Posted on 07/15/2002 7:41:40 PM PDT by american colleen
And as you correctly saw, it's not so different from Protestants who believe only Christians (but not necessarily Catholics :-)) can be saved.
To me it's important but not to get hung up about. After all, we are not God and can never know the mind of God in each specific case.
However, it does make me wonder of our responsibilities to evangelize. It's scary to think how we will be judged. We always need to stand up for Jesus and His Church at the very least.
From what I know about Cdnl. Kaspar and Martini, it was probably they Our Lady of LaSalette was referreing to when she said Rome would lose the faith. However, I did se
15"If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.' 17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. 18"I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. 19"Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. 20For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them."
Jesus is talking about the authority of the church in exactly the same passage.
You can trot out the same tired old arguments that the word "church" does not mean "Catholic church," but that's just what they are: tired, old arguments. He was certainly talking about some church.
He who is not with me is against me.
For he that is not against us is for us.
At once this may seem to present a paradox. But for sure, it does not. Jesus knew well the extremisms that existed in his days. The Pharisees and Saducees who were extremist rigorists and the lapsed Jews who were comparable to our modernists. Jesus was basically telling his disciples that extremism was not of the Gospel.
I'm not sure what saint said it (Aquinas maybe), that extremism was a vice that corrupted the virtues of prudence, patience, humility and love!
I enjoyed this essay too, american colleen. Thanks so much for posting it.
The decision by Cardinal Egan not to grant a funeral mass for John Gotti.John Gotti lived in Queens (when he wasn't in jail), which is Bishop Daley's diocese, not Cardinal Egan's.
Zviadist, unless he's been banned.
His last post was four days ago. He's still around.
Thr chruch compromised things that I thought were solid docrtrine ,,,,,,,but the also losened up some of the litergical ritual so that it could be more culturally revelant.
I played in a folk group post Vat.II....But I was also troubled by some of the changes that make the more conservative RC's nuts
I have had many personal struggles with the all inclusive nature of the church today ( Christian churches not just RC)........too many compromises with non Christians (as I just fought about on the Lutheran thread)
It will be interesting to see what the next Pope will do..(isn't there some tradition or prophecy or something that says the next one is the last one?)......
Now he's in charge of the Vatican's False OEcumenism movement, and one of his first acts is to remove the Words of Consecration from the liturgy.
I think that what you are thinking of is the Aristotelian/Scholastic definition of "vice" as "a deficiency or an excess of a virtue" -- e.g., the virtue of courage is opposed by the vices of cowardice on the one hand, and being rash on the other.
Not exactly the same as a accusing ideological "extremists" of vice.
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.