quote:

---

“It is not possible to find Jesus outside the Church”: this was Pope Francis’ message as he marked his name day, the Feast of St. George, this Tuesday celebrating Mass in the Pauline Chapel with the Cardinals present in Rome.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Percy B:
Indeed Karl.

But does he actually believe that?

---

Presumably. I daresay that if you put his nuts in a vice and twisted he'd do a bit of wavering on how he defines "the church". If you want a definitive answer you'd need to ask IngoB, of course
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 

quote:

---

posted by Percy B
But does he actually believe that?

---

We'll never know.

Any organisation that can invent and protect the cute little concept of "mental reservation" is always going to be opaque in the final analysis.

 

---

Posted by TomOfTarsus (# 3053) on :
 
I guess I'd say it's how he defines "the church," as well. I think a "Paulish" view would be along the lines that, yes, we are his body, his hands, his feet, the "boots on the ground"; we are to be the Good News going someplace to happen. People should say of us as they did the disciples in Acts - And they took note of them, that they had been with Jesus.

Jesus-like traits can be found elsewhere - every kind and merciful act, for instance - but it is His body, the church, that has been commissioned to take the Gospel to the ends of the earth. And as Rich Mullins once said, the scary thing about God is that there is no "Plan B" - it's us, it's our responsibility to bring God's life, love, hope and healing to the world.

It's not my responsibility nor my right to say who is and isn't in that body - it's just my responsibility, in every interaction I have, to push or lead someone closer to Heaven, rather than the other direction.

Blessings.

Tom


ETA: cp'd with L'Organist - err... what is "mental reservation"...?

[ 23. April 2013, 11:53: Message edited by: TomOfTarsus ]
 

---

Posted by Raptor Eye (# 16649) on :
 
I can testify to the fact that Jesus can be found outside of the church, whether or not we use a capital C.
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
Mental Reservation is sometimes referred to as casuistry.

The Catholic Dictionary would say there are two types of mental reservation: wide and defined.

Although the Jesuits didn't invent the doctrine (?) of MR they are renowned for having developed/used it.

An example is in grounds that were sometimes quoted for a catholic anulment: Regardless of the age or mental capacity of the participant, or of how long ago it was, you had only to say that you made a mental reservation about the marriage at the time of the wedding to get an anulment. In other words, say that you thought at the time "this isn't really happening" or "I don't really want to marry you" - NOT ALOUD BUT IN YOUR HEAD (in other words it couldn't be either proved or disproved) - and you got what you wanted. THAT is mental reservation.

The rest of the world generally refers to this in simpler terms: being mealy-mouthed is one, lying is another.
 

---

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Percy B:
But what about when I was naked you clothed me, when I was hungry... Or have I missed the point?

Here is the link to the Vatican news on this

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TomofTarsus
And as Rich Mullins once said, the scary thing about God is that there is no "Plan B" - it's us, it's our responsibility to bring God's life, love, hope and healing to the world.

---

quote:

---

“Do not think in your heart that you will escape in the king’s palace any more than all the other Jews. For if you remain completely silent at this time, relief and deliverance will arise for the Jews from another place, but you and your father’s house will perish. Yet who knows whether you have come to the kingdom for such a time as this?”

---

(Esther 4:13-14)

This gets the balance right. Esther had a responsibility, and if she failed to speak up, she and her family would have suffered, but God would have been able to effect deliverance by some other means. In other words, God had a "Plan B".

Jesus told us to regard ourselves as "unprofitable servants" in Luke 17:10 - hardly the kind of people on whom God could depend, such that if they failed He would be rendered powerless. In fact, such servants had already failed to a degree, otherwise they would not be 'unprofitable'.

I find this "no plan B" idea theologically indefensible, but I can understand how this is championed by certain controlling church leaders who love to 'motivate' their flock by means of fear and guilt.

We know that there is only one Saviour: Jesus Christ. God in Christ paid the ultimate price for our salvation, and a pure and unblemished sacrifice was required. But if Christ's work on the cross is only half of the "salvation formula", then Jesus' words "it is finished" just before He died are a lie. Unless of course, the other putative half of the salvation formula (getting the word out) is also entirely dependent on God. If no one can be saved unless he or she consciously believes in Jesus and a few basic doctrines, and if the promulgation of the knowledge of Jesus and these doctrines is dependent on fallible, blemished and frequently sinful Christians, then clearly Jesus is not the unique Saviour. Christians become co-redeemers. It makes no sense that God would pay such a heavy price by giving Himself in agony on the cross, if that work only completes half the job. Why would God be so whole-hearted in doing half the job, and seemingly so lackadaisical in doing the other half (by relying entirely on unprofitable servants)? It makes no sense.

I have been told in the past that the eternal salvation of many people depends on me. I couldn't live with this blasphemy, and rightly so. I thank God that He has delivered me from this oppressive lie, and assured me that salvation is entirely dependent on Him. Anything that I say and do which may contribute to someone's salvation is merely the outworking of God's work in and through me, and there is nothing 'scary' about it. The moment it becomes 'scary' is the moment the devil has taken over, and we are into propagating and living a false gospel.
 

---

Posted by Stejjie (# 13941) on :
 
ITSM from reading the link that the phrase comes in a passage in the homily about Christian identity and where that identity comes from. Just before the phrase quoted in the OP, he compares the Church to a "Mother who gives us an identity". He goes on to say that "the Christian identity is belonging to the church". And after the OP quote, he quotes Paul VI, talking about how it's impossible to follow Jesus outside of the Church".

So, ITSM, he's not saying that Jesus can't be found in good works, amongst the poor etc. (he may or may not believe that, the point is that's not what he seems to be saying). He's talking about being a Christian, about following Christ and saying that that's impossible outside of the Church.

If it's that he's saying, then I think I'd agree with him (though whether our conceptions of what the Church is are the same I genuinely don't know).
 

---

Posted by Hawk (# 14289) on :
 
Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life. Not the Church, however you may define that. Even if a Catholic believes that the Roman offshoot of the universal church has a monopoly on Christianity, it does not have a monopoly on Christ. Nor does any other branch of Christianity.

The universal church (i.e. everyone who has Jesus Christ as their Lord and saviour) certainly has an important role as the 'body' of Christ, preaching, and practicing God's word and grace in the world. But Christ is the 'head', although connected with the body, He is not enclosed within the body.

Finally, in terms of 'finding' Jesus outside the church, I would argue that in fact everyone finds Jesus outside the church. It is only after someone has found Jesus and been saved that they are then adopted into the body of Christ. They may be pointed to Christ by the church, but everyone is outside the church until they become a christian.

Perhaps it would be more accurate to say it is not possible to follow Jesus outside the church, since by the very act of following Him, one is a part of a great community of others doing the same thing.
 

---

Posted by PaulTH* (# 320) on :
 
Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, or no salvation outside the Church has been widely believed by Christians of various persuasions throughout Christian history. What usually differs is what we mean by "The Church." At the time St Cyprian of Carthage first used the term, in the third century, there was only One Church. Schisms and denominations were still a thing of the future. Luther regarded the Church as the body of believers. Although the Catholic Church has often restated that it is The Church, Dominus Iesus (2000) states:

"for those who are not formally and visibly members of the Church, salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church, but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation. This grace comes from Christ; it is the result of his sacrifice and is communicated by the Holy Spirit; it has a relationship with the Church, which, according to the plan of the Father, has her origin in the mission of the Son and the Holy Spirit."

I think few Christians would deny that salvation is through Christ, even when circumstances permit non Christians to attain it. This article shows that claiming that salvation can only be found in the Church isn't as bleak as it first seems. Note the quote from Bishop Kallistos.
 

---

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :
 
It depends where you lost him.

Seriously, though, Jesus is absent within many churches. The RC church claim to exclusivity may also be reinterpreted as inclusive if you make the intellectual leap that we're all one big (un)happy human family.

Or if you'd rather, my Jesus can beat the bejesus out of your Jesus.
 

---

Posted by dv (# 15714) on :
 
It's just the Pope doing his denominational branding exercise. Unconvincing, even to most thinking Roman Catholics, I would have thought - and irrelevant to the rest of us.
 

---

Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on :
 
The Church is the mystical body of Christ.Those who find Christ,including those who claim to have a very personal relationship with Christ,must recognise Christ in others and serve Him in them.
This is what pope Francis is reminding us,that we are all members of that Body of Christ and it is within that Body of Christ that we find salvation.
A lack of interest in others,a lack of service to others is not a good way of serving Christ.

I wish so much that those who are not Catholics,visbly linked in communion with the Holy See,would stop imagining that Catholics (linked visibly with the Holy See) are only interested in themselves to the exclusion of all others who follow Christ and to the exclusion of all other human beings.

It is almost as bad as those relatively few Catholics,linked visibly with the Holy See, who believe that they are the only ones who have any real contact with God.
 

---

Posted by Indifferently (# 17517) on :
 
There is indeed no salvation outside the Catholic Church. But what does the Pope mean when he refers to the Church? The universal Church, the Body of Christ? Or merely the Roman Communion therein?
 

---

Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :
 
I know: if he says it quickly enough, often enough, he might actually begoin to believe it.

I don't.

Hard not to be cynical. Three cheers for ecumenism eh? When's the next boat leaving for the ordinariate? An Argentian who allegedly believes the falklands should return to Argentina? Well, no sane English person should give him house room. Perhaps he's losing it oo, like JP and Benny.
 

---

Posted by Indifferently (# 17517) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Forthview:
The Church is the mystical body of Christ.Those who find Christ,including those who claim to have a very personal relationship with Christ,must recognise Christ in others and serve Him in them.
This is what pope Francis is reminding us,that we are all members of that Body of Christ and it is within that Body of Christ that we find salvation.
A lack of interest in others,a lack of service to others is not a good way of serving Christ.

I wish so much that those who are not Catholics,visbly linked in communion with the Holy See,would stop imagining that Catholics (linked visibly with the Holy See) are only interested in themselves to the exclusion of all others who follow Christ and to the exclusion of all other human beings.

It is almost as bad as those relatively few Catholics,linked visibly with the Holy See, who believe that they are the only ones who have any real contact with God.

---

quote:

---

it is not possible to find Jesus outside the Church. The great Paul VI said: "Wanting to live with Jesus without the Church, following Jesus outside of the Church, loving Jesus without the Church is an absurd dichotomy." And the Mother Church that gives us Jesus gives us our identity that is not only a seal, it is a belonging. Identity means belonging.

---

 

---

Posted by Laurelin (# 17211) on :
 
As an evangelical, I am completely unsurprised by this latest evidence that Pope Francis is, in fact, an orthodox Catholic. Who knew?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Forthview:
I wish so much that those who are not Catholics,visbly linked in communion with the Holy See,would stop imagining that Catholics (linked visibly with the Holy See) are only interested in themselves to the exclusion of all others who follow Christ and to the exclusion of all other human beings.

---

I can assure you, Forthview, that there really do exist evangelicals who don't take such a crass and uncharitable view of our Catholic brethren (and sistren).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:
Perhaps we will stop doing so when the Church of Rome stops calling itself 'the Catholic Church' and evangelizing other Christians.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
In context, he did not say that you cannot encounter Christ in the poor, as the Matthew story of the sheep and goats has it.

He is talking about being a Christian and needing to be a member of the church:

quote:

---

it is not possible to find Jesus outside the Church. The great Paul VI said: "Wanting to live with Jesus without the Church, following Jesus outside of the Church, loving Jesus without the Church is an absurd dichotomy." And the Mother Church that gives us Jesus gives us our identity that is not only a seal, it is a belonging. Identity means belonging.

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Weber:
sounds like he's saying that it's not possible to be a Christian outside of a Christian community (however small

---

I agree that that is what Paul VI was saying, and what Pope Francis means by quoting him.

Nothing controversial - many protestants would agree.

The following sentence ("Mother Church") seems to me to be addressed specifically to Catholics, and is urging them not to distance themselves from the community that formed them. (as some might be tempted to do given some of the occurrences of the last decade).

So I see nothing here at which non-Catholics should take offence.

Although it is understandable that all those who hope for greater unity among Christians would look to the words of a new Pope for signs as to how he views ecumenism.

Best wishes,

Russ
 

---

Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
There are two options to interpret this:

1. If you take a narrow or restrictive view of "the church", then he is wrong. Completely, utterly, fundamentally wrong. In fact, I think it is often easier to find Jesus outside the church than inside it.

2. If you take a very wide and inclusive view of the church, then it is true because it is a tautology. The wide and inclusive view of the church is that anywhere that God is active, there is the church. But what is that saying? Nothing.

There is no other option, because anything "between" these, is just a restrictive view of the church, even in slightly wider than other views. So he is either completely wrong or meaningless. I tend towards the former.
 

---

Posted by loggats (# 17643) on :
 
Quite a few sour comments from non-Catholics, interesting.

Maybe the Pope is just refining Rahner's ideas of "anonymous Christians" into "anonymous Catholics" - welcome aboard, one and all
 

---

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 
As an Aff-Cath Anglican I find the atavistic anti-popery in this thread rather depressing. Of course you can't be a Christian without the Church. That isn't the same thing as saying Christ isn't present in everyone and especially the poor. Recognising him there might well be the first step to recognising him in the Church.
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
What difference does being a Roman Catholic or further out in the nine circles make to inheriting the Kingdom?
 

---

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :
 
Now where did the idea of 'mother church' come from? Perhaps a mistranslation or reification of a peculiar latin image. It is obviously 'father church', the pope being king, not a queen and the cardinals being princes, not princesses. The pope is styled as an heir to the Roman emperor as well as Peter. It's all a boys' club except for a few sexless nuns, and unless I missed something. And unless we're talking about some introjected sexually deconstructed oedipal thing.

And it is obviously about power.
 

---

Posted by loggats (# 17643) on :
 
The Church is described as female because Latin and Romance languages don't usually use neuter nouns - and she is referred to as the Bride of Christ (Ephesians 5:22-33). And Mary the Mother of God has been described as the archetype of the Church (very beautifully, by Von Balthasar).

Also - I think it's more than a little ignorant to call nuns "sexless" (unless you meant celibate), because they're quite obviously female.
 

---

Posted by Fr Weber (# 13472) on :
 
All of which pales in comparison to the need to scold Rome for not sharing my politics!
 

---

Posted by Percy B (# 17238) on :
 
I can't help thinking, given the variety of attempts to clarify here, that the pope's comments as reported are far from clear.

I am disappointed, I'd expected more ....
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
I've always found it odd that one of the most misogynistic institutions on the planet refers to itself as "mother" church - especially since it doesn't allow its servants to marry.

As for being anti-Catholic: not so. They are entitled to their brand, but it would be courteous if they would acknowledge that the rest of us are entitled to ours.
 

---

Posted by loggats (# 17643) on :
 
See, this 'they are entitled' and 'rest of us' is problematic. I'm one of 'them' and don't think you have any less right to your own views, even if they aren't in conformity with the Church.

[ 23. April 2013, 23:24: Message edited by: loggats ]
 

---

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :
 
Dang, I agree with the pope.
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 

quote:

---

posted by loggats
See, this 'they are entitled' and 'rest of us' is problematic. I'm one of 'them' and don't think you have any less right to your own views, even if they aren't in conformity with the Church.

---

Not "The Church" : the Roman Catholic church: its one of many, you know.

And m views are absolutely in conformity with the Church, just not with your Church.
 

---

Posted by loggats (# 17643) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:

quote:

---

posted by loggats
See, this 'they are entitled' and 'rest of us' is problematic. I'm one of 'them' and don't think you have any less right to your own views, even if they aren't in conformity with the Church.

---

Not "The Church" : the Roman Catholic church: its one of many, you know.

And m views are absolutely in conformity with the Church, just not with your Church.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TomOfTarsus:
. what is "mental reservation"...?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
At the time St Cyprian of Carthage first used the term, in the third century, there was only One Church.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:
[QUOTE]It isn't so much mine as Christ's.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Schroedinger's Cat
There are two options to interpret this:

1. If you take a narrow or restrictive view of "the church", then he is wrong. Completely, utterly, fundamentally wrong. In fact, I think it is often easier to find Jesus outside the church than inside it.

2. If you take a very wide and inclusive view of the church, then it is true because it is a tautology. The wide and inclusive view of the church is that anywhere that God is active, there is the church. But what is that saying? Nothing.

There is no other option, because anything "between" these, is just a restrictive view of the church, even in slightly wider than other views. So he is either completely wrong or meaningless. I tend towards the former.

---

I agree with this post in its entirety.

Nothing more to add.
 

---

Posted by PeteC (# 10422) on :
 
I wondered how long his honeymoon would last. Got it about right. Oddly, it usually happens when the Roman Pontiff speaks to his Church, but everyone else gets their knickers twisted.

Big clue to Protestants. He's not [your pope. Go on ignoring him.
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
I agree too EE.
And in my head is repeating that much-loved hymn

O Jesu, thou art standing
Outside the fast-closed door...

Bishop W Walsham How (English Hymnal 578)
 

---

Posted by EtymologicalEvangelical (# 15091) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB
I doubt very much that Pope Francis would say anything contrary to Vatican II concerning the various heretic and schismatic Christian that regrettably live their faith more or less removed from the RCC.

...

Protestants/Anglicans in particular will be either considered as basically unimportant because disappearing/self-destructing all on their lonesome (Europe, partly USA), or simply as competitors to be "out-missioned" (rest of the world, in particular South America with this pope).

...

Protestants/Anglicans better get used to not being central to RC agendas (other than as competitors where they are competitive) for the foreseeable future.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
I doubt very much that Pope Francis would say anything contrary to Vatican II concerning the various heretic and schismatic Christian that regrettably live their faith more or less removed from the RCC.

---

'Regrettably'? Very happy where I am, ta, and thanking God for my security in Christ.

I have respect for the Catholic Church, and don't approve of Catholic-bashing. It's a shame when the courtesy isn't returned. This sort of snide silliness will get on my nerves no matter who's spouting it.

As for Pope Francis ... I've already said that it's hardly news that he's talking up a good orthodox Catholic spiel. He's the POPE, for Pete's sake! (Ha. Freudian slip. )
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
I like your commnets Laurelin. And IngoB is just being consistent, bless him. We love him despite his invincible ignorance. As we must.

[ 24. April 2013, 13:00: Message edited by: Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard ]
 

---

Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on :
 
Laurelin, I have to thank you for your kind words earlier on.I hope that I didn't imply that all christians who do not happen to be visibly lionked in communion with the Holy See are ipso facto anti Catholic.
Even those who do not agree with the Catholic church are not necessarily anti Catholic. They are more than entitled to disagree with the Catholic church as they have a different viewpoint.
What I cannot undersytand is how Indifferently can suggest that the roman Catholic church should not attempt to evangelise.I would have thought that for a Christian of any sort every word,every action should be an attempt to bear witness to Christ or in other words to eveangelise,to bring the good News in both word and deed to our brothers and sisters.
Presumably Indifferently is a baptised and fully fledged christian but does he not need any further evangelisation ?Within the Catholic church evengelisation is an ongoing thing,every reading, every liturgy, every eucharist is an attempt at evangelisation as we have to be reminded constantly of the teachings of Jesus that we should love both God and our fellow beings as we love ourselves.
 

---

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
To see the church in mean-spirited 'competitive' terms rather betrays a total lack of understanding of the Christian life, not to mention the nature of Christ. Seeing the Church of Jesus Christ in terms of outward authority, power and "market share" is about as carnal and worldly as it is possible to imagine.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
It is also deeply disobedient to the utterances of the so called "Holy Father", who, unless my ears have been deceiving me, has been talking about something called humility!!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Protestants/Anglicans better get used to not being central to RC agendas (other than as competitors where they are competitive) for the foreseeable future.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Perhaps Protestants in the Holy Father's home continent should humbly cease and desist from trying to convert the local RC population to Protestantism?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
[QUOTE]Perhaps Protestants in the Holy Father's home continent should humbly cease and desist from trying to convert the local RC population to Protestantism?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Percy B:
I can't help thinking, given the variety of attempts to clarify here, that the pope's comments as reported are far from clear.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB
I would love it though if all Protestants shared your qualms, that would make it so much easier to relegate them to history...

---

quote:

---

Perhaps Protestants in the Holy Father's home continent should humbly cease and desist from trying to convert the local RC population to Protestantism?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
My reading is that the leaders of the Roman Catholic Church are turning inward to address internal issues, and competing with Protestants is the last thing on their minds these days.

---

This.

Bergoglio is known by now to speak off-the cuff. He is also known to be a great champion of dialogue with the Orthodox and the Jews. And none of this from a standpoint anyone could qualify as "arrogant". I understand that the particular statement referred to in the OP leads to all sorts of misinterpretation, but I would not give too much weight to it. RC theology is not the monolithic brickwall some people (within and without the RCC) take it for.

On another note, I'm almost grateful that Francis has finally said something that makes him move away from the cuddly image some (many) people ascribed to him. He's got edges, and by that I don't just mean that his liturgical style apparently sends shivers down the spines of some trad-caths and recent converts. His message of an option for the Poor is much less palatable than many people think. Watch this space.

The problem is that with twitter and Vatican news and whatever else, anything Francis ever says to anyone is immediately spread to the whole world. Some things can be said to certain people with one would phrase entirely differently (or say not at all) in front of a different audience. Modern media are a leveller where no levelling is needed and audiences must be discerned. As a professor, I naturally speak differently to a first-year student than I would to a PhD student. A Pope has an even greater range of audiences to "manage".

So, if you're a trad-cath, by all means do rejoice in what for many of you could be Francis' first "sensible" uttering. If on the other hand you're out for a witch-hunt, please yourselves. We ("bog-standard", Tablet-reading cradle-Catholics) are used to either .

For anyone else, take it as it is: An uttering made in a specific context to a specific audience.

And no, we don't compete with anyone.

Lastly, a personal note: I, as an RC am on this forum precisely because I know there are non-RCs here. I learn from you Orthodox, Anglicans, and Evangelicals of all shades. At the very least, some of what is said here makes me think. I refuse to wear earplugs and just lurk in the (often muddy) waters of my own school of fish. Does Jesus mind? I really doubt it.
 

---

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Well, Jesus hung out with riff-raff, so we can all do that here!
 

---

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Thank you for re igniting the sectarian hatred and violence in places like Northern Ireland. I hope no one you know or love gets caught in the crossfire of this particular "competition"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Perhaps Protestants in the Holy Father's home continent should humbly cease and desist from trying to convert the local RC population to Protestantism?

---

It's their home as well. Perhaps you'd like to leave England and move to Rome. At the same time, if you apply your own rule, perhaps you should stop your contiual apologia for the RCC on here to those of us living in the UK.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I think we should all stop trying to "convert" our fellow Christians and put the evangelism focus on all the non-Christians that are out there. It's not like they're in short supply.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Perhaps you think freedom of conscience and thought should be "relegated to history"? If not, then what are you saying?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
So you are advocating censorship in South America?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
If your position is true, then I would have thought that the RCC would positively revel in the challenge of, say, Pentecostalism. It provides an opportunity for the "One True Church" to prove its credentials. No one living in the truth need fear a challenge.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurelin:
But the Catholic Church does not have a monopoly on arrogance. Far from it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
So ...

Matthew 25:33-40

New International Version (NIV)

33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

... who is outside Jesus according to Him here ?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Well, you may see mission in terms of competition (in other words, trying to win converts to submission to an authority structure), but actually it should be about truth and the reality of Christ.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Outsider POV, but even I can see IngoB's first post on this thread was spot on. It was an internal memo.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB
That one is bound to Divine truth however does not make one "unfree". Just as one is not "unfree" because one has to agree that water boils at 100 degrees centigrade at regular pressure. If one disagrees, that's not exercising freedom, but just being plain wrong.

---

quote:

---

Then you were making big noises about how terrible it is for RCs to compete in the religious "marketplace". And when I call you on that in "sauce for the gander is sauce for the goose" fashion, suddenly I'm a censor?

---

quote:

---

Why should the RCC revel in heretics leading people astray? The good shepherd fears the wolves for good reason, and he tries to lead his flock away from them to safety, and keeps watch with his dogs while in their reach.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Outsider POV, but even I can see IngoB's first post on this thread was spot on. It was an internal memo.

---

There are no internal memos in the internet age.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Ah, so you agree that we come to a knowledge of the truth through reason, not merely submission to authority?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
After all, we can prove that water boils at 100 degrees centigrade; we don't accept such a claim merely on the say so of someone who himself cannot demonstrate it, but whose authority we must accept through fear of excommunication and damnation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Your idea that I am advocating freedom to reject reason is therefore absurd.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Except nowhere did I advocate competition. Competition is all about trying to outdo "the opposition". That's a childish power game.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Ever heard of fellowship and cooperation? Ever heard of listening to others? Oh but wait... you can't, because we are all heretics (apparently).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
That's assuming that those you call heretics are actually heretics. What is your basis for coming to that conclusion? Reason? Evidence? Or just blind submission to authority? Do you even know what these so called 'heretics' believe or teach? Give me an example. Or do you just assume they are heretics by the mere fact that they are not members of the Roman Catholic version of Christianity?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
If you really want to protect people from error, why not treat them like adults and give them the reasons why you think Pentecostalism (for example) is so dodgy? Or is it a case of "we in the leadership" know best what is good for "you little people"?

---

quote:

---

Personally speaking, I think I could do just fine without your fellowship and cooperation. And if you want to listen to someone else instead, by all means feel free to end this conversation. But all that has little to do with you being a heretic. I rather like some heretics, and talking to them, including on SoF. And in the bigger scheme of things I'm commanded by my Lord to hope for Christian unity. Admittedly, seeing what's currently out there under the label "Christian" I rather feel like adapting St Augustine's famous prayer: "Lord, grant us unity, but not yet." An unworthy prayer, no doubt, but one that is likely to be answered.

---

To be fair to IngoB, he treats his fellow Roman Catholics basically the same way he treats Protestants.

[ 24. April 2013, 21:58: Message edited by: Zach82 ]
 

---

Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :
 

 

---

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
To be fair to IngoB, he treats his fellow Roman Catholics basically the same way he treats Protestants.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:

quote:

---

posted by loggats
See, this 'they are entitled' and 'rest of us' is problematic. I'm one of 'them' and don't think you have any less right to your own views, even if they aren't in conformity with the Church.

---

Not "The Church" : the Roman Catholic church: its one of many, you know.

And m views are absolutely in conformity with the Church, just not with your Church.

---

It isn't so much mine as Christ's.

---

quote:

---

posted by daronmedway
Is this the Christ who wants to marry his mummy?

---

Probably.
 

---

Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :
 
Actually, not.

The Orthodox formula is "mother and bride of God," not Christ.

quote:

---

The irmos on Ode 9 at vespers on the Thursday of the 1st Week of Lent:

Ineffable is the child bearing of a seedless conception,
a mother remaining pure.
For the birth of God renews nature,
so in all ages we magnify you as mother and bride of God.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
Actually, not.

The Orthodox formula is "mother and bride of God," not Christ.

quote:

---

The irmos on Ode 9 at vespers on the Thursday of the 1st Week of Lent:

Ineffable is the child bearing of a seedless conception,
a mother remaining pure.
For the birth of God renews nature,
so in all ages we magnify you as mother and bride of God.

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
To be fair to IngoB, he treats his fellow Roman Catholics basically the same way he treats Protestants.

---

It's quite true. He despises us all quite equally. Especially the Pope.
 

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0