A conversation about unity.

[ozso]

Please try and put the anti-Catholicism you have been taught aside in these discussions.

Oh please, I point out issues in other denominations and in Christianity as a whole where the human factor is involved.

 

[Hentenza]

I am not trying to tell you about my vision of unity. I am an individual and I have no authority to conduct ecumenical dialogue on behalf of the Catholic Church. What the OP presents is the Catholic Church's public statements about what is needed for unity. Specifically what is needed is

1. unity in doctrine
2. unity in sacraments
3. unity in episcopal governance and apostolic succession.

Without the first (unity in doctrine) there can be no commonality in teaching, preaching, theology, and there can be no cooperation in any endeavour that requires shared doctrine.

Without the second (unity in sacraments) we can have no unity in practice.

Without the third (unity in governance) there can be no unity in parish life and all that flows from it, including discipline.

I hope that clarifies whatever it was you were having difficulty with.

You forgot unity in Christ. This is probably the most important one because without it you don’t have a Christian church.

 

[ozso]

When I read the above I thought it looked like something to which no reasonable reply can be given because it appears to be paranoid conspiracy rather than anything that has facts and genuine sources behind it.

Really, in all of its history it has never come close to that eh? The universal stance has always been it makes no difference whatsoever what denomonation you belong to? I've attended Pentecostal churches going back 45 years, and it's there as well. That only Pentecostalism's version of baptism in the Holy Spirit insures salvation lurks there. And if I brought that up to the pastor, I'm pretty sure he'd agree with me.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

You forgot unity in Christ. This is probably the most important one because without it you don’t have a Christian church.

You are incorrect. I did not forget unity in Christ, I am surprised that you would think so. The mere fact that people are Christians already implies, unity with Christ and faith in him, as one's saviour.

 

[concretecamper]

The RCC won't outright say only active membership in the RCC leads to salvation. But it's lurking there all the same. Probably mostly to frighten members of the RCC.

To put it in no uncertain terms:

The Catholic Church affirms that being a faithful Catholic (accepting Jesus' free gift and responding accordingly) will lead one to salvation.

She also affirms that (insert protestant denomination here) can be saved, not because of said religion, faith, or practice, but in spite of it.

Just sayin

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Really, in all of its history the it's

I do not know what " The it's" could be.

has never come close to that eh?

I have no idea what "it" was coming close to or what it is.

The stance has always been it makes no difference whatsoever what denomonation you belong to? I've attended Pentecostal churches going back 45 years, and it there as well.

you still haven't said what "it" is. your reply is a cypher.

That only Pentecostalism's version of baptism in the Holy Spirit insures salvation lurks there.

there is Baptism, it is in water, administered by one who is ordained, The name of The Father and of The Son and of The Holy Spirit. I am not sure what you mean by " baptism in The Holy Spirit", but I have heard The term used Among pentecostals to describe a second experience whereby they believe, that The Holy Spirit comes upon them, and enables them to speak in tongues. this is a belief that I do not share.

And if I brought that up to the pastor, I'm pretty sure he'd agree with me.

 

[ozso]

I am not trying to tell you about my vision of unity. I am an individual and I have no authority to conduct ecumenical dialogue on behalf of the Catholic Church. What the OP presents is the Catholic Church's public statements about what is needed for unity. Specifically what is needed is

1. unity in doctrine
2. unity in sacraments
3. unity in episcopal governance and apostolic succession.

Without the first (unity in doctrine) there can be no commonality in teaching, preaching, theology, and there can be no cooperation in any endeavour that requires shared doctrine.

Without the second (unity in sacraments) we can have no unity in practice.

Without the third (unity in governance) there can be no unity in parish life and all that flows from it, including discipline.

I hope that clarifies whatever it was you were having difficulty with.

That would entail one becoming more like the other. So should Catholocism become more like Protestantism in those three areas, or the other way around?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

That would entail one becoming more like the other. So should Catholocism become more like Protestantism in those three areas, or the other way around?

Catholic teaching is Christ's teaching so it ought to be clear that Catholic teaching is the norm to which others ought to move.

 

[ozso]

I do not know what " The it's" could be.

I have no idea what "it" was coming close to or what it is.

you still haven't said what "it" is. your reply is a cypher.

Okay, I'll rewrite it for you.

Really, in all of RCC history the RCC has never come close to at least a subtle assertion that only active membership in the RCC leads to salvation? The universal stance within the RCC has always been that Protestantism leads one to salvation just as completely as Catholocism?

there is Baptism, it is in water, administered by one who is ordained, The name of The Father and of The Son and of The Holy Spirit. I am not sure what you mean by " baptism in The Holy Spirit", but I have heard The term used Among pentecostals to describe a second experience whereby they believe, that The Holy Spirit comes upon them, and enables them to speak in tongues. this is a belief that I do not share.

My point is, I can point out flaws in Protestantism as well as Catholicism without being either anti-Catholic or anti-Protestant.

 

[ARBITER01]

Really, in all of its history it has never come close to that eh? The universal stance has always been it makes no difference whatsoever what denomonation you belong to? I've attended Pentecostal churches going back 45 years, and it's there as well. That only Pentecostalism's version of baptism in the Holy Spirit insures salvation lurks there. And if I brought that up to the pastor, I'm pretty sure he'd agree with me.

I would say probably in oneness Pentecostal type churches, but there's not this "we are Christians and you're not" attitude in the Assemblies of GOD. I've never seen that in our church yet.

 

[ozso]

Catholic teaching is Christ's teaching so it ought to be clear that Catholic teaching is the norm to which others ought to move.

That's not unity, that's conversion.

 

[Hentenza]

You are incorrect. I did not forget unity in Christ, I am surprised that you would think so. The mere fact that people are Christians already implies, unity with Christ and faith in him, as one's saviour.

You did not mention it. To you only those that agree with your doctrine, sacraments, and episcopate are able to unite. But thst is not what the holy scriptures say or teach. Christ is what unite us not the teachings of your church.

“If anyone thinks himself to be religious, yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this person’s religion is worthless. Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world.”
‭‭James‬ ‭1‬:‭26‬-‭27‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

James 1:26-27 If anyone thinks himself to be religious, yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this person’s religion is worthless. Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father | New American Standard Bible - NAS

If anyone thinks himself to be religious, yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this person’s religion is worthless. Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father

bible.com

 

[ozso]

I would say probably in oneness Pentecostal type churches, but there's not this "we are Christians and you're not" attitude in the Assemblies of GOD. I've never seen that in our church yet.

Like with the RCC it's not there openly. It's not openly taught or said outright, but the suggestion of it lurks there. That baptism in the Holy Spirit via speaking in tongues is the demonstrable evidence that one is saved. I've been with the AG going back to 1980.

 

[ARBITER01]

Like with the RCC it's not there openly. It's not openly taught or said outright, but the suggestion of it lurks there. That baptism in the Holy Spirit via speaking in tongues is the demonstrable evidence that one is saved. I've been with the AG going back to 1980.

Naaa,.....

I've seen it in Oneness churches, but not AG churches. Tongues only demonstrates the filling of The Spirit, not salvation. I'm not sure what church you've been to, but I don't know of any that have that sort of teaching "in the background."

 

[ozso]

To put it in no uncertain terms:

The Catholic Church affirms that being a faithful Catholic (accepting Jesus' free gift and responding accordingly) will lead one to salvation.

She also affirms that (insert protestant denomination here) can be saved, not because of said religion, faith, or practice, but in spite of it.

Just sayin

So there's will be saved vs can be saved. That those who are active members of the RCC will be saved, whereas Protestants could be saved.

 

[public hermit]

Forgive me, but it looks like you were trying to persuade a Roman Catholic member, and a close personal friend of myself I might add, into saying negative things about the Orthodox. If I am mistaken, do forgive me. I just really don’t see the point in prompting members to criticize other denominations, particularly denominations that have close relations with theirs.

You and I both know most all that @PloverWing does on CF is with best of intentions. You could fairly accuse me of this, but not her. Honestly, I was surprised you asked this. The fact is, the OP made claims and has made claims, and they have not been adequately answered. That's the starting place for this discussion.

 

[Carl Emerson]

For the record I don't think any denomination is 'perfect' but some express certain truths better than others.

The letters to the 7 Churches confirm that Churches had failed seriously in different ways within 50 or so years.

Most Churches today continue to fail in the same ways.

Jesus said the disciples were wrong to consider less, those not in their fellowship.

Paul castigated those who held loyalty to one fellowship or another.

So to speak of unity without addressing fleshly loyalty to one traditional stream is a nonsense.

 

[ozso]

For the record I don't think any denomination is 'perfect' but some express certain truths better than others.

The letters to the 7 Churches confirm that Churches had failed seriously in different ways within 50 or so years.

Most Churches today continue to fail in the same ways.

Jesus said the disciples were wrong to consider less, those not in their fellowship.

Paul castigated those who held loyalty to one fellowship or another.

So to speak of unity without addressing fleshly loyalty to one traditional stream is a nonsense.

Each should be willing to admit that some of their doctrine, theology, practices and tradition are man-made. That while they're based on the teaching of Christ and the Apostles, they are man-made. That they were not specifically taught by Christ, Paul, Peter, John, James. Or even Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Papias. But rather are doctrines and practices men came up with centuries later. If someone asks them "is that specifically taught by Christ?" They should be able to honestly say "no it was taught by Augustine" or "no it was taught by Calvin".

 

[ozso]

All denominations are direct descendants of the original Church of Christ which lasted up to around 450 years. But from that point forward additional man-made doctrines and practices were added in. And therefore every denomonation is now different from the original Church. The Roman Catholic Church is not the original Church, but is rather a descendant of the original Church like every other denomonation. An offshoot thereof. And what makes the RCC and other denominations different from the original Church is, the later addition of man-made doctrine, theology, practices and tradition. They are all different in some ways from the Church that Christ and His Apostles originally established.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

All denominations are direct descendants of the original Church of Christ which lasted up to around 450 years. But from that point forward additional man-made doctrines and practices were added in. And therefore every denomonation is now different from the original Church. The Roman Catholic Church is not the original Church, but is rather a descendant of the original Church like every other denomonation. An offshoot thereof. And what makes the RCC and other denominations different from the original Church is, the later addition of man-made doctrine, theology, practices and tradition. They are all different in some ways from the Church that Christ and His Apostles originally established.

You err in asserting that the Catholic Church is merely a later offshoot of the original Church of Christ. In truth, the Catholic Church is that original Church, founded directly by Christ upon the Apostles, with Peter as its visible head: “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build My Church” (Matthew 16:18). This Church has endured continuously, not for 450 years, but from Pentecost to the present day, safeguarded by the Holy Spirit as Christ promised: “I am with you always, even to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:20). The notion that all denominations are equal descendants of an extinct Church contradicts both history and divine revelation.

One must distinguish between legitimate development of doctrine—guided by the Holy Spirit and affirmed by the Magisterium—and the invention of man-made teachings that contradict apostolic tradition. Saint Paul exhorted the faithful to “stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thessalonians 2:15). The Catholic Church has preserved these apostolic teachings through Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the authoritative teaching office (Magisterium), as affirmed in Dei Verbum §10. Protestant denominations, by contrast, arose centuries later through schism and doctrinal innovation, often rejecting sacramental theology, apostolic succession, and the Eucharistic Real Presence.

To claim that Catholic theology is a corruption of Christ’s original teaching is to ignore the historical continuity of the Church, the witness of the early Fathers, and the promises of Christ Himself. The Church is “the pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15), not a human institution subject to decay or reinvention. You are called not to relativise ecclesial truth, but to recognise and submit to the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church, through which Christ continues to sanctify and teach His people.