Posted on 05/16/2008 3:19:30 PM PDT by netmilsmom
Stemming from this comment
>>I think the RCC doctrines are a product of the enemy<<
Please tell us where we stand here. Examples welcome, but I'm not sure that actual names can be used when quoting another FReeper, so date and thread title may be better.
Christian isn't even the right term. We should be worried about who is saved.
I remember you said that once before and when you posted the cite it said no such thing. If they are telling you that and you are going to cite them then you need to save those in a program and you should probably ping the RM too.
Shouldn’t this be labeled a Vanity thread?
Poof, they just stopped listening to the words of the pope and followed the bible alone.
LOL. Now I know whom to blame!
I don't condemn any of them. I am simply pointing out that the Catholic teachings are not as constant as Catholics claim.
That’s what I mean by Christian
Were you aware this was a topic of considerable discussion and debate by Medieval monks for centuries!
The English Puritan church actually "un-named" places called "Saint" so and so.
I'm not tied to any particular doctrine in this.
If a Catholic believes in salvation through Christ and Christ alone, then yes, they are a Christian. Same for Protestants.
BTW, Few Catholics or Protestants I know are Christians.
Well, let’s see, that depends on what one’s definition of a Christian is...if you believe it is a follower of Christ’s teachings, then no they are not based on the RCC teachings. Jesus never taught purgatory and he never prayed to any saint...and one could go on all day...(although the point could be argued that we ALL fall way short of being perfectly christlike, however it is the basic doctrine in question here)
If you believe that a Christian is simply someone who believes in Christ/God....then yes, b/c Catholics do obviously believe in the God of the Protestants...
So it is just a matter of perspective...
Have you ever seen a Calvinist Bible? I'm guessing not. The margins are jammed with explanations, suggestions, and equivocations.
IMHO -
Anyone who has a personal relationship with Jesus Christ - fully God, fully human, the Great I AM of the scriptures - and believes that His death on the cross paid the penalty for their sin, who believes in the Trinity (One God - Father, Spirit, Son), who repents and does their best to live a life dedicated to following Jesus’ commands, that person is a “Christian”. Their denomination or particular church affiliation does not determine their status.
There are points of Catholic doctrine I believe are incorrect, but that does not mean Catholics can't be saved, or that Catholicism is evil.
“B-16 said protestants are not “true” Christians.”
Are you certain that is what he said? I seem to remember the statement was in regard to the definition of what is “church”. I think B-16 said something to the effect that Jesus established his Church, which B-16 considers to be the Catholic Church. He further stipulated that other Christian churches are more correctly called denominations. In the Apostles Creed, the end is “I believe in.... the holy, catholic, church” - which refers to the universality of a Christian church.
Now, I cannot definitely quote him on this either. But I do not believe Pope Benedict XVI considers Protestants to be non-Christians. In fact, I believe he would be angry to have such a notion attributed to him.
Another example - baptism within any Christian church/denomination, if performed using the trinitarian words that Jesus gave us, is considered a valid baptism in Christ and thus into Christianity. Hence, persons who enter the Catholic church, and who have been baptised properly, are not rebaptized.
Catholics anathematize all Protestants by summoning the demons from hell to curse all Protestants who believe they are saved by grace through faith in Christ alone.
What more is there to know regarding how we view each other?
Vanity threads like this serve no real purpose other than to cause more discord.
When the RCC wants true ecumenicism or even civility, it knows how to achieve it -- rescind the curses of the Council of Trent.
Both Luther and Calvin considered Roman Catholics to be Christians, but in a Church riven by some serious errors...namely the stuff added onto the ecumenical Creeds, which we all adhere to. I agree with them, and, the vast majority of (real) Protestants do too.
The radicals of the Reformation, the Anabaptists (of whom mainly Mennonites are the modern descendant) said that Rome was so bad as to be not Christian. Modern Baptists and similar groups on the hyper-fundamentalist side may also condemn all Roman Catholics. They are, like Roman Catholic “fundamentalists” who condemn all non-Catholics, in a tiny minority, now, and in the past.
Well, insert a church father who signed the Nicene Creed in place of Peter and insert "Joseph Smith" in place of "Martin Luther" and you'd sound like a Mormon!!! :)
Fascinating facts! Do you have a link or title for the source? I’d like to learn more.
The dictionary confirms what I said:
3. a formal ecclesiastical curse involving excommunication.
Anathema is issued by a Church council to put Christians on notice that a particular belief is not tolerable in the Catholic Church and a person holding on to this belief is automatically excommunicated, and should not for his own benefit receive Holy Communion; should he ask for Communion it may be denied him. It is a belief that separates.
Of course, there are people using the word in the other senses, but that is the technical sense in which things like “Sola Fide” and other Protestant doctrines are anathemized by councils.
"Be not afraid; only believe." -- Mark 5:36
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.