Fresh Winds From The Prairies
Welcome to Buckdog©!
- BUCKDOG© contains the opinions of a Canadian citizen journalist - Extreme Right wing nonsense is not tolerated well here. Abusive or libelous comments will be deleted.
« Home | Former Conservative MP Supports Saskatchewan's Fig... » | Canada Leads Industrialized World In Marijuana Use... » | Stephen Harper and the 'BIG LIE' » | Seeing Al Qaeda Around Every Corner - The White Ho... » | The Climate Change Denial Industry » | Live Earth Concert - PHOTOS » | Standard Conservative Responses To Health Care Ref... » | RCMP Gets New Commissioner - 'May The Force Be Wit... » | Live Earth Concert - Live Video Feed » | Our 'NO CLASS' Prime Minister Attacks Saskatchewan... »
posted by leftdog at Tuesday, July 10, 2007 | Permalink
The Church believes that all individual baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirt are Christians, regardless of their professed denomination. What is at issue is the legitmacy of the protestant organizations, the validity of its doctrines and sacraments and the issue of its origins.It's not about whether any baptized individual is a real Christian.
Posted by SUZANNE |
2:54 p.m., July 10, 2007
I looked in the bible to where it said that the Pope was next to God, and well, I am still looking. Pompous.
Posted by janfromthebruce |
8:41 p.m., July 10, 2007
The Roman Catholic church is a product of the Dark Ages. It's thinking is the result of that time. It doesn't seem to have moved away from that time's thinking. Even now, women are still in second place, statuary idolatry and veneration of sacred relics continue on and layers and layers of secrets like the strata of an onion envelop the core message and deny access to all but the most exalted.Pity.
Posted by David Elliott |
12:31 a.m., July 11, 2007
The quote you have at the beginning of this does NOT accurately interpret the document. The actual statement from the Vatican is: ""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".So while you might accuse the leaders of the Catholic Church of hubris, you cannot say the Church teaches that only Catholic are saved nor can you say that other Christian religions cannot draw others to salvation in Christ.
Posted by dgarton |
3:00 p.m., July 11, 2007
I personally believe that if Jesus were here today, he would shake his head and be HORRIFIED at the monstrosity that has grown out of his simple message of PEACE and LOVE. I think he would be shocked at structures with Cardinals - Bishops - Indulgences - politics - competing theologies - intolerance.I think he would want to kick the entire lot in the ass for being so bloody stupid for 2000 years!
Posted by leftdog |
3:43 p.m., July 11, 2007
Hi Janfromthebruce, I think you need to resume your Bible Search and check out Matthew 16:18 Jesus says..."And I tell you that you are Peter,and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it" This is the basis of Catholicism. Benedict XVI is in direct sucession with Peter! its been an unbroken chain for two thousand years ( I guess that gives him some authority!)
Posted by Henrietta |
8:05 a.m., July 12, 2007
Sorry Henrietta. The Church used shoddy linguistics to use that passage for support. The context of Jesus' statement was Peter's recognition that Jesus was the messiah. When Jesus said, "you are Peter", the koine word is Petr's, a small stone used to weight a fishing net.When Jesus said, "on this rock", the koine word is petra, a completely different word that means massive boulder or rock formation. Thus, Peter and the rock are clearly not the same. In my opinion, the rock was the faith that Peter expressed.Now, folks, I'm not preaching. What you believe is up to you and far be it from me to shove anything down your throats. My purpose here was only to clear up what the Bible says.
Posted by TomCat |
11:47 a.m., July 13, 2007
IT HAS BEEN WRITTEN THAT THE POPE WAS PART OF THE HITLER YOUTH. HITLER AND HIS FOLLOWERS WANTED TO ERADICATE THE JEWS.JESUS CHRIST WAS A JEWTHE ROMANS KILLED JESUS CHRIST.DOES THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH FEEL THAT JESUS CHRIST WHO WAS A JEW WAS MURDERED TO SAVE THEM AND KNOW ONE ELSE?THE JEWS HAVE A RIGHT TO LIVE.
Posted by Ron |
12:40 p.m., July 16, 2007
Tom you stopped too soon. I found this site looking for the text of what the pope said, but let me interject one thing. First background: I was catholic I am now Lutheran. If my research into history is correct, the Roman (or Western church) broke from the Church much like the Lutherans did during a time now called the great schism. At the time there were 4 patriarcal heads, but the western church thought that Rome was more important and should be "in Charge" I am paraphrasing here. So only the orthodox churches really go back 2000 years. The western or now called Roman church (the term Catholic I am told means one) started after the great schism and started making decrees and laws that weren't in the Bible. Martin Luther was a Bible scholar and was not trying to start his own church. He was trying to change what he felt were abuses in the church. Especially the only one I was taught about in Catholc school, the practise of buying your way into heaven, which continues to today. Yes you can still buy indulgences He also thought that the people should have full communion including the wine. When I was young we didn't get to participate in the taking of Christ's blood. He thought all people should have access to a bible in their own language. there were bibles in latin and greek but no classes for the German people to learn the ancient languages. When I was in Highschool, We got punished by a nun for reading a Gideon Bible some one had. Not for steraling the bible from somewhere but for reading any bible. We were to stupid to interpret it correctly. I have no problem with the faith I was taught (for the most part) the Lutheran faith is not that far off. My proble is with the people who have put themselves in charge of the church, push aside the bible as God's Word and the true authority and try to tell me how to live and try to get involved with the government (and I don't mean things like prayer in school but trying to intimidate people to voteing a certain way) and so on.So to say that Benedict is the direct desendant of Peter and therefore the only true leader is like ignoreing 3 of your children and only counting the desendents of one as your decendants. Didn't Jesus tell ALL of his apostles to go out and spread The Word? Did they not count??
Posted by Tiggerr |
3:10 p.m., July 16, 2007
There is a logical flaw in Suzanne's post. She says that the issue (in the instance of the Pope's statements) is "the legitmacy of the protestant organizations, the validity of its doctrines and sacraments and the issue of its origins" not whether-or-not baptized persons are Christians.What Suzanne fails to realize is that Baptism is a sacrament. Therefore, if the validity of "other churches" sacraments is indeed apart of "the issue", as Suzanne posits, then the validity of their baptism must be in question too. Furthermore, as the sacrament of Baptism marks the conversion of pagans into Christians, what does the Catholic church do with (let's say)a Methodist bapitzed convert....are they "real" Christians? That is the issue here? Also, do they have access to the means of grace or salvation since those are dispensed as other sacrements such as the eucharist?Thanks,Kurt
Posted by Kurt |
10:25 a.m., July 17, 2007