"The Holy Spirit was given by Christ to the apostles, who formed the Church. Through baptism in the Church, one receives the Holy Spirit."
I agree with this, but I do not see where baptism within the bounds of The Church is necessary for reception of the Holy Spirit. Like Orthodoxy, the Latin Church accepts the validity of Christian, Trinitarian, water baptisms performed by ministers of groups outside The Church, or so I understood. Am I wrong?
Though the question is an open one in Orthodoxy, it is the opinion of many Orthodox theologians that theosis by the power of the Holy Spirit might well be found outside the bounds of The Church even of persons who are not Christians and without baptism because they cannot define "whither the Spirit goes". This of course is speculation, which those theologians freely admit, and is related to the apophatic way in which Orthodoxy "does" theology.
That's pretty much what the Latins say when they refer to "no salvation outside the Church". The Church understands that the Spirit blows where He wills, bringing into the "Church" even those who are outside the VISIBLE walls. Thus, the Church firmly believes that even a non-Christian can be saved by the Spirit. The sacrament of Baptism is the normative means of entering the Church. But it is certainly not the only way, as God is not bound by the Sacraments (so says St. Augustine). I think what we see is Rome defining more broadly what "Church" is. Vatican 2 made it clear that the Church of Christ SUBSISTS within the Roman Catholic Church, but never said it IS the Roman Catholic Church. Sort of takes me back to geometry and sets and subsets... What I found interesting is that ONLY APOSTOLIC communities are "churches" per sec. Thus, Rome sees the Orthodox as an Apostolic Church, despite our schism.
Regards
The claim made by Protestants as they interpret the scripture is that they can do so outside of the authority of the Church, and in fact against such authority, because, don't you see, they've got the Holy Ghost. By that logic the Holy Ghost would lead every commuinity of baptized Christians away from error, and it is a plain fact that it cannot be so if only because they plain contradict one another.
I agree that the Holy Ghost can appear extraordinarily outside of the walls of the Visible Church, primarily for the purposes of individual salvation. Nevertheless, the fact that the laity ordinarily receives the Holy Ghost from the Church, as per the scripture cited here my me and others, means that the gift of correct public interpretation of the scripture is confined to the Church. It is analogous to the Body and Blood of Christ: it is possible that one receives it from the Church, carried it outside and misuses it. But once the Precious Body and Blood is carried away in such manner, it no longer works as intended and does not deliver to the mis-communicant any graces, -- that's putting it mildly.
I apologize for not giving everyone, who made cogent remarks to me today, a one-on-one reply. I will go over the thread in a few days and try to reply to everyone who raised substantive points.