. A sane man anywhere in today's world would have to have a sense of wrongness about child sacrifices.

You obviously haven't heard of "abortion."

SD

88 posted on 01/03/2002 5:22:04 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: henbane
When Becky asks SoothingDave "are you saying here that you have to be a member of the Catholic (captiol C) Church to gain salvation?" his answer must be a resounding "YES!"

Iowegian has presented an unimpeachable set of historical Papal pronouncements that makes this basic article of Catholic faith abundantly clear.

There is no interpretive argument possible here on such a fundamental point of Catholic Doctrine.

You don't know me very well, do you?

SD

89 posted on 01/03/2002 5:23:28 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: AlGone2001
If any one saith, that by the said sacraments of the New Law grace is not conferred through the act performed

Grace is an act?

Try reading for comprehension. Grace is "conferred through the act." Do you think that there are people inside of your radio talking, or do you realize that the voices are conferred through a process of transmission and reception? If you don't turn the radio on, you don't get the message. Does this mean that your act of turning it on makes the entire process happen?

I'm sure that we've been told that grace and works were not the same. Grace is a gift. Since when did we earn a gift?

Since when did I "earn" grace through a sacrament? It is freely given. I obtain grace from God by asking for it. So do you. I ask and receive through the signs Jesus gave us. You ask through prayer. We are both "acting" when we receive grace.

SD

90 posted on 01/03/2002 5:28:41 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
Dave I am so confused. I could swear you and all the catholics have been saying over and over on the Neverending Story that this claim of no salvation outside the catholic church was something the church did NOT teach. So whats the truth, does the RCC teach that or not? Yes or no?

Becky

91 posted on 01/03/2002 5:30:21 AM PST by PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
Becky, you know darn well that I believe all Christians are "attached" to this one Church and that I have great faith in God's mercy for those who can not see the necessity of the Church.

NO I DID NOT KNOW THIS. This seems to me a diliberate twisting of words you all have spoken on the other thread. You all never put it this way. You just told me I was a liar because I said I was taught this very thing. Now you are twisting here for this article to make it fit.

Becky

92 posted on 01/03/2002 5:35:20 AM PST by PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: AAABEST;theresa
I'm starting to worry that they saw a picture of the Pope over the holidays and all of their heads exploded.

what a charming Christian thought (sarcasm)

93 posted on 01/03/2002 5:41:26 AM PST by Revelation 911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: k2blader;soothingdave
That I, as a Baptist, am not part of the "only Church" and thus am not saved ?

until Baptists begin speaking mass in latin, accept the pope as a vicar of Christ, and worship the mortal mother of Christ as a co-redeemer, I'm afraid so (sarcasm)

94 posted on 01/03/2002 5:50:37 AM PST by Revelation 911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
Dave I am so confused. I could swear you and all the catholics have been saying over and over on the Neverending Story that this claim of no salvation outside the catholic church was something the church did NOT teach. So whats the truth, does the RCC teach that or not? Yes or no?

It is true, but the meaning is not as "black and white" as the Feeneyites or a plain reading of such would imply.

There is only one Way that we are joined together as the Body of Christ - through the One Church. Salvation comes into the world in the person of Jesus, and He established one Church to bring His Salvation to the world. The Church is necessary, for She is the principal instrument through which God's grace enters the world.

Everyone should then, to assure their salvation, be a formal member of this Church and profess what She professes. However, we make allowances for God to have mercy on those, who for reasons beyond their control, do not formally join the Catholic Church.

That's it. Those not formally part of the Catholic Church who are not culpable for this fact can be saved anyway. But this salvation is only possible because these people will be, in some mystical way, "inside" of the Church.

SD

95 posted on 01/03/2002 5:58:12 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
NO I DID NOT KNOW THIS. This seems to me a diliberate twisting of words you all have spoken on the other thread. You all never put it this way.

Then I am sorry. What do you think Steven's little inside joke name change is all about? Because the only way that I can consider him to be a brother Christian is if I consider him "invincibly ignorant."

You just told me I was a liar because I said I was taught this very thing. Now you are twisting here for this article to make it fit.

I don't recall this subject being discussed over there, but if it was I assure you I am not lying here or there. Before Vatican II, we took a dim view of Protestants and their culpability for being such. Now we have a more accepting view.

SD

96 posted on 01/03/2002 6:02:43 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Revelation 911
until Baptists begin speaking mass in latin, accept the pope as a vicar of Christ, and worship the mortal mother of Christ as a co-redeemer, I'm afraid so (sarcasm)

Do you really want me to respond to this? Let's start with simple, human decency. Both "Latin" and "Pope" are proper nouns that are capitalized in the English (there it is again) language. We know you can use the shift key, cause you managed to capitalize "Baptist." We understand Protestants don't follow the Pope, nor do you follow the Queen of England. Or would you needlessly offend the British by writing that "queen of england?"

SD

97 posted on 01/03/2002 6:06:00 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Theresa
Biblically there are three ways to get to heaven (be saved)

The first is to obey your conscience. (I'll dig up the scriptures later if anyone wants them. I believe this is in Romans) Of course the moment you violate your conscience you are doomed to hell. There is no way to atone for a broken conscience.

The second way is to follow the LAW completely. (Genesis through Deuteronomy) Of course the Hebrews found this impossible even in a simpler time with far greater influence by the religious leaders. Here breaking the law can be atoned for by sacrifice but the slightest, un-atoned infraction sends you to hell

The third way (and only one that really works) is through faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and His atoning sacrifice. Here sin is already atoned for.

Notice that the concept of 'church' never enters into salvation as defined by the bible. Salvation is between you and God. While the bible does command us to fellowship with other believers this fellowship is NOT required to be saved.

There is no salvation in the Catholic Church. There is no salvation in the Baptist Church. There is no salvation in any church. THERE IS ONLY SALVATION IN THE SHED BLOOD OF JESUS CHRIST!

God Save America (Please)

98 posted on 01/03/2002 6:06:12 AM PST by John O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bookwurm
Sometimes, people become debased or degenerate and so their consciences are no longer attuned. But in their OWN mind, they think they are on track.

I disagree. One of the fundamental tenets of the Christian faith as defined by scripture is that we are totally depraved, that is that we (all humans) are degenerate from our birth, it is the work of the Holy Spirit to regenerate us, we don't become degenerate, we become regenerate. There is no "sometimes" about it.

99 posted on 01/03/2002 6:17:37 AM PST by P8riot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DallasDeb
Roman Catholics believe devout Muslims are saved.

On what basis do you believe this, especially when Christ himself says that "no one comes to the Father but by me".

100 posted on 01/03/2002 6:25:46 AM PST by P8riot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 401-412 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson