Considering the Papists around here think Proddies are all lost that is quite funny
Which "Papists" are they?
The Catholic Church doesn't teach that.
>>Considering the Papists around here think Proddies are all lost that is quite funny<<
I’m proud to be Papist, got the bumper sticker to prove it.
Every Catholic believes what the Vatican states.
It is possible, according to Catholic doctrine, to affirm correctly that the Church of Christ is present and operative in the churches and ecclesial Communities not yet fully in communion with the Catholic Church, on account of the elements of sanctification and truth that are present in them.[9] Nevertheless, the word “subsists” can only be attributed to the Catholic Church alone precisely because it refers to the mark of unity that we profess in the symbols of the faith (I believe... in the “one” Church); and this “one” Church subsists in the Catholic Church.
I know some believe that Catholics think that “Proddies are all lost” but we actually believe that you are Brothers and Sisters in Christ.
Wish those that were not Catholic thought the same of us. It always makes me giggle when certain posters call non-Catholics “Brother in Christ” or “Sister in Christ” but never calls a Catholic that.
I have never claimed that non Catholics are lost. However I take exception to the original post and am quite sure the author was never Catholic. Oh and his bit about being allowed to say something from the pulpit at a Catholic funeral? Pure invention.
We must believe that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true Church. Hence they who are out of our Church, or separated, cannot be saved, except infants who die after baptism.
-St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Instructions on the Commandments and Sacraments, pt. 1, sec. 1, n. 10
Q. Have Protestants any faith in Christ?
A. They never had.
Q. Why not?
A. Because there never lived any such a Christ as they imagine and believe in.
Q. In what kind of Christ to they believe?
A. In such a one whom they can make a liar with impunity, whose doctrines they can interpret as they please, and who does not care what a man believes, provided he be an honest man before the public.
Q. Will such a faith in such a Christ save Protestants?
A. No sensible man will assert such an absurdity.
Q. What will Christ say to them on the day of judgement?
A. I know you not, because you never knew me.
Q. Are Protestants willing to confess their sins to a Catholic bishop or priest, who alone has power from Christ to forgive sins? “Whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven them.”
A. No; for they generally have an utter aversion to confession, and therefore their sins will not be forgiven them throughout all eternity.
Q. What follows from this?
A. That they die in their sins and are damned.
Q. But is it not a very uncharitable doctrine to say that no one can be saved out of the Church?
A. On the contrary, it is a very great act of charity to assert most emphatically, that out of the Catholic Church there is no salvation possible; for Jesus Christ and His Apostles have taught this doctrine in very plain language.
-Fr. Michael Mueller, CSsR, “Familiar Explanation of Christian Doctrine”
We Proceed thus to the Third Article: It would seem that a heretic who disbelieves one article of faith, can have a lifeless faith in the other articles.
Obj. 1. For the natural intellect of a heretic is not more able than that of a Catholic. Now a Catholic’s intellect needs the aid of the gift of faith in order to believe any article whatever of faith. Therefore it seems that heretics cannot believe any articles of faith without the gift of lifeless faith.
On the contrary, Just as mortal sin is contrary to charity, so is disbelief in one article of faith contrary to faith. Now charity does not remain in a man after one mortal sin. Therefore, neither does faith, after a man disbelieves one article.
I answer that, Neither living nor lifeless faith remains in a heretic who disbelieves one article of faith.
The reason is that the species of every habit depends on the formal aspect of the object, without which the species of the habit cannot remain. Now the formal object of faith is the First Truth, as manifested in Holy Writ and the teaching of the Church, which proceeds from the First Truth. Consequently whoever does not adhere, as to an infallible and Divine rule, to the teaching of the Church, which proceeds from the First Truth manifested in Holy Writ, has not the habit of faith, but holds that which is of faith otherwise than by faith. Even so, it is evident that a man whose mind holds a conclusion without knowing how it is proved, has not scientific knowledge, but merely an opinion about it. Now it is manifest that he who adheres to the teaching of the Church, as to an infallible rule, assents to whatever the Church teaches; otherwise, if, of the things taught by the Church, he holds what he chooses to hold and rejects what he chooses to reject, he no longer adheres to an infallible rule, but to his own will. Hence it is evident that a heretic who obstinately disbelieves one article of the faith, is not prepared to follow the teaching of the Church in all things; but if he is not obstinate, he is no longer in heresy but only in error. Therefore it is clear that such a heretic with regard to one article has no faith in other articles, but only a kind of opinion in accordance with his own will.
Reply Obj. 1. A heretic does not hold the other articles of faith, about which he does not err, in the same way as one of the faithful does, namely by adhering simply to the Divine Truth, because in order to do so, a man needs the help of the habit of faith; but he holds the things that are of faith, by his own will and judgement.
-Summa Theologica, Part II-II, Q. 5, Art. 3
Whether Unbelief Is the Greatest of Sins?
We proceed thus to the Third Article: It would seem that unbelief is not the greatest of sins ...
I answer that, Every sin consists formally in aversion from God (Part I-II, Q. 71, Art. 6; Q. 73, Art. 3). Hence the more a sin severs man from God, the graver it is. Now man is more than ever separated from God by unbelief, because he has not even true knowledge of God: and by false knowledge of God, man does not approach Him, but is severed from Him. Nor is it possible for one who has a false opinion of God, to know Him in any way at all, because the object of the opinion is not God. Therefore it is clear that the sin of unbelief is greater than any sin that occurs in the perversion of morals as we shall state further on (Q. 20, Art. 3; Q. 34, Art. 2, ad 2; Q. 39, Art. 2; ad 3) ...
-Summa Theologica, Part II-II, Q. 10, Art. 3
Give me a break! I am so sick of “my church is better than your church” crap.
You appear to have not matured past “my dad can beat your dad up” mentallity.
The world is coming apart at the seams and you’re stuck on stupid. Apparently, your “lantern” would be better seen if you could manage to pull it out of your behind.
nuff said.
667 replies ... glad I was doing something useful the past 2 days.