Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit!
You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language.
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
When Is A Protestant Not A Protestant?
Topic Started: Friday, 7. September 2007, 16:44 (761 Views)
OsullivanB

I doubt I shall be taking up that book recommendation Bob. I see it is published by Amer Atheist Press. I don't know the publishing house, but it doesn't sound like a source of spiritual enlightenment.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Bob Crowley
Thursday, 30. April 2009, 03:05
I used to be a Protestant, and I can assure you that most Protestants are Christian, just as most Catholics are Christian. There are Protestants who think they're Christian, and there are Catholics who think they're Christian, but aren't.
I haven't been saying that Protestant people aren't Christian - just that they're denominations aren't.

My view of denominations is stricter than my view of individuals.

S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Derekap
Wednesday, 29. April 2009, 22:43
Clare wrote:

"Methodism won't save them. Being nice won't save them."

For us to be uncharitable about them, unfriendly, "sending them to Coventry" wont save them either!!!

Who said anything about sending them to Coventry or being unfriendly?

I am quite capable of being friends with Protestants who don't think I am a Christian. It's not a problem. You don't have to agree with people on everything to be friendly with them.
Edited by Clare, Thursday, 30. April 2009, 14:10.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Rose of York
Wednesday, 29. April 2009, 20:50
Clare
Wednesday, 29. April 2009, 15:52
They are better off being Catholic, in the long run.

Methodism won't save them. Being nice won't save them.

Without faith it is impossible to please God.
Catholicism won't save them if they don't heed the warnings of the Parable of the sheep and wolves (its about being nice).
Absolutely right.

Quote:
 
The truth is, Clare, you follow an outfit that is not in communion with Rome and refuses to accept the Second Vatican Council's decree on ecumenism, therefore the views you express about other denominations are not compatible with official pronouncments of the Catholic Church.


The truth is that Vatican II's decree on ecumenism is not what would be recognised as Catholic teaching by any pope prior to 1960.

Anything from V2 which the saints and popes and doctors would not recognise, is not definitive Catholic teaching.

And if you can only cite V2 to back up a position, then that position is also not in line with constant Catholic teaching.

The challenge is to find evidence that a teaching is compatible with what the Church has always taught. Not just what has been taught in the last 50 years and in flat contradiction with what was taught before.

If what the SSPX teaches is not Catholic, then there were no Catholics before 1960.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Joe Valente
Wednesday, 29. April 2009, 17:18
Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer was not a Catholic. But I would be very surprised, and disappointed if he were refused admission to Heaven.
Well, for a start, it's not about what we want. We aren't the Just Judge, after all.

And, it's about what we are at the moment of death. Perhaps he died a Catholic, and only God knew.

The fact remains that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Anyone who is saved died a Catholic, whether we're aware of that fact.

And being a Catholic is no guarantee of salvation.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Penfold
Wednesday, 29. April 2009, 16:34
The long and the short prodestant churches who use the trinitarian baptism are Christian.
No they aren't. They are anathema. (Galatians).

Quote:
 
PS 1388; elected 4 March, 1431; d. at Rome, 23 Feb., 1447. long before the reformation and prodestants, we have moved on a little since then in our understanding of forgiveness and reconcilliation.


There were plenty of heretical movements before "the Reformation", and plenty more after. The teaching still stands.

Unless you can show that some post-"Reformation" popes (and I mean from before 1958!) took a more conciliatory line towards Protestantism.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Satis Cognitum, Pope Leo XIII

Quote:
 
And with the same yearning Our soul goes out to those whom the foul breath of irreligion has not entirely corrupted, and who at least seek to have the true God, the Creator of Heaven and earth, as their Father. Let such as these take counsel with themselves, and realize that they can in no wise be counted among the children of God, unless they take Christ Jesus as their Brother, and at the same time the Church as their mother....
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Clare
Thursday, 30. April 2009, 14:35

The truth is that Vatican II's decree on ecumenism is not what would be recognised as Catholic teaching by any pope prior to 1960.

:yellowcard: :dontfeedmods.:

The second Vatican Council has the full Authority of the church. Pope John XXIII called the Ecumenical council and when he died Pope Paul VI reconvened the council. To deny the authority of the popes is unacceptable. What entitles you or anyone else to claim that this pope or that is valid?
How about Pope Alexander VIII who blessed King Billy's Army that beet James II at the battle of the Boyne. In gratitude for which the English Crown paid for the Building of the Royal College of St Patrick at Maynooth for the formation of Roman Catholic Priests. Quite a few Irish people would not be too happy with that and so may declare Alexander VIII an Anti-Pope. Others may claim that Pius V was an Anti-pope because he insisted on reforming the Liturgy and introducing the Tridentine missal in 1570, goodness knows how the church managed in the 1500 odd years before.
I am sorry Clare but this will not do support the old mass by all means but do not presume to deny the validity of the Papal election of Pope John XXIII and his successors.
Goto Top
 
Joe Valente
Member Avatar

"I am sorry Clare but this will not do support the old mass by all means but do not presume to deny the validity of the Papal election of Pope John XXIII and his successors."

I would support Penfold 100% in this.
It would seem that your attitude here is " If I don't like the message them i'll shoot the messenger."
What doth it profit a man if he gains the whole world but suffers the loss of his soul
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Clare
Wednesday, 29. April 2009, 15:52
Methodism won't save them. Being nice won't save them.

Without faith it is impossible to please God.
Jesus promised "For where two or three meet in my name, I am there among them".

Do you think that when the Methodists gather for their service on a Sunday, that Jesus goes back on His word because they've chosen the wrong place to meet?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Penfold
Thursday, 30. April 2009, 14:58
I am sorry Clare but this will not do support the old mass by all means but do not presume to deny the validity of the Papal election of Pope John XXIII and his successors.
Clare isn't a sedavacantist, she just doesn't like some of the things written and said by Pope John XXIII and his successors.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Vatican Radio
 
(04 Feb 09 - RV)]
2. Tradition, Doctrine and the Second Vatican Council
A full recognition of the Second Vatican Council and the Magisterium of Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II and Benedict XVI himself is an indispensable condition for any future recognition of the Society of Saint Pius X.

http://www.radiovaticana.org/english/Articolo.asp?c=263765


Clare
Thursday, 30. April 2009, 14:35
The truth is that Vatican II's decree on ecumenism is not what would be recognised as Catholic teaching by any pope prior to 1960.

Anything from V2 which the saints and popes and doctors would not recognise, is not definitive Catholic teaching.

And if you can only cite V2 to back up a position, then that position is also not in line with constant Catholic teaching.

The challenge is to find evidence that a teaching is compatible with what the Church has always taught. Not just what has been taught in the last 50 years and in flat contradiction with what was taught before.

If what the SSPX teaches is not Catholic, then there were no Catholics before 1960.


Clare you know the score. Catholic Cyberforum is proud to honour the Papacy, and that includes the late twentieth century popes. We don't permit support of SSPX and your arguments are in line with their policies, not with those of the current Holy Father..
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Derekap
Member Avatar

May I suggest there are no Catholics in Heaven ---- no non-Catholics in Heaven either, yet there must be countless millions of people, whatever they were on earth.
Derekap
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
CARLO
Member Avatar

Derekap
Thursday, 30. April 2009, 20:36
May I suggest there are no Catholics in Heaven ---- no non-Catholics in Heaven either, yet there must be countless millions of people, whatever they were on earth.
Hmmm - I think there are souls in heaven not people?


Stand to be corrected of course. :bl:

Pax


CARLO
Judica me Deus
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

But come the general resurrection...
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic »
Locked Topic