extra ecclesia nulla salus (no salvation outside the Catholic Church) in MY view

[rightnow909]

If Jesus established ONE CHurch it just stands to reason He wants people to be in that Church

disagree?

so it also stands to reason that if they are not, they end up in Hell

disagree?

However, I have met protestants who trust the Bible, as they should, and do not argue with Catholics all day long about every little thing the RCC teaches... so IMO, which doesn't matter bc only God's "opinion" does, such open-minded and open hearted people who sincerely seek God in Christ... can be saved.. Only God knows whether they WILL be in the end, at the end of their lives, but that goes w/o saying

I know one thing: It defies all logic to reject a Church that you even begin to suspect is Christ's one and only Church... and of course God holds us accountable for all our choices...

and anyone who is saved while outside the Catholic Churcch (not an official member), if saved, IS saved through the auspices of the Cathlic Church whether that person knows it or believes it or not... because ALL Christian communities are connected spiritually w/ the Catholic Churchc... the Catholic Church was the first Christian Church in the world (the only one but whatever) and all the Protestant ones derived or "spun off" from the RCC

 

[Gabe Lackmann]

Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic?

I would say the Orthodox should have that honor as they are the most original form of the faith.

 

[night_son]

If Jesus established ONE CHurch it just stands to reason He wants people to be in that Church

disagree?

so it also stands to reason that if they are not, they end up in Hell

disagree?

However, I have met protestants who trust the Bible, as they should, and do not argue with Catholics all day long about every little thing the RCC teaches... so IMO, which doesn't matter bc only God's "opinion does," such open-minded and open hearted people who sincerely seek God in Christ... can be saved.. Only God knows whether they WILL be in the end, at the end of their lives, but that goes w/o saying

I know one thing: It defies all logic to reject a Church that you even begin to suspect is Christ's one and only Church... and of course God holds us accountable for all our choices...

No one ever seems to think of asking Christ himself which Church-empire raised in his name is the one.

 

[rightnow909]

Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic?

I would say the Orthodox should have that honor as they are the most original form of the faith.

I can't say I know much about the Orthodox. They don't accept the papacy, do they? or is it just the pope's infallibiliity?

 

[rightnow909]

No one ever seems to think of asking Christ himself which Church-empire raised in his name is the one.

I have.

and I have also experienced in my personal life how and why it is that the RCC is the true Church... Again, it is riddled with corruption and evil.. (pedophile issues.. homosexuality..etc)

that's why I say the SSPX is the true Catholic Church. That Church does not promote all the liberal bs of Vatican II... does not support a fraction of what Pope F has said ...

 

[Gabe Lackmann]

I can't say I know much about the Orthodox. They don't accept the papacy, do they? or is it just the pope's infallibiliity?

They have a leader.
Patriarch Bartholomew I.
Which is kinda like their pope.
Different hat, different title.
No, the Roman Catholic Church do not recognize the Patriarch.
The Roman Catholics are the original protestants.

 

[night_son]

I have.

and I have also experienced in my personal life how and why it is that the RCC is the true Church... Again, it is riddled with corruption and evil.. (pedophile issues.. homosexuality..etc)

that's why I say the SSPX is the true Catholic Church. That Church does not promote all the liberal bs of Vatican II... does not support a fraction of what Pope F has said ...

You missed my point. In doing that, you might as well be choosing ice cream flavors for the manner in which you seek the true path. The modern range of flavors of religious sects is about as wide as sand grains on the beach and just as byzantine in its individual claims to righteousness; every last one of them claim to be the one and only. Religion has become more style than substance. Why not put on a different pair of religions daily in order to suit the in-style of the day?

 

[Meriweather]

The Roman Catholics are the original protestants.

Not quite. The division between the East and West Churches was caused, by of all things, how the different languages were trying to get across the same point. One said the word should be this; the other said a word should be that. It is plain idiotic that the two still cannot reunite and shame on both.

The difference between the Catholic split is that both retained all the sacraments instituted by Christ, while many Protestant denominations let go of a few.

 

[Gabe Lackmann]

Not quite. The division between the East and West Churches was caused, by of all things, how the different languages were trying to get across the same point. One said the word should be this; the other said a word should be that. It is plain idiotic that the two still cannot reunite and shame on both.

The difference between the Catholic split is that both retained all the sacraments instituted by Christ, while many Protestant denominations let go of a few.

IDC WHAT caused it. The premise stated in the OP

"ALL Christian communities are connected spiritually w/ the Catholic Churchc... the Catholic Church was the first Christian Church in the world (the only one but whatever) and all the Protestant ones derived or "spun off" from the RCC"


Going by his statement, it should be the Eastern Orthodox Church. As that sect of Christianity is the oldest, and most original version of Christianity. Not the RCC.

 

[rightnow909]

They have a leader.
Patriarch Bartholomew I.
Which is kinda like their pope.
Different hat, different title.
No, the Roman Catholic Church do not recognize the Patriarch.
The Roman Catholics are the original protestants.

no, the orthodox are

Peter was the first pope, so why wouldn't theChurch continue to have a pope? of course, it does

but what I'm confused about is... don't even know how to word things here. someone hassaid no heretic can be pope, so how is F pope? and other popes have done heretical things also.. kissing theKoran and all that nonsense...

I say the last valid pope was either Pius XII (but i have doubts about him...) or Pius XI or X

Pius X was canonized, wrote a lot against LIBERALISM - he wanted tocurtail that kind of thing in the Church, made priests all take an oath against modernism

which oath of course Vatican II got rid of...

that tells u all you need to know, really, about Vatican II...

-

 

[rightnow909]

You missed my point. In doing that, you might as well be choosing ice cream flavors for the manner in which you seek the true path. The modern range of flavors of religious sects is about as wide as sand grains on the beach and just as byzantine in its individual claims to righteousness; every last one of them claim to be the one and only. Religion has become more style than substance. Why not put on a different pair of religions daily in order to suit the in-style of the day?

well, this is what is wrong with all the divisiveness, started by Luther. There were disagreements among clergy b4 him but he was the one who split and started what he called a church... now we have something like 60,000 non-Catholic "churches" all teaching different things... and all this confusion and no one knows what to believe or where the true Church is. I have studied these issues for many years and been a member of the novus ordo until not long ago (out of ignorance)... Again, there is good in some of those, but the SSPX continued the historical traditions and practices that were somehow acceptable until Vat II came along but now... I mean, I don't have a lot of time to list all the problems of Vat II but... there are books around about the infiltration.. etc..

where were we anyway?

I forgot the original topic... sorry, been a long day and stuff

ok, I re-read what i wrote and I guess I'll leave it at that... but I have heard people say good things about the Orthodox churches so I am not saying anything bad..

 

[Gabe Lackmann]

no, the orthodox are

Peter was the first pope, so why wouldn't theChurch continue to have a pope? of course, it does

Looks like you are dancing on the heads of pins.

The RCC broke away as they disagreed for liturgical reasons.

THUS a new church was formed from the old.

Eastern Orthodox Church has remained constant, and most true to the word of God.

The RRC on the other hand, has instituted many massive changes

• Instituted the infallibility of the pope (dogma-wise)
• Changed the Nicene Creed, concerning the Holy Spirit back and forth, a couple of times, by three distinct Popes
• Heavy focus on the birth of Christ rather than the resurrection...the true intent and most important aspect.
• Altered communion only for bread/body and not wine/blood
• Prohibited the marriage by clergy

This is not bad, per say, I guess, but it is most certainly new, and most CERTAINLY not in line with the original beliefs and practices.

THEREFORE--All Christians must find true salvation stemming from the roots that the original church gave us.

The Eastern Orthodox Church.

 

[Meriweather]

Going by his statement, it should be the Eastern Orthodox Church. As that sect of Christianity is the oldest, and most original version of Christianity. Not the RCC.

Well, we may disagree there, because I see both hand in hand until both got hard-headed over something that should have been resolved ages ago. I get the initial misunderstanding, but it is plain silly to remain apart all this time.

 

[rightnow909]

Looks like you are dancing on the heads of pins.

The RCC broke away as they disagreed for liturgical reasons.

THUS a new church was formed from the old.

Eastern Orthodox Church has remained constant, and most true to the word of God.

The RRC on the other hand, has instituted many massive changes

• Instituted the infallibility of the pope (dogma-wise)
• Changed the Nicene Creed, concerning the Holy Spirit back and forth, a couple of times, by three distinct Popes
• Heavy focus on the birth of Christ rather than the resurrection...the true intent and most important aspect.
• Altered communion only for bread/body and not wine/blood
• Prohibited the marriage by clergy

This is not bad, per say, I guess, but it is most certainly new, and most CERTAINLY not in line with the original beliefs and practices.

THEREFORE--All Christians must find true salvation stemming from the roots that the original church gave us.

The Eastern Orthodox Church.

I can see your point

but theclergy should be celibate

The Word says it is better to be celibate (my phrasing) --that the wife is concerned about pleasing her husband and vice versa (hard to put God first, in other words)

 

[rightnow909]

Well, we may disagree there, because I see both hand in hand until both got hard-headed over something that should have been resolved ages ago. I get the initial misunderstanding, but it is plain silly to remain apart all this time.

i totally agree

and the RCC has it right RE clerical celibacy

the Bible says it is better not to marry

 

[Gabe Lackmann]

Well, we may disagree there, because I see both hand in hand until both got hard-headed over something that should have been resolved ages ago. I get the initial misunderstanding, but it is plain silly to remain apart all this time.

I think they are even further apart today.

No offense to any Roman Catholics but my God that church has been plagued by scandal for millennia.

If I were the Eastern Orthodox Church I would tip my hat passing them to mass.

That would be about it.

 

[Gabe Lackmann]

I can see your point

but theclergy should be celibate

The Word says it is better to be celibate (my phrasing) --that the wife is concerned about pleasing her husband and vice versa (hard to put God first, in other words)

We disagree there.

I contest that MANY of the problems present in the RCC stem from that very practice.

We are men, and women, not God.

Love of a woman, and love of God can happen simultaneously.

A man loves his children, and his wife...his parents...his friends....his career...and God too.

This is a well rounded life.

This is natural.

Denying man natural life prevents him from focusing on God.

 

[rightnow909]

We disagree there.

I contest that MANY of the problems present in the RCC stem from that very practice.

We are men, and women, not God.

Love of a woman, and love of God can happen simultaneously.

A man loves his children, and his wife...his parents...his friends....his career...and God too.

This is a well rounded life.

This is natural.

Denying man natural life prevents him from focusing on God.

not true.. I've been celibate a long time and I am a better person for it. My body didn't appreciate it all the time but oh well....

a man who has to take care of a family cannot be free to take care of the flock... Of course, I have seen it where certain people in the Church are neglected anyway... again, it seems that only those who have $$ are "cared about"

but hey... like u say... we're all human...

except that after awhile that begins to look like a very lame excuse but .. uh... where w ere we?

there was some other thing i disagreed w/ RE orthodox v rcc

but I can't recall at this time...

 

[Gabe Lackmann]

not true.. I've been celibate a long time and I am a better person for it. My body didn't appreciate it all the time but oh well....

That's on you bro, your choice.

If a priest chooses that path then God bless him.

However, for the church to mandate that in the service of God..is not right...IMO.

a man who has to take care of a family cannot be free to take care of the flock... Of course, I have seen it where certain people in the Church are neglected anyway... again, it seems that only those who have $$ are "cared about"

I understand the chain of thought...a man cannot serve two masters.

Your wife is not your master.

True you serve your wife as is your duty to serve and protect her, but this is not the same as God.

I do not agree.

 

[rightnow909]

That's on you bro, your choice.

If a priest chooses that path then God bless him.

However, for the church to mandate that in the service of God..is not right...IMO.

Jesus can mandate anything He chooses and we should listen and follow according. Of course it was a followrer of Jesus in the 1st century who said being single is better than being married.. (paraphrase).

Actually priests could marry until about the 10th or 11th century. The people going to confession preferred the celibate priests... so basically the Church hierarchy went along w/ that... the people.