Cross: Crossing The River Of Spiritual Separation

[hyperdulia again]

bright girl.

[Guest svdrummer87]

Hey all

This is J.C. to those of you from the Ferd's crew. I just thought I'd throw my 2 cents in on this heated discussion. For those of you who don't know I'm in the process of converting to Catholocism. While I may have a lot to learn before my Easter Vigil in 3 months, I belive I have some valid opinions. Nothing is meant to attack anyone, and the mere fact that I'm converting should show that I have an extreme love for the Catholic Church. It is the only one through which I feel the power of Christ.

1.) The topic of the pope. Those here that are not Kristen and Andy seem to believe that the pope is infallilble in all that he does. In what I have been taught and what I have read on my own, it has been my knowledge that the pope is infallible when and ONLY when he declares Papal Infallibility, which has not been declared since Vatican I.

2.)All this business of telling everyone how wrong they are is inherently uncatholic in itself. For those of you that follow the Pope's decrees, Pope John XXIII made the Declaration of Religious Liberty. While I know many catholics view him as a bad pope because, god forbid, he changed something with the whole Vatican II thing, this document states that all men and women should be free of coercion regarding religious choices. It also states that no one can be forced to act against personal convictions in choices of religion and practices. It also states that other faiths should not be disregarded as false. It states that Catholics should be more concerned with sharing beliefs than imposing the Catholic faith.

Just thought I'd throw my thoughts in.

God Bless,

J.C.

[hyperdulia again]

"Originally, this post was to state what the organization was, not the debates on issues that we could possibly be determining in the near future. I would also like to comment as a conclusion to defending my belief on the Pope's "impeccability" that's it's complete and utter misunderstanding and contradiction on your part. You think that it doesn't exist, but contrary to your hometown Parish where everyone thinks everything that the Pope instates that all the beliefs that everyone should follow, other Parishes and other Parishioners have a somewhat less brainwashed mind and can think on their owns. End, conclusion, fin, fini, nous sommes fini avec ton poste. Merci pour tes comments."

Whatever churches/persons/priests you are speaking of aren't Catholic. This Church has taught one thing for two thousand years and will continue to do so. The Pope when speaking to the whole Church on matters of faith and morals is INFALLIBLE. The Church is the only church given the fullness of truth. All who willfully reject her reject Christ, because he leads, guides, and protects the Church. One may call one's self a Catholic and believe other than this, but one is not Catholic and should not BLASPHEME by walking into a Catholic Church and recieving the Groom when the Bride has clearly stated that what they believe is heresy and that they are outside of the Unam Sanctam.

Kyrieleyson/Xristeleyson

Virgin Most Terrible to the enemies of God, pray for us.

St Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

[hyperdulia again]

JC

we are not ignorant catholics no one here thinks the pope is infallibility with feet. we (everyone other than risten and andy) do however believe that when he speaks to the universal church on faith and morals god protects him from error.

[hyperdulia again]

What Diocese do y'all live in?

[phatcatholic]

Andy,

i had hoped to wait until this could be moved to the debate table, b/c debate does not belong here. but, i have been intrigued by ur comments, and so i feel the need to reply. actuallly, i would like to reply to all of ur posts, if that is ok.

first off:

First of all I'd like to take this opportunity to preach to you. I'm not a priest, but this might come in handy.

One, the Catholic Church is not a religion.  The Catholic Church is a denomination of Christianity, which is a religion. 

Second of all, the Catholic Church has major differences between churches, however, we are all "equal" as so you preach against.  All denominations under God, under Christ, and under the Blessed Mother are equal in every way.  We all believe in the same things and there's not one thing that can decompose my belief in that matter.

Third of all, the misinterpretation that the Catholic Church is something bigger than a denomination is complete and utter misunderstanding that needs to be put to an end.  The Catholic Church is not a religion, nor should it ever be classified as one.  The Catholic Church is under Christianity seeing as how over 65% of it's doctrine is Christ-based.  The Catholic Church, the Presbyterian Church, the Lutheran Church, the Episopalien Church (sp?), the Baptist Church, and Non-Denominational Churches are indefinitely equalized because they all believe in God, the Father Almighty and Jesus Christ, our Lord forever and ever.

God Bless,

Andy

you have alot of explaining to do to convince me that catholicism is a denomination. do you not know that for the first 1500 years of the church, catholicism = christianity? if u were a christian, u were catholic. if u were catholic, u were a christian. the terms were synonymous until the reformation, when other groups denominated from the One Church. so, it is logically and historically impossible to say that catholicism is just another denomination.

we're all equal in every way? do u know much about other denominations? u do realize that not christians believe in the real presence right? not all christians believe in water baptism for salvation, not all christians believe in all seven sacraments, not all christians believe that salvation is something u can lose, not all christians believe in apostolic succession, not all christians believe in purgatory. spend enough time here and you'll see first hand how UNequal we are. yet, "We all believe in the same things and there's not one thing that can decompose my belief in that matter." this seems very close-minded, considering the mountain of evidence to the contrary.

65% of the doctrine is Christ-based? first off, how one earth did u come up w/ this percentage? secondly, which doctrines are not christ-based? of course, a proof of why this is so would be helpful as well. thirdly, why are you even catholic if only 65% of it is true. are you implying that there are other denominations w/ a higher percentage? if not--and if 65% True is as high as it gets--then Christianity in general is in a sorry state!

finally, just b/c different denominations all believe in God that does not make them equal. equal means alike in every way. if two things are alike in every single way but one, well then, they are not equal. they are unequal. and as i stated earlier, not all christians are identical in their belief and practice.

all in all, u have much explaining to do. maybe as i address the rests of ur posts, some light will be shed on what u beleive and why.

pax christi,

phatcatholic

[cmotherofpirl]

This is J.C. to those of you from the Ferd's crew. I just thought I'd throw my 2 cents in on this heated discussion. For those of you who don't know I'm in the process of converting to Catholocism. While I may have a lot to learn before my Easter Vigil in 3 months, I belive I have some valid opinions. Nothing is meant to attack anyone, and the mere fact that I'm converting should show that I have an extreme love for the Catholic Church. It is the only one through which I feel the power of Christ.

I am glad you are starting to learn about the Catholics faith. However, you still have a few misconceptions.

1.) The topic of the pope. Those here that are not Kristen and Andy seem to believe that the pope is infallilble in all that he does. In what I have been taught and what I have read on my own, it has been my knowledge that the pope is infallible when and ONLY when he declares Papal Infallibility, which has not been declared since Vatican I.

Nope, nobody here EVER said te Pope was infallible in ALL that he does. He cannot predict the World Series. However, something does not have to be infallible for us to accept it as a teaching of the Church. Look up the definition of ORDINARY

Magisterium.

2.)All this business of telling everyone how wrong they are is inherently uncatholic in itself.

Really. So we are not to correct people's errors? We are to let them go on believing something that isn't true? Should we say a stop sign is only a suggestion, as to not hurt their feelings?

For those of you that follow the Pope's decrees, Pope John XXIII made the Declaration of Religious Liberty.

http://ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/V2RELFRE.HTM

While I know many catholics view him as a bad pope because, god forbid, he changed something with the whole Vatican II thing, this document states that all men and women should be free of coercion regarding religious choices.

Nobody here regards him as a "bad" pope.

"this document states that all men and women should be free of coercion regarding religious choices. It also states that no one can be forced to act against personal convictions in choices of religion and practices. "

This document starts out by saying this

"First, the council professes its belief that God Himself has made known to mankind the way in which men are to serve Him, and thus be saved in Christ and come to blessedness. We believe that this one true religion subsists in the Catholic and Apostolic Church, to which the Lord Jesus committed the duty of spreading it abroad among all men. Religious freedom, in turn, which men demand as necessary to fulfill their duty to worship God, has to do with immunity from coercion in civil society. Therefore it leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men and societies toward the true religion and toward the one Church of Christ.

It also states that no one can be forced to act against personal convictions in choices of religion and practices.

Yep, this is true. Nobody can put a gun to your head and make you convert."

10. It is one of the major tenets of Catholic doctrine that man's response to God in faith must be free: no one therefore is to be forced to embrace the Christian faith against his own will.(8) This doctrine is contained in the word of God and it was constantly proclaimed by the Fathers of the Church.(7) The act of faith is of its very nature a free act. Man, redeemed by Christ the Savior and through Christ Jesus called to be God's adopted son,(9) cannot give his adherence to God revealing Himself unless, under the drawing of the Father,(10) he offers to God the reasonable and free submission of faith.

It is therefore completely in accord with the nature of faith that in matters religious every manner of coercion on the part of men should be excluded. In consequence, the principle of religious freedom makes no small contribution to the creation of an environment in which men can without hindrance be invited to the Christian faith, embrace it of their own free will, and profess it effectively in their whole manner of life."

And again"In the formation of their consciences, the Christian faithful ought carefully to attend to the sacred and certain doctrine of the Church.(35) For the Church is, by the will of Christ, the teacher of the truth. It is her duty to give utterance to, and authoritatively to teach, that truth which is Christ Himself, and also to declare and confirm by her authority those principles of the moral order which have their origins in human nature itself. "

It also states that other faiths should not be disregarded as false.

Nope it doesn't say that at all.

Read Dominus Iesus: http://ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFUNICI.HTM

which clearly says

"16. The Lord Jesus, the only Saviour, did not only establish a simple community of disciples, but constituted the Church as a salvific mystery: he himself is in the Church and the Church is in him (cf. Jn 15:1ff.; Gal 3:28; Eph 4:15-16; Acts 9:5). Therefore, the fullness of Christ's salvific mystery belongs also to the Church, inseparably united to her Lord. Indeed, Jesus Christ continues his presence and his work of salvation in the Church and by means of the Church (cf. Col 1:24-27),47 which is his body (cf. 1 Cor 12:12-13, 27; Col 1:18).48 And thus, just as the head and members of a living body, though not identical, are inseparable, so too Christ and the Church can neither be confused nor separated, and constitute a single "whole Christ".49 This same inseparability is also expressed in the New Testament by the analogy of the Church as the Bride of Christ (cf. 2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:25-29; Rev 21:2,9).50

Therefore, in connection with the unicity and universality of the salvific mediation of Jesus Christ, the unicity of the Church founded by him must be firmly believed as a truth of Catholic faith. Just as there is one Christ, so there exists a single body of Christ, a single Bride of Christ: "a single Catholic and apostolic Church".51 Furthermore, the promises of the Lord that he would not abandon his Church (cf. Mt 16:18; 28:20) and that he would guide her by his Spirit (cf. Jn 16:13) mean, according to Catholic faith, that the unicity and the unity of the Church — like everything that belongs to the Church's integrity — will never be lacking.52

The Catholic faithful are required to profess that there is an historical continuity — rooted in the apostolic succession 53 — between the Church founded by Christ and the Catholic Church: "This is the single Church of Christ... which our Saviour, after his resurrection, entrusted to Peter's pastoral care (cf. Jn 21:17), commissioning him and the other Apostles to extend and rule her (cf. Mt 28:18ff.), erected for all ages as ‘the pillar and mainstay of the truth' (1 Tim 3:15). This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in [subsistit in] the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him".54 With the expression subsistit in, the Second Vatican Council sought to harmonize two doctrinal statements: on the one hand, that the Church of Christ, despite the divisions which exist among Christians, continues to exist fully only in the Catholic Church, and on the other hand, that "outside of her structure, many elements can be found of sanctification and truth",55 that is, in those Churches and ecclesial communities which are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church.56 But with respect to these, it needs to be stated that "they derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church".57

17. Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.58 The Churches which, while not existing in perfect communion with the Catholic Church, remain united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist, are true particular Churches.59 Therefore, the Church of Christ is present and operative also in these Churches, even though they lack full communion with the Catholic Church, since they do not accept the Catholic doctrine of the Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church.60

On the other hand, the ecclesial communities which have not preserved the valid Episcopate and the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery,61 are not Churches in the proper sense; however, those who are baptized in these communities are, by Baptism, incorporated in Christ and thus are in a certain communion, albeit imperfect, with the Church.62 Baptism in fact tends per se toward the full development of life in Christ, through the integral profession of faith, the Eucharist, and full communion in the Church.63

"The Christian faithful are therefore not permitted to imagine that the Church of Christ is nothing more than a collection — divided, yet in some way one — of Churches and ecclesial communities; nor are they free to hold that today the Church of Christ nowhere really exists, and must be considered only as a goal which all Churches and ecclesial communities must strive to reach".64 In fact, "the elements of this already-given Church exist, joined together in their fullness in the Catholic Church and, without this fullness, in the other communities".65 "Therefore, these separated Churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church".66

The lack of unity among Christians is certainly a wound for the Church; not in the sense that she is deprived of her unity, but "in that it hinders the complete fulfilment of her universality in history".67

Edited February 7, 2004 by cmotherofpirl

[phatcatholic]

Well, I still hold firm on my own beliefs that it is a denomination. In this day and age, we are. So you're practically saying we're not Christian and the fact that Protestants aren't Christian either?! I don't think you understand. It's not politically based... it's spiritually based... pick up a Bible.

what you need to understand here is that no one is claiming that protestants are not christian, just b/c they broke away from the one church of Christ. catholics willfully acknowledge that other denominations have many good Truths in them and that God works in them as well. however, they do not have the fullness of Truth that catholicism possesses. therefore, even though they are denominations, they are still christians, we still love them, and we NEVER presume to judge their salvation.

that last sentence is particular important, as i forsee there being a misunderstanding w/ this later on....

[phatcatholic]

Although I have my own strong doctrines and beliefs, I still follow the Word of God. No matter what you say to me about how the Catholic Church is the almighty church and that all should flock to it and it's the best church around, I'm sorry, but I would be inclined to disagree with you. There are other churches in this world that have more of an impact on people than the Catholic Church. Even though people want to say that 100% of the Catholic doctrine is Christ-based, I'd beg to differ. Read the Catechism one more time, then tell me what you think. I'd also recommend reading the footnotes in the New American Bible published by the Council of Bishops (whatever it's called in the US). Anyway, the Protestant and Catholic Churches are the same in many ways and that's what Cross hopes to educate people on. We are also open to the reality that people do have different beliefs than the majority of the Catholic Church patrons.

God Bless,

Andy

first off, find me something in the catechism that is not "christ-based" or scripturally supported. that is my challenge to you. secondly, what is ur point about the commentary in the NAB? u need to be more specific in your objections, and back them up w/ proof. finally, we acknowledge that other christians believe differently then we do. actually, in your last sentence here, you contradict what u said earlier about all christians being totally equal. interesting.....

[Aloysius]

oye vey.

aight, 1st Papal infallibility is present when the Pope speaks in his office as successor to St. Peter about faith or morals. this has happened many times since Vatican I. it does not have to be dogma to be infallible.

2nd Religious liberty does not mean no one is in error and it certainly does not mean we can't inform them they're in error.

3rd Vatican II did not change the Church, the Church does not change. Vatican II changed some disciplines, such as how the liturgy in the Latin Rite of the Church is carried out. it then proceeded to restate a lot of stuff which the Church has always taught for clarification purposes.

4th The Word of God cannot be contained in a book. the deposit of faith given to us by God through Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture as interpretted by the Magisterium guided by the Holy Spirit is the Word of God.

5th if you don't like it, that makes you protestant.

6th i love you all. i love protestants. and because of that love, i have the OBLIGATION to correct the errors of protestantism so that one day all Christianity will be one.

7th Protestantism will not last forever, nothing Christian seperate from the Catholic Church ever does, case in point: HISTORY.

8th Catholics DO have something to learn from Protestantism, otherwise God would have already squashed it out (NOT PROTESTANTS, just protestantISM)... perhaps God is teaching us charity, and how we should have zeal for our faith like so many good protestants do

9th i shall have to join this Cross thing... sounds interesting, however, i cannot in good conscience concede any point of Truth the Catholic Church presents

10th i'll pray for you, pray for me too, i got struggles. i pray for your struggles and that you'll find the one truth that God intends to bind all Christians together by.

Pax Christi (Peace of Christ)

[Aloysius]

oh and 11th, never let religious differences get in the way of friendship! we can all still get along, <we just might haveta fight to the death in the debate table >

May the Peace of Christ descend upon us all and draw all Christians into true unity on the Rock Christ builds His Church upon. :)

[cimlog]

I agree Al. I will not let religious diferences weaken a relationship.

[Aloysius]

What Diocese do y'all live in?

Pittsburgh.. ^_^

CMOM 2, i think... not the same parish though

[Guest svdrummer87]

Ok....I thought of a couple other little things to throw in after consulting with a religious figure tonight who shall remain nameless, mainly because he/she is known among many of the people here and I don't want to cause any conflict. After asking many questions, his/her response to many of these things made a lot of sense to me. The ones I can remember off the top of my head are as follows....I'm sure I'll remember more later as it is almost midnight and my mind is fried.

1.) One cannot use the argument that in the Nicene Creed, the statement is made "I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church" and that means Catholocism is the one and only way to true salvation. In this context, catholic is spelled with a lower case c. When it is spelled in this fashion, it means "universal" and is not referring to the religion as a whole. On the argument that universal means "all encompassing", that is only one definition. It also means "embracing a major part or the greatest portion", " comprehensively broad and versatile", and "adapted or adjustable to meet varied requirements", and " present or occurring everywhere: existent or operative everywhere or under all conditions"...or at least these definitions are good enough for merriam webster. This context of the word catholic is referring to the christian faith as a whole, not Catholocism specifically. These definitions of universal don't quite fit your beliefs of complete and total acceptance.

2.)One can never say that Catholocism is the one true way to salvation. God would not send his son to earth and put him through terrible suffering just to say "All of you are forgiven....except for you, you, you, and you guys over there too." If one says that Catholocism is the only way to true salvation, then Jesus himself didn't make it perfectly because he was Jewish.

3.) One can not say that you cannot speak to God and must rely soley on the interpretations of others. If you cannot speak to god and he cannot act through you, what is prayer?

4.) One can not say that because someone does not accept one piece of the church, they are not Catholic. This is like saying that if you disagree with the president, you are not an American, or if you disagree with your teacher you are not a student.

These were all answers I received from a highly respected religious figure from my Catholic church. I suppose you are now going to tell me that they are not Catholic either.

[Guest svdrummer87]

One more thing just came to mind:

If God didn't want us to have our own opinions, why did he give us free will?