My take on Dominus Iesus And on the Catechism is that Baptism (intention to baptize + water + trinitarian words) is the ordinary means of becoming a member of the Church. It is "ordinarily necessary" — but not absolutely necessary.
But there are "degrees" of membership of the church, and words like "bene" and "plene" ("well" and "fully") are often used in an attempt to characterize those degrees.
So I have no conceptual difficulty in calling all the Baptized brothers and sister, and I will try to be alert for those who were grafted in by extraordinary means. (In this connection, the word about turning the other cheek includes the protasis,"If your brother strikes you ... .")
And I would also distinguish between "heresy" and "error", even though I would immediately say that we may never see either in the "pure" form. Most heresy probably has some inadvertent "misbelief" in it and most error, I'd guess, has its willful aspect. Certainly, I am rife with error (and not just those errors which lead me to be a Papist rather than Orthodox, brother K.)
Coming at it from another POV, since Alamo-Girl says that when she speaks as the Spirit leads her she does not necessarily abide by the strictures of logic, then the conversation with her must be of a particular kind, or, at least, cannot be of a particular kind.
I mean that once someone says, "In this discourse I will ignore the law of non-contradiction," then garden variety dialectics won't apply. What must follow (I think) will be less of a dialogue and more like a "poetry slam." in which inspired utterance is met with inspired utterance.
Or, if we stipulate the inspiration of A-G's discourse, then possibly, following the Corinthian model, we could hope for an interpreter.. If not, then Regensberg goes out the window and we are left with contending mantic proclamations at which those of us whose gift (or burden) if of the more analytic kind can only gaze in respectful silence - or turn away.
"No one can say Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit." But does this mean that every subsequent utterance is similarly inspired? That can hardly be so.
We have all been encouraged, and most have succumbed, to be temporally and culturally provincial, even chauvinist. We have difficulty imagining the poverty of Europe and of the Mediterranean littoral after the dissolution of the Empire and before the rise of cities. This is one reason the ancient Churches are so misunderstood and despised. We have little understanding of being a person to whom it was not only natural but joyful to say to a human ruler, "Have mercy on us!" because we have been largely spared the chaos and slaughter and ignorance of an age when waking every morning was a blessing, when surviving a meal was an uncertain gift, when making it to nightfall without having one's home burned and one's family slaughtered by thugs calling themselves knights or by barbarians from the sea was bit at all taken for granted. And so the idea of a "saving" war-lord is almost unthinkable to us.
Consequently, in our ignorance and in this solipsistic culture it is not surprising that many cannot imagine that allegiance to the cumbersome "edifice" of Catholicism or the ancient glory of Orthodoxy would seem not so much repellent and repugnant as simply unthinkable.
Yes, there is pride in there, I think. But it is, I'd suggest, a pride of which the one so prideful can scarcely be aware, since it seems so much like "common sense."
A-G, this may seem unbearably condescending of me. I don't know what to do about that except to ask God to amend what can be amended and to redeem what cannot. But I think if you were ever to become a Catholic or to join an Orthodox body, you would shine like the sun and know a joy that would almost eclipse the joy you already show so clearly.
But, though there is this huge and important difference in our thought, I am already happy to think of you as one to whom I am blessed to be a brother.
Just remember, I am a former WASP AND a former Episcopalian, and I don't DO emotion. It isn't decent and leads to crimes and disgraces like confusing the salad fork with the dinner fork.
“My take on Dominus Iesus And on the Catechism is that Baptism (intention to baptize + water + trinitarian words) is the ordinary means of becoming a member of the Church. It is “ordinarily necessary” — but not absolutely necessary.”
That’s loose theology, MD. Baptism, and Rome and the East understand the sacrament differently, at least along the margins, may very well signify a dedication of a person to God, but done outside The Church (and it is a point that there is absolutely no such thing as an “invisible” Church)and though the person may thereby become a Christian, that person is not ipso facto a member of The Church. As we know, they may be members of “ecclesial bodies” or “para-ecclesial groups” as we have sometimes called them, but not The Church. If they espouse heresy, they are not members of The Church but rather, as +John Chrysostomos calls them, “enemies of God”, perhaps lead there by the Evil One, but to the extent that they see The Church, to the extent that the teachings of The Church are known to them and nevertheless they reject them for heretical teachings like, for example, forms of universalism, they are cut off from The Church and the sacraments instituted by God for our Theosis.
The tough case, and we all know that tough cases make bad law, are those where by reason of delusion brought about by demonic influences, Christians reject The Church in a true and sincere belief that they are doing God’s will instead of the Evil One’s. I suppose we have to trust to God’s mercy there, as we do for ourselves and our own. My personal opinion is that the overwhelming majority of members of those eccesial groups are sincere, but resolutely refuse to undertake the sort of “self examination” in light of the teachings of The Church which might lead to that point where a choice must be made.
Easy for me to say, I suppose.
Well Dawg.. the inference is that Jesus "IS" that persons LORD, whether they say it or not.. thats even if they dont SAY it, he is.. Of course people can SAY Jesus is lord (of their life) when he ISN'T.. i.e. no Holy Spirit..
The inference being that he was(Lord to them) before they said it, NOT because of saying it.. The word "SAY" in this passage is "pregnant".. as by the way most of Jesus words are, if not all.. I might have missed some..
Thank you. Exactly! The solipsistic culture that has become the "standard" of all truth is an outgrowth of "me-myself-and-I" way of lifestyle we have particualry favor in America for some 40-50 years now.
That way you can be "Catholic" or "Orthodox" but not really adhere to all of its premises and teachings. You can make it your own "PC religion" and it's just as "good" any any other version of it...
Solipsim feeds the ego, and with it—pride. Such deception cannot possibly come from God. First you are assured that all your sins are forgiven, no matter what; your salvation is assured, no matter what, only if you recite the "magic words" (Jesus is my Savior) and you get dunked although it doesn't save, the way one "becomes" a Muslim by reciting the "magic words" "There is not God but Allah, and Mohammad is his prophet" three times! The similarity is glaring.
It actually "makes sense" to our fallen souls (and yet one cursory look around and above us reminds us that nothing in the Creation is the way we would or could make it).
It's too simple, too easy. Yet it has appeal just because of that, because we want to be sure and secure and promised eternal glory, because no one wants to die and suffer in eternity. So, by elevating ourselves above all others, in our mind, we re-create the Creation in our own image and to our own taste.
My mantra is that faith and reason are complementary but reason cannot substitute for faith.
For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
Where [is] the wise? where [is] the scribe? where [is] the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. - I Corinthians 1:18-25
For my people have committed two evils; they have forsaken me the fountain of living waters, [and] hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water. – Jeremiah 2:13
If I thought the Catholic Church was hazardous to their Spiritual health, I certainly would have said so.
But the Catholic Church is an exclusive “club” as hosepipe is wont to say. The subtext is “our way or the highway.” Nevertheless, if the Spirit led me to join that club, I would. But He hasn’t. And for that, the local priest ought to be thanking God – because I would surely be a disruption since if I were a member, I would challenge every dogma, every doctrine, every sacrament, every tradition that serves as a wedge or even a veil between God and man.
Of a Truth, there is only one Way, Jesus Christ. And the Catholic Church is not God.