All Non-Roman Catholics are Heathens

[spartan26]

Yes, the Pope is always infallible in matters of faith and morals. People tend to oversimplify papal infallibility. It's not even that the Pope will say the right thing, it's just that the Holy Spirit will prevent him from saying wrong teaching and only in matters of faith and morals.

Yeah, I'm gonna need book, chapter and verse on this one. I know the NT mentions "the Holy Spirit would give the apostles utterance on what to say" but I think that's a far cry from thinking everything out of a man's lips regarding any subject would be infallible.

 

[Zaerne]

You believe in Sola Scriptura?

____________________________________________
Luke 10:16

He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me; and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me.

Matthew 18:18

Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.

Matthew 16:17-19

And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

Luke 22:31-32

And the Lord said: Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren.

1 Timothy 3:15

But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

____________________________________________________

As JivinJeffJones said, though unbelievingly, the pope is not infallible in everything he says. It is only in matters and faith and morals and when is speaking ex cathedra, which is actually very rare. This only happens when a doctrine is in question, but Roma locuta est, causa es finita. Oh and he's also right that there have been so much corruption inside the Church, so much that it's a wonder why the Church hasn't corrupted.

________________________________________________________

And oh, the Bible version is Douay-Rheims, and Bible verses pulled of Catholic Answers. You must be familiar with the sight....

 

[spartan26]

You believe in Sola Scriptura?

The simple answer would be yes. I'm honestly not that well versed in it to say I know everything about it and agree w/it along in its entirety along party lines but that the Bible is the inspired word of God that stands alone w/out need of interpretation, then yes. Do I believe that the Holy Spirit gives wisdom and understanding to people in order that they may instruct, admonish and encourage others? Of course (Not sure if Sola Scriptura precludes that).

What I don't believe is that any person apart from Jesus is or would be able to speak with 100% accuracy in regards to scriptural interpretation.

That's really what I was looking for when asking for verses. Perhaps you were referencing previous posts but I didn't think any of the examples you listed dealt with the Pope being infallible in matters of faith and morality. Now that you've referenced Sola Scriptura, I better understand where you're coming from.

Is there a point when this was supposed to have happened or been set in motion? Peter certainly wasn't perfect right up until the last supper when not understanding Jesus' words. Also, after Jesus ascended back to heaven it seemed like he and Paul were having some disagreements but the Bible doesn't really suggest that Paul was off and Peter was right on everything.

As JivinJeffJones said, though unbelievingly, the pope is not infallible in everything he says. It is only in matters and faith and morals and when is speaking ex cathedra, which is actually very rare. This only happens when a doctrine is in question, but Roma locuta est, causa es finita.

Aha, say that with a smile. I kinda see, though very quick research, that speaking ex cathedra is like the Pope giving an executive order, not like the apostles on the day of Pentecost where the Holy Spirit was speaking through them in probably words they didn't even understand. In the Catholic Bible, is there anything stating what the power and ability and qualifications of what the Pope should be like there is for elders and deacons?

Oh and he's also right that there have been so much corruption inside the Church, so much that it's a wonder why the Church hasn't corrupted.

And oh, the Bible version is Douay-Rheims, and Bible verses pulled of Catholic Answers. You must be familiar with the sight....

Corruption entered the church through Ananias and I think God clearly showed exactly what He thought of that. God sees it fit to let the wheat and the tares grow side by side until the harvest. People tend to miss that significance as it relates to the Church. Things won't be right until the Bridegroom comes back for his.

 

[Zaerne]

Why do you believe in Sola Scriptura?

Is there a point in time the doctrine of papal infallibility was established? Probably, I'll have to do some more reading to tell you. But then again the Bible wasn't "approved" in its form until of the Council of Hippo (393) and Council of Carthage (397 and 419). Until then, where did the Christians go to? The apostles.

In the Catholic Bible? It's almost like saying "Is this in the Baptist Bible?" Our Bible is one and the same, only yours may have interpretation and translation according to Protestants as well as having been deprived of some verses and 7 books, and mine has it as it was approved in the Council of Carthage, and of course, with Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur (Which I know, you don't really care for). And no there is no explicit verse in any Bible that says, "The Pope must...." Especially because the word pope didn't even exist yet at that time. I'm not sure what your question asks, but I can say that yes, the Holy Spirit is at work to prevent any error in his teaching while speaking ex cathedra. And let me say that again, the Holy Spirit will only prevent error. It does not, in any way, give him the same as you said "accuracy" as Jesus Christ who knows everything perfectly. It's only that the Pope, whether he knows the truth or not, when speaking in ex cathedra, will proclaim no error.

I thought I already said there was corruption in the Church, but I also said the Church hasn't corrupted.

I post again Matthew 16:18

And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

And also 1 Timothy 3:15

But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

Aha, say that with a smile.

Oh, and huh? That last line, yes. I love Latin. I want to learn it, but that's not really on subject....

 

[EffEmDoubleyou]

This thread has given me peace. I can now safely ignore people who bash Catholicism because most of them don't have any idea what they're even railing against.

 

[spartan26]

In the Catholic Bible? It's almost like saying "Is this in the Baptist Bible?" Our Bible is one and the same, only yours may have interpretation and translation according to Protestants as well as having been deprived of some verses and 7 books, and mine has it as it was approved in the Council of Carthage,

Yeah, that's what I meant. I couldn't think of term. Is it Apocrypha? I wasn't sure. I was going to look it up but then, you know lazy P took over and I never got back around to it and suffer looking like an embecile.

Oh, and huh? That last line, yes. I love Latin. I want to learn it, but that's not really on subject....

NP, way to keep it real! Although you may wanna tip people off before you throw up the Latin. I was about ready to cc the FBI on your next post.

 

[spartan26]

Why do you believe in Sola Scriptura?

This is probably better answered through more general apologetics. Upfront I'll stay that I don't view religion as being so compartmentalized but for this sake of explanation, I'll break it down for you in chunks. Probably nothing new here for you and I'm sure there are more formal and standardized terms but I'm separating Christianity into two parts (though there's overlap), 1). one's relationship to God and 2). one's relationship with fellow humanity.

One's relationship with God could be described as the vertical, human on earth, God above human in heaven. (Mind you, this description is for diagram purposes only). The vertical relationship w/God is cultivated through such acts as praying, reading the Bible, singing praises, fasting. If you look at the ten commandments, the first half (not 5 but part) have to do with the vertical relation, No other Gods before Me, no false idols, don't take Lord's name in vain. Same as the first half of the Lord's prayer, Hallowed be Thy name...Your will on earth. Jesus even has a convo w/someone about the most important commandments - the answers: Love the Lord w/all your heart and #2 Love your neighbor as yourself. Which brings me to the horizontal relationship

The second way Christ's love is perfected w/in Christians is through their relationships with other people. (Some people like to diagram this using a cross to symbolize both). Such activities as going to church, loving your enemies, remembering the needs of the poor, correcting or encouraging members of the body, seeking justice, serving others in humble submission are required by God. Jesus talks about before you give your big assed check in the offering plate (something on the vertical tip), settle that feud you've been having with your neighbor (horizontal yo).

One has to look out for others but works alone won't do it. That said, getting closer to God isn't just a bunch of rules being followed or deeds to get gold stars, it is a lifelong process, often a struggle. If you look at Jacob, Jeremiah, Joseph, Jonah, Job, Elijah (see, not all J's), Mary, Mary Magdalene, Paul, the rich young ruler, Abraham, Moses, David, Peter, the list doesn't end, they all had their struggle in coming to understanding. This struggle isn't random nor a matter of weakness but essential in developing faith and growing in the Lord.

Why I believe in Sola Scriptura is that it allows and encourages understanding without there being anyone to interfere with the vertical relationship between God and human. It's not that we all have to find our own truth but that we each need to cultivate our relationships w/God on our own. And it certainly does not negate the importance of preachers, teachers and shepherds of the body.

John 1:1-4 & 14
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God.
3All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.
4In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.
...
14And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.

For those who take that the essence of God existed before creation and assisted in creation as true, couple that with the belief that Jesus' sacrifice on the cross removed the barrier between humanity and God, I think it makes sense to believe the Bible is it's own authority and that one does not have to go through man to get its meaning or to authenticate it - which, if I'm not mistaken falls under the definition of Sola Scrutura, no?

I can't imagine that if Christ came to earth as a man so that all of humanity could live eternally with God that that same God who freely gave His Spirit to dwell within faithful believers would then only allow the meaning of His essence to be grasped by a tiny, select few or possibly only one person on earth, such as the case of ex cathedra. My complaint and it's not strictly against the Catholic church because it happens in different forms elsewhere but I vehemently oppose any human (either themselves or their invented regulations) trying to place themselves as a go-betweens or gate keepers or mediators between people on earth and God in heaven. My belief is there should be no one in the vertical plane between God in heaven and humanity on earth.

 

[Zaerne]

The term for the seven books in the Bible existing in "Catholic Bibles" but not in "Protestant Bibles" is called by Protestants the Apocrypha. However, the Catholic Church calls these the Deuterocanonicals as there is another set of rejected material that is called the Apocrypha.

First of all, I have to praise your reply as it makes sense, and that you don't bombard me with quotes of Scripture, which is although good, can sometimes be very annoying at large amounts, and uh...I tend to just skim over them...

I also have to agree with most of your statements, such as working continuously for salvation but still not works alone. I agree to the same degree of the importance of both man's relationship to God and man's relationship to his fellow men. However, I have some conflict at the last part.

I firmly believe that the Bible is an important authority in faith, however, I do not believe that it is the only authority in faith, which is what Sola Scriptura dictates. I do believe that some other authority had to infallibly pronounce the books of the Bible as inspired for believers to believe it. The believers by themselves cannot decide what is true and what is false as they have no authority to do so. Fortunately an authority was given to the disciples, who in turn gave authority to their disciples, who in turn gave authority to their disciples, and so on, so that when issues came up in matters of faith, it would be settled. This certainly had to be important in even deciding what books should be in the Bible.

Men don't necessarily need to go through other men to get the meaning of the Bible, but as men, they can make mistakes, and then in turn need to know which interpretations of the Bible are right or wrong. We have too many Christian denominations to say that interpretation of the Bible is not a problem. It seems that the Holy Spirit is telling one doctrine to one person and telling another doctrine to another.

Papal infallibility doesn't mean Jesus would "only allow the meaning of His essence to be grasped by a tiny, select few or possibly only one person on earth". His essence could not in fact be grasped by any human but Him. Papal infallibility only gives an authority to lead Christians to the right meaning and away from others, a solution to this problem of who should Christians listen to when Jesus is not personally here to tell us which doctrines are right and wrong. Papal infallibility does not give the pope any more understanding of Christ's message. Papal infallibility simply justs prevents the pope from teaching incorrect dogma, therefore providing an authority to decide which interpretations are wrong more than providing an authority to decide what is right. Also, infallibility does not only belong to the pope but to all successors of the disciples, the bishops, who in speaking as a whole can infallibly announce to truth of Christ. Truly, papal infallibility aren't men who say who have to go through them to go them before you go to God, but as guides and as blocks to the ways you really don't want to go.

Though I know this isn't what you mean, and you that you already know this, but there is someone between the relationship of God and men. Jesus is a proof for us on how much we need physical things to help in our faith because we aren't purely spiritual beings. God could have chosen for the world to receive salvation by no work, or could have chosen for the world to be saved by clouds, sun, angels, and any other thing. But he didn't. He chose to take human form, and show us the path to righteousness and the way to heaven. He chose to physically be here. Establishing contacts between God and man shouldn't really be an alien idea to any Christian, if it is shame on them.

 

[xNFJiminy]

Actually, it seems from the original document that it was only protestant churches he considers completely doomed. I'm Orthodox and because we also have apostolic succession, we're considered a 'sister church' and merely have a 'wound' because we reject papal infallibility.

N.B I shouldn't find this amusing, because my own denomination has always had a similar position with similar statements about both protestantism and Roman Catholicism, although our different views of salvation and damnation make true comparison difficult here.

 

[xNFJiminy]

Just look at the flood myths. Someone is ripping someone else off.

I think each version is a different culture telling the same true story. I think the same about the stories of apparent aliens coming to teach the people of the ancient world everything they knew and that is now hidden from us (hence we can't build the things they used to), before interbreeding with us. Some people think the Bible even tells that story too.

(Yes I'm a Christian who believes a considerable amount of David Icke's theories and has seen what I believe may be alien spacecrafts from my bedroom window... I see no contradiction. )

 

[wildcat]

Does that mean you're safe by default, RC?

The excuse of the Church.

Apologia is for the losers.
Excuse however is for the winners.

 

[OctaviaCaesar]

Misguided Hatred

When the Holy Father said that other churches are not as complete as the Catholic Church, he is refering to their theology, and NOT condemming anyone to Hell. The Catholic Church has NEVER NEVER NEVER declared anyone has ever gone to Hell--only that there are people who have gone to Heaven--saints. As I read one Catholic author saying--"we are obliged to believe that there is a Hell, but not that there is anyone in it."

 

[wedekit]

When the Holy Father said that other churches are not as complete as the Catholic Church, he is refering to their theology, and NOT condemming anyone to Hell. The Catholic Church has NEVER NEVER NEVER declared anyone has ever gone to Hell--only that there are people who have gone to Heaven--saints. As I read one Catholic author saying--"we are obliged to believe that there is a Hell, but not that there is anyone in it."

Thank you!

The article to me just sounds like the Pope restating the view that the Catholic church has had ever since Martin Luther's reformation. This view is that Catholic and Protestant churches are not the same. We believe in the same God and we use the same Bible (not counting the removed Deuterocanonical books in the OT), but we don't agree on how to go about worshiping and going to heaven. Because of this, the two will never be compatible with each other no matter how much anyone (Catholic or Protestant) tries. Heck, it's not like all Protestant religions are united anyways.

Catholics believe that the the church instituted by Jesus has to be: one, holy, catholic ("universal"), and apostolic; which is all taken from the Bible. It's been like this way before Protestantism existed and it wont change.
(The Marks of the Church)

 

[swordpath]

lol @ religious bigots.

 

[substitute]

I don't get it - nothing's changed, that was always the stance of the RC.

It's not all other churches though is it? I mean, they acknowledge the Eastern Orthodox, I'm sure of it. And there are pretty strong links also between RC's and High Anglicans too - but we're not proper Protestants - at least I don't consider myself a Protestant.

But last I heard, Pope JP said that though other churches are not true churches, that doesn't mean that non RC Christians can't still go to heaven, depending on various other stuff. But basically it doesn't mean that all non RC's are going to hell in the RC's opinion.

EDIT - oh, I see Octavia already said that. Never mind then, carry on.

 

[wedekit]

"Since the Eastern schism began, the Orthodox have generally claimed that the pope has only a primacy of honor among the bishops of the world, not a primacy of authority. But the concept of a primacy of honor without a corresponding authority cannot be derived from the Bible. At every juncture where Jesus speaks of Peter’s relation to the other apostles, he emphasizes Peter’s special mission to them and not simply his place of honor among them."

The differences between the Orthodox and Catholic churches are minor when you compare the difference between the Catholics and the Protestants. I really don't believe Anglicans have a close connection to Catholicism unless you count the Anglo-Catholics.

Protestants canons exclude the Deuterocanonical books and believe that belief in Jesus is all that is required for salvation. Differences in beliefs in the path to salvation and the unjustified removal of inspired books puts a deep valley between the two churches. This is why the Pope said they are not guaranteed salvation because that was only granted to those who are part of the church instituted by Jesus; aka Catholics.

 

[Xann]

 

[Galaxy Gazer]

Hey, that's fine with me. The more heathens, the better

 

[Lark]

Always nice to know that I'm fucking right about everything again.

There used to be a smiley which was like Yay or something, were did it go, this is the perfect occasion for it.

 

[Lark]

Roman Catholics, Anglo-Catholics, Vatican Two Catholics, Concilor Catholics, Latin Catholics, Traditionalist?

I'm not even exhibiting anything near an exhaustive knowledge of the diversity there, its stupid to talk about it in that monolithic sense. Even though there's the code of canon law.