Catholic way

[Major1]

If that bothers you, you'd probably do well to reconsider Orthodoxy which long considered the Eastern Emperor to have a place of authority over the church that never was paralleled in the Church of England (and, of course, never has applied to the Episcopal and Anglican churches in the USA anyway).

Is that like the old saying..."I did not see the forests because the trees blocked my view"!

 

[concretecamper]

Is that like the old saying..."I did not see the forests because the trees blocked my view"!

No, I think it's a last ditch effort to keep someone away from Catholicism.

 

[FireDragon76]

A community that changes its doctrines every 10 years or so to keep step with a secular society is not what the OP said they are looking for.

I was responding to Mary.

Episcopalians' social statements on recent controversies have had a clear line of developement going back decades to the 1970's, which have their origins in even earlier theology post-WWII. It's not that different from Catholics social statements developing according to their principles. The only difference is that Episcopalians do not have the same sense of "Sacred Tradition" to uphold.

 

[concretecamper]

Episcopalians' social statements on recent controversies have had a clear line of developement going back decades to the 1970's. It's not that different from Catholics social statements developing according to their principles. The only difference is that Episcopalians do not have the same sense of traditionalism to uphold.

Why do you reference "social statements" when I was referring to doctrine? They are different you know.

If you had advised Mary to seek the LCMS as a protestant alternative I probably would not have commented. But you mentioned a protestant sect that changes it's doctrine every generation.

 

[Antig]

Thank you people for your posts.

I have to admit that I am more and more swayed by Catholicism after reading up on Scripture and Tradition in the church. The answers are out there but not sure if some of you would agree to them.

I am not happy with just Sola Scripture. It can be open to many different interpretations. I like the idea that with the Catholic Church, one can rely on sound theology brought to us down many generations. Since the reformation there have been thousands of new protestant faiths sprouting up and the variety of scriptural interpretations is vast and unreliable for me.

I found a wonderful site that explains in depth Catholic Doctrine with scriptural evidence but I don't think those that are not happy with the Catholic teaching would agree as it's from Catholic sources.

I think one has to put all the pieces together when studying and researching. I have enjoyed the journey so far and I know now that God is calling me home to the Catholic Church.

 

[Basil the Great]

Why would this surprise you? For the audience's sake, please quote the sections that are relevant and the dates the bulls were promulgated. Then we can wrap this thing up.

Wrap it up? Do you really want to open up that can of worms? Most Catholics, including the clergy, want to bury those Papal Bulls back in the Middle Ages and never let them see the day of light again. But since you insist....................

Unam Sanctam from Pope Boniface VIII, dated 1302 - 'We are compelled, our faith urging us, to believe and to hold - and we do firmly believe and simply confess - that there is one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside of which there is neither salvation nor remission of sins; her Spouse proclaiming it in the Canticles, "My dove, my undefiled is but one, she is the choice one of her that bore her"; which represents one mystical body, of which body the head is Christ, but of Christ, God.

If, then, the Greeks or others say that they are not committed to the care of Peter and his successors, they necessarily confess that they are not of the sheep of Christ; for the Lord says in John, that there is one fold, one shepherd, and one only. This authority, moreover, even though it is given to man and exercised through man, is not human but rather divine, being given by divine lips to Peter and founded on a rock for him and his successors through Christ Himself whom he has confessed; the Lord Himself saying so to Peter: "Whatsoever thou shalt bind", etc. Whoever, therefore, resists this power thus ordained by God, resists the ordination of God, unless he makes himself believe like the Manichean, that there are two beginnings. This we consider false and heretical, since by the testimony of Moses, not "in the beginnings", but "in the beginning" God created the heavens and the earth.

Indeed we declare, say, pronounce and define that it is absolutely necessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.'

(note - the reference to the Greeks clearly refers to the Eastern Orthodox Church. This cannot be denied. The reference to others refers to the Waldensians, the Oriental Orthdoox and any other Christian group not in union with Rome.)

Now as powerful as Unam Sanctam is, it pales in comparison to Cantate Domino, signed by Pope Eugene IV in 1441 - 'The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in eternal life; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.'

(note - the reference to schismatics refers to the Eastern Orthodox and the reference to heretics refers to the Waldensians, the Czech Reformers and the Oriental Orthodox, unless you care to throw the Oriental Orthodox into the schismatic category. Also the heretic term would apply in the next century, the 1500's, to Lutherans and Anglicans and obviously later on to all future Protestants. The bold print sections are mine, used for emphasis.)

Here is something to bear in mind. The Waldensians began about 1173 and that is 268 years before Cantate Domino. Even more pronounced is that the Oriental Orthodox broke away in 451 A.D. or 990 years before Cantate Domino. Now for those who believe that the Vatican II teaching on salvation for non-Catholic Christians via "invincible ignorance" makes sense, since Protestants and Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox have been blinded by centuries of their own tradition, as this is the explanation that has been given by Popes since Vatican II, remember that only 524 years passed from Cantate Domino to Vatican II in 1965, but 990 years passed from the time that the Oriental Orthodox broke away in 451 up to 1441. Hence, what is so special about 524 years of tradition that warrants "invincible ignorance", when 990 years was NOT sufficient for the Oriental Orthodox to receive the possible "invincible ignorance" exception in 1441, was Cantate Domino was proclaimed? If my math is correct, 990 years is about double that 524 years amounts to. I am not looking at the 1054 split for the Eastern Orthodox, as their were two brief reconciliations between 1054 and 1441, the date of Cantate Domino, said reconciliation dates being in 1272 at the 2nd Council of Lyon and in 1439 at the Council of Florence. Obviously, Cantate Domino was a response to the Eastern Orthodox faithful rejecting the union that their bishops agreed to in 1439, except for St. Mark of Ephesus it should be noted, who refused to go along.

Don't get me wrong. As a Protestant, I am most thankful for Vatican II and how the Catholic church for the first time, in an authoritative manner, thanks to an Ecumenical Council signed off on by Pope Paul , acknowledged that salvation is possible for non-Catholic Christians and non-Christians. However, after hundreds of hours of personal research, looking at Papal Bulls, catechisms, writings of saints, etc., I simply must agree with the followers of the SSPX and the Sedavacantists, that the Vatican II document on Ecumenism, which lays out that salvation is possible for non-Catholics, is NOT in accord with the Traditional teaching of Holy Mother Church!

 

[Basil the Great]

Thank you people for your posts.

I have to admit that I am more and more swayed by Catholicism after reading up on Scripture and Tradition in the church. The answers are out there but not sure if some of you would agree to them.

I am not happy with just Sola Scripture. It can be open to many different interpretations. I like the idea that with the Catholic Church, one can rely on sound theology brought to us down many generations. Since the reformation there have been thousands of new protestant faiths sprouting up and the variety of scriptural interpretations is vast and unreliable for me.

I found a wonderful site that explains in depth Catholic Doctrine with scriptural evidence but I don't think those that are not happy with the Catholic teaching would agree as it's from Catholic sources.

I think one has to put all the pieces together when studying and researching. I have enjoyed the journey so far and I know now that God is calling me home to the Catholic Church.

Sorry, Antig, but it took me an hour or so for my long post and when I finished and posted it, only then did I see your last post which pretty much sums things up. I wish you God's special blessings. Based upon the Papal Bulls of the Middles Ages, perhaps all of us Protestants and Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orhtodox had better follow in your footsteps and reconcile with Holy Mother Church?

 

[Antig]

I am happy for this thread to be closed now as I have decided that Catholicism is the only right and true way for me. Thank you everyone.

 

[DRobert]

Mind showing exactly where you got that one.

Gladly, although I kindly request we carry it back-and-forth PM conversation. It is easier and more leisurely to carry on so as not to be boggled down by other people's converations and replies within the topic discussion. Let me know what you think. I also tend to reply less frequently. I don't have on-demand internet.

God bless,

Robert Michael

 

[DRobert]

I am happy for this thread to be closed now as I have decided that Catholicism is the only right and true way for me. Thank you everyone.

Thanks be to God!

 

[DRobert]

I believe you meant to say "once you are aware of the claims of the Catholic Church and are convinced that they are true...." That is the stance taken by the church.

Well I can't speak for you, Albion, however it seems critical discernment is needed.

May I know where you got this idea from. I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume your good name and intention so as to avoid rashly judging you, especially in case if what you say is really true and I am found to be in error.

I intend to quickly retract my statement if found to be in error, otherwise I hope my brother that you would be willing to do the same as a christian. God bless in the meantime.

 

[mnorian]

Mod hat on

thread has been permanently closed at the original posters
request.
Carry on. ​