As to my answer about my lack of competence, having lived through the adolescence of my daughter I am not accustomed to anyone thinking I am competent at anything. As it happens I really don't know what we're supposed to do about excommunicated persons. I do remember that in the 39 Articles they are to be shunned, but I don't know were we stand on it. I am pretty much an autodidact on a lot of Catholic stuff, so I suffer the gaps autodidacts suffer. I shudda just said, "I dunno." That would have been just as true and clearer. Again. I am sorry.
As to the barbecue line, that just comes from some goofing around a few years ago when I suggested that an auto-da-fe was incomplete without marshmallows.
I am confused and at a loss to determine what I might have said that would lead you to believe I think Protestants aren't Christians. OR the Jewish stuff.
My church teaches me to refer to the Jews as my elder brothers in the faith, and I am happy to do so.
As to Protestants and Xty the full answer is lengthy and I've given it before, but here goes: If you are validly baptized you are a Christian and a member of the body of Christ, grafted into his death and rising. In some sense the old man is dead and the Spirit of Christ is in you. You are in the one and only Church.
In that sense, speaking scandalously, I would say that it is not wrong, from our POV, to say that everyone who is baptized is baptized into the Catholic Church. It's more politic to say that baptism is not a denominational thing.
Though the theology is vexed still, the initiation is not complete, the full benefits of the Church are not enjoyed, unless one is admitted to sacramental communion and is, sooner or later, confirmed.
This is why when a baptized person, reared and "formed" in another communion wants to become a full-bore (I've got the boring part down, anyway) Catholic, though we loosely speak of "conversion" IMHO the only proper language is that so-and-so is admitted to full communion. The implication is that SOME communion already existed.
As has been noted, we papists are good at weasel words. One of our weasel words is "ordinary" and its cognates. I mention this because baptism is said to be the "ordinary" way of coming into the Church. We make that specification because we allow that, through some extraordinary benefit coming from the atonement wrought by Xt's sacrifice, some people may be grafted into Christ without Baptism.
The famous ways are "baptism by blood" - someone is martyred for the faith before he is baptized, and "baptism of desire" - you get hit by a train or a piano falls on you while you are on your way to your baptism. But that list is not exhaustive, God being wiser, better, and less predictable than we.
I think the "Protestant (spit!)" words were trying to portray an attitude or tone that I do NOT have, but that sometimes we Catholics are accused of.
I hope that is clearer and credible, and I eagerly await your response.
You’re taking things entirely too personally. Keep in mind, I’m responding to the doctrinal learnings of two distinct persons. I’m not blame storming. I might say that I’m looking for explanations, but that could be construed as confrontational or inflammatory. Let’s just say understandings are my objective. And, the issue I raise lies in a much larger context than my participation in this thread.
I don’t propose to suggest that barbecuing is an acceptable method of dealing with heretical thoughts or behavior in modern times. Since (in the Catholic view) being heretical condemns one to being outside the Church (“not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics”), what is the practical consequence of being heretical as so far goes the unity of the Judeo-Christian tradition of Western Civilization? You’ve partially answered my question, but I want you to see more clearly what I am about.
Mad Dawg WROTE:
If you are validly baptized you are a Christian and a member of the body of Christ, grafted into his death and rising. In some sense the old man is dead and the Spirit of Christ is in you. You are in the one and only Church.
verdadjusticia ADDS:
This statement is inaccurate, as it would only apply to validly baptized infants of Protestant parents before the child reaches the age of reason. An adult Protestant is outside of the Catholic Church. Though the Church today uses politically correct euphemisms, properly speaking, clearly saying the real thing, Protestants and Eastern Orthodox are heretics.
Mad Dawg WROTE:
This is why when a baptized person, reared and “formed” in another communion wants to become a full-bore (I’ve got the boring part down, anyway) Catholic, though we loosely speak of “conversion” IMHO the only proper language is that so-and-so is admitted to full communion. The implication is that SOME communion already existed.
Verdadjusticia ADDS:
A validly baptized Protestant can simply decide to be Catholic, be willing to reject all his heretical ideas, and he is no longer a heretic. His other sins still have to be confessed to a priest. If he is willing to confess his sins to a priest, and he is fully repentant for his sins, and he dies before he can confess his sins, he can be saved. It is called a perfect act of contrition. This is only possible if he truly intended to confess his sins to a priest.
I believe that this confession to a priest is the number one obstacle that keeps Catholics, specially men, from coming back to the Church after they reach the teenage years. It’s quite embarrassing to tell someone else your sins of the flesh, but that is why God instituted it. It takes real remorse to humiliate yourself like that. Christ allowed Himself to be crucified for our sins, all we have to do is embarrass ourselves for forgiveness of ours.
Because of this embarrassment of confessing our sins, very few Catholics are saved. AND Protestants keep away. Men need to MAN UP!