Protestants aren't proper Christians, says Pope

Daily Mail ^ | 11th July 2007 | SIMON CALDWELL

[indcons]

Pope Benedict XVI declared yesterday that Christian denominations other than his own were not true churches and their holy orders have no value.

Protestant leaders immediately responded by saying the claims were offensive and would hurt efforts to promote ecumenism.

Roman Catholic- Anglican relations are already strained over the Church of England's plans to ordain homosexuals and women as bishops. The claims came in a document, from a Vatican watchdog which was approved by the Pope.

It said the branches of Christianity formed after the split with Rome at the Reformation could not be called churches "in the proper sense" because they broke with a succession of popes who dated back to St Peter.

As a result, it went on, Protestant churches have "no sacramental priesthood", effectively reaffirming the controversial Catholic position that Anglican holy orders are worthless.

The document claimed the Catholic church was the "one true church of Christ".

Pope Benedict's commitment to the hardline teaching comes days after he reinstated the Mass in Latin, which was sidelined in the 1960s in an attempt to modernise.

The timing of the announcement fuelled speculation that the pontiff - regarded as an arch-conservative before his election in 2005 - is finally beginning to impose his views on the Catholic Church.

The Vatican said it was restating the position set out by the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in 2000 in a document called Domine Jesus because theologians continued to misunderstand it.

At that time, Anglican leaders from around the world made their anger felt by snubbing an invitation to join Pope John Paul II as he proclaimed St Thomas More the patron saint of politicians.

Bishop Wolfgang Huber, head of the Evangelical Church in Germany, said the Vatican document effectively downgraded Protestant churches and would make ecumenical relations more difficult.

He said the pronouncement repeated the "offensive statements" of the 2000 document and was a "missed opportunity" to patch up relations with Protestants.

[lupie]

The Muslims, by virtue of their adherence to monotheism are more progressed theologically, than say a polytheist in Bangladesh.

What??? Where is there scriptural support for the fact that there is such a thing "theological progression" for pagans (and Muslims ARE pagans)??? Muslims worship a black stone. So what if they worship one black stone instead of many?

[conservonator]

I have no interest in any aspect of Calvin’s teachings based on his perversion of Scripture and the writings of St. Augustine. God is not the weak monster god of Calvin.

[maine-iac7]

The "guy" on the right of Jesus is, indeed, Peter - holding the symbols of the Roman Church - which signify only that: symbols of the Roman Church. The formula for iconic painting is to paint a face with little to no emotion...as on the faces of Jesus and His brother, James the Just - on His left, holding "the scroll"

The very unhappy, even angry, face of Peter - totally out of keeping with iconic painting, tells quite a story - as he literally glares across the Lord at James.

In addition, Jesus and James are dressed identically - another pointed message. Their hair is the same - the way the Nazarite Sect wore their hair - and if you looked at James and 'turned' his face towards you, it would be the spitting image of Jesus - this is testifying, in code, that James is the BLOOD brother of Jesus - something the RC would be very upset about someone claiming, as the church, in the Nicea Council, 325 after Jesus, declared Mary never had any more children - ie, no blood line to threaten the authority of the RC claim of apostolic succession and right to rule....

Jesus is holding a message that says "I am the Light" 0 perhaps the artists 'code' to signify there is a message in this painting beyond what most people 'see' when they look at it...

I have seen hundreds of iconic paintings and can't recall one other one that departs from the formula of bland, unemotional expressions. Peter (representing the RC)is pis*ed!

[OLD REGGIE]

From the NAB

The brother of James . . . Simon: in Semitic usage, the terms "brother," "sister" are applied not only to children of the same parents, but to nephews, nieces, cousins, half-brothers, and half-sisters; cf Genesis 14:16; 29:15; Lev 10:4. While one cannot suppose that the meaning of a Greek word should be sought in the first place from Semitic usage, the Septuagint often translates the Hebrew ah by the Greek word adelphos, "brother," as in the cited passages, a fact that may argue for a similar breadth of meaning in some New Testament passages. For instance, there is no doubt that in v 17, "brother" is used of Philip, who was actually the half-brother of Herod Antipas. On the other hand, Mark may have understood the terms literally; see also Mark 3:31-32; Matthew 12:46; 13:55-56; Luke 8:19; John 7:3, 5. The question of meaning here would not have arisen but for the faith of the church in Mary's perpetual virginity.

This Scripture is unknown to me.

Oh! A footnote. Nevermind.

[jddqr]

Thanks for the grammar lesson. I’ll be sure to also point out any flaws in your posts from now on.

[lupie]

Muslims profess to worship the God of Abraham, I can’t tell what’s in their hearts. If and it’s a big if, they do worship the same God that we do, they have a highly defective understanding of His nature and His message of salvation. That said, I know of several Muslims who converted to Christianity, but no Buddhists that have so something in the Muslim religion must have an aspect of truth that allows them to see the truth of Christ more easily than other non-Christian and Jewish religions.

No, they absolutely do NOT worship the same God. They may call it the same, but if you have ever read much about Islam, then you would know that they do NOT worship the same God. His character is totally different. God made His character manifest in all of creation (Romans 1). The god of Islam is NOT the loving, just, merciful, omnipotent, holy, gracious, slow to anger and abouding in love God of the Scriptures.

If Buddists started calling Buddha God for a long enough period of time, most sheeple would begin to believe they loved the same God as we do.

Again, you have NO scriptural evidence that Muslims have an aspect of the truth. It is the God the Holy Spirit that opens anyone's eyes. It is not a false religion. To say that a false religion will lead someone to the Lord is unbiblical, to say the least.

[conservonator]

That’s the nice thing about conspiracy theories, if one doesn't’t work out, you can always invent another.

[lupie]

That's gnosticism.

All men are equally fallen. The length of the walk towards Christ and the quality of the pavement is not what matters; only the destination.

and AMEN to you! \o/

[conservonator]

I’m not about to act as an apologist for Muslims, all I can tell you is that they believe that they worship the same God that Abraham worshiped.

[lupie]

I cannot fathom why anyone (especially a Christian) would want to say that the God of Islam is their God too.

I can't either. And the fact that the pope kissed the koran should be more than enough to make any true believer highly question why their so-called leader is doing that. But yet, they defend that and this teaching that the God of Islam is the God of Abraham. Ugh. It is one thing for a politician to say or do something like that, but not a leader of Christians. How can they be a leader of the fold of the Lord? I don't get it. Not at all.

[conservonator]

One last time, Muslims believe they worship the God of Abraham, I have to take them at their word. I believe that they have a highly defective understanding of God, but at least they believe or (believe they believe) in one God. It would be a bit presumptuous of me to tell a Muslim that despite what they believe, they really worship the moon or a black rock and not God.

I would be entirely correct in telling them, however, that their understanding of God and his plan of salvation is lacking.

[lupie]

Interesting. I will have to ask my my daughter if she knows this stuff. She is an art teacher. Where do you get your information?

[OLD REGGIE]

For whom ever is saved, we are saved by grace.

Clear enough?

Afraid not. I didn't see that in the Catechism.

[OLD REGGIE]

Thanks for the grammar lesson. I’ll be sure to also point out any flaws in your posts from now on.

Unfortunately Bainbridge gave you bad information. "Irregardless" is now accepted, though non standard, usage.

[maine-iac7]

You say to the poster who quoted thusly:

According to the catechism of the RCC of 1994... "841 - The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."

That paragraph is in a section that specifically addresses non-Christian peoples and religions. Protestants are Christians and as such are not considered in this section. Now that you know, I trust that you will refrain from posting this section of the catechism in a misleading way again.

Ahhh - the meaning is bold , clear, and in your face - and I don't recall a refutation of the mooselsimes yet? Maybe I missed it?

[Patriotic1]

Actually, we Catholics do a lot for the 3rd world, just as all of our brothers and sisters in Christ do. We even have an annual Peter’s Pence collection that goes strictly for missionary work. This work is not just for preaching the Catholic faith, but also to improve the lot of the poor. We even help the Muslims, as do other Christians.

The Pope is not saying that if you are not Catholic you are going to Hell. There are those Catholics who are in danger of hell (we don’t believe in once-saved, always-saved). What he is saying is that Christians not in the Catholic Church or in union with her are not within Churches as we define the Church (see the Nicene Creed). According to Catholic belief, a Church must be apostolic.

Converts to Catholicism from other denominations have their baptism automatically recognized as valid as long as they belonged to those who baptize in the name of the Trinity.

If you are not Catholic, why worry? It’s not like you listen to the Pope or care about what he says in general anyway.

[D-fendr]

Nah, Peter is giving the secret Opus Dei handsign. Jesus is telling him, “Not in public!”

Peter was always forgetting about that.

[Patriotic1]

Perhaps it would be an act of Christian kindness to correct those people! Even before Vatican II, it was not the belief that non-Catholics were damned to hell.

[Patriotic1]

Agreed - both Catholics and non-Catholic Christians have a history of sinning.

[Patriotic1]

Well, kinda... He does have a fear of assassination - he goes about in a Popemobile without the covering. About a month ago, a man got through the security lines and was feet from the Pope.

And our last Pope had a serious attempt on his life.