Posted on 07/14/2003 11:56:28 AM PDT by presidio9
If the Catholic-bashing idiots of FR knew even half the details of Karol Wojtyla's biography, they'd know they're not fit to even open their mouths to criticize him. They've been sitting around fat, dumb and happy in the US all their lives - I'd love to see what their reaction would be if real tyranny and persecution came to these shores.
They'd be the first to renounce Christ in order to save their smarmy hides.
I guess that depends on your point of view.
Would it be "uncharitable" of you to say Joseph Smith's, Mary Baker Eddy's and/or Charles Taze Russell's prayers "may have been almost useless"?
Whether or not he did, would it have been "uncharitable" for the 16th Century pope to have said Martin Luther's prayers "may be almost useless"?
It sure would have. No Christian's prayers are useless.
As far as Joseph Smith, MB Eddy and CT Russell's prayers, it depends on to whom they directed them. Joseph Smith directed them to a different "God" than the God of Christianity. Russell, I believe didn't pray to Christ since he believed him to be just a creature. I'm not sure that MB Eddy was even aware of a divinity separate from herself.
But both the Pope and Martin Luther pray to a crucified and risen Jesus who is true God and true man and who answers prayers.
There's no comparison between Smith and Eddy on the one hand and JPII and (say) RC Sproul on the other.
Bingo. Thus, we are in agreement that it is not uncharitable to say such a person's prayers may be almost useless.
Again, it's a matter of perspective.
I disagree. If someone believes that the Jesus Christ of the Gospels is their Lord and Savior, then their prayer can't be useless.
If they believe that the Jesus Christ of the Gospels was just a nice guy, or a manifestation of a shared consciousness or life-force, or a special but non-divine creature then we have an entirely different phenomenon.
This is not a matter of perspective - either you believe Christ is Lord or you don't.
He is the matter of perspective. Some deny one's faith in His finished work on the cross is alone entirely efficacious for salvation. In doing so, they redefine Him. They redefine God.
Some certainly do. But that's not the Catholic position.
The only salvation is Christ crucified.
Really? So, a Roman Catholic need only profess faith in Him, and that's it, eternity in Heaven is assured, no matter what?
If so, I've been misled regarding certain stuff like your "mortal sins" and "last rites" and praying people's souls out of "purgatory" (to name a few).
You've jumped from A to C.
Catholics and Reformed Christians both agree that Christ's blood is the only ransom for sin and Christ's merit is the only source of grace.
We disagree over whether the Scriptures teach that mere verbal profession is the means of availing ourselves of Christ's grace.
We believe that Christ meant what he said: "not everyone who says Lord, Lord will enter the kingdom of Heaven" but that he who does the will of the Father will be saved. We believe that a mere verbal profession can sometimes be empty and meaningless - "This people worships me with their lips but their hearts are far from me."
In other words, for the Catholic faith is not just a synonym for "belief" - having faith means being faithful.
I mean, quite honestly, what does it mean to you when Christ tells the Apostles that He will judge us on the Last Day by how we have served him?
I've never gotten a direct answer from a Reformed Christian about how we are to take such passages from the Gospels.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.