Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Protestants aren't proper Christians, says Pope
Daily Mail ^ | 11th July 2007 | SIMON CALDWELL

Posted on 07/10/2007 6:55:28 PM PDT by indcons

Pope Benedict XVI declared yesterday that Christian denominations other than his own were not true churches and their holy orders have no value.

Protestant leaders immediately responded by saying the claims were offensive and would hurt efforts to promote ecumenism.

Roman Catholic- Anglican relations are already strained over the Church of England's plans to ordain homosexuals and women as bishops. The claims came in a document, from a Vatican watchdog which was approved by the Pope.

It said the branches of Christianity formed after the split with Rome at the Reformation could not be called churches "in the proper sense" because they broke with a succession of popes who dated back to St Peter.

As a result, it went on, Protestant churches have "no sacramental priesthood", effectively reaffirming the controversial Catholic position that Anglican holy orders are worthless.

The document claimed the Catholic church was the "one true church of Christ".

Pope Benedict's commitment to the hardline teaching comes days after he reinstated the Mass in Latin, which was sidelined in the 1960s in an attempt to modernise.

The timing of the announcement fuelled speculation that the pontiff - regarded as an arch-conservative before his election in 2005 - is finally beginning to impose his views on the Catholic Church.

The Vatican said it was restating the position set out by the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in 2000 in a document called Domine Jesus because theologians continued to misunderstand it.

At that time, Anglican leaders from around the world made their anger felt by snubbing an invitation to join Pope John Paul II as he proclaimed St Thomas More the patron saint of politicians.

Bishop Wolfgang Huber, head of the Evangelical Church in Germany, said the Vatican document effectively downgraded Protestant churches and would make ecumenical relations more difficult.

He said the pronouncement repeated the "offensive statements" of the 2000 document and was a "missed opportunity" to patch up relations with Protestants.


TOPICS: Catholic
KEYWORDS: catholics; pope; protestants; vatican
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 601-606 next last
To: pax_et_bonum
Pope Benedict XVI declared yesterday that Christian denominations other than his own were not true churches and their holy orders have no value.

Well, just wait until I'm Pope.

I'll be redefining a value or two for sure!

Right after I take the PopeMobile mudding at the river.

21 posted on 07/10/2007 7:14:39 PM PDT by humblegunner (Word up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sageb1
You understood perfectly. Unfortunately.

Actually, I don't think either one of you understood. My fault for not being clearer...

I don't feel that any one Christian religion is the only "proper" one...

22 posted on 07/10/2007 7:16:03 PM PDT by danneskjold
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: sageb1

Are you saying that Catholics have a lock on being self-righteous? If so, you are EXTREMELY ignorant.


23 posted on 07/10/2007 7:16:52 PM PDT by ItisaReligionofPeace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: danneskjold

I’m guessing you must have a big shortage of Southern Baptists down in LA.


24 posted on 07/10/2007 7:18:13 PM PDT by ItisaReligionofPeace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: indcons
I don’t know how I feel about such statements but I will say this: you’ll notice that protestants and catholics in Europe did not poor into the streets blowing up each other’s churches.
25 posted on 07/10/2007 7:20:18 PM PDT by SouthJrzReaganite18 ("Mental institution, Michael, something you outta think about." - Fred Thompson to Michael Moore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Argus
The Pope didn’t say anything about who’s going to Heaven and who isn’t.

And I didn't accuse the Pope of saying that either...

He simply said that the only legitimate apostolic succession rests with the Roman Catholic Church. And in that, he is stating the simple truth. You don’t even have to be Catholic, or believe that that matters, to acknowledge that.

If you're only referring to an unbroken line of bishops beginning with the original Apostles, ok, sure. However, I'm not sure how that causes a non-Catholic to be "improper"...

Sorry if that offends anybody, but it’s the fact.

Not offended...just don't agree...

26 posted on 07/10/2007 7:20:46 PM PDT by danneskjold
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye

Really? I had no idea the Pope lived in such luxury as you claim.

I think that living a life in the spotlight, under the constant threat of assassination, and of having every move watched is not exactly luxury.


27 posted on 07/10/2007 7:21:34 PM PDT by DTwistedSisterS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: indcons
Protestants aren't proper Christians, says Pope

OK

28 posted on 07/10/2007 7:22:47 PM PDT by markomalley (Extra ecclesiam nulla salus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ItisaReligionofPeace

I am a Catholic.


29 posted on 07/10/2007 7:23:46 PM PDT by sageb1 (This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ItisaReligionofPeace
I’m guessing you must have a big shortage of Southern Baptists down in LA.

:) Actually, they're quite prevelant. I was actually raised Southern Baptist, but that's not what I consider myself now. I honestly never heard any sermons from the pulpit about those "improper" Catholics.

I'm not saying there aren't old-schoolers that feel that their brand is the only way, but this is coming from the Pope for goodness sake...

30 posted on 07/10/2007 7:24:03 PM PDT by danneskjold
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Argus; danneskjold
He simply said that the only legitimate apostolic succession rests with the Roman Catholic Church.

Where in Scripture do we have a practice of Apostles directly appointing bishops of churches? I know that Paul writes of the qualities that an individual should have to be an elder, but the practice was for the congregation to select their elders and bishops. The monobishophoric hierarchy did not develop until after the end of the Apostolic era.

31 posted on 07/10/2007 7:30:37 PM PDT by wmfights (LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SouthJrzReaganite18; indcons
you’ll notice that protestants and catholics in Europe did not poor into the streets blowing up each other’s churches.

They sure did during the religious wars and the RCC has a long history of destruction when it had the power of the state behind it.

32 posted on 07/10/2007 7:34:35 PM PDT by wmfights (LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

Agreed. My point was that if the big claim of being a “proper” Christian lies with apostolic succession, then why?


33 posted on 07/10/2007 7:38:52 PM PDT by danneskjold
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: wmfights
The monobishophoric hierarchy did not develop until after the end of the Apostolic era.

Yeah, because that's when it began to be needed, once the first generation apostles started dying out. Thus, when Peter died he was succeeded by Linus, who was succeeded by Anacletus, who was succeeded by Clement, etc. This was coming into being before the writing of some of the latest New Testament scriptures and certainly before they were codified and declared Holy Scripture (by bishops).
34 posted on 07/10/2007 7:39:27 PM PDT by marsh_of_mists
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: danneskjold
My point was that if the big claim of being a “proper” Christian lies with apostolic succession, then why?

It never has. A "proper" Christian is a believer and follower of Jesus Christ, indwelt by the Holy Spirit, who knows they only path to salvation is through our Saviour Jesus Christ. No institution of man has that power and the theory of Apostolic succession is not supported by Scripture.

35 posted on 07/10/2007 7:45:32 PM PDT by wmfights (LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

Thank You...


36 posted on 07/10/2007 7:50:07 PM PDT by danneskjold
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: marsh_of_mists
...it began to be needed, once the first generation apostles started dying out.

It may have developed in response to external forces, but it was never mandated by Scripture. In fact in Scripture you see at the council in Jerusalem a congregational approach to resolving issues.

when Peter died he was succeeded by Linus, who was succeeded by Anacletus, who was succeeded by Clement, etc.

Your list has some gaps and problems with credibility. Also, you do not see in the generations following the Apostles the supernatural powers in these leaders that the Apostles had. Thus you may a lengthy historical lineage, but it is no direct pipe line to GOD.

This was coming into being before the writing of some of the latest New Testament scriptures and certainly before they were codified and declared Holy Scripture (by bishops).

The Scriptures were Holy whether one group of Christians recognized them or not.

37 posted on 07/10/2007 7:55:12 PM PDT by wmfights (LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: danneskjold
Thank You...

Your welcome Brother.

38 posted on 07/10/2007 7:56:56 PM PDT by wmfights (LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DTwistedSisterS

He wears the finest clothes, has the finest foods, lives in a palace with servants where his ever need is catered to and DOES NOT fear assassination....he has his own secret service.

What does he need? Nothing.

He is no more closely examined than any other powerful person who leads a semi public life.


39 posted on 07/10/2007 8:05:12 PM PDT by Eagle Eye (If you agee with Democrats you agree with America's enemies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: danneskjold

I guess Jesus is d@mned to burn in hell for eternity, according to the Catholics.

After all, he wasn’t Catholic... and didn’t believe in the trinity... or worship himself.

And if you don’t do that, then you’re ‘supposed’ to go to hell.

For only Catholic faith can get you into Heaven.

(rolls eyes)


40 posted on 07/10/2007 8:16:54 PM PDT by gogogodzilla (Republicans only win if they are conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 601-606 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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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