Skip to comments.Can Catholics Be Christians?
Posted on 12/08/2009 11:41:52 AM PST by Gamecock
click here to read article
Anyone who so much as gives a cup of water in My name will have his reward.
Dear is a fairly common salutation used in correspondence. I know of someone who recently wrote both their US Senators and their US Representative. All three are liberals. Nonetheless, each was addressed as dear.
Thus, its hardly a term of abuse, error, fraud or lie, but merely a matter of preferred etiquette. Another valuable effect of this minor social grace is that it should serve as a reminder to try to write charitably to each other.
Thanks for putting my quote back up. I suppose it makes sense that the religion mod is more touchy about coarse language.
What part of “Eternal Life” don’t you get?
It’s kinda funny, in a sad sort of way, to watch the Romanist as they defend there Church as the supreme good fail to realize that it is a rejection of the Gospel.
Stop hitting on me. It's unwelcome and really rather creepy.
Anyone can be a Christian by believing and accepting Christ as their savior. Religion is religion, but a personal relationship with Christ is all it takes to be a Christian.
>>The tea kettle in that picture is brown.<<
Did you post to the wrong thread?
Sometimes, it’s the little things.
“Didn’t you know? Christians are judged by God, but Catholics are judged by Calvin.”
>>Religion is religion, but a personal relationship with Christ is all it takes to be a Christian.<<
Merry Christmas Halls!!!!
You’re a wonderful FReeper and a great Christian.
A better question is can you be a Christian outside the Catholic Church.
So what radio stations do they they get in heaven?
Do you actually seek to limit God, or suppose that He can be limited? Do you not suppose that it is within His power to allow those in Heaven the ability to hear when people still on this mortal coil address them? You might not agree that He does, but your statement appears to indicate that you do not think that He can.
You might want to read Revelation 5 from the POV that those in Heaven not only know what is going on on the earth, but receive prayers coming from us and present them to God. I won't tell you which verses support that; I'm sure you can be open-minded enough to figure them out for yourself.
Actually, us Catholics have much respect and admiration for the Anglicans. What we hate are the fundamentalists that either interpret the bible literally or think they can interpret the bible their own way with no historical or theological basis. There is not much difference between the Anglicans, the Catholics, the Lutherens and the Greeks other than the structure of the respective churches. I have always said if I wasn’t Catholic, I’d be Episcopal. A lot of respect and cohesion between the two, at least in my community.
Hey, no - not me. I was commenting on the absurdity of another post that seemed to presume that heavenly souls can’t hear prayers, that’s all.
With all due respect, I think that the author was referring to individuals who are aware of the differences between Catholics and Protestants and still insist upon being Catholic contrary to their conscience. (I am not saying here that someone would NECESSARILY have a conscientious objection, but merely that it is what the author seems to believe)
As a Catholic you most certainly believe this about Protestants. The Catechism of the Catholic Church allows for "Invincible Ignorance":
1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.
This reflects what the author was saying in regards to faithful Catholics who do not question their beliefs. It's the same statement but flipped as it is coming from a Protestant applying it to Catholics instead of the other way around.
The Catechism also states:
1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.
1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin." In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.
1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one's passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church's authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.
It stands to reason that, from a Catholic point of view, a Protestant who has taken the time to examine what the Catholic Church teaches, understands the reasons it teaches such, and refuses to be a part of her is culpable of mortal sin and places his or her salvation at risk. That education has dispelled all appeals for claims for ignorance. This is exactly what the author was stating, albeit from a Protestant point of view.
Respectfully, it does little good to be indignant about a Protestant teaching the same thing regarding Catholics that the Catholic Church teaches regarding Protestants. The author left the door open for individual Catholics to be saved in exactly the same manner that the Catholic Church leaves it open for Protestants to be saved. It's the same reasoning albeit applied from a different point of view.
Still out of ideas?