RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH
In part, this is what it says:
FIFTH QUESTIONWhy do the texts of the Council and those of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of “Church” with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?
RESPONSE
According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery[19] cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called “Churches” in the proper sense[20].
...
[20] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dominus Iesus, 17.2: AAS 92 [2000-II] 758.
I missed:
[19] Cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 22.3.
Hmmm...sounds almost, but not quite, like what the Morman Church has to say about its outlook on other churches.
THANKFULLY,
God does NOT see it that way, at all.
His OBVIOUS ANOINTING . . . such as the Welsh Revival and other congregations here and there throughout the last 2,000 years demonstrates quite otherwise as well.
But hey, who are we to stop rabid RC’s from talking as though God’s a liar or clueless.
Ratzinger's condemnation of my church reflects not on me, but on him and all who blindly look upon him as "another Christ."
For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be ondemned." -- Matthew 12:36-37"But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.