[RKV]

Great article.

[adiaireton8]

Whose interpretation says the "pope is on the fringe"?

-A8

[newberger]

That is not what the pop said!

[Rodney King]

And to think, I just sat down with a bowl of popcorn. Really.

[Between the Lines]

The more important question than "which is the true church" is "which is the true salvation." Peter was the first to say that it was not his own name that provides salvation but it is the name of Jesus only. To wit; "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." (Acts 4:12) The name is not Baptist, or Catholic or Evangelical or Pentecostal, the name is Jesus.

Other than this very last paragraph, the article is garbage.

[vladimir998]

Quote from the article:

“Protestants have weighed in and the response has included everything from disappointment to anger.”

Who cares? Does it matter what they think?

[Mad Dawg]

It may be a greqt article, but the first couple of sentences are at the very best imprecise:

Pope Benedict XVI has drawn fire from Protestants worldwide for saying in early July of 2007, that they are not part of the “true church.”

What the statement actually says - drawing on Dominus Iesus of which this staqtement is a clarification, is that their assemblies are not truoly churches. But they, if Baptized ARE part of the true church.

Protestants have weighed in and the response has included everything from disappointment to anger.

And some -- as posted on FR -- have said they quite understand, and, understanding, disagree. Why should the writer reduce everything, in the mode of the lame stream media, to emotion? Is it perhaps because thought, reason, truth, and things of that kind don't matter to him as much as feelings? I didn't read click the link to the article because if somebody starts so poorly, the odds that things will get better are poor. My personal FEELINGS about the Catholic church are a roller-coaster. I joined because of what I THINK of it.

[Gamecock]

If Dr Steve had been elected Pope we woudln’t be having this discussion right now.

[kawaii]

Unknown to the world at large is the fact that millions of Bible taught Christians care little about ecumenical dialogue with Catholicism. Because they believe in the promised “apostasy” of the church in the last generation of time they will do anything to stay clear of all the best efforts of ecumenicists to pull them into ecumenicism, syncretism, liberalism or anything else the papacy has to offer.

The thought that their Lutheran, Episcopol, Prebyterian, Baptist, etc churches being just that apostasy never having occured to them I guess.

[kawaii]

Following the Pope’s remarks Dr. Gerald Kieschnick president of The Lutheran Church of the Missouri Synod said, that it was this kind of thinking in the Catholic papacy that precipitated the very 16th century reformation that produced reformers like Luther and Calvin. Dr. Kieschnick said “At that time, Martin Luther said ‘Popes and councils can err.’ Kieschnick said that this is still true today

To which Luther responded with 'Ever man should be free to err wildly all by himself', denounced the teaching of Christ that the Holy Spirit would always guide the church, and almost threw out the book of James.

[DungeonMaster]

The bible says nothing about the pope, that’s the whole point.

[kawaii]

No Catholic catechism class or message from Catholic pulpits ever contains reference to the hundreds of thousands of Protestants that were brutally hunted down and murdered by papal armies. Albigensis, Waldensis and others were slaughtered until nearly a half million of them had been martyred. In one night papal armies pulled 100,000 French Huguenots out of their homes and killed them.

Why would a lesson on church teaching represent late church action? Further do Protestant Catechisms defend the murderous acts of protestants during the same days? The Catholics killed at least as many Orthodox Christians, probably more, and they still decorate their churches with the booty but I've never pondered asking Catholics to put a footnote in their Cathecism about it...

I would be suprised if no Catholic has ever spoken against these actions either during a sermon or in an official document especially under JPII BTW.

[Biggirl]

Let us remember what Jesus said to Peter, “You are Peter and on this ROCK I will build my church,” when we get into debates like this one.

What the Pope did clarifield the Church’s position after having it being watered down for years.

[RobbyS]

The Bible says nothing: it is words on the page. Those who believe in private interpretation think that when they open their mouths to say what the words mean, the Holy Ghost guyides them. To contradictory conclusions? Which Spirit is the real one?

[normy]

The only thing the Pope had right is that the Body of Christ is divided into too many denominations.

There is one Church and its called the Body of Christ. It does not require ritual or sacrifice, it does not require penance or a earthly mediator between God and men, it has one, the man Christ Jesus (1 Tim 2:5).

It doesn't need a Temple built with mens hands because our bodies are the Temple.

[Salvation]

YOPIOS by the author. That is not what the Bible says.

Re-read what Christ said to Peter before the Ascension.

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

The Bible never teaches any sort of office like a “pope”, and in fact, never teaches any organisation for Christians about the local church. The whole notion of dioceses, popes, and a universal church organisation comprising all Christians is unscriptural.