BTW, the Catholic Church does not teach that:
From: Lumen Gentium: "Light of Nations"
The Second Vatican Council speaks of salvation outside the Church in Lumen Gentium, nos. 14 and 16. Here are the pertinent sections from those two articles: 14. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk 16:16; Jn 3:5) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved. [. . .] 16. [. . .] Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel. She knows that it is given by Him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life.
As to the posts, observe not only the quantity, but the quality of the anti-Catholic posts. Name-calling; focusing constantly on chosen verses to justify the un Christian nature of the attitude toward Catholics; the side-bars with private jokes. And please do not tell me it is all out of love and concern for our souls, as the statement is frequently made that all but the "saved" or the"believers" are damned. There are too many whose posts reflect a morbid delight that the remainder of the world will spend eternity in hell.
My apologies to all non Catholic FReepers who are here for discussion; who are polite and kind and who state their beliefs simply and gently, without judgement. I have learned from you, and enjoy our discussions.
May God bless ALL our FReepers, without exception- and may we all rejoice one day together in Heaven!
Then take it elsewhere. This is FreeRepublic -- not catholicculture.
As to the posts, observe not only the quantity, but the quality of the anti-Catholic posts. Name-calling;
I've been here for a long time. Many years.
Over the years I've not noticed all that much objection to quantity and "poor quality" of anti-Protestant commentary. Many threads originated by FRomans do appear to be simply that--- anti-Protestant, as are loads of 'comments'.
In fact, that (posting anti-Protestant claims) is often as rewarded and agreed to in "side-bars" -- including some of the very worst of it.
Recently though there has been some uptick of rebuttal threads themselves. If that is not to anyone's liking, then visit the gift shop on the way out the door and pick up some cheese to go with the whine.
"...focusing constantly on chosen verses to justify the un Christian nature of the attitude toward Catholics; the side-bars with private jokes."
Can you tell the difference between scripture passages which can serve as form of check & test in opposition to particular aspects of [Roman] Catholic theological positions, and statements made against 'Catholic' persons themselves?
How about determining the difference between opposing what a person does or says in comparison to a thing being mere insult?
If so, then apply that process as equitably to those whom criticize this or that which may be found within Roman Catholicism as one might to those whom seek to defend Roman Catholicism.
Let us focus one moment upon this one portion of Lumen Gentium;
And just who or what is this "Church" being spoken of -- but from RCC perspective -- itself, chiefly and alone?
The above passage also makes it out to be that *they" are Jesus Himself -- thus God.
Mankind should never take a seat in the Temple, proclaiming himself to be God.
The secularist humanist do that very thing in their own way.
I reject both approaches in that I will follow neither of those ways...
It is simple.
We are not Him, and He is not ourselves, although He can be within ourselves, and ourselves within Himself, by Spirit, the Holy Spirit. John 14
G2G: you are confused...
"One indeed is the universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved, in which the priest himself is the sacrifice, Jesus Christ, whose body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the species of bread and wine; the bread (changed) into His body by the divine power of transubstantiation, and the wine into the blood, so that to accomplish the mystery of unity we ourselves receive from His (nature) what He Himself received from ours." — Pope Innocent III and Lateran Council IV (A.D. 1215)
Therefore, if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole Church; or that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy: let him be anathema. — Vatican 1, Ses. 4, Cp. 1