I don't think it's so much the organization and formal doctrine as it is they 1) place their formal doctrine on the same level as the Bible, and 2) they don't leave any room for disagreement. If a lay person disagrees with something the church is doing, they've safeguarded against that by saying that he isn't capable of properly interpreting these things...that only their designated members (pope, bishops, priests, etc) are capable of doing so. Why should we accept the church's statement that those people are always right when interpreting scripture, when the church itself has changed and revised it's own teachings through the years?

 

You may see it as a plus that you can't disagree and you have to accept the church's teaching as correct. I don't. I don't think anyone or any church will ever get it exactly right. I think when we allow open discussion and questions and disagreements, it allows us to grow more in faith and understanding. That requires people who are willing to admit when they're wrong and who can discuss things in a constructive manner, and who will seek God's guidance during the process, and accept what he guides them to, whether they were right or wrong.

 

Unfortunately, since the church is made up of fallen humans, it's not perfect...Catholic or Protestant.

 

Good Post, :thumb:

I don't think it's so much the organization and formal doctrine as it is they 1) place their formal doctrine on the same level as the Bible, and 2) they don't leave any room for disagreement. If a lay person disagrees with something the church is doing, they've safeguarded against that by saying that he isn't capable of properly interpreting these things...that only their designated members (pope, bishops, priests, etc) are capable of doing so. Why should we accept the church's statement that those people are always right when interpreting scripture, when the church itself has changed and revised it's own teachings through the years?

 

You may see it as a plus that you can't disagree and you have to accept the church's teaching as correct. I don't. I don't think anyone or any church will ever get it exactly right. I think when we allow open discussion and questions and disagreements, it allows us to grow more in faith and understanding. That requires people who are willing to admit when they're wrong and who can discuss things in a constructive manner, and who will seek God's guidance during the process, and accept what he guides them to, whether they were right or wrong.

 

Unfortunately, since the church is made up of fallen humans, it's not perfect...Catholic or Protestant.

 

 

Don't take this the wrong way, but your post above is indicative of why there are non-Catholic denominations. If you look at each denomination and why they split, you'll find that each wanted the Church to change something for them: eg. Henry wanted to divorce and remarry.

 

Hold firmly that our faith is identical with that of the ancients. Deny this, and you dissolve the unity of the Church.

Saint Thomas Aquinas

Don't take this the wrong way, but your post above is indicative of why there are non-Catholic denominations. If you look at each denomination and why they split, you'll find that each wanted the Church to change something for them: eg. Henry wanted to divorce and remarry.

 

 

Saint Thomas Aquinas

 

...and some wanted the Bible as final authority instead of the pope, the Catholic clergy and their traditions. I'm aware of why the reformation took place, and I don't take offense. I'm just sharing my opinion on the subject, as you are.

 

Along the same lines as people wanting things changed for them, when you put all your faith and trust in men (popes, bishops, priests) by claiming their interpretations are always right and better than yours, then it would be easy for them to abuse that power and take advantage of that for their own personal gain, as has happened in the past.

 

You can find flaws in both views, but IMO, if forced to choose, I'll read and study the Bible earnestly myself, pray to God that He will guide and enlighten my studies, and trust that He will do that.

How can heaven be attainable without salvation? Just curious.

 

I find it quite irritating when Catholics or Protestants make the claim that they are the only group who has the means of salvation and that the other is on the path to hell...it's wrong. Plain and simple.

 

Once again.....the Pope did not say that Protestants are going to hell.

 

Apparently, and it sounds like semantics, there is a difference between getting to Heaven and "means of salvation". Anyone can get to Heaven, but without the existence of the Catholic Church and Jesus's sacrifice being celebrated and re-presented everyday, it wouldn't be possible.

 

I also would like to thank Hearsay, 5wide, Fastbreak, and everyone else in this thread (ok, I guess rockmom too ), because defending my faith, although sometimes in vain, has made me understand who I am and what I believe more and more. I may have to venture over to P & R more often. :fire: P.s. so this expression of gratitude is also an apology for the future

Apparently, and it sounds like semantics, there is a difference between getting to Heaven and "means of salvation". Anyone can get to Heaven, but without the existence of the Catholic Church and Jesus's sacrifice being celebrated and re-presented everyday, it wouldn't be possible.

I'm not sure that this philosophy is proclaimed by any Christian church that I'm aware of. It certainly isn't a Biblical teaching.

...and some wanted the Bible as final authority instead of the pope, the Catholic clergy and their Traditions. .

You know the difference, I'm sure it was a typo.

 

My response to this is as CF999 touched upon....Matthew 16:18-19

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of chell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

 

As CF999 said, Jesus gave authority to Peter and the Church, and then the Church gave us the Bible.

 

This gets me thinking, I am going to start a new thread on the Bible about now.

I'm not sure that this philosophy is proclaimed by any Christian church that I'm aware of. It certainly isn't a Biblical teaching.

Are you talking about the philosophy of anyone can get to heaven, or that the Catholic Church "keeps" (bad word choice) the gates open?

Are you talking about the philosophy of anyone can get to heaven, or that the Catholic Church "keeps" (bad word choice) the gates open?

I'm talking about the philospy that you can get to heaven without salvation. Did I misread you?

...and some wanted the Bible as final authority instead of the pope, the Catholic clergy and their traditions. I'm aware of why the reformation took place, and I don't take offense. I'm just sharing my opinion on the subject, as you are.

 

Along the same lines as people wanting things changed for them, when you put all your faith and trust in men (popes, bishops, priests) by claiming their interpretations are always right and better than yours, then it would be easy for them to abuse that power and take advantage of that for their own personal gain, as has happened in the past.

 

You can find flaws in both views, but IMO, if forced to choose, I'll read and study the Bible earnestly myself, pray to God that He will guide and enlighten my studies, and trust that He will do that.

 

You make it sound as if Catholics are sheep being blindly led. That's simply not true. We make the choice to remain Catholic and even today, lo and behold, we still have people of other faiths who choose to join the Catholic Church.

 

Catholics do question, and change does occur within the Church. However, those changes aren't doctrinal changes. Those would be done by the Pope, as Divinely directed. Whether we agree or disagree is not the question. If one simply cannot agree or live in obedience to the Church's Doctrine, then it's possible that the Catholic Faith is not for them after all.

 

Have I ever wished that something was different in the Church? Sure! But to be Catholic is to accept that there is a good reason for the way things are, and to not lose your Faith in the Basic Tenants of the Church because you think something could be done differently. Who knows? Maybe someday married men may be priests. But until that time, does that really change what I believe? Does that change the fact that I believe that when the Priest celebrates the Holy Eucharist I believe that the bread and wine becomes the body and blood of Christ? Does that fact that Catholics must be married in Church change the fact that I believe that the Virgin Mary was actually a virgin, and that she was assumed, body and soul, into heaven?

Once again.....the Pope did not say that Protestants are going to hell.

 

Apparently, and it sounds like semantics, there is a difference between getting to Heaven and "means of salvation". Anyone can get to Heaven, but without the existence of the Catholic Church and Jesus's sacrifice being celebrated and re-presented everyday, it wouldn't be possible.

 

I also would like to thank Hearsay, 5wide, Fastbreak, and everyone else in this thread (ok, I guess rockmom too ), because defending my faith, although sometimes in vain, has made me understand who I am and what I believe more and more. I may have to venture over to P & R more often. :fire: P.s. so this expression of gratitude is also an apology for the future

 

I'm sorry, but I totally and whole-heartedly disagree with that statement. I'll just leave it at that for now, because I don't know how to respond.

 

I do have some questions though, if you care to elaborate a little further on what you're trying to say.

 

1. What is the difference between getting to heaven and "means of salvation"? How can heaven be attained apart from salvation through Christ? What do you mean by anyone can get to heaven?

 

2. How does the existence of the Catholic Church make heaven possible?

 

3. How does Jesus' sacrifice being celebreated and re-presented every day make it possible? Or to re-word, how would the lack of that celebration and re-presentation every day make it impossible? That seems to imply that the work He accomplished on the cross alone, is not enough in itself.

 

 

Obviously, I celebrate that fact that He died for my sins, so that I might be forgiven and attain salvation, but somehow I don't think that's the point you're making.

 

Jesus came, lived a perfect, sinless life, fulfilled the law, died on the cross and rose again so that I (and anyone else) might have the "means of salvation". That's it. As I heard a preacher say, "A way has been made and the price has been paid." Jesus is the way, the truth and the life...He is the door. Not the catholic church. Salvation cannot be found in any other name.

 

I'm just not sure what you're basing these statements on...I haven't read anything like this from the other Catholics on this thread, so I'm wondering if they hold the same view as you and just haven't stated it, or if your view is somehow different, or if I'm just misunderstanding something somewhere. :thumb:

I'm talking about the philospy that you can get to heaven without salvation. Did I misread you?

Yes, I believe so. I'm not sure how to articulate this. You do need salvation to get to heaven, no matter how much I mangle it.

 

What I was trying to say is that the Catholic belief is that anyone can get to Heaven, but if not for the Catholic Church and the Holy Communion, then no one could get to Heaven.

You know the difference, I'm sure it was a typo.

 

My response to this is as CF999 touched upon....Matthew 16:18-19

 

 

As CF999 said, Jesus gave authority to Peter and the Church, and then the Church gave us the Bible.

 

This gets me thinking, I am going to start a new thread on the Bible about now.

 

No. It wasn't a typo.

What I was trying to say is that the Catholic belief is that anyone can get to Heaven, but if not for the Catholic Church and the Holy Communion, then no one could get to Heaven.

Ok. That was the topic of this thread. The Vatican has backed off of the statement that other churches don't have the ability to obtain salvation.

 

“It follows that these separated churches and Communities, though we believe they suffer from defects, are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation. In fact the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation, whose value derives from that fullness of grace and of truth which has been entrusted to the Catholic Church”.

 

I can live with that.

1. What is the difference between getting to heaven and "means of salvation"? How can heaven be attained apart from salvation through Christ? What do you mean by anyone can get to heaven?

 

2. How does the existence of the Catholic Church make heaven possible?

 

3. How does Jesus' sacrifice being celebreated and re-presented every day make it possible? Or to re-word, how would the lack of that celebration and re-presentation every day make it impossible? That seems to imply that the work He accomplished on the cross alone, is not enough in itself.

 

 

 

I'm just not sure what you're basing these statements on...I haven't read anything like this from the other Catholics on this thread, so I'm wondering if they hold the same view as you and just haven't stated it, or if your view is somehow different, or if I'm just misunderstanding something somewhere. :thumb:

1. I tried my best to explain it in my post before this, but I am doing a poor job.

2 and 3. The Catholic belief is that the Eucharist is not just a reminder of Jesus' sacrifice, it IS His sacrifice. By the actual sacrifice being re-claimed every day, the gates of Heaven are open. His sacrifice did not end on that Easter sunday, it is always going on. I think it probably has something to do with kronos and kairos time (spelling?)

 

 

 

I think that my beliefs are in sync with rockmom's and CF999, but I get the feeling that I should stop responding, because I may be giving a distorted view of the Catholic beliefs. I'm really not properly educated or informed to answer a lot of these questions, but I am doing my best.

Ok. That was the topic of this thread. The Vatican has backed off of the statement that other churches don't have the ability to obtain salvation.

 

Really? I doubt they backed off 2000 years of teaching. Could I have a link, I kind of miss everything because I sleep all day.